
Trump declares national emergency to build border wall - sahin-boydas
https://nypost.com/2019/02/15/trump-declares-national-emergency-to-build-border-wall/
======
luxuryballs
The thing I find funny about some of the media narrative on this topic is the
claim that ports of entry are the only places significant drug trafficking is
occurring, it’s almost 2000 miles of wilderness...

you know what’s going on at entry ports because it’s being monitored, you
can’t quantify what’s going through in places you’re not looking, more
probably flows through hidden tunnels that are discovered all the time

there’s no hyperbole in saying it’s a threat and an emergency, seeing the
effects of the drugs and crime, people getting raped/killed, human
trafficking... it was an emergency decades ago when they could have done
something to prevent it from getting to this point

~~~
amluto
“Emergency” comes from “emerge”. Think “emergent threat”. There is nothing
emergent about this situation. Sure, drugs and our nation’s handling of them
is a serious problem, but “problem” is not at all the same thing as
“emergency”.

As a secondary consideration, I find it hard to believe that a fence or wall
is going to help much. Some kind of DARPA-like competition-based inexpensive,
well-considered electronic border monitoring might be helpful, but there are
plenty of examples of people trivially bypassing fences and overpriced virtual
walls.

(My personal favorite example of a virtual wall completely failing was at JFK
Airport: [https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Security-Breach-JFK-
Je...](https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Security-Breach-JFK-Jetski-
Jamaica-Bay-Airline-165959376.html))

~~~
reallydude
> There is nothing emergent about this situation.

That's a matter of perspective. If one party unilaterally decides to block the
budgeting crisis, on a philosophical and political premise (albeit, the R's
creating the situation to illustrate it), you end up with a situation where
you cannot address an issue through political means, at any cost. This is a
terrible precedent, but it's also logical for the tool at hand.

People have shotguns, which can blow through a window. I still lock my doors
and close my windows. Walls work to a degree, for most situations intended to
block access.

~~~
amluto
One party? Trump couldn’t get his wall funded even when the Republicans
controlled both houses.

~~~
reallydude
Control is a misleading term. There is some control, but not enough for all
actions and no solidarity (except among the opposition). Again, it's a matter
of perspective, which seems lost on even those with all the information
available.

------
sahin-boydas
[https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/us/politics/national-
emer...](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/us/politics/national-emergency-
trump.html)

------
simonsarris
Trump was elected on a platform with only a few big goals, and one of them was
"Build the wall." This became something of a chant for his supporters. Now
that Trump is president, shouldn't it be his duty to try very hard to make it
a reality? Isn't that one of the most democratic things that he could do, to
try and enact what he promised to the people that elected him, regardless of
how good or bad an idea it is?

(note that this is not an opinion on wall proposals, which from my skimming
seem like a colossal waste of money, or the procedural hijinks involved which
seem like the bread and butter of American politics)

~~~
krapp
>Isn't that one of the most democratic things that he could do, to try and
enact what he promised to the people that elected him, regardless of how good
or bad an idea it is?

Trump has been _quoted_ as saying he didn't _need_ to declare a national
emergency to fund the wall. He just did it because it was more expedient and
he didn't want to have to deal with all that _democracy_ and the hassle of
having to compromise over it. That's not democratic. If Obama had used
emergency powers for such a petty reason, say to fund the ACA, there would
already be blood in the streets.

Trump is president of the entire country, not just of the people who voted for
him. I would hope, although I don't expect, that he could see the bigger
picture.

~~~
beatgammit
Didn't Obama do this with the Flint water issue? That turned a local issue
into a national one, likely to score points for the sitting president. I
disagree with both usages of the "state of emergency", and I really wish
presidents couldn't do it as easily as they can.

------
skh
I remember when Reagan signed legislation granting citizenship to millions of
illegals. At the time the idea was that in exchange for doing this the border
with Mexico would be tightened. Bush II had a decent proposal for addressing
the large number of illegals in the country but his party shot down the
proposal. Under Obama deportations greatly increased. This is an issue that
has been going on for decades and one that resonates with a certain segment of
the voting population.

