this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
345 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19302 readers
3063 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The White House statement comes after a week of frantic negotiations in the Senate.

President Joe Biden on Friday urged Congress to pass a bipartisan bill to address the immigration crisis at the nation’s southern border, saying he would shut down the border the day the bill became law.

“What’s been negotiated would — if passed into law — be the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border we’ve ever had in our country,” Biden said in a statement. “It would give me, as President, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law.”

Biden’s Friday evening statement resembles a ramping up in rhetoric for the administration, placing the president philosophically in the camp arguing that the border may hit a point where closure is needed. The White House’s decision to have Biden weigh in also speaks to the delicate nature of the dealmaking, and the urgency facing his administration to take action on the border — particularly during an election year, when Republicans have used the issue to rally their base.

The president is also daring Republicans to reject the deal as it faces a make-or-break moment amid GOP fissures.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MegaUltraChicken 2 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Do we not like Channel 5 or something? I find their interviews interesting most of the time.

[–] Marcbmann 0 points 11 months ago (4 children)

If it challenges the narrative on Lemmy, it gets downvoted.

The flood of immigrants crossing the southern border has been deemed a non issue by the liberal hivemind, and any evidence or arguments to the contrary will not be tolerated.

[–] MegaUltraChicken 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I'm just surprised because I feel like liberals generally care about the welfare of the people coming theough. The "flood of immigrants" isn't a problem. The fact that we don't devote enough resources into processing them and making sure they are safe/have a place to go is the problem in my view (and I would argue that's generally the consensus with most of the left).

You want a better life? You're welcome here. We're the wealthiest country in human history. There's plenty of room on this boat. We just need a significantly better onboarding system and to stop looking at immigrants as invaders. They're here for the exact same reasons. We should be jumping to help them. That's what being an American should be.

[–] Marcbmann 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Here's the thing. My wife originally came to the US on a tourist visa. She went through a long process to get that visa. I am concerned by the idea of people walking into the country without any screening whatsoever.

I believe the majority of these immigrants are fine people. But with poverty comes crime, often out of necessity. And when these individuals enter the country illegally, it means they don't have working papers. Depending on where they go, they won't have driver's licenses or insurance. They likely won't have health insurance. Many won't be paying taxes out of fear of deportation, and because they can get away with it. I'm not generalizing here - I have known many good people in this exact situation, and I know the challenges that come with being undocumented.

My wife would tell you that she's concerned with who may be coming over that border. I am concerned about what comes with a flood of persons who are destined to be stuck in the lower class.

These are not unfair or unreasonable concerns. Look at the level of gang violence in Mexico. Nobody else is concerned that these persons can walk into the US without question? Nobody is thinking about what these people will do once here? I didn't even touch on what working conditions look like, or housing, for undocumented immigrants.

The people espousing that the open border is a non issue are living in a fairy tale with no regard for long term implications or the human element of what's happening here

[–] MegaUltraChicken 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Is there actually a large cohort of people that think we should have a completely open border with no screening process? I've never seen that advocated for outside of those who want to completely abolish Nation-States and that's definitely not a large group.

Devote proper resources to screen, process, and take care of these people. We aren't doing that.

[–] Marcbmann 1 points 11 months ago

On Lemmy, absolutely.

And, I mean look at the comments in general. Whenever this topic comes up people call it a non-issue, people say the issue doesn't exist, people say who cares if people are coming over the border, you have people citing studies showing illegal immigrant populations are generally less violent than citizens. People want to justify the relative inaction of Biden. Now, I voted for the man, but this is absolutely disgusting.

Now he's claiming he doesn't have authority to act. I'm sorry, but at this point I've seen more than enough in the way of arguments for the White House already having the necessary powers to secure the border. There has never been a point in Biden's presidency where he did not have the authority to take the necessary action in securing the border.

So yes, I do not believe we should have a wide open border that is a literal free-for-all like we have at this exact moment. I agree, we should be devoting proper resources to screen, process, and take care of the people that want to come into the country. We should be doing this the right way.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)