Border compromise - no wall

Fárbauti

I thought I'd throw this out there as a bipartisan compromise.

The problem we have is that we have hundreds of thousands of people arriving at our borders and asking for asylum once they get caught. Once they set foot on US soil they must get due process, which causes huge backlogs and they must be released never to be seen or heard from again. while I'm sure there's genuine people who are genuinely persecuted, most of these claims are bogus and designed to take advantage of the logjam. Also, many get through without getting caught.

One way to resolve this is to prevent them from setting foot on US soil to start with by building a barrier. But that is a nonstarter with Democrats. Democrats insist they care about borders and illegal immigration,but do not want a wall which costs a lot of money, would not be effective and would pose environmental problem. I will go ahead and take them at their word.


Instead of a wall, I would propose that we reform the system that is being taken advantage of. We want to be compassionate, but at the same time we are a country of laws. Thus, asylum claims shall only be processed for people arriving from countries deemed unsafe. All other asylum claimants shall be processed for removal via the expedited removal procedure currently in place for Mexico. Congress shall have the ability to deem a country unsafe through the normal legislative process in one year increments, and the President shall have the ability to make an emergency declaration for 3 months to deal with unforeseen situations. This way we can insure that those who need safe haven get it, and those who are looking to game our immigration system get sent back swiftly.


In addition, significant investments would be made in technology and border patrol agents to ensure most of illegal crossers get caught.


What say ye?

SaveComment83Like
Comments (83)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

What say I?

NO!

No wall.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Fárbauti

I already agreed to no wall. What say ye on the proposal which does not include a wall?

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
llucy

What would be the proposal to deal with those who overstay their visas? That seems to be more of a problem when it comes to immigration. People who come here on work/education on visa's and want to become citizens? How is the path to citizenship managed?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie
I think you're on the right track.
The only comment I have is that declaring a country safe or unsafe is not so straighforward. Wish it was. A country may have regions that are safe or unsafe, and it may be a constantly changing situation. Also, what about areas that have been affected by natural disasters? What if the danger comes from persecution of a specific class or group, but not others?
6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sunflower_petal(5a)

Intriguing. I'd like to see this idea evaluated by a bipartisan group of people (not necessarily legislators but it could include some if they know the subject) who know the details around claiming asylum. There is a chance that some desperate people could fall through the cracks in such a system so I'd like to see some method of appeal.

I'd also like to better understand how it would be decided which countries are considered which category.

And there needs to be Congressional approval on the emergency declaration process. We've already seen one president who would take advantage of that so regardless of which party you are, you might want to see some check on it (what if a Democrat president declared a sudden increase countries deemed unsafe and reopened the floodgates?).

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tryingtounderstand

Are you talking about something like this Designated Country of origin

Most Canadians recognize that there are places in the world where it is less likely for a person to be persecuted compared to other areas. Yet many people from these places try to claim asylum in Canada, but are later found not to need protection.

Too much time and too many resources are spent reviewing these unfounded claims.Designated Countries of Origin include countries that do not normally produce refugees and respect human rights and offer state protection.

The Designated Countries of Origin policy is meant to deter abuse of the refugee system by people who come from countries generally considered safe. Refugee claimants from Designated Countries of Origin will have their claims processed faster.

This will make sure that people in need get protection fast, while those with unfounded claims are sent home quickly.

Every eligible refugee claimant, including those from Designated Countries of Origin, will still have a hearing at the independent IRB.

Hearings on these claims should be held within 30-45 days after they are referred to the IRB. The timeframe for other refugee claimants is 60 days. https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/refugees/claim-protection-inside-canada/apply/designated-countries-policy.html

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Fárbauti

The only comment I have is that declaring a country safe or unsafe is
not so straighforward. Wish it was. A country may have regions that
are safe or unsafe, and it may be a constantly changing situation.
Also, what about areas that have been affected by natural disasters?
What if the danger comes from persecution of a specific class or group,
but not others?

I think the asylum claims would still be processed on their merits once the asylum seekers arrive from the countries deemed unsafe. They go in front of a judge etc.

What would be the proposal to deal with those who overstay their visas?

Immediate deportation when apprehended and 10 year ban.

People who come here on work/education on visa's and want to become citizens? How is the path to citizenship managed?

We already have processes in place for that.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

I would like an answer from the left. Why are you against the barrier now?

Meanwhile, these current, former, and then-ascendant Senate Democrats all voted for SFA, which President George W. Bush signed into law. On September 26, 2006, the Senate passed SFA 80–19, with 26 Democrats voting Yea. Among them:

  • Joseph Biden of Delaware (“I voted for the fence related to drugs,” he explained in a 2007 debate. “A fence will stop 20 kilos of cocaine coming through that fence.”)
  • Sherrod Brown of Ohio (while still in the House, Brown voted Yea that September 14.)
  • Tom Carper of Delaware
  • Hillary Clinton of New York (the Halloween after voting for SFA, she told the Council on Foreign Relations that America should “secure our borders with technology, personnel, physical barriers if necessary in some places.”)
  • Dianne Feinstein of California (“Democrats are solidly behind controlling the border, and we support the border fence,” she told the Los Angeles Daily News. “We’ve got to get tough on the border. There’s no question the border is a sieve.”)
  • Bill Nelson of Florida (freshly defeated by Republican Rick Scott)
  • Barack Obama of Illinois (“The bill before us certainly will do some good,” Obama argued on the Senate floor. “It will authorize badly needed funding for better fences and better security along our borders, and that should help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country.” He added that SFA would stymie “immigrants sneaking in through unguarded holes in our border. . .”)
  • Chuck Schumer of New York
  • Debbie Stabenow of Michigan
  • Ron Wyden of Oregon


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Fárbauti

Are you talking about something like this Designated Country of origin

Oh yeah look at that it already exists. Sounds very common sense.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Chi

"I would like an answer from the left. Why are you against the barrier now?"

There are already probably hundreds of posts from people on Hot Topics on why they don't want the wall.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mayflowers

Yes, there are hundreds of posts addressing just that.

Aren't the Dems requesting more judges to handle asylum requests to relieve the backlog?

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie
Why don't I want a wall?
Because I think it's impractical, just as many on the right think a single payer health plan is impractical. The costs will be astronomical once you take into account costs to obtain the land and the costs of building a solid wall across all the terrain on the border.
Because I think it will be breached, by tunnels, drones, etc.
Because it will require constant repair and monitoring. More $$$.
Because I think we could make better use of all that money to deal with infastructure, health care, education, or any number of other things.
Because I hate what it will do to the environment and to the communities that exist on the border and interact daily with communities on the other side.
I may think of more reasons later....
11 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

Trumpian propaganda presented as a request for discussion

Straight out of Goebbels' methods.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sunflower_petal(5a)

mrskjun, we're not against a barrier. We have some barrier, 700 miles of it, right? Democrats voted for that, remember? We're against more barrier just because.

More isn't always the answer. Be smart. Use our big brains.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
heri cles

Humpty Trumpty sat on a wall..


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tryingtounderstand

In reviewing the citations upthread, I tried, unsuccessfully, to find out if the length and cost of a wall was discussed or noted by either democrats or republicans, way back when. Though lots of talk and agreement re border security etc.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

Refugees . Christ would welcome them.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
studio10001

I would be encouraged by system reform. If congress agrees to this much, it would be a step in the right direction, if not a complete solution.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mrskjun(9)

Thanks for answering numbers. Even if I disagree with you, I respect your reasoned response.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Joaniepoanie

We are against a wall for the same reason no one on the right would build a 20' wall around their home for security.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
llucy

Humpty Trumpty sat on a wall..

And Humpty Trumpty had a great fall.

All his comrades and all his henchmen,

Couldn't get Trumpty elected again.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mayflowers

Trump weaponized the wall from the start, using it against Democrats, the Mexican people, and Mexico's government. He worked his followers into a frenzy with it at his campaign rallies. Philosophically we are against what it symbolizes--it will forever be a reminder of his and his followers' bigotry. I don't see any way around that. It didn't symbolize those things when Dems voted for some border barriers so they took a more pragmatic approach.

Lest you say trump's wall isn't symbolic, the Berlin wall was symbolic too, as was Reagan's cry to tear it down.

5 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

Can someone please tell me where I can find information about a workable technological method which can be used instead of a wall?

There is a lot of talk, but I have not been able to find any real information.

I am also curious, if in fact there is, why isn't it being used?

1. Drones - Limited range, can fly only a few minutes, and cannot to used to fly into some other country's air space.

2. Fiber optics - to do what? Problem is not to detect how many violators are running across the border. Problem is to stop them.

3. Cameras - to do what? Problem is not to see how many violators are running across the border. Problem is to stop them.

dcarch



Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
margaritadina

''

numbersjunkie

A country may have regions that
are safe or unsafe, and it may be a constantly changing situation.
Also, what about areas that have been affected by natural disasters?
What if the danger comes from persecution of a specific class or group,
but not others?

''

Religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation is already included in immigration law. Friend of mine received asylum (? not sure what status) in 1997 for been persecuted in Belarus for his sexual orientation. Was VERY tough back then but he won the case with the flying colors.

Natural disaster victims also receive a temporary stay visa until it becomes safe to return to their country.


Wall. We need a wall. We don't need to count border jumpers with high tech devices , we need to keep them out.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie
margaritadina,. I was responding to the OPs proposal, not how our current laws work.
Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Chi

Nope, no wall. It's expensive, there's no guarantee it will work, it will harm the environment, it will take away people's land, it's an eyesore and it's not necessary. Illegal border crossings have been declining for a long time on their own, so keep funding and expanding what we are doing because it works.

Even the border patrol union says walls are worthless and a waste of money without addressing the real issue, which is job opportunities. People will go under and over a wall as long as there's a nice job waiting for them.

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie
"Wall. We need a wall."

Why don't you share reasons why you think we need a wall? And why it should be more of a priority than other projects like infastructure?

Fact based arguments would be appreciated.
1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie

What, no factual response's about why we need a wall and why it is a higher priority than other projects?


I am disturbed by Trumps threat that he will reallocate funds from other areas to get his wall, "one way or another". This sounds like a spoiled toddler. Basically, he wants to steal funds from other projects which are likely more critical to the safety and security of our country. If he wants to get his way, he needs to provide his case to Congress and the American people, He needs real facts, not false claims. He needs to stop bullying everyone who questions or disagrees with him. He needs to stop using racist stereotypes and insults. If he's correct that a wall is the best use of limited funds, we will all back off and support him on this. I have no idea why he thinks he can insult and bully everyone, and then expect our support. He has no real leadership skills - no social intelligence.


Also want to repeat what Mayflowers said above:

Trump weaponized the wall from the start, using it against Democrats, the Mexican people, and Mexico's government. He worked his followers into a frenzy with it at his campaign rallies. Philosophically we are against what it symbolizes--it will forever be a reminder of his and his followers' bigotry. I don't see any way around that. It didn't symbolize those things when Dems voted for some border barriers so they took a more pragmatic approach.

6 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sunflower_petal(5a)

Well, we have to have a wall before we tackle infrastructure repair or the contractors will just attract and hire all the undocumented folks to do the work because they're cheaper.

/sarcasm

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
VedaBeeps SoCal 9b/10a(9b/10)

Trump would just make sure the visas get approved to bring in foreign workers like he does for his properties, sunflower. He has to make good with his buddy Abromovich to buy that Evraz steel.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
artemis_ma

Farbauti, some good beginning thoughts here. As with any ultimately good proposal, it will need work but I could and would think about this.

A wall itself raises more problems than it can solve.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

I am asking the question again, can someone please tell me where I can find information about utilizing technology solutions instead of walls for border security.

Why is that there are more than 60 countries building walls, if there are better alternatives?

Since all political parties here want border security, if we actually have cheaper and better options, let's go for it.

dcarch

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

Dcarch, do you have a link to your assertion that "60 countries are building walls"

I can find nothing on the internet that says that . I did find an article that says 60 countries have built fences since 1987, and almost all of them are in war zones or totalitarian govts. ( well Finland built a wall to keep the russian reindeer from being herded into their country). And almost all did it 20 or more years ago

Indeed , we seem to be the only country that is still talking about building a wall

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
kaych

mayflowers

Trump weaponized the wall from the start, using it against Democrats, the Mexican people, and Mexico's government. He worked his followers into a frenzy with it at his campaign rallies. Philosophically we are against what it symbolizes--it will forever be a reminder of his and his followers' bigotry. I don't see any way around that. It didn't symbolize those things when Dems voted for some border barriers so they took a more pragmatic approach.

