Would you vote for President Trump's plan on immigration?

A continuous "ocean-to-ocean wall" is what he described in his Executive Order concerning a border barrier. I'm not trying to pour gasoline on a grass fire, but I have never seen any common sense in the idea of a solid, unbroken, 30-foot high wall that is 1,550 miles long, for so many obvious reasons, especially given that it would be built, maintained, and staffed in the most hostile desert-mountain terrain on the North American continent....

Please, I would invite everyone to read President Trump's Executive Order about this:

Link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...ecurity-immigration-enforcement-improvements/

Go down to "Sec. 3. Definitions." The envisioned wall is described in considerable detail. Note the use of the word, "shall", which means a great deal more than a simple "will" in documents like this....

 

Were I in your seat, I would want more than one terrorist were I trying to make this solely about Terrorists. But I am not calling all of them terrorists. Have Mexicans arrived here and killed Americans? Definitely they have. Kate Steinle for instance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Kathryn_Steinle

 

The definition in section 3 merely defines the southern border: (b) “Southern border” shall mean the contiguous land border between the United States and Mexico, including all points of entry.. SHRUG

Section 4 of your link refers to the Secure Fence Act, which was passed under Bush and for which the Congress still owes us roughly 112 miles of, to which Obama failed to complete. That is all your link is talking about. Nowhere does it mention a fence from Ocean to Ocean. Your link also talks about operational control of the border, i.e. more guards, drones, etc.

 

LOL had not a few Americans killed the citizens of almost every nation on earth over the years including Mexicans so Americans as a group should be ban from all international travel due to those murders.

 

Congress approved this back in 2006. Also he describes protections afforded to a particular class of Mexican.

 

You may believe that. Now sell your idea.

 

As an American citizen living abroad, I had to enter the Country I live in legally and have to report my existence every 90 days with immigration, and once a year file an application to extend my visa, at which time I have to prove that I have adequate monetary resources to provide my needs and wants for the following year. If I were to fail I would be required to leave the country by the expiration date on my current visa or face fines and jail until which time I could pay my accumulated fines and pay for the means to leave the country. I am entitled to NO government aid by the country I live in other than being allowed to contact the embassy or consulate of the country I am a citizen who also would only provide me assistance to contact friends or family for any monetary assistance needed. I'm not allowed to vote, and could be denied a visa renewal should I become involved in politics or break any laws, and could then be deported more immediately. I feel this is a fair system and all I have to do is obey the existing laws. In the local community I live in I am treated equal to all other members of the community, which includes occasional labour and/or monetary fees. When there is work to be done, a choice exists for each household to provide a days labour or a days average pay which is a little less than $10. So everyone, rich or poor, bears an equal burden with NO free riders. And we take care of each other when the need arises, as well as provide aid to adjacent villages when they have problems beyond their ability to alleviate. This, in my opinion, is how ALL societies should be run; by the people directly helping one another.

 

No , Limiting chain migration is a deal breaker this will mean as a US citizen I couldn’t for example bring my english parents over. I don’t even live in the USA but still pay US taxes why should my rights be reduced? I am for, border security, and DACA. So no deal i think 60 senators agree Trump’s proposal was the worst!

 

Gentlemen, what I provided was a link to this Executive Order issued by President Donald Trump:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...ecurity-immigration-enforcement-improvements/

"Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements
IMMIGRATION

Issued on: January 25, 2017"

I have my own subjective views concerning "the wall", but in that earlier post I was merely trying to focus on what the president actually declared in his Executive Order. You are, of course, capable of producing your own interpretation(s) of what the document says, and adding commentary about other governmental actions, measures adopted under the Bush Administration, other details during the Obama Administration, and whatever... I, however, am neither trying to 'interpret' what it says, nor to read President Trump's mind. It says what it says.....

 

Did you believe or do you believe your message was stomped on by myself?

I wanted to point out that well before the Trump presidency, the wall was approved by Congress with funding to follow.

 

No, Robert, not really. Again, I'm not trying to 'flame' anyone. On the contrary, I was just trying to put President Trump's Executive Order up for everyone to be able to see exactly what it is that he stipulated in it -- and thereby differentiate it from any subjective speculation, or other interpretation, including my own.

I don't like the idea of "the wall" as the president has described it in his Executive Order, but, it is important that I not try to 'marble-cake' my own views about "the wall" with the president's words. I'm just trying to re-state my intention to present his Executive Order, separate and distinct from anyone's commentary about it, my own included....

 

Thing for Trump is that if he won't put up the wall, he is defying a lawful order from the Congress.
i like the wall since it is humane. I saw one design that I doubt they will try to use a ladder to cross. But why make it easy on people who are citizens of other countries to illegally enter this country? Do we want a welcome sign at places?

The posting of the EO is a valuable post. Very interesting.

 

I tell you with all the sincerity I have in my body that building a 30-foot high wall through that desert-mountain country from just north of Del Rio,Texas all the way out to the California state line would be absolutely insane. I know that country. I've jeeped through many parts of West Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona.

But, you make a good point -- if Congress has issued a lawful order that could not be overturned or modified by a sitting president, then, yes, he would have to comply. I'm not actually sure what kind of 'lawful order' that Congress could issue unless it were in the form of an actual law, and, a law that would have survived an early presidential attempt at a veto, but I'm not expert in those matters.

Tell you what. Fly to El Paso, Texas, rent a Jeep, and drive the 'border-hugging' dirt roads all the way back down to Del Rio, Texas, as closely as you can. Tell me what you think of the idea of this "wall" after your trip is finished.... Warning: take weapons, ammunition, food, medicine, and LOTS of water. And wear very good boots in case the Jeep breaks down and you have to walk out....

 

It was in 1962 and only as a passenger on the train that I was at El Paso. More recently I drove highway 40 headed to Missouri but that does not come close to the borders. We in CA have the wall done I believe. Seeing El Paso though gives me the idea you want to convey. I am so far from there now I would not take the trip merely to confirm so i take your word. Congress did pass the law to build the wall. I have not read the law so won't try to explain what I never studied. I think Trump also realizes that parts of the border do not merit a wall and figures only a mountain goat would be able to make the trip or perhaps a mountain lion. We have here in the SF coast areas that are that rugged and steep. This past week they rescued 4 adults and 2 of them were fined per person, $200 I think the news said. The others i don't know since the news did not say. So fit people trying here in CA just to climb those rugged coast cliffs needed to be rescued and I doubt many Mexicans qualify as mountain goats. Then you have the heat at times of the year that can kill humans. Still we need the border blocked. If not by fences, then by nature.

 

Also to go for the better educated immigrants who have more to contribute.



We need a good agricultural worker visa program.


Better visa controls. Like someone on a student's visa is going to school.


And basically corset this graph more like the 1940 corset.

​

Moi

r > g

Most likely to over stay their visa.
True!​

 

I'm not seeing anywhere in the EO that it says a wall from Ocean to Ocean along the southern border. The EO merely talks about the 2006 Act passed by Congress and its completion to include additional man power and equipment. Like I said, I don't see where Trump declared building a wall along the entire length of the Southern border in that EO. Maybe you can point it out? (the definition you pointed to earlier in this thread simply defines the southern border, nothing more.)

That's what the EO says it's purpose is.

 

If they were coming off the boat they went through proper channels. Some were turned away for medical reasons or criminal pasts. (They were vetted), Who vetted those who came here illegally? Who did background checks on the illegals. Who checked the illegals for medical infections? Every one of those illegals can be replaced by another immigrant who came here properly or maybe some white girl like my grand daughter who is going through nursing school. They even have Asian, Hispanic, Black Americans of legal status in her classes.

 

this is what I would accept:

$50 billion for the wall and more border patrol folks

DACA

let all illegals who have been in the USA for at least 10 years, stay..but they must pay any possible back taxes, a fine, and not be able to apply for citizenship for another 10 years.

if they commit a felony or 3 misdemeanors, they get deported.

 

Yours is not a bad compromise solution, honestly. In addition to your proposal, though, we must end "chain-migration", "anchor babies legitimacy", and "diversity quotas".

 

From President Trump's Executive Order (with my added emphasis):

"Sec. 3. Definitions.

(b) “Southern border” shall mean the contiguous land border between the United States and Mexico, including all points of entry.

(c) “Border States” shall mean the States of the United States immediately adjacent to the contiguous land border between the United States and Mexico.

(e) “Wall” shall mean a contiguous, physical wall or other similarly secure, contiguous, and impassable physical barrier."

I don't see any exceptions in that to the full length of the border, from Brownsville, Texas all the way to the Pacific Ocean at the southern end of San Diego, California. Believe me, I would love to be wrong....

 

As I stated initially, those definitions are merely definitions of each phrase, it does not mean, in any way, there will be a wall along the entire length of the southern border. Each definition merely tells you what each phrase means, i.e.:
the southern border is a contiguous land border between the US and Mexico; a border state is a state immediately contiguous to the border; and a wall is an impassable barrier. SHRUG

It, by no means, means there will be a wall along the entire length of the southern border. So I ask again, where in the EO does it claim there will be a wall along the entire length of the southern border?

 

There may be some natural barriers which would fit the description as being an "impassable physical barrier".

 

There are formidable natural barriers along the border, but so far no 'barrier', natural or man-made has been able to offer 'illegal alien-proof' protection. They climb over, tunnel under, or just burrow through all natural barriers I'm aware of.

Realistically, they'll try to cross where they almost always have -- usually within 20 miles of civilization. If we put up a 'wall' in those areas, backed up by the armed drones and strips of anti-personnel mines, we could have a workable solution. Please don't get me wrong -- I'm entirely in favor of keeping ALL illegal aliens out of here, by any means necessary.

 

There is nothing that would be 100% effective (the goal is to dramatically reduce the number entering Improperly), there are those that will get through the cracks, ie they will attempt more crossings at points of entry using fake/forged/ stolen documents, thus possibly getting in with having gone through inspection, albeit with illegal documents. Then you also have visa overstays with an order of removal against them, how do we now prevent that from happening too?

Strips of anti-personel mines is a bit beyond inhumane.

 

"Definitions", ostensibly, define what is referred to in an Executive Order or, any other document they are provided as being pertinent to. They are there to tell you what certain words in the document mean. If the words don't actually mean what the definitions say they mean then what are they there for? This is so damned wearisome that we have to quibble over not only what the 'words' say, but what the 'definitions' say the words say. I wish he had had it written in German so that no one with any intelligence could be in any doubt about what the hell it was that he meant when he said what he thought he meant. Do you see how futile this is...?

Build the wall... don't build the wall.... I'm at the point where I don't care whether they build the damn thing or not.... But if they do (or TRY to) it will provide some of the most amusing entertainment we've had in a very long time....

. "I heard Mexican bandits stole the water truck! Got your canteen?!"