Thread: 4 Immigration and DACA bills fail in Senate

nebish - 2/16/2018 at 04:08 AM

4 bills all had different components, all failed

Coons-McCain failed 47-52

quote:

Provided a path to citizenship for 1.8 million undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children
Offered no money for Trump’s border wall, though it did include some border security measures

It failed 52 to 47, with Democrats almost united in favor and Republicans mostly voting against it.


Toomey Amendment failed 45-54

quote:
The second vote, on an amendment from Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), did not actually address DACA or border security. The Toomey amendment would have penalized so-called sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce federal immigration policy, by withholding federal funding from those municipalities. The issue has been a fixation for Trump and some of the conservative hardliners in Congress.

It failed 54 to 45. Republicans and a few Democrats supported it, but most Democrats were opposed.

What it means: Sanctuary cities are a deeply partisan issue, so it’s no surprise this failed to win broad bipartisan support. Republicans likely wanted to get vulnerable Democrats up for reelection in 2018 in states that Trump won on the record on the issue.


Common Sense Plan failed 45-54 (WH threatened veto)


quote:
Provided a path to citizenship for 1.8 million undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children
-Offered $25 billion for border security
-Prevented DACA recipients from sponsoring their parents for legal status

It failed 54 to 45. Democrats almost unanimously backed the plan, along with eight Republicans. But the rest of the GOP conference and a handful of Democrats blocked the bill.

What it means: The “Common Sense” plan seemed like it had the best chance of winning 60 votes, but the White House threatened to veto it, and Republicans who had previously been more moderate on immigration refused to support it. This is the most damning vote on Thursday: No other bill seemed viable, and yet even this plan, after the White House’s intervention and amid intransigence from conservatives, could not win the necessary support.


The Grassley Bill failed 39-60 (WH preferred plan)

quote:

Provided a path to citizenship for 1.8 million undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children
-Offered $25 billion to fund a southern border wall
-Substantially curtailed family immigration and eliminated the diversity visa lottery program in such a way that would gut the legal immigration system

It failed, 39 to 60. Democrats opposed the bill en masse, joined by a notable number of Republicans, while most of the GOP conference and a couple Democrats supported it.

What it means: Trump’s preferred immigration plan appears to be unviable in the Senate.


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/15/17017682/senate-immigrati on-daca-bill-vote-failed

Further:

quote:
Senators fume after immigration bill failure
Lauren Fox

By Lauren Fox, CNN

Updated 7:35 PM ET, Thu February 15, 2018

Washington (CNN)It was supposed to be a raucous, week-long, open floor debate on immigration -- the President's signature issue and such a contentious topic that Democrats shut the government down over it just a month ago.

Instead, it was the incredible shrinking immigration debate, which lasted roughly one hour on the floor and ended without a single amendment passing to protect DACA recipients or send a cent of funding for President Donald Trump's border wall.

"I'm ready to move on," said Louisiana Republican Sen. John Kennedy. "We wasted a whole week here. And I'm ready to move on. There are other issues in front of us."

Fingers were pointed in all directions as members retreated from the floor, defeated, frustrated and downright mad that after weeks of negotiations, the best chance they had to broker a deal ended without any resolution for a population everyone agreed they had wanted to help.

A group of bipartisan lawmakers -- the same group responsible for helping end a government shutdown weeks before -- fumed at the White House's treatment of their proposal, which they argued could have inched toward passage, had the White House stayed on the sidelines rather than actively lobbied against them.

On the floor of the Senate, Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine, was frustrated that the amendment her group had brokered without Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, was being referred to as the Schumer amendment. The name undermined the entire point of her group's efforts: that it had been reached by the middle, not by party leaders. Collins could be heard telling colleagues that the move was "so wrong."

Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican from South Dakota, acknowledged "there were a few games being played."

"You don't forget 'em, but you just roll with them," Rounds said.

Just hours after senators had reached an agreement on a plan that provided a path to citizenship for DACA recipients in exchange for $25 billion in border security, the administration began their effort to undermine the amendment. President Donald Trump issued a veto threat. And in a briefing call with reporters Thursday, two administration officials, one of them a White House official, called the bill "outrageous" and "irresponsible," and argued it would "put many innocent lives at risk."

"The bill is so spectacularly poorly drafted, I mean unless you imagine it was drafted for the purpose of gutting immigration enforcement," the White House official said, before the officials criticized Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, who fought back.

"I could care less about what an anonymous White House official says. I'm looking for leadership from the White House, not demagoguery," Graham told reporters.

Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat from Delaware, said he blamed the White House "a great deal."
"It is striking to me that the White House and the Department of Homeland security actively and aggressively campaigned against the McCain-Coons bill and the bipartisan Rounds-King bill and yet both of those bills got more votes significantly then the White House- initiated Grassley bill," Coons said.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska, lamented that the White House had missed an opportunity.

"I fear that you've got some within the White House that have not yet figured out that legislation almost by its very definition is a compromise product and compromise doesn't mean getting four Republicans together and figuring out what it is that those four agree on, it is broader," she said.
GOP efforts to kill amendment Sen. Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, called the bipartisan bill the "olly olly oxen free amendment."

In the end, the bipartisan proposal was short six votes it needed, but did far better than the White House-backed plan, which only got 39 votes.

