Should Congress OK Funds For Emergency Conditions At The Border?

Jump to Last Post 1-7 of 7 discussions (112 posts)
  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
    Sharlee01posted 8 months ago

    President Trump has requested 4,5 billion to help alleviate growing problems at the border. Last month over 140 thousand immigrants entered the USA.   

    The request includes $3.3 billion to shelter the growing number of migrants and to process and handle their arrival,  $1.1 billion for operations including detention beds and personnel, and $178 million for information technology system upgrades and law enforcement pay adjustments.

    The funds were requested May 2019, as of yet they have not been provided.  It would seem that the recent cry by Democrats that our border facilities are unsuitable for anyone to be housed.  Last week  AOC  referred to the border facilities as nothing but "concentration camps"... So, why does Congress sit on their hands, and not allocate the funds that could help alleviate the very conditions they openly condemn in the media daily?  It appears they care little about helping make conditions better at the border facilities.  Could the Democrats be using this crisis as a political tool? Do they really care about the conditions the migrants are living in or are these people being used as a convenient political stick to bash president Trump with?
    https://hubstatic.com/14575550.jpg

    1. Valeant profile image96
      Valeantposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      His request is reasonable, but trusting Trump to accomplish anything of merit usually backfires.  It's still infrastructure week, two and half years in.  The Democrats show up to accomplish that initiative and he cancels the meeting.

      Government is about compromise.  If Trump really needs this, perhaps he'd be willing to let his lapdog McConnell bring the bi-partisan created election security bill come up for a vote in the Senate.

      But trusting Trump to use the money for what he says it will be for is another question mark.  The man flip flops more than a fish out of water and ignores Congressional directives.  So, with that history, who's to say that he wouldn't try and reallocate that money for his wall and make Congressional Democrats fight him in the courts.

      If he wanted to achieve policy, he should have built a relationship with Congress.  Not just the GOP in Congress, but the Democrats as well.  Instead he insults and blames them for all his criminal activity and shortcomings.

      So in summary, he's untrustworthy, he's inconsistent, and that's before considering he's presiding over a budget that is a trillion dollars over budget during this year and has already initiated a socialist bailout of 16 billion dollars for farmers due to his disastrous trade war with China.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

        "His request is reasonable, but trusting Trump to accomplish anything of merit usually backfires."

        Interesting reply?  I would suppose the Dem's would love to see your vision of Trump misusing the funds. I would think if they allocated the money to help make things better at the border they would get a "feather in their caps" hey would also get a feather if Trumpmisapropraited the money. They would be winners either way. Would they not?

        I won't discuss the rest of your comment, you deflected on to several other subjects?  It is apparent we don't agree on what the president has accomplished, it would be futile to go back and forth on his accomplishments.

        You did not answer either of my questions. Both rather simple straight forward questions.

        Could the Democrats be using this crisis as a political tool? Do they really care about the conditions the migrants are living in or are these people being used as a convenient political stick to bash president Trump with?

        I look forward to hearing your answer to my questions.

        1. Valeant profile image96
          Valeantposted 8 months agoin reply to this

          Simple, if you assume the worst about the Democrats, like you do and write leading questions to fit your narrative.  What I tried to illustrate, were other reasons why policy might not be achievable with the erratic, inconsistent man elected to the White House who has a history of failing to reach bipartisan solutions to the nation's problems.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Val, I pointed out a fact. The Dem's in Congress have not coughed up the cash. Although I think they will. They are getting lots of flack from even the liberal media.  I do dislike the dirty methods the Dem's use when politicking. You got me there... I will tell you a little secret, many are done with the old dirty worn out tricks the Dem's pull out each election. That's why Trump won.

            1. Valeant profile image96
              Valeantposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              Trump is an unreliable negotiating partner...

              Congressional Democrats and Republicans have been in this situation many times before with the president: Trump makes a demand on immigration, congressional leaders negotiate with him and think they’ve struck a deal, and then Trump backtracks or comes out with a wildly different demand.

              This is an administration that has been embroiled in not one, but two, government shutdowns over immigration funding. The December-January government shutdown (the longest in America’s history) was started because Trump changed his mind at the last minute and decided to not accept a government funding bill offered up by House and Senate Republicans because it didn’t have money for his border wall.

              And the three-day shutdown that happened a year earlier in January 2018 stretched out because the president’s constantly shifting whims during negotiations. “I honestly don’t know what is going on,” the lead Democratic negotiator, said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) in the middle of that standoff. “This president is just unable to make a promise and keep it.”

              Part of the reason Democrats have had such a hard time dealing with Trump is because he often agrees with them on one-on-one phone calls or Oval Office meetings, before his staff intervenes. This has happened in talks that have had nothing to do with immigration.

              Earlier this year, Democrats were optimistic they could reach a deal with Trump on an infrastructure deal after the president told Pelosi he “liked” the $2 trillion number she was proposing for a package to repair America’s roads and bridges. A month later, Trump had completely walked away from negotiations in a huff, furious over House Democrats’ investigations of him.

              This is a familiar pattern: Trump says one thing, and does another.  This just happened again.  Pelosi and Trump negotiated something on Friday, then Trump asks for something else entirely that they hadn't even discussed.

              The Dems have been on board with $3.3 billion for humanitarian aid, so saying they were unwilling to 'cough up' the cash is uninformed.  Trump could have made that deal long ago, but as usual, pushes for more and more that causes the deal to fail.  That's why he fails to solve these issues time and time again.  He never sticks to a deal and always flip-flops.

              As for the dirty politicking, your ignorance to Trump breaking campaign finance laws and the laws regarding the use of charitable funds towards his campaign to get elected, as well as having Russia assist him is about as dirty as it gets.  But, apparently, you're not done with those new ones.

      2. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

        I have to say you have a conviction, and you stand by them... I must also say it seems many of the usual liberal users here are easy to chase off. LOL

        1. Randy Godwin profile image92
          Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

          It's easy for them to get disgusted with the right wing posters and decide it's not worth repeating themselves or trying the make the comment simple enough for the right to understand.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image83
            PrettyPantherposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            I'm pretty sure those laws she requested from Don have been posted several times slready. What good would it do to do it again?

            1. Randy Godwin profile image92
              Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              Been there, done that, Pretty. After a while trying to use facts to counteract willful ignorance gets to you.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                Facts that are taken out of context are just hard to take...

            2. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

              Yes they have, I posted them several times for him to view. They just don't sink in. And by the way, your on a new thread of a different subject... Perhaps you would like to answer my questions?

              1. PrettyPanther profile image83
                PrettyPantherposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                No thank you.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  Would have loved to bet you would say that... Do you ever add anything else but two liners?

          2. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Really? It much appears they run from anything that remotely makes them uncomfortable. However, I understand it's hard to look deep into the dark part of any problem, the core where the fault really lies.  I asked a couple of questions, you, as usual, came up with an excuse.

            And yes, many do repeat themselves over and overstating what is merely words out of context. CNN dribble.

            1. Randy Godwin profile image92
              Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              Why doesn't Trump simply take money from projects Congress has set aside money for like he wanted to do for the "Big beautiful wall."?

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                Well, Randy you know we disagree on the wall. No need to go down that path. I look at it as a deterrent to those that want to enter illegally.  Yes, it well appears Trump will not stop coming up with other methods than the normal routs to obtain money. He hopes to solve problems that have been around for a very long time. It's very apparent the normal routes are dead ends...  I love how the man comes up with ways to go around the status quo.  Another reason he won. Some were just over all the crazy do nothing Washington l bloodsuckers.

        2. promisem profile image96
          promisemposted 8 months agoin reply to this

          Such as?

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

            This message was a message in response to Val's comment. I guess I should have added his name. Not sure why you have imposed yourself in our conversation? Hopefully, you will answer the questions I posed. I m not willing to go off subject.

            If Val would like to address my response to him, I will be glad to further my discussion with him in regards to his my feelings about his firmly held belief and opinions.

            1. promisem profile image96
              promisemposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              I believe this is a public forum. I'm not aware that you own it or that I'm forbidden from commenting.

              I believe we have a right to know the person or persons you are mocking in your comment.

              You created this subject. If you don't want a response to something you write in a public forum, then don't write it.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                No, I never claimed to own it.  I also could care less about how you conduct yourself on any given forum. I forgot you are  HP conscience.

                "I believe we have a right to know the person or persons you are mocking in your comment."

                The Congress in this case. To be more specific the Democratic majority. I thought my statement was pretty clear.  Making mention of the Dem's frequently in my opening blurb.

                If I was unclear in my blurb. I hope to clear that put. I was pointing the finger at the Congress, which is a majority of Dem's.  I was clear in my opinion that I feel they have little care for the migrants due to their lack of doing anything to aid in helping the humanitarian needs at the border. But, don't worry I think they will soon allocate the cash. I am not the only one pointing the finger. The media is on the case, even fake news CNN.

                1. Randy Godwin profile image92
                  Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  So why didn't the Cons fix this when they had the House and the Senate, Shar? You don't put any blame on their indecisiveness?

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    Don't even go there... I have as much animosity for the Reps in office. Are you kidding,  This problem has been around for so long it's ridiculous. But it's not Pep that are holding up humanitarian funds, and bitching about the inhumane conditions. This is he here and now.

    2. gmwilliams profile image83
      gmwilliamsposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      No,  Trump should send all of them back.  America is in a deficit.  We can't afford to have tax monies fund this.  Just send them back.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

        I am of the opinion that any and all migrants that have been deemed to not have a ligitimate asylum claim or crossed illegally into the country that did not intend to make an asylum claim should be deported with good speed.

        Our current laws support this opinion but are slow to be enforced. We need to overhaul our immigration laws, and actually, limit how many persons we will appoint asylum to.   I have been unable to locate any law that covers the number of people we give asylum to. 

        And yes America is in a deficit, our National debt should be considered above all in the decision in regards to how many are too many...  This is common sense, unfortunately, it seems many are not willing to have a good common sense look at the ugliest part of the immigration problem, and that is we can't even afford to continue down the path we are on.   And  I agree with you. At this time with the current deficit and the many problems, we as American citizens face we need to take a long look at where our tax dollars are being.  The mindset of many citizens is what scares me more than anything.

  2. Live to Learn profile image81
    Live to Learnposted 8 months ago

    Their lead feet on this crisis leads me to believe they don't want to alleviate suffering. Why act when the ongoing crisis gives them so much political fodder?

    1. Ken Burgess profile image90
      Ken Burgessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      Lets try to define the Crisis.

      What - Tens of Millions of people trying to cross the Southern Border of America, this year, and every year in the foreseeable future.

      Who - People emanating from all over the globe, not just from Central America, though that is where the entry point seems to be for those from Africa or the Middle East as they make their journey northward.

      Why - Opportunity for jobs and benefits, our government welfare systems provide legal and illegal immigrants more in food, housing, schooling, etc. than they could ever hope to gain in their own country.

      When - now and forever more, until our country is no longer a leading economy in the world, or until it no longer offers support and benefits once they are here, only jail and deportation.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image92
        Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

        Are you claiming those from African and the Middle east are coming across our southern border, Ken? Trump claimed the same but none were apprehended thus far.

        1. Ken Burgess profile image90
          Ken Burgessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

          I suggest you research that a bit more.

          https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/16/us/b … maine.html

          1. Randy Godwin profile image92
            Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Your link requires me to create an account before reading the article, Ken. Don't want one...

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this
            2. Ken Burgess profile image90
              Ken Burgessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              "SAN ANTONIO — For months, a migrant-services center blocks from the Alamo in downtown San Antonio has been packed with Central American families who have crossed the border in record-breaking numbers.

              But in recent days, hundreds of migrants from another part of the world have caused city officials already busy with one immigrant surge to scramble on a new and unexpected one. Men, women and children from central Africa — mostly from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Angola — are showing up at the United States’ southwest border after embarking on a dangerous, months long journey."

            3. GA Anderson profile image92
              GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              I have reached my free article limit too Randy. And I don't intend to subscribe either, but ...

              Here is the article title: A New Migrant Surge at the Border, This One From Central Africa

              I also recently saw a news video clip at the border where the group surrounding the interviewer spoke of being from Africa.

              GA

              1. profile image75
                Hxprofposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                There's a huge weakness on our southern border, and the world is responding.

                1. GA Anderson profile image92
                  GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  I disagree Hxprof. I think the "huge weakness" is in our immigration laws.

                  For instance, as frequently cited; the Un Article 31, page 29 is used to demand that all asylum seekers are afforded certain processes. But, a primary determinant of that article is the word "direct;" '... coming directly from ..."

                  That "directly from..." doesn't seem to be a part of U.S.law, (I only looked briefly), but I think it is an important consideration.

                  If an asylum seeker has multiple country options to seek asylum, (as is the case in all but Mexican asylum seekers), in a "safe" country prior to their arrival at our U.S. border I don't think the U.N. protocols tie our hands as many claim.

                  GA

                  1. profile image75
                    Hxprofposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    "If an asylum seeker has multiple country options to seek asylum, (as is the case in all but Mexican asylum seekers), in a "safe" country prior to their arrival at our U.S. border I don't think the U.N. protocols tie our hands as many claim."

                    Thanks for reminding me about that.  My understanding of international law is that a migrant is SUPPOSED to seek asylum in the nearest safe country, so I have wondered why the US hasn't been more stringent in insisting upon that.

                    At any rate, Belize and Costa Rica are both closer to Guatemala and Honduras than the US, and at least as safe as Mexico.  So again, I strongly question the motives of those traveling through Mexico to get to the US.  Are the majority of them truly seeking asylum, or are the vast majority of them fleeing poverty? If most of them are seeking asylum, the closer places are clearly the way to go.

                    The fact that so many travel so incredibly far to gain "asylum" tells me that few are actually seeking asylum.  And yes, many people fleeing poverty will indeed take great risks just as they would fleeing persecution, so the distance they travel to get to the States is NOT an indicator that they're seeking asylum. 

                    You've helped me unload a couple things that have been on my mind with this subject.

      2. Live to Learn profile image81
        Live to Learnposted 8 months agoin reply to this

        Has the rhetoric perpetrated by the Democratic party not been designed to lead those people to believe that our borders were going to drop so many might not have headed this way during that time span.

        We had a problem. The democrats exacerbated it by giving false hope.

      3. Don W profile image82
        Don Wposted 8 months agoin reply to this

        Let me correct this for you.

        The real crisis is the fact that vulnerable people, including children, are being detained in places with conditions that make them essentially concentration camps.

        And the fact that children are dying, and being abused, while in the government's custody.

        And the fact that children have been separated from their families to serve as an illegal "deterrent" to others, and still not reunited with their families even after the courts have ordered they must be.

        And the fact that all the above has been aggravated, and in many cases directly caused, by the Trump administration's treatment of immigrant families and children.

        You and wilderness getting upset because lots of (mostly) brown people have decided they want to try for a better life in the United States, is not a "crisis".

        Immigrant families and children are not the crisis. The conditions they have been placed in  for simply possessing the ability to hope for a better life, is the crisis.

        Hope that clarifies..

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

          Ken was right - the real crises is that millions upon millions of people are entering the country illegally. 

          Not that they are put into "concentration camps" no matter how you try to spin it, for there are no concentration camps in the US. 

          No children are abused in our custody, and while a handful die that is not unexpected considering what they have been through and the health care they've received during their tenure outside the US.  Pretending we are at fault does not make it so.

          We have separated children from parents for centuries when the parents are incarcerated, and so has every other country in the world.  Again, this is not a "crises", particularly as if the parents (or abductors) were not performing illegal acts it would not happen at all.

          Trump has mistreated no one - that he follows the law is to his credit.

          And with the comment that I and Ken are racists because we object to open borders, I'm out of here.  You know as well as I do that color makes no difference, any more than religious beliefs did when Trump shut down travel from terrorist harboring countries that did not vet their travelers.  Such comments are offensive in the extreme and serve only to deflect attention when you have nothing else to offer.  Shame.

          1. Don W profile image82
            Don Wposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Declaring something is true, just because you've said it, seems to be what passes for meaningful discourse with you and Ken. So I'll do the same.

            "Ken was right"

            No he wasn't.

            "there are no concentration camps in the US"

            Yes there are.

            "No children are abused in our custody"

            Children have been abused in our custody.

            "Trump has mistreated no one"

            Yes he has.

            On the whole, not supporting views with facts is quite liberating. It makes things so much easier. I might do it more often.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

      I think they will act on allocating the funds. the media is starting to point out their inhumanity. Even the Fake News media.

    3. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      First, there is no "crisis" on the border - just ask any liberal.

      Second, when suffering can be used to gain political points, and Trump cam be blamed for Democrat failures, then suffering must take a back seat.  Politics and political power first, always.

      1. Randy Godwin profile image92
        Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

        So what did the Cons do when they had both Senate and Congress about the problem, Dan? They seem to want to do nothing when they have the power, but complain when the Dems only have one house. Please explain why this is.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

          I think we have a draw... Let's put it this way. The problem has been around a very long time. Its time something is done, and at least Trump is taking measures to try and fix the growing problem. His measures may not be to everyone's liking. But he is bringing this ugly mess where it belongs out in the open.  Guess he just won't learn to be a politician.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            No, he will never be a good politician.  All too ready and willing to bring the failures of Congress, whatever party you might assign it to, right out in the open for all to see.  And that's not how you play the game!

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

              Agree, The time was long overdue that someone did. I knew he was the mn to do it.

              I will save this comment and quote it. It pretty much explains why I voted for Trump in a few sentences.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                You and millions of others.  What American politics has become is unacceptable, and a change, any change is necessary if we are to survive as a nation.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  Totally agree,  we have a good start with Trump, and hopefully, the Dem's continue down the path leading to socialism. It will be the last nail in the coffin.  One can see it's business as usual with the dirty politicking, poor"Uncle Joe". They have started the usual battering... He is a racist, what next? Maybe his sexual abuse of women? Oh, they already used that one. How about going after his family? That one too... Maybe his taxes? Have they pulled that out of the old hat yet?  Poor sleepy Joe.

                  1. profile image75
                    Hxprofposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    It seems to me that Sleepy Joe is being targeted by the far left, though I'm open to being corrected.

        2. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

          Not sure what that has to do with anything at all.  Are you suggesting that because someone else failed to do their duty as lawmakers Democrats must do the same, all while whining about Trump not providing billions to care for illegal aliens?  Are they expecting him to do it out of his pocket when they don't provide the funding necessary to fix the problem they're whining about?

          1. Randy Godwin profile image92
            Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Yes I am, you and others blame the Dems for the crisis on the border, but what did the Cons do when they had the majority in both houses and the POTUS. Why did they not do something with that much control?

  3. Randy Godwin profile image92
    Randy Godwinposted 8 months ago

    I just wish Mexico would hurry up and pay for the wall. What are they waiting for? Didn't they hear Trump when he said they would? I know he wouldn't lie about something so important.

    1. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

      Neither would Obama about "you can keep your doctor"...

      1. Randy Godwin profile image92
        Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

        Do you even know why the promise wasn't kept, Shar?

        1. promisem profile image96
          promisemposted 8 months agoin reply to this

          I kept my doctor. So did everyone else I know.

          Some people were given a choice: 1) keep their doctor under a different insurance company or 2) go to a new doctor under their same insurance company.

          I kept my doctor under a new insurance company.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Did you apply for Obama care?

            1. promisem profile image96
              promisemposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              Not when it first came out 10+ years ago. I started going through the ACA exchange several years ago to get better prices. I still kept my doctor.

          2. Live to Learn profile image81
            Live to Learnposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            If you went through Obama care how did the costs compare to your previous plan?

            1. promisem profile image96
              promisemposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              It was quite a while ago, so I don't remember many details. Back then I had a high-deductible plan ($10,000+) with an HSA account and eventually switched to a plan that didn't qualify for an HSA. The premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etcetera, were apples and oranges.

              1. Live to Learn profile image81
                Live to Learnposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                I'll tell you. When I went to get a plan it was quoted at $700+ per month for a plan similar to the one I had at work for $200 a month. Anyone who can afford $700 doesn't need a government insurance exchange and whoever needs a government insurance exchange can't afford $700 a month

        2. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

          No, I would assume it was a political promise that was never meant to be kept. You know like Mexico will pay for the wall. By the way, have you has a look at the new trade agreement with Mexico. Not the est, but so much better than it was...

          1. Randy Godwin profile image92
            Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            I didn't think you knew why or you wouldn't use that as an excuse. The Republicans fought this part of the bill tooth and nail and Obama finally had to negotiate with them causing him to not keep his promise.

            But if you want to compare Obama's "lie" with Trump's "Mexico will pay for the wall," then have at it.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

              I compared political promises. Simple as that  They all make them.

  4. Randy Godwin profile image92
    Randy Godwinposted 8 months ago

    Trump is vowing to veto the bill just passed by Congress to help alleviate the border mess. What a guy!

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      What did the bill encompass?  Most such bills include either pork barrel spending or completely untenable requirements/conditions - did it require open borders, accepting any and all border crossers as citizens?

      I'd be interested in just what that bill proposes to accomplish; obviously it is beyond "helping to alleviate the border mess".

    2. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

      He may sign it. I read the bill looks straight forward. Perhaps something has been added?

      https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr3401/text

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 8 months agoin reply to this

        He might - as you say it appears a straight forward effort to fund supporting illegals until they can enter our justice system.

        Or he might refuse, thinking that the money is better spent keeping them out of the country in the first place rather than caring for and supporting them after they've broken the law.

        Should we spend a trillion dollars supporting illegal aliens (to be repeated every few years) or spend half that taking steps to keep them out in the first place?  Tough choice...

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

          "Or he might refuse, thinking that the money is better spent keeping them out of the country in the first place rather than caring for and supporting them after they've broken the law."

          In my opinion, It is clear we are unable to enforce our immigration laws. Trump's policies would work to deter those that have no real asylum claim.

          "Should we spend a trillion dollars supporting illegal aliens (to be repeated every few years) or spend half that taking steps to keep them out in the first place?  Tough choice..."  No, I don't think we should. I feel we should spend some money to deter migrants from making the trip. If they want to claim asylum it would be less costly for us to have some form of system to apply in their countries of origin. Realistically some counties would not permit it   I would like to see the wall built, a barrier would be the best deterrent.

          I do think we have an emergency, and something should be done to put a bandaid on it. With the election right around the cornor, there is  littlle chance the Dems will cooperate with Trump on anything. Although I think he will win once again, and if the crisis is left to continue, he will have the support to fix our immigration laws.

          1. savvydating profile image93
            savvydatingposted 8 months agoin reply to this

            Sharlee....To your point about Dems cooperating or not...AOC, Omar,  Tlaib & Pressley (Pressley who?) voted against the bill in the House today, June 26, 2019. They said they "will oppose any funding from Trump’s Administration." So much for caring about illegal immigrant children.
            And for those who don't know, AOC's photo op-ed, wherein she wore white clothing and bright red lipstick, her eyes drenched in tears, fiercely hugging other onlookers as the cameras snapped close-up pictures of her face....those were taken at a facility before she was even elected.

            Anyway, Trump is thinking of vetoing the Bill because it still leaves the door wide open for the trafficking of children, and it contains other problems which do not address fixing the other problems at the border...
            But AOC, Rashid and Omar made no mention of that, naturally. Their only beef is with Trump as president, or so they say..

            And the latest? Wayfair, the manufacturing company, is protesting having their beds purchased by the Trump administration (for illegal immigrant children). Wow! Somehow their refusal to provide beds for children they claim to care about is somehow supposed to make a point and provide a remedy for children who are sleeping on concrete? Good job, Wayfair! Well, at least I know who I won't be any buying goods from.

            Only six months ago, Democrats in Congress accused Trump of manufacturing this border crises. Now they say there is a huge crises at the border and it's all Trump's fault. Get your story straight, people. You're like the boy who cried wolf. Much worse, in fact. What a bunch of hypocrites.

            1. GA Anderson profile image92
              GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              "And the latest? Wayfair, the manufacturing company, is protesting having their beds purchased by the Trump administration (for illegal immigrant children). "

              We must have differing sources Savvydating. The sources I found have the worker's protesting the Wayfair sale of mattresses and beds to a Baptist charity associated with the detention camps.

              The company didn't protest, all the social media warriors that have a keyboard protested.

              If you aren't going to buy from a company you should at least be sure of your reasons for that choice.

              GA

              1. savvydating profile image93
                savvydatingposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                I stand corrected. It appears Wayfair, the company, will provide beds despite the opposition of some Trump hating employees. One would think there would be no reason to protest illegal immigrants finally getting beds....but who I am to reason why.....
                https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wa … n-n1022201

            2. Valeant profile image96
              Valeantposted 8 months agoin reply to this

              Yeah, and only three in the GOP voted for the bill.  Yet, you ignore the 191 GOP House members who were uncooperative on passing a bill to get aid to children.  Talk about focused hatred.  Was it that they were Democrats? Freshman members?  Women?  Minorities?  What's the hatred about that you single out four and ignore the other 191 that voted against the bill?  I'd sure like to know.

              And of course Trump will veto the bill.  He cannot give the Democrats a victory by accepting their version of the aid package.  So he'll let the kids suffer a little longer so the Senate can be seen as taking the lead on the issue.  Politics over morality is all he's about.

              When you implement policies that change the asylum process, as this administration has done, without understanding the backlog of humanity that it will cause, the case that the border crisis is partly made by Trump has merit.  Especially when there was no request for additional funds to handle the holding of so many migrants prior to the change in policies.  It's like his stupid shutdown.  He had no idea how his policy would affect the economics of individual Americans or things like air traffic control.

              1. Live to Learn profile image81
                Live to Learnposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                Are we to ignore the fact that there is ample documented evidence that the asylum process is being sorely abused? Are we to ignore the fact that Congress has allowed the problem to fester for so long? I think all Trump has done is implement a system that showcases the problem that was not of his making.

                Don't think the administration didn't understand the ramifications of a government shutdown. We've had enough for the consequences to be well documented.

                1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  President Trump has made many take a good long hard look at a festering problem. A problem that many just don't want to accept exists.

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image92
                    Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    Indeed, a problem he's made worse with his scare tactics and family separation..

              2. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                It was the GOP that requested a bill from Congress for emergency funds due to a humanitarian crisis? humanitarian   

                "Yeah, and only three in the GOP voted for the bill.  Yet, you ignore the 191 GOP House members who were uncooperative on passing a bill to get aid to children.  Talk about focused hatred.  Was it that they were Democrats? Freshman members?  Women?  Minorities?  What's the hatred about that you single out four and ignore the other 191 that voted against the bill?  I'd sure like to know."

                The Gop in the Senate has added amendments and passed the bill. I.  The amendments are straight forward and should not hold up the bill.  The bill has been passed back to Congress to consider new amendments.  Hopefully, it passes. I have added a link to the amendments that the Senate requested. I assume you read the bill the Congress put forth.

                https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr3401/text

                IT's our current immigration laws and the fact we don't enforce them that is causing overcrowding.  and actually, if you read the new bill, it will stand as an open invitation for more migrants to make the trip... I am not disputing we need to pass this bill. We have an emergency... However, we had better work on needed changes in our immigration policies.

                1. Valeant profile image96
                  Valeantposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  ...which 'we (a bi-partisan bill created by the gang of eight that modified immigration policies)' did and the GOP's Tea Party pressured Congress to not bring to the floor for a vote.  It's not all members of Congress holding up immigration reform, it's the far-right wing of the GOP.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    I prefer to converse on a serious crisis we are facing today. It just serves no purpose to point fingers at the past mistakes. It is very apparent due to this festering long time problem we have many we could lame for our current situation.   The politicians on both sides are doing a great job at stirring up hysteria to hide the problem they created...    It is also clear to me there is plenty of blame to go around.  We need this problem solved, and now.

            3. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

              "To your point about Dems cooperating or not...AOC, Omar,  Tlaib & Pressley (Pressley who?) voted against the bill in the House today, June 26, 2019. They said they "will oppose any funding from Trump’s Administration."

              Yes, it appears they are taking an inhumane stance on the current problem in regards to the crisis at the border.  Omar stated, "I can not throw more money at the very organizations committing human rights abuses".

              These women seem willing to let many suffer to make their point? Is this the kind of Congresspersons we really want? The problem is serious,  I don't agree with our old out of date current immigration laws. However, I do realize we have a humanity problem, and yes it is unfortunate this problem is of our own government's lack of facing and fixing immigration problems.

              " So much for caring about illegal immigrant children"

              You hit it on the head... Trump asked for humanitarian funds over two months ago. In my opinion the Dem's have ignored the problem, actually two months ago they denied there was a crisis. Called it contrived, made up. They saved this little gem to handle when they felt would politically help their party. My, did they make a big mistake... Their timing was severely off. It is clear they showed they care little about the very children they are now are using as political pawns. They had hoped to look like heroes. But just the opposite has occurred.  Over the past month, 140 thousand more immigrants have poured in the country. 

              I think he may sign the bill, I think he is sincere in wanting to help those in need right now.  I have read the bill and its new Republican amendments. This bill is int solving the root of the problem. In fact, it will be an attractive invitation for more migrants to make the trip. Ultimately it will make the on slot of migrants walking over our border worse.worse. We will be setting new laws that in some cases give migrants better rights than citizens. The bill is straight forward and will if enforced create a very pleasant facility as well as very good legal, financial support while an immigrant waits for their decision on their asylum claims.

              " Wayfair, the manufacturing company, is protesting having their beds purchased by the Trump administration (for illegal immigrant children). "

              It is not the company that is protesting the sales of mattresses. It there employees. Wayfair did sell the government the mattresses. Once again it seems the protesters care little about the crisis, the children? They care about making a point by using the suffering of children. This is very sad, it shows a real lack of thought process of these protesters.  In my opinion, when it comes to children, we need to care for them, be their voices. They just don't have the ability to fight for themselves.

              Hopefully, I have not offended you. We are on the same page... We need our immigration laws enforced while we work on changing them. We need to solve the current humanitarian crisis and work on deterring migrants from coming. Like you have said we have children being sold, and drugs pouring in, not to mention criminals making their way into our counties.

              And I agree with you. President Trump did not create this problem. It has been around for a very long time. he just brought it into the light of day.. And many would have preferred he had not.

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
                Kathryn L Hillposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                Worth repeating:

                We need our immigration laws enforced while we work on changing them. We need to solve the current humanitarian crisis and work on deterring migrants from coming. ... we have children being sold, and drugs pouring in, not to mention criminals making their way into our counties ... President Trump did not create this problem. It has been around for a very long time. He just brought it into the light of day."  Sharlee01

              2. savvydating profile image93
                savvydatingposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                Sharlee....No offence taken. It was my mistake regarding Wayfair. That's what happens when I watch a coverage too fast and fail to check sources before making a comment. GA pointed out my error and I replied that "I stand corrected." (That is not to say I feel obliged to anyone who thinks  comments about bj's is in anyway appropriate or "funny.") A different post....

                On a much more positive note, I am thankful to Kathryn Hill, who has highlighted your comment regarding the humanitarian crisis at the border, which is of great concern to all conservatives. That being said, if the Democrats in Congress choose to allocate money only for beds and facilities for illegal immigrants, but refuse to address the asylum laws which have caused this crisis in the first place, then indeed, we are merely putting a bandage on a gaping wound.
                Obviously, or at least it should be obvious to most Americans, we need to fix our immigration laws once and for all. Otherwise, all we end up doing is allocating money for more and more beds and more and more facilities until one day, the entire state of Texas (and perhaps New Mexico and Arizona) is just one big detention facility, in which case the Democrats will once again feign horror towards Republicans who are "doing nothing." 
                Trump is trying to solve this crisis....but he is not part of the establishment. Consequently, Pelosi, in asking for two weeks, has outwitted him. Nonetheless, that gives me full confidence that president Trump actually wants to fix the problem, unlike the Democrats, who are merely playing chess.

              3. GA Anderson profile image92
                GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                Hopefully, I have not offended you. "

                What a spineless statement Sharlee01. Now honest discussion has to be conditioned on 'not offending' someone. Did you miss the turn to the hallway to the choir room?)

                (sorry Ms. I am still steaming from PrettyPanther's ban)

                I need a martini. This is just too much. If someone is offended by a contrary opinion then I think they should look for a safe space on Reddit instead of posting in a Political and Social Issues forum.

                Maybe we should rename this forum "The Choir Room." We could split it up and have a Democrat Political and Social Issues Choir Room and a Republican Political and Social Issues Choir Room.

                Then I could be an equal-opportunity offender and pee in the Cheerios of each room.

                GA

                1. IslandBites profile image86
                  IslandBitesposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  PP was banned? Why?! SMH

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image92
                    Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    Still waiting for the explanation from Matt the head moderator. No one has a clue...

                  2. GA Anderson profile image92
                    GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    I don't know why, I only heard about it from Randy.

                    GA

                2. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  GA.  Spineless?  I am trying to dial it back. In the near past, it got very ugly.in some threads. Just reevaluating making an attempt to just keep to my opinion and facts when possible, try not to be snarky and insult anyone else's opinion. I was becoming a pro at snarky. I noted I was responding like those that I was accused of being rude and insulting.

                  I can see my opinion is not well accepted as a rule. I am not blind to the fact that there are many liberal-minded folks here, and are passionate in their opinions. It'appears that there is little room for any opposing options on most of the political and Social threads here at HP.  And I must say they do a good job when they have the need to rally to massacre anyone that posts something they don't appreciate.

                  I can't imagine you have not read some of my responses to others here on HP?  I don't think some that have gone a few rounds with me would call me a Choirgirl?   It's a very nice compliment compared to some of the vague insults  I have received.   

                  So, finally to why I offered my statement.  "Hopefully, I have not offended you".  I saw a human being that is very passionate in her beliefs and is putting it out there for all to see. She is not afraid to go right to the shocking ugliness of a problem. She does not stay on a peripheral of a problem. She smacks ya right in the forehead with it.

                  I did not want to offend her.  Partly as you see we are very much on the same page on the subject of the immigration problem. Second, I find her refreshing, not at all afraid to stand behind her beliefs.

                  As a rule, I don't apologize, as a rule, I fight the good fight. There just was no fight here. I respect what she said. I guess I felt a bit of a connection to this woman and her opinion. 

                  You know it's not such a bad idea to split it up, a Democrat Political and Social Issues Choir Room and a Republican Political and Social Issues Choir Room.  Maybe not, it might get boring?

                  (sorry Ms. I am still steaming from PrettyPanther's ban)

                  Are you accusing me of having PrettyPanther banned? Not my bud, I have only reported one person and he knows who he is because I openly told him I reported him.  You have the wrong propagandist... 

                  Sorry GA,  I can't stop being kind just because it bugs you. maybe you could just look the other way. I mean come on I piss lots of people off too.

                  1. Randy Godwin profile image92
                    Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    I'm pleased it wasn't you who reported PP, Shar. smile Who did and the reason for is a mystery.

                  2. savvydating profile image93
                    savvydatingposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    Thank you for the kind words, Sharlee. Not everyone appreciates my passion. Lol. I'll direct a brief comment to GA.

                  3. GA Anderson profile image92
                    GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    I just discovered this comment Sharlee. I hope you have seen my explanation and apology by now.

                    I don't like to apologize either, but when I am wrong I am usually very wrong, and an apology is not an inappropriate penance.

                    GA

                3. savvydating profile image93
                  savvydatingposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  Not cool, GA. Sharlee did nothing to you. She's a classy lady.....and she deserves better than the "spineless" comment you hurled at her. She is anything but and you KNOW that!

                  The spineless ones are the trolls, of which there are many around here.

                  I know what she means when she says it can be easy to become snarky on forums. I have had to bring myself back from the brink as well. We do that by having manners. Manners are a good thing. We should all try to have more of them.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image92
                    GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    You are right Savvydating. I was wrong. Sharlee's comment just happened to be a target I vented on. She didn't deserve it and will receive my apology.

                    GA

                4. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

                  GA,  Could you please tell me why you feel I was the culprit that reported PP?  I have had very little communication with her.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image92
                    GA Andersonposted 8 months agoin reply to this

                    Sharlee I didn't think you were the one that reported PrettyPanther.

                    I reacted very poorly to her banning and took it out on your comment.

                    Except for the appearance that my comment was directed at you as the perpetrator, I stand by my thought that a political discussion forum is no place for the thin-skinned. But my method of saying so--by directing my anger at you-- was wrong and tasteless.

                    I hope you will accept my apology.

                    GA

        2. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

          I think he will sign it due to being aware for months that the problem was getting worse, and really wanting to help this humanitarian problem. he asked for a bill six months ago.  The Dems were just not willing to help, most stating there was no crisis. That Trump was manufacturing the crisis... The Dems just may have sat on the problem, and watched it get worse. I hope he asks for the bill to be amended. Have you noticed media is not giving many details on the bill nor is Congress on either side? One can read the entire bill as well as GOP amendments online. I posted the link on a previous comment.

          This bill is an open invitation to migrant, showing them they will be more than well taken care of if they can just get across our border. All of their needs, housing, food medical care, even legal representation will be on our tax dime after the president sins that bill...  Dems are a deceptive bunch fight in the dirt. It would be hard to believe they did not realize the horrific problems that have been going on for some months due to overcrowding at the border facilities. They saw a situation were Trump would e dammed if he does not sign the bill or dammed if he doesn't. And they could care less about"the children"... Only about having their political scam play out.

          "Should we spend a trillion dollars supporting illegal aliens" You have said a mouth full...  With this bill, we are going too. But in the end, in a very short time, the liberals will see this plan to let people pour into the country is going to cause so many problems they had not considered. Too many to mention. But that's OK the liberals can come up with a new ideal to chase. A new plan to fix the new problems that come with taking in so many migrants that will add trillions to our bulging debt. First, they can blame Trump for the huge debt, that's a given. Then they can demand new immigration laws, and demand they be enforced. LOL
          It's laughable but realistically so sad.

          One need only to have watched the debate late night to see the troubles that would come if any Dem wins the next election. My god, what a bunch.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEjRkGVyNsY

      2. Randy Godwin profile image92
        Randy Godwinposted 8 months agoin reply to this

        Supposedly--heard a bit on TV--the Senate bill is bi-partisan and may have a chance to pass.  Hopefully...

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 8 months agoin reply to this

          It passed the Senate yesterday with a slight amendment and was sent back to the House. It will be interesting to see if Trump will this bill sign it. I think most likely he will. If he practices what he preaches. He asked for humanitarian funds and declared the problem at the border a Humanitarian crisis. This bill although will help right now with the crisis, it will stand as an invitation and look very attractive to migrant to make the trip and claim asylum.

          View amendments
          https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr3401/text

          Basically, this bill will help the overcrowding at the border.   However, It is just a needed bandaid. It will definitely in the long run not deter more migrants from presenting themselves at the points of entry as well as just passing into the country illegally.  It is a great new invitation. It's sort of dammed if we do and dammed if we don't.

          We currently have people that need humanitarian help,  we can't turn our backs on that fact. However, it's time to work on deterrents to cut down the numbers that make the trip...  We need to overhaul our immigration laws and enforce them.

          At this point, we just can't afford financially to open borders to all that apply. Our national debt is huge, and the immigration problems stand to make it worse.  Yes, we have always been a nation that has been caring and humane. But times have changed, and this is a unique problem that will ultimately have to be considered differently than we did in the past.

          GA pointed out a vivid scenario using a full boat of survivors. If we have a boat with 100 survivors,  and there was one more would definitely sink the boat causing the death of 101 souls. This one person would die one way or the other. Do we all go down with the boat? Could we just cut down who is in the water, for the benefit of all?

  5. GA Anderson profile image92
    GA Andersonposted 8 months ago

    Hi Hxprof,

    Just a note to make one point clear. I am not disputing that the immigrants arriving at our border maybe/are legitimate asylum seekers. And I am not even demanding that the asylum criteria be strictly fear of death. I am fine with the five critia currently being used.

    My only intended point is that the UN protocol does not seem to mandate they be treated as asylum seekers, (as in automatic assumption and accommodation), if our border is not the first safe country they enter from the one they are fleeing.

    If that point is valid, then I think we could change our own asylum processes to better deal with the current crisis -- without being inhuman orgres.

    GA

  6. IslandBites profile image86
    IslandBitesposted 8 months ago

    The asylum officers tasked with implementing a Trump administration policy that forces migrants seeking asylum to wait in Mexico until their requests are processed are now urging a U.S. appeals court to block it.

    The officers said in a brief Wednesday that the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) measure, also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, abandons the country’s longstanding tradition “of providing a safe haven to the persecuted and violates our international and domestic legal obligations.”

    “Moreover, the MPP is entirely unnecessary, as our immigration system has the foundation and agility necessary to deal with the flow of migrants through our Southern Border,” they continued. “The system has been tested time and again, and it is fully capable — with additional resources where appropriate — of efficiently processing asylum claims by those with valid claims while removing those that are not entitled to protection after they undergo the process designed to ensure that they will not be returned to a place where they will be persecuted.”

    “The MPP, contrary to the administration’s claim, does nothing to streamline the process, but instead increases the burdens on our immigration courts and makes the system more inefficient,” they continued, while also blasting the policy’s directives as “fundamentally contrary to the moral fabric of our nation and our international and domestic legal obligations.”

    “Asylum officers are duty bound to protect vulnerable asylum seekers from persecution,” the officers said. “However, under the MPP, they face a conflict between the directives of their departmental leaders to follow the MPP and adherence to our nation’s legal commitment to not returning the persecuted to a territory where they will face persecution.”

    Under the policy, which was implemented in January, asylum seekers are required to establish a “reasonable fear” of persecution or torture in Mexico in order to be able to stay in U.S. custody as their requests are processed. But prior to the policy’s implementation, migrants seeking asylum were able to remain in U.S. custody while their asylum requests were being reviewed.

    1. profile image75
      Hxprofposted 8 months agoin reply to this

      And furthermore they were free to not show up for their hearings. These officers are entirely aware of the huge downside to the old policy.

  7. Valeant profile image96
    Valeantposted 7 months ago

    Worth a read to hear about the neglect that was allowed under this administration...

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … en/593224/

    1. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      The article gave what I would think a good description of the conditions of the facilities as well as the children that are living in these conditions. I would have hoped these children would have received help many months ago before it got this bad. I can only give my feelings on this situation, and I feel these children were used as pawns by the Dem Congress. They were told in hearings by border officials how bad the conditions were, they had the sheer numbers of how many were in these facilities and how many were being added every day. The Dems were all over the media stating Trump was concocting a crisis. No one will ever convince me they did not know of the conditions. I have said it before, and once again I will say it. I have never witnessed such an evil bunch in my life. They could care less about these children, it's business as usual. Tricks scams, and dirt... That's all the Dems in Washington have to offer. 

      They did nothing... Now they are trying to blame Trump for this mess, and. trying to stir their base into hysteria. Time to fix our immigration laws. Contact your representatives and demand they do their jobs. It's up to Congress to create change in the laws, not Trump. Time to wake up and put the blame where it belongs.

      1. Valeant profile image96
        Valeantposted 7 months agoin reply to this

        The people who did nothing seem to be the ones in charge of the facilities or within the administration.  But in typical Trump supporter fashion, continue to blame Democrats.  Remind us again how many migrant children died when the Democrats held the presidency again...

        https://www.yahoo.com/news/stuff-nightm … 20812.html

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 7 months agoin reply to this

          My gosh,  As I said Trump warned of the situation in Dec of 2018. Many border officials have been questioned before Congress. They have been well aware of the problem. Please listen to these You tubes, and perhaps you will think differently about who's fault this crisis is. It's our Congresses fault.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1uoisVjolU

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnx9WJ4TY3g

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1Yjxrb8h30

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1Yjxrb8h30

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzgDoWduGXU

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpq3YwUWnoQ

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://maven.io/company/pages/privacy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)