6
   

This is Biden's America

 
 
hightor
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 11:08 am
@edgarblythe,
I apologize, edgarblythe, but I really do think his list is simplistic. I realize the twitter format doesn't allow for detailed policy analysis but there will be people who'll demand these points instituted immediately and neither Biden nor the Democrats currently have that power.

Medicare for all?

hightor: medicare is imperfect; time to come up with something a little better.

Cancel Student debt?

hightor: Why? Why not subsidize the cost of education based on family income and work toward restoring inexpensive state university systems as used to be the case.

End putting kids in cages?

hightor: Emotionalism, pure and simple. Family separation is no longer our policy, new temporary detention facilities are built, old ones are being refurbished, and the huge backlog of asylum claims is being addressed with the appointment of more judges and other immigration officials are being allowed to rule on asylum claims. We don't have "open borders" so people can't just enter the country and automatically assume the rights of citizens.

Lower military budget?

hightor: Spend it on different things — it's useful to have a rapid deployment force to address environmental crises.

Ban fracking and seriously fight climate change?

hightor: Fracking should be banned but that in itself won't alter the rate of global warming. Serious efforts to halt climate change will not occur when so many politicians represent states with large petrochemical interests.

Progressives: Our path to change is through the Democratic Party

hightor: True, so we need to elect more candidates who run on a platform of
comprehensive change. Biden was elected to change presidents; with a few exceptions Democrats running for Congress failed miserably, including progressive candidates. That indicates that voters, when given a stark choice, are still wary of rocking the boat.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 11:21 am
Democrats in general act as cheering squads for anything the leadership does. That's 99% of why I started this thread. The monitoring Biden thread not only makes no criticism of Biden, it concentrates on his opposition almost exclusively. We already know how heinous Republicans are. We need to know what Democrats are going to do in this time so critical for the mid-terms. So far it's well you know, the parliamentarian don't want no minimumum wage hike. Our hands are tied there. Even if congress were to pass universal health care, which they pretend to never have heard of, Biden would veto it. He campaigned on stuff he later went the reverse of. Reverse Trump on Cuba. Reverse Trump on Iran. He said during the campaign he would erase something like $5,000 of student debt. Nobody said he couldn't erase student debt until this week Pelosi said it. THe list goes on and on.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 11:23 am
We have more detained kids under Biden than Trump.
hightor
 
  0  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 11:30 am
@edgarblythe,
I think you credit him with having more power than he actually does. He can't even count on fifty votes in the Senate. That's why perfectly good ideas like beefing up the IRS got dropped from the infrastructure bill. The best we can hope for is that his administration is seen as trying to govern responsibly so that people begin to feel a connection with national politics and see a reason to vote for a government which cares about them, not one that panders to them. I don't mind you posting these screeds, because it's good to know how people think, but when they're dumbed down like this one by "Nick" is I'll post my objections.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 11:31 am
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
We have more detained kids under Biden than Trump.

That's because more "kids" are entering the country. What are we supposed to do, just let them wander around freely?
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 12:19 pm
@hightor,
Just put them in cages and forget about it. That works for Republicans. I guess Democrats feel the same way?
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 12:37 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

Nick is a Fred Hampton Leftist Martial arts uniform
@SocialistMMA
·
19h
Medicare for all?

Dems: No

Cancel Student debt?

Dems: No


End putting kids in cages?

Dems: No

Lower military budget?

Dems: No

Ban fracking and seriously fight climate change?

Dems: No

Progressives: Our path to change is through the Democratic Party

Unamused face

Seems pretty accurate to me.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 01:09 pm
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
Just put them in cages and forget about it.


As I said in my previous response:
Quote:
Family separation is no longer our policy, new temporary detention facilities are built, old ones are being refurbished, and the huge backlog of asylum claims is being addressed with the appointment of more judges — and other immigration officials [asylum officers] are being allowed to rule on asylum claims.


Do you really think unaccompanied children should simply be left to fend for themselves?

