Why Can’t A Daca Bill Sail Through Congress?

[peach174]

[

It doesn't exactly work that easily. Beyond immediate family (spouse and minor children) - it can take years to get a visa for other family members, so the impression you are giving that they bring in dozens and hundreds of remote relatives as soon as they get their green card is false.

If there are a million of them and they each average one person and those people invite a person, it adds up pretty fast.

If it takes 20 years to bring in someone beyond immediate family (spouse and minor children) - that's not adding anything up very fast.

Yes for the rest of us but not DACA children.
They can sponsor parents and relative's after 2years if DACA passes the way it is.

 

[bripat9643]

Ok, lets clear out all the noise and partisanship. The Daca bill has been easily described as four pillars.

End to chain migration
End to lottery
The wall
Pathway to citizenship for dreamers

So fund the 20 billion for wall and security and pass the thing. I would vote for this in a heartbeat. It is a reasonable compromise. I would wager a hundred dollars that if this deal was presented to Americans for a vote it would pass by a super majority. Bring this bill in this simple form to the floor and vote on it. This is not rocket science. I can’t believe that even some of our libs would not support this. Get er done!

The thing of it is, the far left wants open boarders and chain migration and has taken a hard line stand on it.
That is exactly why they can't get it passed.

The far right has taken a hard line stand on DACA and insist on ending family reunification and the lottery. What's with that? That might be another reason it can't get passed.

So I and a girlfriend of mine have a whole bunch of Irish relatives We would want to bring in. But we can't because we all came in the right way legally under the laws.
All of my relatives came in legally not by chain immigration.
How about all of my German family?
Where does it end?
Special treatment for those in South American and Mexicans who can.
That's not right to all who came in here legally.

This doesn't make any sense.

You can sponsor foreign relatives for immigration if you are legal. In fact that is the only way you can.

Chain immigration IS legal. You realize that don't you?

And no, it's not special treatment for those in SA or Mexico. A lot of "chain immigration" includes the Irish, Chinese, and Indians.

It needs to become illegal.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Well if it takes 20 years for each of them to get in then it's not going to add up to a lot fast and - legal immigration takes a long time. In fact shouldn't we focus our energy on fixing that bottleneck?

 

[TomParks]

I cant believe democrats are so demoralized they need the votes of illegals to win elections. If not for their votes they could care less about them

 

[Thinker101]

I'm actually torn on this subject, after having thought about it. I know the right thing to do is to follow the law, as we have to make the law mean something. If we don't, then people will trample it all day every day.

However, how do you tell a 12 year old kid, who has only ever known america, "sorry kid, you're here illegally, were sending you to mexico".


Imagine The horror that child will experience when he arrives at his new school, not speaking any Spanish, not knowing any of the customs and traditions, and not knowing a single person.

I have to agree that, for the child, it would not be fair.

Herein lies the crux of the dilemma. How do you enforce our laws without severely damaging a child?

There has to be consequence, otherwise there is nothing to deter future illegal crossings.

One thing is for sure, the border needs to secured...yesterday.

You don't punish innocent people to act as a deterence.

But the parents aren't innocent. I will agree, the child had no choice in the matter, but the parents did, and that has to be recognized. There needs to be a deterrent to let people know that we will not stand for this. However, the first thing we need to do is secure the border, build the wall, put all the latest tech on it to monitor and detect crossings.

Then, for those that were brought here after the age of...say 13, but are still under 25, then they must return to their origin country with their parents. If they arrived younger than 13 then maybe think about a way to start their citizenship proceedings.

For those over 25, I mean what do you do? They may already have a life built around them.

At the least, the parents will need to return, and there should be no provision to allow their family to join them here.

It also should be made VERY clear that, should they reproduce, the new child will not be granted citizenship because the parents had them here illegally, and the baby will return with the parents when the parents return. Otherwise, the parents could just keep having more children to avoid being deported. This should be a deterrent to the parents, because they will know what will happen.

Amnesty needs to be taken off the table.

I would also add, if there has been no effort to become legalized in the last, 2/5/7 years (pick one) then send them back.

 

[Coyote]

I didn't move any goal posts, you neglected to read my preceding posts that clarified what chain migration is and who they can sponsor. Immediate family can usually get a VISA through this means fairly easily. For extended family members it can much longer - 20 years is not uncommon.

You realize that if you bring your sister in, she has a family too, so the brother-in-law is now eligible. Then he helps a sister-in-law and now half of Mexico can get in.

Well if it takes 20 years for each of them to get in then it's not going to add up to a lot fast and - legal immigration takes a long time. In fact shouldn't we focus our energy on fixing that bottleneck?

