Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly what changed in his immigration policy that Hispanics liked before but do not now? That he stopped claiming he would deport all 11 million illegals and only the criminals?
We'll see in November. Besides, most Hispanics in this country live in CA TX FL. CA is a lost cause anyway even if this were true, which I don't believe it is. TX will be voting for Trump regardless. Florida is still a toss up. We'll see if his speech helped or hurt on election day.
Exactly what changed in his immigration policy that Hispanics liked before but do not now? That he stopped claiming he would deport all 11 million illegals and only the criminals?
He didn't say he would only deport the "convicted" criminals just address them first. They are all criminals.
Obama counts anyone 'stopped at the designated Border Entry Points" as a "Deportation". Those that get in and stay and those that sneak in at points other than Border Entry ..... just disappear into the country - often with the help of ICE as ordered by TeamObama. IF they wind up before an immigration judge - they get a date to appear and then they just disappear. There are many ways into the USA other than an Official Border Checkpoint.
Would you mind enlightening us and backing up your posts with facts, please.
It's my understanding the traditional approach has been detention meaning the US is responsible for the cost of physical detention, feeding and medical care of those being detained until their court date which, due to backlog, could be months into the future. The Laws of Due Process apply to illegal aliens. They are in most cases given the opportunity to post bail and appeal deportation orders. Reportedly 50% don't show for court.
Obama has trended more towards a Catch and Release approach to avoid the costs of detention and due process and attrition when the illegal immigrant is a no show for court.
Some media chose to call this a Stand Down Order.
The Private Prison Industrial Complex lobby has been a long time advocate for detention for the obvious reason- profit.
The existing wall is not continuous. There are huge gaps to accommodate gated communities, resorts, golf courses, a university and miles and miles of land owed by special interests.
The existing wall is not the same standard envisioned by Trump. Is the intent to tear it down and start over?
Reportedly, about 60% of the border land for the intended fence is either state or privately- owned. I assume Texas would be thrilled to enter into a long term lease of state- owned and otherwise useless land to the Federal Government. The disposition of privately- owned land will be more challenging to acquire Eminent domain, appeals and eventual suits to condemn take time and money. And then there are the special interests.
You speak as if Texas is a sovereign nation and not a state that is part of the United States. Federal law trumps state law. I think the security of the country is a pretty good darn justification for eminent domain; more important than a highway or other things that have used eminent domain and won. How interesting that you're more concerned upsetting a handful of private, wealthy golf resort owners than upsetting vast numbers of Americans around the country that want this.
People that own land along the border do NOT want the continued flood of human trafficking on their property. Such human smuggling leaves garbage--including human waste and dangerous chemicals from illicit drugs--all over their land, and destroys the natural flora. Additionally, people that live in border towns WANT a wall. They do not feel safe with foreign nationals, mostly men, literally running through their small town streets (and backyards!) all hours of the day and night.
You speak as if Texas is a sovereign nation and not a state that is part of the United States. Federal law trumps state law. I think the security of the country is a pretty good darn justification for eminent domain; more important than a highway or other things that have used eminent domain and won. How interesting that you're more concerned upsetting a handful of private, wealthy golf resort owners than upsetting vast numbers of Americans around the country that want this.
People that own land along the border do NOT want the continued flood of human trafficking on their property. Such human smuggling leaves garbage--including human waste and dangerous chemicals from illicit drugs--all over their land, and destroys the natural flora. Additionally, people that live in border towns WANT a wall. They do not feel safe with foreign nationals, mostly men, literally running through their small town streets (and backyards!) all hours of the day and night.
And what about those on the boarder that own land and use the Rio Grande for irrigation of their fields? The wall would either have to be in the middle of the river or on the US side thus blocking off access to those farmers and ranchers.
About 70 million people legally enter the US each year. Most do so for stated purposes of tourism, business or education. Once here, there are no restrictions on travel. No one knows where 70 million go or what they do while here. Those who want a job, get a job. The skilled trades are full of tourists who work, return home, rinse and repeat.
Most US people don't care who does the job so long as it's cheap.
Reportedly about 1% overstay their visa term.
The US is not going to put an ankle bracelet on 70 million people.
The US doesn't need to. Not every single person here coming for vacation, to do business, to go to college, etc. is a risk to overstay their visa.
Also, one cannot work on a tourist visa so no, the skilled trades aren't "full of tourists." Did you mean to say work visa? The maximum stay on a tourist visa is 6 months. Show me a construction job that gets done in six months and I'll show you a bridge in Brooklyn for sale.
Would you mind enlightening us and backing up your posts with facts, please.
It's my understanding the traditional approach has been detention meaning the US is responsible for the cost of physical detention, feeding and medical care of those being detained until their court date which, due to backlog, could be months into the future. The Laws of Due Process apply to illegal aliens. They are in most cases given the opportunity to post bail and appeal deportation orders. Reportedly 50% don't show for court.
Obama has trended more towards a Catch and Release approach to avoid the costs of detention and due process and attrition when the illegal immigrant is a no show for court.
Some media chose to call this a Stand Down Order.
The Private Prison Industrial Complex lobby has been a long time advocate for detention for the obvious reason- profit.
Regardless of all the spin and analyzing all the tiny details, the bottom line is that the border needs to be secured using whatever methods are available and possible. Something that hasn't been done in a very long time. You can find faults with everything. Every plan, every concept, every idea. Nothing is perfect. That doesn't mean it doesn't need to be done. I realize people like yourself that are not affected personally by illegals have no idea why this is a big deal to others.
I have always said there is a threefold blame here. Our government, the greedy employers and the illegals themselves. They all need to be held accountable. If e-verify is mandated across the board and the system in place in every workplace it will stop all of them. Not many will take the chance and hire for cash if the fines are steep enough. Where is your link that the majority of small businesses don't have a payroll anyway? That would only be possible with some very small mom and pop businesses.
A small business is defined as one with fewer than 500 employees.
There are 6.73 million small businesses with Payroll. 90% of them have fewer than 20 employees.
There are 23 million small businesses with no Payroll.
How many of the 23 million small businesses with no Payroll employ others with cash under the table is anyone's guess.
How many households hire landscapers, snow plowers, housekeepers, child and elderly care workers and make the check payable to cash or pay cash?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
