• 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!

Modest Proposal to Let DACA People Stay

JBG said:
How about the following trade; we don't allow ANY deportations, but in exchange allow any undocumented worker a waiver of union requirements and the Davis-Bacon Act on Federal jobs? Bye bye union jobs at $75 or more per hour plus benefits.Or fixing hurricane damage.

I feel this kind of proposal would put the Democrats (in the nature of full disclosure I am an extremely liberal Democrat) on the spot big time. They would have to choose between their buddies in the union or importing more knee-jerk Democratic voters. There's lots of work needed to fix hurricane damage now in at least Texas, Louisiana, Florida and maybe Georgia.
Click to expand...

I've got some better ideas:
Start a bonded immigrant program. Make the bond a sliding scale based on demand for the immigrant's skillset. High demand = low bond, low demand = high bond. During a transiition period allow any employer who is employing an illegal immigrant to pay fine of triple the bond amount for that person and the illegal immigrant is given 90 days to come up with the bond. If an immigrant draws on any public funds, the money comes out of their bond. If the bond drops below a certain threshold (25%??), they are given a specific period of time to renew it (180 days) otherwise they go home. If their bond ever goes to zero, they go home immediately.

Tie citizenship of people born in the US to the citizenship of their parents.

For the "Dreamers", if they are "good citizens" (no criminal record, in school and getting reasonable grades, etc.), they go to the head of the line and are given a discount on the bond amount they need to raise. Once 18 years have passed, end the program.
 
jimbo said:
Then we should deal with the adults in the situation. Deport them after they finish doing their time for forcing children into committing a crime.
Click to expand...

It's all about Revenge ... somehow I still think that would not satisfy you, but I'm ok with deporting people who are a risk. But if it just old parents who are no risk to you ... why? Will this make you feel better. I thought Donnie was going after Rapist and Murders?
 
Cigar said:
Try to keep up, that's not what we were talking about.
Click to expand...

Then could you clarify what the "punishment" you were referring to was?? "Dreamers" aren't being thrown in jail, they are being deported back to their nation of birth. Do you consider living places like Honduras, Peru, Viet Nam, etc. to be a punishment???
 
JBG said:
How about the following trade; we don't allow ANY deportations, but in exchange allow any undocumented worker a waiver of union requirements and the Davis-Bacon Act on Federal jobs? Bye bye union jobs at $75 or more per hour plus benefits.Or fixing hurricane damage.

I feel this kind of proposal would put the Democrats (in the nature of full disclosure I am an extremely liberal Democrat) on the spot big time. They would have to choose between their buddies in the union or importing more knee-jerk Democratic voters. There's lots of work needed to fix hurricane damage now in at least Texas, Louisiana, Florida and maybe Georgia.
Click to expand...

This turned out to be a really enlightening discussion, because I believe we've uncovered what the crucks of the issue really is ...

DACA Recipients are getting Stuff ... it doesn't matter if they have to earn it, pay for it, die for it or even wait for it, the fact that they're getting anything bothers some people. This Stuff is for The Privileged and they have no right to it no matter how many hoops there are to jump through.

;) Disclaimer, this is my Opinion.
 
faithful_servant said:
Then could you clarify what the "punishment" you were referring to was?? "Dreamers" aren't being thrown in jail, they are being deported back to their nation of birth. Do you consider living places like Honduras, Peru, Viet Nam, etc. to be a punishment???
Click to expand...

If someone dropped your kid or someone your cared about in a country they know knowing about, you'd be ok with that?
 
Cigar said:
If someone dropped your kid or someone your cared about in a country they know knowing about, you'd be ok with that?
Click to expand...

