Gluxford1 (C-AZ) proposes Best and Brightest Immigration Act
Great bill, sad.
This is brain numbingly stupid
Nay. Quite frankly, this bill is one of the absolute worst I've ever seen. Except for maybe the ones written by FloridaPopulist.
By immigrations were mostly pretty moderate, except for my attempt to ban Muslims. Unless your talking about my universal healthcare bill
Well mine aren't moderate, but they weren't quite extreme either. Bert war actually the one with shooting border crossers and shit lol
Also I don't understand social justice outrage coming from a "libertarian"
Perhaps the WORST immigration bill I have ever seen.
Yea! I like it, it this doesn't pass, I will make a new immigration bill and will try my best on it!
Huge Yea! As long as it doesn't limit H1-A visas.
Yea! This is the proper way to do immigration. Sad to see so many globalist cucks though.
What party is "C" @gluxford1 and why are you no longer a GOP member in the VC?
It's the newly formed Conservative party. He joined it because the Republican Party is too moderate.
I only like sections 4,5, and 7. Hate the rest. I'm voting nay. I would recommend though that you release this again but in parts.
It is my opinion that dual citizenship is a reasonable freedom that the US should afford its citizens. Dual citizens are not automatically disloyal so 6 doesn't make sense. Nay
You can't be loyal to two countries at once. Pick one.
That's simply false
No, it's actually not. Any man who loves a foreign country as much as his own is on the same level as a man who loves other women as much as his wife.
I ask you this: are you a dual citizen?
No. I'm just a citizen of the United States. I'm a proud American with an undying loyalty to my country. The U.S.A is the only country that I would ever swear my allegiance to.
Do you know what it is to be a dual citizen? I do, and I tell you proudly that I am a loyal citizen to both nations. Your uninformed rhetoric based on how you interpret an experience you do not have gives away a great deal about your thought process when writing these bills. I'm done with this discussion, as, with all due respect, you are coming from a blind position of ignorance on the subject
And what if the two nations of which you are citizen go to war? Which nation would you side with? This is where loyalty comes into question. You cannot be loyal to both at once. Half-loyalty to the United States is not loyalty at all. There is no bad blood between us, and I still respect you and your opinions, but it seems we will have to agree to disagree on this issue.
And section 6
Section 1 helps working
class Americans. Importing extreme levels of immigrants every year displaces them and takes their job opportunities away. Section 6 ensures that the people we admit are loyal to the United States. Dual citizenship signals lack of loyalty.
Nay, this nation should not shut its doors to immigrants who have benefited our country with their economic potential and cultural milieu. We need to be accepting more legal immigrants, not less.
We need less because those jobs could be going to Americans instead.
Immigrants work the kind of jobs that Americans will not work. Perhaps you could recondition unemployed Americans to think that these kinds of low skill agricultural and construction jobs are right for them, but if this effort succeeded, then the cost of construction and farm products would dramatically increase since Americans will not work for less than minimum wage. We need to let the market choose who to employ, even if the best employee for market value is not American.
I'm not willing to pay a lot more at the grocery store so that some American can work in the corn fields. That's not a worthwhile trade off.
That's BS. Plenty of working class Americans are despite for employment. They would gladly take jobs like these if given the chance, but folks like you would prefer to deny them that chance.
* desperate for employment. Sorry for the typo.
Private prison labor costs way more jobs than immigrants.
First of all, I'm not denying anyone the chance to do anything. You're the one doing that. I'm not denying Americans the chance to work these low-skill jobs; I'm just saying that if they want to do them they should be willing to compete in the free market with immigrant labor. You're the one denying people the chance of employment by deliberately restricting the free market of labor.
Secondly, Americans don't want to work in the fields all day for an unlivable wage. Maybe some would have wanted that during the Great Recession when we had double digit unemployment, but the unemployment rate is less than 5%. The low skill job market is the most rapidly expanding sector of the American economy, so there are no shortage of McDonalds people would rather work in than fields.
It's only an unlivable wage because the companies know immigrants are willing to work for less (even less than minimum age), which unfairly tilts the hiring process in favor of immigrants, both legal and illegal. It is not our government's responsibility to give opportunities to foreigners, it is their responsibility to do what is best for Americans. Importing more foreigners instead of hiring Americans does not help our fellow countrymen.
You sound like you hate capitalism. It's not unfair that immigrants are willing to work for less, it's competitive. If you're unemployed you either have to become more competitive in your given field or pursue a new career. You shouldn't be appealing to the government to limit free enterprise and hamper the ability of businesses to serve their consumers and shareholders.
And besides, prisoners are dpimg agricultural jobs for 7 cents an hour. Nobody can compete with that.
I like capitalism, but like everything else in life, it must have its limits. Our government's duty is to act in the best interests of the American people, not corporations. Importing immigrants instead of hiring Americans is not in the best interests of the American people.
Yet you support the president cutting taxes only for the owners of corporations?
He's going to cut taxes across the board, not just corporations.
