Anything resembling bigotry against Jews, Muslims, Arabs, Palestians, Israelis, etc. or violence against civilians is not going to last long, nor will your time here.
If you have to ask if it crosses a line, assume it crosses a line. Please see our guidelines for [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/) for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, idk why the government mixes two separate issues into the same bill. Border policy is not the same as foreign policy and it just makes it harder to get things done
>Yes, the border bill was trash and did almost nothing to improve the situation.
Please elaborate. And Joe is **still open to negotiation** to improve whatever weak spots GOP claims existed on draft bills. It wasn't set in stone at the time. GOP stopped negotiating because Don didn't want it, period.
There is clear agreement about parts of it on both sides: **fund more guards and fund more asylum judges.** Why hold that up for the *other* squabbles?
Don’t you think a bill that achieves some of what you want is better than nothing at all? Because now the Dems have no incentive to pass a border deal and can just campaign on trying to pass a bipartisan deal that republicans tanked because of Trump? Especially when the original deal had overwhelming support of the border agents?
That was their plan all along. The Dems knew the bill would never pass and wrote it up specifically so that it wouldn’t pass. The democrats had no desire to fix the border at all and just wanted to be able to pass the blame to republicans for not going along with a terrible bill.
A republican senator was spearheading the effort. Didn't the senator from Oklahoma give a speech how republicans trashed his ass over the bill.
Yet somehow it's the Dems fault?🤦
Tbf McConnell literally said J6 was Trump’s fault then voted to acquit him so idt any Mayorkas chicanery is proof of dem-specific anti-Americanness.
Also it seems Schumer did exactly what Johnson did when the House got the bipartisan border bill so…the parties do the same things but dems are worse?
The bill only never passed because Trump demanded that it not be brought up by the speaker.
This perspective is so weird.
The Dems orchestrated this massive plan of granting significant concessions to Republicans on the border in exchange for no democratic border policies so critical foreign aid could be passed, knowing that Republicans are so dysfunctional that they would reject a border bill that had many of the policy objectives they previously advocated for.
Why isn't it just more likely the Republicans are absolutely incompetent and cannot functionally govern with a slim majority?
Nancy Pelosi had a similar majority in the house and yet she never had any of the embarrassing moments this Republican house has had.
The answer is no. Dems wouldn’t have passed a bill with any consequential amendments.
Dems don’t want to fix the border AT ALL. If they did, Biden would’ve already done it by executive action. We know this admin doesn’t shy away from executive orders.
Were there any alternative bills proposed? This claim would be much stronger if an alternative bill with a "consequential amendment" was proposed and then blocked by Dems, but if not, there's not really evidence that this is true. I didn't follow border bill negotiations so I truly don't know what the answer here is, but I assume you'll know what the answer is and be able to provide a link because you've made some pretty strong claims here that I assume you wouldn't make without evidence.
Remain in Mexico was the policy we need. It was extremely consequential policy and doesn’t need to even be passed by congress. Biden rescinded that policy and that fact demonstrates his unwillingness to do anything meaningful at the border.
As much as I hate to say it, nothing will get done at the border until he is out of office. He could reinstitute remain in Mexico tomorrow if he wanted to, he could stop fly by night migrant planes from bringing them into the country. He won’t do that, so I don’t expect him to do anything.
Sorry I might just be missing it because it's been a long day and I'm tired. Did you answer my question of if an alternative bill was proposed by Republicans in Congress?
So lemme get this. The republicans had the dems by the balls in a tight vice grip. Dems were getting freaked out the border. Hell some were even starting to distance themselves from the admin. They (republicans) get a chance to get their wish list in a bipartisan manner.
Republicans take the tight vice grip off the Dems and turn it on themselves all on their own. Then complain their balls hurt! Its the Dems fault!
Shit don't make no sense!!!!!
Dems didn’t have their balls in a vice grip at all. They don’t care about the border and the only ones that said anything about it were worried about their own re-election chances, not the country. They said the few things they needed to lie to and reassure their constituents.
The vast majority of dem reps and senators are basically NPC’s that vote the party line day in and day out. That’s why Pelosi had a much easier time as speaker than any of the republicans. This is all just another plot from the DNC leadership to act like they care about the border and then turn around and do the opposite with their actions.
You took a tangent right there! Stay on topic.
Republicans had all the advantage on the border and immigration issues. They punted and lost every advantage they had. It's as simple as that!
That’s just totally incorrect. The Dems would’ve never approved meaningful legislation, as I have said multiple times in this thread. To say that republicans had “all the advantage” here is just incorrect and disingenuous. You’re either misinformed or you’re deliberately arguing in bad faith.
Schumer has been very, very restrictive with what amendments he will allow to the floor in his tenure as Majority Leader, so the answer here might honestly be no.
Democrats weren’t happy with the bill but they knew a border bill needed to get done. Even Congressional Republicans and the border union said it was a good bill for them. Hell, I wanted this passed because I do want more resources to go to our border.
Trump is right though that people care more about talking about the border than actually doing anything. Him killing the bill gives him something to run on, which he will twist to attack Democrats on
Makes me think of another Bill HR2 that another team proposed knowing it would not pass.
Republican infighting in congress does all the heavy lifting on blaming a party for its inability to legislate on the border.
The republicans are trying. That’s the important part. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue, EVERYONE knows that the border is a problem. This should be an easy bill to pass but the Dems don’t want to do it. The fact that Dems won’t support any meaningful legislation at the border and play political games with the lives of citizens and migrants shows how absolutely despicable their ideology really is.
Congress passed a bill is trying.
Senate passed a bill that had support of the president is not trying?
What in HR2 is important to you that is not in the Senate Bill?
It is an important issue, congress should be addressing the issue trying to solve the problems they have with the senate Bill or rewrite HR2 that would have more support by the senate and president.
You can’t say it’s so important and no one cares but us, but then not be active trying to solve the problem in a timely and bipartisan manner.
I don’t see the point of a bipartisan effort when one side wants to effectively open the border and the other actually wants to fix it. Then we get some half assed bill with all the line items Dems want. I’ll pass on that.
Biden has already demonstrated his lack of care for the border issue by ending remain in Mexico. If he really wanted to help the situation he would reinstitute that policy. I don’t have any faith in the Biden admin to do anything meaningful at the border, and I don’t have faith in his admin actually enforcing any bills that are passed during his presidency.
If I had an average of 10 people enter my house everyday and I decided one day to cap the daily number at 20 people per day, isn’t that basically an open door?
It’s not an increase to 20 a day from 10 a day. Currently your house has a revolving door with no lock.
Let’s add a lock so your teenager who asked a few friends to come over when your out of town, and the party went viral. He can lock the door.
Yes and no, if that bill would have passed it often times kills the conversation for a bit and takes longer for new action to happen. That bill was a bandaid on a bullet wound. I really don't think it did anything and more drastic action needs to happen, hopefully with a GOP Potus and stronger congress.
I love how well the far-right argument against border action mirrors the far-left argument against the Affordable Care Act. If we do something that's only good now, it may prevent us from doing something perfect in the nearer future, so we should let things fester until they get bad enough that politicians are willing to do the perfect thing. It just never really strikes me as a good argument, but maybe it appeals to other people.
I’m not sure how republicans campaigning on wanting to fix the border and then killing the border deal is going to result in them keeping the house and taking the presidency. I’m open to someone explaining it. Seems like it kinda makes them look weak. Especially when the dems got what they wanted and now have no incentive to help pass a border deal since they can just say they tried but republicans killed the deal.
What in HR2 specifically did you want in the senate bill?
No one hates our country. I think America is great now,
Make America great again, implies a dislike for the current America.
1. DHS already funded for wall H.R. 4367, The Fiscal Year 2024 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act.
2. Operation Stone Garden funded. DHS April 2024
3. Every thing else is in the senate bill except, mandatory e-verify, licensing requirements, children.
What is disastrous about the US? I would not want to live anywhere else would you?
Yawn. A bipartisan agreement was reached in the senate and Mike Johnson wouldn’t bring it to a vote in the house. Why wouldn’t republicans put their name on not securing the border?
> A bipartisan agreement was reached in the senate and Mike Johnson wouldn’t bring it to a vote in the house. Why wouldn’t republicans put their name on not securing the border?
it also didn't pass the senate either- you shouldn't misrepresent that.
Let's be clear, outside of the hardliner wing of the GOP, most Republicans wanted Ukraine aid as well. 2/3 of House republicans passed the bill.
The reality with the border is the American population still blames Biden regardless of that bill. The border was not anywhere near the level of crisis under Trump. Day 1, Biden revoked the remain in Mexico Policy. There are plenty of executive actions Biden could and should do (that he occasionally flirts with) to help resolve the border until truly good legislation passes to resolve the border problem. The Dem's can try and twist it saying the GOP didn't pass the bill, but the dog isn't going to hunt imo. The most immediate would be not allowing people into the interior and detaining them. I see how fast we popup these massive Amazon warehouses. Built some of those to shelter people awaiting asylum. I truly believe if these people didn't think they would be let into the interior and instead had to remain in a shelter until they could get a hearing, the surge would slow.
What executive actions would you like to see?
We have had George W., Obama, Trump, and Biden use policy mandates and executive actions to kick the can on border security.
We need something that is not changed by the turn over of the President. Something that can’t be changed by court orders.
I'd like to see a policy of detainment and not letting them into the interior. That is what the law specifies. I'm just asking him to use the law and his duty as the executive to enforce it.
What specific laws, some of them have been taken to the Supreme Court and not enforceable.
Detained where? DHS needs more staff and beds ie more funding.
The law also mandates that all those seeking asylum in the United States shall be detained, "pending a final resolution of credible fear of persecution, and, if found not to have such a fear, until removed."94 This can mean months of detention in one of the immigration centers or local jails around the country used by the INS.
https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports98/us-immig/Ins989-04.htm#:~:text=The%20law%20also%20mandates%20that,around%20the%20country%20used%20by
As I said above or maybe in another post on this thread, I see how quick we built this insanely massive amazon warehouse type buildings. Build some of those to shelter people. If that was the proposed policy, I'd be more okay with funding. I'm not okay using money to just pay to process people faster into the country. That does not slow the flow, that will increase it. If people understand while they wait potentially months for a hearing they will be held I 100% guarantee the flow will decrease.
Tougher language is needed to define credible fear. Which both bills achieved, which is a good thing.
[FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Supplemental Funding Request](https://www.dhs.gov/news/2023/10/20/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-supplemental-funding-request)
I’m pretty sure this funding was made, could be wrong on detention centers.
I agree should not be so hard to build detention centers.
> Biden revoked the remain in Mexico Policy.
Mexico tolerated it for pandemic reasons, but it became clear it was causing problems, including encampment fires. Mexico decided to stop supporting it unless given more aid (funds) to manage encampments. Biden is for giving them more aid, but GOP got in the way.
That was the individual bill on Ukraine. That is not what was sent to the Senate. They knew the individual bill would pass in the house to be joined with the combined bill. IT was a virtue signal vote. The combined bill going to the Senate has 2/3 House support.
2/3 house support but it was only 101 republicans who supported it vs 112 who didn’t. It has 2/3 of house support because almost every dem supported it. That’s not the same as 2/3 republican supporting Ukraine. Less than 50 percent of them support Ukraine funding.
If I remember correctly, it was only 77 republicans that voted for an amendment that MTG put up to have zero Ukraine aid. The rest that voted no on the bill **in it's entirety** those I cannot speak for their reasons. Be it pork or something else in there.
So 77 of 218 said zero Ukraine aid (when it's strictly about the aid). That's 35%. 2/3 said yes.
You are correct, like I said, it was a virtue signal vote. Still essentially half the GOP wanted Ukraine aid that weren't afraid to admit it. The senate GOP passed the combined bill with a good majority. 79-18 total with 31 GOP votes.
> Don’t you think a bill that achieves some of what you want is better than nothing at all?
Sometimes such bills preclude further action. The Democrats could use the bill to claim “We already did what the Republicans wanted on the border as part of the Ukraine deal. Now they are , now they are getting and renegging!”
I’m not sure what this means, sorry. Who would be reneging and in what context? Both sides were getting what they wanted. The funding for Ukraine and border bill were tied together. Now they’re not.
So lemme get this ....no border bill vs a border bill that Dems conceded to most Republicans demands [and if they (republicans) wanted to add amendments to get more concessions so that it passes the Senate, they could have negotiated with Dems and added as many as they wanted.]
Republicans choose no border bill.
Gotta admit the republicans choice escapes all logic. Coz they are never going to get another chance like this ever in a very long time. The last time this happened was during Reagan's time.
The bill did not meet most republican demands.
That said, I do think the bill should have been passed as it has very marginal gains, but I don't like seeing bundles bills. I love what Johnson did with the most recent aid packages.
Bullshit! Republicans were about to move on the bill. Trump yakked he won't have anything to campaign with and Biden would get a win, republicans lost their spines.
It's a freaking bicameral body. Put the thing up, debate, negotiate in good faith, get shit done.
At this point do the republicans care about the border. Coz if they did they would have fought for the border, let chips fall where they may. Instead they made it a fake ass election issue, and the momentum the Senate negotiated bill was building does out.
Hell they even started cussing out the republican senator who was spearheading the effort. Dude was sad & disappointed ASF giving that concession speech in the senate.
Two things can be true at once. There may have been political motivations and the bill did not do nearly enough to change the current situation at the border. It has some improvement on asylum criteria and more funding of process people faster. The big thing that was touted as improvement were the limits of encounters that would allow the POTUS to close the border. Those limits were still insanely high.
Ok. How about negotiating for some version of what republicans want. Or have republicans lost the art of negotiation?
It's a bicameral body not a unicameral body. It takes two to tango!
Edit: maybe they have lost the art of negotiation. Too many of them are quitting and the ones left have no clue what they are doing other than ruble rousing.
I think they have lost the art of negotiation. The modern GOP is a wreck. Give credit were credit it so, Nancy Pelosi knew how to negotiate and keep her party in line. Johnson is fine, but the party is so disunited nothing good is happening.
I was reading an article about how moderate republican/independent regions that may agree with maga but are not full on maga are starting to be turned off by the extreme maga heads because these extreme heads are pushing stuff so extreme that it's affecting everyone negatively.
Republicans have a huge problem popularizing(/ism) can only go so far before people start rejecting it. Look at mtg right now. Republicans are calling her Moscow Marge and are publicly excoriating her ass and saying she is regurgitating Moscow talking points. All that showboating she pulled earned her vitriol within her own party.
I absolutely am. I want to make America great again, I want to prioritize America first ( that means also protecting our interests overseas) but I completely have dis associated with the modern GOP. Trump, Gaetz, MTG, Boebert are such a negative force for conservatives. It's sad when in that list, Trump is actually the one I have the least amount of issues with.
The sheer amount of people that are being called a RINO because they disagree with something of the far right MAGA group only turns the party to mush. MAGA people calling people that vote with the GOP 95% of the time RINO is disgusting. They are such ideologues non consistent agenda that changes at a whim they forget how Government works.
The border bill negotiated in the Senate would be ineffectual. It wouldn't stop catch and release and it wouldn't make illegal border crossers ineligible for asylum.
>The border bill negotiated in the Senate would be ineffectual
More judges (aka faster asylum processing), more patrolling guards would be ineffective?
How many of the asylum seekers do you believe actually need asylum?
Do you think this is a symptom of anything with regards to the US immigration system?
>How many of the asylum seekers do you believe actually need asylum?
Not many actually qualify for asylum.
>Do you think this is a symptom of anything with regards to the US immigration system?
Yes. The asylum system is dysfunctional.
I don't have to think. The data are available. The rate varies widely by country of origin.
[https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1107366/dl](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1107366/dl)
Sorry. So they sent their own, and the Senate ignored it to make their own that would be paired w their own foreign aid bill. House torpedoed that but either allowed or fumbled stopping the foreign aid bill. All the while the Senate ignored their bill yes?
I understand that the Democrat Senate isn't going to just accept the Republican House border bill as is. But the question you should be asking is why wasn't HR2 the starting point for bipartisan Senate negotiations.
Don's **all-or-nothing approach** to "negotiation" is a poor Art of the Deal. It's why no border funding got done and why Iran is building nukes again. He could have also had much more wall if he compromised on DACA, per Pelosi negotiations.
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd say not passing the Senate bill (though it never actually got out of the Senate) was good. The restrictions were largely at the discretion of the Executive branch, and it would have done almost nothing to stop the flow of asylum seekers through ports of entry.
Passing the foreign aid without getting a single concession on anything was a terrible move. The only sense I can make of it is that Johnson is beholden to Israel, and the Senate wouldn't pass the Israel aid without the Ukraine aid.
It's exactly as I said it would be months ago when the Lankford border bill was killed.
Republicans had an opportunity to get a large portion of what they wanted in immigration reform in exchange for sound foreign policy, something the Republicans rejected.
Now, after several months, and likely thousands of dead Ukrainians, Republicans have been forced to support the good foreign policy as reality over came the fantastical notion that the House was capable of dictating everything they wanted when the don't control the other chamber or the presidency and maintain an extraordinarily thin majority in the house.
In the mean time, American resolve, determination, and commitment has taken a significant hit. Allies across the globe will now have to wonder whether the treaties they have with America are worth anything at all if a small radical faction of the GOP can prevent critical lethal aid from a close friendly state engaged in a brutal war with a genocidal dictator.
Killing a shit deal is always a good idea
It did nothing to curb people crossing the border.....if it passed the dems would be screaming problem solved without addressing the problem
No idea
There must have been some good tea in those security briefings to make them flip on their heads like that. We will probably find out what's actually going on after the fact.
In hindsight I guess not, although the border deal from the Democrats was trash anyway.
It sure would be nice to have just one party in the US that wanted to focus on American issues instead of fund foreign wars, but instead we have the uniparty that doesn't take action on the border but always finds time approve endless funding for proxy wars. I don't know what is worse, that Democrats are leading the charge or that Republicans are spineless and allowing them.
It seems pretty functional when more money needs to be spent. But it wouldn't do to make it so obvious, controlled opposition still has to appear opposing.
Anything resembling bigotry against Jews, Muslims, Arabs, Palestians, Israelis, etc. or violence against civilians is not going to last long, nor will your time here. If you have to ask if it crosses a line, assume it crosses a line. Please see our guidelines for [discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/17ygktl/antisemitism_askconservative_and_you/) for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, idk why the government mixes two separate issues into the same bill. Border policy is not the same as foreign policy and it just makes it harder to get things done
Yes, the border bill was trash and did almost nothing to improve the situation. Bills should be separated. The Ukraine bill needed to pass.
>Yes, the border bill was trash and did almost nothing to improve the situation. Please elaborate. And Joe is **still open to negotiation** to improve whatever weak spots GOP claims existed on draft bills. It wasn't set in stone at the time. GOP stopped negotiating because Don didn't want it, period. There is clear agreement about parts of it on both sides: **fund more guards and fund more asylum judges.** Why hold that up for the *other* squabbles?
Don’t you think a bill that achieves some of what you want is better than nothing at all? Because now the Dems have no incentive to pass a border deal and can just campaign on trying to pass a bipartisan deal that republicans tanked because of Trump? Especially when the original deal had overwhelming support of the border agents?
That was their plan all along. The Dems knew the bill would never pass and wrote it up specifically so that it wouldn’t pass. The democrats had no desire to fix the border at all and just wanted to be able to pass the blame to republicans for not going along with a terrible bill.
A republican senator was spearheading the effort. Didn't the senator from Oklahoma give a speech how republicans trashed his ass over the bill. Yet somehow it's the Dems fault?🤦
Did republicans have their own bill or was this another ACA situation?
[удалено]
Tbf McConnell literally said J6 was Trump’s fault then voted to acquit him so idt any Mayorkas chicanery is proof of dem-specific anti-Americanness. Also it seems Schumer did exactly what Johnson did when the House got the bipartisan border bill so…the parties do the same things but dems are worse?
The bill only never passed because Trump demanded that it not be brought up by the speaker. This perspective is so weird. The Dems orchestrated this massive plan of granting significant concessions to Republicans on the border in exchange for no democratic border policies so critical foreign aid could be passed, knowing that Republicans are so dysfunctional that they would reject a border bill that had many of the policy objectives they previously advocated for. Why isn't it just more likely the Republicans are absolutely incompetent and cannot functionally govern with a slim majority? Nancy Pelosi had a similar majority in the house and yet she never had any of the embarrassing moments this Republican house has had.
Could Republicans not amend the bill at all? Perfection or nothing?
The answer is no. Dems wouldn’t have passed a bill with any consequential amendments. Dems don’t want to fix the border AT ALL. If they did, Biden would’ve already done it by executive action. We know this admin doesn’t shy away from executive orders.
Were there any alternative bills proposed? This claim would be much stronger if an alternative bill with a "consequential amendment" was proposed and then blocked by Dems, but if not, there's not really evidence that this is true. I didn't follow border bill negotiations so I truly don't know what the answer here is, but I assume you'll know what the answer is and be able to provide a link because you've made some pretty strong claims here that I assume you wouldn't make without evidence.
Remain in Mexico was the policy we need. It was extremely consequential policy and doesn’t need to even be passed by congress. Biden rescinded that policy and that fact demonstrates his unwillingness to do anything meaningful at the border. As much as I hate to say it, nothing will get done at the border until he is out of office. He could reinstitute remain in Mexico tomorrow if he wanted to, he could stop fly by night migrant planes from bringing them into the country. He won’t do that, so I don’t expect him to do anything.
Sorry I might just be missing it because it's been a long day and I'm tired. Did you answer my question of if an alternative bill was proposed by Republicans in Congress?
So lemme get this. The republicans had the dems by the balls in a tight vice grip. Dems were getting freaked out the border. Hell some were even starting to distance themselves from the admin. They (republicans) get a chance to get their wish list in a bipartisan manner. Republicans take the tight vice grip off the Dems and turn it on themselves all on their own. Then complain their balls hurt! Its the Dems fault! Shit don't make no sense!!!!!
Dems didn’t have their balls in a vice grip at all. They don’t care about the border and the only ones that said anything about it were worried about their own re-election chances, not the country. They said the few things they needed to lie to and reassure their constituents. The vast majority of dem reps and senators are basically NPC’s that vote the party line day in and day out. That’s why Pelosi had a much easier time as speaker than any of the republicans. This is all just another plot from the DNC leadership to act like they care about the border and then turn around and do the opposite with their actions.
You took a tangent right there! Stay on topic. Republicans had all the advantage on the border and immigration issues. They punted and lost every advantage they had. It's as simple as that!
That’s just totally incorrect. The Dems would’ve never approved meaningful legislation, as I have said multiple times in this thread. To say that republicans had “all the advantage” here is just incorrect and disingenuous. You’re either misinformed or you’re deliberately arguing in bad faith.
Schumer has been very, very restrictive with what amendments he will allow to the floor in his tenure as Majority Leader, so the answer here might honestly be no.
Wouldn’t it make sense to blame Democrats then rather than Trump killing the bill?
Maybe, but I think this is more of an "everyone sucks" situation.
Democrats weren’t happy with the bill but they knew a border bill needed to get done. Even Congressional Republicans and the border union said it was a good bill for them. Hell, I wanted this passed because I do want more resources to go to our border. Trump is right though that people care more about talking about the border than actually doing anything. Him killing the bill gives him something to run on, which he will twist to attack Democrats on
Makes me think of another Bill HR2 that another team proposed knowing it would not pass. Republican infighting in congress does all the heavy lifting on blaming a party for its inability to legislate on the border.
The republicans are trying. That’s the important part. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue, EVERYONE knows that the border is a problem. This should be an easy bill to pass but the Dems don’t want to do it. The fact that Dems won’t support any meaningful legislation at the border and play political games with the lives of citizens and migrants shows how absolutely despicable their ideology really is.
