Key highlights of the Senate’s proposed border deal package | CNN Politics

1. New emergency authority to restrict border crossings if daily average migrant encounters reach 4,000 over a one-week span. If that metric is reached, the Homeland Security secretary could decide to largely bar migrants from seeking asylum if they crossed the border unlawfully. If migrant crossings increase above 5,000 on average per day on a given week, DHS is required to use the authority. If encounters reach 8,500 in one day, the department is required to trigger the authority. But the federal government is limited in how long it can use the authority. In the first year, the government can use it for 270 days, then 225 calendar days in the second year, and 180 days in the third year. The authority sunsets after three years.

- Why a sunset? Also, I still don't like the idea of allowing anyone to cross and claim asylum, vs having them go to the US Embassy in the country of origin or those they travel through. We should instead have consulates at key border locations, where these requests can be processed, but no more allowing them to come in illegally. If they cross illegally, they've given up their opportunity to claim asylum and must be immediately deported. If Mexico is experiencing too many people on their norther border, that's their problem and they should review their own policies on enforcement vs allowing caravans to go through.

2. Codifies a policy that requires the government to process at least 1,400 asylum applications at ports of entry when the emergency authority is triggered.

- Not without new stipulations on what constitutes asylum. Some of these requests should be easy to determine are not valid.

3. Raises the legal standard of proof to pass the initial screening for asylum, making it potentially more difficult for asylum seekers to pass.

- What is the standard? What happens after the "initial screening"? Asylum HAS to be revised to become very difficult to claim and it should not equate to immediate entry after the initial screening. They should then be placed in a controlled site to process the claim. It also cannot be based on "my country has a lot of turmoil, crime, war, and/or a bad system of government. Asylum is meant for those who are political refugees from locations we have identified, and we should only be able to take in a certain number consistent to what we can sustain. There needs to be a process that goes beyond a series of questions. People can be taught to answer the questions in order to get their foot in the door.

4. Expedites the asylum processing timeline from years to six months.
- Or what? Immediate deportation? Require all states to report encounters? Revoke all government issued credentials and services? Deny employment status? There has to be consequences that must be enforced, with little to no prosecutorial discretion.

Admittedly I have not read the bill, but if these are the "major" items for border security and immigration reform, no. Not enough, at take out the funding to Ukraine and Israel. Those should be separate debates. I don't like the idea of hold one hostage over another. Border security needs to be done... Debate that, make bills in reference to just that and have another discussion on military assistance.