Biden positions on immigration

Biden policies off his website, immigration  Plan for securing our values as a nation of immigrants.

Wow, now that is as vague a statement of policy that I have ever seen. This is lots of wishful thoughts with no real end point. I propose, “A plan to continue being the place where people who yearn to be free can come and contribute to the American experience.”

Barbara Jordan, the famous congressperson, was instrumental in our immigration policies that I think should be remembered by those who want no immigration, and to those want no limits,

“Credibility in immigration policy can be summed up in one sentence: those who should get in, get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave.”

She talked about not flooding our country to the detriment of current citizens finding work, or suppressing wage growth through oversupply. Half of those without papers today, roughly 11,000,000, are allowed to stay through lack of action on their visas, or 5,000,000 people.

Those on the left think it is inhumane to keep people in detention centers while they await a court hearing. By not holding them we create an open door at our border; 90% of released entrants do not return for their hearing. Try going into Mexico or any other country like that!

So, Congress should set the number of immigrants we allow based on Rep. Jordan’s goal. The executive should enforce those limits. The courts should be resourced so that hearings are held quickly, thus no one is “caught and released.” People with expired visas that show no exit should be found and adjudicated. Only immediate families, not extended, should be let in. The progressives caterwaul about wages not rising yet they support massive immigration, supply and demand folks!

On to the Biden Harris proposals: The Obama administration separated families, just google it. Criminals in the US are separated from their families. Trump has been more aggressive, but it is a lie that this has not occurred before.

Biden focuses a lot on cargo coming into the country versus people, which is a diversion. Yes we should check cargo but that isn’t the issue, illegal immigrants are; they are trying to bait and switch.

Looking at research there is much on both sides of whether immigrants contribute, or deplete our financials. Biden only quotes that which supports his policy, believe me there is a equal amount disagreeing with his $2 trillion contribution.

The bill he talks about was a partisan bill like Obama care where conservative input was rebuked. Thus executive orders were used, thus Congress abdicated its’ power. I cannot figure out why the extremes of both sides do not understand they must compromise to retain the power they should have.

The first 100 Days: Trump has already stopped separating families. We let in some folks from Saudi Arabia in 2001 without proper vetting, big mistake, we must vet. If a country does not have enough information on a potential immigrant or visa request, we should not let them in.

We must be clear, because someone can’t find a job in their country they aren’t eligible for asylum. If they do qualify under strict guidelines and can be vetted, then let them in, I do not agree with arbitrary numbers.

Every one of my friends who have gone overseas for extended periods must prove they will not be a public burden. Saying immigrants can be a public burden is foolish and unfair to our citizens who need help.

DACA was terminated because Congress refused to negotiate; Trump doubled the number of people to be allowed in if Congress would fund some more wall and other request. Nancy put DACA in jeopardy.

TPS. DED. I would rather send money to adjacent countries to house people driven out by war, etc. There is no need to allow them in.

ICE and CPB: Another Democrat hit piece on law enforcement, rather than focusing on problems and fixing them.

I agree with integration, I wonder how the “Squad” feels about that. If you want to come to this country you should agree to become a part, not form your own little country within ours.

Regional meeting of Latin American countries: How many more times must nation building be brought up, it doesn’t work.

We are mostly immigrants and it is beautiful, and has been productive, and will continue to be. We must limit the number of people who we allow in and create filters to be sure they will be productive and engaged citizens who support our way of life, and not oversupply the labor markets thus reducing wage growth. This would require some compromise from both sides and a lessening of finger pointing and name calling. But, we must do so.


Biden policy on reducing violence and gun control

Biden policies off his website End Gun Violence

The very first statements say there are 40,000 gun deaths yearly. Biden doesn’t mention the breakdown:

61% are suicides, would those who want to take their lives not do so if there were no guns, nope, this is a red herring (Overwhelmingly white and male by the way). 36% were homicides, 3% accidents (which includes those killed by police),

He goes on to talk about background checks, which I agree with.  I agree with background checks at gun shows, private sales, etc. What he doesn’t support is connecting the database to mental health issues, which is the overwhelming cause of mass shootings (more than four people).

He calls the following common sense:

  1. Hold gun manufacturers liable for the use of a firearm. He says no other industry has protection, say again? When a murder is done with a knife, or a car, or a hammer, or with gasoline-should I go on, they are not held liable. Doing so would mostly put firearm manufacturers out of business. According to, gun owners defending themselves killed 1500 people a year versus 606 killed by the police. All of those 1500 were adjudicated as self-defense. Also, 2,500,000 times firearms were brandished, interrupting a crime. No guns, more crime-Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the country and highest gun crime rates.
  2. Get firearms off the streets. I can shoot a semi-automatic pistol at the same rate of an “Assault weapon (meaning a rifle with a detachable magazine and semi automatic).” My hunting rifle doesn’t have a pistol grip yet has 2-3 times the range of an AR-15. So logic doesn’t apply. Having a rifle capable of automatic firing requires a federal license. Bump stocks should require that kind of license. I can’t wait to see gang bangers line up to sell their MP5’s back to the government. He says only buy one weapon a month, no sweat, this is just inane, 12 a year, etc.
  3. He lists many “task forces” to look at various issues, like a task force can produce action, give me a break.
  4. A smart gun is an interesting idea, my concern is that lower income folks won’t be able to afford personal protection, and studies show they want to have a firearm to protect themselves.
  5. I agree with holding adults liable for the use of their guns by family members. I agree with prohibiting “Ghost guns”. I agree with requiring owners to report lost or stolen guns.
  6. I disagree with prohibiting educators from having firearms. Those who have had experience in the military or law enforcement and are certified through annual tests (same type as the police are required to take) should have one, in a biometric safe. To that end, anyone with a carry permit should go through the same annual certification.