At least you're honest about the reason you're against a wall. So what if the wall gives us better border security that would not only benefit Americans, but also all those exploited immigrants who have their lives ruined too. Imagery matters much more than reality, or another way to put it, America last. Trump hate first.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

sunflower_petal(5a),

I have seen that one, using fiber optic to detect. I have read it many times. Detection of an individual, or a few individuals making an attempt to illegally cross the border is not a solution. Stopping them from crossing is the need. How does a detection system stop a caravan? In any case, it takes a few second to cut a fiber optic cable using minimum tools. A cheap portable low frequency generator will render the detectors useless.

dcarch


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

dcarch could you answer my question?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

Zeus, That video shows a very low wall. Anyone can use a ladder to easily climb over it.

A 30 foot wall will require two 30 foot extension ladders, one for each side, each ladder weighs over 80 lbs. This will significantly slow down any illegal activity, giving time for border patrols to take action.

dcarch

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

GOD,

I am busy at work in office, can't research now. Sorry.

Why don't you find me some information about technological solutions that is better than walls? If you don't mind.

dcarch

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie

Hey guys, what we really need is one of the impenetrable domes to cover the USA - like the one on that TV show a few seasons back! OMG, it's soooooooo easy!

3 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
patriciae_gw(07)

dcarch, you are like that TV commercial where the guy asks his neighbor to do all the work vetting the roofer he needs. Why don't you do some research on this yourself is you actually want to know.


2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

Dcarth, it's your theory that there are walls being built and technology doesnt' work.

you've yet to prove either of those assertions.

If you want to make strawmen and then knock them down, have fun!

But don't expect the adults to play with along with you

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

And

dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

GOD,

I am busy at work in office, can't research now. Sorry.


But you can post repeatedly.

How convenient.

If you posted less you could google more. It actually takes less time than typing a response.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

God,

"How many countries have built walls" is not relevant to the discussion. The discussion is about what are other methods which are more effective than walls in stopping illegal entries.

And writing takes seconds, research takes longer.

Aren't you curious about what is this better way, a better way than a wall that everyone is talking about? Do you know what is this (these) better way (ways)?

And:

"Dcarth, it's your theory that there are walls being built and technology doesnt' work"

I never said that. I said I want to know about what are the better tech way everyone is so convinced about.

dcarch

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

GOD,

I am busy at work in office, can't research now. Sorry.

Obviously untrue

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Zeus

Lying to God.....not a good plan.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

studio10001, there are also opposite opinions.

Again, I just want to know what tech methods which we are being told that are more effective, who has used it, and has it (those) been shown to work. I have no interest defending walls.

dcarch

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
llucy

My impression from what I have read, is that it is technology AND personnel which is considered effective. As in, drones, cameras can spot potential border crossers, but border patrol agents need to to be in the vicinity to check out the situation and apprehend if necessary.

Similarly, a barrier is not going to be effective without the personnel to monitor it, and without drones and cameras barriers are easily breached with the determined going over, around, tunneling under. Can't see what's going on the other side of "the wall" without technology. Logical.

If you want stats on this do your own research.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

llucy, thanks for no-insult discussion.

I have read about drones. This is my understanding of drones.

Currently drones has limited range, less than 1/2 mile? limited operating time, less than 30 minutes, and one operator can only operate one drone at a time, they are very noisy, and a drone can only operate within US territory. A drone can easily be disabled by jamming.

2000 miles will need 2000 operators, 2000 operators x three shifts per day comes to 6000 operators. This is in addition to all other required border agents.


I do know of a high tech effective barrier. I have one in my garden. My DIY electric fence. just two wires and 7000 volts. LOL.

dcarch

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
llucy


Walls, damned lies, and statistics

This is an article I saved recently from someone who submitted it on HT.

It's comprehensive and well written. Give it a read dcharch7.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

Thanks llucy.

I also want to make it clear that I am not supporting trump, against trump, for wall, or against wall.

I am under the impression that all political parties want border security and I am interested in the cheapest effective method.

I don't want to be a blind follower taking anyone's words on blind faith alone.

