2015 American Politics Thread: The 114th Congress Is in the House!

mike moon has something important to say

Governor Nixon seems intent on allowing the relocation of Syrian refugees in Missouri.
I do realize that the refugees we should be scrutinizing most is one who professes the muslim faith. Unless I'm mistaken, a practicing muslim can do whatever is necessary for the "good" of the faith - telling "fibs" is a smallpart of what they might do. And, from what I've seen, a practicing muslim comes in all flavors (black, white, brown, yellow - American, African, European, etc. etc.). A “white” lie could allow an individual to pass through the vetting process.

In this instance, we cannot afford to be too careful - especially given the fact that immigration officials report they cannot properly vet the refugees (before or after they've entered the country).

If my information is correct, Afghan refugees sent to Pakistani and Iranian refugee camps returned to their homeland when it was safe to do so. I see no reason not to follow that example because once they're on U.S. soil they'd have no reason to leave. Our preference, as a nation, should be to place the refugees in camps so that they can be properly cared for and returned safely home when the time is right.

Unless appropriate legislative action is taken, Governor Nixon may very well proceed with the acceptance of the refugees. For the safety of Missourians, we can ill-afford to wait. I ask that you begin the process of calling the General Assembly into Special Session in order to tie the Governor's hands, putting a stop to the potential Islamization of Missouri.

Mike Moon

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article45337596.html

hurry, before the raising of the Royals' championship flag is performed by an imam

Islamic "fibs"

it's a hateful letter, but you have to admit that it is a major achievement to pack all of these snippets

the "good" of the faith
telling "fibs" is a smallpart [sic] of what they might do
a practicing muslim comes in all flavors (black, white, brown, yellow - American, African, European, etc. etc)
a "white" lie

INTO THE SAME PARAGRAPH. mike moon must spend his time walking around yelling at himself and anyone else around him and poking squarequote fingers into nearby eyeballs

He has a point, re: potential Islamization. Missouri is right on the cusp of becoming balls-out Muslim.

Experts have identified many of the same letters - "it's definitely in the frame"

a talking point for Sanders in future debates (not that there are net votes in it)

Even after accounting for every government assistance program — housing subsidies, food stamps, help with the electricity bill — nearly 16 million Americans still fall below 50 percent of the poverty line, measured by the Census Bureau’s revamped poverty measure that includes the effect of government support. That translates to roughly $8.60 per person per day for a family of four. That group is six million people larger than half a century ago.

No other advanced nation tolerates this depth of deprivation. It amounts to one in 20 Americans — a share that has refused to shrink despite five decades of economic growth.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/18/business/economy/electing-to-ignore-the-poorest-of-the-poor.htm

That group is six million people larger than half a century ago.

... so it's actually grown by less than the population has over that period?

(any value above zero is bad of course, but death to shitty maths)

i think the most relevant stats are the distribution of benefits toward the more "productive" poor. The guvmint really hates single/childless people.

also, Karl Malone plz check yr email or FB

Honest question: is there any way that governors and mayors actually have a legal right and jurisdiction to withhold public services from refugees of a particular nationality, as the TX governor seems to be suggesting here and the Roanoke mayor seemed to be calling for? I didn't see the answer to this when I skimmed the thread.

No they do not

as an example of precedent, CA passed a law restricting services to illegal immigrants and even that was struck down as unconstitutional: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187. Legal refugees being explicitly discriminated against would be challenged on similar grounds.

Feds are in charge of immigration: In November 1997, Pfaelzer found the law to be unconstitutional on the basis that it infringed on the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction over matters relating to immigration

I'm surprised the right hasn't cited these passages from Scalia's dissent in Arizona v. United States:

In light of the predominance of federal immigration restrictions in modern times, it is easy to lose sight of the States’ traditional role in regulating immigration—and to overlook their sovereign prerogative to do so. I accept as a given that State regulation is excluded by the Constitution when (1) it has been prohibited by a valid federal law, or (2) it conflicts with federal regulation—when, for example, it admits those whom federal regulation would exclude, or excludes those whom federal regulation would admit.

Possibility (1) need not be considered here: there is no federal law prohibiting the States’ sovereign power to exclude (assuming federal authority to enact such a law). The mere existence of federal action in the immigration area—and the so-called field preemption arising from that action, upon which the Court’s opinion so heavily relies, ante, at 9–11—cannot be regarded as such a prohibition. We are not talking here about a federal law prohibiting the States from regulating bubble-gum advertising, or even the construction of nuclear plants. We are talking about a federal law going to the core of state sovereignty: the power to exclude

now who's making up rights

greg abbott used a story from breitbart (written by brandon darby no less) to justify himself

https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/667159455419666433

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/18/report-8-syrians-caught-at-texas-border-in-laredo/

federal agents chatting anonymously w/ darby, that's terrific

darby has the good taste to use scare quotes here:

The sources claimed that eight Syrians were apprehended on Monday, November 16, 2015. According to the sources, the Syrians were in two separate “family units” and were apprehended at the Juarez Lincoln Bridge in Laredo, Texas, also known officially as Port of Entry 1.

the DHS followed up to the local NBC station:

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Syrians-Arrested-Trying-to-Cross-Texas-Border-Report-351721471.html

DHS confirms that on Tuesday, members of two Syrian families, two men, two women and four children, presented themselves at a port of entry in Laredo. They were taken into custody by CBP and turned over to ICE for further processing. The two adult women and four children were transferred to the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, Texas. The two men from these families are being held at the South Texas Detention Center in Pearsall Texas. Due to privacy issues, no additional information will be provided at this time.

spot the difference

"family units" = phalanxes of Muslim stormtroopers

that toddler might be stuffed with anthrax, you just never know

Thanks, Οὖτις. That was what I expected.

pretty good replies to this

‏@RandPaul
My amendment will end housing assistance to refugees. It sends a clear message to the president. We have control of the power of the purse!

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/667090048588771328

I'm glad that these brave souls are willing to put the weak and powerless in their place. Countdown to a compassionate conservative proposal to just euthanize the lot.

maybe the plan is if we shed enough freedoms we wont have any more for them to hate us fo

WASHINGTON (AP) — In a stinging rebuke to President Barack Obama by Republicans as well as members of his own party, the House ignored a veto threat Thursday and overwhelmingly approved Republican legislation erecting fresh hurdles for Syrian and Iraqi refugees trying to enter the United States.

Dozens of Democrats joined Republicans as the House passed the measure 289-137. That margin exceeded the two-thirds majority required to override a veto, and it came despite a rushed, early morning visit to the Capitol by top administration officials in a futile attempt to limit Democratic defections for the measure.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Picard_as_Locutus.jpg

resistance is futile

the democrats who voted for this fucking thing:

https://twitter.com/polyphonique/status/667435878168547329

47 democrats voted for it:

Rep. Sanford Bishop Jr. [D] GA
Rep. Jim Cooper [D] TN
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D] TX
Rep. Gene Green [D] TX
Rep. Steve Israel [D] NY
Rep. Marcy Kaptur [D] OH
Rep. Ron Kind [D] WI
Rep. James “Jim” Langevin [D] RI
Rep. Stephen Lynch [D] MA
Rep. Collin Peterson [D] MN
Rep. Tim Ryan [D] OH
Rep. David Scott [D] GA
Rep. Louise Slaughter [D] NY
Rep. Jim Costa [D] CA
Rep. Daniel Lipinski [D] IL
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D] TX
Rep. Richard Nolan [D] MN
Rep. Joe Courtney [D] CT
Rep. David Loebsack [D] IA
Rep. Timothy Walz [D] MN
Rep. Gerald Connolly [D] VA
Rep. James Himes [D] CT
Rep. Jared Polis [D] CO
Rep. Kurt Schrader [D] OR
Rep. John Garamendi [D] CA
Rep. Terri Sewell [D] AL
Rep. John Carney [D] DE
Rep. William Keating [D] MA
Rep. Janice Hahn [D] CA
Rep. Kyrsten Sinema [D] AZ
Rep. Ami Bera [D] CA
Rep. Julia Brownley [D] CA
Rep. Raul Ruiz [D] CA
Rep. Scott Peters [D] CA
Rep. Patrick Murphy [D] FL
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard [D] HI
Rep. Cheri Bustos [D] IL
Rep. John Delaney [D] MD
Rep. Ann Kuster [D] NH
Rep. Sean Maloney [D] NY
Rep. Marc Veasey [D] TX
Rep. Filemon Vela [D] TX
Rep. Donald Norcross [D] NJ
Rep. Pete Aguilar [D] CA
Rep. Gwen Graham [D] FL
Rep. Brad Ashford [D] NE
Rep. Kathleen Rice [D] NY

sorry for weird copy and paste from excel

xpost oops, polyphonic beat me to it

all coward sell outs.

My fucking dem rep (Kurt Schrader) voted for it. Time for some strongly worded outrage from me to land squarely in his lap, I guess.

one of the better wisconsin congressmen voted for it too

motherfuckers

"Defeating terrorism should not mean slamming the door in the faces of those fleeing the terrorists. We might as well take down the Statue of Liberty," said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.

seriously, they should really take it down. what's the point

maybe we can tear it down and then construct some sort of massive machine that uses it to pummel refugees

Rep. Steve Israel [D] NY
Rep. Louise Slaughter [D] NY

what's in a name?

wasn't Marcy Kaptur a solid liberal a few years ago?

Yeah, I was just gonna say, Marcy Kaptur?!?!?! WTF??

greg sargent:

An astounding 47 House Democrats voted for the bill, which is actually a lower number than Democratic leaders feared. Earlier today a House Dem source told me that as many as 100 Dems were at risk.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/11/19/can-democrats-block-the-gop-bill-stalling-syrian-refugees/

And why would Keith Ellison not vote on this?

Rep. Patrick Murphy [D] FL

the Wasserman-Schultz-approved candidate in the Senate race.

We don't really need to go as far as taking down the Statue of Liberty. I don't think it would be that difficult to replace the torch arm with one that's flipping the bird.

All jokes aside, this is a disgusting and shameful moment for our country. Congratulations, human waste.

And why would Keith Ellison not vote on this?

Maybe he felt there was a conflict of interest? That was my guess.

This is my rep:

Washington, D.C. – Today, Congressman Donald M. Payne, Jr. (NJ-10) released the following statement after voting against H.R. 4038, the American SAFE Act of 2015. This House Republican legislation would immediately halt resettlement of refugees from Syria and Iraq:

“My top priority is the safety and security of my constituents. And, as Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications, I understand the seriousness of the threat ISIS poses to the United States and our allies, and to the entire world. We must be vigilant against this terrorist group.

“At the same time, we have a moral and humanitarian obligation to provide refuge to the people escaping the very terrorist violence our nation is working to eradicate, including Syrians. These refugees are rigorously vetted, more so than any other group entering our nation. To abandon these people would be to abandon the very values that define our nation.

“ISIS seeks to destroy innocent lives; those are the lives we must steadfastly protect.”

So glad I live in Marcia Fudge's district and not Kaptur's.

Why didn't they just cut to the chase and call this thing the Giving ISIS Exactly What They Want Act of 2015?

My congressman issued shrewd doublespeak:

After last week’s horrific terrorist attacks in Paris and Beirut, it is clear that our country must help those suffering at the hands of ISIS. The refugees currently fleeing the Middle East seek the same freedoms that we as Americans are blessed to enjoy. I want to ensure our country remains a place of refuge and hope for oppressed people from all over the world, while granting our law enforcement officials the tools they need to properly screen each refugee and keep Americans safe. The ultimate solution for this tragic refugee crisis is to defeat and destroy ISIS and clear the path for new leadership in Syria. On this, our country must lead.”

these chuckleheads seem to think that liberty and compassion are reasonable only when politically expedient and that both law and human decency is justified in capitulation under duress. it's despicable.

While I was initially pretty pissed about this, I had a thought: could this move toward some kind of political compromise where the GOP gets to announce that it imposed "new, harsher screening measures" that don't in fact make it much more difficult than the already onerous process? That might shut up a lot of the opposition and ultimately allow us to let in a decent number of refugees.

Also, any read on what support for this looks like in the Senate?

the NYT story suggested it was more difficult, but so is courage.