New Report Looks at Growth of Nativism in Congress

A new report from Building Democracy Initiative examines the growing role of nativism in national politics. Chronicling the rise of the House Immigration Reform Caucus, the BDI report, Nativism in the House: A Report on the House Immigration Reform Caucus examines not only the growing influence of nativist and xenophobic philosophies in national politics, but the concerted effort of the far-right to bring their extreme ideological agenda to the forefront .

The "report tells us much regarding the shape that "immigration politics" and public policy is likely to take in the foreseeable future. The Caucus's extreme ideological agenda, long-standing ties to anti-immigrant groups, and cohesion in a fractured House of Representatives makes it a noxious ingredient in the melting pot of America. It has drawn even well-intentioned immigration reform proposals down into an abyss of nativism and xenophobia."

Nativism in the House: A Report on the House Immigration Reform Caucus

In the ebb and flow of nativist politics, the House Immigration Reform Caucus has been one of the most powerful and significant forces on Capitol Hill. With 110 congressmen and women as of this report, its members constitute fully one quarter of the House of Representatives. Members have introduced some of the most punitive legislation proposed during the last two House sessions. Their past chairman, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), is now running for president and participating in national debates. Their current chairman, Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.), is a former lobbyist for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). Some of its members have helped legitimize vigilante organizations such as the Minutemen. While voters tend to view their representatives as individuals or by party affiliation, the members of the House Caucus have acted as a bloc. Collectively, they have stood athwart the legislative process, preventing the emergence of meaningful and humane policy choices. And they have gone all the while virtually unnoticed.

In this report, the Center for New Community's Building Democracy Initiative examines the House Immigration Reform Caucus.

The Anti-Immigrant Movement Sets the Stage

From the emergence of a new nativist movement in the late 1970s, groups such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) have sought influence inside Washington D.C….

…Today, a dozen anti-immigrant organizations maintain national profiles. These groups have combined annual budgets of over twelve million dollars, and an active donor base of between six hundred thousand and seven hundred fifty thousand. As these national groups have expanded their influence, the number of state and local organizations has jumped up. Between January of 2005 and January of 2007, such groups have increased in number by 600 percent.

Formation of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus and Rep. Tom Tancredo

…Tom Tancredo founded the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus (hereinafter the Caucus or HIRC) in May 1999, soon after he began his first term as a Republican congressman from Colorado's Sixth District. During its first years, the Caucus had few members and served largely as a platform for Tancredo's views on immigration….

On August 1, 2001—five weeks before the events of 9-11—Tancredo introduced H.R. 2712, a bill intended to begin a moratorium on legal immigration, according to the Library of Congress' THOMAS website. Much of the recent public discussion on immigration policy has been voiced about "illegal" immigration. The particulars of this bill, however, demonstrate that opposition to legal entry remains an integral part of so-called immigration reform. This initial proposal would have cut the number of visas issued for family-sponsored immigrants to zero. And it would have cut the visas for "priority workers" to zero. The bill was referred to committee, however, and went nowhere. Undeterred, Tancredo introduced H.R. 3222 on November 1, 2001 with the intention of sharply reducing the number of H1-B visas issued to high-tech professionals. That bill also was referred and died in a subcommittee.

It is useful to remember that questions related to immigration have always been intertwined with questions of national identity. As Rep. Tancredo told one interviewer, "…if we don't control immigration, legal and illegal, we will eventually reach the point where it won't be what kind of a nation we are, balkanized or united, we will have to face the fact that we are no longer a nation at all…" His is a sentiment which has been oft repeated by members of the HIRC….

The year 2005 was a watershed year for the anti-immigrant movement. In April, the Minuteman organization was launched with an armed civilian "border watch" in Arizona. Although President Bush described the Minutemen as "vigilantes," the HIRC defended and praised the group in a "Field Report" entitled "Results and Implications of the Minuteman Project." In a separate statement, Caucus member Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) said, "The Minuteman Project is a shining example of how community initiative and involvement can help make America a safer, better place to live." The sentiment was echoed by the eight other congressmen cited in the press release.

Also in 2005, Tancredo personally introduced a resolution proposing that the Constitution be amended to establish English as the "official language," another resolution "recognizing the importance of Western civilization," legislation to enhance border enforcement and curtail H1-B visas, as well as several amendments aimed at changing federal enforcement policies. He introduced eleven different measures in all, none of which succeeded. But Tancredo had raised the flag of the anti-immigrant movement within Congress. By August, the Caucus registry had grown to 82 members of the House.

By December of that year, the House passed H.R. 4437, known popularly as the "Sensenbrenner Bill." James Sensenbrenner, a Republican from Wisconsin's 5th District, was first elected to congress in 1978, and was chairman of the House Judiciary Committee at the time. He was not then, and is not now, a member of Tancredo's Immigration Reform Caucus. Nevertheless, H.R. 4437 was widely regarded by both immigrant rights activists and moderates as an unnecessarily harsh bill that was unlikely to pass in the Senate. It would have turned undocumented immigrants into felons (current law considers this violation a misdemeanor) and thus make them ineligible for citizenship in the future. It would have also criminalized anyone who gave them assistance of any kind, including providing them with simple social welfare or routine medical services. The bill also called for the construction of 700 miles of fencing on the southern border.

The debate in Congress became so vicious that even conservatives were forced to comment on its racism. "Some anti-immigrant Republicans are guilty of demagoguery and racism," one Republican governor, Mike Huckabee from Arkansas, told the press.

Read the complete report; Nativism in the House: A Report on the House Immigration Reform Caucus

Read More...

Summary only...

Overview of STRIVE Act

UPDATE 3-24-2007-2:00AM: Full text of the bill is now available for download HERE (PDF 2Mb)

Yesterday, Reps. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ.) introduced the House version of long awaited immigration reform legislation. The "Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy (STRIVE) Act" contains most of the provisions of the bill that came out of the Senate Judiciary Committee last year with additional "triggers" added that would insure that the border security aspects of the bill were working before any legalization of the current undocumented population could begin. Additionally, a "touchback" provision was added requiring some undocumented immigrants to leave the country and re-enter before normalizing their status.

The bill will now move to the Immigration Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Zoe Lofgren, where it could become the basis of a new House immigration bill. Lofgren could also choose to modify it or start from scratch with an entirely different bill that the committee would then work from.

The full text of the bill is yet to be released but a synopsis was provided yesterday by the House.

Overview of the Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy Act of 2007 (STRIVE Act of 2007)

TITLE I: SECURING OUR BORDERS

Sets certification requirements that must be met before implementation of the New Worker Program and the program to legalize undocumented individuals. The Secretary of DHS must certify to Congress that improvements in border surveillance technology are being implemented; that the systems and infrastructure necessary to carry out improvements to immigration document security are ready to use; and that the first phase of the Electronic Employment Verification System requiring the participation of critical infrastructure employers has been implemented.

• Increases border and other enforcement personnel, including port of entry inspectors, immigration and customs enforcement investigators and border patrol

• Accelerates technology and border infrastructure, including unmanned aerial vehicles, cameras, poles, sensors, and other technologies necessary to achieve operational control of the border

• Requires DHS to develop a national strategy for border security and comprehensive plan for surveillance of the international land and maritime borders of the United States

• Requires the U.S. to work with Mexico to address border security, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and gang activity.

• Requires DHS to make biometric data enhancements to travel documents and provide Customs and Border Protection officers with training on document fraud detection and identification.

TITLE II: STRENGTHENING INTERIOR ENFORCEMENT

• Expands the types of crimes and increases penalties related to passport, visa and document fraud

• Enhances criminal penalties for aliens associated with money laundering

• Increases criminal penalties associated with firearms offenses for aliens

• Creates new immigration penalties for aliens convicted for drunk driving and gang crimes

• Increases criminal penalties associated with alien smuggling

• Enhances the criminal penalties associated with the unauthorized employment of aliens

• Allows DHS to detain certain aliens with removal orders beyond the 90 day removal period

• Enhances the address reporting requirements under the immigration law

• Requires DHS to significantly increase the number of facilities for the detention of aliens (at least 20 additional detention facilities that have the capacity to detain 20,000 aliens)

• Clarifies the authority of state and local law enforcement to enforce criminal immigration laws

TITLE III: BOLSTERING EMPLOYMENT VERIFICATION

• Sets up an employment verification system for employers to verify each new hire’s authorization to work.