I am fully aware of a physical wall's short comings.

It occurred to me that I actually do not have any believable information about a high tech wall.

dcarch



Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

I just saw this and need to go cook dinner, but will be back soon. I need to read it carefully, but I think this is exactly what my husband says he'd like to see happen.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Becca Reese

Ann, I've posted a ton of information about the limitations and costs of drones. Issues: cost per apprehension, manpower, operation time, operation limitations, upkeep, repair, replacement, privacy.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
studio10001

dcarch, Kayyem explained how they successfully employ border security. You are right, people will give opposing opinions; most experts will not. Personally, I have never heard of a "high tech wall", and have no idea what you are referencing, other than another static solution, which is not, as Kayyem explained, how border security is approached.

As I said, it is a starting point for you. Efficacy of our current security can be shown through DHS graphs, publicly available. Details of the specific devices used are not publicly available. Good luck in your research.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie
Beca, maybe drones aren't useful for primary border defense, but they could sure be great for sending drugs over the wall! Just like Amazon delivery service!
1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

I'd like to add, that anyone who is caught in the U.S. and here illegally, is immediately deported. I assume the DACA group would first be dealt with legislatively, but adding this to Farbauti's idea could very significantly reduce illegal crossing attempts! The oh so tempting welcome mat would be removed.

You ask, "What say ye?". I answer, great plan!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dcarch7 d c f l a s h 7 @ y a h o o . c o m

GOD, you are right. It was easy to find info on countries which built solid border walls, not "high tech" walls. Plenty of info.

Interesting , they also give reasons for the walls, almost every one listed as "Anti- illegal immigration" and many "Anti-terrorism, anti-illegal immigration, anti drug smuggling"

Are we the only country who believes that walls have no use?

dcarch

From WIKI

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

As I've discussed several times, I consider the release part of catch and release to be at least as big a problem as an easy to cross border. I'd like to see a barrier to make crossing more difficult in the most vulnerable areas. but the release problem is the biggest welcome mat! I agree with Farbauti that anyone caught overstaying their visa be removed immediately and not let back in for a significant period of time.

TTU, I like what you discussed about Canada. Quite reasonable! Honestly, I think the lax policies in America are beginning to have a real impact on the number of people also crossing Canada's southern border and I would hope all Canadians would begin to see real advantages to their country if Congress in the U.S. could pass legislation more like Canada's policies.


1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)



2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Becca Reese

! I agree with Farbauti that anyone caught overstaying their visa be
removed immediately and not let back in for a significant period of
time.

Dems will never got for that. They will tell you that these people are not criminals and should be left alone forever. So, basically, if you can make it to American soil (with or without a visa), manage to work and make some anchor babies, you're golden.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

Or if you have the skills that employers are looking for and who pay big bucks to knowingly have you overstay your visa.......

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)

Or if you are willing to work for less than minimum wage at a golf course or resort, you can probably stay, too.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
chase_gw

I don't know it to be a fact but my sense is that the biggest reason for visa overstays and illegal immigrants is American employers offering them work.

4 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tryingtounderstand

“Becca. “Dems will never got for that” Don’t worry, no point arguing about this issue. USCIS is all over this one..it’s been taken care of . Ya don’t want to overstay your welcome, or face dire consequences:

“Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence during a single stay, and then depart, may be subject to three-year or 10-year bars to admission, depending on how much unlawful presence they accrued before they departed the United States. Individuals who have accrued a total period of more than one year of unlawful presence, whether in a single stay or during multiple stays in the United States, and who then reenter or attempt to reenter the United States without being admitted or paroled are permanently inadmissible.

Those subject to the three-year, 10-year, or permanent unlawful presence bars to admission are generally not eligible to apply for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status to permanent residence unless they are eligible for a waiver of inadmissibility or another form of relief”.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tryingtounderstand

Interestingly “

  • DHS identified just over 700,000 overstayers in 2017, a decline of 5 percent from 2016. About 15 percent of those 700,000 have departed, and the rest are believed to have remained in the country.


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
studio10001

What would people think about mandatory e verify, with strict prosecution for failure to comply?

