2024 Border Legislation

[Grace]

I see a Politico headline that reads, "Trump slams deal that would give Biden authority to close border." Can anybody, especially someone who likes Trumpism, explain why he would do this?

Not sure if I like Trump or not. But I think the reason that he would do this is twofold:
1. Major Republican don’t actually mind immigrants coming here. Hence, your typical Republican doesn’t really care either.
2. Trump doesn’t want the problem solved by anyone else. Just like he hopes the economy crashes before the election so that he can use the economic crash as a campaign issue, Trump wants there to be problems at the border in order to use the matter as a campaign fodder.
Trump generally doesn’t seem to care about people being harmed via an economic crash, or immigration, so long as he can benefit from these issues. Other people bare the cost, he benefits. Diffused costs, concentrated benefits.

I certainly don't care for Trump. But everything you just said about Trump can be applied to Biden, but ten times worse.

[Grace]

I see a Politico headline that reads, "Trump slams deal that would give Biden authority to close border." Can anybody, especially someone who likes Trumpism, explain why he would do this?

Because his 2024 campaign is nothing more than fear mongering about immigration and grievance mongering about the 2024 election and his legal troubles.

Take away immigration as an issue and he has no policies at all left to run on. His campaign this summer and next fall depends on the border being a mess. He is counting on it.

It may be true that Trump is counting on the border to be a mess, and Biden sure isn't letting him down on that.

[temporal1]

The correct question is why you’re putting any faith in Politico headlines.

Agreed.
msm is marketing the words, “shut down” and “close,” at best, it’s word salad.
There may be temporary slow downs, delays, reorganizing to open more efficiently. But the marketing is lying. On purpose.

Most are sufficiently educated to grasp this, if not blinded by partisanship.

The FIRST time i saw the headline this morning i was encouraged. Reading a bit more, it was clear: NO CHANGE. More double-talk.

biden is getting heat from DNC mayors who don’t want to be bothered by migrants - WITHOUT MAJOR FED DOLLARS,
AND, 25 governors are supporting Abbott. That should be 50 governors. As it has been in times of disaster in the past.

This should not be a partisan battle.

The cartels are running this country. They’re not going to go on their own.

[RZehr]

I see a Politico headline that reads, "Trump slams deal that would give Biden authority to close border." Can anybody, especially someone who likes Trumpism, explain why he would do this?

Not sure if I like Trump or not. But I think the reason that he would do this is twofold:
1. Major Republican don’t actually mind immigrants coming here. Hence, your typical Republican doesn’t really care either.
2. Trump doesn’t want the problem solved by anyone else. Just like he hopes the economy crashes before the election so that he can use the economic crash as a campaign issue, Trump wants there to be problems at the border in order to use the matter as a campaign fodder.
Trump generally doesn’t seem to care about people being harmed via an economic crash, or immigration, so long as he can benefit from these issues. Other people bare the cost, he benefits. Diffused costs, concentrated benefits.

I certainly don't care for Trump. But everything you just said about Trump can be applied to Biden, but ten times worse.

Maybe, but I understood the question to be about Trump, not Biden.

I really don’t believe that Biden will “close” any border no matter what legislation is passed.

[temporal1]

I really don’t believe that Biden will “close” any border no matter what legislation is passed.

With 40-50 years in elected offices, biden+other career politicians have a POOR record.
No reason for trust.

i could not be more remorseful, but, in the roughest ways, i now expect significant changes in the U.S.,
i have no idea what will unfold.

Clearly, MANY MANY U.S. citizens had not given a thought about what millions of migrants would mean in THEIR lives.
They presumed that was the border states’ problem.

NAPERVILLE, IL / “Illinois suburb scraps migrant housing 'sign-up' sheet after councilman’s viral proposal to residents”
Naperville City Councilman Josh McBroom's sign-up sheet proposal went viral last week
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/illino ... -residents

i’ve never been to Naperville, i’ve wanted to visit, it’s not terribly far, it’s known to be a wealthy, nice Chicago suburb.
Most of Illinois does NOT vote with Chicago.

- - - - - - -

In my personal experience, i helped a young family with 4 children adopted from the streets of Guatemala and Honduras.
i cannot describe what a Herculian effort was required of this mother+father - with aid of community counselors, and local schools, including juvenile detention for the oldest. Counseling! No effort spared.

These were young children, nevertheless, alcohol and sex abuse had to be addressed. They were required to have locks on their bedroom doors to keep them safe from one another. 3 were siblings. They had to be watched day+night, everywhere.

It was an incredible experience. Those YOUNG children, with intensive attention and care, blossomed.
The family moved, i’m not sure how they’re doing. i presume well.

