Democrats have control over the senate

[Dashinka 23,291]

We all have to remember that now that this election cycle is mostly over, all the House Members, and those Senators up for re-election are going to be very busy working on fund raising for 2022.

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

19 hours ago, Ikhan said:

Now that Democrats have control over the senate, how quickly can immigration reform occur? UScis needs an overhaul imo

If you really think this will happen then I have some beachfront property in Arizona I can sell you

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

2 hours ago, XenophiliusPDX said:

Refugees and asylum seekers aren’t “illegals.” They’re refugees and asylum seekers who by nature of their having made application to USCIS for work permits and refugee status, they’re not even undocumented. It’s a terribly sad day if “refugee” and “illegal” are synonymous terms in the United States. 
 

Your deduction  is based on the assumption that any change to immigration law would lead to increases in illegal border crossings. Given that there is no bill presently, there is no way for that assumption to be based on facts. 

Nobody associates refugees with illegals at all. It is many of the people that come in illegally then try to file a fraudulent asylum claim that screws it up for everyone

[Crazy Cat 39,362]

2 hours ago, XenophiliusPDX said:

Your deduction  is based on the assumption that any change to immigration law would lead to increases in illegal border crossings.

The Democrats promoted free healthcare to every person in the US...including those here illegally .  You don't think that will cause an increase in border crossing?   I suspect the increase will begin even before any bill is passed.  I think it is a logical deduction.

Edited January 7, 2021 by Lucky Cat

[African Zealot 1,453]

Keep dreaming. It helps keep one refreshed.

 

20 hours ago, Ikhan said:

Now that Democrats have control over the senate, how quickly can immigration reform occur? UScis needs an overhaul imo

😂

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

20 hours ago, JeanneAdil said:

yep,  it has been used as a campaign issue since the original immigration law of 1882 

which is an interesting read itself

Congress acts a little slow

Agree.... It is mainly used as a fundraising tool that is it. 

[JeanneAdil 6,220]

now,  the Democrats have control over Senate as of yesterday's results 

but they don't have control of 72,000,000 who voted republican so they will still be only concerned with their next re election and staying in the seat they now hold

and immigration is not on the list of any agenda that i have seen and i searched the internet while waiting in both dr appointments for any sign or statement saying a congressman was ready to tackle immigration issues

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

2 minutes ago, JeanneAdil said:

now,  the Democrats have control over Senate as of yesterday's results 

but they don't have control of 72,000,000 who voted republican so they will still be only concerned with their next re election and staying in the seat they now hold

and immigration is not on the list of any agenda that i have seen and i searched the internet while waiting in both dr appointments for any sign or statement saying a congressman was ready to tackle immigration issues

Nope, it will just be something they run and fundraise on while blaming the other side for the deadlock

[MrHanky 1,377]

10 hours ago, Duke & Marie said:

Unfortunately if any changes occur all it will do is increase the cost and time taken to process LEGAL Migration. 
 

Why do I say this?
1. The number of people illegally crossing the boarder will significantly increase,

2. These illegals will mostly apply for refugee status,

3. The Refugee application process is almost free, I think $60 or so 

4. Refugee cases must be prioritised, since ICE etc can’t accomodate them all and they will need work authority etc

5. USCIS isn’t funded by the government, it’s an applicant pay for service, so fees of all other visa’s e.g. CR1/K1/Work/Tourist etc etc will increase since more staff are needed to prioritise illegals... 

6. Like every other bureautic organisation, money goes walkabout, so the number of new staff:fee ratio won’t be nearly enough to process everything in a timely way, so processing times will increase. 

Maybe not what you meant, but #2 is a racist rhetoric.

They are not illegals.

 

https://www.rescue.org/article/migrants-asylum-seekers-refugees-and-immigrants-whats-difference

 

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

4 minutes ago, MrHanky said:

Maybe not what you meant, but #2 is a racist rhetoric.

They are not illegals.

 

https://www.rescue.org/article/migrants-asylum-seekers-refugees-and-immigrants-whats-difference

 

Sorry but that is what happens in many cases is they file fraudulent claims in a bid to try to stay in the country, and it's not racist

[African Zealot 1,453]

17 hours ago, JeanneAdil said:

Watching news from several different channels (many local Georgia stations as i am  almost on the state line) and as of right now,  who controls Senate is  not yet confirmed.   

Lol, don't tell us you are the proverbial only stranger in Jerusalem. Barring a meteorite striking earth, it is a done deal. Democrats control congress. Accept it and your life will be easier.

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

6 hours ago, XenophiliusPDX said:

Refugees and asylum seekers aren’t “illegals.” They’re refugees and asylum seekers who by nature of their having made application to USCIS for work permits and refugee status, they’re not even undocumented. It’s a terribly sad day if “refugee” and “illegal” are synonymous terms in the United States. 
 

Your deduction  is based on the assumption that any change to immigration law would lead to increases in illegal border crossings. Given that there is no bill presently, there is no way for that assumption to be based on facts. 

Most refugee apply for status from outside the country, if they cross illegally and then apply for refugee they are still illegal entries 

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

2 hours ago, MrHanky said:

Maybe not what you meant, but #2 is a racist rhetoric.

They are not illegals.

 

https://www.rescue.org/article/migrants-asylum-seekers-refugees-and-immigrants-whats-difference

 

it’s not racist at all
 

People who illegally cross without the relevant paperwork are illegals... the fact that many later put in applications to obtain status dosent change that fact...

[JeanneAdil 6,220]

5 hours ago, Ray.Bonaquist said:

Lol, don't tell us you are the proverbial only stranger in Jerusalem. Barring a meteorite striking earth, it is a done deal. Democrats control congress. Accept it and your life will be easier.

I accept it (not a Trump fan)

just was seeing what i was seeing on local channels 

[JeanneAdil 6,220]

3 hours ago, Duke & Marie said:

Most refugee apply for status from outside the country, if they cross illegally and then apply for refugee they are still illegal entries 

Not quite an asylum seeker can be in the US or at POE according to DHS but refugee is outside the US

 

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/immigration-statistics/yearbook/2019/refugee_and_asylee_2019.pdf

 

To be eligible for refugee or asylum status, a principal applicant must meet the definition of a refugee set forth in section 101(a)(42) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which states in part that a refugee is a person who is unable or unwilling to return to his or her country of nationality because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.7 Applicants for refugee status are outside the United States, whereas applicants seeking asylum are either within the United States or arriving at a U.S. port of entry (POE).