Open Borders Bernie

Ana the Ist · Nov 7, 2019

Well...Old man Sanders just released his immigration plan.

Bernie Sanders wants to revamp trade deals, labor protections as part of sweeping immigration plan

The senator would also start a program to accept at least 50,000 migrants displaced by climate change during his first year in office.

Sanders also says his signature universal health-care plan, "Medicare for All," would "provide comprehensive care to everyone in America," regardless of immigration status.

It's a long list, but the short summary is if you can dodge deportation long enough, you're a citizen. If you get caught, that's no reason to send you back...it's just a civil offense. It includes the complete dismantling of immigration enforcement agencies....and a path to citizenship for basically all the illegals here now.

Oh, and a 14$ billion dollar fund for lawyers for illegals to help them fight any slim possibility of deportation once the rest of his executive orders go through.

Seeing as how basically every liberal poster I've seen on here opposed a 8 billion dollar wall to keep illegals out....I'm curious how they feel about 14 billion to help them stay? Also, can we stop pretending Democrats aren't supporting open borders since Bernie definitely is?

Thoughts?

Not David · Nov 7, 2019

Socialized healthcare makes more sense in a society that does not allow uncontrolled immigration, that's why the Nordic countries and Germany were doing much better.

Mountainmanbob · Nov 7, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
can we stop pretending Democrats aren't supporting open borders since Bernie definitely is?
Thoughts?

It's as if they have been blinded
and want to give their Country away -- for free.
M-Bob

Speedwell · Nov 7, 2019

Mountainmanbob said:
It's as if they have been blinded
and want to give their Country away -- for free.
M-Bob

If it really was a question of giving the country away for free or handing it over to Trump supporters, I know what I'd do.

Ana the Ist · Nov 7, 2019

Speedwell said:
If it really was a question of giving the country away for free or handing it over to Trump supporters, I know what I'd do.

What would you do?

Ana the Ist · Nov 7, 2019

David Neos said:
Socialized healthcare makes more sense in a society that does not allow uncontrolled immigration, that's why the Nordic countries and Germany were doing much better.

I'd agree with that.

Mountainmanbob · Nov 7, 2019

Speedwell said:
If it really was a question of giving the country away for free or handing it over to Trump supporters, I know what I'd do.

Yes, we know what you would do.
Any real news?
M-Bob

RocksInMyHead · Nov 8, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
It's a long list, but the short summary is if you can dodge deportation long enough, you're a citizen.

Not sure where you get that - are you referring to the mention of DACA?

If you get caught, that's no reason to send you back...it's just a civil offense.

Making it a civil offense doesn't mean they aren't going to deport you. It just means that you don't have to go in front of a judge before they do.

It includes the complete dismantling of immigration enforcement agencies.

Don't forget that it also replaces them by shuffling their duties (and, I would presume, their funding and personnel) to the appropriate agencies. Shutting down ICE is related to the fact that it was only doing half of its job because all of its budget was going to the Enforcement and Removals side of the agency.

and a path to citizenship for basically all the illegals here now.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

Ana the Ist · Nov 8, 2019

RocksInMyHead said:
Not sure where you get that - are you referring to the mention of DACA?

Sanders' immigration plan: Halt deportations, abolish ICE, welcome 50K 'climate migrants,' give welfare to all

I figured the more liberal posters would object to Fox.

"He also promises to use executive authority to allow illegal immigrants who have lived in the country for five or more years to stay “free from threat of deportation.”

Makes sense now?

Making it a civil offense doesn't mean they aren't going to deport you. It just means that you don't have to go in front of a judge before they do.

It means a lot more than that.

Don't forget that it also replaces them by shuffling their duties (and, I would presume, their funding and personnel) to the appropriate agencies. Shutting down ICE is related to the fact that it was only doing half of its job because all of its budget was going to the Enforcement and Removals side of the agency.

What do you think ICE does?

Not necessarily a bad thing.