I see no resolution as long as businesses profit off illegal labor with
impunity. I've come to believe that few in power actually want to change
things. Both major parties can flame the passions of their respective bases by
keeping the status quo. If the prognostications of the effects of global
warming are true then it is rational to want to fix the situation. Mass
migrations are occurring and will get worse. The whole issue is a symptom of a
broken political system in my opinion.

~~~
fuzz4lyfe
I find to hard to understand what the lefts actual position is on illegal
immigration. I know they aren't a monolith but is the idea that immigration
laws should still exist but not be enforced (or enforced lightly)? That seems
to me to create a caste system where you have legal citizens and illegal
citizens with defacto less rights.

If people want open borders, or something like it. My view is they should say
so proudly and clearly. It's a defensible position even if I disagree. If the
idea is we are going to continue to have a slave caste of illegal immigrants
without many labor protections and fearful that their employer will call ICE
on them if they don't work unpaid overtime, not only is that indefensible I'd
be willing to go to war over it just like my ancestors did the last time we
had a similar institution in America.

~~~
teucris
Definitely no monolithic opinion but my cohort (i.e. those I speak to
regularly about this issue) believe there should be major reforms to vastly
simplify legal immigration and enable a clear path to citizenship. You might
call this open borders, but that implies a free-for-all. I personally think
getting a work visa should be pretty easy, taxes paid by all, and employers
should be severely punished for attempting to hire under the table.

I think you’re right to say illegal immigration causes a caste system. I think
that’s artificially created by our strict immigration policies. We need more
workers of all skill levels in the US. There are people who want to pursue a
better life by moving here. Why get in the way?

~~~
fuzz4lyfe
That's perfectly reasonable and honestly I agree. If people coming here have
the same rights and responsibilities I don't see the issue. The only thing I'd
add is it may make sense to have a waiting period for certain welfare programs
like the UK does, where you have to pay into the system for a little while
before you are eligible in order to prevent people from coming for solely that
purpose. Outside of that it seems such a plan would be popular, why isn't
anyone framing it this way? Instead I see that we should #DefundICE[0], why is
that better than reforming the laws that ICE is enforcing?

[0][https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/aoc-ice-illegal-
immigratio...](https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/aoc-ice-illegal-immigration-
aoc/2019/02/07/id/901772/)

~~~
uniacid
I don't think Newsmax is the best source of news on this, you might as well
have linked Breitbart.

As far as the defund ICE movement, it's just a small movement by a small set
of people (namely AOC whom conservatives think is their modern red herring),
lets not generalize and say all left leaning people want this when in reality
they most likely don't, but you have to understand ICE has been abusing its
power and it has also pushed to help create a massive private industry of
private prisons housing "illegals" in which you could say should be defunded
or more regulated since it's not properly handling people humanely nor are
they helping the situation at hand.

~~~
fuzz4lyfe
>I don't think Newsmax is the best source of news on this, you might as well
have linked Breitbart.

The cspan video in the link has her entire comments unedited for you to review
if you doubt she made the statement. I wasn't able to find CNN or Buzzfeed's
reporting on the matter I presume they chose to not cover it. I am citeing it
for the quote not any of the editorial content, I'd cite the video directly
but it's over half an hour long.

>As far as the defund ICE movement, it's just a small movement by a small set
of people

This small set of people are extremely loud, if you have a more reasonable
voice please use it. The DNC would be wise here to put forward their plan for
immigration because as I see it today AOC and her supporters are driving the
conversation from the left at least as far as public perception goes.

~~~
uniacid
I haven't heard any of the DNC leaders pushing this agenda in any strong
manner, also the only reason it might seem like it's loud is maybe due to the
fact of conservative outlets pushing the narrative.

In regards to an Immigration plan the DNC has time and time again pushed for
reforms and debate but nothing has been done not because they are not willing,
primarily because the other party loves to lambaste any idea or reform
immediately as "open borders" or "Amnesty" when it could be no further from
the truth, this is nothing new for us, unfortunately it's just a political
cycle at this point.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Refo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2006)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_reform_in_the_Unit...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_reform_in_the_United_States)

~~~
masonic

      nothing has been done not because they are not willing, primarily because the other party
    

When the Democrats controlled the entire Federal government in 2009-10
(including filibuster-proof control of the Senate for parts of that term),
they did _absolutely nothing_ toward immigration reform. In fact, Charles
Schumer himself made speeches in Congress against illegal immigration.

They pushed the ACA through with no Republican votes: they could have easily
done the same with immigration law.

------
sahin-boydas
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-border-
emerge...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-border-emergency-
the-president-plans-a-10-am-announcement-in-the-rose-
garden/2019/02/15/f0310e62-3110-11e9-86ab-5d02109aeb01_story.html)

