The Senate has released its long-awaited “border” bill that reportedly increases the inflow of legalized immigrants into Americans’ communities, workplaces, and schools.
Titled ‘‘Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024’,” the 370-page bill was released at 6:40 p.m. on Sunday.
It is accompanied by a multi-billion dollar appropriations bill intended to fund the resources needed to register, release, transport, and house migrants in Americans’ coastal cities and inland communities.
The bill is being marketed as a “national security” bill as it seeks to overcome opposition by Republican legislators whose election depends on the enthusiastic turnout of ordinary populists who are worried about migration’s lawlessness, pocketbook damage, crime, overcrowding, and chaotic diversity.
However, Democrats are touting the bill as a fix for President Joe Biden’s terrible poll numbers in the 2024 election.
The establishment authors of the bill have largely hidden its contents — along with many possible loopholes, exceptions, modifications, and caveats that can turn apparent restrictions into government-funded welcomes.
The bill was assembled behind closed doors by a tight circle of establishment advocates — and their business donors. They include Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who appointed three senators to negotiate a plan with the White House.
The three senators were Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ).
The White House side was advised by Biden’s pro-migration border chief, Alejandro Mayorkas.
Mayorkas is a skilled lawyer who has cut numerous loopholes in the nation’s border laws while arguing that the crush of migrants will be easier to manage if the migrants are let in by legal pathways. He has also argued that Americans have a moral duty to accept migrants and that Americans “need” more migrant labor to fill jobs created by investors.
The bill is being marketed as a way to curb border chaos — and as a national security push — because advocates need to provide cover for pro-establishment Republican senators who want to support the bill despite public opposition. “For five months, my Republican colleagues have demanded — and I think rightfully so — that we address this border crisis as part of a national security package,” Sinema told CBS on Sunday. “I agree: The crisis on our border is a national security threat.”
"I don't know what Speaker Johnson will do" when the border security bill gets to the House, @SenatorSinema says. When asked if Johnson can be persuaded to support the bill, Sinema says, "I think everyone has an opportunity to be persuaded…I simply mean: Read the legislation." pic.twitter.com/vNdz2SuVbW
— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) February 4, 2024
Breitbart News has highlighted many of the critical issues that will be carefully read before Schumer’s rush to a scheduled vote on Wednesday.
Central Issues:
Will the bill reduce the inflow of migrants — or just legalize much of Biden’s illegal migration?
Each year, Congress allows one million legal immigrants and roughly one million temporary workers to enter the country. That inflow is huge compared to the American population, which includes roughly 3.6 million births each year.
The bill reportedly includes some token curbs on Biden’s illegal parole migration, which imported roughly one million migrants into 2023 despite laws limiting the inflow.
This provision may be a sneaky way of expanding the parole inflow, which was limited to roughly 15,000 people a year under Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump.
So the bill may tout minor curbs on migration while actually legalizing Biden’s current inflow of migrants via parole. These include the CPB-One border cellphone app for migrants at the border, the “CHNV” program which allows 30,000 migrants to fly in from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, and the family reunification programs that allow chain migration migrants to move into the United States in greater numbers than allowed under existing regulation.
Will there be a provision to ensure that parole migrants leave the country after two years, or will it include various legal loopholes to help them get green cards, bring up their families, and win citizenship?
If the parole workers are forced to leave after a period of work, this giveaway would be a gift of cheap labor to companies seeking to suppress Americans’ wages.
The parole workers would be welcomed by some Republican legislators because it ensures that donors get cheaper labor without also giving new voters to Democrats. In the early 2000, President George W. Bush pushed this plan via his “Any Willing Worker” program. Democrats shot the program down then — but may support a new version to help Biden get through the 2024 election.
If the parole workers can stay, the border management would dramatically expand legal migration from its current level of one million people per year, much to the disadvantage of American families.
The advocates say the bill ends “catch and release.”
But Sinema said that migrants with children will not be detained at the border. So this supposed curb would be a rollback of current law, which requires that all migrants seeking asylum be held until their asylum pleas are decided. This is a huge court-created loophole that has long been exploited by men who bring their children — and sometimes, other people’s children — to walk out of detention.
Sinema also said that migrants would be released under electronic surveillance. This is a critical issue because supervised release allows migrants to get the jobs they need to pay back their high-interest loans to the smugglers and cartels. If migrants are not released, few will risk taking out loans and mortgages to make the trek, and the number at the border will crash.
Biden’s administration is ignoring the “shall” detain law under its claim that Congress does not provide it with enough funding to detain the migrants. But the administration also transfers billions of dollars a year to transport and house the migrants who should be detained by law.
Does the legislation overturn court-imposed loopholes, such as the Flores decision?
Continue reading: Breitbart.com
Leave a Reply