If the plan was to take control of our borders and enforcement of the law....I'd agree.

Since the plan appears to be "let everyone in" I disagree.

RocksInMyHead · Nov 8, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
Sanders' immigration plan: Halt deportations, abolish ICE, welcome 50K 'climate migrants,' give welfare to all

I figured the more liberal posters would object to Fox.

"He also promises to use executive authority to allow illegal immigrants who have lived in the country for five or more years to stay “free from threat of deportation.”

Makes sense now?

Yes, it helps when you provide citations. I'm not sure I agree with this position 100% - as I said, I support the idea of a path to citizenship for people currently in the country illegally, but a policy like this with reduced border enforcement wouldn't be great.

It means a lot more than that.

What do you think it means? Citation please. I'll point out that unauthorized presence in the US is already classified as a civil rather than criminal offense. Currently, it's just the illegal entry that is considered a criminal offense. So if it were true that we can't deport people under civil statutes, then we wouldn't be able to deport visa overstays and the like.

What do you think ICE does?

ICE has two arms: enforcement and removal operations (ERO), and homeland security investigations (HSI). My understanding is that their budgets aren't separated, and ERO has been monopolizing the money such that HSI has been unable to do its job effectively. Every "abolish ICE" plan that I've seen is geared towards splitting those two arms apart so that both can do their jobs effectively - and also as a public relations stunt. I'm not aware of any politician who wants to get rid of both ICE and ICE's function.

If the plan was to take control of our borders and enforcement of the law....I'd agree.
Since the plan appears to be "let everyone in" I disagree.

Fair, I agree with you, though I don't know that Sanders has said enough about his plan to say for sure that he wants to "let everyone in". I think it's clear that he wants those already in to stay, but he doesn't say much either way on the topic of border enforcement.

Ana the Ist · Nov 8, 2019

RocksInMyHead said:
Yes, it helps when you provide citations. I'm not sure I agree with this position 100% - as I said, I support the idea of a path to citizenship for people currently in the country illegally, but a policy like this with reduced border enforcement wouldn't be great.

Agreed....generally. I certainly agree with DACA, as for the rest, I'd rather see a case by case basis for a pathway to citizenship rather than a blanket citizenship.

What do you think it means? Citation please.

You're asking for a citation on the difference?

I'll point out that unauthorized presence in the US is already classified as a civil rather than criminal offense. Currently, it's just the illegal entry that is considered a criminal offense. So if it were true that we can't deport people under civil statutes, then we wouldn't be able to deport visa overstays and the like.

While that's technically true....I can't imagine why we would change it to a civil offense unless the larger goal was to reduce the penalty. We actually have discretion for people who accidentally cross the border already....it's called a "humanitarian voluntary return". If someone was mentally or chemically impaired and crossed by accident...they're removed without any real difficulty.

Everyone else is willfully breaking the law. That's a criminal offense by our standards. I understand that some people caught speeding intended to...but some also just don't realize how fast they were going. They're charged with a civil offense and sent on their way. Someone could similarly overstay a visa if a flight is canceled, or if they get into a car accident, or hospital stay, etc. It makes sense to just call it a civil offense and move on.

Those illegally crossing the border though....they're fully aware they are breaking a law intentionally. They are criminals and I see no reason to drop that distinction unless it's part of a longer term goal of non-enforcement.

ICE has two arms: enforcement and removal operations (ERO), and homeland security investigations (HSI). My understanding is that their budgets aren't separated, and ERO has been monopolizing the money such that HSI has been unable to do its job effectively. Every "abolish ICE" plan that I've seen is geared towards splitting those two arms apart so that both can do their jobs effectively - and also as a public relations stunt. I'm not aware of any politician who wants to get rid of both ICE and ICE's function.

They should probably tell Bernie that then. He plans to end "work raids" entirely. I probably don't have to explain why it's more costly and difficult to round them up one at a time than hundreds at once.

