• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    President Joe Biden previously endorsed the border provisions, and while Trump and other Republicans have called it too weak, the bill would have marked a tough change to immigration law and would have given the president far-reaching powers to restrict illegal migrant crossings at the southern border.

    The White House and top Democrats have discussed taking more action on the border ahead of the first presidential debate next month, CNN previously reported. Those plans, intended to strengthen the party’s hand on a critical campaign issue ahead of the 2024 election, also potentially include a sweeping executive order limiting migrants’ ability to seek asylum, sources have told CNN.

    Biden’s getting protested by his own party for acting too much like Republicans…

    So now Dems are going to act even more like Republicans? We can’t address real problems, but we’re working with republicans on “border security”?

    If Dem voters always “vote blue no matter who” then the party is going to keep moving right under the misguided idea that trump voters will vote for Biden.

    I truly wish it didn’t take abstaining from the vote to get the message across, I don’t even know if that will work honestly. But it’s clear they don’t give a fuck about protests when they’re in power to do something.

    I’ve watched the party pull to the right for 30 years now. Shutting up and voting for the lesser of two evils isn’t sustainable long term. The party needs to move back to the left, but they never will if we keep blindly voting for Dems that agree with Republicans on this stupid shit.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ma dude, you’re just ranting in this thread and not making much of a coherent argument or thought in context with the article. Politics is shitty. We get it.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Politics is shitty. We get it.

        It doesn’t have to be, but the reason it is shitty, is people just accept that we can’t have anything more.

        You get that right?

        It’s not like there’s something magical about America that prevents decent politicians from fixing things.

        It’s just money in politics keeping it this way. And both parties like that money.

        That’s why BVF can coordinate with the party and Biden’s campaign while taking up to a million a year from each donor.

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Republicans have been manufacturing outrage at the border to score political points on a regular basis, like that migrant caravan which convenes every four years like a Fox News political convention.

      However, this recent crisis is a bit different, as we have numbers that show that there have been an increase in asylum claims at the border vs. before the Pandemic, which is overwhelming the courts that handle this sort of thing. If someone makes it over the border and claims asylum, it can take years to get a hearing, and in the meantime they can live and work here. That was not the intent behind the asylum process.

      Some Senators on both sides realized this, and used the opportunity to try and fix the asylum process. Yes, it also reduces the types of people who could claim asylum. But it also addresses critical staffing shortages in CBP and other agencies who have to deal with the influx of migrants on a daily basis.

      So, this is an evidence-based attempt to make things better. So, of course, Trump is against it, because using immigration as a campaign plank matters more to him than fixing the problem. As much as he complains about it, having the problem to talk about is more valuable to him than fixing it.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        So, this is an evidence-based attempt to make things better

        Just because Republicans keep saying something doesn’t make it “evidence”…

        If that was true, Joe Biden would be a Communist that’s more progressive than AOC, whose trying to pass strict gun laws, tax the rich, fight climate change, and get universal healthcare.

        I’d love for that to be true, but it’s not. And republicans repeating it over and over again won’t suddenly make it try.

        • dhork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Just because Republicans keep saying something doesn’t make it “evidence”…

          Maybe this does:

          A Sober Assessment of the Growing U.S. Asylum Backlog

          At the end of FY 2012, over 100,000 asylum cases were pending in the Immigration Court’s backlog. A decade later, the backlog had grown over 7-fold to over 750,000 cases in September at the end of FY 2022. Since then, in just the first two months of FY 2023 (October-November 2022), the asylum backlog jumped by over 30,000 new cases and now totals 787,882. See Figure 1.

          https://trac.syr.edu/reports/705/

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            What?

            You think the existence of a large backlog of asylum seekers… Means we should deny all asylum seekers?

            I don’t understand any of that logic…

            Wouldn’t the fix be to process all those applications?

            You don’t think people waiting years for asylum are going to try and cross illegally out of desperation?

            I appreciate you linking that to show an actual problem with the border, but I have zero idea how you think this makes it better instead of worse.

            Like, at all, unless I’m confused and you’ve been agreeing with me this whole time, I don’t understand why you would link something so harmful to your own argument

            • dhork@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              You think the existence of a large backlog of asylum seekers… Means we should deny all asylum seekers?

              I never said that, and that’s not what this bill does. If you are going to lie about stuff, then there is no point to argue with you.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                So what does the bill that’s a “compromise” with republicans do to clear the backlog of asylum seekers?

                • a lil bee 🐝@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Quite a bit. Have you read the bill? Section I is doing a lot of hiring and training changes for border personnel. Section II is entirely centered on enhancements to the asylum review process. It’s mostly minutiae like streamlining certain bars for entry and such. There is also the contentious 5k/day (likely to be 4k under an R admin since it’s discretionary) threshold in Section III that triggers a full stop to entry until some of the backlog is cleared. Not sure I fully agree with that one but it will indisputably have an impact on the backlog.

                  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    There is also the contentious 5k/day (likely to be 4k under an R admin since it’s discretionary) threshold in Section III that triggers a full stop to entry until some of the backlog is cleared.

                    So…

                    The limit is discretionary if they can change it…

                    So they could do it at any point, just like I was saying?

                    And I still don’t know why/how not accepting more applications or not allowing anyone else to cross the border actually fixes the backlog.

                    Like, them saying they’ll hire more people could help. But if you had experience with a government agency, you’d know they’re always saying they’re going to increase staffing, and rarely random to do more than keep up with people leaving.

                    But thanks for letting me know what was in there is what I’ve been saying is in there.