Conservative Latinos support Goodlatte Immigration Bill

[HSFBfan]

According to Law360.....https://www.law360.com/immigration/articles/1021495/conservative-latinos-back-goodlatte-immigration-bill

Unfortunately you need a subscription to read the whole article at this site so I found something about the Goodlatte Bill on the Washington Post

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2018/03/13/to-attract-gop-moderates-house-immigration-bill-could-become-more-generous-for-daca-recipients/?utm_term=.536eef1656f3

[HSFBfan]

Law360 (March 13, 2018, 11:23 PM EDT) -- Conservative Latino groups are backing a proposal penned by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., addressing a legislative replacement to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, touting it as a fine balance between border security and assurance for so-called Dreamers. 

The bill, known as the “Securing America’s Future Act,” is backed by a coalition of conservative Latino groups, including the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference.

Alfonso Aguilar, the executive director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, told reporters at a press conference Tuesday that the bill includes provisions that prominent Democrats have supported in the past. He pointed out that former President Barack Obama, former Vice President Joe Biden and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton all supported the Secure Fence Act in 2006 while they were in the Senate, which included substantial border security provisions.

“Democrats seem more interested in having an issue to play politics with than actually finding a solution to the problem,” Aguilar said. “As usual, they have done a lot of talking among themselves and with their activist base, but there hasn't been a good-faith effort for Democrats to compromise and strike a deal with Republicans. I recognize that the bill is not perfect, but it is a fair and middle-ground solution.”

The bill would offer DACA beneficiaries, known as Dreamers, a three-year renewable legal status allowing them to work and travel overseas, but no new path to permanent residency or citizenship. Notably, it would also fund border security, slash overall immigration levels by about 25 percent and end what Republicans call extended-family "chain migration," through which individuals sponsor their relatives for immigration benefits.

“This bill closes many gaping loopholes in our existing immigration enforcement laws, makes important reforms to our legal immigration programs, secures the border and provides a permanent legislative solution for the DACA program,” Goodlatte said during the press conference. “While we address DACA in the bill, the act contains much needed reforms to discourage parents from bringing their children to the United States illegally in the future.”

The DACA program, implemented by Obama in 2012, has provided deportation relief and work authorization to some 800,000 young undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children. President Donald Trump moved to terminate the program by March 5, but a series of federal court injunctions have kept the program alive so far.

Goodlatte urged his colleagues to embrace his bill Tuesday, after numerous proposals have stumbled in the Senate, failing to gain support from both parties and the president.

The bill would also end a diversity visa lottery program, authorize the construction of President Trump's proposed border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, hire 10,000 more immigration officers at the border and allow the U.S. Department of Justice to withhold law enforcement grants to sanctuary cities, among other provisions.

Immigration advocates, however, criticized the bill as a “poison pill” on Tuesday.

Andrea Senteno, a legislative staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, told reporters during a press call on Tuesday that the bill was merely a “nativist wish list” and much more extreme than the Republican proposals that have been circulated in the Senate.

Galen Carey, vice president of government relations for the National Association of Evangelicals, said during the call that his organization could not back a proposal that would cut family-based migration.

“We support smart border protection and conscientious enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws,” he said. “But we cannot endorse any proposal that would break up families, gut protection for refugees fleeing persecution, or criminalize and imprison undocumented workers, without offering them any way to earn legal status or citizenship."

[TheBlockIsHot]

Conservative Latinos? So all two of them?

[dbcaptiron]

12 hours ago, TheBlockIsHot said:

Conservative Latinos? So all two of them?

However many it looks like they are in good company by your standards...

"He pointed out that former President Barack Obama, former Vice President Joe Biden and 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton all supported the Secure Fence Act in 2006 while they were in the Senate"

So remind me again....which ones were the Hitler racists from all of these?  I keep being told that it's everyone who wants to build a wall that is one...guess we need to agree in condemnation in all these cases as well...... if that's the case

(damn racist Trumpsters keep popping up everywhere now don't they LOLOL)

 

[HawgGoneIt]

FWIW, Trump isn't being called a racist for wanting to build a wall or secure the border. It's the rhetoric that he has used coupled with the fact that he wants to build a wall. 

His supporters that support him in spite of the rhetoric get to join him in having fingers pointed at them. 

 

A person could support the wall, a fence, a laser beam or some other border security measures, and say, Trump is ignorant or insensitive for using inflammatory "campaign talk" because it's "so funny" and gets cheers at rallies. That would possibly earn them a pass from being placed in the racist basket with the president. 

The problem is, so many do cheer his rhetoric, either ignoring the inflammatory talk or accepting it as their own. There is no in between on this in the eyes of many. If you support the wall and not the idiot-speak that he uses surrounding it, then say so and distance yourself from it. 

 

Hope this helps clear up the "racist and bigotry" stuff. 

 

[concha]

5 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

FWIW, Trump isn't being called a racist for wanting to build a wall or secure the border. It's the rhetoric that he has used coupled with the fact that he wants to build a wall. 

His supporters that support him in spite of the rhetoric get to join him in having fingers pointed at them. 

 

A person could support the wall, a fence, a laser beam or some other border security measures, and say, Trump is ignorant or insensitive for using inflammatory "campaign talk" because it's "so funny" and gets cheers at rallies. That would possibly earn them a pass from being placed in the racist basket with the president. 

The problem is, so many do cheer his rhetoric, either ignoring the inflammatory talk or accepting it as their own. There is no in between on this in the eyes of many. If you support the wall and not the idiot-speak that he uses surrounding it, then say so and distance yourself from it. 

 

Hope this helps clear up the "racist and bigotry" stuff. 

 

So, no outrage if you say it in a smooth, PC manner?

Does that explain the Dem change from pro-wall, pro enforcement (care to see video if the likes of Slick Willie and Barry?) to "wall is dumb" and "let's have sanctuary cities and states"?  Hell, Nasty Pelosi is bragging that she has a grandson who wants to change his skin color.  "My beautiful self-loathing grandson" ...  Disgusting.

[HawgGoneIt]

1 minute ago, concha said:

So, no outrage if you say it in a smooth, PC manner?

Does that explain the Dem change from pro-wall, pro enforcement (care to see video if the likes of Slick Willie and Barry?) to "wall is dumb" and "let's have sanctuary cities and states"?  Hell, Nasty Pelosi is bragging that she has a grandson who wants to change his skin color.  "My beautiful self-loathing grandson" ...  Disgusting.

There is a difference between being politically correct or speaking smoothly and using what can be basically equated with bigotry and hate, or at the minimum, a dog whistle to the hateful types. 

One is either a bigot or they aren't, just like one either applauds a bigot or they don't. 

I guess "anti-pc" is the new bigot. I think I'm starting to see where DD was coming from with his anti-pc sarcasm now. 

 

[concha]

1 hour ago, HawgGoneIt said:

There is a difference between being politically correct or speaking smoothly and using what can be basically equated with bigotry and hate, or at the minimum, a dog whistle to the hateful types. 

One is either a bigot or they aren't, just like one either applauds a bigot or they don't. 

I guess "anti-pc" is the new bigot. I think I'm starting to see where DD was coming from with his anti-pc sarcasm now. 

 

 

Ahhhhh yes, the famous "dog whistle".  Which is often any and every excuse dreamable in order to yell "racist".

A wall is either a good idea or bad. Supported or not. Willie and Barry supported it until their party was hijacked by the loonie left.  I fail to see why Trump being blunt or rude changes whether or not the wall should be built.  It is simply a distraction and excuse for leftist whackos.

[concha]

PS:  How are you this morning, New Bestie?

[BUFORDGAWOLVES]

I'd smash a Latina, does that help?

[HawgGoneIt]

3 hours ago, concha said:

 

Ahhhhh yes, the famous "dog whistle".  Which is often any and every excuse dreamable in order to yell "racist".

A wall is either a good idea or bad. Supported or not. Willie and Barry supported it until their party was hijacked by the loonie left.  I fail to see why Trump being blunt or rude changes whether or not the wall should be built.  It is simply a distraction and excuse for leftist whackos.

I didn't get into whether the wall should be built or not. Stop wiggling. 

The guy used a lot of bigot type language leading up to his election. 

I think you will find more people don't mind the wall or securing the borders. It's the applause for the bigotry that turned people off. 

You call it rude, which is partly true, but, I call it being a bigot. Yours and other's consistent spin and applause for the language he used and uses only leads others to believe you feel the same way and probably talk just like him. Therefore you get lumped in as a bigot too.

In the words of Zulu...Hope this helps.

[concha]

Just now, HawgGoneIt said:

I didn't get into whether the wall should ve built or not. Stop wiggling. 

The guy used a lot of bigot type language leading up to his election. 

I think you will find more people don't mind the wall or securing the borders. It's the applause for the bigotry that turned people off. 

You call it rude, which is partly true, but, I call it being a bigot. Your and other's consistent spin and applause for the language he used and uses only leads others to believe you feel the same way and probably talk just like him. Therefore you get lumped in as a bigot too.

In the words of Zulu...Hope this helps.

 

While there may have been some perceived bigotry, there was also plenty of cold, hard facts that many on the left don't like to hear.

The left likes to put flowery language on things. Ex.  "Undocumented immigrants" - as if they came here legitimately and someone just forgot to hand them their visas as they were hopping the fence.

In reality they are "illegal aliens" - foreigners who are in this country in violation of our sovereignty and laws.

Have you ever stopped to think about the time, effort and treasure the left spends on non-Americans here illegally that could be spent helping our own (homeless, vets for example).  I would wager that a tally of the hours and money spent by the left working for illegals rather than Americans vet would be stunning to behold.

[BUFORDGAWOLVES]

Also, I want to add something, politics being a real lovemaking breaker....

Where do you see or hear these racist, bigoted items?

Do you get the whole transcript or snapshots from the media?

My issue is the media... print, audio or broadcast. So much bits and pieces out there.

I wouldn't put it past the Donald to say something outrageous, however.

 

[dbcaptiron]

6 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said:

FWIW, Trump isn't being called a racist for wanting to build a wall or secure the border. It's the rhetoric that he has used coupled with the fact that he wants to build a wall. <<This provides no excuse to not support a secure border if that is what is required

His supporters that support him in spite of the rhetoric get to join him in having fingers pointed at them. << the vast majority of 'HIS' supporters in this case are not supporting ' HIM' in his rhetoric, but his policy as being the appropriate one and the right one at this time for our country...since your so hung up on projection

A person could support the wall, a fence, a laser beam or some other border security measures, and say, Trump is ignorant or insensitive for using inflammatory "campaign talk" because it's "so funny" and gets cheers at rallies. That would possibly earn them a pass from being placed in the racist basket with the president. <<you don't get to give a pass...you get to give your vote and opinion.......................what IS given...is certainly not a 'pass' anyways. It's your assumptions again...

The problem is, so many do cheer his rhetoric, either ignoring the inflammatory talk or accepting it as their own. There is no in between on this in the eyes of many. If you support the wall and not the idiot-speak that he uses surrounding it, then say so and distance yourself from it.  <<so your blaming 'everyone else' here (for your own false projections LOL) for the bigoted responses that you think are not just as bigoted? nice...

 

Hope this helps clear up the "racist and bigotry" stuff.  Somewhat...

Still does not answer the basic question of you stating why YOU support the wall for the best interest of our country, or the reasons why you think it's not............and "I can not support it cause Donny said some meanie rhetoric" will only be viewed as the easiest cop out that you could muster...and proof of placing personal dislikes, above your countries best interests... 

 

See Above...^^^