Absolutely you need either a very comfortable majority or you need bipartisanship. I don't think that anyone right now would bridge the partisanship issue right now. The better bet is to find a President popular enough to control the agenda..... LBJ for a very short time, Eisenhower and FDR come to mind but there were extenuating in all of those examples.
The USA had a very open immigration policy for the most part in the 18th and early 19th century. Almost anyone could enter the USA, but to become a voting or landowner, they had to be naturalized. It was after the Civil War where there was any real concern about there being some sort of federal guidelines for immigration into the USA. Before then, the position of most was that the Founding Fathers were supportive of open immigration to the USA. Some things started to change when there was a huge influx of Irish and Italian immigrants entering the USA and there was a growing belief in Eugenics. Some Americans began to believe that only certain races should be allowed to immigrate to the United States. Under the Nationalization Act from 1795, you only had to be an immigrant in the USA for five years and you could apply for citizenship. The Emancipation of slaves was also used as a justification to begin excluding certain groups of people. States like California and New York passed state laws to keep out Asians and some Eastern Europeans. By the early 20th century there was a call to standardize the law at the federal level because each state was acting independently and there was no real uniformity. Around 1910 we see the first real effort to clearly exclude certain people from entering the USA at the federal level. They excluded those with chronic diseases, mental illnesses and certain political beliefs like anarchism. They even required a formal education to enter the USA. In the 1920's we say fairly widespread racism from elected officials at the federal level and also at the highest courts. There were quotas established for each ethnicity to keep any one group from having too large an influence. Between the end of WWI and the end of WWII the USA under Republican rule almost completely shut down immigration and actually stripped citizenship in some cases, they were primarily sending Mexicans back into Mexico and also any Asians or Eastern Europeans that tried to enter. In the 1960's and 1970's both parties agreed to get rid of the rigid quotas and split the globe into hemispheres. They agreed to take so many people from each hemisphere (a pretty large number) and the focus wasn't on ethnicity but more on skills and talents. Having said that, if you read some of the political statements at the time, there was real concern letting one ethnic group come in a large number and then cost US citizen's jobs and reinvent what it means to be an American. This fear lives on to this day. In the 1980's we saw amnesty given for some illegal immigrants already in the USA and there was for the first time an effort to punish businesses that hired illegal aliens. Also for the first time there was a concern about the Southern border at the federal level. By 1992 a commission was done by congress to consider whether current policy for immigrant control was in the best interest of the USA and effective. The commission concluded that wide spread change needed to take place, that was 30 years ago! After 9-11 there was a renewed call for immigration reform and it was a bipartisan bill by several senators (I don't remember who) that would call for comprehensive and vast immigration reform. The Republicans then decided they would pass their own bill and all that happened was that nothing of substance ever passed. Then there was the outline for an agreement to make those already in the USA long term and were not in trouble and that wanted to be citizens, would be given a simple road map to citizenship. The Republicans after agreeing to the concept only a few years earlier then were against it. Around that time Democrats that in the past had supported some degree of quotas and some increased border security stated that the border wasn't an issue. So here we are..... decades later and this is what we have and both parties have plenty of blame and it has become a hot button issue for both parties. Also, the history painted by both parties is simply false, our immigration policy historically has been all over the place.
Just to add to that in 1882 Chinese Exlusion Act banned immigration from China. It was the first time the US had a law banning whole sale immigration from one country. It wasn’t lifted until after WWII. Also the 1790 Naturalization Act only applied to immigrants from European countries.
I’m not knowledgeable about the laws I. This regard but given that asylum seekers aren’t supposed to work in the country could this be seen as an illegal inducement to get them to work?
This seems like an area where you could get a majority by appealing to probusiness Republicans who aren’t concerned about things like Replacement Theory. I think a narrow bill that resolves the DACA and Dreamers situation, provides increased immigration for things like H1B and a guest worker program in exchange for greatly increased border enforcement could pass. If I recall Pelosi offers a similar compromise to Trump on 2018 that would also give wall funding.
Because he wanted to make the headlines right now, and those particular migrants were available? Why else?
Yet you’re saying he was talking about more than those immigrants. So then there really was no point to sending them since they aren’t illegal and at his announcement about sending them didn’t directly apply to these particularly.
Is that all a Trumper has to offer? Come with better material already. someone who rides Trump’s nutsack talking about dictators… lol, please police the trash coming from your MAGAt party, and maybe Democrats won’t have to do it for u
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...-to-sanctuary-destination-of-marthas-vineyard "Martha’s Vineyard has styled itself as a “sanctuary destination” that welcomes migrants — a position it took early in former President Donald Trump’s administration."
Trump Fumes: DeSantis Stole My Plan for Shipping Migrants Conservative pundits are fawning over DeSantis’ cruel political stunt to fly immigrants to' Massachusetts. Trump thinks the "credit" should be his Trump is telling allies and confidants he’s outraged that DeSantis seems to think he’s allowed to steal the ex-president’s mantle as both media star, and as undocumented-immigrant-basher-in-chief. He has pointedly complained to some of his closest associates that DeSantis is attempting to take the national news cycle away from him fumed over all the praise DeSantis’ action has been receiving in influential conservative circles lately — such as on right-wing media like Fox News — and has privately accused DeSantis of doing this largely to generate a 2024 polling boost for himself among GOP voters.