Fair, I agree with you, though I don't know that Sanders has said enough about his plan to say for sure that he wants to "let everyone in". I think it's clear that he wants those already in to stay, but he doesn't say much either way on the topic of border enforcement.

I'm sorry....doesn't he call for an end to removals?

RocksInMyHead · Nov 10, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
While that's technically true....I can't imagine why we would change it to a civil offense unless the larger goal was to reduce the penalty. We actually have discretion for people who accidentally cross the border already....it's called a "humanitarian voluntary return". If someone was mentally or chemically impaired and crossed by accident...they're removed without any real difficulty.

Everyone else is willfully breaking the law. That's a criminal offense by our standards. I understand that some people caught speeding intended to...but some also just don't realize how fast they were going. They're charged with a civil offense and sent on their way. Someone could similarly overstay a visa if a flight is canceled, or if they get into a car accident, or hospital stay, etc. It makes sense to just call it a civil offense and move on.

Those illegally crossing the border though....they're fully aware they are breaking a law intentionally. They are criminals and I see no reason to drop that distinction unless it's part of a longer term goal of non-enforcement.

But what do we get out of classifying it as a criminal offense besides the right to call them criminals? Either way, they're getting deported, and it's actually easier to deport someone when they've committed a civil offense since there's no prosecutor involved. Takes less time and fewer resources.

They should probably tell Bernie that then. He plans to end "work raids" entirely. I probably don't have to explain why it's more costly and difficult to round them up one at a time than hundreds at once.

Work raids ultimately aren't very effective though - the employer just hires a dozen new illegal immigrants a few days later. Also, as I've said, I'm generally supportive of a pathway to citizenship for people in the country illegally, so I'm okay with ending removals (of people already here) and workplace raids.

The ways to slow down/stop illegal immigration are to increase enforcement at the border and discourage employers from hiring illegal immigrants, as well as working to help stabilize the countries that people are immigrating from.

Ana the Ist · Nov 11, 2019

RocksInMyHead said:
But what do we get out of classifying it as a criminal offense besides the right to call them criminals?

Laws don't exist for "what we get out of them"...but as for results, a 10 or 20 or lifetime ban on re-entry sounds better coming from a criminal offense than a civil offense.

Work raids ultimately aren't very effective though - the employer just hires a dozen new illegal immigrants a few days later.

I don't know if that's true, but if it is, we should raid them again.

Also, as I've said, I'm generally supportive of a pathway to citizenship for people in the country illegally, so I'm okay with ending removals (of people already here) and workplace raids.

Lol so if we don't catch someone at the border...they get to stay?

No offense, but that just makes it a huge incentive to come in illegally.

The ways to slow down/stop illegal immigration are to increase enforcement at the border and discourage employers from hiring illegal immigrants, as well as working to help stabilize the countries that people are immigrating from.

No offense...but the first two need to work together with deportation of those here illegally. As for the last one...propping up poor and overpopulated nations isn't our responsibility.

RocksInMyHead · Nov 11, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
Laws don't exist for "what we get out of them"...but as for results, a 10 or 20 or lifetime ban on re-entry sounds better coming from a criminal offense than a civil offense.

How many people attempt to re-enter the country legally after being deported for illegal entry? I legitimately have no idea, so if it's significant, then there's some merit. Otherwise, it seems like a waste of resources.

And what else do laws exist for than to improve our society? That's "what we get out of them."

I don't know if that's true, but if it is, we should raid them again.

Or perhaps impose stronger penalties for hiring illegal immigrants? You keep talking about punishing illegal immigrants for breaking the law, but nothing about business owners who break the law by hiring them.

Lol so if we don't catch someone at the border...they get to stay?

No, the idea is that we discourage people from coming illegally in the first place, so that massive raids that round up hundreds of illegal immigrants aren't necessary because there aren't hundreds of illegal immigrants to round up.

No offense...but the first two need to work together with deportation of those here illegally. As for the last one...propping up poor and overpopulated nations isn't our responsibility.