And it wasn't just Republican opposition that stopped the bipartisan proposal. Three Democrats also voted against the proposal. But Democrats and Republicans in the middle believed the White House's efforts had given senators on the fence little political cover to support their proposal.

With just weeks to go until the original March 5 deadline and a week of recess ahead, members acknowledged there was little time left to find a breakthrough now.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, the majority whip, told reporters after the failed amendment votes that he does not see the issue of immigration being raised again soon.

"I don't see it. We couldn't get it together this week. We've got other things we have to do, which are pressing. The Majority Leader's (Mitch McConnell) the one who sets the agenda. We need to get some things done: nominations, other bipartisan legislation. If I were him, I'd be reluctant to spend another week of wasted time."

He continued, "I thought the deadline and I thought the empathy that people have for these young people would be enough to change the outcome here, but apparently not yet."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/politics/senate-immigration-anger/index.html


2112 - 2/16/2018 at 04:19 AM

Maybe they should have kept the government shut down. Might have had different results.


nebish - 2/16/2018 at 05:20 PM

Not sure if anyone caught it, but I chuckled when the CNN story said "Democrats shut down the government".

Anyway, the WH plan. Trump's offer for 1.8 million to be on a path to citizenship is a concession and not popular with many on the right. But then he expects to get everything else he wants. I would start there too. I would ask for the sky, knowing that to get some kind of deal, compromises need to be met. You can't start out with what you are really comfortable with and then compromise down to something lower.

Perhaps Senator Murkowski said best from the story:

quote:
"I fear that you've got some within the White House that have not yet figured out that legislation almost by its very definition is a compromise product and compromise doesn't mean getting four Republicans together and figuring out what it is that those four agree on, it is broader," she said.


Now they'll all go out and play the blame game again.


Muleman1994 - 2/16/2018 at 10:46 PM

The Democrats vote against all bills to solve the illegal immigration problems and throw their precious "dreamers" (illegal aliens) under the bus.



OriginalGoober - 2/17/2018 at 02:46 PM

It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]


jkeller - 2/17/2018 at 03:11 PM

quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]


The Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House. The Democrats can’t stop anything. The Republicans cannot agree among themselves. This is a GOP problem.


Muleman1994 - 2/17/2018 at 05:04 PM

quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]



Poor Schumer may be beginning to realize that demanding amnesty for illegal aliens will not get the Democrats and votes in the mid-terms.

The left's dependency on low-info voter remains their only hope of any representation in government.

Note keller's post above. That idiot is so stupid he does not understand that in the Senate 60 votes are require to pass the bill.


jkeller - 2/17/2018 at 05:59 PM

quote:
quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]



Poor Schumer may be beginning to realize that demanding amnesty for illegal aliens will not get the Democrats and votes in the mid-terms.

The left's dependency on low-info voter remains their only hope of any representation in government.

Note keller's post above. That idiot is so stupid he does not understand that in the Senate 60 votes are require to pass the bill.



There you go with the personal attacks.

Whatever, explain why they can't get a bill passed in the House?


Muleman1994 - 2/17/2018 at 08:29 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]



Poor Schumer may be beginning to realize that demanding amnesty for illegal aliens will not get the Democrats and votes in the mid-terms.


The left's dependency on low-info voter remains their only hope of any representation in government.

Note keller's post above. That idiot is so stupid he does not understand that in the Senate 60 votes are require to pass the bill.



There you go with the personal attacks.

Whatever, explain why they can't get a bill passed in the House?



The House isn't the problem.
Senate Democrats are killing every bill.
They don't want a solution, they want the issue for the fall mid-terms.

Of course of you were informed you would know that.
However.


jkeller - 2/17/2018 at 09:08 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]



Poor Schumer may be beginning to realize that demanding amnesty for illegal aliens will not get the Democrats and votes in the mid-terms.


The left's dependency on low-info voter remains their only hope of any representation in government.

Note keller's post above. That idiot is so stupid he does not understand that in the Senate 60 votes are require to pass the bill.



There you go with the personal attacks.

Whatever, explain why they can't get a bill passed in the House?



The House isn't the problem.
Senate Democrats are killing every bill.
They don't want a solution, they want the issue for the fall mid-terms.

Of course of you were informed you would know that.
However.



Let me help you there.

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/15/17016278/senate-immigration-deal-vote-count


Eight Republicans — Sens. Rounds, Susan Collins (R-ME), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Cory Gardner (R-CO), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), and Johnny Isakson (R-GA) — joined most Democrats to vote in favor of the proposal. All the other Republicans present voted no.

Three Democrats — Sens. Kamala Harris (D-CA), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), and Tom Udall (D-NM) — also voted no, apparently due to concerns that the Rounds deal conceded too much to President Trump on funding of the border wall and other immigration enforcement measures.


Sp, Mule, the GOP doesn't have enough of their own votes. Oh well.


OriginalGoober - 2/17/2018 at 09:25 PM

So democrats werent united for DACA? Border state senators as well. Close vote. if Democrats were united it may have swayed republicans. Instead, democats chose whine about border Security. No one believes the border is secure.


nebish - 2/17/2018 at 11:06 PM

It is hard to be united on anything really.

And why would we want that? Who wants group think? I want independent thought.