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
numbersjunkie
I'm surprised ( but not surprised) that e-verify isn't already required by law. I think the real problem is that our immigration system needs to be fixed before we start kicking out all the illegals or preventing businesses from hiring them. Where are we going to get people to do many of these jobs under the same employment terms? I'm wondering where Trump is going get workers to replace all those illegals that have been fired at his clubs.
Contrary to what Trump has led you to believe, many of these immigrants are honest hard-working people and benefit our economy. They would love to be here legally if it was possible.
1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sunflower_petal(5a)

"the biggest reason for visa overstays and illegal immigrants is American employers offering them work. "

Absolutely!


Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

If the heads of companies were prosecuted and imprisoned (if guilty) for their companies' action, the illegal hires would stop basically overnight. CEO bye bye

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sunflower_petal(5a)

Even posters here (remember j4?) have said they would hire someone for work based on price and not bother themselves with determining if the person is illegal or not.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
dandyfopp

That is what we want. Cheap labor, powerless labor, cheap prices, and folks to scapegoat, demonize and blame at the same time. Pretty sweet deal.

2 Likes Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ann

"What would people think about mandatory e verify, with strict prosecution for failure to comply?"

I'd be very supportive!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Stan Areted

What would people think about mandatory e verify, with strict prosecution for failure to comply?

Absolutely.

Johns and prostitutes, same relationship.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sunflower_petal(5a)

We don't have mandatory e-Verify now? Why not? I'd support Trump doing an executive action on that! That seems like they would have taken care of that in January 2017.

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Izzy Mn

Just saw a short clip of Hannity calling the border wall compromise garbage and Trump shouldn't sign deal. Is Trump not taking his phone calls so this is the only way he has to communicate his displeasure with Trump?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
adoptedbyhounds

"That is what we want. Cheap labor, powerless labor, cheap prices, and folks to scapegoat, demonize and blame at the same time. Pretty sweet deal."

Who is the "we" you refer to?

Are you an employer looking for cheap powerless labor? If so, I agree it's a sweet deal. For you.

For the American people left holding the bag for that "cheap" labor, it's a disaster. Taxpayers, not the employer, pick up the tab for medical care, educating their children, free breakfasts and lunches in school, food subsidies offered by states, and low income housing subsidies. Employers can pay their illegal employees under the table and both avoid paying taxes at all. In sanctuary cities, they can get free legal help as well.

When my DIL entered the US from the Netherlands, she was warned if she took a job before receiving her green card, she could be deported.

Special treatment and protections for illegals and their employers are a slap in the face to all law abiding immigrants and employers. American families deserve better.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sunflower_petal(5a)

" When my DIL entered the US from the Netherlands, she was warned if she took a job before receiving her green card, she could be deported.

Special treatment and protections for illegals and their employers are a slap in the face to all law abiding immigrants and employers. American families deserve better."

Tell that to Melania Trump and her husband. There is proof that she worked before she got a card.

Tell that to the dairy farmers who knowingly hire undocumented workers and even admit it to a guy writing a story about it.

esquire.com/news-politics/a23471864/devin-nunes-family-farm-iowa-california/

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
GOD

It seems ADH want Melania deported. Is that correct ADH?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)

"What would people think about mandatory e verify, with strict prosecution for failure to comply?" I'd be very supportive!

How many people have you hired?


Trump never used it

Guess Trump thought he could get away with breaking the law.

Imagine that.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momj47(7A)

The problem we have is that we have hundreds of thousands of people arriving at our borders and asking for asylum once they get caught

Everything in that statement is false.

You'll need to document that stat, of course.

Migrants coming across our southern border are not "caught". They go to a border patrol station as soon as they are caught and turn themselves in and ask for asylum.

Right wing brains are something to behold.


Save    
Browse Gardening and Landscaping Stories on Houzz See all Stories
Bathroom Design No Need to Compromise on Style With a Shower-Tub Combo
A combination shower and bathtub can be a chic and practical option if you don’t have room for separate ones
Full Story
Houzz Tours My Houzz: A Happy Compromise Between Clean and Cluttered
A self-described minimalist and a ‘maximalist’ take on a renovation together and find harmony and balance
Full Story
Feel-Good Home Decorate With Intention: The Art of Compromise
You're modern, he's traditional? Someone's collection has gotta go? These 10 steps can help keep the peace when decorating tastes clash
Full Story