GOP House candidate wants to stop immigration for 10 years

[Swordsmyth]

A Republican from Wilmington is challenging Republican U.S. Rep. David Rouzer in the 2020 election.
Pete D’Abrosca announced his candidacy several weeks ago. He and Rouzer will face each other in the 7th District GOP primary in March. The 7th District runs from Wilmington to Wayne County and southern Johnston in eastern North Carolina. In the Fayetteville region it has Sampson County and the southeastern end of Bladen County.


D’Abrosca, 27, has two published books (his most-recent is “Enemies: The Press vs. The American People”) and he writes articles and commentary for conservative news websites. He also is the editor-in-chief of The Rundown, a recently launched news website.
In his campaign announcement, D’Abrosca bashes Rouzer as one of the “yes-men” of the Republican establishment that “has actively worked against President Trump at nearly every turn.”
Immigration is one of D’Abrosca’s top issues.
“My plan is to introduce flagship legislation in Washington D.C. to put a complete moratorium on immigration to the United States — legal and illegal — for a period of 10 years,” he said in his campaign announcement. This is to give the country time to “restore law and order, and implement a sane immigration policy.”

More at: https://www.fayobserver.com/news/20...didate-wants-to-stop-immigration-for-10-years

It should be longer but this is a start.

 

[Schifference]

It is my understanding that a congress person cannot introduce anything without the approval of those pulling the strings.

 

[Sammy]

This will trigger the Republican Establishment!
Go Pete D’Abrosca!

 

[Kilrain]

Sorry, but that sounds like a really dumb idea. It's just unworkable and counter-productive.

I could get behind a proposal that stipulates zero net immigration, coupled with requiring immigrants to take an IQ test and score above the current US average, and a requirement that you have to pay a certain amount of income tax (like 10x what the median US worker pays in a year) before becoming eligible for any social services.

But to just say no one can move to the US, under any circumstances, just doesn’t make sense.

 

[dean.engelhardt]

I remember the old days (10 years ago) when this was a left wing stand.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

It is my understanding that a congress person cannot introduce anything without the approval of those pulling the strings.

Are you suggesting puppet masters are running the show? If so, who would those PMs be?

Such a proposal may impact alleged Russian foreign interference in US elections though:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ial-election&p=6865174&viewfull=1#post6865174




Related
Trump reiterates claim that he wants more legal immigration

Indian PM 'endorses Trump for 2020 in breach of diplomatic convention'
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Donald Trump attend the "Howdy, Modi!" rally at NRG Stadium in Houston Sunday. Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

MH1BGA
US approves more H-1B visas this year
Oct 14, 2019

• US has approved a higher number of H-1B applications this year
• 3.89 lakh applications were approved for the fiscal 2019, up from last year's 3.35 lakh
• In past years, more than 70% of the aggregate H-1B visa applications for new jobs and visa extensions given to those born in India

MUMBAI: The US has approved a higher number of H-1B applications (both for initial visas and visa extensions for continued employment) this year, showing that the demand for these work visas continues unabated. This is a relief to Indians, who are the dominant holders of H-1B visas, especially after processing regulations got more stringent post-2015 .

Temporary relief to Indians in US! Work ban on H-1B visa holders' spouses pushed back till 2020
A 2015 rule issued by Barack Obama allowed work permits for certain categories of H-4 visa holders (dependent family members - spouse and children - of the H-1B visa holders), who otherwise could not be employed
September 19, 2019

 

[Sammy]

Sorry, but that sounds like a really dumb idea. It's just unworkable and counter-productive.

I could get behind a proposal that stipulates zero net immigration, coupled with requiring immigrants to take an IQ test and score above the current US average, and a requirement that you have to pay a certain amount of income tax (like 10x what the median US worker pays in a year) before becoming eligible for any social services.

But to just say no one can move to the US, under any circumstances, just doesn’t make sense.

The problem with mass immigration is that most of them vote for bigger Government.
We have to many immigrants that are not assimilated. We need to deal with this problem first!

 

[revgen]

The digital economy allows companies to hire foreigners without needing them to come here physically. In 2019, the question should be, why do these employees need to move here to work for you?

 

[Schifference]

Are you suggesting puppet masters are running the show? If so, who would those PMs be?


Such a proposal may impact alleged Russian foreign interference in US elections though:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ial-election&p=6865174&viewfull=1#post6865174

 

[AngryCanadian]

Soros wont be happy.

 

[Todd]

Sorry, but that sounds like a really dumb idea. It's just unworkable and counter-productive.

I could get behind a proposal that stipulates zero net immigration, coupled with requiring immigrants to take an IQ test and score above the current US average, and a requirement that you have to pay a certain amount of income tax (like 10x what the median US worker pays in a year) before becoming eligible for any social services.

But to just say no one can move to the US, under any circumstances, just doesn’t make sense.

I'll bet most immigrants could easily score higher than the US IQ average.

 

[phill4paul]

Works for me.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Sorry, but that sounds like a really dumb idea. It's just unworkable and counter-productive.

I could get behind a proposal that stipulates zero net immigration, coupled with requiring immigrants to take an IQ test and score above the current US average, and a requirement that you have to pay a certain amount of income tax (like 10x what the median US worker pays in a year) before becoming eligible for any social services.

But to just say no one can move to the US, under any circumstances, just doesn’t make sense.

We need to freeze all immigration until further notice in order to deal with the excessive and incompatible immigrants already here.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I'll bet most immigrants could easily score higher than the US IQ average.

You would lose.

But thanks for exposing your America hate.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I remember the old days (10 years ago) when this was a left wing stand.

One they never meant and only took in order to fool the right into opposing it.

 

[Kilrain]

We need to freeze all immigration until further notice in order to deal with the excessive and incompatible immigrants already here.

I think that's conflating two separate issues. I totally agree with getting rid of "bad" immigrants - pretty much anyone who is a drain on society, financially or even culturally, and with having a really high bar for immigrants. Basically, you only want immigrants that are "better" than the natives. But you don't actually get rid of any "bad" immigrants by keeping out "good" immigrants, so as a policy measure this sounds rather pointless.

Edit: But you could have a policy that ties immgration to emigration, meaning that more people have to emigrate (including forced repatriation) than are allowed to immigrate. It's just that a complete freeze on all immigration doesn't make sense. Preventing a Finnish neurosurgeon from moving to the US does not get rid of a single illegal alien or welfare parasite.

 

[euphemia]

I think we need a break of about 3-5 years so tptb can clear the backlog of legal applications sitting on their desks.

 

[Swordsmyth]

I think that's conflating two separate issues. I totally agree with getting rid of "bad" immigrants - pretty much anyone who is a drain on society, financially or even culturally, and with having a really high bar for immigrants. Basically, you only want immigrants that are "better" than the natives. But you don't actually get rid of any "bad" immigrants by keeping out "good" immigrants, so as a policy measure this sounds rather pointless.

There are no "good" immigrants if they don't assimilate and they won't assimilate while we have so many new arrivals that they don't have to experience the real America.
We need the freeze to give us time to assimilate any good immigrants and expel the bad ones until we have a low enough proportion of immigrants that those we do let in assimilate.

 

[Kilrain]

There are no "good" immigrants if they don't assimilate and they won't assimilate while we have so many new arrivals that they don't have to experience the real America.
We need the freeze to give us time to assimilate any good immigrants and expel the bad ones until we have a low enough proportion of immigrants that those we do let in assimilate.

See my edit above.

 

[phill4paul]

We need to freeze all immigration until further notice in order to deal with the excessive and incompatible immigrants already here.

Freeze ALL immigration until Congress, both House AND Senate can come up with a comprehensive and rational process.