• 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 support the New Way Forward Act?

Do you support the New Way Forward Act?

  • Total voters
    33
Mongidig said:
I'm no snitch. I can't believe people actually complain to MODs because they got their feelings hurt by a post.
Click to expand...

But you believe in issuing completely baseless orders for which you have absolutely no power to enforce. I dont snitch either.
 
bomberfox said:
But you believe in issuing completely baseless orders for which you have absolutely no power to enforce. I dont snitch either.
Click to expand...

I wasn't giving you an order. I was offering a suggestion because I think most people including liberals will find this legislation to be ridiculous.

I'm glad you don't snitch;)
 
enderpotato00 said:
This new House bill will fundamentally change our entire immigration system.

Text - H.R.5383 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): New Way Forward Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Click to expand...

Only if there is a law that requires penalties for employers who hire illegal aliens.
If you're not sure, use e-Verify.
No excuses.
That tamps down the incentive to come here illegally in the first place.

Also, another bill that reorganizes the immigration system into a mildly merit based process, in other words, if you have something to offer this country and no criminal record, there is an accessible and reasonable path to legal residency therefore there is more incentive to use the legal system instead of just crossing the border: "Here I am..."
 
bomberfox said:
Lol anything that doesnt torture immigrants is nefarious.
Click to expand...

Better pay attention to the provisions on what they consider a felony immigrant---anyone that was given a sentence of incarceration of less than 5 years, which can easily include violent felons. It decriminalizes illegal immigration, it changes deportation hearing from shall to may, and many language changes that seem minimal but have large impacts.
 
If there was any doubt that the Democratic Party was for open borders this puts it to rest. This encourages criminals to come to the USA. I like to think the bill wouldn’t have a chance in hell of getting passed. And they know it. So what’s the real agenda here?
 
Nice to see that decent people don't support this act.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Certainly the President will veto it.
Click to expand...

That assumes that 1) Trump actually wins this year, the odds of which are a debate for a different thread, and

2) the bill isn't held up in committee for 4+ years, so that Trump can't veto it.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
I didn't see a choice for "hell no".
 
ttwtt78640 said:
No bond should be set at less than the typical amount needed to locate and recapture them if they fail to show up for court.
Click to expand...

You would prefer that they sit in prison, possibly for years, without due process, yet you call yourself a libertarian. Please square that.
 
j brown's body said:
Decent people love punishing those who don't look like them.
Click to expand...

How despicable. Cant get your way? Throw the race card.

Under the provisions of the bill, people guilty of say, domestic battery, can still immigrate with no issues. Why? Why pass a bill that allows felons to become US citizens?
 
86% don't want it

which is like saying you don't want a root canal

no, it is worse

a root canal may be necessary to save your life

this thing will take lives
 
j brown's body said:
You would prefer that they sit in prison, possibly for years, without due process, yet you call yourself a libertarian. Please square that.
Click to expand...

Nope, I would prefer that they be deported if they lack solid evidence to present for asylum.
 
Absolutely not. Where to begin?

It removes the ability to remove aliens who are removable or inadmissible if they manage to duck the system for at least five years:
TITLE II—STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS said:
(3) (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), any removal proceeding against an alien previously admitted to the United States for being within a class of deportable aliens described in section 237(a)(2), or within a class of inadmissible aliens described in section 212(a)(2), shall not be entertained unless commenced not later than the date that is five years after the date on which the alien became deportable or inadmissible.
Click to expand...

It appears to eliminate inadmissibility due to crimes involving moral turpitude (INA 212(a)(2)(A) currently states aliens who have committed "a crime involving moral turpitude (other than a purely political offense) or an attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime" is inadmissible):
TITLE III—LIMIT CRIMINAL-SYSTEM-TO-REMOVAL PIPELINE said:
(a) Inadmissibility Based On Criminal And Related Grounds.—Section 212(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)) is amended—

(1) by striking subparagraph (A); and

(2) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (I) as subparagraphs (A) through (H), respectively.
Click to expand...

It removes the ability of the government to re-remove an alien who was deported yesterday and instead it must begin removal proceedings all over again:
TITLE IV—RESTORE JUDICIAL DISCRETION AND END REMOVAL WITHOUT DUE PROCESS said:
(c) Reinstatement Of Removal Orders Against Aliens Illegally Reentering.—Section 241(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(a)) is amended—

(1) by striking paragraph (5)
Click to expand...

It removes penalties for aliens who cross the border illegally or commit fraud for the purposes of obtaining an immigration benefit, and also (shockingly) removes the prohibition on creation of a commercial enterprise for the purpose of evading immigration laws (human trafficking organizations). It also removes enhanced criminal penalties for aliens who were deported yesterday and illegally reenter today:
TITLE VI—DECRIMINALIZE MIGRATION said:
SEC. 601. REPEALING MIGRATION CRIMINAL LAWS.

(a) Criminal Penalties For Entry At Improper Time Or Place.—Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1325) is repealed.

(b) Criminal Penalties For Reentry.—Section 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1326) is repealed.
Click to expand...

And you wanna talk about immigration backlogs? How about opening the floodgates by requiring the government to re-open cases from the past 25 years of aliens who were removed, deported, or excluded:
TITLE VII—RIGHT TO COME HOME said:
SEC. 701. RECONSIDERING AND REOPENING IMMIGRATION CASES.

(a) In General.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Attorney General—

(1) shall grant a motion to reconsider or reopen proceedings pursuant to paragraph (6) or (7) of section 240(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)) with respect to any alien who—

(A) on or after April 24, 1996—

(i) was ordered removed, deported, or excluded; or

(ii) departed the United States pursuant to a grant of voluntary departure under section 240B of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229c) (regardless of whether or not the alien was ordered removed, deported, or excluded)
Click to expand...

And it even requires the government to pay for transportation of the aliens to the US to re-litigate their now-re-opened cases:
TITLE VII—RIGHT TO COME HOME said:
SEC. 701. RECONSIDERING AND REOPENING IMMIGRATION CASES.

(d) Transportation.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide transportation for aliens eligible for reopening or reconsideration of their proceedings under this section, at Government expense, to return to the United States for further immigration proceedings and shall admit or parole the alien into the United States.
Click to expand...

So, not just no, but abso-****ing-lutely no, I don't support this trainwreck of a law that will effectively gut any remaining semblance of immigration enforcement this country still had. It is an abomination, and anyone who had a hand it writing it should be ashamed of themselves.
 
Captain Adverse said:
To the Question: "Do you support the New Way Forward Act?"

What's that old saying?

"Not only no, but HELL NO!"

If it gets passed in the House, I doubt the Senate will vote for it.

Certainly the President will veto it.
Click to expand...

And I thank goodness that we have rational people in our Government (not so much in our House) to protect our borders and voting process. What is Nancy thinking?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
maquiscat said:
That assumes that 1) Trump actually wins this year, the odds of which are a debate for a different thread, and

2) the bill isn't held up in committee for 4+ years, so that Trump can't veto it.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
It can't be held up in committee for four years. It can be held up for a maximum of not quite two years, assuming it was introduced (and passed) on the first day of a new Congress, and then it will expire at the end of that Congress. If they want it to become law after that, it will have to be re-introduced and re-passed.
 
bomberfox said:
Well bonds are supposed to motivate people to come in, not bankrupt them.
Click to expand...

Sure, and if they show up, they get their money back. If it’s “what they can afford” they will slide into the darkness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
bomberfox said:
Uhhh being a fugitive is a rather big expense already, yeah lets tack the potential for bankruptcy on top of it......
Click to expand...

Great idea! That might deter them from being a fugitive.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom