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.
I didn't say it wasn't allowed to be used but communities are barred by law from requiring it. For instance, your family can use e-verify but the county govt in which your farm resides cannot require it to be used. In short, California is not just saying "we don't want to require e-verify" but taking it a step further and saying "and localities can't require it either".
Perhaps you forgot what you said, here you go:
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia View Post
Tell me about California. Why do you ignore any request for comment on California. Why do you not have anything to say about the many other Democratic states with NO E-verify at all?
I've had it with this "Texas e-verify" nonsense that liberals always pop off about when sanctuary state California is the outrage, the only state prohibiting communities from using e-Verify even if they wanted to. Every dammed time anyone mentions Texas and E-verify in the same sentence, I'm going to cut and paste the relevant stats showing Texas is at least partially implementing while California is prohibiting.
Yes, I said "prohibiting communities", not prohibiting employers.
Is this what you are whining about?
Quote:
Governor Jerry Brown signed the “Employment Acceleration Act of 2011” (AB 1236) which will take effect on January 1, 2012. This bill prohibits the state from requiring employers to use E-Verify. In a nutshell, the new law prohibits the state, cities or counties from requiring employers to use E-Verify, an electronic employment verification system that uses employees’ Social Security numbers to determine work eligibility. The bill makes certain exceptions for city or county workers, and also takes into account that E-Verify is a requirement for particular employers under federal or as a condition for employers receiving federal funds. https://www.lexology.com/library/det...4-1dfe9c31f012
He doesn't have to sign it. The power of the veto ... it goes back, they vote then done deal. May be after this President the people in this country will see, just how congress was suppose to be running things all along, but didn't, cause having a president just sign whatever, was easier. Now they have to work. lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia
Except that the House did not pass their bill with anywhere near the number of votes needed to override.
Making it seem like the buck stops with the POTUS is rubbish. Stalling everything out based on a POTUS signature only makes for great theatrics. Win, loose or draw ... move forward. They can and they won't, that's the hold up. Finger pointing blame game theatrics ... it's ignorant.
"When the president vetoes a bill, the legislation is dead unless Congress takes action.
Congress can override the veto, and in doing so, passes the bill over the president’s formal objection. Overriding a presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority vote of the members present and voting (in other words, those who are actually in the chamber rather than two-thirds of the total) in each chamber.
An override vote is a momentous step and difficult to win. In recent years the mere threat of a veto has been enough to convince members not to proceed with provisions that the president doesn’t like."
Tough said the kitty ... they created this type of monster, they can uncreate it.
wow, check that out ... It can be done, the fact is they won't go forward and are stonewalling the whole process with the shutdown and funding. The power is in the Congressional house, not the White House.
Making it seem like the buck stops with the POTUS is rubbish. Stalling everything out based on a POTUS signature only makes for great theatrics. Win, loose or draw ... move forward. They can and they won't, that's the hold up. Finger pointing blame game theatrics ... it's ignorant.
"When the president vetoes a bill, the legislation is dead unless Congress takes action.
Congress can override the veto, and in doing so, passes the bill over the president’s formal objection. Overriding a presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority vote of the members present and voting (in other words, those who are actually in the chamber rather than two-thirds of the total) in each chamber.
An override vote is a momentous step and difficult to win. In recent years the mere threat of a veto has been enough to convince members not to proceed with provisions that the president doesn’t like."
Tough said the kitty ... they created this type of monster, they can uncreate it.
wow, check that out ... It can be done, the fact is they won't go forward and are stonewalling the whole process with the shutdown and funding. The power is in the Congressional house, not the White House.
It is the White House's fault as much if not more so than Congress due not just the threat of the veto, but the turtle being on the same page as Trump and not letting a previously passed Senate bill that couldn't get a House vote under the old Congress on the Senate floor, only because Trump would veto it. So yeah, everyone has some fault in it, but Trump's is the lack of negotiating.
It is the White House's fault as much if not more so than Congress due not just the threat of the veto, but the turtle being on the same page as Trump and not letting a previously passed Senate bill that couldn't get a House vote under the old Congress on the Senate floor, only because Trump would veto it. So yeah, everyone has some fault in it, but Trump's is the lack of negotiating.
McConnell "not unless it is something Trump will sign" ... McConnell is stonewalling as the signature is not a necessary item. We know this already. If they go through all the 'steps', gridlock opens. 2/3 vote or not ... doesn't matter, it gets over, it gets done, we move forward.
Pocket it and forget it ... we move forward.
Changing optics on this only works, if people do not understand civics 101, and guess who knows theirs better than native born Americans. hint, they had to pass the test that most high school graduates don't know material because the schools don't teach it.
If this country is being run by a dictator on authoritarian form of government, then yea, okay ... the laws don't read that way though. The failure to do their job, that's on Congress, always has been.
Shoot, even Trump is catching on, he has an Ace; he's thinking on playing it. How does one bypass Congress? But it is only applicable if ... there is a 'real' threat. Not the pretend one.
McConnell "not unless it is something Trump will sign" ... McConnell is stonewalling as the signature is not a necessary item. We know this already. If they go through all the 'steps', gridlock opens. 2/3 vote or not ... doesn't matter, it gets over, it gets done, we move forward.
Pocket it and forget it ... we move forward.
Changing optics on this only works, if people do not understand civics 101, and guess who knows theirs better than native born Americans. hint, they had to pass the test that most high school graduates don't know material because the schools don't teach it.
If this country is being run by a dictator on authoritarian form of government, then yea, okay ... the laws don't read that way though. The failure to do their job, that's on Congress, always has been.
Shoot, even Trump is catching on, he has an Ace; he's thinking on playing it. How does one bypass Congress? But it is only applicable if ... there is a 'real' threat. Not the pretend one.
McConnell also knows that there will be Republicans to flip (fearing re-election bids), especially ones not even near the border. I think he fears that they would move to override the veto with the Democrats. He knows the rules and the optics of as the President goes, the party follows is not bringing it to a vote.
Many people truly don't know how government works. Trump is one of them. He moaned and ******* about Obama resorting to executive orders, yet he used them a lot to bypass stalemate in Congress like with parts of Obamacare.
As for Trump, he is bluffing that he has an Ace but it really is a 2 with a white sticker covering the second icon. I imagine that if he uses the national emergency card, it too will get sued (as will much of the wall building since a good amount is on private land) and bogged down for a long time.
The government shutdown has already cost the USA more than 5 billion. If the Democrats had agreed initially to 5 billion dollars and avoided this shutdown for 2 weeks they would have saved the US money.
.1% of the budget supported by 30-40 of the electorate is a good .1%. How many items in the budget are so small and supported by so much of the electorate? You would struggle to find many. There is so much pork in the budget higher than 5 billion supported by pretty much no-one. This is not about a wall or 5 billion, this is about frustrating Trump and in the process shutting down the government.
Make the same argument
If Trump has not reneged on signing the bill McConnell had the Senate pass—that the House under Ryan was going to duplicate and pass and then send to Trumo to SIGN
There would be no shutdown
WHO GOT IN THE WAY???
Rush Limbaugh—not elected by anyone
Ann Coulter—not elected by anyone
Fox talking heads—not elected by anyone
Sean Hannity—not elected by anyone
Stephen Miller—not elected by anyone
Do you get the drift???
The people who changed the progress of keeping the government in business are NOT ELECTED BY ANYONE
Yet they seem to wield the most power to push an agenda
17% of Americans supposedly support Trump and this dedication to building a wall
17% is no one’s idea of a MAJORITY—in a democratic form of goveernment the majority rules
In this case, Trump’s weakness to thwart 10 talking heads and an ephemeral 17% of Americans—who knows how many really want this shutdown or the version of a wall Trump supposedly wants but changes his mind about every news cycle...
This is a manufactured crisis
It would take years of legal wrangling to get imminent domaine to all the border land needed
People are not going to GIVE their land to the government, allow massive construction project to wreck their land to GET to the border, house all the people needed to do the construction effort—-
This is just not going to happen on PRIVATE land w/o huge cost—
And I think we all know how lawyers love to drag out legal billing time
Anyone who thinks this wall could be finished by 2020 has been smoking too much dope...
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.