Still here is how the votes went:

Amdt 1959 "WH preferred plan" Rep 36 yea, 14 nay = 72%

Democrats were united in support of TWO bills:

Amdt 1955 "McCain - Coons" Dem 46 yea (+ Bernie and King) = 48 yea, 1 nay = 98%
Amdt 1958 "Commonsense" Dem 44 yea (+ Bernie and King) = 46 yea, 3 nay = 94%

I do not see the Democrats wanting this a campaign issue. I am usually cynical like that, but I just think neither side wants to give enough based off what they are getting in return.

Sounds like the Goodlatte House bill "Securing America's Future Act" has the votes, passed the whip test Wednesday. They are tweaking language. If they introduce it, I should pass with only partisan support. But it has no chance in the Senate. As we saw, nothing has any chance in the Senate.

The President said he would take the heat. The President said he would accept whatever they sent him. The President has no idea how to lead or make a deal on this.

Party politics just sucks. And it sucks balls. These wimps in Congress, vote for your constituents, or atleast vote your conscious. Don't run scared because of you don't want to vote for something the President is going to oppose. Commonsense bill was only 6 votes short of cloture and 42 Republicans voted against it because they were scared of going against their President.

They want to do something, make Trump veto it. Make him own it. But they all protect eachother. They protect the party, they protect the brand.


2112 - 2/18/2018 at 02:18 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]



Poor Schumer may be beginning to realize that demanding amnesty for illegal aliens will not get the Democrats and votes in the mid-terms.


The left's dependency on low-info voter remains their only hope of any representation in government.

Note keller's post above. That idiot is so stupid he does not understand that in the Senate 60 votes are require to pass the bill.



There you go with the personal attacks.

Whatever, explain why they can't get a bill passed in the House?



The House isn't the problem.
Senate Democrats are killing every bill.
They don't want a solution, they want the issue for the fall mid-terms.

Of course of you were informed you would know that.
However.



Funny that you blame the Democrats, yet Trump's preferred bill was the least supported of the bunch. Blame the Democrats but not the Whitehouse. Classic!


Muleman1994 - 2/18/2018 at 04:45 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]



Poor Schumer may be beginning to realize that demanding amnesty for illegal aliens will not get the Democrats and votes in the mid-terms.


The left's dependency on low-info voter remains their only hope of any representation in government.

Note keller's post above. That idiot is so stupid he does not understand that in the Senate 60 votes are require to pass the bill.



There you go with the personal attacks.

Whatever, explain why they can't get a bill passed in the House?



The House isn't the problem.
Senate Democrats are killing every bill.
They don't want a solution, they want the issue for the fall mid-terms.

Of course of you were informed you would know that.
However.



Funny that you blame the Democrats, yet Trump's preferred bill was the least supported of the bunch. Blame the Democrats but not the Whitehouse. Classic!



The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.


2112 - 2/18/2018 at 06:24 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
It's pretty clear this is a democratic strategy to not make a deal and have this as a campaign issue in the fall. Chuck Schummer is hoping to wake up and get the low infos to turn up.

[Edited on 2/17/2018 by OriginalGoober]



Poor Schumer may be beginning to realize that demanding amnesty for illegal aliens will not get the Democrats and votes in the mid-terms.


The left's dependency on low-info voter remains their only hope of any representation in government.

Note keller's post above. That idiot is so stupid he does not understand that in the Senate 60 votes are require to pass the bill.



There you go with the personal attacks.

Whatever, explain why they can't get a bill passed in the House?



The House isn't the problem.
Senate Democrats are killing every bill.
They don't want a solution, they want the issue for the fall mid-terms.

Of course of you were informed you would know that.
However.



Funny that you blame the Democrats, yet Trump's preferred bill was the least supported of the bunch. Blame the Democrats but not the Whitehouse. Classic!



The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.



So did the Republicans. No bill reached 50 votes, including the one Trump supported, but sure, continue to blame the Democrats.


Sang - 2/28/2018 at 10:05 PM

In blow to Trump, Supreme Court won’t hear appeal of DACA ruling

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the Trump administration's appeal of a federal judge's ruling that requires the government to keep the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program going.

Under a lower court order that remains in effect, the Department of Homeland Security must continue to accept renewal applications from the roughly 700,000 young people who are currently enrolled in the program, known as DACA. The administration had intended to shut the program down by March 5, but that deadline is now largely meaningless.

In a brief order, the court said simply, "It is assumed the court of appeals will act expeditiously to decide this case."

Monday's denial also gives Congress more time to come up with a legislative solution, though repeated bipartisan efforts have failed so far.

At a White House meeting with governors from around the coutry, President Donald Trump said after the court's decision, "We'd like to help DACA" and criticized the lower court.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said, "Today's Supreme Court action shows that rescinding DACA was not only legally questionable, but also unjust and cruel. The court's action is welcome news, but only Congress can provide the permanent protection our Dreamers need and deserve."

The Supreme Court's denial Monday was expected, because the justices rarely accept appeals asking them to bypass the lower courts.

The program allows children of illegal immigrants, known as Dreamers, to remain here if they were under 16 when their parents brought them to the U.S. and if they arrived by 2007. Those given DACA status must renew it every two years.

On Jan. 9, a federal judge in San Francisco, William Alsup, ruled in favor of the University of California and its president, former Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano. They sued to keep the program going after the Trump administration said in September that it would end it within six months. Alsup said Attorney General Jeff Sessions had wrongly concluded that DACA was put in place without proper legal authority.

The Justice Department said it would contest that ruling before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California. But government lawyers also asked the Supreme Court to take the highly unusual step of agreeing to hear the case, bypassing the appeals court.

"The district court has entered an unprecedented nationwide injunction requiring the government not simply to tolerate, but to affirmatively sanction, a continuing violation of federal law by nearly 700,000 aliens," said Solicitor General Noel Francisco in asking the justices to take the case.

After the Supreme Court's decision Monday, the White House said, "The DACA program — which provides work permits and myriad government benefits to illegal immigrants en masse — is clearly unlawful. The district judge's decision to unilaterally re-impose a program that Congress had explicitly and repeatedly rejected is a usurpation of legislative authority...We look forward to having this case expeditiously heard by the appeals court and, if necessary, the Supreme Court, where we fully expect to prevail."

The Supreme Court has agreed only about a dozen times in the past century to immediately take a case and bypass the federal appeals courts, and those case usually involve a national emergency, such as nationwide strikes in the steel and coal industries.

In asking the court to take the case, the Justice Department took another unusual step in declining to ask the justices to block the lower court order in the meantime, which would have allowed the government to shut DACA down as planned. Such a start-and-stop approach, the government said, would frustrate the goal of winding the program down in an orderly way.

Monday's action by the Supreme Court leaves the DACA challenge pending before the California appeals court, where it is in the early stages. The Justice Department has said it will take at least another year to get back to the Supreme Court for a decision on DACA's future.

If Congress acts in the meantime to extend the program or provide an alternative path to citizenship for its recipients, the legal case would probably be dismissed.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/supreme-court-won-t-hear-dac a-case-n851186


Trump seems to be having trouble with immigration and the courts...........


nebish - 3/2/2018 at 04:10 PM

The stories reads like the supreme court has refused to hear the administation's DACA appeal because it is out of order on process. After the 9th rules, then they may be more inclined to consider it. We all pretty much know how the 9th is going to rule, but there is a process that should be followed in the appeals process.

Supreme court will be hearing the travel ban in April.

quote:
Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court announced Friday that it would hear oral arguments concerning the legality of the latest version of President Donald Trump's travel ban on April 25, which is currently scheduled as the last argument day of the term.

The court will consider whether the ban violates immigration law as well as the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.

Its eventual ruling will determine the fate of the Trump administration's third attempt to restrict entry to people from several Muslim-majority countries.

Late last year, the justices allowed the entire travel ban, issued in September, to go into effect while the legal case played out before it.

The ban places varying levels of restrictions on foreign nationals from eight countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Somalia and Yemen.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/23/politics/supreme-court-travel-ban/index.html


Muleman1994 - 3/2/2018 at 07:45 PM

The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.


2112 - 3/2/2018 at 10:49 PM

quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.




And so did the Republicans. So what's your point? Trump's preferred bill had the least amount of votes of all the bills. Why couldn't Trump convince the Republicans to vote for his bill? Failed leadership from Trump and the Republican congressional leadership.


BrerRabbit - 3/2/2018 at 10:54 PM

quote:
. . .killed every bill.


Hahaha . . . if only you were a bill!


Muleman1994 - 3/3/2018 at 03:12 AM

quote:
quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.




And so did the Republicans. So what's your point? Trump's preferred bill had the least amount of votes of all the bills. Why couldn't Trump convince the Republicans to vote for his bill? Failed leadership from Trump and the Republican congressional leadership.



The Democrats claimed they wanted to help the so-called "Dreamers" (illegal aliens).
It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass a bill.
How many Democrats voted for what they said they wanted?



BoytonBrother - 3/3/2018 at 12:30 PM

Why was Obama able to get the votes he needed for Obamacare?


nebish - 3/3/2018 at 01:33 PM

quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.



quote:
The Democrats claimed they wanted to help the so-called "Dreamers" (illegal aliens).
It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass a bill.
How many Democrats voted for what they said they wanted?


quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.


quote:
The House isn't the problem.
Senate Democrats are killing every bill.
They don't want a solution, they want the issue for the fall mid-terms.

Of course of you were informed you would know that.
However.


quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.


Muleman, you keep repeating this over and over - it is false and this very thread provides the evidence.

48 out of 49 Democrats voted FOR McCain-Coons.

46 out of 49 Democrats voted FOR the Commonsense bill.

Democrats did not vote against and kill every bill. Specifically they supported passage of two bills by a 94-98% margin of their caucus. There are many websites that track vote tallies, I suggest you familiarize yourself with those.


nebish - 3/3/2018 at 01:38 PM

quote:
Why was Obama able to get the votes he needed for Obamacare?


Democrats owned a supermajority in the 2009 Senate. The vote was 60-39 with 58 Democrats and two independents (Sanders and Lieberman) voting for and all 39 Republicans voting against (Bunning R-KY not voting).


2112 - 3/3/2018 at 07:45 PM

quote:
quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.



quote:
The Democrats claimed they wanted to help the so-called "Dreamers" (illegal aliens).
It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass a bill.
How many Democrats voted for what they said they wanted?


quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.


quote:
The House isn't the problem.
Senate Democrats are killing every bill.
They don't want a solution, they want the issue for the fall mid-terms.

Of course of you were informed you would know that.
However.


quote:
The Democrats voted against and killed every bill.


Muleman, you keep repeating this over and over - it is false and this very thread provides the evidence.

48 out of 49 Democrats voted FOR McCain-Coons.

46 out of 49 Democrats voted FOR the Commonsense bill.

Democrats did not vote against and kill every bill. Specifically they supported passage of two bills by a 94-98% margin of their caucus. There are many websites that track vote tallies, I suggest you familiarize yourself with those.




Trump has ushered in the new post-fact world, so your facts will be ignored. Much easier to just mindlessly call anything you don't agree with Fake News. It's all it takes to keep the sheep in line.


Muleman1994 - 3/3/2018 at 09:45 PM

The Democrats wanted amnesty for the illegal aliens.

The Democrat failed yet again.


BoytonBrother - 3/4/2018 at 02:43 AM

Obama didn't have that problem. He got Obamacare passed, and Trump can't get this passed. He should learn from Obama.


nebish - 3/4/2018 at 02:18 PM

quote:
Obama didn't have that problem. He got Obamacare passed, and Trump can't get this passed. He should learn from Obama.


Second time you have said that and I'm responding for a second time. I don't know what point you are trying to make. Obama got party line votes to reach 60 on ACA, all Democrats (counting Sanders and Lieberman). Republicans only have 52 Senate seats if they all go party line. It takes 60 to invoke cloture. There is nothing that Republicans or Trump could've learned from Obama's ACA vote, the votes and seats are different. It is apples and oranges. What is your point?


Bhawk - 3/4/2018 at 04:29 PM

quote:
quote:
Obama didn't have that problem. He got Obamacare passed, and Trump can't get this passed. He should learn from Obama.


Second time you have said that and I'm responding for a second time. I don't know what point you are trying to make. Obama got party line votes to reach 60 on ACA, all Democrats (counting Sanders and Lieberman). Republicans only have 52 Senate seats if they all go party line. It takes 60 to invoke cloture. There is nothing that Republicans or Trump could've learned from Obama's ACA vote, the votes and seats are different. It is apples and oranges. What is your point?


Don't want to speak for anyone else, but maybe a point could be something like...let's see...the guy who has proclaimed himself as the greatest dealmaker in the history of the human race should be able to find 8 votes.

No? Or is that too negative and unfair of a question?


BoytonBrother - 3/4/2018 at 05:48 PM

quote:
What is your point?


That Obama is way better leader, and passing Obamacare was an incredibly impressive feat, and that Trump doesn't have his skills to achieve something of this magnitude, and wishes so badly that he does, hence the obsessive schoolyard crush tweets about him.

You can break it down any which way you want. The bottom line is that Obama figured out a way to get a "horrible, country-destroying, hated, corrupt, illegal, unsustainable, destructive" bill passed......pretty impressive, and makes Trump look really really pathetic in comparison.


Muleman1994 - 3/4/2018 at 08:28 PM

quote:
quote:
The Democrats wanted amnesty for the illegal aliens.

The Democrat failed yet again.


Seems to me Democrats called Trump's bluff and won. Dreamers stay and no wall funded. How easy was that?


It was and is the Democrats demanding amnesty for the illegal aliens and that will not happen.
Obama's DACA fiasco end on March 5th and the illegal aliens go on the list to be deported.

President Trump met and exceeded what the Democrats wanted and the Democrats sill killed the bills. The Democrats do not want the issue solved. They want it as a political issue which of course did not work for them in 2016.

President Trump wins.


nebish - 3/4/2018 at 08:40 PM

quote:
Don't want to speak for anyone else, but maybe a point could be something like...let's see...the guy who has proclaimed himself as the greatest dealmaker in the history of the human race should be able to find 8 votes.

No? Or is that too negative and unfair of a question?


Trump's leadership on this immigration issue and what he actually wants and supports has been awful and I've said as much. Deal making has been nonexistent, not just actual deal making but the understanding of what is required to strike a legislative deal. You've heard nothing different from me on that.

I'm taking exception that somehow Trump or the Republicans could've learned something from how ACA went, which I see absolutely no comparison between anything related to that. Think Obama would've gotten votes from the other side if he had to for ACA passage? It's easy to be a "leader" when you own a super majority and don't have to work with the other side. So was Obama a great leader when the Senate had a filibuster proof majority and then was he a poor leader when the Democrats lost that majority? It is a silly argument.

quote:
That Obama is way better leader, and passing Obamacare was an incredibly impressive feat, and that Trump doesn't have his skills to achieve something of this magnitude, and wishes so badly that he does, hence the obsessive schoolyard crush tweets about him.

You can break it down any which way you want. The bottom line is that Obama figured out a way to get a "horrible, country-destroying, hated, corrupt, illegal, unsustainable, destructive" bill passed......pretty impressive, and makes Trump look really really pathetic in comparison.


I am going to have to admit that we are just not going to see eye-to-eye on this. Figuring out a way to get everyone in your own party to support something for passage is one thing. Figuring out a way to get people outside your party to support something for passage is different. It's like, so I should be proclaiming that the tax cut plan was some significant leadership from Trump? I'm not saying that because any run-of-the-mill Republican who was in the White House could've done that with this Congress. Sorry, I don't think getting something passed along party line displays leadership - quite the contrary in fact.


2112 - 3/5/2018 at 06:04 PM

quote:
quote:
Don't want to speak for anyone else, but maybe a point could be something like...let's see...the guy who has proclaimed himself as the greatest dealmaker in the history of the human race should be able to find 8 votes.

No? Or is that too negative and unfair of a question?


Trump's leadership on this immigration issue and what he actually wants and supports has been awful and I've said as much. Deal making has been nonexistent, not just actual deal making but the understanding of what is required to strike a legislative deal. You've heard nothing different from me on that.

I'm taking exception that somehow Trump or the Republicans could've learned something from how ACA went, which I see absolutely no comparison between anything related to that. Think Obama would've gotten votes from the other side if he had to for ACA passage? It's easy to be a "leader" when you own a super majority and don't have to work with the other side. So was Obama a great leader when the Senate had a filibuster proof majority and then was he a poor leader when the Democrats lost that majority? It is a silly argument.

quote:
That Obama is way better leader, and passing Obamacare was an incredibly impressive feat, and that Trump doesn't have his skills to achieve something of this magnitude, and wishes so badly that he does, hence the obsessive schoolyard crush tweets about him.

You can break it down any which way you want. The bottom line is that Obama figured out a way to get a "horrible, country-destroying, hated, corrupt, illegal, unsustainable, destructive" bill passed......pretty impressive, and makes Trump look really really pathetic in comparison.


I am going to have to admit that we are just not going to see eye-to-eye on this. Figuring out a way to get everyone in your own party to support something for passage is one thing. Figuring out a way to get people outside your party to support something for passage is different. It's like, so I should be proclaiming that the tax cut plan was some significant leadership from Trump? I'm not saying that because any run-of-the-mill Republican who was in the White House could've done that with this Congress. Sorry, I don't think getting something passed along party line displays leadership - quite the contrary in fact.


I agree with you. But when you can't get anything through congress, and your own party controls both houses, that certainly shows a lack of leadership. I find it amazing that it took Trump as long as it did for him to get a major piece of legislation through congress, not that I'm complaining.


Muleman1994 - 3/6/2018 at 02:23 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Don't want to speak for anyone else, but maybe a point could be something like...let's see...the guy who has proclaimed himself as the greatest dealmaker in the history of the human race should be able to find 8 votes.

No? Or is that too negative and unfair of a question?


Trump's leadership on this immigration issue and what he actually wants and supports has been awful and I've said as much. Deal making has been nonexistent, not just actual deal making but the understanding of what is required to strike a legislative deal. You've heard nothing different from me on that.

I'm taking exception that somehow Trump or the Republicans could've learned something from how ACA went, which I see absolutely no comparison between anything related to that. Think Obama would've gotten votes from the other side if he had to for ACA passage? It's easy to be a "leader" when you own a super majority and don't have to work with the other side. So was Obama a great leader when the Senate had a filibuster proof majority and then was he a poor leader when the Democrats lost that majority? It is a silly argument.

quote:
That Obama is way better leader, and passing Obamacare was an incredibly impressive feat, and that Trump doesn't have his skills to achieve something of this magnitude, and wishes so badly that he does, hence the obsessive schoolyard crush tweets about him.

You can break it down any which way you want. The bottom line is that Obama figured out a way to get a "horrible, country-destroying, hated, corrupt, illegal, unsustainable, destructive" bill passed......pretty impressive, and makes Trump look really really pathetic in comparison.


I am going to have to admit that we are just not going to see eye-to-eye on this. Figuring out a way to get everyone in your own party to support something for passage is one thing. Figuring out a way to get people outside your party to support something for passage is different. It's like, so I should be proclaiming that the tax cut plan was some significant leadership from Trump? I'm not saying that because any run-of-the-mill Republican who was in the White House could've done that with this Congress. Sorry, I don't think getting something passed along party line displays leadership - quite the contrary in fact.


I agree with you. But when you can't get anything through congress, and your own party controls both houses, that certainly shows a lack of leadership. I find it amazing that it took Trump as long as it did for him to get a major piece of legislation through congress, not that I'm complaining.



Apparently you are unaware of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act.

The DACA fix died because the Democrats did not want it to pass. They only want the political issue.



nebish - 3/6/2018 at 03:01 PM

I think both sides did make honest attempts at coming up with a DACA bill, but the related details of the specific bills is what ultimately killed it.

If DHS was able to create DACA, then DHS can surely discontinue it. Like many things, the Trump administration has not taken the proper route or argument in doing so and allowed Napolitano to sue and Judge Alsup to rule in her favor on technical grounds. Trump administration claimed it wasn't lawful, it was lawful. Whether or not it should have been created or exist isn't something for a court to decide. If the Obama administration wanted it, they had authority to create it within DHS policy. It must also be true that if the Trump administration doesn't want it, it is also within their authority to rescind the actions taken by DHS. Napolitano is protecting something she created and believes in, and is in her right to do so as President of the University of Cal, although her primary goal is to draw out and extend the process because in the end I believe Judge Alsup's ruling will not stand. It's just a long process to overturn his wrong decision.


Sang - 3/6/2018 at 07:00 PM

quote:


Apparently you are unaware of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act.






Of course we are - but the republicants only needed 50 votes instead of 60 for that.... surprised you didn't point that out....


Muleman1994 - 3/7/2018 at 04:14 PM

quote:
quote:


Apparently you are unaware of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act.






