Connect with us

Immigration

Daniel Horowitz on illegal immigrant birth rates

Published

on

Daniel Horowitz on illegal immigrant birth rates

There’s more to the illegal immigration debate than just how to stop them from coming over. Once here, they’re figuring out how to stick around and grow as a future influence on the United States.

Conservative Review’s Daniel Horowitz sent this out on Twitter:

This is more than a problem we’re facing now. It’s becoming generational.

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Immigration

Little if any progress as partial government shutdown looms

Published

on

Little if any progress as partial government shutdown looms

WASHINGTON (AP) — The fight over President Donald Trump’s $5 billion wall funds has deepened, threatening a partial government shutdown in a standoff that has become increasingly common in Washington.

It wasn’t always like this, with Congress and the White House at a crisis over government funding. The House and Senate used to pass annual appropriation bills, and the president signed them into law. But in recent years the shutdown scenario has become so routine that it raises the question: Have shutdowns as a negotiating tool lost their punch?

Monday brought few signs of progress. A partial shutdown that could occur at midnight Friday risks disrupting government operations and leaving hundreds of thousands of federal employees furloughed or working without pay over the holiday season. Costs would be likely in the billions of dollars.

Trump was meeting with his team and getting regular updates, said White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Trump was also tweeting Monday to keep up the pressure.

Exiting a Senate Republican leadership meeting late Monday, Sen. John Thune of South Dakota said, “It looks like it probably is going to have to build for a few days here before there’s a solution.”

The president is insisting on $5 billion for the wall along the southern border with Mexico, but he does not have the votes from the Republican-led Congress to support it. Democrats are offering to continue funding at current levels, $1.3 billion, not for the wall but for fencing and other border security.

It’s unclear how many House Republicans, with just a few weeks left in the majority before relinquishing power to House Democrats, will even show up midweek for possible votes. Speaker Paul Ryan’s office had no update. Many Republicans say it’s up to Trump and Democrats to cut a deal.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Trump talk most days, but the senator’s spokesman would not confirm if they spoke Monday about a plan. McConnell opened the chamber hoping for a “bipartisan collaborative spirit” that would enable Congress to finish its work.

“We need to make a substantial investment in the integrity of our border,” McConnell said. “And we need to close out the year’s appropriation process.”

Meanwhile more than 800,000 government workers are preparing for the uncertainty ahead.

The dispute could affect nine of 15 Cabinet-level departments and dozens of agencies, including the departments of Homeland Security, Transportation, Interior, Agriculture, State and Justice, as well as national parks and forests.

About half the workers would be forced to continue working without immediate pay. Others would be sent home. Congress often approves their pay retroactively, even if they were ordered to stay home.

“Our members are asking how they are supposed to pay for rent, food, and gas if they are required to work without a paycheck,” said a statement from J. David Cox, Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, the large federal worker union. “The holiday season makes these inquiries especially heart-wrenching.”

Many agencies, including the Pentagon and the departments of Veterans Affairs and Health and Human Services, are already funded for the year and will continue to operate as usual, regardless of whether Congress and the president reach agreement this week.

Congress already approved funding this year for about 75 percent of the government’s discretionary account for the budget year that began Oct. 1.

The U.S. Postal Service, busy delivering packages for the holiday season, wouldn’t be affected by any government shutdown because it’s an independent agency.

Trump said last week he would be “proud” to have a shutdown to get Congress to approve a $5 billion down payment to fulfill his campaign promise to build a border wall.

During his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump promised that Mexico would pay for the wall. Mexico has refused.

Democratic leaders Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, in a meeting last week at the White House, suggested keeping funding at its current level, $1.3 billion, for improved fencing. Trump had neither accepted nor rejected the Democrats’ offer, telling them he would take a look.

Schumer said Monday he had yet to hear from Trump. Speaking on the Senate floor, Schumer warned that “going along with the Trump shutdown is a futile act” because House Democrats would quickly approve government funding in January.

“President Trump still doesn’t have a plan to keep the government open,” Schumer said Monday. “No treat or temper tantrum will get the president his wall.”

One option for lawmakers would be to provide stopgap funding for a few weeks, until the new Congress convenes Jan. 3, when Pelosi is poised to become House speaker.

Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, who is in line to become the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, suggested a stopgap bill could be one way to resolve the issue or a longer-term bill that includes money for border security.

GOP leaders, though, were frustrated as the clock ticked away. Leaving the weekly leadership meeting, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said any planning was a “very closely held thing. That’s why we should never let this happen. We should pass the bills the way we’re supposed to pass them.”

___

Associated Press writer Laurie Kellman in Washington contributed to this report.

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Immigration

Why aren’t Republicans on Capitol Hill demanding wall funding?

Published

on

Why arent Republicans on Capitol Hill demanding wall funding

Below is a transcript of the video above.

The word of the day, dear friends, is…

feck·less
/ˈfekləs/
adjective
lacking initiative or strength of character; irresponsible.

If Republican voters needed any further proof that the men and women they voted in to serve us in the House of Representatives and Senate are nothing more than watered down versions of their Democratic counterparts, one needs only to look to the southern border to see a glaring absence of a border wall.

Perhaps they need a reminder of what that wall should have been. Back in 2016, they won the White House and retained control of the House and Senate due in large part to their promise to build the wall. Now, as they’re on the verge of handing over control of the House to the Democrats, we’ve barely scratched the proverbial surface on the wall debate. Perhaps they fell for the sales pitch that Mexico was going to pay for it. Who knows?

Whatever they’re reasoning for not funding it when they had the chance, we’re now at the eleventh hour and they’re siding with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer by supporting keeping the government open without increasing the DHS budget to $5 billion for wall construction. Instead of standing firm with the President, they’re trying to convince him to punt. They’re ready to go home for the holidays, after all, and they see no way to make the Democrats budge. The path of least resistance is to fight the President and the people they represent instead of fighting the Democrats. This should be remembered.

Primary them all, I say. At least that’s what I would say if I were still a Republican. I gave up on them doing anything different from the Democrats long ago. As I Tweeted earlier…

It’s time to demand answers. We need to flood their phones, emails, and social media asking them why they haven’t been fighting with every ounce of courage they can muster to unite behind the goal of funding the wall. They can say they tackled Obamacare and tax reform in 2017. I’ll buy that. But the only excuse they can muster for failing to address it in 2018 is the midterm election and that’s a pitiful excuse. I could even make the case that had they fought to fund the wall in 2018, they might have been able to retain control of the House and expand their majority in the Senate.

The funny part, for me at least, is that I’m not a huge fan of the wall. I’d prefer a technology-based solution that would be just as effective as a deterrent while being exponentially more effective at actually capturing those who attempt to cross illegally.

But that’s not what we were promised. For now, let’s just get the darn wall. Our elected officials are so obtuse when it comes to understanding technology, I won’t push for something so complex. Get the down payment on the wall. It’s a great place to start. Otherwise, the flow of illegal immigrants crossing over will never be impeded.

The wall is not a perfect solution. I’d prefer a much more practical, affordable, and effective virtual wall. But we need something and the GOP promised a wall. The fact they refuse to deliver it after two years is proof that they truly are feckless.

I’m JD Rucker. Thank you for listening.

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Immigration

How Beto O’Rourke could solve the migrant crisis if he wanted to

Published

on

How Beto ORourke could solve the migrant crisis if he wanted to

This is a transcript of the video above.

Let’s look at the migrant caravan crisis from a different perspective. Currently, the positions are very polarized between the two dominant political philosophies. On one hand, you have the progressives who mostly want the migrants at the border to be let into the nation, granted asylum, and given opportunities to build a better life. On the other hand, you have conservatives who want them to go through the process legally or simply go home.

Both positions have their merits, but both sides are also missing important points. The death of a 7-year-old Guatemalan migrant while in Border Patrol custody has sparked outrage from the left who blame the Trump administration’s policies for her death, while the right is equally outraged that the girl was forced to enter the country illegally when she could have received food, shelter, education, and healthcare in Mexico.

This girl’s horrible and avoidable death is now being politicized by both politicians and the media. Everyone’s pointing fingers. Nobody’s working on actual solutions.

As a sovereign nation, the government has a responsibility to its citizens to prevent foreign nationals from crossing the border illegally. As a nation that doesn’t turn its back on those who need help, the American people should have a sense of compassion for those who seek our help. We can accomplish both goals if the government does its job of defending the border while the people do our job of rendering assistance. It’s very important to note that the people, not the government, should be the ones rendering assistance to the migrants. The last thing we need is more intervention from Washington DC.

Private charities are fully capable of working with the Mexican government to provide better lives for the migrants. All Mexico has to do is continue to offer asylum to all the migrants and dramatically improve border security on their southern border. They’ve done what they can to mitigate the humanitarian crisis that is brewing even while their temporary facilities are being overrun. But combine Mexican asylum with good old fashioned American philanthropy and everyone can be happy.

It wouldn’t take much. Fundraising is easy for those who are willing to make it happen. With the funds that Democrat Beto O’Rourke accumulated during his failed Senate bid in Texas, every adult migrant can be paid the average Mexican household income for a full year. If one Senate candidate in a midterm election can raise those kinds of funds in a matter of months, surely the empathetic left and the industrious right could get together to raise even more in a much shorter period of time.

Instead of giving them food and a cot, philanthropic efforts could give these people real opportunities to succeed in Mexico. Those who still want to go through the process of entering the United States legally will have the resources to wait for it to happen in safety. Meanwhile, border patrol will be able to focus on the remaining illegal border crossings, the ones that aren’t at the border for an opportunity to earn American wages but who are trafficking illegal goods or nefarious people.

For this concept to work, both sides of the political aisle will have to abandon some of their false premises. Progressives will have to admit that our sovereignty is too important to encourage even more unlawful traffic than we already have at our southern border. They would also have to acknowledge that Mexico is offering asylum, so the notion that the migrants must be let in so they can escape their horrible situations in Central America is false.

On the other side of the aisle, conservatives have to understand that most of these people will not or cannot go back. We need to send the message to potential future migrants that they will not be able to circumvent our laws, but doing so does not require turning a blind eye because it’s not our problem. Don’t get me wrong. It’s definitely not our problem, which is why I would be opposed to taxpayer-funded solutions. However, a charitable solution would allow people to willingly pitch in without condemning our own sovereignty.

If a current or near future charity launched a massive drive to give the migrants more opportunity in Mexico, and this philanthropic drive coincided with efforts by the Mexican government to stop the flow of migrants crossing into their country, neither political side in America would be completely happy about it but both sides would have their concerns essentially eased.

This bears repeating. Beto O’Rourke raised enough money for his Senate campaign to pay every adult migrant at the border an average Mexican household income for a full year.

I invoked Beto O’Rourke for three reasons. First, he’s demonstrated an ability to raise money for something of minimal importance like a political campaign. Surely he could turn those efforts towards a philanthropic campaign and achieve even better results. The second reason I mentioned him is because he lost his race. Very soon, he’ll have nothing better to do. The third reason is that for something like this to work, a network of powerful people would need to get behind it. O’Rourke’s leftist buddies on the coasts plus his friends in Texas would be perfect for a scenario like this own.

Instead of the left calling for the President to relieve border restrictions or the right saying the only solution is for them to go back to the situation they chose to leave, we should be putting together the solution as a people. The only responsibility the government has in this whole mess is to prevent illegal border crossings and commit appropriate resources to work with those who are trying to enter legally.

I can already hear the complaints from both sides. The left will complain that helping them build lives in Mexico goes against their desire to achieve the American Dream. The right will say there are starving Americans who deserve our charity more than the migrants. Both sides are right, but this solution really doesn’t oppose either notion. To the left, I’d say if they choose to enter legally and work through the process we have in place, so be it. They’re welcome to pursue their version of the American dream as long as they do it within our laws. To the right, I’d say the charitable efforts put towards solving American problems would not be hampered by a campaign to help the migrants. If we’ve learned anything about American philanthropy, it’s that the vast charity of our citizens is driven by a diverse range of motivations. The money that would be given to help the migrants is not money that would have been given to help Americans. No domestic causes would be harmed by aiding the migrants.

If the left stops playing the open borders card and the right stops playing the not-our-problem card, we can make this solution happen. It may not be the solution either side wants, but it may be the only solution that can actually work.

I’m JD Rucker. Thank you for listening.

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report