Well I hope so. I thought Feinsten was working on her own bill, but maybe if she knows it is a non started she’s decided to work with Rs. But I wonder where Schumer is.
And yes, the ridiculous rhetoric and lies being spread on both sides needs to stop.
Why is it a crap bill? It’s a clean bill that prevents children from being separated from their parents.
Schumer is one of 48 co-sponsors on Feintstein’s bill.
I don’t disagree, but as I said, no reason a person could not be granted an extention if they show just cause.
Anyway, it can easily be modified. The main thing is to get something done NOW.
Which has zero chance of passing, and Ds know it.
That’s why Cruz purposely left off anything that Trump is asking for, and his bill is ONLY dealing with the issue of kids being separated. That way there is no reason for any D to oppose it.
Ds want to go back to catch and release. That will not happen.
If the main thing is to get something done NOW, then perhaps the bill that was introduced over two weeks ago should get some GOP support? Arguing anything else is basically using the issue as a bargaining chip to address some other aspect of immigration policy.
This “clean” bill is nothing more than releasing people without any fear of deportation. It goes way further than preventing families from being broken up. Ds want open borders. This is proof.
If the language doesn’t result in what I pointed out - bringing the asylum grant rates down to effectively 0 - then I’ll be on board. But there’s no reason why the D bill shouldn’t pass if the point is to address the issue of separating children from parents. Fix that issue in a clean bill, then address the other immigration issues in another bill.
■■■■■■■■■ it prevents families from being separated. You want the bill to include unrelated issues. Fix the issue at hand, and then work on a bipartisan immigration bill separately. Otherwise, you’re basically using the same tactic as the Trump admin.
Ted Cruz’s bill addresses the issue of separating children from their parents. That’s the entire point of his bill, along with a few other things such as more judges, etc.
And last time I checked, Rs controlled Congress, not Ds.
You’re essentially saying, “Include a fix to catch and release or else we won’t fix the issue of separating children from their families.”
It’s disgusting.
Whatever bill they pass better have 67 senators on board. If not, the crybaby-in-chief will just send it back- complaining e’s not getting his stinking wall.
Anyone with even half a heart is extremely disturbed by this- which gives you an idea what kind of people Trumplicans on this board are.
Makes me wonder if anyone will attempt to add a few riders to the bill.
What part about Ted Cruz’s bill also prevents families from being separated that you do not understand?
As I’ve posted here repeatedly, there is NOTHING in that bill that would provide things that Trump wants, such as a wall.
There is NO REASON for Ds to oppose that bill. NONE. The only issue, which you addressed and I agreed with, is the 14 days. But that can be modified.
McConnell controls the agenda, and it will be the Cruz bill that will come up for a vote.
Not a single reason why any D should vote no, unless of course they want this issue to carry on for political gain.
Not that any D would dream of doing that. (sarcasm)
I could be mistaken here too and misread something from earlier. Because I’m trying to find something showing Democrats and Republicans in agreement on some legislation, but am coming up goose eggs. But I have found this…
And this…
Which is a much more conservative approach to the issue. But also appears to be moving as a stand-alone measure. From the first link, it appears as if Trump is going to demand that this issue be a part of the negotiating tools he wants to ensure his immigration demands are met. But both the House and the Senate seem poised to now take this bargaining chip off of the table.
The question is how will Trump react? If both chambers pass something that makes it to his desk, ending this policy, like he claims he wants, but does not have any other immigration measures associated with it, will he veto it? Essentially proving definitively that this was always nothing more than using these kids as a pawn to get his broader wants?
If it effectively grants zero asylum requests then it’s just a ruse and we can just keep the current policy and decide in November… In the meantime, the lawsuits are already starting… One more filed today and another represented by Michael Avenatti of Stormy Daniels fame on its way… The ACLU suit will probably be granted class action soon and the courts can decide…
Assuming R leadership have enough brains in their head, the answer should be no. Cruz seemed to be quite clear about it.
This way there is no reason this should not pass easily.
It doesn’t help when the president says illegal immigrants want to “infest” our country.
Joanne is definitely not a Trumplican. Not by a looooooooong shot.
