Republicans Shut Down the Federal Government Again & Suffer Humiliating Defeat

[WakeandBake]

All those illegals are making the expat very angry. Look at him go!

 

[scooter84]

imgaine that. scooter had a strong opinion about a topic he knows nothing about.

And is unwilling to learn.
He’s a model republican.

Do y'all enjoy being insufferable? What did I post that looked like a strong opinion? I would characterize my posts on this subject as the opposite of a strong opinion. I am asking questions, and mostly being non-committal. And how does asking questions indicate an unwillingness to learn?

 

[scooter84]

Yes. It is very hard to immigrate to the US.

There are basically 5 main ways to immigrate to the US (while there are other immigrant visas besides these 5 (such a U-visas for victims of crimes, etc.), their numbers are negligible - usually fewer than 1,000/year)

1) Family Reunification - If you are a citizen or are a legal permanent resident (green card holder), you may apply for "immediate family members" to receive an immigrant visa to come to the US. Immediate family member is defined strictly as parent, spouse, or child, nothing else (no grandparents, uncles, cousins, etc.). A maximum of 460,000 family-based immigration visas are issued each year and no more than 7% of these may be from a single country. These requests are processed on a priority basis and on a timetable. The time table is generally 15-25 years. For example, the immigration court in Charlotte is now dealing with cases submitted in the third quarter of fiscal year 1998.

2) Employer sponsored immigration - there are a certain number of immigrant visas reserved for the workforce. Generally, these have to be applied for by a company who is offering a job to an individual. These visas are generally reserved for highly skilled workers/professors with advanced degrees, although if a company can show need, there are a limited number of visas for unskilled workers provided a company can attest that no suitable or willing workers exist within the country. The current cap on these visas is 66,000 per year, with 33k in the first half of the year, and 33k in the second.

3) Refugees - Since 1980 the USRAP has resettled refugees (meaning those who have fled their country due to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. This individual first must apply to be a refugee with UNHCR and then must be referred to the USRAP either by UNHCR or a US Embassy (usually happens when a refugee who has been resettled in the US files an AOR to bring a relative. An AOR does not guarantee resettlement, but it does ensure that if they are approved for resettlement, they will be resettled in the US. Generally, refugees who are resettled do not get to choose to which country they are sent). The max cap of refugees is set each year by a presidential determination. Since the inception of the Refugee resettlement program, the number has generally fluctuated between 70,000-85,000, with its high point at 110,000 heading into FY2017 (although that number was cut mid-year). The US resettled many more refugees prior to the act in response to the Vietnam war and WW2 (in mid 70s, we resettled over 200,000 refugees in one year - mostly Vietnamese). Right now, the cap for this year is set at 25,000, although while previous administrations saw the cap as a goal as well, this is not true with this administration (for example, last year the cap was 45,000, but we only resettle 22,500 for the year) - so we'll see. SIVs (special immigrant visas that are given to individuals who are in danger because of service to the US - such as interpreters for the army, etc.) fall under this category as well and are tied to the refugee max-cap as well.

4) Asylum seekers - Asylum seekers are similar to refugees in that they must show a well-found fear of persecution due to the previous stated classes/groups. The difference here is that asylum seekers ask for admission from within the US or at a Port of Entry. It is legal to seek asylum and by us law, it does not have to be at a POE (so one could cross the border illegally and ask for asylum and that is legal and they have a right to due process in their asylum hearing). When someone asks for asylum, they must go before an asylum hearing and a judge to see if they have a credible fear because of one of the explicitly stated reasons. Up until last year, while waiting for the hearing, asylum seekers were allowed to enter the country and have a case worker check in with them. This program had a 97% success rate in having asylum seekers show up at their hearing This administration disbanded this program, opting instead to detain all asylum seekers. The big problem here is the lack of resources and hearing judges. As of right now, there is a backlog of over 800,000 asylum cases. The real humanitarian crisis at the border could greatly be alleviated by using some of the "wall money" to pay for judges to adjudicate case and clear the backlog.

5) Diversity Lottery - You can also put your name in a lottery to receive an immigrant visa. There are only 50,000 each year. You are automatically ineligible for a DV lottery visa if you are from a country that has sent 50,000 or more immigrants to the US total over the past 5 years - so for this year: Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Canada, Colombia, DR, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, S. Korea, UK, and Vietnam. Countries included in Trumps "travel [Muslim] Ban" are also ineligible for a dv lottery visa. These countries are Iran, Libya, N. Korea, Somalia, Venezuela, Syria, and Yemen. Usually over 18 million people apply for these each year, making the odds of receiving a dv lottery visa about 1 in 400.

That's it. Those are the the only ways to enter the US as an immigrant. Either you wait for 20 years to join a family member, are one of 66,000 highly skilled workers that get to enter each year, have suffered extreme trauma and loss of protection and your home, or one of the 50,000 holders of a golden ticket.

Thanks for typing all that out.

For family members - why is the timeline so long? Is that just an overloaded and backed-up system? What would it take to fix that? How many of those are issued in a year?

How many people apply for asylum in a typical year? Just wondering how many years the 800,000 backlog represents.

I don't have a feel for how this compares to other countries. I assume that we would have to have more stringent requirements because we have so many people trying to get in. I don't think other countries generally have to deal with these kinds of numbers. I know the recent refugee crisis in Europe jacked up the numbers but I don't know how well they dealt with that.

 

[RJKarl]

Do y'all enjoy being insufferable? What did I post that looked like a strong opinion? I would characterize my posts on this subject as the opposite of a strong opinion. I am asking questions, and mostly being non-committal. And how does asking questions indicate an unwillingness to learn?

Well, Thunderbolt laid out how difficult it is to emigrate to the US. He deals with this all the time. What's your opinion with that knowledge?

 

[IamThunderbolt]

But I thought the Dems claimed that most illegals were due to overstaying visas. Your numbers don't seem to confirm this Dem claim.

The census might be a good way to get much more accurate information but the Dems want to block that.

An unknown number of unlawful entries and lack of cooperation by businesses and some local governments most likely make the determination of the number of illegal immigrants living in the US highly inexact.

Here are some stats:

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/pro...Annual-Number-of-US-Legal-Permanent-Residents

Seems pretty high, especially if you ad the illegals.

US also admits the most immigrants per year, and probably has the highest percentage of immigrants in it's population

https://www.forbes.com/sites/modele...t-friendly-country-in-the-world/#7b2524665a1d

https://www.finglobal.com/2016/10k/...at-are-the-easiest-to-settle-into-for-expats/

The claim of overstay v. unlawful entry is generally around 50 - 65% depending on the data source. The only way that gets skewed is if you count all asylum seekers as unlawful entry (which they aren't based on US law).

A few notes on the links you provided.

On the migration policy link, this doesn't show arrivals - it shows total # of those who are living in the US with a green card (so cumulative, not annual entries)

The Forbes article was written in 2012, and there have been immigration policy shifts since then. And while the US may still accept a large number of immigrants compared to smaller countries, even the article you posted shows that as a percentage of population, we're not in the top 10.

The final link has nothing to do with ease of entry, just the desirability/opportunity of the destination

 

[scooter84]

Well, Thunderbolt laid out how difficult it is to emigrate to the US. He deals with this all the time. What's your opinion with that knowledge?

See my other posts. What opinion are you asking about? The fact that it is difficult to immigrate to the US doesn't really tell you much in isolation. When you have so many people trying to get into the country each year it likely makes sense to have pretty stringent requirements. Unlike many of you, I don't think it makes sense to just open up the doors and let them all in. As Sailor pointed out above, the US lets in more immigrants than any other country. How many is enough? How many is just right? I don't really know.

I do think it is a problem that the system is backed up so badly. Whatever the policy is, we should be able to process requests and give people an answer within a reasonable time.

 

[IamThunderbolt]

Thanks for typing all that out.

For family members - why is the timeline so long? Is that just an overloaded and backed-up system? What would it take to fix that? How many of those are issued in a year?

How many people apply for asylum in a typical year? Just wondering how many years the 800,000 backlog represents.

I don't have a feel for how this compares to other countries. I assume that we would have to have more stringent requirements because we have so many people trying to get in. I don't think other countries generally have to deal with these kinds of numbers. I know the recent refugee crisis in Europe jacked up the numbers but I don't know how well they dealt with that.

For the delay in family members - a lot of it has to do with the cap on admittance from certain countries. Countries with a high number of immigrants already in the states - such as Vietnam, India, Mexico, etc. bump up against the cap pretty quickly. We only allow maximum of 32,200 family-based immigration visas for each country each year. For those more common countries, they aren't eligible for a dv lottery visa either. So you have a backlog because of immigration caps, but there are issues of under-resourcing the process as well.

For asylum claims, my most recent numbers that I have are from FY16 (I should be able to find FY17, but not at the house) and asylum claims were 91,786. I do know that asylum claims have increased. But the increase is correlates pretty closely with the increase in displaced people in the world - which is now the highest ever in history with about 60 million displaced people (about 25 million refugees and 35 million internally displaced people).

The backlog in asylum claims is pretty much because of underfunding and understaffing.

 

[RJKarl]

See my other posts. What opinion are you asking about? The fact that it is difficult to immigrate to the US doesn't really tell you much in isolation. When you have so many people trying to get into the country each year it likely makes sense to have pretty stringent requirements. Unlike many of you, I don't think it makes sense to just open up the doors and let them all in. As Sailor pointed out above, the US lets in more immigrants than any other country. How many is enough? How many is just right? I don't really know.

I do think it is a problem that the system is backed up so badly. Whatever the policy is, we should be able to process requests and give people an answer within a reasonable time.

The larger, highlighted is a typical false RW talking point. Show me ANYONE here who said anything like "let them all in". No one has. But it is the conservative go to lie.

 

[WakeandBake]

So much fear, so little time

 

[sailordeac]

See my other posts. What opinion are you asking about? The fact that it is difficult to immigrate to the US doesn't really tell you much in isolation. When you have so many people trying to get into the country each year it likely makes sense to have pretty stringent requirements. Unlike many of you, I don't think it makes sense to just open up the doors and let them all in. As Sailor pointed out above, the US lets in more immigrants than any other country. How many is enough? How many is just right? I don't really know.

I do think it is a problem that the system is backed up so badly. Whatever the policy is, we should be able to process requests and give people an answer within a reasonable time.

Without being able to control the borders, it's pointless to have a debate about it because the citizens of the country can decide what they want, the migrants impose their decision on the country.

 

[WakeForestRanger]

 

[PhDeac]

The US is the 4th largest country by land mass, 3rd largest country by population, 1st in GDP. Why wouldn’t we have more immigrants than other countries? We have room and wealth. We can pick and choose who we want from the rest of the world.

Perhaps the better question, scooter, is what is wrong with having immigrants?

 

[scooter84]

The larger, highlighted is a typical false RW talking point. Show me ANYONE here who said anything like "let them all in". No one has. But it is the conservative go to lie.

Actually, someone in this very thread asked what problem there is that needs to be solved by the wall - implying that it is not a problem to have open borders. Others have said that controlling the borders is immoral and against the teachings of the bible because we are supposed to help those in need - again implying that we should let all these needy people in. So, actually, there are people that believe we should let them all in.

But, I'll grant that it is something of a straw man, sure, because I don't think the majority of the people are taking that stance. In any event, my point was that there are millions of people trying to get into our country and, for that reason, I believe you need controls in place to limit and restrict those numbers. Our support system, our economy, can only handle so many.

You may not believe it, but even terrible OWGs like me that want to control immigration have compassion - my heart breaks for families suffering through desperate situations around the world. I just know that, no matter how much we all would like to, we can't help them all.

 

[PhDeac]

Republicans Shut Down the Federal Government Again & Suffer Humiliating Defeat

Wall or open borders is a dumb false choice, scooter. That’s like saying Manning or [Redacted].

You’re basically screaming “I’M A TERRIBLE OWG!!!” when you make such an argument.

 

[scooter84]

The US is the 4th largest country by land mass, 3rd largest country by population, 1st in GDP. Why wouldn’t we have more immigrants than other countries? We have room and wealth. We can pick and choose who we want from the rest of the world.

Perhaps the better question, scooter, is what is wrong with having immigrants?

I never said we shouldn't have more than other countries. I would expect us to, for just the reasons you point out. For those same reasons, we are an extremely attractive destination for immigrants.

Did I say we shouldn't have immigrants? Of course I didn't. All I have said is that the fact that we have huge numbers of immigrants trying to get into the country, we have to have stringent controls to keep the numbers to a reasonable level. Too many and all of our systems can become overloaded. I am not an expert so I don't know what an appropriate number is.

Do you believe there should be standards and limits on immigration?

 

[scooter84]

Wall or open borders is a dumb false choice, scooter. That’s like saying Manning or [Redacted].

I never said those were the only choices. I said that I was not necessarily a big advocate for the wall. Keep trying to put me in that box.

 

[PhDeac]

Republicans Shut Down the Federal Government Again & Suffer Humiliating Defeat

Yes. And there have been standards and limits on immigration since non-European people started coming here willingly. Somehow people like you have been convinced that the US has had no immigration policy and Trump’s Wall is the solution.

 

[IamThunderbolt]

Actually, someone in this very thread asked what problem there is that needs to be solved by the wall - implying that it is not a problem to have open borders. Others have said that controlling the borders is immoral and against the teachings of the bible because we are supposed to help those in need - again implying that we should let all these needy people in. So, actually, there are people that believe we should let them all in.

But, I'll grant that it is something of a straw man, sure, because I don't think the majority of the people are taking that stance. In any event, my point was that there are millions of people trying to get into our country and, for that reason, I believe you need controls in place to limit and restrict those numbers. Our support system, our economy, can only handle so many.

You may not believe it, but even terrible OWGs like me that want to control immigration have compassion - my heart breaks for families suffering through desperate situations around the world. I just know that, no matter how much we all would like to, we can't help them all.

While this is true - and it would be interesting to see what that limit is (I expect it is much, much higher than most of us think), our economy would be greatly improved with higher immigration levels - I'll try to link them later, but there have been numerous studies that show the positive benefit to both legal and undocumented immigrants to our economy. In fact, part of the problem is that our economy can support (and actually needs) more immigrant workers than we let in, creating the space for a lot of undocumented workers in the country. In fact, the IRS recognizes this and provides a legal means for these individuals to participate in the economy. So we have a messed up system where it's illegal to hire an unauthorized worker, but our government provides an open way for them to pay taxes - both through a tax ID number and looking the other way when a name and SSN don't align on tax forms.

Also, undocumented immigrants contribute much more in taxes than they receive in services.

 

[PhDeac]

I never said those were the only choices. I said that I was not necessarily a big advocate for the wall. Keep trying to put me in that box.

Stop the gaslighting scooter. You said this: “Actually, someone in this very thread asked what problem there is that needs to be solved by the wall - implying that it is not a problem to have open borders.”

 

[IamThunderbolt]

Also, I will again point out that unsecured borders and open borders are two different concepts.