This was an average young Christian couple, home schooled, with college degrees. Dedicated, not wealthy.
They reminded me of Robert and his adoptions.

These were legal formal adoptions.
i can only wonder how on earth anything close to this level of care would be available for the vast majority of illegals, it doesn’t seem remotely realistic anything like this will happen for the vast majority.

Pray for miracles.

[temporal1]

John 11:35

35 Jesus wept.
https://biblehub.com/john/11-35.htm

[Ernie]

Lankford is being censured. This is what happens when congressmen try to do something about the border crisis... Which is why few congress representatives want to participate in bi-partisan discussions about how to solve the border crisis.

Lankford

"It will be the most significant shift in border law and enforcement than we've had in three decades, easily," Lankford said.

“This bill focuses on getting us to zero illegal crossings a day. There’s no amnesty. It increases the number of Border Patrol agents, increases asylum officers, it increases detention beds so we can quickly detain and then deport individuals,” Lankford said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“This is not about letting 5,000 people in a day. This is the most misunderstood section of this proposal,” Lankford said on Sunday on Fox. “This is not someone standing at the border with a little clicker saying, ‘I’m going to let one more in. We’re at 4,999’ and then it has to stop. It is a shutdown of the border and everyone actually gets turned around.”

Lankford called out his colleagues for bowing to political pressure, noting that four months ago Republicans refused to grant funding for Ukraine, Israel and the southern border until there were policy changes.

“So we actually locked arms together and said we’re not going to give you money for this. We want a change in law,” Lankford said. “When we’re finally going to the end, they’re like, ‘Oh, just kidding. I actually don’t want a change in law because it’s a presidential election year.’ We all have an oath to the Constitution and we have a commitment to say we’re going to do whatever we can to be able to secure the border.”

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2024/ ... ty-bill-a/

The kinds of authority and funding this bill gives to the President for border enforcement, is the sort of authority the Trump administration would have loved to have had, but didn't. But because it is a bi-partisan bill that is being drafted, and because it actually might do something about the border crisis in election year, it is being shot through.

And I am aware that similar things have happened whenever Republicans were in the Whitehouse. Which is why there has not been any progress in three decades.

[Josh]

Explicitly waving in 1.3 million illegal arrivals (when they could just enter via legal ports of entry) is not a “shutdown”.

[Ernie]

How about they just start using an expulsion power now for every illegal crossing?

They need more personnel, more funding, and more authority. There are laws they need to follow for expulsion.

There are legal ports of entry all over the place. Anyone seeking to enter (including asylum seekers) may enter there.

But that is not where Coyotes are dropping people off.

[HondurasKeiser]

Lankford is being censured. This is what happens when congressmen try to do something about the border crisis... Which is why few congress representatives want to participate in bi-partisan discussions about how to solve the border crisis.

Lankford

"It will be the most significant shift in border law and enforcement than we've had in three decades, easily," Lankford said.

“This bill focuses on getting us to zero illegal crossings a day. There’s no amnesty. It increases the number of Border Patrol agents, increases asylum officers, it increases detention beds so we can quickly detain and then deport individuals,” Lankford said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“This is not about letting 5,000 people in a day. This is the most misunderstood section of this proposal,” Lankford said on Sunday on Fox. “This is not someone standing at the border with a little clicker saying, ‘I’m going to let one more in. We’re at 4,999’ and then it has to stop. It is a shutdown of the border and everyone actually gets turned around.”

Lankford called out his colleagues for bowing to political pressure, noting that four months ago Republicans refused to grant funding for Ukraine, Israel and the southern border until there were policy changes.

“So we actually locked arms together and said we’re not going to give you money for this. We want a change in law,” Lankford said. “When we’re finally going to the end, they’re like, ‘Oh, just kidding. I actually don’t want a change in law because it’s a presidential election year.’ We all have an oath to the Constitution and we have a commitment to say we’re going to do whatever we can to be able to secure the border.”

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2024/ ... ty-bill-a/

The kinds of authority and funding this bill gives to the President for border enforcement, is the sort of authority the Trump administration would have loved to have had, but didn't. But because it is a bi-partisan bill that is being drafted, and because it actually might do something about the border crisis in election year, it is being shot through.

And I am aware that similar things have happened whenever Republicans were in the Whitehouse. Which is why there has not been any progress in three decades.

I agree that this is a bad move for Republicans and it makes them look like hypocrites. Both sides though are playing politics. The bolded part of your post though seems to miss the Democratic politicking going on; Biden does not need this bill to close the border. If he had the political will he could close the border quite easily without this new piece of legislation. What it comes down to is, Biden doesn't desire to stanch the flow of illegal immigration and Republicans don't desire to give him Ukraine/Israel aid in return for powers he doesn't need. The whole episode is a charade for both sides.