Nope and not even white. |
I don’t think the dems who voted to reopen are willing to trust in the good faith of people like Collins, Graham, Flake etc.
There is a bipartisan group of 25 senators working hard to get a bill ready for a floor vote. They will have to watch their backs - Cotton and Perdue have proven to be dishonest at a minimum. Hopefully it will be tough for McConnell to attach a lot of poison pills if there is a large and unified group of senators supporting a moderate bill What I fear is the WH will try to get everything on their wishlist in exchange for DACA protection. We need comprehensive immigration reform but not on such a short timeline. Big bills like tax reform and immigration reform need a bipartisan approach and need lots of hearings with expert testimony and floor debate etc |
From the cspan video I’m hearing - they work on this now. Predictably they won’t agree. Then they get to Feb 8 - do a budget deal. IF then there is no DACA deal + Dems don’t shut down the govt, THEN McC puts up a DACA bill with all that other stuff. Couldn’t they do a clean budget now, that Dems have no choice but to pass if they want to keep the govt open - which they do now bc DACA only comes up with an open govt. But once a clean budget is passed, GOP can put up any DACA bill it wants and Dems can take it or leave it - but can’t shut down the govt for it bc a budget will already be in place.
So why are people saying another shut down Feb 8? |
Sorry the first sentence should read that I think the dems who voted to reopen did so because they DO trust the goodwill of Collins, Flake, Graham etc |
I agree with the "long time Conservative" at 15:12, that immigration is a complex issue with both positives and negatives for the US. A one-size-fits-all approach doesn't make sense. I don't agree with all of 15:12's specific policy ideas, but I agree there should be a system to encourage positive activities and discourage negative ones. In essence, this means offering a path to citizenship for those who contribute positively to society, and removing those who contribute negatively.
Both Republicans and Democrats have wanted this middle ground for decades. But the hard-liner Tea Party people who are now supporting Trump won't compromise toward sensible policy. |
I think a lot of us are confused. Some believe McConnell said we’ll do DACA by/before Feb 8, at which time we’ll also vote on a budget. But others are saying he said “if the government is open feb 8” which would indicate something more like 1. Budget passes and government is open, then 2. DACA brought up on/after Feb 9 with intent to resolve before March deadline. |
I posted a link to the cloture vote Video in a separate thread, and asked Jeff to consider leaving it. He clearly starts stating around 1:08, and finishes around 1:50. It is not just about DACA or immigration.
Please watch and process. |
The bolded is my interpretation. If that’s what he meant cant the GOP put on the floor some minor DACA deal -like one that says these 700k can stay on work permits permanently but no green card or path to citizenship ever - and Dems have no choice but to take it? If it comes up AFTER the budget is in place, Dems are left with no option of shutting the govt. Why would McC possibly tie it to the budget? |
The fundamental problem is not whether some accommodation should be made for the Dreamers but what the nature of that accommodation should be. The Hispanic lobby and most Democrats want them to be given amnesty with a path to citizenship. But there are other alternatives to protect the Dreamers: - they could be given 5 year renewable work permits which would grant them permanent resident status as long as they don't break the law - if the above happens, then one could offer citizenship to those who serve in the armed forces and are honorably discharged This would be a compromise that would prevent them being deported but still not reward them for breaking the law. But in conjunction with this one would need border security that would minimize the likelihood of this happening again. There would need to be legislation that enable the prompt deportation of those who enter the country illegally. Sanctuary city nonsense would need to end. Chain migration should be limited only to parents and minor children. Visa overstays should be dealt with by prompt deportation. Keep in mind that there are millions of people following the rules and waiting patiently to enter the country. Why should Dreamers have precedence over them in permanent resident status? And if all of the above happens, then the issue remains about what to do with the parents who were the ones who broke the law in the first place. All of the above would take care of the Dreamers but would not be responsive to what the left wing of the Democratic party wants which is amnesty and citizenship. |
Agreed that yes, if the second interpretation is correct, Dems are at the mercy of whatever McConnell will bring forward. All they could do is wail publicly that GOO are not acting in good faith. |
Because they will not go along with what Democrats want? |
Here is the link to the cloture video thread. Listen carefully, to all of it, not just the immigration part. As I said before, start around 1:08, and hang in there until at least 1:50.
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/698376.page |
There can’t possibly be Dreamers in all 50 states right? There’s lists on twitter of the Dem senators who voted for the CR and “sold out” Dreamers. Looking at the list - sure Fla and Va have lots of Dreamers probably bc they have lots of illegal parents. But the other senators were from - Del, ND, NH, Minn, ME — not exactly huge population centers so I can’t imagine there are huge illegal populations. Why would these states/senators even care about this issue?? |
You have to read between the lines. McConnell was telling the dems they need to work out a deal BEFORE Feb. 8. If they don't, they should not plan on being able to leverage a floor vote or a shutdown to get what they were unable to negotiate behind them scenes. They'll get a floor vote for a bill if they refuse to compromise, but it won't be one they like, or will be worse than if they had negotiated behind the scenes. McConnell was also suggesting that he would put other goodies on the table I.e. pork of some kind in exchange for an acceptable daca/immigration reform package. But he was clearly telling them that any further posturing was not going anywhere at all. |
Because they have a moral conscience. |