Make up your mind, you just got done saying visas were easy for immediate family. I gave you a good example of how immediate relatives can multiply well beyond a single family very easily.

What don't you understand?

Chain migration - Wikipedia

Chain migration allows U.S. citizens and immigrants (Lawful Permanent Resident or "Green card" holders) to petition for visas for their immediate relatives. Until the late 1950s, America's chain migration policies included only spouses and minor children of immigrants. However, since that time, chain migration policies of the United States have included the ability of immigrants to sponsor not only their minor children and spouses, but also their parents, siblings, and adult children.


Chain migration in the United States allows subsequent immigrant Lawful Permanent Resident parents and adult children to sponsor their other children, parents, etc., thus representing a chain of immigrants following the first family member into the country. In practice, however, the wait times from when the petition is filed until the adult relative is able to enter the U.S. can be as long as 15–20 years (as of 2006). This is a result of backlogs in obtaining a visa number and visa number quotas that only allow 226,000 family-based visas to be issued annually. There are four family-based preference levels:[18]


First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.

Second: Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents: 114,200, plus the number (if any) by which the worldwide family preference level exceeds 226,000, and any unused first preference numbers:
A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;
B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.

Third: Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.

Fourth: Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.


Backlogs in obtaining visa numbers range from four-and-a-half years (for preference level 2A) to 23-years (for preference level 4 immigrants from the Philippines).


While some backlogs have remained relatively steady for some time, since 1995, backlogs for other family-sponsored preferences have steadily increased (see image to the right).​

 

[bripat9643]

I didn't move any goal posts, you neglected to read my preceding posts that clarified what chain migration is and who they can sponsor. Immediate family can usually get a VISA through this means fairly easily. For extended family members it can much longer - 20 years is not uncommon.

You realize that if you bring your sister in, she has a family too, so the brother-in-law is now eligible. Then he helps a sister-in-law and now half of Mexico can get in.

Well if it takes 20 years for each of them to get in then it's not going to add up to a lot fast and - legal immigration takes a long time. In fact shouldn't we focus our energy on fixing that bottleneck?

Make up your mind, you just got done saying visas were easy for immediate family. I gave you a good example of how immediate relatives can multiply well beyond a single family very easily.

What don't you understand?

Chain migration - Wikipedia

Chain migration allows U.S. citizens and immigrants (Lawful Permanent Resident or "Green card" holders) to petition for visas for their immediate relatives. Until the late 1950s, America's chain migration policies included only spouses and minor children of immigrants. However, since that time, chain migration policies of the United States have included the ability of immigrants to sponsor not only their minor children and spouses, but also their parents, siblings, and adult children.


Chain migration in the United States allows subsequent immigrant Lawful Permanent Resident parents and adult children to sponsor their other children, parents, etc., thus representing a chain of immigrants following the first family member into the country. In practice, however, the wait times from when the petition is filed until the adult relative is able to enter the U.S. can be as long as 15–20 years (as of 2006). This is a result of backlogs in obtaining a visa number and visa number quotas that only allow 226,000 family-based visas to be issued annually. There are four family-based preference levels:[18]


First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.

Second: Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents: 114,200, plus the number (if any) by which the worldwide family preference level exceeds 226,000, and any unused first preference numbers:
A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;
B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.

Third: Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.

Fourth: Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.


Backlogs in obtaining visa numbers range from four-and-a-half years (for preference level 2A) to 23-years (for preference level 4 immigrants from the Philippines).


While some backlogs have remained relatively steady for some time, since 1995, backlogs for other family-sponsored preferences have steadily increased (see image to the right).​

Why do you believe we should allow this to continue?

 

[saveliberty]

What don't you understand?

Chain migration - Wikipedia

Chain migration allows U.S. citizens and immigrants (Lawful Permanent Resident or "Green card" holders) to petition for visas for their immediate relatives. Until the late 1950s, America's chain migration policies included only spouses and minor children of immigrants. However, since that time, chain migration policies of the United States have included the ability of immigrants to sponsor not only their minor children and spouses, but also their parents, siblings, and adult children.


Chain migration in the United States allows subsequent immigrant Lawful Permanent Resident parents and adult children to sponsor their other children, parents, etc., thus representing a chain of immigrants following the first family member into the country. In practice, however, the wait times from when the petition is filed until the adult relative is able to enter the U.S. can be as long as 15–20 years (as of 2006). This is a result of backlogs in obtaining a visa number and visa number quotas that only allow 226,000 family-based visas to be issued annually. There are four family-based preference levels:[18]


First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.

Second: Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents: 114,200, plus the number (if any) by which the worldwide family preference level exceeds 226,000, and any unused first preference numbers:
A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;
B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.

