LAS VEGAS (AP) — Declaring ‘‘now is the time’’ to fix broken immigration laws, President Barack Obama on Tuesday urged Congress to put millions of illegal immigrants on a clear path to U.S. citizenship while cracking down on businesses that employ people illegally and tightening security at the borders. He heralded a rare show of bipartisanship between the White House and Senate leaders on basic plans to resolve the long, emotional national issue.
But both the White House and Senate proposals for tackling the complex and emotionally charged issue still lack key details. And potential roadblocks are already emerging over how to structure the avenue to citizenship and whether a bill would cover same-sex couples — and that’s all before a Senate measure can be debated, approved and sent to the Republican-controlled House where opposition is likely to be stronger.
Comments
yet does not like bipartisan agreement. far, far left
How in the world are the two proposals the President's or the Senate's far, far left. Seems fairly practical, logical and straight forward. The deveil will be in the details on enforcement, but outside of that I see nothing left on this. Left would be pure amnesty and that isn't happening.
Just read between the lines on the White House's proposal, and see my other blogs.
there is a touchy question that certainly bears on this whole immigration issue... I would like to ask why it is at the very least not being discussed from a sociological or ethical point of view ....
That issue is race... the decline in the percentage of the U.S. population that is white... there is huge concern by the media and the political world about Latino and Black, and sometimes even Asian populations and the way those three factors come together and make a majority of minorities... that says that Caucasians are still the majority single population.... Yet it continues to decline . . . The media in particular has come to favor this structure, doing all but saying that Whites should be persecuted because they are now outnumbered by the other three population groups together. . . Of course, I will be accused of racism because I ask these questions. . . But another query associated with the issues I already ask about is this. . . how much of this situation is caused by white females refusing to have more than a limited number of children while some some ethnic groups have larger families? If I am not mistaken this same question applies to Russians when that Caucasian population is compared to minority residnts of that nation.
Finally, do these plans that the senators and Obama are patting themselves on the heads for thinking about include source nations that have majority or very large minority White populations such as Ireland or Eastern European nations? Or are we only dealing with Latino or Hispanic nations with small numbers of people from majority Blkack or Asiatic nations thrown into the mix?
I don't think the media has come to "favor" this structure as you say. The media recognizes the coming structure as do sociologists and economists. While it is true that white educated women have less children that is a phenomena that occurs in every group in which incomes rise, education for women rise and birth rates decline.
However, what you argue is exactly what the xenophobes fear and I'm not saying you are one. I'm simply pointing out this is their concern. This demographic shift is permanent and will continue and politicians ignore it and their own peril.
boatwrote: "Of course, I will be accused of racism because I ask these questions. . ."
That's right, because it is racist. I couldn't care less about whites becoming a minority in this country. Do you think white people are so superior that there's a problem when they become a minority? That's racism.
Racism per Merriam-Webster: "the assumption that psychocultural traits and capacities are determined by biological race and that races differ decisively from one another which is usually coupled with a belief in the inherent superiority of a particular race and its right to domination over others"
It sounds to me that's what you're implying.
Obama will find a way ti TORPEDO the bipartisan Senate agreement. That's because he would rather keep the discussion going inorder to score political points. For instance he will say that borderr enforcement is not necessary.
The AP says "The Senate proposal says that entire process couldn’t start until the borders were fully secure and tracking of people in the U.S. on visas had improved. Those vague requirements would almost certainly make the timeline for achieving citizenship longer than what the White House is proposing".....Exactly what is VAGUE about those requirements? Just SECURE the Borders. But that is something Obama does not want to do. In fact he SUES states that try to secure their own borders.....There you have the White House looking for ways to override the Senate's proposal, including the Senate Democrats. And watch the AP push the White House's propaganda, which is why "AP" is short for "Administration's Propaganda"
"Miker5" I'm not a liberal but I'm also not today's ignorant "conservative". Hopefully the R's will reinvent the party into something the rest of us can go back to.
AP, Administration Propaganda, probably the most "conservative" of the MSM and you line them up with Obama. Do you know the immigration numbers between the US and Mexico is now zero. Do you realize the immigration problem includes work visa's to Europeans, to Asians a lot more than just Mexice.
You know what those amongst us who are rational who want to see the Republican Party revived for a number reasons dont have to argue these silly points with you. Because if the Republican Party wishes to survive wishes to be something more than a party of paranoid old white guys it has to pass a new immigration law, that Latino's like, that American's like, but that the minority, the Tea Party wing of what once was a Party that represented true "conservative" values, those folks the Tea Party folks, they don't have to approve and the rest of us don't care.
Considering that Obama refuses to enforce CURRENT immigration law, do you think that he will have a change of heart and enforce a new immigration law? Particularly if it includes building a border fence? How abougt all of those lawsuits against states for trying to protect their own citizens and their property?