• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do You Agree With [Obama's] New Approach to Deportations?

Do You Agree With [Obama's] New Approach to Deportations?


  • Total voters
    29
Do You Agree With [Obama's] New Approach to Deportations?
  • Yes, focus on deporting dangerous criminals first.
  • No, this is the WH bypassing Congress to implement 'backdoor amnesty.'
  • Other
Here is a link to Fox News report on the change in policy.


"Special Report" On Backdoor Amnesty For Illegal Immigration? | RealClearPolitics

Not only no but HELL NO! this is the white house bypassing congress to enact amnesty. He should be thrown out of office for it. The one thing a president should never do is basically encourage a unarmed invasion of the country he is running.
 
This is Obama showing that he thinks he can circumvent the law and the Constitution and dictate what he wants. I think he needs to be impeached or at least threatened with it, to put his Anti-American Ass in its place.
 
Yes it makes sense to optimize if one has resource constraints.

We give money away to foreign countries, we give money away for stupid grants, we have hundreds of overlapping government agencies and many other stupid unnecessary government programs. We do not have a resource problem or resource constraint.
 
Not only no but HELL NO! this is the white house bypassing congress to enact amnesty. He should be thrown out of office for it. The one thing a president should never do is basically encourage a unarmed invasion of the country he is running.
This is Obama showing that he thinks he can circumvent the law and the Constitution and dictate what he wants. I think he needs to be impeached or at least threatened with it, to put his Anti-American Ass in its place.

Bypassing Congress, Impeached? :lamo Are you guys serious?? I Suppose I can understand that Fox fooled you with their spin on this. But seriously, how is this in anyway shape or form bypassing Congress or an impeachable offense.
 
This is Obama showing that he thinks he can circumvent the law and the Constitution and dictate what he wants. I think he needs to be impeached or at least threatened with it, to put his Anti-American Ass in its place.

He is looking for votes. The one term Marxist president Obama wants to change the demographic by flooding the nation with poor, illiterates from south of our border. He is dangerous. I think the right answer is to defund the white house. When he stops his dictatorship Congress can turn his phones and power back on.
 
No. He's implementing a policy that back-burners going after employers who employ illegals and deporting illegals caught at the border unless they have a criminal record. This is amnesty, and I'm against it. There's a reason that every country in the world regulates immigration. Economically and societally, nations can absorb only a certain number of immigrants each year. Too many will overwhelm resources. That's what is happening to us. We take in 1 million a year legally, but 1-2 million flood in illegally each year. Hospitals are overwhelmed, and literally dozens have closed their doors in California alone, due strictly to the enormous cost of attending to pregnant illegals. Schools are overwhelmed by the rapid influx of students requiring bi-lingual education.

All of society's services are strained when trying to absorb more people than can comfortably be assisted. That's why countries set immigration standards. And that's why we should be enforcing ours.
 
No. He's implementing a policy that back-burners going after employers who employ illegals and deporting illegals caught at the border unless they have a criminal record. This is amnesty, and I'm against it. There's a reason that every country in the world regulates immigration. Economically and societally, nations can absorb only a certain number of immigrants each year. Too many will overwhelm resources. That's what is happening to us. We take in 1 million a year legally, but 1-2 million flood in illegally each year. Hospitals are overwhelmed, and literally dozens have closed their doors in California alone, due strictly to the enormous cost of attending to pregnant illegals. Schools are overwhelmed by the rapid influx of students requiring bi-lingual education.

All of society's services are strained when trying to absorb more people than can comfortably be assisted. That's why countries set immigration standards. And that's why we should be enforcing ours.
Sorry, but you've got it wrong, the new policy is to deport the most dangerous cases first. That's not amnesty, it's smart thinking especially if there are limited resources.
 
There's essentially "back-door amnesty" by default. The federal bureaucracy (DHS, DOJ, ICE) has nowhere near enough resources to prosecute every ****ing deportation case involving an illegal, by default. You can look at it as a de facto passage of the Dream Act (as some folks have called it), sure. You could also look at it as a prioritization of resources and efforts.

Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Some more links, if anyone cares to find out more

Original ICE Memo by director John Morton:

http://www.ice.gov/doclib/secure-communities/pdf/prosecutorial-discretion-memo.pdf

Napolitano's letter to 22 senators, including Sen. Dick Durbin (chief proponent of the dream act) on Thursday, about the new guideline changes:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/11-8949_Durbin_Dream_Act_response_08.18.11.pdf

Rep. Lamar Smith's (R-Texas) response:

http://judiciary.house.gov/news/08182011.html
 
Last edited:
The policy is not about detention but order of priority in deportation. I agree with deporting detained individuals who are the most dangerous FIRST. Get them out of here, out of our system, out of our country, and out of our sight.

The immigration department is dealing with so many illegals right now that it makes sense to have a priority system.
 
Yes it makes sense to optimize if one has resource constraints.
expand your resources. There are States wanting to use their LE to asssist. Quit wasting money taking States like Az to court over laws which would allow them to more effectively assist the feds.
 
Fox is being dishonest as usual. The change doesn't change the number of people deported at all. Immigration courts have been over capacity for years. There is currently an 18 month backlog. That means that if ICE detained nobody at all for 18 months then started up again, it would not cause any change at all in the number of people deported per year. What it does do is instruct ICE to focus on the highest priority cases. Since we can only deport so many people per year, it seems obvious to me that it makes sense to pick the ones that are causing the most trouble.

In fact, it may actually lead to an increase in the number of deportations. A higher priority undocumented immigrant will most likely be able to be deported after a much quicker trial. If you commit a felony, for example, it doesn't even matter if you have a valid visa, you're out. So, by focusing on felons the trials don't need to waste time on the visa issues, which is usually a big complicated part of the trial. ICE credits the focus on higher priority targets as the main reason that deportations were higher in 2010 than they've ever been in US history. So, if anything, it appears that it means more deportations to prioritize.
 
Obama's basically taking the approach of "I'm not going to stop it, I'm not even gonna try to remedy the overall situation, but I'll try and minimise the worst parts of it", which makes sense, it's pragmatic, but I disagree with it.
 
Deportations, prisons, nothing will matter till we for the most part seal the border...they couldve slowed illegal immigration down to a trickle along time ago...

democrats want votes and republicans want cheap labor so the pigs at the trough can keep all labor pay in the toilet
 
Deportations, prisons, nothing will matter till we for the most part seal the border...they couldve slowed illegal immigration down to a trickle along time ago...

democrats want votes and republicans want cheap labor so the pigs at the trough can keep all labor pay in the toilet

We currently spend $40 billion/year on immigration enforcement. How much would you like to see it increased to?
 
We currently spend $40 billion/year on immigration enforcement. How much would you like to see it increased to?


Whatever it takes...and if they got for real about it...the cost would be less, instead of creating eyecandy divisions and creating that all of which DO NOTHING...they are pissing it away....you cant deport enough to make a differnence if you have more than you deport running over the border....we have to seal the border but we never will

bush wanted amnesty...obama wants amnesty...REAGAN gave them amnesty
 
Whatever it takes...and if they got for real about it...the cost would be less, instead of creating eyecandy divisions and creating that all of which DO NOTHING...they are pissing it away....you cant deport enough to make a differnence if you have more than you deport running over the border....we have to seal the border but we never will

bush wanted amnesty...obama wants amnesty...REAGAN gave them amnesty

Whatever it takes? You mean whatever it takes to reduce illegal immigration to zero? Because that would certainly be more than our entire GDP. Do you mean spend enough so that the number of undocumented immigrants in the country goes down each year? Because we're already there- the number has been dropping for three years now. What exactly do you mean? Specifics, not slogans.
 
I think the focus is completely off. Don't go after the illegals, but go after the employers who hire them and go after the hand-outs US gives them.

This will reduce the incentive to stay in the US, and the number of illegals in the US will be reduced.
 
We currently spend $40 billion/year on immigration enforcement. How much would you like to see it increased to?

I'd like to see the budget for deportations raised to the $40 billion figure that you just pulled out of your ass.

The ENTIRE department of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is budgeted at $11.84 Billion (2012)
The ENTIRE department of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is budgeted at $5.82 Billion (2012)

Where did you get that $40 billion figure from, one of those pro-illegal alien websites that you reference in other posts dealing with these issues?
 
Whatever it takes? You mean whatever it takes to reduce illegal immigration to zero? Because that would certainly be more than our entire GDP. Do you mean spend enough so that the number of undocumented immigrants in the country goes down each year? Because we're already there- the number has been dropping for three years now. What exactly do you mean? Specifics, not slogans.

Number 1...run over the border pregnant and we get the privledge of paying for the birth and hospital care and it could be millions if theres mother or baby complications..and when its all said and done...we make your child a citizen so proponents of illegal immigration can whine OH YOU CANT SPLIT UP FAMILIES...whos kidding who...NO baby born of illegal immigrants should be a citizen number 1, number two ENFORCE huge fines for any employer that hires an illegal immigrant, get caught to many times, go to jail......put troops on the border when you catch them coming over...pile them in trucks and drive them to the mexican border...as soon as an illegal is identified...drive him to the border...thats if anyone wanted illegal immigration stopped...only the victims of illegal immigration want it stopped...the taxpayers the people that live lousy lives who live on the border and the victims of the criminals....All we have to do to slow illegal immigration down to a trickle is to let them know WERE SERIOUS , dont need fences...dont need more bureaucracies...just need to get serious.
 
I'd like to see the budget for deportations raised to the $40 billion figure that you just pulled out of your ass.

The ENTIRE department of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is budgeted at $11.84 Billion (2012)
The ENTIRE department of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is budgeted at $5.82 Billion (2012)

Yeah, so that's $17 billion right there. The Secure Border Initiative is the budget center for creating the fence at about $2 billion. US Citizenship and Immigration Services runs just under $3 billion. The DoJ's immigration enforcement office is around $1 billion. So we're up to $23 billion so far. Then you have state and local enforcement, detention costs, court costs, e-verify, etc. You also have a large portion of the Coast Guard's budget that is focused on immigration enforcement.
 
Yeah, so that's $17 billion right there. The Secure Border Initiative is the budget center for creating the fence at about $2 billion. US Citizenship and Immigration Services runs just under $3 billion. The DoJ's immigration enforcement office is around $1 billion. So we're up to $23 billion so far. Then you have state and local enforcement, detention costs, court costs, e-verify, etc. You also have a large portion of the Coast Guard's budget that is focused on immigration enforcement.

Everything in this post...says STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION....the fence is dead...obama killed it.
Like I said all we have to do to get illegal immigration to a trickle is make a few changes...and let them know WE ARE SERIOUS and most will stop coming...no fences, no stealthfighters flying over head, no special ops, just troops on the border temporarily till they know were serious then border patrol can be beefed a little more...its not going to stop entirely...but we have to stop this bleeding.....but I doubt we will
 
Number 1...run over the border pregnant and we get the privledge of paying for the birth and hospital care and it could be millions if theres mother or baby complications..and when its all said and done...we make your child a citizen so proponents of illegal immigration can whine OH YOU CANT SPLIT UP FAMILIES...whos kidding who...NO baby born of illegal immigrants should be a citizen number 1

Er, that would INCREASE illegal immigration. You'd be classifying a whole new group of millions of people as illegal immigrants.

But, regardless, you need a constitutional amendment to do that. No way that happens.

number two ENFORCE huge fines for any employer that hires an illegal immigrant

Yeah, that has been one of Obama's main pushes. Very successful so far.

put troops on the border

If you took our entire military, even at it's currently ultra inflated size, and you stationed every single person- that means every accountant and janitor that works for the military, not just active duty soldiers- along the entire US border 24 hours a day working in shifts, then there would be approximately 2,000 feet between one military person and the next. Plenty of room for somebody to slip through. Plus you have something like 100,000 of those huge shipping containers a day coming in to the US, around 1 million people legally crossing the border each day, planes, cruise ships to be searched, etc... And even if you secured the entire border 100% somehow, a huge portion of undocumented immigrants are people who overstayed visas, so it wouldn't help with them at all. Not really the complete solution one might have assumed even if we completely withdrew from all military obligations and ventures around the world, completely retooled the entire military into purely a border patrol, and kept it at approximately half of our federal budget.

What you are proposing is spending approximately $1 trillion/year trying to solve a problem that only costs us around $30 billion/year in social services. And even at the $1 trillion/year level, all we can really expect is maybe a 50% reduction or so. I don't think that makes sense to spend $1 trillion just to save $30 billion.

Besides, if we are going to do a no-holds-barred, no-budget-is-too-big all out law enforcement blitz on some crime, why pick illegal immigration? Why not focus those resources on a more serious type of crime like murder or rape?

when you catch them coming over...pile them in trucks and drive them to the mexican border...as soon as an illegal is identified...drive him to the border...

If they catch somebody as they are crossing the border that is what they do. But, once somebody is inside the US then they need to have due process. We don't allow the government to apply such a massive punishment to people as deportation just on the suspicion of a law enforcement officer. That would be straight up tyranny.
 
Last edited:
Who here expects that we actually will deport all of them?

If we're not going to deport all 12mil of them, then we should prioritize.

If we are going to deport all of them, then there's no need to prioritize.​


Who here expects that we actually will deport all of them?
 
Back
Top Bottom