Of course we are - but the republicants only needed 50 votes instead of 60 for that.... surprised you didn't point that out....



No need to point out what informed people already knew.
Harry Reid changed those rules in the Senate.

Those senate rules do not apply to an immigration bill.

Take a basic civics course junior.


Muleman1994 - 3/7/2018 at 05:13 PM

National Digest: Federal judge in Md. sides with Trump in ending DACA

IMMIGRATION

Federal judge approves ending DACA

A federal judge in Maryland has affirmed the Trump administration’s authority to end an Obama-era program that protected from deportation people brought to the country as children.

U.S. District Judge Roger W. Titus, who was appointed to the federal bench in Maryland by President George W. Bush, issued the ruling Monday in a case brought by the advocacy organization CASA de Maryland.

President Trump cited the decision in a message Tuesday morning on Twitter.

“Federal Judge in Maryland has just ruled that ‘President Trump has the right to end DACA,’ ”

Trump wrote in an 8:46 a.m. tweet.

Titus’s decision affirmed that Trump’s administration had the authority to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. The judge, however, criticized Trump for his “unfortunate and often inflammatory rhetoric” and noted that, were he not a judge constrained to interpreting the law, he would opt for a different result.

The Trump administration had hoped to end DACA on March 5, though federal district judges in California and New York had issued nationwide injunctions stopping it from doing so — making the date effectively meaningless. Late last month, the Supreme Court turned down a request to get involved in the dispute at this time. Titus’s ruling does not disturb the earlier injunctions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-digest-federal-judge-in-md -sides-with-trump-in-ending-daca/2018/03/06/7d59ec14-1916-11e8-b681-2d4d462 a1921_story.html?utm_term=.969f0cc86c38


Sang - 3/7/2018 at 06:08 PM

So, Trump owns it. So what has he done to help the Dreamers that he cares about so much?


Muleman1994 - 3/8/2018 at 03:56 AM

quote:
So, Trump owns it. So what has he done to help the Dreamers that he cares about so much?



President Trump has put on the table a package that more than doubles what the Democrats shut down the gov't for as well as the measures to stop the problems from happening again.

it is up to the Democrats to work for their country instead of whoring for votes.


Sang - 3/8/2018 at 05:24 AM

Trump hasn't put in writing what he wants Congress to do yet .... especially not in this case, but with everything he does ... republican senators I saw on the news said they keep waiting for him to put something in writing, not just say what is on the top of his head - and then change it the next day after he meets with someone else.

Yep, he's a real leader.... lol ... people are just jumping at the chance to work for him...

[Edited on 3/8/2018 by Sang]


Muleman1994 - 3/8/2018 at 05:39 PM

quote:
Trump hasn't put in writing what he wants Congress to do yet .... especially not in this case, but with everything he does ... republican senators I saw on the news said they keep waiting for him to put something in writing, not just say what is on the top of his head - and then change it the next day after he meets with someone else.

Yep, he's a real leader.... lol ... people are just jumping at the chance to work for him...

[Edited on 3/8/2018 by Sang]



President Trump Was very clear in stating the exact measures to solve the illegal immigration issue and his plan was read into the Congressional Record.

You are as stupid as keller and his ilk and not capable of accessing public records.

The Democrats intentionally screwed this up and as the mid-terms are approaching are no long even talking about it.



BoytonBrother - 3/8/2018 at 06:23 PM

quote:
The Democrats intentionally screwed this up and as the mid-terms are approaching are no long even talking about it.


True, because it’s been overshadowed by his affair with a porn star. Can you believe he would be so foolish? You know who never had an affair like a good Christian? Obama.


Muleman1994 - 3/8/2018 at 07:07 PM

Dreamers to Democrats: We're tired of your lies
www.foxnews.com

The illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children – known as Dreamers – say that they have been failed by Democrats who are more interested in blaming President Trump and Republicans than delivering a congressional measure that would protect the young people from deportation as they await a path to legal residency.

Dreamers are done giving Dems a pass.

“They don’t walk their talk,” said Cata Santiago, a 20-year-old Dreamer who was brought to the U.S. from Mexico when she was just 8 years old. “We’re tired of it. We’re tired of believing them when they say ‘It’s the Republicans.’ They make promises when they’re in an election, and when it’s over they’re done and don’t do anything.”

“I’ve decided to put my faith in my community [of Dreamers] and not in the Democrats,” Santiago told Fox News.

We're tired of believing [Democrats] when they say 'It's the Republicans.' They make promises when they're in an election, and when it's over they're done and don't do anything.
- Cata Santiago, Dreamer

On Monday, when a program that temporarily shields such immigrants from deportation had been set to end, Dreamers held a sit-in at the national headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, D.C., to shine a spotlight on what the youths describe as the Democrats’ betrayal of them.

“The Democrats made the calculation to kick the can down the road and allow hundreds of thousands of us undocumented youth to live in uncertainty,” said Maria Duarte, one of the participants, in a statement. “We are anxious and we are scared of being torn away from our homes and our community.”

Many Dreamers say they are urging their supporters to suspend their affiliations with the Democratic Party until they see evidence that members of Congress who have portrayed themselves as working on a solution to their undocumented status are doing more than just making promises and giving reassurances.

Members of the Seed Project, a part of the Movimiento Cosecha (or the Harvest Movement), which advocates for undocumented immigrants, say they are determined “to continue to expose the Democrats’ false promises.”

Many Dreamers say Democratic leaders such as Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York have strung them along on immigration. (AP)

In the short term, many want an extension of the program, a 2012 initiative by President Barack Obama called the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. But what they most want is a permanent fix – congressional legislation that would give them a way to legalize their status in the only country many of these young people truly consider home.

Last year Trump said he would end the program and gave Congress six months to come up with a permanent fix, but bipartisan bickering has stalled various efforts to come up with a bill.

Some 800,000 immigrants received DACA, which allowed recipients to obtain work permits, driver’s licenses and some government benefits.

Two federal courts ordered the Trump administration to continue accepting DACA renewal applications.

Democrats relinquished the leverage they had for meaningful legislation...[they] aren't fooling anyone.
- Cesar Vargas, immigration activist, civil rights attorney

Many Dreamers have blamed Democrats, particularly Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, for boasting about having plans that will result in legislation to benefit Dreamers, but then letting the ball drop by failing to push assertively for the youths, or by refusing to compromise for the sake of political optics.

“Democrats relinquished the leverage they had for meaningful legislation,” wrote Cesar Vargas, a civil rights attorney who has advocated for immigrant causes, in an opinion piece in the Huffington Post.

Democrats, Vargas said, “aren’t fooling anyone.”

“Democrats have no plan, and once again, Schumer, now the minority leader, is showing that protecting these immigrants…was never his priority,” he said. “The lack of leadership by Democrats, however, is nothing new. In 2009, they controlled the White House and Congress and still failed to bring up immigration reform for a vote.”

The DNC maintains that it is the only party that the Dreamers can count on.

DNC National Press Secretary Michael Tyler said to Fox News: "The Democratic Party is the only party that is standing with and committed to protecting Dreamers. Our Democratic President Barack Obama established DACA to provide relief for Dreamers because Congress failed to act."

"And now, Donald Trump has rescinded DACA to pander to his base all at the expense of Dreamers," Tyler said. "Democrats have put countless proposals on the table, and yet this president and Republican Congress refuse to take action."

Many Dreamers say that their disappointment in Democrats is nothing new, and goes back some 17 years.

In 2010, they say, Congress seemed close to passing a Dream Act when it passed in the House of Representatives, only to have it fail in the Senate after five Democrats voted against the measure.

The frustration directed at Democrats, the critics say, does not mean that they don’t blame Republicans for the Dreamers’ uncertain future.

But it’s the Democrats, they say, who have gone out of their way to depict themselves as their only hope on immigration efforts that will give them a chance to legalize their status. Obama did the same, many note, when he was running his presidential campaigns, only to end up presiding over a record number of deportations. They feel used.

“We’re done speaking to the Democrats behind closed doors and trusting them,” Santiago said, “everything is going to happen out in the open.”

Rev. Gabriel Salguero, president of the National Latino Evangelical Coalition, remembers taking political leaders to his churches around the country in 2010 to build momentum for Dreamer legislation.

“There’s been a lack of political will,” Salguero said to Fox News. “This is beyond partisanship, it’s a leadership issue. These kids trusted the process. We told them ‘If you play by the rules, if you wait, if you come forward, it will happen.’ They did everything that was asked of them. I understand their frustration.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/03/08/dreamers-to-democrats-were-tired -your-lies.html



BoytonBrother - 3/8/2018 at 07:13 PM

I thought you didn’t post links to obvious information?


Muleman1994 - 3/8/2018 at 11:18 PM

quote:
I thought you didn’t post links to obvious information?



Glad to see you agree that the Democrats were only using the DACA people for political purposes and then screwed them.


BoytonBrother - 3/8/2018 at 11:19 PM

Well, it's pretty obvious all politicians are the same on both aisles....not sure why you can't see that.


Sang - 3/9/2018 at 12:10 AM

quote:
quote:
I thought you didn’t post links to obvious information?



Glad to see you agree that the Democrats were only using the DACA people for political purposes and then screwed them.




Yet the Democrats are not the ones who ended DACA - go figure. They also didn't put in a requirement for a multi-billion dollar wall as a condition for "fixing" the problem. So sad that you can't see this..... as the trillion dollar a year deficit keeps building ... but since republicans are in office, it doesn't matter anymore - right?


jkeller - 3/9/2018 at 01:13 AM

quote:
quote:
I thought you didn’t post links to obvious information?



Glad to see you agree that the Democrats were only using the DACA people for political purposes and then screwed them.



No, you see, DACA was in place until Trump ended it and has turned down every bipartisan deal that came to his desk.


Muleman1994 - 3/9/2018 at 01:30 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I thought you didn’t post links to obvious information?



Glad to see you agree that the Democrats were only using the DACA people for political purposes and then screwed them.



No, you see, DACA was in place until Trump ended it and has turned down every bipartisan deal that came to his desk.



DACA was an Obama invention by exec. order because Congress would have never passed such a piece of crap.
President Trump ended it with a six month fix it provision and the Democrats blocked it every time.

DACA is over and a Federal Judge sided with President Trump's decision to kill Obama's bad and politically motivated order.

Try to keep up son.
Even the Democrats are not talking about amnesty for illegal aliens any more.


This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
http://www.allmanbrothersband.com/

Url of this website:
http://www.allmanbrothersband.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=127&tid=146070