Al Jazeera: "Trump backs drastic changes to legal immigration"
- Page 1 of 1
Draft legislation seeks to give English-speakers priority for US residency and to halve the number of legal immigrants.
Deport my Black ass if old.
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday threw his weight behind efforts to give English-speakers priority for US residency cards and halving the number of legal migrants admitted to the country.
Trump backed proposals that would reform the process of obtaining a US "green card" by introducing a points-based system favouring skilled Anglophone workers.
Around one million immigrants are granted permanent residency each year, but the draft legislation - presented at the White House by Trump and two senators who crafted it - aims to cut that number by around 50 percent.
Trump hailed what he described as "the most significant reform to our immigration system in half a century".
The legislation has only a slim chance of passing in Congress.
It brought almost immediate rejection from influential South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, who said he favoured a merit-based system, but said this proposal would have a "devastating" effect on his state's economy.
Deport my Black ass if old.
why wouldn't they get 100% of the vote and break the tie?
are they conservatives or not? this actually isn't that egregious by republican standards
are they conservatives or not? this actually isn't that egregious by republican standards
It's pretty heinous and only tries to feed off (or into) the fear of the "strange and unknown" foreigners.
By Kibner Go To PostIt's pretty heinous and only tries to feed off (or into) the fear of the "strange and unknown" foreigners.
Right, but its a pretty standard conservative position in my opinion, and one that imo wouldn't really threaten the seats of anyone in 2018. You're not losing a south eastern vote over this. And they have the numbers. So I'm curious why it wouldn't pass.
By Dark PhaZe Go To PostRight, but its a pretty standard conservative position in my opinion, and one that imo wouldn't really threaten the seats of anyone in 2018. You're not losing a south eastern vote over this. And they have the numbers. So I'm curious why it wouldn't pass.Because it would affect business owners and customers of the products that make use of the cheap labor provided by the people who would be denied entry.
By Dark PhaZe Go To PostRight, but its a pretty standard conservative position in my opinion, and one that imo wouldn't really threaten the seats of anyone in 2018. You're not losing a south eastern vote over this. And they have the numbers. So I'm curious why it wouldn't pass.
Because GOP donors and constituents have different views and donors have the money
I thought it was more about skilled/educated rather than english speaking people when I first heard about it. Nothing really egregious and it makes sense if there was a surplus of low skilled laborers but I'm not sure there is evidence that there is. I guess you could argue that the continued march of automation means that there wont be a job market for these types of workers in the near future. Plus maybe it would force places to increase wages/benefits? lmao
By Vlatko Go To PostI thought it was more about skilled/educated rather than english speaking people when I first heard about it. Nothing really egregious and it makes sense if there was a surplus of low skilled laborers but I'm not sure there is evidence that there is. I guess you could argue that the continued march of automation means that there wont be a job market for these types of workers in the near future. Plus maybe it would force places to increase wages/benefits? lmao
Pretty much economic consensus is that opening borders is good for the economy. It would be challenging to find a good counter to this. This isn't a political consensus at all though. Most people think foreigners are coming to take their jobs and so the message plays well.