Getting rid of all of the illegal immigrants here already is an impossible task, and I believe that it would be a waste of resources to try to do so. The idea is to discourage illegal immigration by making the market less hospitable for employment and making it less likely to successfully cross the border illegally. In conjunction, we work to improve the conditions where they're coming from to encourage them not to leave. If you ignore the conditions that are leading to illegal immigration, you're just passing the problems down the line. It doesn't have to be a "propping up." It can be the equivalent of teaching a man to fish. The alternative is expanding the legal immigration options - otherwise you're just foisting the problem on some other country that is less able to handle it, which I don't believe to be a moral option.

Speedwell · Nov 11, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
No offense...but the first two need to work together with deportation of those here illegally. As for the last one...propping up poor and overpopulated nations isn't our responsibility.

It kind of is, given that the countries in question suffer from corruption of government which has frequently been contributed to by the interference of US business interests and from social disorder caused by drug gangs which exist to supply the US with the illegal drugs we buy.

FreeinChrist · Nov 11, 2019

Ana the Ist said:
Well...Old man Sanders just released his immigration plan.

Bernie Sanders wants to revamp trade deals, labor protections as part of sweeping immigration plan

It's a long list, but the short summary is if you can dodge deportation long enough, you're a citizen. If you get caught, that's no reason to send you back...it's just a civil offense. It includes the complete dismantling of immigration enforcement agencies....and a path to citizenship for basically all the illegals here now.

Oh, and a 14$ billion dollar fund for lawyers for illegals to help them fight any slim possibility of deportation once the rest of his executive orders go through.

Seeing as how basically every liberal poster I've seen on here opposed a 8 billion dollar wall to keep illegals out....I'm curious how they feel about 14 billion to help them stay? Also, can we stop pretending Democrats aren't supporting open borders since Bernie definitely is?

Thoughts?

That is not open borders. Open borders is where there is complete freedom of movement and goods across the border. He is talking about medical care in America (the US). He is talking about accepting a certain amount of refugees per year. IF it were open borders, there would be no restriction to a certain amount.

mark46 · Nov 11, 2019

Please post the list or number of businesses that have been prosecuted, and then convicted, under Trump's policy of immigration raids.

Ana the Ist said:
.

I don't know if that's true, but if it is, we should raid them again.
.

mark46 · Nov 11, 2019

Bernie's policy is very close to open borders. I agree, just like his socialism, he doesn't quite meet the dictionary definitions.

FreeinChrist said:
That is not open borders. Open borders is where there is complete freedom of movement and goods across the border. He is talking about medical care in America (the US). He is talking about accepting a certain amount of refugees per year. IF it were open borders, there would be no restriction to a certain amount.

mark46 · Nov 11, 2019

The Democratic CANDIDATE against Trump would likely lose several states with this type of policy.

Democrats need to support
1) immediate citizenship for DACA folk,
2) a path to citizenship for the undocumented already here (perhaps for more than 5 years),
3) mandatory e-verify, and raids that result in prosecutions of businesses,
4) detention and very rapid trials at the border,
5) rapid deportation procedures at the border, and deportation of violent criminals already here,
7) ankle bracelets for anyone awaiting trial, who is not in the detention centers (an Obama policy that had an effectiveness of over 90%),
8) increased expenditure for wall security, including wall money,
9) a 5 year low limit on legal immigration,
10) legal representation for everyone at hearings, with a legal aid fund to help those in need.

If folks object to wall money, I would point out that this virtually useless deterrent should not be the political issue that stops the rest.

St. Helens · Nov 11, 2019

ADMIN HAT ON
Closed for Review
ADMIN HAT OFF

Open Borders Bernie

Aggressively serene!

I'm back!

Goat Whisperer

Well-Known Member

Aggressively serene!

Aggressively serene!

Goat Whisperer

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Aggressively serene!

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Aggressively serene!

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Aggressively serene!

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Well-Known Member

CF Advisory team

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

I stand with Israel

Similar threads