Trump tweeted he will "Address the Nation

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Nobody on either side is fighting against good border security and the need to be constantly changing strategies as things change. To hold the government hostage and put government workers livelihoods at risk over political BS is just wrong.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Speaking of political bs....how about one side actually endorsing the idea and then “changing strategies” because the the president changed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Speaking of political bs....how about one side actually endorsing the idea and then “changing strategies” because the the president changed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think the previous Congress did just that, but then couldn't accomplish anything with a new administration.
But now it's the Democrats fault

Meanwhile, I worked with Congress on a comprehensive fix, and last year, 68 Democrats, Republicans, and Independents came together to pass a bipartisan bill in the Senate. It wasn’t perfect. It was a compromise, but it reflected common sense. It would have doubled the number of border patrol agents, while giving undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship if they paid a fine, started paying their taxes, and went to the back of the line. And independent experts said that it would help grow our economy and shrink our deficits.

Had the House of Representatives allowed that kind of a bill a simple yes-or-no vote, it would have passed with support from both parties, and today it would be the law. But for a year and a half now, Republican leaders in the House have refused to allow that simple vote.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I think the previous Congress did just that, but then couldn't accomplish anything with a new administration.
But now it's the Democrats fault

Meanwhile, I worked with Congress on a comprehensive fix, and last year, 68 Democrats, Republicans, and Independents came together to pass a bipartisan bill in the Senate. It wasn’t perfect. It was a compromise, but it reflected common sense. It would have doubled the number of border patrol agents, while giving undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship if they paid a fine, started paying their taxes, and went to the back of the line. And independent experts said that it would help grow our economy and shrink our deficits.

Had the House of Representatives allowed that kind of a bill a simple yes-or-no vote, it would have passed with support from both parties, and today it would be the law. But for a year and a half now, Republican leaders in the House have refused to allow that simple vote.

Did it include funding the wall? If that was done, I suspect your bill would pass. And, I know, you don't believe the wall is necessary and would do little in stopping illegal immigration. But the other side believes it would make security overall better. Isn't that what compromise is, giving the other side something it wants if it doesn't essentially harm the goal?