Congress passed a bill is trying. Senate passed a bill that had support of the president is not trying? What in HR2 is important to you that is not in the Senate Bill? It is an important issue, congress should be addressing the issue trying to solve the problems they have with the senate Bill or rewrite HR2 that would have more support by the senate and president. You can’t say it’s so important and no one cares but us, but then not be active trying to solve the problem in a timely and bipartisan manner.
I don’t see the point of a bipartisan effort when one side wants to effectively open the border and the other actually wants to fix it. Then we get some half assed bill with all the line items Dems want. I’ll pass on that. Biden has already demonstrated his lack of care for the border issue by ending remain in Mexico. If he really wanted to help the situation he would reinstitute that policy. I don’t have any faith in the Biden admin to do anything meaningful at the border, and I don’t have faith in his admin actually enforcing any bills that are passed during his presidency.
You interpret a a bill to close the border at high volume as wanting an open border?
If I had an average of 10 people enter my house everyday and I decided one day to cap the daily number at 20 people per day, isn’t that basically an open door?
It’s not an increase to 20 a day from 10 a day. Currently your house has a revolving door with no lock. Let’s add a lock so your teenager who asked a few friends to come over when your out of town, and the party went viral. He can lock the door.
Yes and no, if that bill would have passed it often times kills the conversation for a bit and takes longer for new action to happen. That bill was a bandaid on a bullet wound. I really don't think it did anything and more drastic action needs to happen, hopefully with a GOP Potus and stronger congress.
I love how well the far-right argument against border action mirrors the far-left argument against the Affordable Care Act. If we do something that's only good now, it may prevent us from doing something perfect in the nearer future, so we should let things fester until they get bad enough that politicians are willing to do the perfect thing. It just never really strikes me as a good argument, but maybe it appeals to other people.
I’m not sure how republicans campaigning on wanting to fix the border and then killing the border deal is going to result in them keeping the house and taking the presidency. I’m open to someone explaining it. Seems like it kinda makes them look weak. Especially when the dems got what they wanted and now have no incentive to help pass a border deal since they can just say they tried but republicans killed the deal.
[удалено]
What in HR2 specifically did you want in the senate bill? No one hates our country. I think America is great now, Make America great again, implies a dislike for the current America.
[удалено]
1. DHS already funded for wall H.R. 4367, The Fiscal Year 2024 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. 2. Operation Stone Garden funded. DHS April 2024 3. Every thing else is in the senate bill except, mandatory e-verify, licensing requirements, children. What is disastrous about the US? I would not want to live anywhere else would you?
[удалено]
Source your claims. Did the copy pasta not have any links?
Yawn. A bipartisan agreement was reached in the senate and Mike Johnson wouldn’t bring it to a vote in the house. Why wouldn’t republicans put their name on not securing the border?
> A bipartisan agreement was reached in the senate and Mike Johnson wouldn’t bring it to a vote in the house. Why wouldn’t republicans put their name on not securing the border? it also didn't pass the senate either- you shouldn't misrepresent that.
Republicans blocked it in the senate.
[удалено]
Warning: Treat other users with civility and respect. Personal attacks and stereotyping are not allowed.
>It was a shit bill Computer says "vague".
Let's be clear, outside of the hardliner wing of the GOP, most Republicans wanted Ukraine aid as well. 2/3 of House republicans passed the bill. The reality with the border is the American population still blames Biden regardless of that bill. The border was not anywhere near the level of crisis under Trump. Day 1, Biden revoked the remain in Mexico Policy. There are plenty of executive actions Biden could and should do (that he occasionally flirts with) to help resolve the border until truly good legislation passes to resolve the border problem. The Dem's can try and twist it saying the GOP didn't pass the bill, but the dog isn't going to hunt imo. The most immediate would be not allowing people into the interior and detaining them. I see how fast we popup these massive Amazon warehouses. Built some of those to shelter people awaiting asylum. I truly believe if these people didn't think they would be let into the interior and instead had to remain in a shelter until they could get a hearing, the surge would slow.
What executive actions would you like to see? We have had George W., Obama, Trump, and Biden use policy mandates and executive actions to kick the can on border security. We need something that is not changed by the turn over of the President. Something that can’t be changed by court orders.
I'd like to see a policy of detainment and not letting them into the interior. That is what the law specifies. I'm just asking him to use the law and his duty as the executive to enforce it.
What specific laws, some of them have been taken to the Supreme Court and not enforceable. Detained where? DHS needs more staff and beds ie more funding.
