• 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!

So then, what is a reasonable DACA/Border deal look like?

jdog21 said:
90% of our immigration is from family sponsored visas. While 5% is for diversity lottery and 5% is other.
Id like to see added a merit based system and a true random lottery.
Id also like to see the who qualifies as family scaled back. Currently, siblings, parents, grandparents, cousins, nieces & nephews get it. Id like to see that scaled back to just siblings.
And proportions like 50% merit based. 30% family sponsored. 10% true random lottery to give hope fairly to all those on the list even if their on back of the list. 5% for the diversity lottery. 5% other
Click to expand...

How you you feel about replacing a diversity lottery with 5% of the spots going to anyone a US sponsor is willing to take responsibility for. For instance, you know of an individual from a certain country, you sponsor their application, but you have supervisory responsibilities for, say, five years to make sure they make a good transition. You would have to file certain reports during that time to certify that they are employed, learning English, staying out of trouble, etc.

I am as conservative as you can get, and I would approve of a plan like that for 5%.
 
Last edited:
$18 Billion for the wall right now and end to chain migration in exchange for permanent citizenship for DACA and keeping the lottery.
 
eohrnberger said:
Same as what they did with Reagan. Do you really think that Trump is going to go for that deal? Form what I heard he already rejected something along those lines just in the last 2 days.
Click to expand...

Yes. So he can say he made a deal and got funding for it. Trump can't control what the next president and congress will do. Funding for the wall can be ignored, removed or the wall built in such a way that a paraplegic can easily go over it.
 
flex said:
How you you feel about replacing a diversity lottery with 5% of the spots going to anyone a US sponsor is willing to take responsibility for. For instance, you know of an individual from a certain country, you sponsor their application, but you have supervisory responsibilities for, say, five years to make sure they make a good transition. You would have to file certain reports during that time to certify that they are employed, learning English, staying out of trouble, etc.

I am as conservative as you can get, and I would approve of a plan like that for 5%.
Click to expand...
Im in favor of most things when their done in small doses. 1 their easier to change when down the road they are shown to not be as good as originally thought. And 2 Its easier to curb out abuse and easier to end with out a huge public uproar. Now for your stance on the diversity lottery change I beileve those same requirements are already a part of the sponsor process that makes up a big chunk of our imigrants that come into this country. The sponsors are required to either house them or set them up in adeqaute houseing and there is also an income requirement. The sponsor has to
he or she has income or assets that reach at least 125% of the federal Poverty Guidelines levels
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom