The White House statement comes after a week of frantic negotiations in the Senate.

The White House statement comes after a week of frantic negotiations in the Senate.

President Joe Biden on Friday urged Congress to pass a bipartisan bill to address the immigration crisis at the nation’s southern border, saying he would shut down the border the day the bill became law.

“What’s been negotiated would — if passed into law — be the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border we’ve ever had in our country,” Biden said in a statement. “It would give me, as President, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law.”

Biden’s Friday evening statement resembles a ramping up in rhetoric for the administration, placing the president philosophically in the camp arguing that the border may hit a point where closure is needed. The White House’s decision to have Biden weigh in also speaks to the delicate nature of the dealmaking, and the urgency facing his administration to take action on the border — particularly during an election year, when Republicans have used the issue to rally their base.

The president is also daring Republicans to reject the deal as it faces a make-or-break moment amid GOP fissures.

  • gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
    2·
    10 months ago

    Thank you for the link!

    I don’t have time to respond to all of this, but there are a few things I just gotta

    This is conveniently ambiguous. What, specifically?

    Ask all your federal agencies what resources they have on hand that could be redirected to humanitarian efforts for migrants and asylum seekers, order those resources deployed immediately with an executive order. When federal courts strike it down for a bullshit reason, change one or two superficial details, reissue the order, and again make it effective immediately. Trump did this with his travel bans and showed a determined executive can move a lot faster than oversight.

    Exploiting a badly designed system is not an ideal long term solution I’ll admit, but so long as the Republican party continues to exist and make solving those system design problems impossible it will have to do.

    Also, ditch the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court with like thirteen new appointments, right after slapping yourself in the face several times for not doing this years ago.

    Why would you think that and not, “Gosh, I think Democrats are actually doing a pretty good job and I really don’t want to vote for Trump, and since they seem to be trying to solve the border issue as well which was my chief concern, I really don’t have a reason to not vote for them now.”?

    “The border is in crisis right now, but I think Democrats are doing a good job,” just seems like a really unlikely pair of opinions to hold to me.

    I also feel like if you’re in a headspace where the border is your chief concern (with things like climate change, mass shootings, healthcare, affordable housing, Russia, Israel, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. all at different levels of crisis), you’re going to be a harder sell on the big tent party.

    And just in general, one of the axioms about human behavior I believe is that if you do not like what is being said you need to change the conversation. I’m thinking of those easily swayed moderates when I say our approach should be, “The border? Sure, we want to get funding from Congress to provide needed services there and that’s in process, but what’s driving this migration is climate change, and that’s why this administration has etc.”

    You know it’s all bullshit, but you can’t publicly state this because right-wing media propaganda is controlling the narrative.

    Because you do not state this right wing media propaganda controls the narrative, imo

    but what is the alternative plan – just ignore the fact that a majority of independents view this as a major concern and the border issue (again, manufactured as it is) is now the #1 issue with voters overall? Is that really a winning strategy?

    If it’s done with a bit of tact and coordination, yeah. Try not to seem like you’re ignoring it by responding to it quickly, but if you’re giving it more than one or two sentences you’re wasting time that should be spent talking about more important issues.

    • lennybird@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      I’ll try to narrow down to my central point, but first points I agree with:

      • Yeah, I believe Biden should do as much as possible to alleviate the suffering for those seeking a better life and seeking asylum within the purview of existing laws.

      • Yeah I agree the filibuster should be ditched (thank Sinema for blocking that)

      • Yeah I agree the Supreme Court needs overhauled (though I can’t say I’m a legal expert and I know there are a few routes to take with this).

      The existential question at hand is: How do we keep Trump and the Republican party and Project 2025 away from power?

      Because if entropy teaches us anything, it’s always easier to smash a a trillion-piece puzzle than to preserve it let alone build upon it.

      Would Biden be acting this way if he had a super-majority in Congress and a fair Supreme Court? I think the answer is fairly clear that he would not. So I think this is what we need to work towards first and foremost.

      “The border is in crisis right now, but I think Democrats are doing a good job,” just seems like a really unlikely pair of opinions to hold to me.

      But here’s the key thing: This is the position of many. From that link I gave you, along with this WaPo article titled, "Democrats’ border problem is getting real – they highlight the fact that this is impacting not just swing-voters and independents, but a large swath of Democrats, themselves. That is, indeed, a problem that the Biden administration is clearly concerned about.

      Nevertheless, until polling shifts I truly don’t think the Biden administration has a choice but to cater to the concerns of these crucial voters, lest he loses and things get very bad very quickly. In the end I believe it would be incredibly hard to pith during an Oval Office meeting to Biden by saying, “Yeah independents, swing voters, and even a large chunk of Democrats consider the (manufactured) border crisis a huge issue, but we don’t believe you should concern yourself with this.” Meanwhile Ukraine’s funding is slipping because of Republicans holding this aid hostage. Unfortunately because of this, every single press conversation and every single debate with Republicans is going to arise the issue of the border crisis.

      And while I completely agree with you that that we should “change the conversation” and go to the root of the problem and try to alter the outcome of the polls themselves, that’s a long-term strategy and easier said than done when right-wing media propaganda has complete domination on the national narrative — especially in the aftermath of Citizens United and SpeechNow decisions. Forget the fact that there is a clear foreign presence influencing dialogue as well (Russia; likely China). In that respect, I also do think that Biden should redirect the conversation every single time to not just climate change, but to the domestic right-wing extremist terrorist threat within our borders itself. Any time the border comes up, redirect to the threat to Democracy itself and the FBI’s pointing out that these are the most dangerous individuals to national security. Not the poor migrants fleeing crime and poverty south of the border. But simultaneously, Biden’s campaign has little choice but to respond to the polls as they are now and address it. And to me, I love the move to side-step Republicans and call their bluff.