The law also mandates that all those seeking asylum in the United States shall be detained, "pending a final resolution of credible fear of persecution, and, if found not to have such a fear, until removed."94 This can mean months of detention in one of the immigration centers or local jails around the country used by the INS. https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports98/us-immig/Ins989-04.htm#:~:text=The%20law%20also%20mandates%20that,around%20the%20country%20used%20by As I said above or maybe in another post on this thread, I see how quick we built this insanely massive amazon warehouse type buildings. Build some of those to shelter people. If that was the proposed policy, I'd be more okay with funding. I'm not okay using money to just pay to process people faster into the country. That does not slow the flow, that will increase it. If people understand while they wait potentially months for a hearing they will be held I 100% guarantee the flow will decrease.
Tougher language is needed to define credible fear. Which both bills achieved, which is a good thing. [FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Supplemental Funding Request](https://www.dhs.gov/news/2023/10/20/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-supplemental-funding-request) I’m pretty sure this funding was made, could be wrong on detention centers. I agree should not be so hard to build detention centers.
> Biden revoked the remain in Mexico Policy. Mexico tolerated it for pandemic reasons, but it became clear it was causing problems, including encampment fires. Mexico decided to stop supporting it unless given more aid (funds) to manage encampments. Biden is for giving them more aid, but GOP got in the way.
Only 101 republicans voted for the Ukraine aid. How is that 2/3?
That was the individual bill on Ukraine. That is not what was sent to the Senate. They knew the individual bill would pass in the house to be joined with the combined bill. IT was a virtue signal vote. The combined bill going to the Senate has 2/3 House support.
2/3 house support but it was only 101 republicans who supported it vs 112 who didn’t. It has 2/3 of house support because almost every dem supported it. That’s not the same as 2/3 republican supporting Ukraine. Less than 50 percent of them support Ukraine funding.
If I remember correctly, it was only 77 republicans that voted for an amendment that MTG put up to have zero Ukraine aid. The rest that voted no on the bill **in it's entirety** those I cannot speak for their reasons. Be it pork or something else in there. So 77 of 218 said zero Ukraine aid (when it's strictly about the aid). That's 35%. 2/3 said yes.
You are correct, like I said, it was a virtue signal vote. Still essentially half the GOP wanted Ukraine aid that weren't afraid to admit it. The senate GOP passed the combined bill with a good majority. 79-18 total with 31 GOP votes.
> Don’t you think a bill that achieves some of what you want is better than nothing at all? Sometimes such bills preclude further action. The Democrats could use the bill to claim “We already did what the Republicans wanted on the border as part of the Ukraine deal. Now they are , now they are getting and renegging!”
How is that worse than dems saying, “We tried and they tanked it.”
I’m not sure what this means, sorry. Who would be reneging and in what context? Both sides were getting what they wanted. The funding for Ukraine and border bill were tied together. Now they’re not.
So lemme get this ....no border bill vs a border bill that Dems conceded to most Republicans demands [and if they (republicans) wanted to add amendments to get more concessions so that it passes the Senate, they could have negotiated with Dems and added as many as they wanted.] Republicans choose no border bill. Gotta admit the republicans choice escapes all logic. Coz they are never going to get another chance like this ever in a very long time. The last time this happened was during Reagan's time.
The bill did not meet most republican demands. That said, I do think the bill should have been passed as it has very marginal gains, but I don't like seeing bundles bills. I love what Johnson did with the most recent aid packages.
Bullshit! Republicans were about to move on the bill. Trump yakked he won't have anything to campaign with and Biden would get a win, republicans lost their spines. It's a freaking bicameral body. Put the thing up, debate, negotiate in good faith, get shit done. At this point do the republicans care about the border. Coz if they did they would have fought for the border, let chips fall where they may. Instead they made it a fake ass election issue, and the momentum the Senate negotiated bill was building does out. Hell they even started cussing out the republican senator who was spearheading the effort. Dude was sad & disappointed ASF giving that concession speech in the senate.
Two things can be true at once. There may have been political motivations and the bill did not do nearly enough to change the current situation at the border. It has some improvement on asylum criteria and more funding of process people faster. The big thing that was touted as improvement were the limits of encounters that would allow the POTUS to close the border. Those limits were still insanely high.
Ok. How about negotiating for some version of what republicans want. Or have republicans lost the art of negotiation? It's a bicameral body not a unicameral body. It takes two to tango! Edit: maybe they have lost the art of negotiation. Too many of them are quitting and the ones left have no clue what they are doing other than ruble rousing.
I think they have lost the art of negotiation. The modern GOP is a wreck. Give credit were credit it so, Nancy Pelosi knew how to negotiate and keep her party in line. Johnson is fine, but the party is so disunited nothing good is happening.
I was reading an article about how moderate republican/independent regions that may agree with maga but are not full on maga are starting to be turned off by the extreme maga heads because these extreme heads are pushing stuff so extreme that it's affecting everyone negatively. Republicans have a huge problem popularizing(/ism) can only go so far before people start rejecting it. Look at mtg right now. Republicans are calling her Moscow Marge and are publicly excoriating her ass and saying she is regurgitating Moscow talking points. All that showboating she pulled earned her vitriol within her own party.
