Democrats abandoning marginalized people because they got an opportunity to be more like Republicans on an issue will never rise to the level of surprising, let alone shocking.
this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023
50 points (84.7% liked)
politics
25585 readers
4031 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't think this would just be a concession to Republicans. I live in New York and I used to think Texas was making a big deal out of nothing but now I have to admit that I was wrong. Some sort of policy change is clearly necessary - having the federal government admit so many refugees while leaving state and city governments to pay for the care these refugees require isn't working very well.
European perspective:
We've faced a lot of migration after Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. Climate change is likely to displace billions in the coming century, so it's not going to get any better.
You can't simply not address migration, pretend mass migration doesn't (also) have negative effects on communities or affect the social fabric of your society. If you do that, you only embolden the far right, who get to pretend they're the only ones offering solutions.
Sure, plenty of those concerned about immigration are racist. But plenty also have legitimate concerns.
You're better off being honest about it. Admit that there are downsides, show the electorate you have a plan to deal with those downsides, and that the plan doesn't just involve dumping newly arrived migrants in the poorest areas of your cities where public services are already overstretched. Emphasise the positives too.
It's easy to be ok with immigration if you live in an affluent area, are well educated, have a good job, never use public transport, and none of the housing in your area is affordable for recent arrivals.
It's far harder when you live in an already deprived area, where good jobs are hard to find, where you're forced to rely on already overcrowded public transport or crumbling public services, only to be confronted with hundreds of new faces who don't speak the language, increase demand for housing, and depress wages. Especially when you're already struggling and are now forced to compete with these new arrivals.
Politicians who hand waive these voters' concerns, are likely to be seen as elitist and out of touch. Often by traditional left wing voters. And justifiably so.
Comments along the lines of "Hurdur, if a migrant can take your job, you must be dumb." are also inherently classist. Elon Musk is not richer than you because he is that much smarter than you. The world is simply not fair. The world is full of very intelligent and talented people, who are forced to do menial jobs, because that's what it takes for them to survive, and because they were never afforded the opportunities they deserved. Those who pretend otherwise are no better than the stereotype of an out of touch boomer who goes on about the young not being able to afford a house because they eat too many advocados.
It's blackmail, yeah?
It’s hard to overstate the potential destructiveness of the sweeping changes to US immigration policy currently being discussed as part of President Joe Biden’s negotiations with Republicans over aid for Ukraine and Israel.
Yep. We have to fund Ukraine, because if Russia wins due to Republicans withholding funding, it will likely signal to and embolden other countries. And if those countries attack NATO countries (and there's a real possibility), we are now obligated to send live troops, and we'll be in a real war, instead of funding a proxy war.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“A return to Trump-era policies is not the fix,” Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) — the first Latino chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on immigration, citizenship, and border safety — said in a press conference earlier this week.
Rather than being evaluated for eligibility for asylum and other humanitarian protections that would allow them to remain in the US, as is their right under international and current US law, migrants were returned to Mexico within a matter of hours after crossing the border.
Human Rights First, for instance, reported that over 1,300 people have experienced kidnapping, torture, rape, extortion, and other violence while stranded in Mexico due to Biden administration policies since mid-May.
This would mark a significant departure from the administration’s current policies in which US Customs and Border Protection holds migrants for less than 72 hours, screens them, and releases them unless they are among the small number found to be high risk.
Not only does that make the policy proposal impractical, but government watchdogs have documented widespread abuses and inhumane conditions in some immigrant detention facilities, many of which are owned and operated by private contractors.
Some Democratic negotiators have reportedly said they are open to raising the legal standard for what constitutes “credible fear of persecution” — what migrants have to demonstrate in their initial screenings to continue in the process of applying for asylum.
The original article contains 1,840 words, the summary contains 230 words. Saved 88%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!