Generally Biden-Harris want the United States to be like Europe in this regard. Well, Europe grew up under monarchies or totalitarian forms of government who knew what would happen if their serfs had weapons, their power would be challenged. Their culture is very different than ours. That is why the second amendment was demanded, to be sure that wouldn’t happen again.

Some say we don’t need it now since we know our government wouldn’t ever try to do that, use force to concentrate power against the wishes of the citizen. Really, below comes from their website.

Incentivize state “extreme risk” laws. Extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws, enable family members or law enforcement officials to temporarily remove an individual’s access to firearms when that individual is in crisis and poses a danger to themselves or others. Biden will incentivize the adoption of these laws by giving states funds to implement them. And, he’ll direct the U.S. Department of Justice to issue best practices and offer technical assistance to states interested in enacting an extreme risk law.

Create an effective program to ensure individuals who become prohibited from possessing firearms relinquish their weapons.

As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.

Biden told Robert Francis O’rourke that he would be the point person on taking weapons away from citizens.

Some may say these proposals for removing weapons are reasonable, but due process isn’t mentioned. Will an owner have the right to challenge a “red flag” law? Well of course you say, talk to the college students whose due process rights were removed by Obama-Biden if they were accused of sexual assault-this has finally been fixed but hundreds of people’s reputations have been ruined by false accusations. I worry about that exercise of progressive opinion over my rights.

Lastly: Crime is a problem we need bi-partisan action to reduce. The democrat passed 1994 crime bill Biden takes credit for has put too many people in jail. Fix it. The violence, harassment of conservatives, defund the police, and other sheer idiocies  that Biden-Harris have basically supported through their lack of condemnation must be recognized as dangerous to a civil society. Reform the police-sure, get rid of the racists-absolutely, train them better, etc.. Trump at least got a bi-partisan bill passed to reform the federal justice system.


Biden Harris platform section on post K-12 education

My comments about Democrat Platform sections

Biden policies off his website Education beyond high school.

I am happy to see the focus on other education paths than a four year degree. The education Nomenklatura has depreciated the value and purpose of other types of education for decades, and devalued those who had not desire or capacity for a four year degrees. Too many kids went to college, were given too much money and ended up without the expected income and high debt.

Biden proposes many solutions:

  1. Invest in community colleges-OK with me.
  2. Strengthen College as a reliable pathway…. What in the Sam Hill does that mean?
  3. Support colleges that play a unique role, OK with me, Trump has started that effort.

He then states this will be accomplished in coordination with states and educators. Fair, but will that cooperation include those who ideas involve other models like home schooling, charter schools, etc. Or, as both have said they will work with the unions that have brought our K-12 education system from the top five to 25th in the world. Or the college elite who are 75% self-identified as progressives. Or eliminate charter schools and condemn kids to low performing government schools.

Specifically they say:

  1. 2 years of high quality training without debt for “Hard working” folks. The failure rate today is very high in two year or certificate programs. Preparation is key, focus on K-12 first, demand kids come out prepared.
  2. Once qualified some folks need support to finish, I agree. Some homes and families do not provide the atmosphere and support needed for further education.
  3. Apprenticeships are a good idea, this smells like $50Bn spent to support unions against right to work desires by most folks. Will this be union agnostic?
  4. Student debt. If you look at the graph of student debt and college costs they ramp up dramatically once Obama came into office. Kids could borrow easily, had money to spend, the demand was high and the supply lower. Simple economics. Tuition free for those below $125,000 of income. Great, freer stuff means cost will go up. How about help with a note on 10% of earnings for 15 years.
  5. This next one is wild, halve the payments on current debt, or refinance it. OK, reasonable, but how come these folks have to repay debt and the new ones don’t? Then after 20 years forgive the debt. The left caterwauls about bailing out companies during times of crises, or leads the charge as in the case of GM and others. The consequence of overbowering is bankruptcy; that should be the end solution. Always bailing out breeds’ complacency.
  6. Other suggestions, some are reasonable, others follow in the same vein of more government control and involvement in our lives, reducing the risk in our decisions thus breeding an attitude of irresponsibility and solid reasoning in decision making.
  7. Invest in the alphabet soup of colleges that serve various ethnic populations. A bit unseemly to me to separate them out for special funds; seems like an election tool to me.

Lastly: Nowhere in this section of the Biden-Harris platform for after K-12 education is the military mentioned. The military should be elevated to equal status. Those colleges who will not allow military recruiters on campus should be struck from the list of federal funds. The Democrats have been notoriously anti-military for decades, sometimes anti soldier. People choosing the military receive high quality education on both the technical and leadership fronts; it has been shameful the way they have been treated after President Carter.

Overall this platform section is more of the same and lots more money for the same organizations and people who got us in the situation we are in today. CHeck out this link from Thomas Sowell,, DeBlasio and Biden want to eliminate charters. Sorry, what Trump has started seems better for the future. Teacher unions and tenure will destroy high quality education, but they do spend a lot of money and deliver a lot of votes to those who pander to them.