• The new system will eventually apply to all workers and all new hires, and will be rolled out in phases, beginning with critical infrastructure employers and large employers.

• Creates significant civil penalties for employers who do not comply with the requirements under the new system and establishes serious criminal penalties for knowingly hiring unauthorized aliens. Debars employers who repeatedly violate these provisions from government contracts, grants, and agreements.

• Includes privacy safeguards. Limits the data that can be collected and stored in the database and requires the agencies to develop the system with maximum security and privacy protections. Requires the agencies to evaluate impact of system from a privacy perspective and complete privacy impact statements. Prohibits creation of a national identification card.

• Includes anti-discrimination provisions. Forbids employers from using the new system to discriminate against applicants or employees on the basis of nationality. Prohibits employers from terminating employment due to a tentative non-confirmation, using the system to screen employees prior to offering employment, or using the system selectively.

TITLE IV: NEW WORKER PROGRAM THAT REFLECTS REALITIES OF OUR WORKFORCE

Worker Visa Program: Creates a legal channel for future immigrant workers (and their spouses and children) by establishing the H-2C visa, which is valid for three years and renewable for another three. Employers must attempt to hire U.S. workers by first offering the job to any eligible U.S. worker who applies and is qualified and able. To achieve this, employers must go through a rigorous recruitment process. Employers are barred from hiring new immigrant workers if they are located in an area with an unemployment rate higher than 9 percent for workers whose education level is at or below a high school diploma.

The visa program has an initial cap of 400,000 which adjusts yearly based on market fluctuations. Requires H-2C immigrants who are unemployed for more than 60 days to leave the United States. Includes the following labor rights and protections for H-2C workers: fair and competitive wages, the ability to travel outside the United States, whistleblower protections, flexibility to change employers (“portability”), an opportunity to apply for conditional permanent residence after five years of employment and eventual citizenship, if desired, among other protections.

Requirements to be Met by Applicants for an H-2C Visa:

• demonstrate job qualifications and provide evidence of a job offer from a U.S. employer


• complete criminal- and terrorism-related background checks


• pay a $500 application fee


• undergo a medical exam


• show admissibility to the U.S. (certain bars to admission related to undocumented status may be waived; security and criminal related bars may not be waived)

Earned Citizenship: Provides new workers (and their spouses and children) with an opportunity to apply for conditional permanent residence and eventual citizenship. The immigrant may apply through an employer or by self-petition after working for 5 years and paying a $500 application fee.

Requirements for Earned Citizenship

• show physical presence in the U.S. and evidence of employment


• complete criminal and security background checks


• pay $500 application fee


• meet English and civic requirements


• show admissibility (certain bars to admission related to undocumented status are waived; security- and criminal-related bars may not be waived)

TITLE V: REFORMING A BROKEN VISA SYSTEM IN A WAY THAT PROTECTS FAMILIES

The STRIVE Act overhauls the family-based and employment-based immigration system to reduce backlogs and inefficiencies. The legislation provides opportunities for high skilled workers to come to, and remain in, the U.S. It also addresses employment needs in shortage occupations, such as nursing.

TITLE VI: EARNED LEGALIZATION FOR QUALIFIED, HARDWORKING INDIVIDUALS

Visa Program for Qualified Undocumented Workers: Creates a new visa program (conditional nonimmigrant status) for undocumented immigrants and their spouses and children in the U.S., which is valid for six years. Provides conditional nonimmigrant visa applicants with work and travel authorization and protection from removal. Provides certain immigrants in removal proceedings, facing removal, or ordered to depart voluntarily with an opportunity to apply for conditional nonimmigrant status. Bars related to undocumented status will be waived (security and criminal bars cannot be waived);

Requirements for Conditional Nonimmigrant Status:

• Establish continuous presence in the U.S. on or before June 1, 2006;


• Attest to employment in the U.S. before June 1, 2006 and employment since that date (and submit related documentation);


• Complete criminal and security background checks;


• Pay a $500 fine plus necessary application fees (fine exemption for children).
  Other Criteria for Conditional Nonimmigrant Status:


• The individual must not be ineligible to receive a visa pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act;


• The individual has not been convicted of a felony or three or more misdemeanors;


• The individual has not participated in the persecution of another person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion;


• The individual has not been convicted by final judgment of a particularly serious crime and there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the alien has committed a particularly serious crime abroad before arriving in the U.S.; and


• There is a penalty of up to five years' imprisonment for anyone who willfully falsifies information in an application for conditional nonimmigrant status.

Earned Citizenship: Provides qualified conditional nonimmigrants and their spouses and children with an opportunity to apply for lawful permanent resident status (green card) and eventual citizenship. Applicants go to the back of the line for permanent visas; the current immigrant backlogs must be cleared before qualified conditional nonimmigrant visa applicants (and their families) can adjust to permanent resident status. Immigrants who adjust from a conditional nonimmigrant visa (including dependents) to lawful permanent resident status shall not be counted against the worldwide numerical visa caps.

Requirements for Earned Citizenship:

• Meet employment requirements during the six-year period immediately preceding the application for adjustment;


• Pay a $1,500 fine plus application fees;


• Complete criminal and security background checks;


• Establish registration under the selective service (if applicable);


• Meet English and civic requirements;


• Undergo a medical examination;


• Pay all taxes;


• Show admissibility to the U.S.; and


• Meet a “Legal Reentry” requirement during the six-year period in conditional nonimmigrant status but no later than 90 days before filing an application for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status. Paperwork processing is performed in the U.S. An exit and re-entry through any port-of-entry is required. Limited exceptions apply.

Title VI also includes the DREAM Act of 2007 and AgJOBS Act of 2007.

TITLE VII: MISCELLANEOUS

The bill also would increase resources for the immigration court system, provides relief for immigrant victims of the 9-11 attacks and their families, and facilitates naturalization for members of the armed forces.

link

Related:
Analysis of STRIVE Act (Part 1: Enforcement Sections), Migra Matters

From more detailed information see the longer version of the synopsis. (12pg PDF)

A complete text of the bill is now available for download HERE (PDF 2Mb)


tags: immigration, STRIVE Act , Flake, Gutierrez, HR1645, H.R.1645

Read More...

Summary only...

The wedge worked, it tears Republicans to pieces.

In the wake of last weeks defeat, the feeding frenzy of Republicans eating their own has reached a feverous level. From the fiscal conservatives come calls that only a return to some sort of mythical economic orthodoxy can save the party. The religious right blames the party's defeat on their failure to enact enough restrictive social legislation. The xenophobe wing complains that Bush and his big business buddies sold them out on border security and the now disgraced neo-cons blame the failure of their vision for transforming the world on the administrations ineptitude in following their plan. But the neo-cons excuses have for the most part fallen on deaf ears. Iraq played a central role in the Republican defeat, and no matter how much spin they put on it, the fact remains that they led the nation into an unnecessary and unwinnable war that cost their party dearly.

Now the neo-cans have fired back and the Weekly Standard has taken the offensive. According to an article by Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, the blame for the Republican defeat is squarely placed on the shoulders of those who forced immigration as a wedge issue.


tags: immigration, immigration reform , wedge issue , election 2006, Republicans, immigration legislation

The fact that those who brought us the nightmare in Iraq would be looking to shift blame comes as no surprise. But the bluntness and honesty with which they skewer the xenophobe wing of the party is still a vindication for those of us on the other side of the aisle who have long been saying that the immigration issue was no more than a carefully crafted "crisis" that had far more to do with political expediency than principle and was doomed to failure.

Jacoby's article, "A Wedge Too Far: The immigration issue didn't work.", not only goes into detail about how the issue was fabricated and fostered for more than a year in anticipation of the election, she lays out a convincing case for why the plan backfired and ended up tearing the Republican Party apart.

As the Democrats take control of Congress the story Jacoby lays out should be a lesson on how not to deal with this issue.

Immigration was the dog that didn't bark. It did not prove an effective wedge issue. And as far as could be determined, it decided few if any contests. No congressional or gubernatorial candidate otherwise poised to win was defeated primarily because of his or her views on immigration. No more than one or two, if that many, struggling to catch up managed to ride it to victory. And the most stridently restrictionist candidate in the country, Arizona congressional hopeful Randy Graf, who ran a campaign based almost entirely on immigrant-bashing, went down in flaming defeat.

This wasn't for lack of trying by immigration naysayers--activists, candidates, or the Republican party establishment. The GOP leadership, particularly in the House, started planning their wedge campaign over a year ago…

…Struggling candidates and activist PACs were only too happy to play into this scenario, generating some of the nastiest ads in recent campaign memory. The 600-plus page Senate bill was reduced to a single sound bite: More than two dozen spots misleadingly claimed that it would pay Social Security benefits to illegal aliens. Democratic candidates who had not been anywhere near the Senate vote or even endorsed the bill were pilloried for its contents. On one particularly unsavory website, Michigan Democrat Debbie Stabenow was pictured in a sombrero, bobbing back and forth to Mexican music, over a text that thanked her in Spanish for what it implied was an un-American vote for the package.

Still other ads aimed directly at immigrants, calling them, among other things, "sneaky" intruders, "stealing" American jobs and taxpayer dollars. More than one Republican flyer mixed photos of Latino workers and Middle Eastern terrorists; several spots dwelt ominously on mug shots of convicted felons. Perhaps the ugliest commercial, out of North Carolina, showed a Latino man clutching his crotch, followed by an image of the American flag in flames: "They take our jobs and our government handouts," the voice-over ran, "then spit in our face and burn our flag." Far-right restrictionist groups--the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the Minuteman PAC, Bay Buchanan's Team America PAC--were responsible for some of this demagoguery. But the national Republican Senatorial and Congressional committees were not ashamed to put their names on far too much of it.
link

Jacoby then goes on to dissect the extent of the issues failure.

Meanwhile, even as Republicans painted themselves into a xenophobic corner, they inadvertently cast the Democrats as the party of pragmatism and problem-solving. Few Democratic candidates sought this role. Few if any, given the climate, wanted to run on the Senate bill's guest worker or earned legalization provisions…

But once pinned with the label "pro-reform," most Democrats had little choice, and many rose to the occasion. Incumbent senator Maria Cantwell made a persuasive case in Washington state; Jim Webb took a similar line in Virginia. And if anything, the harder the job and higher the stakes, the better these sometimes reluctant reformers performed--nowhere more surprisingly or impressively than at the epicenter of the immigration debate, in Arizona.

It would be hard to imagine a tougher test. More illegal immigrants enter the United States by way of Arizona each year than come through California, Texas, and New Mexico combined. Human smugglers and their accomplices have driven state crime rates to the top of the national rankings. And unlike almost everywhere else in the nation, a majority--6 out of 10 Arizonans--told pollsters that immigration was one of the top issues determining how they would vote in the midterms. Still, or maybe because of this, Arizona became the place where candidates--all of them Democrats, unfortunately--showed Americans how to talk effectively about immigration reform.

Gov. Janet Napolitano set the tone. She didn't denounce the fence or other border enforcement--in fact, she led the way, over a year ago, in calling for deployment of the National Guard on the border. She talked tough about smugglers; she repudiated amnesty. But she also insisted relentlessly that border enforcement was only a first step toward the solution: comprehensive reform of the kind proposed by the Senate. The more firmly she held to this tough but pragmatic line, the more frenzied her opponent grew--and as he promised more and more draconian enforcement, her lead only widened….

As Election Day approached, the contrast between these Democrats and Republicans wasn't soft versus hard, as the House leadership had hoped. It was tough versus ugly--and polls showed voters, especially Hispanic voters, very clear about which approach they liked better.

…Will Republicans learn from this? Will the country? The results of the 2006 midterms are not a mandate for comprehensive reform--far from it. Still, they point the way toward change, opening the political space for better, more pragmatic policy by proving that it can be defended on Election Day. Randy Graf once boasted foolishly that if he couldn't win in Arizona, he couldn't win anywhere. And by the same token, if immigration pragmatists can triumph in Phoenix and Tucson, they should be able to win in any state.

It will still take a bipartisan majority to pass immigration reform. Democrats and Republicans will still have to compromise to get it done. And this may or may not happen in the 110th Congress. But one thing is clear and must be fixed: The Republican party has maneuvered itself onto the wrong side of the immigration issue.

The lesson here for Democrats as they take power in Washington is that the American people are by and large a pragmatic yet compassionate people. Despite what anti-immigration hardliners believe, the polling has been consistent since this issue came to the forefront, the American people favor an immigration policy that is firm but above all fair. How this will all shake out in the new Congress is yet to be seen. "Comprehensive Reform" has been to a catch-all term used by many to mean anything that's not the Tancredo/Dobbs/Buchanan brand of restrictionist immigration policy. It will be up to this upcoming Congress, immigration advocates, organized labor, and the American people to determine what the true face of comprehensive reform will look like. Let's hope we can finally get it right this time around.

Read More...

Summary only...

The hypocrisy of the Border Security Republicans (SC-05)

Like many other Republican candidates from areas far from the border with relatively small populations of undocumented immigrants, Ralph Norman, running in S. Carolina's 5th district, has made "border security" a cornerstone of his campaign.

Accusing his opponent, Rep. John Spratt, of being soft on immigration, Norman has hammered away on the issue tenaciously. Stating that "only by sealing our borders first can we truly stop the unregulated flow of illegal immigrants into our country." Norman proposes that we need to "identify the illegal immigrants living inside our borders and remove the laundry list of incentives that encourage them to live here illegally…"

But the real estate developer turned candidate has one big problem. His development company employs numerous undocumented workers at various sites, making him one of the very people he would have us believe are providing an incentive for "illegal immigrants" to come here.


tags: immigration, Ralph Norman , John Spratt , SC-05


Despite the fact that S. Carolina's 5th District has one of the lowest levels of undocumented immigrants in the nation(1), putting it on par with places like N Dakota and Montana, Ralph Norman, like many other Republicans this election cycle, has chosen to use border security as the key issue in his campaign. Relying on the general hysteria whipped up by the House leadership over the issue of "illegal immigration," candidates like Norman have been focusing on the border as a means to insulate themselves from the electorates overall discontent with Republican performance and policies over the last few years.

Norman's TV spots have all featured some aspect of border security as their major theme. This despite the fact that his opponent has voted with the Republican majority on most border security issues.

Yet despite the obvious contradictions of running an anti-immigration campaign in an area with a very low concentration of foreign-born non-citizens, against a candidate who recently voted to double the size of the border patrol, build a security fence and bolster port security, Norman has continued to press the issue. But revelations about just how Norman runs his person business have raised serious questions about the level of hypocrisy the candidate is willing to stoop too.

Press accounts revealed that Norman, through his company, Warren Norman Co., has hired numerous undocumented workers at various sites.

The Observer identified and visited properties owned by Norman and several of his businesses and spoke with workers.

Two construction workers at Shiland Village, a Rock Hill office and retail project on Celanese Road, said they work for a contractor on the job and are illegal immigrants from Mexico. Norman and his brother David own the property. Across the road, another contract worker at Warrington Place, a townhouse development, said he came here illegally from Mexico.
Charolette Observer

When asked about the situation, Norman replied that "We do what the law requires."

NORMAN: “I don't know who the Mexicans work for. They probably work for Wachovia.”

Norman said the immigrants worked for a sub contractor, not his company.

NORMAN: “I do not check our subcontractors. People that have a company they hire their own people. I don't check it now and won't in the future. That's why we need an immigration policy.”
WCNC News

There are free, federal programs available to employers to verify Social Security numbers and immigration status. The programs are voluntary, but such worker verification has been part of immigration-reform bills in both the House and Senate….

Norman said Thursday that he didn't know about the existing verification programs. Initially, he said he would "absolutely not" require contractors on his projects to use the programs. Later in the day, he said he'd check into the programs and would consider requiring contractors to use them.

However, he said: "It's unfair to say business should take responsibility for the government….
Link

With, sinking poll numbers across the country for Republican polices, it's no small wonder that in races across the country Republican candidates have tried to find a new group do demonize in hopes of garnering support. But Norman has perhaps demonstrated just how shallow and callous this whole issue really is. He apparently sees no hypocrisy in demanding the harshest punishment possible for the undocumented who come here to find jobs and make a better life, while at the same time profiting off their labor. As an employer he was unaware of the very mechanisms available to ensure his workers were in fact legal, and when made aware of them after years of business experience, he stated at first he had no intention of adhering to the law and availing himself of the programs.

From the very start the "border security" and "illegal immigration" issues have been exercises in hypocrisy and misdirection.

Failure after failure by the federal government to really make our nation secure, from Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and Korea, to securing our ports, mass transportation and vital infrastructure have been convoluted and transformed into a simplistic crusade for "border security" to close the southern border.

Domestically, every policy failure of the last 25 years has been laid at the feet of the demon "illegal immigrant," from the health care crisis, a failing education system, and job loss, to the undue tax burden placed on middle and working class Americans while the top 1% benefit. The Republican Party, through their House surrogates have relinquished all responsibility for their actions. Instead they have formulated a policy of misdirection to place the blame squarely on the 4% of the population that are in this country without documentation.

Ralph Norman has now demonstrated just how hollow the anti-immigrant rhetoric rings. It's all just the smoke and mirrors of a charlatans sideshow. A patent medicine for the American public made of one part fear and two parts ignorance…. and having swallowed down a whole bottle of Tancredo's Magical Elixir, the nation will only be sicker for the exercise.

(1) The SC-05 has a foreign born population of 18,115 (2.78% of population), putting it far bellow the 12.4% national average. Of those, 1.98% are non-citizens (13,680). Of the non-citizen residents 55% arrived prior to 2000, and 45% came between 2000- 2005. This is nowhere near Mr. Norman's claim of a 1000% increase in "illegal immigrants" in the last few years, in fact the number has not even doubled in the last five years.
US Census 2005 Community Survey, SC community profiles
US Census 2005 Community Survey, analysis by MPI

Read More...

Summary only...

House immigration legislation stalled in Senate

A collection of last minute anti-immigration bills, passed by the House, appear to be facing challenges as they try to move through the Senate before the fall break.

Unable to reach consensus with the Senate on immigration reform for the past four months, House Republicans chose instead to attach bits and pieces of many of the more controversial measures from the Sensenbrenner immigration bill they passed last December to appropriations bills that must be passed by both houses before the October campaign break.

But the plan appears to be backfiring.

Republican Senate leaders, unwilling to be pawns in Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert's eleventh hour election year ploy, have threatened to join Democrats in blocking any legislation attached to vital appropriations bills for homeland security and defense.


tags: immigration, immigration reform , wall bill , H.R. 6061, Republicans, immigration legislation

As of Tuesday, there were three must-pass pieces of legislation pending: defense and homeland security appropriations and the annual Department of Defense authorization. Each year, when the few must-pass bills move forward, there is a major temptation to throw on all kinds of extraneous provisions; when lawmakers can identify a train that is both leaving the station and sure to reach its destination, everyone has baggage they try to toss on board. Each year, responsible party leaders resist most of these measures, to preserve the integrity of the process and to keep shoddy bills with no vetting and no broad support from either being railroaded or inserted surreptitiously.

This year, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John W. Warner (R-Va.) has vowed to protect the defense authorization bill — but House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) has other ideas. Hastert says he will kill the bill, doing damage to the Department of Defense and conceivably to troops in the field, unless Warner and his fellow senators cave and tack on an entire federal court security bill and another House anti-immigration bill.

The anti-immigration bill would allow indefinite detention of illegal immigrants protected under political asylum provisions, and it would deny court access to many.

LA Times

Hastert also added legislation to make it easier to deport those accused of gang related activity. Additionaly the House Speaker also added a provision to allow federal judges to carry concealed firearms in courts.

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., Warner voices his "strong objection" to "the desire of a number of colleagues, almost all non-members of the defense committees, to have the conferees agree to include in the conference report nine or more bills all of which ... are 'out-of-scope'," meaning they are not germane to the underlying substance of the bill.

He says that at least three Republican members of the House-Senate conference committee considering the defense bill would refuse to sign onto legislation that included such measures, which means there would not be enough votes to pass the legislation out of conference and on for a final vote in both chambers.

UPI

Warner added that he wanted to keep the defense spending bill bipartisan during a time of war.

Hastert also added immigration provisions to the homeland security appropriations bill.

The half dozen or so measures slated for inclusion in the homeland security bill all grow out of the series of field hearings GOP committee chairs held over the summer, many in districts facing tight races this November.

"I think there are some things that should be in that bill," Hastert told a press briefing Tuesday, "Things that we think are commonsense things that ought to happen. But we have problems with the Senate."

The provisions include language that would empower state and local police forces to investigate, arrest, detain, or transfer to federal custody anyone found in the country illegally or in violation of their immigration status; a bill that would make it a crime to tunnel under the border; and other legislation intended to make it easier to deport or deny entry to illegal immigrant gang members.

House leaders also reportedly want changes to language in the homeland security bill that would move back by 19 months a deadline for the introduction of stricter entry requirement for U.S. and Canadian citizens on
UPI

Senate Judiciary Chairmen, Arlen Spector, whose committee must approve the bill, voiced concern about Hastert's attempts to use the bill as a way to pass legislation that would under normal circumstances could never pass Senate muster.

Specter, who wrote to Frist, Hastert and the two chairmen of the separate committee which Monday night voted to approve the homeland security appropriations bill, voiced "grave concern" about "altering an already-approved conference report," and likewise threatened to remove his signature if changes were made.

Without his signature, an amended bill would not get to the floor.

UPI

Without the support in the committees, the Houses legislation will most likely not see the light of day.

This is not the case with the bill to build 700 miles of walls along the southern border. Originally attached to President Bush's torture bill that would allow the US to disregard Geneva conventions in its treatment of those held at the Guantanamo detention facility, it was removed in order to expedite the torture bills passage. It will now be a stand alone item that could pass through the Senate before weeks end. Although the House and Senate agreed Tuesday to devote $1.2 billion to the wall project, only $250 million can be used until the Department of Homeland Security tells Congress how the remaining $950 million would be spent. That most likely won't happen until next year.

The Senate had (already) approved $1.8 billion for 370 miles of fence and 500 miles of vehicle barriers.(in its comprehensive immigration bill, back in May)

"Some would say that, 'Well the fencing will probably take two years to complete anyway and we can come back next year' but ... promises of appropriations in the future often don't materialize," complained Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

Forbes

The next two days will tell. House Republicans have gambled by making immigration one of the cornerstones in their re-election campaigns this November. Now they may have to go home with little to show for their efforts. It appears that most of their proposals will never get out of committee in the Senate and the wall building bill will go largely unfunded.

In fact, they would have gotten a better deal had they just passed the Senate's comprehensive bill in the first place. At least they would have been assured $1.8 billion for their walls. Now, as it stands, the best they can hope for is $1.2 billion….if they ever see that at all.

Read More...

Summary only...

Republicans push for eleventh hour immigration legislation

If there was ever any doubt in your mind that desperate Republicans facing election defeat weren't going to go out fighting, this week's reemergence of "immigration issues" on the legislative calendar should put that thought to rest. Having spent a good part of the summer unsuccessfully trying to rile up the electorate into believing that immigration was the most important issue facing the nation, both House and Senate Republicans decided to once again force the issue to the front burner this week hoping to gain traction going into what is shaping up to be a dismal November for them.

Facing sagging poll numbers and an angry electorate, Republican prospects look bad. Having spend six years rubberstamping every proposal coming from the Whitehouse, the President's failures and unpopularity now hang around their necks like a an albatross. It would be impossible for most of them to distance themselves from a President they fear to even be seen with on the campaign trail. So what are they left to do?

The answer is simple … distract, distract, distract.



tags: immigration, George Bush , House Legislation , Border Wall, immigration legislation, voter ID


Their mission is simple. Shift the debate away from their records, the war in Iraq, corruption scandals, oil prices, a stagnating economy, record deficits, job loss, and a failed "war on terrorism." Their plan is to make this a single issue campaign. Make it all about immigration, the only issue they have had any success in misrepresenting to the American people.

They've spent an entire year preparing for just this contingency. Hammering away with talking points and skewed statistics they have tried to convince the average American that the borders are "broken", immigrants are stealing jobs, abusing social services and putting a huge burden on average American tax payers.

They've also continually obfuscated the line between terrorism and immigration in order to try to link a genuine fear and concern with an unfounded one.

In many ways they have been successful, but it has come with a price. Having convinced a segment of the population that immigration is a matter of life and death, they now want to see something done about it.

This week House and Senate Republicans are preparing to do just that … come up with a few mostly symbolic pieces of legislation to go home and campaign on. It doesn't really matter that like most legislation coming from this Congress, from the war in Iraq to tax cuts for the rich, they haven't really figured out how to pay for their proposals. The public has already proven that they rarely ask the tough questions like "how do you plan on paying for this?" when dealing with this Congress.

So far from the House we've gotten a 700 mile long wall, a bill requiring proof of citizenship for voting, a proposal to make digging tunnels under the 700 mile long wall illegal, indefinite detention of aliens suspected of being terrorists, a request for universal guidelines for handling alien smugglers, and a proposal to "reaffirm" local law enforcements authority to enforce Federal immigration laws.

The Senate thus far has agreed to debate the wall building bill.

As for the President … he's said he would sign the wall building legislation if it gets to his desk.

So what does this all amount to? … A big pile of nothing. The money for the wall will not be appropriated before the break to go home and campaign, and the rest of the House legislation won't be ready in time to go to the Senate, and would never pass through anyway. If the Republicans were truly concerned about immigration reform they would have done the hard work and hammered out a compromise between the two houses on the comprehensive plan. Instead they'll pass a passel of meaningless legislation to be finished in the lame duck session after the election...when they'll no longer need the issue if they win, and could care less if they lose. But the whole endeavor will make for good bumper stickers and 30 second sound bites about being tough on border security... and that's all that really matters.

It's all just smoke and mirrors. A cheap parlor trick to perform back home to prove that they are not a bunch of ineffectual Bush puppets.

But for Democrats this move creates a danger. The Republicans have proven time and time again that they can be quite effective at turning a non-issue into an important election weapon. They did it with the gay marriage, the phony terror alerts, and "family values."

If they can convince the American people that they have in fact done something to "secure the border" and make them safe not only from "invading Mexicans" but from the "terrorists" that have been hanging in out south of the border just waiting for drug smuggling coyotes to bring them across the desert to attack a mall near you, they might be able to just pull this one out of their behinds. It’s a big "if" … but it wouldn't be the first time Republicans have forced the Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

The Democrats must start to frame this election before the Republicans do it for them. This has been a do-nothing, rubberstamp, corrupt, spendthrift Congress for the past six years while under Republican control, and that needs to be hammered home consistently. This election is not about immigration, it's about allowing Bush to go unchecked for two more years. Democrats must remember that and not allow this issue to get in the way

Read More...

Summary only...

All hat and no cattle from House Republicans

On Thursday, for the second time in ten months, the Republican controlled House once again voted to construct a 700-mile long wall along the southern border. The bill, sponsored by Homeland Security Committee Chairman, Peter King (NY-3) comes after a summer-long series of hearings held in hopes of whipping up some support for a similar proposal passed last December as part of the House’s immigration reform package.

Recent polls now show that concern over immigration is waning among voters, falling far bellow the war in Iraq, terrorism and the economy as their chief concern. Additionaly, Democrats are holding a strong advantage in almost all categories when asked ‘who do you think would do a better job.” Against this backdrop, King and his cohorts are trying to breathe new life into the immigration debate, hoping to gain some advantage going into the November election.

Emboldened by the primary win in Arizona by "Minuteman candidate", Randy Graf, who ran a single-issue, anti-immigration campaign against his more moderate Republican opponent, the “enforcement-only” wing of the party appear to be looking at immigration to be a possible Hail Mary play in what’s shaping up to be disastrous election cycle for House Republicans.

But the plan could backfire.


tags: immigration, Peter King , border wall , Randy Graf, farm labor shortage, Pew poll


For one thing, the House failed to fund the wall building project with an estimated cost of $2 billion. It also has little chance of getting through the Senate as a stand–alone item not connected to a broader comprehensive bill. This leaves the legislation looking more like an election year ploy than any real attempt at meaningful border security. “I voted for the un-funded border wall” doesn’t make for the most compelling campaign slogan. Those voters who see immigration as their chief concern will not be satisfied with half-hearted attempts and excuses. They’ve been convinced by the rabid rantings of Tom Tancredo, Pat Buchanan and Lou Dobbs that their nation is being invaded… and they want to see it stopped.

Additionally, there has been backlash against a lack of compromise on a comprehensive immigration plan coming from many areas in traditionally Republican strongholds in agricultural regions. From Florida citrus growers, Idaho potato farmers, NE apple farmers, and fruit and row-crop growers in California a clear message has been sent over the past month that they simply do not have the workers to bring in their harvests. Most blame a combination of tightening border security, anti-immigrant rhetoric and lack of leadership in Washington for preventing the needed agricultural workers from making their yearly migration from Mexico to the US to work the harvest. Some have already left crops to rot in the fields for a lack of workers and many more warn of a worsening situation as we move towards the peak harvest season.

The Republican House now seems to be faced with a dilemma from which they cannot escape. Having spent ten months stirring up the anti-immigration pot in hopes of creating an issue to run on in November, they have failed to deliver on their promises to that 7% of the population who view immigration as the most important issue, while at that same time alienating many traditional rural Republicans who now see their livelihoods threatened.

It’s just another case of all hat and no cattle from the House Republicans.

Read More...

Summary only...

House Republicans last ditch effort to avert electoral defeat

Facing a tidal wave of voter discontent that could drive their majority out of power this fall, House Republicans announced Thursday that they would try to pass some sort of immigration legislation before November.

Having spent most the summer holding a series of mock hearings on immigration reform intended more to bolster waning support for candidates in tight races and bash the legislation passed by the Senate back in May, they are now faced with a dilemma. In order to insulate themselves from the President’s plummeting popularity, they have staked their hopes of retaining power on a “get tough” immigration policy.

In order to fire up the base, they have promised to close the borders and stem the flow of new immigration. Using terms like “invasion” and “attack on the middle class,” they have succeeded in riling up a segment of the electorate, but they now have a problem. Having worked relentlessly to convince voters that immigration is an urgent and pressing problem… they have been unable to supply anything but empty rhetoric and unfulfilled promises. No proposed legislation has been enacted.


tags: immigration, Dennis Hastert , House Legislation , Border Wall, immigration legislation, increased Border Patrol


Hoping to have something to go home and campaign on, House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) announced plans to cobble together some sort of package of crackdown legislation that would allow House Republicans some measure of cover as they face a disaffected electorate.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert said he would convene an unusual forum Wednesday in which Republican committee chairmen would report their findings from immigration hearings held around the country this summer and suggest proposals such as the creation of voter identification cards that the House would try to pass before Congress adjourns.

"It won't be the whole 95 tons of what we've tried to work between the House and Senate, but we will try to get some things done," Hastert, R-Ill., said, emphasizing that the measures would be passed quickly by his house -- although their fate in the Senate is uncertain.

Republicans have made illegal immigration a linchpin to preserving their threatened House majority in the November midterm elections, seeing it as one of the few issues that may work in their favor. Yet after insisting the issue is a crisis, House Republicans can't show voters they've addressed the issue because of an impasse with fellow Republicans in the Senate … Hastert said discussions continue with the Senate but "in the meantime ... there are things we can do right now."

Link

Ratcheting up the rhetoric, Hastert claimed, “We’re at war …Our borders are a sieve. We need to stop the bleeding.”… “Before you have a guest worker program or any other program, you need to heal the wound or stop the bleeding.” Affirming that, "The intention of the House is to secure the borders,"

Majority leader John Boehner (R-OH) laid out plans to pass some interim legislation to build walls along the border, increase Border Patrol Agents and give local law enforcement the authority to enforce federal immigration regulations. The legislation could be attached to appropriations bills to be pushed through the House before the scheduled Sept. 29 adjournment date.

"The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said he will continue talking to his Senate counterparts. It's unclear whether the Senate would respond to an enforcement-only measure.”

But at least the House members know they can go home and continue to campaign that they are tough on immigration and will have the legislative record to prove it…. Even if these measures never pass Senate muster.

And that’s been the essence of this issue from the start …it's been a cheap election-year parlor trick to divert a discontented electorate's attention away from the true problems that have not been addressed by the Republican majority. From the failures in Iraq and New Orleans to an economy that favors the top 1% of the population while all others fall behind, it’s always been more about sound bites and inflammatory rhetoric than actual reform of our failing immigration system.

Read More...

Summary only...

Facts get in the way at Congressional hearing.

"What I wanted was witnesses who agree with me, not disagree with me," said Congressman Charlie Norwood(R-GA) at last Tuesdays Congressional field hearing on immigration in Gainesville Georgia held by The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health.

The hearing was intended to gather information about the impact of undocumented immigration on the state's Medicaid program and health care delivery system. Apparently though, "information" was not really what the House Republican wanted to hear, threatening a witness when she failed to present testimony to support his views.

At one point he scolded immigration specialist Alison Siskin, of the Congressional Research Service, saying he was "disappointed" with her testimony and that he intended to complain to her supervisors at CRS after she said there were no studies to show "rampant abuse" of government healthcare programs.


tags: immigration, healthcare, Charles Norwwod , GA-9, immigration hearing

Siskin, one of nine witnesses, including Georgia state lawmakers, government specialists on Medicaid, doctors and hospital administrators, incurred Norwood's wrath when she said studies have been unclear about immigration's impact on health care. "The studies are all over the place," she said, adding, "There are not studies that have shown rampant abuse."

Norwood would have none of it… He knows what he knows, and he's not about to let facts get in the way.

He made his views quite clear, bloviating at length about what he expected to hear. "I know what they're saying in my district," he said, "We didn't wake up yesterday. We've been working on this for four years and I espouse the feelings of the large majority. They want this border shut down and they want it secured….Fewer poor Americans get Medicaid because illegal aliens get Medicaid, it's that simple." He added that "Illegal immigrants are getting onto our social system, and it is busting the bank now."

The CRS expert was not alone in her assertion. Rep. Hilda Solis(D-CA), the lone Congressional Democrat at the hearing said, "Immigrants use less health care services than American citizens; immigrants use emergency rooms less than non-immigrants, the real problem with our health system is not immigrants, but the fact the system is broken." Adding that hearings were just a "big family squabble" for Republicans. Solis said, "We haven't spent enough time working in Congress on this issue. We don't even have a full quorum to discuss issues to pass. To me, it's just a facade."

Despite Congressman Norwood's claims about "Illegal immigrants busting the bank", recent studies do in fact back up Rep. Solis' position.

In July, the health care policy journal Health Affairs published a study that found that undocumented immigrants are not the cause of a public health crisis defined by over-crowded emergency departments, higher health care costs, and lower-quality primary care.

"What Accounts For Differences In The Use Of Hospital Emergency Departments Across U.S. Communities?" by Peter Cunningham, a senior fellow at the Center for Studying Health System Change in Washington, D.C. looked at 46,600 people living in 60 different communities and found that the communities with high levels of Hispanics and undocumented immigrants had far lesser rates of emergency department use than communities with low undocumented representation. The study also found that the largest cause of emergency department overcrowding was found to be an increased use of them as primary care facilities by native born Medicare and Medicaid recipients.

This sentiment was also echoed by The Hospital Association of Southern California, an organization that represents 170 different hospitals in the state. Despite the fact that California has the highest level of foreign-born in the nation at 26.2% of the population, with 60.8% of them being undocumented, the HASC said that blaming the undocumented for the current healthcare crisis takes the focus away from the true root causes of the problem.

In Focusing on Healthcare Costs of Illegal Immigrants Draws Attention Away from the Real Problem" the organizations Vice President, James Lott wrote that 80% of all unreimbursed care that Southern California is due to non-immigrant uninsured. "… you have to conclude that it's the larger problem of just simply having so many uninsured patients that is a key driver of rising hospital costs." and that "in the absence of strong political leadership on the question of insuring the uninsured" it is hospitals and patients with insurance who are forced to pick up the tab.

Norwood's demagoguery did not go unnoticed in the local press. The Gainesville Times said this of Norwood in a Sunday op-ed entitled: "Closing our minds to facts won't fix immigration mess"

" Illegal immigration is a real problem that needs real solutions, but those solutions should be based on facts, not guesswork and predetermined notions.

The Norwoods of the world are merely playing to the emotions of their voting base instead of trying to act like statesmen and solving problems with their heads.

We deserve better."

We as a nation deserve better.

Read More...

Summary only...

Sensenbrenner testy over accusations of bigotry

While in San Diego to preside over the House Republican traveling immigration road show last week, Judiciary Chairmen James Sensenbrenner sat down with the San Diego Union-Tribune editorial board for an interview. The architect of the House's strict enforcement only immigration bill that bears his name, and a chief spokesman for the anti-immigration wing of the Republican Party, had an oft times contentious interview as he tried to justify his positions on immigration reform.

As Ruben Navarrette Jr. reported today in his op-ed piece, "Is this an anti-Mexican debate?" the Wisconsin Republican was "likable but not very impressive."

Having been one of the chief forces in trying to move the "immigration crisis" to the front burner of national political discourse, Sensenbrenner now claims that it is "just one of many issues,” and Republicans were unlikely to suffer a backlash from voters if they fail to get anything done on immigration this year. He further backpedaled stating that the best way to attack the issue now might be to scrap all the current legislation and “start with a clean piece of paper and put together a clean bill that is neither the House bill nor the Senate bill - and then make sure it passes.”

Yet, it was Sensenbrenner's exchange with Navarrette about charges of bigotry that prompted the most animated exchange of the interview:

tags: immigration, Sensenbrenner, immigration reform , immigration hearing, HR4437, Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005

He was awfully thin-skinned when he talked – repeatedly – about “the name-calling . . . by a lot of the pro-immigrant advocates,” including officials of the Mexican government and protesters in Mexico City who, according to Sensenbrenner, have carried signs depicting him as a Nazi.

And he was evasive when I asked him about what he insisted was the major problem with the compromise plan offered by Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas. The plan rejects amnesty but provides guest workers for employers.

What concerns Sensenbrenner is that the plan “provides unlimited immigration from Mexico and Central America.” I asked him if that meant he'd like to see a return to the pre-1965 system when we had immigration quotas based on country of origin.

No, he insisted, he didn't support quotas, but he and some of his GOP colleagues did have concerns about an “immigration system heavily weighted toward Mexicans and Central Americans rather than people from other parts of the world.” Then, he tried to change the subject.

I pressed him on whether rhetoric like that fed the perception that Republicans are flirting with nativism or racism. If you say the problem is that there are too many Mexicans, I asked, then why isn't the conversation anti-Mexican?

He tried to change the subject again. “A lot of the conversation is anti-Mexican,” he said, “because the Mexican government is committing, at the very least, a sin of omission. It's to their advantage for people to go north so they don't have to educate them and provide. . . .”

“I'm not talking about the Mexican government,” I interrupted. “I'm talking about the tenor of the debate in this country . . . and when you say that what worries you about the Pence plan is that we could have unlimited migration from Mexico, if you're Mexican and you hear that, the response is: 'Well then, this is an anti-Mexican discussion. . . . ' ''

By now Sensenbrenner was agitated, but still not eager to answer the question. “Well, I can say that the Mexican government has been absolutely disingenuous in attacking me right from the very beginning. . . . ”

“If you don't want to answer the question, that's fine,” I said.

Then he went from agitated to angry. “Well,” he said, “the Mexican government, I'm sorry Ruben, has been responsible for that.”

He was talking about the ugliness of the debate. He's not the bad guy, he insisted.

“I have tried my darnedest to keep the debate on the issue and not get involved in race-baiting by anybody,” he said. “I'm trying to get a responsible immigration bill passed that treats with fairness Hispanics who wish to immigrate into the United States. . . . ”

Yet Sensenbrenner thinks it's fair to object to a proposed solution on the grounds that it would allow in too many Latinos, and then insists that he's not appealing to bigotry.

You could have fooled me.

Link

Read More...

Summary only...

Oh look ma' the circus is comin' to town.

It appears as though House Republicans plan on spending the rest of the summer break touring the country with the road company of their newest production; "The Great Immigration Dog and Pony Show." Announcing 21 more hearings in thirteen states between now and the grand finale on September 1st in Dubuque, Iowa, House Republicans plan on taking this leg of the tour even further into the heartland than on previous tours. To make sure that those who might not regularly have much exposure to "illegal immigration," or have much to say about immigration reform get their chance, the Republican leadership plans on taking their show to such places as Evansville, Ind.; Concord, N.H.; Glens Falls, N.Y.; Hamilton, Mont.; Grand Rapids, MI; and Bellingham, WA.

This move has only further lent fuel to the fire of critics who see the hearings as nothing more than a political ploy ... and rightfully so.


tags: immigration, Republican hearings, immigration reform , immigration hearing, Reid-Kennedy, S.2611


Like the first round of hearings, this round will feature testimony from politicians, military leaders, border patrol officials, local law enforcement, and various "experts" such as Robert Rector of the right-wing think tank, the Heritage Foundation and Jack Riley of the RAND Corporation.

As the road show moves further from the border the topics appear to become even more political. Along the border topics have ranged from, “What are the criminal consequences of illegal immigration along the Southern Border?” to “What is the state of technical surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities for monitoring the efforts of terrorists and drug cartels to infiltrate American soil through the Southern Border?” When they move towards the heartland the emphasis of the hearings appears to bashing the Senate's comprehensive bill which has been childishly renamed the "Reid-Kenndey" bill by House Republicans.

August 10th in Nashville, TN
Energy & Commerce Committee
“What is the impact of the Reid-Kennedy bill's amnesty provisions on the healthcare delivery system and for individual American taxpayers?”

August 14 , 2006 in Gainesville, GA
Education and the Workforce Committee
"What is the impact on American workers and businesses of the Reid-Kennedy bill's provisions mandating Davis-Bacon wage rates for guest-workers?"

August 15 , 2006 in Dalton, GA
Energy and Commerce Committee
"What is the impact of the Reid-Kennedy bill's amnesty provisions on the health care delivery system and for individual American taxpayers?"

August 24 , 2006 in Concord, NH
Judiciary Committee
"How do illegal immigrants impact the costs of healthcare, local education, and other social services, and would these costs increase under Reid-Kennedy immigration bill? What is the societal impact of the Reid-Kennedy bill's grant of amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants?"

August 25 , 2006 in Upstate NY
Judiciary Committee
"What are the current risks of terrorists, narcotics smugglers, and human traffickers infiltrating the United States, and what role do secure identification documents play in limiting those risks? Does the Reid-Kennedy bill undermine efforts to limit those risks?"

August 28 , 2006 in Hamilton, MT
Resources Committee
"What efforts need to be undertaken to secure the federal lands along the Northern Border to prevent drug trafficking and other illegal activities? Could the Reid-Kennedy bill make these efforts more difficult? "

August 29 , 2006 in Evansville, IN
Judiciary Committee
"How are U. S. workers impacted, and potentially displaced by the Reid-Kennedy bill?"

September 1 , 2006 in Dubuque, IA
Judiciary Committee
"Do the Reid-Kennedy bill's amnesty provisions repeat the mistakes of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986?"

Link

How did the House leadership choose the sites to host their traveling road show?

Obviously it wasn't proximity to the border or experience with large numbers of undocumented immigrants, as many of these hearing sites are in the regions least effected by immigration issues. But they do have one thing in common – vulnerable Republican candidates in heated races.

Several immigration hearings are being held far from the border with Mexico, in districts where Republican lawmakers are engaged in competitive races for the House, including Evansville, Ind.; Concord, N.H.; and Glens Falls, N.Y. Hearings are also being held in Dubuque, Iowa, where Republicans are fighting to hold on to the seat being vacated by Representative Jim Nussle, and in Hamilton, Mont., where Senator Conrad Burns faces a tough challenge.

Jeff Lungren, a spokesman for the House Judiciary Committee, which set hearings in four battleground districts, said more than 60 members of the House had asked for immigration hearings in their hometowns.

Lawmakers and political analysts say the hearings may help vulnerable Republicans by rallying conservatives, who view Democrats as being weak on border security, and by drawing attention away from other issues like the war in Iraq and President Bush’s diminished approval ratings.
New York Times

Apparently for Republican House candidates struggling to retain power, getting to have an immigration hearing in your district is like getting box seats to the Superbowl or tickets to this season's hottest Broadway show.

One group that will be showing up at the hearings to make sure they can stir up their own special brand of immigration magic are the minutemen, whose leadership has put out a call for participation.

We need your help now!

Minutemen supporters and volunteers: please be sure to attend these Congressional hearings in your area and interact with the Members of Congress and their staffs. This is not a request to protest, but to attend the hearings, and talk with Congressmen to help inform them and make your voice heard.

Let them know that you are a Minuteman or support the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, and you want the borders secured NOW.

Inform them that because of broken faith we do not trust the government to secure our borders, that any guest-worker Amnesty must not be in any new legislation, that they must PROVE that the borders are secured before any deliberations will commence on what to do with the estimated 12-30 million people already here illegally.

Let them know clearly that terrorist groups like al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas and their facilitators in Iran and Syria know what we all know—that our borders are disgracefully and dangerously open to penetration by our enemies. Impress upon them that the American people will not tolerate this national security risk any longer. We will not stand idly by and let political pandering jeopardize our safety and sovereignty.

Secure the borders FIRST, NOW, and ONLY. Prove it.

Save The Dates! Be sure to attend!



minutemanhq.com

So gather up the kids, buy some cotton candy, peanuts and balloons and get ready for the big show, because the Great Immigration Dog and Pony Show will be coming to a town or city near you soon.

Read More...

Summary only...

Hastert and Boehner do Joseph Goebbels proud

In a quest to keep a tenuous grip on their ever decreasing hold on power in Washington, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and his new "enforcer," John Boehner have taken a page from a master of nefarious propaganda in hopes to further obfuscate the already confusing immigration debate.

Hoping to re-frame the debate more to their political liking, they have continued their effort to portray the bipartisan immigration reform bill that came out of the Senate as a Democratic effort despite the fact that the bill was sponsored by six Republicans and only one Democrat . With heads firmly planted in the sand, the House leadership, wishing to underplay the huge rift in their own party, upped the ante once again when announcing further hearings in their summer campaign to make immigration a key issue in the upcoming midterm elections.

The deception started only hours after the Senate passed its comprehensive plan back in May and has been stepped up in recent weeks. With the announcement by House Republicans of another round of hearings scheduled in August in their continuing immigration carnival road-show, they have apparently taken Joseph Goebbels advice that "“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it" to heart.


The bipartisan Senate immigration bill authored by Republican John McCain [R-AZ] has become, according to House leadership, "the Democrat Reid-Kennedy immigration bill" and will be a major target in the next round of hearings


tags: immigration, Congress hearings, HR4437 , Reid-Kennedy, Hastert


The bill, which first began it's life as the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act", introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on May 15, 2005, took over a year to pass through the Senate. During that time numerous changes and compromises were made, co-sponsors came and went, and its name was changed. On May 25, 2006 the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006" was passed in a bi-partisan vote of 62-36.

Up until that point the bill was commonly called the "McCain-Kennedy" bill, named after its two key authors.

Within days, House Republicans decided it needed a new name; the "Reid-Kennedy Immigration Bill," to make it sound like an effort of Senate Democrats despite the fact that Reid played no roll in authoring the bill and Kennedy was the only Democrat to co-sponsor its final version.

From House Majority Leader John Boehner comes this:

Unfortunately, the Democrat Reid-Kennedy immigration bill makes the problem even worse. Local law enforcement is currently able to assist the federal government in enforcing both civil and criminal violations of immigration laws. The Reid-Kennedy bill, however, would only allow local law enforcement to assist in enforcing criminal violations of immigration law -- not civil violations.

In other words, rather than empowering them to detain illegal aliens, the Reid-Kennedy bill would further restrict local law enforcement’s ability to act on immigration violations.

The September 11th hijackers had only committed civil immigration violations. Under the Democrat Reid-Kennedy bill, local police would have no power to arrest possible terrorists who commit similar offenses and hand them over to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). In contrast, the House-passed bill includes provisions championed by Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-GA) aimed at empowering state and local law enforcement to investigate and apprehend illegal aliens on a voluntary basis.

Last week, Republicans announced a set of five principles that should be reflected in immigration reform legislation. Among them:

Republicans strongly support initiatives to secure our borders and provide additional resources to federal and state authorities to strengthen border patrol efforts.

Republicans want to enact a strong bill that secures our borders and puts a premium on strict enforcement of our immigration laws. The Reid-Kennedy immigration bill is the wrong direction for our country, and exemplifies the notorious weakness of Capitol Hill Democrats on defense and border security issues.
Link

Sponsored by Judiciary Chairmen Arlen Specter[R-PA], and co-sponsored by Sen Brownback, Sam [R-KS] , Sen Graham, Lindsey [R-SC], Sen Hagel, Chuck [R-NE], Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [D-MA], Sen Martinez, Mel [R-FL], and Sen McCain, John [R-AZ], the bill is clearly a Republican affair, but that doesn't make for good political theater.

The other factor in play is that as the House whips up their base with a mix of xenophobia, fear, and racism, they don't want to turn that rabid base against their own party. This is quite a precarious balancing act since the Senate bill mirrors the wishes President Bush and his allies on this issue. Additionally having the presumptive 2008 Presidential frontrunner John McCain's name attached to his own bill presents the House leaders with a problem.

Their solution – ignore the facts – create a false reality – and keep repeating the lie until it becomes the truth... or so they hope




“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Josheph Goebbels

Read More...

Summary only...

Making sense of the GOP's immigration schizophrenia

Last week the Republican immigration dog and pony show hit the road. Like any good circus midway, it contains a mix of freak shows, fixed games and snake-oil salesmen whose main purpose is to pick the pockets, or in this case steal the votes, of unsophisticated local rubes. Utilizing double talk to prey on the public's naiveté, these political carnies offer up a midway where the prizes promised will never be worth the price of the game.

Under the big top, it appears the acts in the three rings are at odds with each other, with clowns, elephants, and monkeys running amok. In one ring, House Republicans feature a xenophobic revival meeting with appeal to a rough trade mix of minutemen and border cowboys. In another, Bush juggles for his uptown clientele. Yesterday, Ringmaster Karl took the center ring, and performed some slight-of-hand to rival any two-bit patent medicine purveyor as he attempted to convince the Latino activist group La Raza that Republicans had their best interests at heart.




tags: immigration, Republican hearings, guest workers , immigration hearing, HR4437, S.2611




All this would be an interesting summer distraction if it were not so serious. Like a killer-clown horror movie where the harmless sideshow freaks turn on the unsuspecting townsfolk, it's just a matter of time before the Republican immigration carnival performers unite to begin their real work. What seems like chaos at present may very well turn out to be nothing more than a warm up act for the main event. At some point the Republicans will reach a "compromise" that will contain all the worst aspects of their proposals. Having spent the summer priming the public with a staged wrestling match, the compromise can then be heralded as the most reasonable agreement between the warring factions. The American electorate will then be presented with this years major distractive wedge issue. There will be no talk of Iraq or Katrina or the myriad of other conservative policy failures ... just immigration 24/7.

It seems impossible at the present time that any sort of compromise could ever be reached under the Republican big top, but if we listen carefully to what their saying, a common ground can be found... and it's not pretty.

The House Republican sideshow began last week with photo-op hearings along the border in San Diego and Laredo. Featuring hand-picked panels to rehash the merits of the seven month old Sensenbrenner bill, the hearing brought out the vocal right-wing fringe.

About 200 people, including scores of Minuteman Project border activists waving "Don't Tread on Me" flags, attended the House hearing at the Imperial Beach Border Patrol station on a bluff overlooking the Pacific Ocean. Some of their cars sported "Tancredo for President" bumper stickers, a reference to Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Republican and an advocate for sharply restricting immigration -- who, so far, isn't running.

Link

Even the House spokesmen are not making too much of an effort to present their hearings as anything more than blatant political posturing. Usually Congress holds hearings prior to the passage of legislation to research an issue and look for solutions to a problem. In this case House Republicans have been frank in stating that the goal of the two month road show is to create a negotiating tool by rallying public support and discrediting the Senate bipartisan compromise plan.

The goal is to convince the Senate and the American public that a bill approved by the House of Representatives that emphasizes enforcement is better than a Senate bill, said Rep. Ed Royce, R-Fullerton (Orange County), chairman of the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation, which sponsored the hearing.

"It's an educational effort on our Senate colleagues and the American people, because as the public becomes more cognizant about the border, the pressure increases in our direction," Royce said after the hearing.

Link

As the House members posed for photo-ops with border patrol agents and local sheriffs, George Bush went on his own immigration road trip. First appearing with Larry King then following up with a press conference in Chicago the next day. Bush's comments, although familiar by now, opened a window of opportunity for Republican compromise.

From Larry King Live:

KING: We're back in the Blue Room with President and Mrs. Bush. Immigration. This law. When is it going to be passed and did you hedge back a little. You now say the other day that you first want to see that the borders are safe before we work on legalizing the immigrants.

G. BUSH: I don't think I said that. I have always said we need a comprehensive plan. First and foremost we've got to enforce the border and that means more border patrol agents, better technology, ending catch and release. Secondly that we've got to have interior enforcement. But I don't see how you can enforce a border unless you have a rational way for people to come here and work temporarily.

--snip--

KING: Well, we had amnesty in other cases in the past.

G. BUSH: I know but it won't work in this case. Just not the right thing to do. If you're trying to solve the problem, bringing people automatic citizenship isn't solving the problem. It's creating another problem, which is another 8 million people or so will come and hope to get granted automatic citizenship.

Secondly, is you can't reward people who broke the law because you've got people standing in line legally, because we're a nation of laws, we've got to uphold the laws. But this is -- we have a duty to enforce the border and I think everybody agrees with that and -- and we are. We are expanding agents, and we're expanding technologies, but I think it needs -- there needs to be a plan that recognizes people coming here to do work Americans aren't doing. And they ought to be allowed to do so on a temporary basis for a limited period of years provided they pass a criminal background check and then go home.

Link

What will it take "unite" these warring factions?

Bush is already willing to give the House Republicans their "enforcement first." He's recently met with Mike Pence (R-IN) who has stumbled on the holly grail for Republican compromise on this issue; privatization of the immigration processes. You can almost hear the squeals of delight coming from Dick Cheney's office at the thought of doling out no-bid contracts not only for border security and immigrant incarceration but also immigrant processing.

So it appears the only missing puzzle piece in a Republican compromise is: How do they assure a constant supply of low cost workers for businesses after they get rid of the 12 mil undocumented immigrants already here using Tancredo's attrition plan?

The answer is simple ... Bush's guest workers. Notice how on Larry King he stresses the need for these workers to be here "on a temporary basis for a limited period of years provided they pass a criminal background check and then go home" That's the key.

Up until now the guest worker program has been tied to a plan to allow workers to legalize their status after a given amount of time and work towards citizenship. It was a key aspect of the compromise Senate bill that allowed some Unions and immigrant activists groups to get behind the bill. They figured that as long as the guest workers had some hope of naturalization they could overlook the exploitive nature of importing workers on a temporary basis.

If Bush was to eliminate that one provision, he could probably sell the plan to Sensenbrenner and the anti-immigration House Republicans. This kind of compromise would allow the House Republicans to close the border to maintain the racial balance that so concerns them. They could also criminalize the undocumented and go after the employers to drive out the 12 million already here. Then allow in a controlled flow of indentured servants to do the jobs that they all know Americans don't really want.

All Bush has to do is figure out a way to assure the House Republicans that the temporary workers will leave when their term of service is over.

At the moment that part of the plan has not been worked out or perhaps revealed, but I would bet it will have a "privatization" component. It could be data bases, biometrics, or microchip implants, but at the end of the day it will definitely involve huge government contracts handed out to big Republican donors.

As the summer progresses we need to watch the movement of the Republicans on this issue. At some point Ringmaster Karl will blow his whistle and the chaos we see now under the big top will subside as all the circus players start to perform in unison. The jugglers, lion tamers, and acrobats will take the stage as the clowns and monkeys take their leave, and once again the Great Republican Election Show will begin.

Read More...

Summary only...