How Much Time/Effort Should be Spent Attempting to Find Compromise on Immigration?

FYI, I posted a New Consolidated Immigration Reform Vote.
So for anyone who said they were willing to spend a good amount of time seeking compromise on immigration
here's a chance to help out. Oh... and those of you who indicated you weren't willing to compromise,
you're welcome to change your mind and weigh in too of course.

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

-Meta

 

Agree, though I would add that an unwillingness to compromise among some on this issue is only part of the problem here. Another major piece of the dysfunction imo seems to stem from a significant general state of apathy among the citizens of this country more broadly. This, despite the fact that there are a high number of people, particularly on a site like this, who suggest they view the immigration issue as one of this nation's most pressing. It seems that many folks have an intense feeling that something really ought to be done on the matter, but, even among those who suggest they would like to see compromise, there don't appear to be many willing to do all that much to actually achieve such a thing. Or... perhaps they're just distracted by other subjects...

Either way, I'm sure I've mentioned before that we can't just rely on elected politicians alone for something like this. Yes, it would be nice if they provided some good leadership in the area, but at the end of the day they're there to represent us, the average everyday citizens, and if we ourselves don't have it in us to both care about and accept compromise on an issue like this one, it will be difficult for those elected officials to move the needle on their own.

So the way I see it, we, the regular citizens, if we really want anything to ever get done on this, need to be able to openly talk with each-other about and spend at least a little bit of effort truly considering all aspects of the issue, including how to compromise on it, so that we might give our elected leaders some better guidance. All of which may be uncomfortable for a lot of people, especially on a subject which, once you dig into it, is actually fairly complicated in comparison to others.

Also, folks seem to have gotten quite used to simply going into immigration discussions with simple, one dimensional, usually preconceived solutions for one particular aspect, and arguing for that one solution while ignoring other potential solutions as well as other parts of the issue itself... in fact I'd say that that sort of thing happens in a lot of topics outside of immigration, but unfortunately, at least for the issue of immigration in particular, simple solutions like that which only address a single aspect of the larger problem just aren't going to work.

So in addition to actually caring about the issue enough to want to talk about it and also being open to compromise, I would say that one also needs to be willing to put forth effort in considering all the different parts. Obviously, the folks who aren't at all open to compromising probably also aren't going to be all too willing to consider other viewpoints or spend extra effort discussing aspects of immigration other than the specific part they care about. Hoping that those who are open to compromise are also open to spending time finding it. And that those open to both can actually follow through... But it remains to be seen...

-Meta

 

Exactly, I agree with this too. While I still don't believe that we can just put folks in office and then sit back and take it easy as if that's all that needed to be done, if we want congress to function, then we should at least make sure that the folks we're putting in there are actually willing and open to compromising in order to make that happen.

In my opinion, there are far too many my-way-or-the-highway types in congress right now. I like someone with a good set of core beliefs, but some politicians take it too far, and sticking to campaign promises is fine and all, even admirable, but if doing so doesn't leave any room for compromise, then I would say that the promises themselves were flawed and both the candidate and the voters should have thought a little more about their full implications before making them/voting for them.

-Meta

 

What does the law say about Dreamers, Securing the Borders, Splitting Up Families?
What does it say about Requiring an e-Verify system, Asylum Seekers/Refugees, or Ensuring Process Efficiency?...

I'm telling you guys, on this issue things aren't nearly as simple as people keep trying to make them out to be.
If we want anything to ever be done on this, we can't keep hand-waving away the parts we feel uncomfortable dealing with.

-Meta

 

Agreed!!

 

Do you hear what you're saying???
We need another Pearl Harbor??? Really???

If we believe that a Pearl Harbor-like situation is coming,
imo, we shouldn't be sitting around waiting for it, we
should be doing all we can to make sure something
like that doesn't happen... including compromising,
if that's what it takes...

-Meta

 

If you think things are so simple, then why not try to answer the question I asked?
What does the law say about Dreamers, Securing the Borders, Splitting Up Families,
Requiring an e-Verify system, Asylum Seekers/Refugees, and Ensuring Process Efficiency?...

That's like saying that the problem of car accidents would go away if people didn't drive drunk.
First of all, it doesn't matter how good of an idea it is, there are always going to be a few people who try to do it anyways.
As such, our country needs a bit more of a policy than just telling folks, hey don't drive drunk and we wont have issues.
Secondly, even if you did somehow get rid of all the drunk drivers, there are many other causes of car accidents.
Likewise, there are many facets of the immigration issue other than what to do about people sneaking in.

Again I ask, what does the law say about Dreamers, Securing the Borders, Splitting Up Families,
Requiring an e-Verify system, Asylum Seekers/Refugees, and Ensuring Process Efficiency?...

-Meta

 

Oh, well thanks for the clarification.
Out of curiosity, what do you think such a catalyst
situation would look like if in relation to immigration?

-Meta

 

Hmm, interesting answer. But yeah, I agree that's probably not too likely...

 

What do you mean wrong question??...
If we are going to be trying to ensure that the law gets enforced,
then we need to first know what the law actually is. So I ask again...

What does the law say about Dreamers, Securing the Borders, Splitting Up Families?
What does it say about Requiring an e-Verify system, Asylum Seekers/Refugees, and Ensuring Process Efficiency?...

-Meta

 

As I want it to be??...
Look... if it were up to me, immigration would be a straightforward easy to fix problem
and just as simple as any other issue to deal with... may be even a bit simpler...

But the fact of the matter is that it isn't that simple.
If it was, it probably would have been resolved a long time ago.
Has nothing to do with anyone wanting it to be complicated, that's just the reality of the matter. A reality which needs to be faced.

I mean we, the citizens of the United States of America.
You are a U.S. citizen, right??...

I have no idea what you're talking about here,
but I get the sense you feel I'm not doing enough to solve the problem.
If that's the case, then perhaps you ought to lead by example...

And what's that supposed to mean?
You're suggesting that calling for compromise,
opining that we probably shouldn't deport all the Dreamers,
saying that'd it be a good idea to beef up border security...
you're saying that's going to lead to a Pearl Harbor like situation???
Really???... How?

-Meta