Results 1 to 5 of 5
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By Jean
  • 1 Post By Judy
  • 1 Post By Judy
  • 1 Post By MW

Thread: Trump can’t tackle illegal immigration in NAFTA deal — thanks to border security hard

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Administrator Jean's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    63,611

    Trump can’t tackle illegal immigration in NAFTA deal — thanks to border security hard

    Trump can’t tackle illegal immigration in NAFTA deal — thanks to border security hard-liner

    By S.A. Miller - The Washington Times - Sunday, April 15, 2018

    Rep. Steve King, a crusader against illegal immigration, has emerged as the unlikely culprit blocking President Trump from a crackdown on Mexico’s border jumpers in the renegotiation of NAFTA.

    Mr. Trump has repeatedly tied the issues together, saying he will scrap the 25-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement unless Mexico does more to stop the flow of people headed north across its territory.

    But a 2015 law Mr. King helped author, intended to prevent President Obama from boosting immigration as part of trade pacts, is preventing Mr. Trump from using trade deals to reduce the immigration rate.

    Mr. Trump’s prime motivation in tackling NAFTA is to correct what he calls a bad trade deal. It was a top campaign promise to stop the exodus of U.S. factories and manufacturing jobs to low-wage Mexico.

    As the talks enter the final stages, Mr. Trump has increasingly mixed the immigration and trade issue, despite restrictions on executive authority to make trade deals.

    “Mexico is doing very little, if not NOTHING, at stopping people from flowing into Mexico through their Southern Border, and then into the U.S. They laugh at our dumb immigration laws. They must stop the big drug and people flows, or I will stop their cash cow, NAFTA. NEED WALL!” he tweeted this month.

    Any immigration agreements between the U.S. and Mexico can’t be in the trade deal, including reducing the number of guest worker visas or creating arrangements for immigration enforcement.

    Mr. King, Iowa Republican, said he was glad that his provision stopped Mr. Trump from putting immigration provisions in NAFTA, even though he agrees with the president’s tough immigration policies.

    “There are other ways to do immigration — not through trade,” Mr. King told The Washington Times. “The president can throw anything into the negotiation that he chooses, but when they write a treaty, they can’t be writing ‘immigrate’ into that treaty because my language prohibits it.”

    He said he did so to protect Congress’ constitutionally enumerated power to write immigration law.

    Mr. King warned the Trump administration when the NAFTA renegotiation talks opened last year that immigration couldn’t be part of the deal.

    In a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, the congressman cited the language he tacked onto the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, also known as the customs bill, that says trade agreements “do not require changes to the immigration laws of the United States or obligate the United States to grant access or expand access to visas.”

    Mr. King stressed in the letter that he was raising the issue out of concern that the Trump administration would seek to grant more visas, specifically the “TN visas” for temporary professional workers that citizens of Canada and Mexico can get under NAFTA.

    He would prefer to have the TN visas stripped from NAFTA in the rewrite.

    The restriction, included in a package of legislation granting the president fast-track trade authority, was originally aimed at Mr. Obama as he prepared to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

    The deal, known as TPP, was a 12-nation agreement among the U.S. and Pacific Rim countries that proponents said would act as a counter to China.

    U.S. trade negotiators have often used guest worker visas and other immigration concessions as bargaining chips in cutting trade deals.

    A 2008 bilateral trade agreement between Vietnam and the United States shielded from deportation citizens of that communist country who came to the U.S. before 1995. The Trump administration is trying to cancel that arrangement to deport thousands of Vietnamese who are legal U.S. residents but not citizens and have criminal convictions, according to Reuters.

    In 2015, there were fears that Mr. Obama would allow TPP to open a floodgate for high-tech workers and other professionals to come to the U.S. Mr. King’s legislation prevented it.

    As it turned out, one of Mr. Trump’s first actions as president was to rip up TPP, which he said was another bad trade deal that would ship American jobs overseas.

    Michael Camunez, the former U.S. ambassador to Mexico who helped implement the original NAFTA, said the immigration issue — even if not part of the deal — could blow up the negotiations.

    “The president is antagonizing the negotiations with his tweeting and his bombastic rhetoric,” he said. “He is trying to threaten and bully the Mexicans in a way that I don’t think they are going to accept.”

    Mr. Camunez added, “The outcome depends on one man and one man only, and that is Donald Trump.”

    Any agreement for Mexico to step up immigration enforcement on its side of the border would have to be outside of NAFTA, said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies.

    “It would have to be a side agreement or an understanding. I can’t see that it is actually going to be part of NAFTA,” she said. “The TN visas could be up for renegotiation because that is a provision of NAFTA. But these other issues such as enforcement measures and how to deal with asylum seekers and things like that — those are not trade issues.”

    The pressure Mr. Trump has exerted on the government of Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto has already paid off.

    Mr. Pena Nieto’s government recently intervened against a caravan of about 1,000 migrants headed for the U.S. border, providing transit and humanitarian visas that helped reduce the size of the caravan.

    Mexican officials insisted they were not bowing to pressure from Mr. Trump.

    “There is no way the Mexican government can escape the perception that they took action on the caravan because of being prodded by Trump,” said Ms. Vaughan. “They never would have stepped in to head off the caravan without Trump drawing attention to it. It just wouldn’t have happened.”

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...nking-nafta-i/
    Judy likes this.
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  2. #2
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    50,918
    ......... what??!!!

    Any immigration agreements between the U.S. and Mexico can’t be in the trade deal, including reducing the number of guest worker visas or creating arrangements for immigration enforcement.

    Mr. King, Iowa Republican, said he was glad that his provision stopped Mr. Trump from putting immigration provisions in NAFTA, even though he agrees with the president’s tough immigration policies.

    “There are other ways to do immigration — not through trade,” Mr. King told The Washington Times. “The president can throw anything into the negotiation that he chooses, but when they write a treaty, they can’t be writing ‘immigrate’ into that treaty because my language prohibits it.”
    I'm sure Trump isn't talking about "immigrate", he's talking about illegal aliens violating US immigration law which makes them criminals invading our nation in violate of US law and American Sovereignty, which as important as I'm sure Steve King thinks his "provision" is, his provision has nothing to do with illegal border crossings of people (illegal aliens) or goods (illegal drugs). See? I didn't use the word "immigrate" ... once. I could write an entire book on this issue without using the words "immigrate" or "immigration" once. Why? Because these types of violations of law are not "immigration". Immigration is a legal process that makes you an immigrant, not the actions that make you an illegal alien, that's why US immigration law refers to these people as illegal aliens and not immigrants, because they aren't "immigrants" complying with our laws, they are "illegal aliens" violating them.

    Pay attention, Mr. President, you get the language you need in NAFTA, whatever you can negotiate, to stop as much of these crimes, criminals and illegal products from entering our country as possible, or terminate NAFTA. And make sure Steve King gets the first copy of the NAFTA IS DEAD letter.
    jtdc likes this.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  3. #3
    MW
    MW is online now
    Senior Member MW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    23,254
    “There are other ways to do immigration — not through trade,” Mr. King told The Washington Times. “The president can throw anything into the negotiation that he chooses, but when they write a treaty, they can’t be writing ‘immigrate’ into that treaty because my language prohibits it.”

    He said he did so to protect Congress’ constitutionally enumerated power to write immigration law.
    It was the right thing to do, Rep. king. Thank you.

    Combining immigration deals with trade could set us down a very dangerous path.

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  4. #4
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    50,918
    So tell me, how is Congress doing lately with its "enumerated powers to write immigration law"?

    Congress wrote the "credible fear" provision that forces catch and release as a matter of law for asylum-seekers.

    Congress wrote the free to enter provision that forces detention and then subsequent release to sponsors of unaccompanied minors.

    Sounds to me like Congress is in bed with the foe Trump is trying to fight. Why would an immigration "hard-liner" confuse illegal aliens with immigrants?

    I don't think statements like King's will have much impact on NAFTA negotiations because his "provision" doesn't apply to problems Trump is trying to fix. It's a little (if not greatly) bizarre that King would try to put up an obstacle like this. Weird!!
    Last edited by Judy; 04-16-2018 at 12:29 PM.
    jtdc likes this.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  5. #5
    MW
    MW is online now
    Senior Member MW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    23,254
    Quote Originally Posted by Judy View Post
    So tell me, how is Congress doing lately with its "enumerated powers to write immigration law"?

    Congress wrote the "credible fear" provision that forces catch and release as a matter of law for asylum-seekers.

    Congress wrote the free to enter provision that forces detention and then subsequent release to sponsors of unaccompanied minors.

    Sounds to me like Congress is in bed with the foe Trump is trying to fight. Why would an immigration "hard-liner" confuse illegal aliens with immigrants?

    I don't think statements like King's will have much impact on NAFTA negotiations because his "provision" doesn't apply to problems Trump is trying to fix. It's a little (if not greatly) bizarre that King would try to put up an obstacle like this. Weird!!
    King stopped the possibility of the folks like Obama from manipulating trade treaties to include immigration because he was making sure increased immigration couldn't be a part of any treaty. Smart man. Rest assured, Rep. King (R-Iowa) is resolute in his battle against increased immigration. He has never done anything that I'm aware of to give anyone a reason to think otherwise.
    Beezer likes this.

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Similar Threads

  1. How Trump Should Tackle Illegal Immigration
    By lorrie in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-23-2016, 08:06 PM
  2. Border Security No Longer Part of Illegal Alien Amnesty Deal
    By Jean in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-04-2013, 04:01 AM
  3. Lawmen tackle border security
    By jimpasz in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-06-2008, 09:06 AM
  4. Bush to Tackle Border Delays, Security in Canada-Mexico Talk
    By Jean in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-20-2007, 08:44 PM
  5. House to tackle border security measures
    By crazybird in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-21-2006, 11:41 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •