• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Immigration Proposal from Senator Boxer

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I was just told she is proposing to drop drop border security funding so twice it's amount of money can be sure to provide health care to the former criminals who violated our nations borders and law.
 

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I was just told she is proposing to drop drop border security funding so twice it's amount of money can be sure to provide health care to the former criminals who violated our nations borders and law.

What sources do you have for these rumors and gossip? Do you know how much money is actually spent on medical/health care for undocumented workers vs what we spend on Americans? What percentage of our federal dollars exactly, pay for health care for undocumented people?
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,663
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
What sources do you have for these rumors and gossip? Do you know how much money is actually spent on medical/health care for undocumented workers vs what we spend on Americans? What percentage of our federal dollars exactly, pay for health care for undocumented people?

Her proposal calls for providing the money without increasing the federal budget deficit by using some of the money paid by applicants for legalization, much of which is now earmarked to further secure the border.
Boxer to push funding for health costs of uninsured immigrants - latimes.com
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
We don't deny health care to anyone so this changes nothing. As for border security, what a joke. What border security? Or are we back to the grand concept of the 2000 mile fence?
 

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,663
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Not sure how it is a problem for immigrants seeking legal status to have coverage for health care costs while seeking citizenship out of fees they are paying out of their own pockets to become citizens, IOW part of their citizenship fees will cover their healthcare costs. What's the problem with that OP?

The point is that the new legislation calls for immigrants to pay fees while they're working their way toward citizenship. Those fees will be used to beef up our borders; that's what the current bill planned for. The current bill also plans for these people to not have the benefit of Medicaid or food stamps, et al until they are citizens.

Now here comes Barbara Boxer saying, "Instead of using those fees to pay for increased border security, let's use it to pay for their healthcare benefits." (Which the current legislation doesn't even call for them to receive.)
 

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The point is that the new legislation calls for immigrants to pay fees while they're working their way toward citizenship. Those fees will be used to beef up our borders; that's what the current bill planned for. The current bill also plans for these people to not have the benefit of Medicaid or food stamps, et al until they are citizens.

Now here comes Barbara Boxer saying, "Instead of using those fees to pay for increased border security, let's use it to pay for their healthcare benefits." (Which the current legislation doesn't even call for them to receive.)

Well the biggest anti-immigrant whine I see is the myth of how they're such "a burden on taxpayers" this way they are paying for their healthcare vs taxpayers. Again, what is the problem, exactly? Increased border security is a joke. The more money we've spent on "border security" the less successful it has been. Having reasonable immigration laws, fair enforcement of them and good relations with our border neighbors would go much farther in keeping borders safe. The drug cartels and gangs are not thwarted and cannot be stopped with "border security" those are the people that we want to keep out of our country, migrant workers and immigrants here to make a better life for their families are no threat to American citizens.
 

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
94,436
Reaction score
32,286
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well the biggest anti-immigrant whine I see is the myth of how they're such "a burden on taxpayers" this way they are paying for their healthcare vs taxpayers. Again, what is the problem, exactly? Increased border security is a joke. The more money we've spent on "border security" the less successful it has been. Having reasonable immigration laws, fair enforcement of them and good relations with our border neighbors would go much farther in keeping borders safe. The drug cartels and gangs are not thwarted and cannot be stopped with "border security" those are the people that we want to keep out of our country, migrant workers and immigrants here to make a better life for their families are no threat to American citizens.

Where in the article does it say that "immigrants" are paying for anything? All I see it Washington sending $250M to state and local govts to pay for their healthcare insurance.
 

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
94,436
Reaction score
32,286
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Older and younger Americans don't agree on the immigration bill currently before the U.S. Senate, but a small majority of Americans overall favors the bill, according to a new CNN/ORC International survey.

The poll also indicates that more than six in 10 say border security rather than a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants should be the bigger priority.

According to the poll, 51% say they support a bill that would attempt to increase border security and create a pathway to citizenship for many undocumented immigrants, with 45% saying they are opposed to such a measure.

People 65 and older oppose the bill by a 17-point margin, while younger Americans tend to favor it.

The survey was conducted June 11-13, with 1,014 adults nationwide questioned by telephone. The survey's overall sampling error is plus or minus three percentage points.

Find out more about the poll on CNN's new morni ng show, “New Day,” at 6 a.m. ET on CNN.
Are we clear now? Boxer isn't even close to what public opinion is.
 

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

JackFrost

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
3,471
Reaction score
513
Location
El Monte, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I was just told she is proposing to drop drop border security funding so twice it's amount of money can be sure to provide health care to the former criminals who violated our nations borders and law.

Boxer to push funding for health costs of uninsured immigrants - latimes.com

As MaggieD pointed out:

Her proposal calls for providing the money without increasing the federal budget deficit by using some of the money paid by applicants for legalization, much of which is now earmarked to further secure the border.

Drop border security funding, what? Border security will be unchanged with her proposal, hardly a "drop".

WASHINGTON—Sen. Barbara Boxer plans to push for Washington to provide $250 million and perhaps more to help local and state governments pay the cost of healthcare to uninsured immigrants who seek legal status under legislation now before the Senate.

"Provide healthcare", as in no healthcare is being provided to illegals right now, but Boxer is somehow "providing" it to them with her proposal?

Look, I am not a fan of Boxer either, but that doesn't mean you can just flat out lie about her proposals.
 

JackFrost

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
3,471
Reaction score
513
Location
El Monte, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well the biggest anti-immigrant whine I see is the myth of how they're such "a burden on taxpayers" this way they are paying for their healthcare vs taxpayers. Again, what is the problem, exactly? Increased border security is a joke. The more money we've spent on "border security" the less successful it has been. Having reasonable immigration laws, fair enforcement of them and good relations with our border neighbors would go much farther in keeping borders safe. The drug cartels and gangs are not thwarted and cannot be stopped with "border security" those are the people that we want to keep out of our country, migrant workers and immigrants here to make a better life for their families are no threat to American citizens.

Correct. Wall street banksters and their government cronies are getting away with much more than illegals get away with. Yet Americans seem more concerned with people who don't speak English, and are turning to the same people who are raping them financially to go after the mean brown people.

Illegals-low/minimum wage jobs, healthcare, education for their kids, etc.

Banksters-Crash the economy, financially rape Americans while making a profit.
 

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
How is anything I said a lie; your quotes illustrate exactly what I said. Take money that is planned to go to border security and give "possibly more" and I illustrated I heard (2x as much) to providing health care to criminals that live here in violation of our laws.


Boxer to push funding for health costs of uninsured immigrants - latimes.com

As MaggieD pointed out:



Drop border security funding, what? Border security will be unchanged with her proposal, hardly a "drop".



"Provide healthcare", as in no healthcare is being provided to illegals right now, but Boxer is somehow "providing" it to them with her proposal?

Look, I am not a fan of Boxer either, but that doesn't mean you can just flat out lie about her proposals.
 

JackFrost

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
3,471
Reaction score
513
Location
El Monte, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
How is anything I said a lie; your quotes illustrate exactly what I said. Take money that is planned to go to border security and give "possibly more" and I illustrated I heard (2x as much) to providing health care to criminals that live here in violation of our laws.

You said:

1. Boxer will "drop" border security funding-not true, as funding will not be "dropped" below what it currently is, or at least the article did not mention it
2. Boxer will "provide" healthcare to illegals-not true, as healthcare is being provided to illegals right now
 

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
You can play games with the words all you want that is pathetic. "dropped border security funding" meant the funding raised for it in the immigration bill. Also a total ignorant failure to say we provide health care to illegals right now because you know that is not what is meant, what is meant is to give them more health care services and probably insurance with the money that was to be raised for border security. You act like the Giffords shooter playing stupid games with words like that - a big reason I can't stand extremist libertarians - good riddance.


You said:

1. Boxer will "drop" border security funding-not true, as funding will not be "dropped" below what it currently is, or at least the article did not mention it
2. Boxer will "provide" healthcare to illegals-not true, as healthcare is being provided to illegals right now
 

JackFrost

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
3,471
Reaction score
513
Location
El Monte, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
You can play games with the words all you want that is pathetic. "dropped border security funding" meant the funding raised for it in the immigration bill. Also a total ignorant failure to say we provide health care to illegals right now because you know that is not what is meant, what is meant is to give them more health care services and probably insurance with the money that was to be raised for border security. You act like the Giffords shooter playing stupid games with words like that - a big reason I can't stand extremist libertarians - good riddance.

How am I playing word games? You started a thread with no source and expect everyone to know what you mean??? Your OP implied that funding from border security would be taken away as it is now, and diverted toward healthcare services for illegals. You failed to even mention this is legislation being discussed in the Senate, which means that border security does not have that funding yet.

Nothing I have read from the article MaggieD posted says "additional" services would be provided. It reads like the funding will go toward hospitals/medical services already being provided to illegals.
 
Last edited:

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
How is anything I said a lie; your quotes illustrate exactly what I said. Take money that is planned to go to border security and give "possibly more" and I illustrated I heard (2x as much) to providing health care to criminals that live here in violation of our laws.

Actually, they wouldn't be criminals, they'll be applying for legal citizenship. We already pay for their health care when they go to ERs (which has been discussed and statistically shown that it is a very small percentage of health care costs). So THEIR money, the money of the applicants for legal status will go to pay for their healthcare. So no, you won't be paying anything for them.
 

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You can play games with the words all you want that is pathetic. "dropped border security funding" meant the funding raised for it in the immigration bill. Also a total ignorant failure to say we provide health care to illegals right now because you know that is not what is meant, what is meant is to give them more health care services and probably insurance with the money that was to be raised for border security. You act like the Giffords shooter playing stupid games with words like that - a big reason I can't stand extremist libertarians - good riddance.

You're the one playing games with words, or perhaps you struggle with comprehension?

The facts are that:

Currently, the proposal is that immigrants applying for citizenship (a legal process making them no longer "criminal") will pay FEES for their citizenship status along with waiting periods and other qualifications they have to meet to become legal citizens.

In that proposal, it is also suggested [which means this doesn't yet happen, since the proposal hasn't passed and no one is as of yet paying the fees] that a portion of those fees collected go toward border security.

Boxer is proposing that a portion of the fees suggested for border security instead go toward health care. [i.e. lightening the so-called burden on taxpayers for medical care for undocumented immigrants] These are from FEES not yet collected or allocated, merely proposed allocations.
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
You're the one playing games with words, or perhaps you struggle with comprehension?

The facts are that:

Currently, the proposal is that immigrants applying for citizenship (a legal process making them no longer "criminal") will pay FEES for their citizenship status along with waiting periods and other qualifications they have to meet to become legal citizens.

In that proposal, it is also suggested [which means this doesn't yet happen, since the proposal hasn't passed and no one is as of yet paying the fees] that a portion of those fees collected go toward border security.

Boxer is proposing that a portion of the fees suggested for border security instead go toward health care. [i.e. lightening the so-called burden on taxpayers for medical care for undocumented immigrants] These are from FEES not yet collected or allocated, merely proposed allocations.


So, nobody should comment about future legislation since it's only been suggested, and is only pending?

I think you may want to reconsider your definition of "word games".
 

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
They are criminals - period. They have broken the laws of our land - I don't care what they "would be" I care what they ARE. Why else the term "illegal" alien or do you want to play on that word too?

Actually, they wouldn't be criminals, they'll be applying for legal citizenship. We already pay for their health care when they go to ERs (which has been discussed and statistically shown that it is a very small percentage of health care costs). So THEIR money, the money of the applicants for legal status will go to pay for their healthcare. So no, you won't be paying anything for them.
 

JackFrost

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
3,471
Reaction score
513
Location
El Monte, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So, nobody should comment about future legislation since it's only been suggested, and is only pending?

I think you may want to reconsider your definition of "word games".

Sir, the OP did not link any information. It reads like Boxer is just proposing to "drop" border security by itself , and starting healthcare programs/services for illegals, both of which are not true. He did not even indicate the proposals were being discussed in the Senate's immigration bill.
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Sir, the OP did not link any information. It reads like Boxer is just proposing to "drop" border security by itself , and starting healthcare programs/services for illegals, both of which are not true. He did not even indicate the proposals were being discussed in the Senate's immigration bill.

I understand the OP was lacking information, but I think that has been filled in since, yes?

My comments regarding the post stand in the context they were offered.
 

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So, nobody should comment about future legislation since it's only been suggested, and is only pending?

I think you may want to reconsider your definition of "word games".

No, that is not what I said. The OP presented the proposal inaccurately and continues to argue about it inaccurately. We of course, can and should have discussion on pending legislation, however, we should discuss the actual legislation being proposed versus innuendo, rumor and unfounded gossip not based in any facts.
 

SassySmartie

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
528
Reaction score
630
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They are criminals - period. They have broken the laws of our land - I don't care what they "would be" I care what they ARE. Why else the term "illegal" alien or do you want to play on that word too?

So then this thread is really about your disagreement with any path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and not Boxer's proposal then? Make up your mind.

Undocumented immigrant = "illegal alien" I prefer to use the less degrading term since they are, in fact humans and people. They are also marginalized and disenfranchised in their country of origin and here. Even if they did enter the country without going through the proper channels, by and large the undocumented immigrant population are otherwise law abiding, contributing members of our communities. It is a small minority (as with any culture) that are causing any real, substantial trouble.

So, was your OP really meant to discuss the actual proposal from Boxer and discuss it's merits, based on the actual facts/truth of what the proposal entails? Or was this simply bait to argue whether or not you want any undocumented workers to have the opportunity to apply for legal citizenship?
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
No, that is not what I said. The OP presented the proposal inaccurately and continues to argue about it inaccurately. We of course, can and should have discussion on pending legislation, however, we should discuss the actual legislation being proposed versus innuendo, rumor and unfounded gossip not based in any facts.

Well, it seems to me proposals are always subject to interpretation. That doesn't mean the interpretation is unfounded, or gossip, or innuendo.

When Sen. Boxer said she wants some of the money paid by applicants for legalization to be diverted away from border security, it can be said she wants to cut money earmarked for border security, to pay for medical coverage.

But then again, perhaps it's better if I stay out of this part of the discussion.
 
Top Bottom