Ranked Vote: How To Enact Immigration Reform? (Consolidated)

Well, I'm not exactly saying that. The reality is that...it depends. It depends on what we the people do. How and when we choose to act.
If a significant portion of the population for instance gets up tomorrow and starts pushing hard for change,
the elected leader are likely to take notice and respond.

But trying to predict when exactly that will happen is less useful imo. If we actually want it to happen,
we should focus more on figuring out what we need to do to get it done.

Hmm... I think that the closest thing to that would be the following:

N5,N2,A2,C2,D2,E2,J0,F0​

N5. Build a Wall
N2. Add More towers, cameras, ground sensors, radiation detectors, drones, other aircraft, ships, and radars on the borders
A2. Undocumented Adult Who Snuck In: Conditional Temporary Residency Status Granted
C2. Children Brought by Parent: Conditional Temporary Residency Status Granted
D2. Unaccompanied Child Who Snuck In: Conditional Temporary Residency Status Granted
E2. Dreamers: Conditional Temporary Residency Status Granted
J0. Crack down on employers of undocumented immigrants with stiffer penalties and more aggressive enforcement
F0. Require children/parents kept together (ie. deport immediately, released on bond w/ankle bracelet, or detained together)

Though I'm not sure how well J0 and F0 actually fit in with what you were saying.
You'll have to let me know if you wanted something different. Also... I think that adding machine guns and land mines to a border wall is going way overboard. Plus... there isn't an option for that, but I can add it to your vote as a write-in... that is, if you really do want that...

-Meta

 

Gut the 1965 immigration Act? What exactly are you saying here...
that we need to get rid of all the Visa programs, and family reunification policies? What about asylum seekers/refugees?
I'm not so sure that's a good idea. Seems to me that would just lead to a loss of talent and more untalented people trying to sneak in illegally.
Anyways... I think the closest thing from the list to what you're suggesting would be the following:

G1,G3,G6,A3,B3,B2,C3,C5,D4,E3,I2​

G1. End H1B Temporary Work Visa Program
G3. End Permanent Visa Lottery Program
G6. Discontinue Allowing Parents and or Siblings to count as Family for Green Cards
A3. Undocumented Adult Who Snuck In: Deported
B3. Visa Holders Who Overstayed: Deported and Banned from Reentry regardless of degree
B2. Visa Holders Who Overstayed: Deported and Banned from Reentry if Overage Over a yr
C3. Children Brought by Parent: Deported w/Parent
C5. Children Brought by Parent: Deported
D4. Unaccompanied Child Who Snuck In: Deported
E3. Dreamers: Deported
I2. Amend 14th amendment, require legal guardian to be citizen/PermResident for citizenship to be automatic at birth

Though based on what you wrote, maybe there are other specific changes you want to see in addition to what's listed??
If so, let me know...

-Meta

 

Why would we need to invade it though. Its not like Mexico is a hostile foreign nation or something.
I'm sure they'd be more than willing to work with us if we offered to help them out,
but I agree with you, it'd probably be cheaper to do either than to build a wall.
And it might actually be more effective at keeping folks from sneaking in too
by giving them less incentive to want to in the first place.
A bit more fencing and surveillance equipment would also be more effective for less.

-Meta

 

Really... that's barely even a 20th of what I wrote.

If you'd actually go back and read the rest of my post, you'd find out that isn't true.

I mean seriously... it wont be possible to have a coherent discussion if we just talk past one another
and reply without attempting to understand what the other is saying... I mean, c'mon, at least read it, its not that long...

-Meta

 

Same here, at least to an extent.
I think its good for there to be a bit of competition to get in,
make folks work for it a bit, prove that they're serious, improve themselves,
but it shouldn't be so hard to do it legally that it might as well be impossible imo.

All the more reason for us to come together as a country and agree to some consensus before that happens.

Hmm, so based on what your views are right now, do you think you can vote in this poll?
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...enact-immigration-reform-consolidated.541275/

BTW, the way that compromise works in these Ranked Votes, is that everyone voting starts off with their personal ideals, the options from the list that best reflect exactly what they would like to see, and they place those options at the top of their list/vote/ballot. Those can then be followed up with options which, while not being your ideal, are what you would like to see in the case that not enough people agree with you on your ideal options. Basically, we sort the list in the OP with our favorite options at the top, and our least favorite either at the bottom or left off completely. As such, including more of the options in your vote is usually an indication of a greater willingness to compromise. Though note, that in these votes, at least for the Ranked Pairs tally, adding extra options does not affect the likelihood of your more favored options winning.