Biden Is Planning To Make Big Changes To How The US Handles Asylum-Seekers At The Border

Exclusive: The plan could represent President Joe Biden’s most consequential immigration policy to date and fundamentally change the dynamics at the southern border.

Quote:
The Biden administration is planning to dramatically reshape how asylum-seekers are processed in order to prevent an increase in the backlog of immigration court cases, potentially cutting the waiting period for some applicants by years, according to government documents obtained by BuzzFeed News.

The policy, which has been months in the making and was first alluded to by White House transition officials in December, has yet to be finalized. However, it would shift the decision-making power for whether certain immigrants encountered at the border are granted asylum from an immigration judge to an asylum officer. It would not, however, apply to unaccompanied children (who have a separate process) or to those who are already in court proceedings in the US.

Depending on how it is implemented, the plan could represent President Joe Biden’s most consequential immigration policy to date and fundamentally change the dynamics at the southern border by preventing asylum cases from taking years to complete in court. It’s also a departure from the Trump administration, which sought to block asylum protections at the border through several initiatives, some of which were ultimately overruled in federal court.

BuzzFeed News has obtained a draft version of the policy and a draft communications plan for the rollout. Key questions remain about its scope, funding, and how quickly it will be implemented. Senior officials in the Department of Homeland Security want to issue the plan in June, according to government documents, but the timing and details could change.

DHS declined to comment on the plan.

The draft policy begins by arguing that a major change in the asylum system is needed.

“If there is any area of agreement on immigration, it is that the system for dealing with asylum claims at the border is 'overwhelmed' and in desperate need of repair. A system that takes years to get to a result is not a working system,” the draft policy reads. “It is unfair to those who need protection, and it encourages abuse by those undeserving of protection and the smugglers who exploit dysfunction for profit. The aim of this rule is to begin urgently replacing a broken system with a more efficient one, adjudicating asylum claims expeditiously without [compromising] fairness.”

Administration officials have drafted the policy in a way that it could take effect quickly, mimicking how Trump often issued changes to border and immigration policies. That approach, however, faced countless legal challenges, as immigrant advocates claimed it violated federal law and was too rushed.

With that in mind, Biden may opt for a more traditional route, through a “notice of proposed rulemaking,” which would add months to the process and allow for comments from the public to be considered.

The Biden administration has been focused on unwinding years of restrictions on immigration implemented under Trump. At the same time, DHS officials have spent much of the year contending with rising numbers of unaccompanied children and immigrants arriving at the southern border. More than 172,000 immigrants crossed over from Mexico in March, the highest level in at least 15 years, though many of them were quickly turned back under Title 42, a rarely used public health law invoked by Trump.

Currently, immigrants encountered at or near the border who are placed into an “expedited” removal process are screened by officers from US Citizenship and Immigration Services on whether they can continue with their asylum claims. If they pass that test — called a credible fear screening — their case moves to the immigration courts, where they can attempt to apply for asylum in front of a judge.

But the backlog of more than 1 million cases, many of which are asylum applications, has overwhelmed the immigration court system. The median completion time for a case is now nearly four years for people who are not in custody.

Under the draft version of Biden’s plan, if the immigrants pass the credible fear screening, they would have their asylum cases heard by an asylum officer instead of an immigration judge. They would also be considered for other forms of protection. An immigration judge could review the asylum officer’s decision if an immigrant is ultimately denied, and a third appeal would also be possible. If the decision remains after all those avenues are exhausted, or an appeal is not pursued, the immigrant would be subject to deportation.

The logistics of how to carry out the plan, including how it will be funded, are still being worked out. It is unclear how widespread it could be implemented on the border. DHS officials have estimated that officers could end up adjudicating upward of 300,000 cases a year.

In preparation for the rollout, DHS officials created a communications plan for the policy, a draft of which was also viewed by BuzzFeed News.

DHS officials believe the new system would “reduce the processing time” and simplify the adjudication process for people apprehended at or near the border.

Internally, administration officials have discussed potential issues with the plan, including that it essentially turns asylum officers into immigration judges. The range of litigation experience among asylum officers also varies, which brings up potential issues with due process.

Asylum officers already decide cases for asylum-seekers who are in the US and apply from within the country, but that system has also been plagued with a massive backlog. Only certain immigrants who have been in the US for less than a year and are not already in immigration court can apply for asylum through this process, called affirmative asylum. It’s unclear what Biden’s plan would do to that backlog.

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas appeared to allude to the new system in a statement in March when the administration was struggling to deal with the growing number of unaccompanied children in federal custody.

“For years, the asylum system has been badly in need of reengineering. In addition to improving the process by which unaccompanied children are placed with family or sponsors, we will be issuing a new regulation shortly and taking other measures to implement the long-needed systemic reforms,” he said. “We will shorten from years to months the time it takes to adjudicate an asylum claim while ensuring procedural safeguards and enhancing access to counsel.”

Also in March, Mayorkas told congressional officials that DHS was exploring the option of having asylum officers consider more cases in the first instance.

If implemented immediately, it could also provide a way for the Biden administration to move away from a policy instituted under Trump that allows border agents to turn around most people arriving at the border, including those seeking asylum. The so-called Title 42 policy — which Trump invoked citing efforts to contain the coronavirus — has come under heavy scrutiny from immigration advocates who believe it is illegal and has placed asylum-seekers in danger.

The ACLU has been in negotiations with the US for several weeks over blocking the use of Title 42 against families. The two sides recently agreed to a delay in any federal court judgment to allow for continued discussion.

The ACLU represents six families who fled their countries and were seeking safety in the US. Prior to Title 42, the group contends, the families would have had a chance to seek asylum at the border. Instead, immigrants and families at the border must “affirmatively” state they are fearful of being tortured in their home country to get a chance at a screening.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 01:40 pm
You have a way of giving me thoughts I don't think, such as do I want them roaming free? On the other hand, if in four years they are still in cages you just may be forced to look at it a little differently.
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 02:17 pm
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
You have a way of giving me thoughts I don't think, such as do I want them roaming free?

I didn't accuse you of thinking that, I just asked a question.

The "still in cages" language is inaccurate and is quite prejudicial. It makes it sound like kennels. I'd just like to know what the alternative is to families being temporarily detained until host sponsorship is found.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 03:30 pm
@hightor,
The United States is almost wholly responsible for immigrants coming here. The two strongest factors are the drug war and intentional destabilizing of the countries from Cuba to the tip of South America. They destabilize a country until a coup installs some right wing dictator, creating immigrants from both the destabilized and the
couped. The drug war tears societies apart. All of our recent presidents have pursued these policies and Biden is no different. It's time to work to heal those bullied and disrupted countries and make life better so there is no need for fleeing. In the meantime, when they reach our border let them in. They will find work and pay taxes instead of costing money while being warehoused. They will stop letting go of their children.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 04:00 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
The United States is almost wholly responsible for immigrants coming here.

Nonsense. We are not responsible for leftist regimes destroying the nations that they pretend to govern.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 04:02 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Spend it on different things -- it's useful to have a rapid deployment force to address environmental crises.

What should we do if China declares war on our allies and we no longer have a military that is able to match them?


hightor wrote:
Fracking should be banned but that in itself won't alter the rate of global warming.

If fracking is out, and if renewables cannot meet our power demands, what do you propose we use to make up the shortfalls? Coal or nuclear?
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 04:03 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
Just put them in cages and forget about it. That works for Republicans. I guess Democrats feel the same way?

Why do you blame Republicans for Barack Obama's policies?

https://i.imgflip.com/2cvofi.jpg
https://cdn.creators.com/1054/258919/258919_image.jpg
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2021 04:07 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
You have a way of giving me thoughts I don't think, such as do I want them roaming free?