No he's not. In fact, he's actually raising taxes on middle class single parents or middle class families with 3 or more kids
Representing the best interest of Americans means making affordable food and real-estate, which means hiring cheap foreign labor. Americans shouldn't be content with these kinds of low skill jobs. We owe them better than that.
Will 6 be retroactive as well @gluxford1 ? I have dual citizenship, will I no longer have dual citizenship if this passes
No, it will apply to future cases only.
What is section 3 doing
Section 3 trains creates optional programs for young Americans in high school and college that would train and prepare them for blue collar and agricultural jobs.
Yes how does it have to do with immigration
Instead of importing immigrants into the country to do those jobs, Americans would be able to get those jobs.
Do you want to become Saudi Arabia? Because this is how you become Saudi Arabia.
Nope. This is how we become a united republic.
Countries that dont allow dual citizenship are shining examples like Singapore, Saudi Arabia and India. This is how you wind up like them
Not really, no. The U.S. Constitution prevents that.
Not when you do stupid shit like this it doesnt.
Americans obsession with dual citizenship is ridiculous. Every other developed country let's it happen.
The only major countries that don't allow dual citizenship are Singapore India and Saudi Arabia, not exactly models to follow
Nay, number 6 is rediculous.
How are people going to visit their families back home? Or what if they want to move back?
What about kids born with one parent a citizen and one not? What about people born in the US to non citizen parents? What about people born in another country to us citizen parents?
You cannot be loyal to two countries at once. Pick a side. An immigrant who has dual citizenship is clearly not fully loyal to the United States. To quote Teddy Roosevelt, "Any man who loves other countries as much as their on stands on the level of man who loves other women as much as his own wife". If you have no interest in becoming fully loyal citizen of the United States, then you shouldn't be coming here at all.
Since when did "loyalty" become a requirement?
Show me where in the constitution it says "you must worship the united states"
The united states is a country to live in, not a wife.
Swearing your full loyalty to the United States in an oath of allegiance had been a requirement since 1778.
That's false, glux, and that rhetoric saddens me. I'm a dual citizen, my parents are too. Immigrants are already made to swear allegiance to the US when they become citizens. It's false to say that you can't be a citizen of another country and not love the US. It's perspective and personal experience that's necessary to tell you that
RagingMystic, the Roosevelt quote about the wife is an analogy. Do you know what an analogy is? Man, your public school must have been terrible if they didn't teach you this.
Ill tell you what it is, its a combination of xenophobia and nationalism, he fears any outsider that doesnt prostrate themselves and cry before the flag.
Its a false analogy, because the country you live in isnt as important as your wife. By your logic nobody should get married because they'd be loyal to their family over the country.
@buffalozulu and @RagingMystic here is the oath that is required in naturalization and citizenship ceremonies:
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I ABSOLUTELY and ENTIRELY RENOUNCE and abjure ALL ALLEGIANCE and fidelity to any FOREIGN PRINCE, POTENTATE, STATE OR SOVEREIGNTY of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject OR CITIZEN; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service to the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, so help me GOD."
Those words speak for themselves. It's not about xenophobia, it's about loyalty.
So... if it's already in there, why do we need 6
Because this requirement is far too loosely enforced. Dual citizenship is a blatant violation of the oath of allegiance. There's a reason why I highlighted those particular words in there by making them all caps.
Question: who gives a shit?
Most of America. And it's pretty sad that your argument has come down to that.
No, most of america does not. And you're arguing ideology and opinion.
I'm disappointed in how rude you've been in this discussion. Don't you know it's my job to be all snarky 😜
Learn your place 😂👌🏼
Strong yea. I very much like #6
Best and Brightest Immigration Act
Section 6- Dual-citizenship shall henceforth be illegal in the United States. When coming here, immigrants must swear their full loyalty to the U.S. and relinquish any and all foreign citizenship or loyalties to foreign nations. Those who refuse will be eligible for expedited deportation.
Section 7- After and only after these policies are put into place, the pathway to citizenship for legal immigrants will be shortened from an average of 15 years to an average of 5 to 6 years.
Section 1- Legal immigration will be reduced from around 1 million a year down to 40,000 a year starting in the 2018 fiscal year.
Section 2- Only highly-skilled, highly-educated, and financially-sound immigrants will be accepted into the United States. Low-wage immigrants with a lower skill set will no longer be admitted into the U.S. for a period of at least 30 years.
Section 3- Optional programs will be created for high school and college students that are designed to encourage and train young Americans to succeed in blue collar and agricultural jobs.
Section 4- All immigrants will be heavily vetted and will undergo extensive background checks. If an immigrant fails the background checks and does not pass the vetting process, they will be barred from immigrating to the United States.
Section 5- All immigrants will be required to learn English within 5 years of entering the United States. Immigrants who are already fluent in English are exempt from this requirement.
Summary: This bill is aimed at reforming the legal immigration process so that it better benefits America and Americans.