-Meta

 

Oh... and I usually post these links in all the Ranked Vote threads to give a little more background (but didn't this time)
Since you haven't voted in a Ranked Vote yet, I though you might want to check them out.

Ranked Vote: Discussion Thread (includes schedule)
What To Do To Reduce Partisan Dysfunction In Politics
Solutions Oriented Approach to Restoring Meaningful Civil Discourse​

The last two are kind of wordy, but if you go to the first one, you can get an idea
of exactly how past Ranked Votes have played out on this site.

-Meta

 

The law never stops, it is always in effect.
The specific requirements for one to qualify as a Dreamer (or AKA DACA recipient) are as follows:

https://www.uscis.gov/archive/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca

-Meta

 

Like I said before, the law does not stop, it is always in effect.

-Meta

 

If they've applied for and received DACA then they are protected from deportation, at least temporarily.
As for those who haven't applied, well... yes, they could be deported if someone reported them.
As to why no one reports them... idk, you'd have to ask their neighbors that I suppose.

-Meta

 

Yes, those temporary protections were granted through executive order. Though there is associated congressional legislation known as the DREAM Act which would make those protections permanent. It was first introduced in 2001 but has yet to make it through both houses. The last attempt I believe was in 2011.

In my opinion, the permanent protections ought to be put into law along with beefed up security on the border and a crack down on illegal employers so we don't end up in the same dilemma again down the road.

I don't understand what you're saying here...

But I get the sense you're trying to say that making the DACA protections permanent would encourage more folks to immigrate here illegally. This is exactly why I keep saying that something like the DREAM act can't just be passed on its own, it needs to be part of a larger comprehensive plan on immigration, including beefing up the security on the border, and cracking down on illegal employers of undocumented immigrants among a few other things... so that while we're moving the folks who are already here into a legal status, we also make it significantly harder for more people to immigrate here illegally as well as removing much of the incentive for them to try, all of which to make sure that we don't end up back in this same dilemma latter on.

Again I refer you to the vote I submitted in the second post of this thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...n-reform-consolidated.541275/#post-1069590383

DACA is fine as a temporary measure I guess, but I believe we need to give those people a permanent status,
while, again, at the same time, beefing up security on the border, and cracking down on illegal employment.
What we need is a comprehensive solution.

-Meta

 

You mean like the Madoff kids and their families?

Assuming that you as the child have no culpability in the robbery, that's actually a bit of a tricky question. At least in the case of the Madoff families, other than Bernie Madoff himself, they were not forced to pay back the money that Bernie had embezzled, at least not in totality. The sons at least did end up agreeing to hand over some of their money to the victims, but obviously nowhere near all of the people who ended up getting scammed out of their life savings etc. have been paid back all that they lost, and obviously, the Madoff families (or those who survived at least) still have money, some would say quite a lot.

Should they be forced to pay it all to the victims? I would say that were we talking about a specific, finite, non-fungible, and well defined tangible object or set of objects, the question would be a lot more straightforward and easy to answer. For instance, if Bernie Madoff had instead of money, stolen a bunch of rare paintings and then given a few of them to his kids, I would say that yes, the kids should be forced to hand those paintings back over to whoever they were stolen from. With money though, things get tricky, especially if many many years are allowed to go by after the initial theft, because at that point you have to suss out how much of the children's current wealth is a direct result of the stolen funds and what proportion of it is actually due to the children's own legitimate efforts...

There are arguments either way here, but for my part I will say this. I don't think the kids should be punished in a punitive sense for what their father did, but also believe that it makes no sense that those kids and or their families should be allowed to live better lives than that of those whos lives were ruined by the theft. So if the surviving Madoff families are well off, and making them pay a bit more back can bring surviving victim families at least up to that same level, then I'm all for it.

-Meta

 

Huh? Did you skip out on reading the entirety of my post again? :/
On your car question, I believe the way that works is that you can sue the seller for your money back.
There's a high probability that you'll win easily and they'll be forced to pay you.

-Meta