Maybe your parents forgot to teach you about "questions". You see, a "question" is used when you have information that someone else is curious about or needs to know and they use a "question" to try to get you to communicate that information to them. It's used quite often in conversation to help smooth out confusion about ideas or statements a person makes. When asked a "question", the appropriate thing to is either provide the information being asked for, let the person know that you don't have the information or tell them that the information is not for them to know (also known as "None of your damn business!"). Now that we hopefully have that cleared up:

Then could you clarify what the "punishment" you were referring to was?? "Dreamers" aren't being thrown in jail, they are being deported back to their nation of birth. Do you consider living places like Honduras, Peru, Viet Nam, etc. to be a punishment???
 
faithful_servant said:
Maybe your parents forgot to teach you about "questions". You see, a "question" is used when you have information that someone else is curious about or needs to know and they use a "question" to try to get you to communicate that information to them. It's used quite often in conversation to help smooth out confusion about ideas or statements a person makes. When asked a "question", the appropriate thing to is either provide the information being asked for, let the person know that you don't have the information or tell them that the information is not for them to know (also known as "None of your damn business!"). Now that we hopefully have that cleared up:

Then could you clarify what the "punishment" you were referring to was?? "Dreamers" aren't being thrown in jail, they are being deported back to their nation of birth. Do you consider living places like Honduras, Peru, Viet Nam, etc. to be a punishment???
Click to expand...

I never once used the word punishment ...
 
Cigar said:
Being a Child is not a Crime ... the people who committed the the crime was their parents.

They're not taking anything from you and you're not giving anything to them for free.
Click to expand...

No one is charging anyone for being a child. Being an illegal immigrant is a different matter.

"you're not giving anything to them for free"

There is legitimate reason to disagree with that.

[h=3]Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers nearly $750 ... - Washington Times[/h]www.washingtontimes.com/news/.../illegal-immigrants-cost-taxpayers-750-billion-ove...


Aug 3, 2017 - Deporting the country's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants would cost nearly $125 billion, but allowing them to remain in the U.S. could cost ...
Click to expand...
 
Captain Adverse said:
Perfect response, as it undercuts the basic "emotional appeal" the advocates of DACA amnesty keep using as a fallacious argument.

The "children" are not being punished. They are simply being relocated back to the country of their birth.

They should be grateful for the opportunity to get a better education and other short-term benefits of "illegal" residency (and make no mistake...Obama's "policy" violated the letter of Immigration law), and use this benefit when they return for the betterment of their home countries.
Click to expand...

How did Obama's policy violate the letter of immigration law? As I understand it, and as I have posted before, presidents have granted blanket amnesty to immigrants, legal or not, at various times. Poles, Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Iranians and Nicaraguans have been given deferred deportation, protected status or parole into the US at various times, through presidential action, sometimes confirmed by legislation. My knowledge of the field goes back more than 15 years tho, so any correction or explanation is welcome.

As to how these folks would benefit their home countries by the mere fact of being educated here rather than there, strange.
 
JBG said:
How about the following trade; we don't allow ANY deportations, but in exchange allow any undocumented worker a waiver of union requirements and the Davis-Bacon Act on Federal jobs? Bye bye union jobs at $75 or more per hour plus benefits.Or fixing hurricane damage.

I feel this kind of proposal would put the Democrats (in the nature of full disclosure I am an extremely liberal Democrat) on the spot big time. They would have to choose between their buddies in the union or importing more knee-jerk Democratic voters. There's lots of work needed to fix hurricane damage now in at least Texas, Louisiana, Florida and maybe Georgia.
Click to expand...

Wait. You think all those dreamers will go rebuild Texas and Florida? If not, then what use is your union/Davis-Bacon stuff?

No...Congress doesn't need your deal. All they have to do is put into law whatever Obama took it upon himself to put into law. Believe me, there are enough Democrats and Republicans in Congress who would do that.

btw, when you say "we don't allow ANY deportation", do you actually mean "ANY"? How about a dreamer, who is required to keep a clean record, breaking the law? They get a pass and don't get deported? Sounds kind of unfair to the other...law-abiding...dreamers.
 