He was not saying that you think that, he was asking a reasonable question.

If you don't want the kids running free, what do you want to be done with them?

I say give each kid half a canteen of water and turn them all loose in the middle of the Mexican desert.

(Just kidding, but that should add a bit of emphasis to hightor's point about "what are we supposed to do with them".)
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2021 04:56 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
We are not responsible for leftist regimes destroying the nations that they pretend to govern.

But we are responsible for doing everything in our power (short of outright conquest) to make sure governments which we label as "leftist" fail. It's not our business to decide what sorts of governing systems are appropriate for other countries. When we make it impossible for countries to have effective governments by blocking trade, suspending aid, and undermining their efforts to achieve economic independence, pretense at governing is all they have left.

edgarblythe wrote:
The United States is almost wholly responsible for immigrants coming here.


edgarblythe is right, and you can add climate change to the list. But that doesn't give them an automatic right to settle here.
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2021 05:05 am
@oralloy,
Quote:

What should we do if China declares war on our allies and we no longer have a military that is able to match them?

Other countries shouldn't provoke China to declare war and expect us to help them.
Quote:
If fracking is out, and if renewables cannot meet our power demands, what do you propose we use to make up the shortfalls?

Reduce consumption, dial back our expectations, and go to work.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2021 06:22 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
But we are responsible for doing everything in our power (short of outright conquest) to make sure governments which we label as "leftist" fail.

We are not doing any such thing.


hightor wrote:
It's not our business to decide what sorts of governing systems are appropriate for other countries.

Neither do we try to do so.

If we did do so, those leftist governments that are currently destroying their own countries would already have been replaced.


hightor wrote:
When we make it impossible for countries to have effective governments by blocking trade, suspending aid, and undermining their efforts to achieve economic independence, pretense at governing is all they have left.

We only block trade with other nations for a very good reason, like genocide or some similar crime.

The notion that our blocking of trade is responsible for their economic ruin is particularly absurd BS. These places create their own economic ruin due to the leftist policies of their governments.


hightor wrote:
edgarblythe is right,

No he isn't.


hightor wrote:
and you can add climate change to the list.

I can, but I won't.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2021 06:25 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Other countries shouldn't provoke China to declare war and expect us to help them.

So when China invades our allies, your answer is to falsely accuse our allies of starting the war and then abandon them??

And when the US is alone in a world that is full of countries that have either been conquered by China or who no longer trust us because of our past betrayals of allies, what then?


hightor wrote:
Reduce consumption, dial back our expectations, and go to work.

Not going to happen. The voters will not stand for it.

You might get lucky and renewables might be enough to supply all of our needs.

But if that doesn't happen, the voters will elect a government that will fill in the shortfall with some other form of energy.

If it's not nuclear or fracked natural gas, it'll be coal.
hightor
 
  0  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2021 07:53 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
So when China invades our allies, your answer is to falsely accuse our allies of starting the war and then abandon them??

Why would it be in China's interest to invade Japan, Australia, or South Korea? Seems like an awful failure of statesmanship on all sides.
Quote:
And when the US is alone in a world that is full of countries that have either been conquered by China or who no longer trust us because of our past betrayals of allies, what then?

Learn Mandarin.
Quote:
Not going to happen. The voters will not stand for it.

When the economy tanks, the electric grid fails, and the distribution and communications networks collapse they will be immersed in a new world whether they like it or not. What are they going to vote for? A return to the 1950s? Way too late for that.
Quote:
But if that doesn't happen, the voters will elect a government that will fill in the shortfall with some other form of energy.

No, they'll just elect a government that tells them what they want to hear.
Quote:
If it's not nuclear or fracked natural gas, it'll be coal.

I don't think economical fracking will last that long; isn't its efficiency dwindling and isn't the industry heavily subsidized? I'm not opposed to a new generation of nuclear technology but I don't think it could be developed quickly enough to forestall a collapse. Looks like coal then, doesn't it.

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/02/2022 at 09:03:46