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

their top concern must be the safety of state residents,

except when it comes to drugs and health care

er, i mean drugs, health care, and guns

since when could governors make demands

watch out, they can also summon spirits from the vasty deep.

These governors have no ability or power to enforce such a ban, do they? On what grounds -- and via what methods -- could they possibly ban from their states immigrants whose status has been approved by Federal immigration authorities?

except when it comes to drugs and health care

or climate change or living wages or or or

via what methods

In refugee situations, immigrants are generally given government assistance in resettling to their new country. In the USA such assistance is facilitated by the state governments, which usually run social welfare programs, even if much of their regulation and funding is from the federal government. We have a weird confusing system.

Obama conducting himself admirably imo:

Mr. Obama grew especially animated in rebuffing suggestions by some Republican presidential candidates, governors and lawmakers that the United States should block entry of Syrian refugees to prevent terrorists from slipping into the country.

“The people who are fleeing Syria are the most harmed by terrorism; they are the most vulnerable as a consequence of civil war and strife,” Mr. Obama said. He added: “We do not close our hearts to these victims of such violence and somehow start equating the issue of refugees with the issue of terrorism.”

Without naming him, Mr. Obama singled out a comment by former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, one of the Republicans seeking to succeed him, for suggesting the United States focus special attention on Christian refugees. “That’s shameful,” Mr. Obama said. “That’s not American. It’s not who we are. We don’t have religious tests to our compassion.”

I recall Nino's dissent in the Arizona immigration case in which he basically said sovereign states should be able to exclude whomever they please.

fuck these liars

https://newrepublic.com/minutes/123888/john-brennan-and-james-woolsey-think-edward-snowden-should-be-blamed-for-the-paris-attacks

https://theintercept.com/2015/11/15/exploiting-emotions-about-paris-to-blame-snowden-distract-from-actual-culprits-who-empowered-isis/

they hate us for our freedom

Chuck Schumer of New York, the third-ranking Senate Democrat, broke with most in his party and told reporters that a pause in accepting Syrian refugees "may be necessary."

feeling p good about my household "no Schumers" policy

party leadership soon to be in his capable reactionary hands

i know for various reasons (well money basically) it would probably be futile but that guy should be primaried every cycle. sometimes you get lucky.

just such fucking cowards always

oh he should definitely be primaried, surely there are better candidates from NY out there

is Jacob Javits dead

yes but his convention center lives on

GUESS LEVIS GUESS LEVIS

Chuck went there

“Israel and the Jewish people have been subject to the same type of terrorism since the 70s. And for so long, when it just happened to Israel, the world condoned it. They [may have not] condoned it, but maybe didn’t do much about it, and Israel had to fight terrorism on her own. And, because the world did not rise up, this terrorism, like a cancer, has spread throughout the world.”

http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/against-terrorism-schumer

on her own lol

if fucking only

since the 70s? on her own? what alternate universe does this guy live in?

Manhattan

the Senate

Bibi's colon

btw did you guys know feingold is running to win his old senate seat back and is apparently polling pretty well? having him back would be nice

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/12274485_10153702703563255_8470062729100080694_n.jpg?oh=d4e62c0539ad90b946d910129182c66b&oe=56B42E32

huh, interesting: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/refugees-christians-215991

i've seen a few 'jesus was a refugee' church signs around

Well, well: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/the-koch-brothers-intelligence-agency-215943

legality of that seems kind of sketchy

like the Koch hairlines

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.