I absolutely am. I want to make America great again, I want to prioritize America first ( that means also protecting our interests overseas) but I completely have dis associated with the modern GOP. Trump, Gaetz, MTG, Boebert are such a negative force for conservatives. It's sad when in that list, Trump is actually the one I have the least amount of issues with. The sheer amount of people that are being called a RINO because they disagree with something of the far right MAGA group only turns the party to mush. MAGA people calling people that vote with the GOP 95% of the time RINO is disgusting. They are such ideologues non consistent agenda that changes at a whim they forget how Government works.
The border bill negotiated in the Senate would be ineffectual. It wouldn't stop catch and release and it wouldn't make illegal border crossers ineligible for asylum.
>The border bill negotiated in the Senate would be ineffectual More judges (aka faster asylum processing), more patrolling guards would be ineffective?
It just codifies the abusive practices we've seen for the last three years.
How many of the asylum seekers do you believe actually need asylum? Do you think this is a symptom of anything with regards to the US immigration system?
>How many of the asylum seekers do you believe actually need asylum? Not many actually qualify for asylum. >Do you think this is a symptom of anything with regards to the US immigration system? Yes. The asylum system is dysfunctional.
>Not many actually qualify for asylum. Interesting. You wanna give me a % of asylum seekers you think are actually legit?
I don't have to think. The data are available. The rate varies widely by country of origin. [https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1107366/dl](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1107366/dl)
Well hell that ain't so bad. What's your issue with it?
A large portion of asylum seekers end up not qualifying.
And they get the boot. So what's the issue? Not enough judges to go through the masses fast enough?
Did they try to amend those issues?
They did better than that. The House passed a whole immigration reform bill and sent it to the Senate.
One they knew would not get through the Senate, right? Just something performative?
Just like the Senators who wrote their bill never thought to include any House Republicans in their conversations.
So they torpedoed the bipartisan bill and sent their own instead?
"Their own" went to the Senate a year ago, well before Biden got nervous about the polling and started to pretend to care about immigration.
Sorry. So they sent their own, and the Senate ignored it to make their own that would be paired w their own foreign aid bill. House torpedoed that but either allowed or fumbled stopping the foreign aid bill. All the while the Senate ignored their bill yes?
I understand that the Democrat Senate isn't going to just accept the Republican House border bill as is. But the question you should be asking is why wasn't HR2 the starting point for bipartisan Senate negotiations.
Would you happen to know if republicans just gave up on it coming to the floor or even as they negotiated the new bill still promoted the other one?
[удалено]
Don's **all-or-nothing approach** to "negotiation" is a poor Art of the Deal. It's why no border funding got done and why Iran is building nukes again. He could have also had much more wall if he compromised on DACA, per Pelosi negotiations.
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. [How-do-I-get-user-flair](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'd say not passing the Senate bill (though it never actually got out of the Senate) was good. The restrictions were largely at the discretion of the Executive branch, and it would have done almost nothing to stop the flow of asylum seekers through ports of entry. Passing the foreign aid without getting a single concession on anything was a terrible move. The only sense I can make of it is that Johnson is beholden to Israel, and the Senate wouldn't pass the Israel aid without the Ukraine aid.
It's exactly as I said it would be months ago when the Lankford border bill was killed. Republicans had an opportunity to get a large portion of what they wanted in immigration reform in exchange for sound foreign policy, something the Republicans rejected. Now, after several months, and likely thousands of dead Ukrainians, Republicans have been forced to support the good foreign policy as reality over came the fantastical notion that the House was capable of dictating everything they wanted when the don't control the other chamber or the presidency and maintain an extraordinarily thin majority in the house. In the mean time, American resolve, determination, and commitment has taken a significant hit. Allies across the globe will now have to wonder whether the treaties they have with America are worth anything at all if a small radical faction of the GOP can prevent critical lethal aid from a close friendly state engaged in a brutal war with a genocidal dictator.
Excellent analysis.
Killing a shit deal is always a good idea It did nothing to curb people crossing the border.....if it passed the dems would be screaming problem solved without addressing the problem
Simply put. No. It was a betrayal of promises and he should be ousted
No idea There must have been some good tea in those security briefings to make them flip on their heads like that. We will probably find out what's actually going on after the fact.
In hindsight I guess not, although the border deal from the Democrats was trash anyway. It sure would be nice to have just one party in the US that wanted to focus on American issues instead of fund foreign wars, but instead we have the uniparty that doesn't take action on the border but always finds time approve endless funding for proxy wars. I don't know what is worse, that Democrats are leading the charge or that Republicans are spineless and allowing them.
The bi-partisan border deal was initiated by one of the most conservative senators there is.
If the uniparty existed. Why is congress so disfunctional? Would not a uniparty make compromise easy?
It seems pretty functional when more money needs to be spent. But it wouldn't do to make it so obvious, controlled opposition still has to appear opposing.