Immigration Executive Order On The Horizon

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**whembly**

Uh... anyone noticed this?

...where workers who pick our fruit and make our beds...

**Co'tor Shas**

What's face-palm-worthy about that? Kind of hard to judge out of context.

**Gitzbitah**

Why are we calling them undocumented immigrants now? If they entered the country illegally, they're illegal immigrants, right?

Our system certainly needs to be reformed- but I don't think just accepting a large group of known lawbreakers into the fold is a great approach to it.

Perhaps provide an expedited procedure for any illegal immigrant who can document 5 years of occupancy- and let the IRS pull 5 years of back taxes from them in exchange for the privilege of being citizens and wiping the slate clean. The US makes some income, the illegals have been suitably fined, and there is now an expedited policy in place that can be repeated by anyone willing to squat for 5 years.

To balance it, we need a way to make legal immigration faster and ultimately cheaper for the immigrants.

**whembly**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
What's face-palm-worthy about that? Kind of hard to judge out of context.

Do me a favor, read his speech (Dreadclaw posted just before mine).

Then, come back to me.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gitzbitah wrote:
Why are we calling them undocumented immigrants now? If they entered the country illegally, they're illegal immigrants, right?

Right.

Our system certainly needs to be reformed- but I don't think just accepting a large group of known lawbreakers into the fold is a great approach to it.

Perhaps provide an expedited procedure for any illegal immigrant who can document 5 years of occupancy- and let the IRS pull 5 years of back taxes from them in exchange for the privilege of being citizens and wiping the slate clean. The US makes some income, the illegals have been suitably fined, and there is now an expedited policy in place that can be repeated by anyone willing to squat for 5 years.

To balance it, we need a way to make legal immigration faster and ultimately cheaper for the immigrants.

The problem... as I understand it, is that if you're an illegal immigrant, you are NOT allowed to work in the US. Full Stop!

Obama is created new "laws" to some illegals to be eligible for work permits, allowing them to be employed in the country legally and compete with citizens and legal residents for better-paying jobs.

This is purely a selfish, political ploy in which the Republicans will be glad to fight Obama over with. Namely, no more political appointees. Zero.

**Co'tor Shas**

whembly wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
What's face-palm-worthy about that? Kind of hard to judge out of context.

Do me a favor, read his speech (Dreadclaw posted just before mine).

Then, come back to me.

Dammit whembly, now I have to use actual effort

.

**Jihadin**

Ugh. USCIS is fee base funded. To financially support this se agencies in the Executive branch has to be defunded

Edit
Some agencies.
Still learning how to use ASUS smart phone.

**Breotan**

The details were a little underwhelming.

We wouldn't need a boarder fence if we'd just enforce the laws on people hiring illegals. A lot fewer people would be crossing if there were no easy jobs available.

**Co'tor Shas**

Breotan wrote:
The details were a little underwhelming.

We wouldn't need a boarder fence if we'd just enforce the laws on people hiring illegals. A lot fewer people would be crossing if there were no easy jobs available.

Exactly. And I think we might need to have some sort of separation of minimum wages for ag-workers.*

It could get thousands of USAmericans jobs as well. As long as the stigma against low-wage, hard-labor work is dropped.

We might do well with some sort of seasonal workers program as well, and get some tax revenue to fund whatever agency is in control of immigration to make them hurry the hell up.

What also would be great for us in the long run is to help Mexico and the rest of South America to fix the problems it has.

*Don't really know. I don't know economics. I know they used to do it.

**Sigvatr**

LordofHats wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Oh gosh, I hope that goes through. Obama would sabotage himself to such a ridiculous degree as he'd heavily offend Republicans and shut down any chance for cooperation in the long-term future.

It'll be hilarious.

That long term future where he's never again a political leader?

The long term with a Republican president

So Obama really wants to burn all bridges. This gun' be good.

This clearly is just a political ruse with the democrats blatantly trying to increase their amount of voters.

**d-usa**

Illegals, with work permits or without, are not voters. So that argument is always a bit silly.

Business coalitions, which almost always lean Republican, want these workers. Which is what makes it hard for republicans to kick them out.

The logistics for getting rid of all illegals is the same as getting rid of all guns: it is never going to be a realistic expectation so there is no point in even entertaining the thought. Everyone needs to realize that there is no way to ever get rid of them, so any plan has to include them.

So there has to be an amnesty component. The first step of which would require us to throw out anyone that has broken the law (besides the whole being here thing). Treat non-offenders like someone on parole: check in every so often, require mandatory classes, taxes and/or fines, etc.

Break any other law before or during that process: deport with extreme prejudice, no second chances.

And congress still has the option they always had: pass their own plan.

**Tannhauser42**

As Obama said, don't like it, pass your own bill.

Will that happen? No. Congress is no longer in the business of legislating, they would rather just continue to play petty political games for their own personal political gains.

**Frazzled**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
What's face-palm-worthy about that? Kind of hard to judge out of context.

They also have all the construction jobs and many of the manufacturing jobs. Maybe not in NY but in most of the South.
NOLA was rebuilt with foreign labor. There's a little Honduras there now.

As I am not working class it doesn't impact me negatively. If I were, I'd be royally

now.

But again, they're here now and hard working. Get the criminals out and put the majority onto the legal immigration path, and secure our borders before ISIS tries to sneak more people over.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

This is purely a selfish, political ploy in which the Republicans will be glad to fight Obama over with. Namely, no more political appointees. Zero.

Sure they will. They serve the same paymasters.

He's openly challenging them to join the party so he can shut the government down. He even said it with a glint in his eye. Thats what this is really about.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tannhauser42 wrote:
As Obama said, don't like it, pass your own bill.

Will that happen? No. Congress is no longer in the business of legislating, they would rather just continue to play petty political games for their own personal political gains.

What if they pass a bill mandating immediate expulsion-you know the existing law?

UNder this view any future President can call for a law, wait a few months and then do what he wants. Yerp.

**d-usa**

The existing law won't get repeated. Many won't like Obama's plan, but pretty much everyone in DC agrees that the current laws are useless and that reform needs to happen. It's the split loyalty in the GOP that is a big road block.

John Boehner has been wanting to address this for quite a while, but he has a caucus that is split on the subject and quite a few of his republican members are worried about a tea party challenge if they appear soft on throwing every single illegal out. At the same time the chambers of commerce across the nation are whispering in his ear "look at all that cheap labor we could have...".

I do think that this is an area where the bipartisan desire for a fix is there, but it's an internal split in the GOP that is keeping things from progressing.

Which is why I think that this might be the best option for everyone. Obama gets what he wants, democrats get what they want, republicans get the reform they want without getting their hands dirty, and they get the added bonus of vilifying a guy that is going to never occupy a political office again and who has nothing to lose.

**whembly**

It's what unsaid that folks are missing...

His plan, as stated, will also allow millions of eligible illegal immigrants to receive work permits and compete for jobs alongside American citizens.

Obama effectively codified the principle that bringing a child into the United States is a ticket to legal status, which will inevitably result in new waves of immigrants from South and Latin America sweeping across the border.

The president also declared millions of illegal immigrants, without much specificity, ineligible for deportation which expands the powers of prosecutorial discretion to a ludicrous degree.

Here's the key, imo, why this can backfire: The executive has the power to accelerate or decelerate enforcement priorities... which is called Prosecutorial Discretion™, but not to ABJURE the enforcement of the law entirely.

**Natalya**

whembly wrote:
His plan, as stated, will also allow millions of eligible illegal immigrants to receive work permits and compete for jobs alongside American citizens.

no, it won't because having easier access to a work visa is't going to suddenly give Jose working knowledge of the english language and a first-world education, and that's what you need to compete for a job that isn't the same minimum-wage exploitation crap that illegals have been predominantly working and that no American citizen would touch for decades.

Obama effectively codified the principle that bringing a child into the United States is a ticket to legal status, which will inevitably result in new waves of immigrants from South and Latin America sweeping across the border.

no he didn't, because a one-time amnesty deal =\= policy. his speech makes it very clear that once this amnesty deal is completed, money is going to be pumped into border-enforcement and illegals that missed the boat on it (pun not intended) are going to have to get in the same way they have been for years (legally and illegally).

**whembly**

Natalya wrote:
whembly wrote:
His plan, as stated, will also allow millions of eligible illegal immigrants to receive work permits and compete for jobs alongside American citizens.
no, it won't because having easier access to a work visa is't going to suddenly give Jose working knowledge of the english language and a first-world education, and that's what you need to compete for a job that isn't the same minimum-wage exploitation crap that illegals have been predominantly working and that no American citizen would touch for decades.

Let me break it down for you: Illegal immigrants by statutory law is forbidden to work in the US. Only way that changes is for Congress to pass a law to allow this.

Obama effectively codified the principle that bringing a child into the United States is a ticket to legal status, which will inevitably result in new waves of immigrants from South and Latin America sweeping across the border.
no he didn't, because a one-time amnesty deal =\= policy. his speech makes it very clear that once this amnesty deal is completed, money is going to be pumped into border-enforcement and illegals that missed the boat on it (pun not intended) are going to have to get in the same way they have been for years (legally and illegally).

*sigh*

I don’t think Obama even thinks it will work. The only reason he did this is because his base needed some red meat to help them get over the ass-kicking they took in the midterms.

Besides... ask yourself this: Why Now? What changed that precipitated this? Keep in mind, that in 2009 and 2010, Obama had a 79-seat majority in the House and 60-seat majority in the Senate. He could've gotten his party to pass this if this was urgent.

**Kanluwen**

whembly wrote:
Natalya wrote:
whembly wrote:
His plan, as stated, will also allow millions of eligible illegal immigrants to receive work permits and compete for jobs alongside American citizens.
no, it won't because having easier access to a work visa is't going to suddenly give Jose working knowledge of the english language and a first-world education, and that's what you need to compete for a job that isn't the same minimum-wage exploitation crap that illegals have been predominantly working and that no American citizen would touch for decades.

Let me break it down for you: Illegal immigrants by statutory law is forbidden to work in the US. Only way that changes is for Congress to pass a law to allow this.

No, the only way that changes is for businesses to stop employing illegal immigrants.

**Asherian Command**

Frazzled wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
A September CBS/New York Times poll found 51% saying Obama should use his executive powers to address immigration if Congress fails to act while 43% said he should not. A similar ABC/Washington Post survey earlier that month found 52% support for Obama acting on his own.

I find these numbers fascinating. 20 years ago I wouldn't think any executive action of this scale was fathomable, but now? I don't think it's even about Obama, or even Immigration, but another sign that voters are just getting increasingly tired of Congress. Even when a party holds a a super majority, they struggle to get legislation passed, and numerous long running issues in the US, like the budget and immigration, have become impossible for the legislature to even tackle.

Here's what Congress should do. Just a few thoughts.
1. Pass a border security act. Fund it appropriately. You'know its working when the price of illegal drugs skyrockets.
1a. devolve illegal drug legislation back to the states.
2. Pass a budget including #1 above. You have a constitutional duty inthis area. Quit ducking.
3. Begin tax reform.
4. Begin ACA reform (Frazzled translation-how can we quietly turn this into the Canadian System 'eh?)
5. Take six months for detailed analysis of what other countries are doing well economically and educationally. Steal their ideas and moon them when we do it.
6. Mandate full auto wiener dogs for every American.
7. Declare war or not against ISIS. You have a constitutonal duty in thia area. Quit ducking.
8. Review executive nominees with speed. With the exception of the judiciary, absent something significant, approve.
9. I forgot after 1 year with #1 working then pass comprehensive immigration reform, and by that I mean a one liner- " All illegal immigrants who can prove they were here before 2015, will now be granted visa as legal immigrants following a ful back ground check. Any criminal convictions during this time will result in immediate deportation."

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

But this country is highly conservative apparently.

The united states will always be quite weird to me.

**whembly**

Kanluwen wrote:
whembly wrote:
Natalya wrote:
whembly wrote:
His plan, as stated, will also allow millions of eligible illegal immigrants to receive work permits and compete for jobs alongside American citizens.
no, it won't because having easier access to a work visa is't going to suddenly give Jose working knowledge of the english language and a first-world education, and that's what you need to compete for a job that isn't the same minimum-wage exploitation crap that illegals have been predominantly working and that no American citizen would touch for decades.

Let me break it down for you: Illegal immigrants by statutory law is forbidden to work in the US. Only way that changes is for Congress to pass a law to allow this.

No, the only way that changes is for businesses to stop employing illegal immigrants.

No, that's not what I'm talking about...

Obama is stating that those approx 5 million illegal immigrants would be qualified for work visa, social security cards, etc... there's no statutory law that empowers the Executive Branch to do that. The only way THAT changes, is for Congress to pass a law to do so.

He's effectively concocting arbitrary lines out of thin air that separate illegal immigrants worthy of work permits and Social Security numbers, from other illegal immigrants who get nothing.

Why should parents of legal residents get benefits but not parents of DACA recipients? Why should an illegal immigrant who entered the country before 2007 be eligible for DACA but not one who entered in 2008?

All of these illegal immigrants will be forced to play under very different sets of rules, rules completely made up by Obama.

Unless someone can show me statutory laws that grant Obama from doing this... he's looking for a battle with Congress.

This really, REALLY important dude says he can't do it.

**Asherian Command**

Sigvatr wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Oh gosh, I hope that goes through. Obama would sabotage himself to such a ridiculous degree as he'd heavily offend Republicans and shut down any chance for cooperation in the long-term future.

It'll be hilarious.

That long term future where he's never again a political leader?

The long term with a Republican president

So Obama really wants to burn all bridges. This gun' be good.

This clearly is just a political ruse with the democrats blatantly trying to increase their amount of voters.

Or you know its been done in history before.

This is like the third time this has happened from taiwan to vietnam, and to koreans coming to the united states to live here.

A lot of people that are illegal immigrants are people running away from the drug war in mexico. I mean they are technically refugees then.

**whembly**

Asherian Command wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Oh gosh, I hope that goes through. Obama would sabotage himself to such a ridiculous degree as he'd heavily offend Republicans and shut down any chance for cooperation in the long-term future.

It'll be hilarious.

That long term future where he's never again a political leader?

The long term with a Republican president

So Obama really wants to burn all bridges. This gun' be good.

This clearly is just a political ruse with the democrats blatantly trying to increase their amount of voters.

Or you know its been done in history before.

This is like the third time this has happened from taiwan to vietnam, and to koreans coming to the united states to live here.

A lot of people that are illegal immigrants are people running away from the drug war in mexico. I mean they are technically refugees then.

There is a process to claim refugees status.

We have laws on the book for a reason... enforce it.

**d-usa**

What are the actual "laws" regarding work permits? Don't feel like diving head first into legislative records today.

If there is actually real laws passed by congress that say who is eligible for permits there could be problems. But what if the law just says something to the effect of "department X shall issue work permits and develop guidelines for doing so"? If the actual decision of developing criteria is passed along to the executive branch then he can decide whatever he wants.

Obama might be an egotistical megalomaniac, but he is a constitutional lawyer and not an idiot. There has to be some reason why he thinks he can do what he did.

**Frazzled**

Asherian Command wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
A September CBS/New York Times poll found 51% saying Obama should use his executive powers to address immigration if Congress fails to act while 43% said he should not. A similar ABC/Washington Post survey earlier that month found 52% support for Obama acting on his own.

I find these numbers fascinating. 20 years ago I wouldn't think any executive action of this scale was fathomable, but now? I don't think it's even about Obama, or even Immigration, but another sign that voters are just getting increasingly tired of Congress. Even when a party holds a a super majority, they struggle to get legislation passed, and numerous long running issues in the US, like the budget and immigration, have become impossible for the legislature to even tackle.

Here's what Congress should do. Just a few thoughts.
1. Pass a border security act. Fund it appropriately. You'know its working when the price of illegal drugs skyrockets.
1a. devolve illegal drug legislation back to the states.
2. Pass a budget including #1 above. You have a constitutional duty inthis area. Quit ducking.
3. Begin tax reform.
4. Begin ACA reform (Frazzled translation-how can we quietly turn this into the Canadian System 'eh?)
5. Take six months for detailed analysis of what other countries are doing well economically and educationally. Steal their ideas and moon them when we do it.
6. Mandate full auto wiener dogs for every American.
7. Declare war or not against ISIS. You have a constitutonal duty in thia area. Quit ducking.
8. Review executive nominees with speed. With the exception of the judiciary, absent something significant, approve.
9. I forgot after 1 year with #1 working then pass comprehensive immigration reform, and by that I mean a one liner- " All illegal immigrants who can prove they were here before 2015, will now be granted visa as legal immigrants following a ful back ground check. Any criminal convictions during this time will result in immediate deportation."

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

But this country is highly conservative apparently.

The united states will always be quite weird to me.

Thats just a graduated tax system. We used to have a similar millionaires surcharge. Cool with me.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:
What are the actual "laws" regarding work permits? Don't feel like diving head first into legislative records today.

If there is actually real laws passed by congress that say who is eligible for permits there could be problems. But what if the law just says something to the effect of "department X shall issue work permits and develop guidelines for doing so"? If the actual decision of developing criteria is passed along to the executive branch then he can decide whatever he wants.

Obama might be an egotistical megalomaniac, but he is a constitutional lawyer and not an idiot. There has to be some reason why he thinks he can do what he did.

Well there has to be a law in the first place allowing work permits to even be issued.

**Sigvatr**

Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

Yes, because rich people are evil and it's ok to steal from them.

**Asherian Command**

Sigvatr wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

Yes, because rich people are evil and it's ok to steal from them.

No its more of the fact that they should pay more taxes than someone who makes 100k, not the same.

It should be based on higher precentage. So if you make a billion dollars. A millon dollars is sent to the government.

And it increments. only up to 25%

Its not because they are evil. But because that would help devy up the rich's wealth and allow it to spread and not remain within the few.

AS Historically the rich never give up their money and they have a lot of money. Infact some have too much money.

1% of the united states own 99% of the wealth of the united states. With that in place it would start to shrink and become more acceptable.

Where the middle class would be able afford more luxuries and the poor becoming a dwindling number due to the influx of money from the rich.

It would also allow for technological and economic progression. As those who could not afford go to school can now go. So we would start to also see dwindling of the poor class and more middle class compatriots and more critical thinking and a better country overall.

**Frazzled**

Asherian Command wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

Yes, because rich people are evil and it's ok to steal from them.

No its more of the fact that they should pay more taxes than someone who makes 100k, not the same..

You're describing the current system. The only difference is the % of the top rate (or maybe the re-imposition of a millionaire rate).

**Asherian Command**

Frazzled wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

Yes, because rich people are evil and it's ok to steal from them.

No its more of the fact that they should pay more taxes than someone who makes 100k, not the same..

You're describing the current system. The only difference is the % of the top rate (or maybe the re-imposition of a millionaire rate).

Yes but where there not cutbacks a while ago during the bush adminstration?

That were massive cutbacks for the wealthy?

I know there were was a discrepancy somewhere. I mean I am not an economist, just a theorist in this case.

So it may be my misunderstanding of the whole issue. We touched on it quite often in my Political Science Classes. Which was also not really an introduction but an indepth study of economics in the united states compared to other countries. (Seeing as there is more white collar crime nowadays than any other time.)

But that does not mean my views were skewed. I think it should be a flat precentage on those who make millions of dollar a year, and they have to pay more in terms of taxes like 20% of their money intake. Which is quite a bit if your making a million dollars.

**whembly**

Asherian Command wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

Yes, because rich people are evil and it's ok to steal from them.

No its more of the fact that they should pay more taxes than someone who makes 100k, not the same..

You're describing the current system. The only difference is the % of the top rate (or maybe the re-imposition of a millionaire rate).

Yes but where there not cutbacks a while ago during the bush adminstration?

That were massive cutbacks for the wealthy?

I know there were was a discrepancy somewhere. I mean I am not an economist, just a theorist in this case.

So it may be my misunderstanding of the whole issue. We touched on it quite often in my Political Science Classes. Which was also not really an introduction but an indepth study of economics in the united states compared to other countries. (Seeing as there is more white collar crime nowadays than any other time.)

But that does not mean my views were skewed. I think it should be a flat precentage on those who make millions of dollar a year, and they have to pay more in terms of taxes like 20% of their money intake. Which is quite a bit if your making a million dollars.

The top of the tax brackets pays plenty in taxes:

Spoiler:

(FYI: if you want to debate this some more, create a thread!

)

Unless, you'd think Obama should unilaterally decree that the rich should pay more.

**Asherian Command**

whembly wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot 10. 20% of money made on those who make more than a million dollars a year must go to the government and charities.

Yes, because rich people are evil and it's ok to steal from them.

No its more of the fact that they should pay more taxes than someone who makes 100k, not the same..

You're describing the current system. The only difference is the % of the top rate (or maybe the re-imposition of a millionaire rate).

Yes but where there not cutbacks a while ago during the bush adminstration?

That were massive cutbacks for the wealthy?

I know there were was a discrepancy somewhere. I mean I am not an economist, just a theorist in this case.

So it may be my misunderstanding of the whole issue. We touched on it quite often in my Political Science Classes. Which was also not really an introduction but an indepth study of economics in the united states compared to other countries. (Seeing as there is more white collar crime nowadays than any other time.)

But that does not mean my views were skewed. I think it should be a flat precentage on those who make millions of dollar a year, and they have to pay more in terms of taxes like 20% of their money intake. Which is quite a bit if your making a million dollars.

The top of the tax brackets pays plenty in taxes:

Spoiler:

(FYI: if you want to debate this some more, create a thread! )

Unless, you'd think Obama should unilaterally decree that the rich should pay more.

This may sound like Hersey. But obama does not match my Views. And he is apparently 'left' in this country.

It is quite skewed in this country it is kind of hilarious.

I agree, but then why do we have the top 1% dealio.

I mean this executive order is well within the Presidents Power.

I mean Bush did it, Regean did, George Washington did it.

I don't get the kerfuffle of a president doing what the congress refuses to do. Act. I mean this congress has only shown to be moronic and know little of what their people want. Especially after they tried to push a certain bill. That will go nameless and was attacked for being.... not well written.

But hey my opinion is moot because I think no child left behind actually leaves more children behind than it helps. And I also think the immigration is a smaller issue compared to education and economics. But again, I think the economic system should be reformed into a newer system. So it is both controlled in certain areas, (like public water, food, fire, police, security, healthcare etc.) but everything else is controlled by the free market.

Because you know Socialism its evil.

**Frazzled**

I don't get the kerfuffle of a president doing what the congress refuses to do. Act.

By not doing anything they are acting. Just not doing what he wants to do.

Under the "Obama Dctrine" any president can now unilaterally act on major issues if he/she disagrees with Congress. Thats a nice step to dictatorship.