Quote:

---

Biden To 'Immediately' Send Congress Bill That Would Offer Citizenship To 11 Million Illegals

President-elect Joe Biden will 'immediately' send a legislative package to Congress which would provide a pathway to citizenship for some 11 million illegal immigrants, according to the Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-01-15/biden-to-send-cong
ress-bill-to-legalize-11-million-immigrants-who-lack-documentation according to "immigrants rights activists in communication with the Biden-Harris transition team."

The bill would also provide a shorter pathway to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of people living in the United States under a temporary protected status and/or who qualify under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program who were brought into the US as children.

And in what the Times calls a "significant departure from many previous immigration bills under both Democratic and Republican administrations," the Biden plan would contain zero provisions for stepped-up immigration enforcement and security measures, according to Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center Immigrant Justice Fund, who was informed of the details by Biden staffers.

Both Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris have said their legislative proposal would include a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants in the U.S. without legal status, and The Times has confirmed the bold opening salvo that the new administration plans in its first days doesn’t include the “security first” political concessions of past efforts.

Hincapié, who was co-chair of the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force on Immigration — part of Biden’s outreach to his top primary rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and his progressive base — said that Biden’s decision to not prioritize additional enforcement measures was probably a result of lessons learned from the Obama administration’s failed attempt to appease Republicans by backing tighter immigration enforcement in hopes of gaining their support for immigration relief. -Los Angeles Times

"On Inauguration Day, President-elect Biden will sign roughly a dozen actions to combat the four crises, restore humanity to our immigration system, and make government function for the people," reads a Saturday memo by incoming Biden chief of staff, Ron Klain, who said the incoming president's agenda included "the immigration bill he will send to Congress on his first day in office."

If Republicans don’t stop this in the Senate, it’s GG for the GOP https://t.co/LEE5OkqqpD
— Jack Posobiec ???? (@JackPosobiec) January 16, 2021

Under BIden's plan - the most sweeping and comprehensive since President Regan's 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act granting some 3 million people legal status (after which California flipped blue), immigrants would be eligible for legal permanent residence after five years, and US citizenship after three more years.

Several immigration activists who spoke with The Times praised the reported scope and scale of the bill and expressed surprise at its ambition. A number of legislators and analysts had predicted that the new administration, at least in its first months in power, would be likely to pursue immigration measures that would stir the least controversy and could be achieved by executive actions rather than legislation. -LA Times

Will it pass?

Given the sweeping changes, Democrats are likely to face serious pushback despite holding slim majorities in both chambers of Congress - and the bill will likely face months of political debate as conservative members and immigration hard-liners push back.

Meanwhile, Texas Democratic Rep. Juaquin Castro said in a Friday call with reporters that he's formulating a bill which would offer illegals immediate protection from deportation and a fast-tracked path to citizenship for essential workers who are undocumented.

"It’s time for essential workers to no longer be treated as disposable, but to be celebrated and welcomed as American citizens," said Castro, adding "If your labor feeds, builds and cares for our nation, you have earned the right to stay here with full legal protection, free from fear of deportation."

And look at this - just in time:

A Honduran migrant caravan is heading to the United States.

Arriving just in time for Joe Biden’s inauguration.

This is the future Democrats’ voted for.

pic.twitter.com/sKy8NHJfkJ
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 15, 2021

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Illegal is a race?

When did that happen?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
AS PREDICTED .....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Refresh my memory: is there a difference between entering the US legally v entering it illegally?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Now that the Dems are the party of big business their donors need that cheap labor.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Ahead of the 2016 elections, the Republican presidential candidate pledged a “deportation force” that would remove millions of unauthorized immigrants. “We have at least 11 million people in this country that came in illegally. They will go out,” he claimed during one primary debate.

How many millions did Trump deport? Zero.



https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/trump-deportations-unfinished-
mission

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
You'll never end the cheap labor force as long as we're letting people in illegally by the millions and outsourcing jobs.

Once they put AI trucks on the roads, that will be another 20 million jobs lost.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
AS PREDICTED .....

---

Refresh my memory: were your parents Americans, or were they from other countries?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Please ignore the Russian troll who is an enemy of the United States and wants our country destroyed.

Stop wasting time on this evil cunt.

Kill yourself, Russian troll.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
You'll never end the cheap labor force as long as we're letting people in illegally by the millions and outsourcing jobs.

Once they put AI trucks on the roads, that will be another 20 million jobs lost.

---

I think you might understand that rich Republicans aren't in business to create well-paying jobs for anybody who is not their relatives. Either the Federal Government does the creating or it won't be done. Rich people will NEVER voluntarily pay well. Rich people have to be FORCED to pay well, either by their unionized employees or by the government. Rich people in competition with other Rich people understand that they set the level of wages when employees and government won't. Wage level has no connection to immigration. Never has, never will. Nobody but the Rich seem to understand what is completely obvious, but instead blame anyone except the Rich. Read a book on Economics and you will discover the Economy does not work the way you think it works. The books are free:

https://libgen.unblockit.ltd/search.php?req=Economics+Wells+Krugman

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: You couldn't get me to read two sentences with Krugman's name on them if you paid me a livable wage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Now that the Dems are the party of big business their donors need that cheap labor.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Free ain't cheap enough. You couldn't get me to read two sentences with Krugman's name on them if you paid me a livable wage.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Free ain't cheap enough. You couldn't get me to read two sentences with Krugman's name on them if you paid me a livable wage.

---

Find another free economics book. There are a million of them. Or be an obstinate blockhead who refuses to understand the simplest thing that every rich person in the world knows about America -- wages are set by rich Americans in competition with other rich Americans for employees/slaves, not by how many unemployed are legal/illegal in America. It is a really simple mathematical idea that most Trumptards can never wrap their minds around.

All the free books with Economics in the title:
https://libgen.unblockit.ltd/search.php?req=Economics

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I aced Economics in college.

I'm good.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

I aced Economics in college.

I'm good.

---

Do you think that there will be more jobs and wages will increase if there were fewer illegal workers? That isn't how it works.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Ya know, Second.

For a guy who made hundreds of millions of dollars through 4 years of Trump tax breaks alone, you sure do pirate a LOT of stuff.

---

Quote:

---

whozit:
Now that the Dems are the party of big business their donors need that cheap labor.

CAPTAINNZILCH: As expected... I'm a big fat nothing.

---

Quote:

---

Big Tech and CEOs Poured Millions Into The Election. Here’s Who They Supported
By Sissi Cao and Jordan Zakarin • 11/02/20 12:52pm

... After years of cordial but largely distant relations between Washington, DC and the tech industry, controversial business tactics, accusations of bias, and activism during the Black Lives Matter movement have put giants of Silicon Valley have become front and center in American politics. That profits have soared while the rest of the American economy has struggled throughout the COVID-19 recession has only created more tension. It’s also allowed the big tech companies and their executives to spend a whole lot of money on Tuesday’s elections.

Below, we dive into the big donations from these companies, their employees and their CEOs, which have soared past $50 million this election cycle.
Alphabet

Total contribution: $21 million
Top recipients: Joe Biden, Democrat super PACs
Google’s parent company Alphabet is one of the largest corporate donors during the 2020 election cycle. The company’s employees and PACs have contributed a total of $21 million to presidential and congressional candidates since 2019. Nearly 80 percent of the funds went to Democrats, while just 7 percent went to Republicans. $3.66 million went to the Joe Biden campaign....


Microsoft
Total contribution: $17 million
Top recipients: Joe Biden, Democrat super PACs
Also a major donor in the 2020 election season, Microsoft’s PACs and employees shelled out a total $17 million to presidential and congressional candidates through individual and PAC donations. Three quarters of Microsoft’s funds went to Democrats, and 14 percent went to Republicans....

Amazon
Total contribution: $8.9 million
Top recipients: Joe Biden
The e-commerce giant contributed $8.9 million through individual and PAC donors to federal candidates. ...


Facebook
Total contribution: $6 million
Top recipients: Joe Biden
Employees and PACs affiliated with Facebook donated a total of $6 million during the 2020 election cycle. More than 92 percent of the funds came from individuals. Mirroring Google’s and Microsoft’s partisan splits, Facebook spent nearly 80 percent of the funds on Democrats ...

Apple
Total contribution: $5.7 million
Top recipients: Joe Biden
... About a quarter of the funds ($1.4 million) went to Joe Biden. Bernie Sanders and the DNC trail as the second and third largest beneficiaries, receiving $389,000 and $295,000 respectively.
CEO Tim Cook has not donated to any candidates this year, but did give $236,100 to help Hillary Clinton in 2016.


Netflix
Total contribution: $5.42 million
Top recipients: Democrat super PACs
... Co-CEO Reed Hastings has been a huge Democratic Party booster this cycle. In September, he donated $1 million to Senate Majority PAC, the party’s main US Senate fundraising vehicle, along with another $1 million in June. Hastings has also been very supportive of VoteVets, a PAC supporting military veterans running for office as Democrats, to the tune of $180,000 donated, and was a big backer of Democratic presidential candidates Pete Buttigieg and John Hickenlooper when they ran for the nomination last winter.


Twitter
Total contribution: $689,000
Top recipients: Joe Biden

---

Quote:

---

DNC AND RNC AWASH WITH CASH FROM CORPORATE DONORS

The big bucks sponsorship packages raise sticky questions for both parties as organizers go after major donors to raise money

Last modified on Tue 15 Dec 2020 09.34 EST

Next year’s national political conventions, where Donald Trump and the winner of the Democratic primaries will be enshrined as their parties’ candidates in the 2020 presidential election, will be awash with corporate cash from donors seeking access, their marketing plans reveal.

Organizers of both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions are going after major corporate donors appealing for huge lump sums as they scramble to raise the money needed to bankroll the made-for-television events.

Fundraising materials show that both parties are hoping to lure $1m donations from corporations and wealthy individuals in exchange for access and advertising opportunities.

The big bucks sponsorship packages raise potentially sticky questions for both parties... The scale of the parties’ ambitions is disclosed in marketing materials provided to the Guardian by Documented, a watchdog group that investigates how corporations manipulate public policy.

The host committee for the Republican National Convention pitches its offering in the most enticing language, having set itself a total target of $70m to pay for the bonanza. It promises that “for corporate donors, the sponsorship opportunities can be incredibly valuable”. It lists a range of inducements at the RNC which will showcase Trump’s re-election bid in Charlotte, North Carolina, between 24 and 27 August.

Not only will companies have the chance to project their brands in front of up to 50,000 participants at the convention, including 15,000 members of the global media, but they can also customise packages to their corporate needs “to ensure your convention experience is both enjoyable and beneficial”.

Top-tier sponsors, making a tax-deductible donation of $1m or more, will get VIP access at the convention as well as seats at an “exclusive campaign briefing with 2020 campaign leadership”.

The Democratic National Convention, where the party’s presidential candidate will be nominated, will be held in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from 13 to 16 July. Its host committee has also set itself a target of $70m, though that would be further supplemented by $20m from the Democratic National Convention Committee (DNCC).

Fundraising brochures put out by the host organisation Milwaukee 2020 similarly sets out a tiered approach with the top level lauded as “gold” donors contributing at least $1m each. For that largesse they are promised select advertising opportunities, VIP access and hospitality and tickets to host committee parties.

... That [SANDER'S "PEOPLE POWERED" CAMPAIGN MESSAGE] would appear to conflict with the message being handed out by DNCC officials who have been telling potential donors and lobbyists that their money would be welcomed no matter who the eventual nominee is. As Politico has reported, the DNCC’s chief executive, Joe Solmonese, has taken the view that the event needs to be funded well in advance, with the use of corporate dollars, no matter who is victorious in the Democratic primaries.

“We can’t know and try to, nor can I ever suggest that we ever try to, bend this towards any one candidate’s philosophy,” Solmonese told the news site.

Though the Democrats have a more progressive stance on big money in politics than the modern Republican party, they are by no means immune to the stresses and contradictions that come from welcoming large amounts of corporate cash into their coffers.

The Open Secrets database that tracks money in US politics calculated that almost three-quarters of the $70m raised for the Philadelphia Democratic National Convention that nominated Hillary Clinton in 2016 was raised from just 17 sources.

Among those mega-donors were Facebook, the telecoms company AT&T and health insurer Independence Blue Cross which all gave $1.5m each, and American Airlines and Bank of America donating $1m each. JB Pritzker, the current Democratic governor of Illinois whose fortune comes from the Pritzker family’s ownership of the Hyatt hotel chain, gave a personal donation of $1.3m

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
FIFY

---

Quote:

---

But it wasn’t until the 1886 case Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road that the Court appeared to grant a corporation the same rights as an individual under the 14th Amendment. The case is remembered less for the decision itself—the state had improperly assessed taxes to the railroad company—than for a headnote added to it by the court reporter at the time, which quoted Chief Justice Morrison Waite as saying: “The Court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws applies to these corporations. We are all of opinion that it does.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

But since corporations represent extreme concentrations of wealth, and they pick and choose candidates, you will not find the stomach in either party for limiting the rights of corporations.

As an aside, please note that all of the big tech companies either donated directly, had their chief officers donate directly, or bundled contributions from their employees (or all three) to JOE BIDEN.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Refresh my memory: is there a difference between entering the US legally v entering it illegally?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

One is legal and one is illegal? [ / snark ] Gawd, SpeedBump, you sure do need a lot of hand holding.

“Under Biden's plan - the most sweeping and comprehensive since President Regan's 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act granting some 3 million people legal status (after which California flipped blue), immigrants would be eligible for legal permanent residence after five years, and US citizenship after three more years.“

Back to the thread title (until SIG changes it) it says:

“Great: A President who cares more about corporations and citizens of other countries than Americans”

How about you? Were your parents Americans? Or citizens of other countries?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Refresh my memory: is there a difference between entering the US legally v entering it illegally?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

One is legal and one is illegal? [ / snark ] Gawd, SpeedBump, you sure do need a lot of hand holding.

“Under Biden's plan - the most sweeping and comprehensive since President Regan's 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act granting some 3 million people legal status (after which California flipped blue), immigrants would be eligible for legal permanent residence after five years, and US citizenship after three more years.“

Back to the thread title (until SIG changes it) it says:

“Great: A President who cares more about corporations and citizens of other countries than Americans”

How about you? Were your parents Americans? Or citizens of other countries?

---

So ... you have no answer for why changing the law to REWARD PEOPLE FOR ILLEGAL ENTRY is equal justice compared to those who waited their turn in line, and jumped through all the hoops AHEAD OF TIME to gain LEGAL ENTRY to the US.

As for the thread title: "citizens of other countries" you seem confused about the status of those who made LEGAL ENTRY into the US. They can get a "GREEN CARD" which allows them legal permanent residence, and is the first step to US citizenship. They're still citizens of their home country (and many will STILL be citizens of their home country even after acquiring US citizenship because many countries permit dual citizenship). BUT THEY ALSO HAVE A SPECIAL STATUS IN THE US ...

... because, you know, THEY FOLLOWED THE LAW AND THE LAW GIVES THEM THE RIGHT TO LEGALLY RESIDE HERE.

That's as opposed to those who made ILLEGAL entry who have NO RIGHT to be here at all.

If I can clear up any more of your abundant confusion, let me know. But I'm afraid I have no remedy for your complete dishonesty.

Hello, my name is Karen, and I’m really simple.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

NOW, let's get back to your confusion about the difference between people who enter the country illegally and have no legal rights to be here, v people who are here legally, on the path to citizenship ...
... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

---

Quote:

---

1KIKI:

NOW, let's get back to your confusion about the difference between people who enter the country illegally and have no legal rights to be here, v people who are here legally, on the path to citizenship ...
... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

CAPTAINZILCH

Awww, KIKI? Did you come back and erase most of your original, mostly all caps hysterical rant?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

They were AMERICANS - legal citizens of the US.

Any more questions about their status?

---

Quote:

---

Your parents are from Poland, you said so once. You explained your family was kicked out of Poland and ended up in England. Where, surprise surprise, they were kicked out of their as well. Let's see, where’d you go from there. Oh yeah New York then California.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Your parents are from Poland, you said so once. You explained your family was kicked out of Poland and ended up in England. Where, surprise surprise, they were kicked out of their as well. Let's see, where’d you go from there. Oh yeah New York then California.

---

Nope, you got that wrong, THUGGER.

Go back and read what I posted.
Assuming you can read English.
Assuming you're an American.
Living in America.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

NOW, let's get back to your confusion about the difference between people who enter the country illegally and have no legal rights to be here, v people who are here legally, on the path to citizenship ...
... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CeeCee:

Awww, KIKI? Did you come back and erase most of your original, mostly all caps hysterical rant?

No worries - time to let you and Jack and the other harpy twist for a while.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

NOW, let's get back to your confusion about the difference between people who enter the country illegally and have no legal rights to be here, v people who are here legally, on the path to citizenship ...
... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CeeCee:

Awww, KIKI? Did you come back and erase most of your original, mostly all caps hysterical rant?

No worries - time to let you and Jack and the other harpy twist for a while.

---

Awww CeeCee - did you stop beating your 'wife' yet?

So ... ... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

---

Quote:

---

1KIKI:NOW, let's get back to your confusion about the difference between people who enter the country illegally and have no legal rights to be here, v people who are here legally, on the path to citizenship ...
... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

CAPTNZILCH: Originally posted by CeeCee:
Awww, KIKI? Did you come back and erase most of your original, mostly all caps hysterical rant?
No worries - time to let you and Jack and the other harpy twist for a while.

KIKI: Awww CeeCee - did you stop beating your 'wife' yet?
So ... ... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

THUGR: So if you don't like it Polish Russian Collaborator kiki, fuck you and tough shit. Biden's president now. Your Sig and Jacks racist bigoted hero is gone.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

NOW, let's get back to your confusion about the difference between people who enter the country illegally and have no legal rights to be here, v people who are here legally, on the path to citizenship ...
... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CeeCee:

Awww, KIKI? Did you come back and erase most of your original, mostly all caps hysterical rant?

No worries - time to let you and Jack and the other harpy twist for a while.

---

Awww CeeCee - did you stop beating your 'wife' yet?

So ... ... should people who are here illegally, who have no rights to live here at all, who followed no rules to enter, and are on no path to citizenship, have the same rights as people who followed all the rules and are on the path to citizenship?

A simple yes or no will do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
AS PREDICTED

Quote:

---

Biden To 'Immediately' Send Congress Bill That Would Offer Citizenship To 11 Million Illegals

President-elect Joe Biden will 'immediately' send a legislative package to Congress which would provide a pathway to citizenship for some 11 million illegal immigrants, according to the Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-01-15/biden-to-send-cong
ress-bill-to-legalize-11-million-immigrants-who-lack-documentation according to "immigrants rights activists in communication with the Biden-Harris transition team."

The bill would also provide a shorter pathway to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of people living in the United States under a temporary protected status and/or who qualify under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program who were brought into the US as children.

And in what the Times calls a "significant departure from many previous immigration bills under both Democratic and Republican administrations," the Biden plan would contain zero provisions for stepped-up immigration enforcement and security measures, according to Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center Immigrant Justice Fund, who was informed of the details by Biden staffers.

Both Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris have said their legislative proposal would include a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants in the U.S. without legal status, and The Times has confirmed the bold opening salvo that the new administration plans in its first days doesn’t include the “security first” political concessions of past efforts.

Hincapié, who was co-chair of the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force on Immigration — part of Biden’s outreach to his top primary rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, and his progressive base — said that Biden’s decision to not prioritize additional enforcement measures was probably a result of lessons learned from the Obama administration’s failed attempt to appease Republicans by backing tighter immigration enforcement in hopes of gaining their support for immigration relief. -Los Angeles Times

"On Inauguration Day, President-elect Biden will sign roughly a dozen actions to combat the four crises, restore humanity to our immigration system, and make government function for the people," reads a Saturday memo by incoming Biden chief of staff, Ron Klain, who said the incoming president's agenda included "the immigration bill he will send to Congress on his first day in office."

If Republicans don’t stop this in the Senate, it’s GG for the GOP https://t.co/LEE5OkqqpD
— Jack Posobiec ???? (@JackPosobiec) January 16, 2021

Under BIden's plan - the most sweeping and comprehensive since President Regan's 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act granting some 3 million people legal status (after which California flipped blue), immigrants would be eligible for legal permanent residence after five years, and US citizenship after three more years.

Several immigration activists who spoke with The Times praised the reported scope and scale of the bill and expressed surprise at its ambition. A number of legislators and analysts had predicted that the new administration, at least in its first months in power, would be likely to pursue immigration measures that would stir the least controversy and could be achieved by executive actions rather than legislation. -LA Times

Will it pass?

Given the sweeping changes, Democrats are likely to face serious pushback despite holding slim majorities in both chambers of Congress - and the bill will likely face months of political debate as conservative members and immigration hard-liners push back.

Meanwhile, Texas Democratic Rep. Juaquin Castro said in a Friday call with reporters that he's formulating a bill which would offer illegals immediate protection from deportation and a fast-tracked path to citizenship for essential workers who are undocumented.

"It’s time for essential workers to no longer be treated as disposable, but to be celebrated and welcomed as American citizens," said Castro, adding "If your labor feeds, builds and cares for our nation, you have earned the right to stay here with full legal protection, free from fear of deportation."

And look at this - just in time:

A Honduran migrant caravan is heading to the United States.

Arriving just in time for Joe Biden’s inauguration.

This is the future Democrats’ voted for.

pic.twitter.com/sKy8NHJfkJ
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 15, 2021

---

---