Third: Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.

Fourth: Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.


Backlogs in obtaining visa numbers range from four-and-a-half years (for preference level 2A) to 23-years (for preference level 4 immigrants from the Philippines).


While some backlogs have remained relatively steady for some time, since 1995, backlogs for other family-sponsored preferences have steadily increased (see image to the right).​

I understand perfectly, that was my example. Now you can avoid the truth or admit I was correct, your choice.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I cant believe democrats are so demoralized they need the votes of illegals to win elections. If not for their votes they could care less about them

1960 Dems lost a squeaker of a Presidential election to Nixon. They realized then that they had to come up with some votes for the future... After JFK's assassination it was imperative to come up with more votes... LBJ's legacy of Social Justice...

 

[BradVesp]

So change it for just the Dreamers or - hell, give in and if their parents have been law abiding let them get legal residency. It's not hurting us. Spend the money on increasing security at the border and more important - spend the energy on fixing an antiquated cumbersome lengthy immigration system.

...or just use the same border protection Mexico has on its southern border....

I don't know that this picture is true or false (I'm gona guess it's true).
I do know that The U.S.A. has way more land then Guatemala.

 

[blackhawk]

Other than Congress voting to give it's self a raise when has anything sailed through it?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Other than Congress voting to give it's self a raise when has anything sailed through it?

They don't have to vote. It's automatic.

 

[peach174]

I am not convinced on the pathway to citizenship issue. Why is it necessary?

I'm not convinced on the end to chain migration. Families are stabilizing elements in a society and having family members there to support an immigrant through the transition to American life is a good thing.

I'm not convinced we need to end the lottery. How about we quit talking about END to something and readjust proportions - increase merit based, decrease lottery.

Wall schmall - I support increasing border security.

Do you have a whole bunch of family members that you want to bring in from another country?

No, and even if I did - I couldn't. It simply doesn't work that way.

It is that way for the dreamers if DACA passes without that part taken out.
The Dems are standing on hard line for it.

So change it for just the Dreamers or - hell, give in and if their parents have been law abiding let them get legal residency. It's not hurting us. Spend the money on increasing security at the border and more important - spend the energy on fixing an antiquated cumbersome lengthy immigration system.

We brought in a whole bunch of M-13 gang members through Obamas DACA Executive order.
While they were taking pictures of these kids, they were making M-13 gang hand signs.
So yes it does harm us.

 

[saveliberty]

Somebody should start another thread on this topic, so we can go all through this again and again and again.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Somebody should start another thread on this topic, so we can go all through this again and again and again.

Yes.

 

[peach174]

So change it for just the Dreamers or - hell, give in and if their parents have been law abiding let them get legal residency. It's not hurting us. Spend the money on increasing security at the border and more important - spend the energy on fixing an antiquated cumbersome lengthy immigration system.

...or just use the same border protection Mexico has on its southern border....

I don't know that this picture is true or false (I'm gona guess it's true).
I do know that The U.S.A. has way more land then Guatemala.

It is true.
It's not just Guatemala it's for all of South America who is coming into Mexico Illegally.

 

[saveliberty]

I live 100 miles form the Canadian border, in my entire life I have never met an illegal Canadian.

 

[BradVesp]

Somebody should start another thread on this topic, so we can go all through this again and again and again.

Maybe I'll do that later this week. I've been thinking about pointing out how it is that you get to be a citizen by being born in The U.S.A.

 

[Coyote]

I'm not convinced on the end to chain migration. Families are stabilizing elements in a society and having family members there to support an immigrant through the transition to American life is a good thing.

I'm not convinced we need to end the lottery. How about we quit talking about END to something and readjust proportions - increase merit based, decrease lottery.

Wall schmall - I support increasing border security.

Do you have a whole bunch of family members that you want to bring in from another country?

No, and even if I did - I couldn't. It simply doesn't work that way.

It is that way for the dreamers if DACA passes without that part taken out.
The Dems are standing on hard line for it.

So change it for just the Dreamers or - hell, give in and if their parents have been law abiding let them get legal residency. It's not hurting us. Spend the money on increasing security at the border and more important - spend the energy on fixing an antiquated cumbersome lengthy immigration system.

We brought in a whole bunch of M-13 gang members through Obamas DACA Executive order.
While they were taking pictures of these kids, they were making M-13 gang hand signs.
So yes it does harm us.

A "whole bunch" came in through DACA.....? Those DACA kids were making M-13 gang hand signs?

 

[Coyote]

I live 100 miles form the Canadian border, in my entire life I have never met an illegal Canadian.

I'm sure you'd recognize one.