Modest Proposal to Let DACA People Stay
Click to expand...

here's my modest proposal : give them complete amnesty. most of them had no more choice in the matter than we had a choice in picking where our parents chose to move for work when we were kids.
 
Nickyjo said:
How did Obama's policy violate the letter of immigration law? As I understand it, and as I have posted before, presidents have granted blanket amnesty to immigrants, legal or not, at various times. Poles, Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Iranians and Nicaraguans have been given deferred deportation, protected status or parole into the US at various times, through presidential action, sometimes confirmed by legislation. My knowledge of the field goes back more than 15 years tho, so any correction or explanation is welcome.

As to how these folks would benefit their home countries by the mere fact of being educated here rather than there, strange.
Click to expand...

First, Obama's action was simply a "policy instruction" to enforcement agencies. It was not a "pardon," nor was it a legal, as in via Federal law, action like Ronald Reagan's "Immigration Reform and Control Act," an "amnesty" passed by CONGRESS.

Second, I guess you missed this thread? :

Captain Adverse said:
People keep arguing how D.A.C.A. should remain in force, it is only the humane thing to do.

Here is Obama on the topic:



For those who don't like watching video's, here is the quote:

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through Executive Order, that's just not the case. Because, there are laws on the books that Congress has passed...Congress passed the law, the Executive branches job is to enforce and implement those laws...There are enough laws on the books that are very clear on how we have to enforce our immigration system. That for me to simply through Executive Order ignore those Congressional mandates, would not conform with my appropriate role as President.
Click to expand...

Two years later...he establishes D.A.C.A. via Executive Order.

So The President himself states he cannot do this, then goes ahead and does it anyway.
Click to expand...


Finally, as for your last question?

Simply by taking their acquired skills and advanced educational knowledge and applying it to the advancement of their own home society...in government service, education, and politics.

Meanwhile, I'd further propose that such individuals be placed on a fast track for LEGAL immigration...competing with all the other people around the world for those (relatively) few slots in fair competition.

As stated, you don't reward people for cheating (or lawbreaking), the just and fair thing is to deny ill-gotten gains.
 
Last edited:
Helix said:
here's my modest proposal : give them complete amnesty. most of them had no more choice in the matter than we had a choice in picking where our parents chose to move for work when we were kids.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I just can't agree with you there. :no:

Every time an amnesty or exception is granted it encourages those seeking a short cut to repeat the process themselves.

It also unfairly favors anyone coming in from south of the border, when there are people from Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East who are unable to "easily" use that route to bull their way in.

Fair immigration policy enforced without (or with minor and rare for specific individuals) exceptions.

Otherwise the law will be honored, as history keeps demonstrating, in the breach rather than in the main.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Sorry, can't agree with you there.

Every time an amnesty or exception is granted it encourages those seeking a short cut to repeat the process themselves.

It also unfairly favors anyone coming in from south of the border, when there are people from Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East who are unable to use that route and bull their way in.

Fair immigration policy enforced without (or with minor and rare) exceptions for specific individuals.

Otherwise the law will be honored in the breach rather than in the main.
Click to expand...

kids don't have a choice. also, the real draw is employers who want cheap labor.
 
Helix said:
kids don't have a choice. also, the real draw is employers who want cheap labor.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. So they don't get to "choose" to stay here either.

Send them home with their parents.

For those (like the vast majority at the time Obama enacted this "policy") who were adults 19 - 31 years old at the time of D.A.C.A.'s creation? They can hardly claim to be "kids" unable to take care of themselves. :shrug:

View attachment 67222404

Sixty-Four Percent of DACA Applicants Past High-School Age | Federation for American Immigration Reform
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
EXACTLY. So they don't get to "choose" to stay here either.

Send them home with their parents.

For those (like the vast majority at the time Obama enacted this "policy") who were adults 19 - 31 years old at the time of D.A.C.A.'s creation? They can hardly claim to be "kids" unable to take care of themselves. :shrug:
Click to expand...

they're kids who moved here with their parents and had no say in the matter. many of them have only known America, which is why this solution was proposed in the first place.
 
Captain Adverse said:
First, Obama's action was simply a "policy instruction" to enforcement agencies. It was not a "pardon," nor was it a legal, as in via Federal law, action like Ronald Reagan's "Immigration Reform and Control Act," an "amnesty" passed by CONGRESS.

Second, I guess you missed this thread? :



Finally, as for your last question?

Simply by taking their acquired skills and advanced educational knowledge and applying it to the advancement of their own home society...in government service, education, and politics.

Meanwhile, I'd further propose that such individuals be placed on a fast track for LEGAL immigration...competing with all the other people around the world for those (relatively) few slots in fair competition.

As stated, you don't reward people for cheating (or lawbreaking), the just and fair thing is to deny ill-gotten gains.
Click to expand...

Still don't understand. Simple search shows that Ike, JFK, LBJ, and Nixon paroled 600k Cubans, later15k Chinese, 360k SEAsians, 14k Lebanese, Ethiopians, Soviets, Nicaraguans, Iranians, Afghans, Cubans again, Chinese, Salvadoran, Haitians, and Liberians by succeeding presidents. In some cases this was to allow people in, in some cases, not to deport them or to defer action to deport them temporarily or in effect, indefinitely. In some cases it was people who had been here a set number of years, in some cases it didn't matter. In some cases Congress authorized the President to decide, in some cases there was none. Sometimes this was to protect people from generalized violence in their countries, sometimes for humanitarian reasons. Many of these people had broken the law ("cheated") by entering illegally or overstaying permission to be here and were outside the normal immigration or refugee process. In a few cases, Congress legislated protection.

Irrespective of what Obama might have said, I assume he would have argued in court that DACA was like other deferred actions on migrants. That doesn't mean that what all the presidents since Eisenhower have done couldn't have been challenged as illegal, just that what Obama did wasn't unprecedented. In my view, he was Obama, thus for some, especially Trump, nothing he did was ok.

As noted before and as Trump pointed out, however, legislation to give these people status would work out for the best in the end.
 
Nickyjo said:
Still don't understand. Simple search shows that Ike, JFK, LBJ, and Nixon paroled 600k Cubans, later15k Chinese, 360k SEAsians, 14k Lebanese, Ethiopians, Soviets, Nicaraguans, Iranians, Afghans, Cubans again, Chinese, Salvadoran, Haitians, and Liberians by succeeding presidents. In some cases this was to allow people in, in some cases, not to deport them or to defer action to deport them temporarily or in effect, indefinitely. In some cases it was people who had been here a set number of years, in some cases it didn't matter. In some cases Congress authorized the President to decide, in some cases there was none. Sometimes this was to protect people from generalized violence in their countries, sometimes for humanitarian reasons. Many of these people had broken the law ("cheated") by entering illegally or overstaying permission to be here and were outside the normal immigration or refugee process. In a few cases, Congress legislated protection.

Irrespective of what Obama might have said, I assume he would have argued in court that DACA was like other deferred actions on migrants. That doesn't mean that what all the presidents since Eisenhower have done couldn't have been challenged as illegal, just that what Obama did wasn't unprecedented. In my view, he was Obama, thus for some, especially Trump, nothing he did was ok.

As noted before and as Trump pointed out, however, legislation to give these people status would work out for the best in the end.
Click to expand...

Special circumstances allowed under immigration law for "Refugees and Asylees." https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/how-united-states-immigration-system-works

Review of that Obama 2011 video (which it seems you did not peruse) starting at 2:29 will show he did not consider the people he eventually allowed via DACA to qualify for the exceptions in Immigration law used by those President's in those prior admissions.

The D.A.C.A. by his own admission was a violation of the law...as he saw it in 2011.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom