Immigration Reform: Shame on all of us for we have failed

Twenty-one years ago, at the height of his political power, Ronald Reagan moved through Congress the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. It granted amnesty to the roughly 3mil undocumented immigrants and promised increased border security and stricter enforcement of employer sanctions. We now know that that law was not only highly flawed, but set the stage for today's current immigration debate.

Today as the Senate prepares to vote on the current immigration reform bill, we are once again at a crossroads. …and once again we are about to take a path that will most assuredly lead to problems of even greater scope and scale than were ever caused by IRCA.

But before going into detail as to how great a mistake we are about to make, we need take to look at just how we got to this place


The rumblings about immigration began long before the 2004 Presidential race. Prior to being thrust into reality by the events of September 2001, a newly elected President Bush had made "immigration reform", in the form of a greatly increased guest worker program, a cornerstone of his new administration's policy agenda.

Back-burnered by world events, the issue lay dormant for a few years as a growing current of anti-immigrant sentiment grew in the right-wing of the President's party. Shortly after salvaging the 2004 election with a combination of wedge issues and personal attacks, the Republicans went looking for a new wedge to divide the Democrats and bring out the party faithful. Newly appointed Democratic Chairman, Howard Dean, warned at that time that immigration would be the next great wedge.

With a highly unpopular war, record federal and trade deficits, wage stagnation, a growing health care crisis, and an under-funded and failing education system, only a wedge issue of epic proportions could save the Republicans from sure defeat in the next election cycle.

And so the "immigration crisis" was born.

To the Democrat's delight the wedge has blown up in the Republican's face and divided the party as never before. Exposing the fragility of the coalition first put together by Nixon's Southern Strategy and honed by Reagan with the inclusion of the Christian Right and Reagan Democrats, the immigration issue, fueled by nativist xenophobia on one side and corporate greed on the other, has cleaved the party down the middle.

But in so doing, it has now left the nation equally divided and put us in a position where one of the worst pieces of legislation ever written is about to leave the Senate.

But now it is no longer solely a Republican problem. Democrats, through their inability or unwillingness to stick to the liberal and progressive ideals on which the modern party was built, are now equally culpable in enacting legislation that will manage to not only virtually enslave millions of current and future immigrants in a system of second-class citizenry, but also attacks the very working Americans who have long been the backbone of the party.

The greatest failure of the Reagan legislation, contrary to popular opinion, was not its lack of enforcement and employer oversight, or an amnesty that sent a message of permissiveness to a world anxious to take advantage of our perceived weakness.

In the years following the legislation there was no great rush to the border by all those "waiting for the next amnesty." In fact, the numbers of undocumented immigrants remained stable at around 3.5 mil for nearly ten years, until the mid-nineties, when border crossing soared.

The same is true of border enforcement. In the 21 years since the bill was enacted the number of border patrol agents has increased from 3,243 in 1986 to 11, 106 today. Spending on border security has gone from $700 mil to $2,792 mil.

Additionally with the enactment of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 hundreds of miles of border walls and fences were built along the most heavily populated and traveled illegal entry routes, yet with all this added man-power and spending, the number of border apprehensions went down from 1,692,544 in 1986 to 1,188,977 currently, while the undocumented population soared to 12 mil.

This is because the true flaw in the Reagan legislation was that it never changed the fundamental dynamics of illegal immigration because in didn't make the needed and fundamental changes in the legal immigration system.

Reagan essentially asked for a "do-over" and got it without changing the rules of the game. There were no quota changes, no changes in the number green cards issued, no change in processing of paperwork, no changes in the path to citizenship for those qualified, no provisions made for any further immigration. Basically 3mil undocumented immigrants...many of them refugees from Reagan's Dirty Wars in Central America were made legal essentially over night ...then business was resumed as usual....without addressing why there were 3 mil undocumented immigrants here in the first place.

And we are about to repeat the same situation again. In fact, outside of the roughly 3mil green cards that will be used to alleviate the backlog that was caused by our current failed system...once it's been cleared up, there will be 200,000 less green cards available on a yearly basis then there are even today…. and we all know what that will lead to....in five years or ten...we'll be right back where we started.

Additionally, we will end up with 12 million people in the perpetual limbo of the Z visa system where they will pay continual fees to remain in legal status while never being able to convert to LPR status (green card holder) due to the constraints of a merit system intended to keep them on the margins of society while favoring the kind of high-skilled workers already stressing certain sectors of the native –born workforce through the various temporary worker programs already in place such as the H1-b visa program.

These perpetual Z workers will never become citizens, never fully join society, never have a voice in the political system, and never achieve the rights all workers deserve to organize and demand fair treatment due to the fact that their very ability to stay in the country will hinge upon their ability to remain employed. If they get fired …and are not re-employed within sixty days …they lose all rights and privileges. … no matter how long they've been here.

But, perhaps the most insidious aspect of this legislation is the new temporary worker program which will serve no purpose outside of supplying a perpetual supply of little more than indentured servants to a corporate system all too willing to exploit foreign workers to keep the wages of all workers artificially low.

These are only the most glaring faults of the legislation, but anyone whose read through it can attest to the hundreds of loopholes, infringements on basic rights and protections that will not only apply to immigrants but all US citizens, capitulations to business interests and lack of protections of workers both immigrant and native-born.

But who is to blame for this monstrosity?

It's easy to blame the politicians, the corporate boogiemen, the opposition party, DINOS, RINOS, the DLC, Bush, special interests, and lobbyists.

But the only ones we can really blame are ourselves. The liberals, the progressives, the left, the unions …. All of those who are supposed to be the conscience of the Democratic party.

WE had an opportunity, after twenty one years, to right a wrong, to fix a broken system, but instead we sat back either relishing the meltdown of the opposition party, or spent the time infighting.

As we have done so many times in the past, we have allowed our small differences to divide us. Those concerned with the human rights issues surrounding immigration reform fight with those advocating for H1-b visa reform. Those who favor guest worker programs as a path towards citizenship fight with those who oppose the plans on the grounds they are exploitive.

We have allowed those who first brought this issue to the forefront to frame the debate. We argue in the language of the Republican right and corporate wings. We argue in the language of Lou Dobbs, Tamar Jacoby, Tom Tancredo and George Bush. "Open Borders", "willing employers" "amnesty", "rule of law", "xenophobe" "anchor baby", "Mexican invasion", "English only", "Nation of immigrants", "Jobs Americans won't do"...this is how we have argued this debate….and shame on us for doing so.

These are their words … not ours. These terms were not part of the Democratic lexicon. They were spawned in the think tanks and PR firms of the Manhattan Institute and Frank Luntz.

We could have held firm to our values and beliefs as liberals and progressives.

• We could have focused on workers rights and workplace enforcement of labor laws.



• We could have focused on addressing the root causes of migration and demanded changes to trade agreements and foreign policy to guarantee a change of the conditions in sender nations.



• We could have worked to change the quota system to ensure that it reflected our true labor needs as opposed to those imposed by corporate interests.



• We could have demanded that all new immigrants were guaranteed the same worker protections and rights afforded all workers to end the exploitive practices that lower wages for all.



• We could have ended all the exploitive guest worker programs that lower standards for all workers.



• We could have fixed the legal immigration system so that it worked for all Americans and those wishing to become Americans.

But instead we dropped the ball. We allowed ourselves to lose sight of our core beliefs and got caught up in a Republican cat fight.

We could have led on this issue - instead we followed. And now we will reap what we have sown.

To those who sat back and watched the Republican melt-down in glee, I say shame on you.

To those who allowed themselves to be blinded by the faux populism of the Republican right, I say shame on you.

To those whose rigid adherence to humanitarian concerns allowed them to lose sight of the bigger picture, I say shame on you.

To liberals, progressives and Democrats, I say shame on us…shame on us all.

Read More...

Summary only...

This week's upcoming immigration fight

The Senate spent most of today's afternoon session on little more than a series of long-winded speeches in attempts to set the stage for this weeks upcoming immigration fight.

Tomorrow morning the main event should resume with a series debates on proposed amendments and voting.

With the defeat of the Vitter (R-LA) amendment to strike title VI from the bill by a vote of 29-66 and the Dorgan (D-ND) amendment to kill the Y-visa program by a vote of 31-64 during the first week of debate, it's appearing as though the bill's opponents will not be able to muster the needed votes to kill this legislation in the Senate.

Having tested the two most controversial aspects of the bill, the earned legalization provisions that have been characterized as "amnesty" by the right, and the guest worker program opposed by those on both sides of the debate - and failed on both accounts - it looks highly unlikely that opponents will be able to stop the bill on lesser grounds.

Not surprisingly, the World Street Journal reported this past weekend that business interests have now moved their lobbying efforts over to the House.

In a further sign that passage is expected, business lobbyists and others seeking changes in the bill already were starting to make their cases in the House, which would take up the issue after Senate passage. The Bush administration was pushing hard for a top business priority: increasing the number of laborers who would be allowed in each year under a new temporary-worker program.

WSJ

The same is true of those on the left looking to modify the legislation. The Mexican American Political Association (MAPA) has advised that while still working to make the Senate bill more palatable through the amendment process, it is now the House that should become the center of focus.

The debate on and the amendments to the "grand bargain" in the Senate will continue this week, but shortly the debate will move to the House. In reality, this is where we will have more leverage. The main focus of our attention should be on the House Subcommittee on Immigration, chaired by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren.

Link

Yet with that said, there are still many important amendments to be considered by the Senate, and they will be taking up 14 of them in the next few days...some the bill's architect, Jon Kyl (R-AZ), characterized today as deal breakers.

This weeks upcoming amendments

Those highlighted in red are highly troubling and should be opposed by all looking for meaningful progressive reform

1. Grassley 1166 - This amendment would broaden the restriction on judicial review of visa revocations. Currently, judicial review of visa revocation is already severely restricted. Judicial review is, however, permitted in the context of removal proceedings if the revocation is the sole ground for removal.


2. Cornyn 1184 - The amendment severely limits who would be eligible for legalization programs. Makes anyone who is inadmissible under 212(a) ineligible for the legalization program. This is virtually the entire undocumented population. Also makes ineligible anyone unlawfully present for one year or more and subsequently reentered. Significantly expands class of “Aggravated Felony” crimes and makes them retroactive. Gives the AG unreviewable discretion to use secret evidence to determine if an alien is ‘described in’ the national security exclusions within immigration law. Adds new grounds of deportability for convictions relating to social security account numbers or social security cards and convictions relating to identity fraud


3. Dodd-Menendez 1199 - amendment would undo damage in the compromise that makes it more difficult for the parents of U.S. citizens to obtain a visa. The compromise would place a limit on the number of visas for parents at roughly half the current usage. The amendment retains the limitation but raises it to 90,000 visas per year or roughly the current usage.


4. Menendez-Hagel 1194 - to extend the date for those eligible for back-log reduction green cards from May 2005 to Jan. 2007 to ensure that the entire family backlog already in line to become legal permanent residents will get addressed. The current bill would essentially toss out all applications filed after May 2005. Also calls for increased quotas in all categories (family based, employment based, and asylum/refugee) of green cards set aside for back-log reduction.


5. McConnell 1170 - Each State shall require individuals casting ballots in an election for Federal office in person to present a current valid photo identification issued by a governmental entity before voting. Each State shall be required to comply with the requirements of subsection (a) on and after January 1, 2008


6. Feingold 1176 – to set up a commission on wartime treatment of European Americans of Italian and German decent during WWII and a commission to address the wartime treatment of Jewish refugees during WWII.


7. Durbin-Grassley 1231 - to require all employers seeking a Y worker to first attempt to recruit US workers. Removes exemptions for employers in occupations and areas that the DOL has determined there is a shortage of US workers.


8. Sessions 1234 - to deny Earned Income Tax Credit to Y and Z visa holders paying back taxes.


9. Sessions 1235 - to deny Earned Income Tax Credit to legal immigrants with less than five years in the US,


10. Lieberman 1191 - to improve treatment of immigrants seeking asylum and to establish clear standards for treatment of immigrants in detention.


11. Allard 1189 - to remove the supplemental schedule for merit-based points for Z visa holders that gives credit for past employment, home ownership and having medical insurance when applying for green cards. In essence would eliminate the majority of Z visa holders from eventually obtaining permanent residency.


12. Cornyn 1250 - removes the confidentiality protections for legalization applicants and orders the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State to provide the information furnished in applications filed under section 601 and 602, and any other information derived from such furnished information, to any law enforcement entity, intelligence agency, national security agency, component of the Department of Homeland Security, court, or grand jury in connection with a criminal or civil investigation.


13. Clinton-Hagel 1183 - to ensure that the spouses and children of legal permanent immigrants can immigrant into the United States to be with their family members.


14. Obama-Menendez 1202 - to sunset the point system after five years. The Senate never had the opportunity to debate the system out in the open; the result is a proposal that would gut family-sponsored immigration

Call your Senators – 1-800-417-7666 in English or 1-800-882-2005 en Espanol

UPDATES:

Grassley (#1166) abolishing judicial review on visa revocations made by the Secretary of State. Agreed to by unanimous consent on 6/4/07

Allard (#1189) to remove the supplemental schedule for merit-based points for Z visa holders. Failed by vote of 62-31 on 6/5/07

Durbin-Grassley (#1231) to require all employers seeking a Y worker to first attempt to recruit US workers. Passed 71-22 on 6/5/07

Read More...

Summary only...

The good, bad and ugly: Today's Senate immigration action

It's a given that no one likes the current immigration compromise moving through the Senate. So there's no need to rehash all the pro's and con's of the bill.

But since there is still a chance this thing might see the light of day and actually make it out of the Senate, it's important to try our best to influence those who are supposed to represent us to make the necessary changes to it.

In general, the debate thus far has followed a predictable path. Democrats, in concert with the labor unions and the immigrants-rights lobby, have been trying to limit guest worker programs and add more labor protections to them. They have also tried to ease the quotas and restrictions on family based immigration and family reunification.

The Republican immigration hawks are trying to stiffen penalties and limit participation in legalization programs, and the corporate wings of both parties are just trying to get the bill through with as few changes as possible.

Yesterday we had one major change to the bill when the total number of Y-visas guest workers was cut in half. There were also a few important modifications made by both side of the aisle.

• Senator Bingaman (D-NM) entered an amendment to cut the number of Y-visa guest workers from 400k to 200K – despite opposition from Kennedy (D-MA) and Martinez (R-FA) - the amendment passed - 74-24.


• Senator Feinstein (D-CA) introduced an amendment that attempts to improve the way the federal government treats those unaccompanied alien children in its custody who have no other family members in this country - amendment was agreed to by voice vote.


• Senator Graham (R-SC) introduced an amendment calling for mandatory minimum penalties for those who have been removed from the country and attempt to reenter unlawfully. The amendment calls for a minimum mandatory jail sentence of 60 days for anyone previously removed and who attempt an unlawful reentry or is found to be present unlawfully in this country. It also calls for jail sentences ranging from a minimum of one year to a maximum of 20 years for those who attempt to reenter unlawfully after having been convicted, prior to removal, of 3 misdemeanors or 1 felony. - amendment was accepted by unanimous consent.


• Senator Gregg (R-NH) introduced an amendment to provide additional resources aimed at shoring up the southwest border, above what is already called for in the underlying bill. Specifically, the amendment calls for an additional 375 miles of real and virtual fencing along the border, additional CBP agents, and detention beds above what is already called for in the underlying bill It also requires certification that the requirements have been satisfied before implementation of certain other provisions in the larger bill can be triggered , including the new worker program. Finally, that the Secretary of DHS certify in writing that they have achieved and demonstrated operational control over 100% of the U.S.-Mexico land border. - amendment was accepted by voice

That brings us to today's action:

THE GOOD

Menendez/Hagel Amendment - amendment to restore the ability of over 800,000 U.S. citizens to be reunited with close family members. Without this bipartisan amendment, they would lose their place in the legal immigration line and get shifted into the untested and unpredictable Point System for visa allocation. Reducing opportunities for citizens who have waited to be reunited with close family members should not be part of the overall compromise. This amendment limits the damage to families and should be the first amendment to be debated and voted upon today.

Clinton/Hagel Amendment – this amendment would treat spouses and minor children of permanent residents as 'immediate relatives' for immigration category purposes. If adopted, the amendment would mean that spouses and minor children would no longer have to endure up to five years of waiting for their visas.

Menendez/Obama Amendments - offer two amendments that would reduce the negative impact on family reunification that would be created by the new Point System. (1)would end the Point System after 5 years unless Congress studies and extends it and (2) give family members a better chance of emerging from the Point System with enough points to qualify for a visa

Dodd/Hatch Amendment - This bipartisan amendment would undo damage in the compromise that makes it more difficult for the parents of U.S. citizens to obtain a visa. The compromise would place a limit on the number of visas for parents at roughly half the current usage. The amendment retains the limitation but raises it to 90,000 visas per year or roughly the current usage.

Sanders (I-V) Amendment(#1223) an amendment to significantly increase employer fees on H-1B Visas and use the resulting resources for scholarships in math, science, engineering and nursing education. The scholarship program would award merit-based scholarships of up to $15,000 per year for students to pursue associate, undergraduate or graduate level degrees in mathematics, engineering, nursing, medicine, or computer science. The scholarships would be awarded to over 65,000 American students each year and would be funded by increasing the current $1,500 employer fee per H-1B worker to $8,500 per worker.

THE BAD

McCaskill Amendment - . In addition to the $5,000 fine, would add various application fees and eight or more year process for eventual legal status that is already in the compromise, the potential McCaskill Amendment would force individuals seeking legal status to admit to the misdemeanor of entering the United States without authorization and to perform hundreds of hours of 'community service.'

THE UGLY

Cornyn (R-TX) Amendment - Expanding Restrictions on Immigration Benefits and Due Process (#1184)
The amendment severely limits who would be eligible for legalization programs. Makes anyone who is inadmissible under 212(a) ineligible for the legalization program. This is virtually the entire undocumented population. Also makes ineligible anyone unlawfully present for one year or more and subsequently reentered. Significantly expands class of “Aggravated Felony” crimes and makes them retroactive. Gives the AG unreviewable discretion to use secret evidence to determine if an alien is ‘described in’ the national security exclusions within immigration law. Adds new grounds of deportability for convictions relating to social security account numbers or social security cards and convictions relating to identity fraud

Coleman (R-MN) Amendment– (#1158) - an amendment to outlaw state and local policies that prevent their employees—including police and health and safety workers—from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is “probable cause” to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented. Essentially outlaws "sanctuary" legalization or policies by municipalities and states. There is no exception where such policies are necessary to protect the health and safety or promote the welfare of the community


There are probably a few I've missed as these amendments are coming out fast and furious.

Please take the time to call your Senators to let them know what you think of these various amendments.

If we are to end up with this legislation passing, we need to do all we can to make sure it's at least better than what we started with at the beginning of the process. It will be a long summer of immigration debate so get ready to start participating ....or you've got no one to blame but yourself if when it's all over and you don't like what we end up with.

Call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 to be directly connected to your Senators’ offices. OR Call your senators using this toll-free number: 1-800-417-7666

[UPDATE]: 6:00 PM EST - Coleman Amendment defeated by one vote. - Sanders Amendment passes 59-35

Read More...

Summary only...

MPI releases data on merit based point systems for immigration

The Migration Policy Institute, a non-profit think tanks that studies global migration and refugee policies , has released a report that sheds some additional light on the proposed "merit system" contained in the compromise immigration reform legislation now being debated in the Senate.

The report, authored by the Institute's President, Demetrios Papademetriou, who is viewed as a leading expert on the use of point systems internationally and has advised more than 20 countries on their immigration policies, looks at how point systems work in general, and more importantly examines recent US immigration trends to see how various immigrant groups from around the world would be effected by the new proposal.

The MPI backgrounder titled, "Proposed Points System and Its Likely Impact on Prospective Immigrants", looks at the current demographic data on the foreign born in the United States as it relates to the immigrant selection criteria expected to be part of "merit system" proposal. These include age, educational attainment, occupation, English proficiency, and labor force participation.

In the report, Papademetriou sets four criteria by which to judge the effectiveness of any point based system:

Things To Watch For

At the end of the day, points selection systems are a bit like government budgets: They tell the reader where a government and a society’s priorities lie. The following are the things to watch for in that regard:

1. The “pass mark,” that is, the points total one would have to earn in order to be admitted to the United States. Setting a high pass mark would likely disqualify applicants with fewer formal skills and less education  but skills which may nonetheless be essential. If the pass mark is allowed to fluctuate (the term of art is “float”) those with the highest formal qualifications and degrees will crowd out all others.

2. The overall number of visas allocated to points selected immigrants. The supply of visas would always be lower than the demand for them by people eager to come to the United States. However, if the number of visas allocated and the difficultly of obtaining sufficient points for entry are not aligned, and not all who earn enough points to qualify for visas can obtain them, the immigration system would once again become clogged by large and growing backlogs.

3. The internal distribution of points—both the categories chosen but, more importantly, the weight distribution within each category. Allocating many points for education but few for employment in high-demand occupations such as carpenters and home health aides, for example, would skew the immigration system toward the high-skilled. Allocating many points for age (youth) or for participation in a proposed apprenticeship program but fewer for employment in a specialty occupation requiring a college degree would skew immigration toward the low skilled. Small changes in the allocation of points could have very large ramifications for the composition of immigrants granted entry through a merit-based system.

4. Mechanisms for revising or adjusting the system. Many of the current problems in the US immigration system – visa supply being out of line with labor force supply and demand, high rates of illegal immigration, persistent backlogs, and systemic delays  all have roots in the inflexibility of the current immigration system. Revisions to the immigration system can happen more quickly and with less national anguish if flexibility is built into the statute and Congress does not need to revisit immigration law on a regular basis in order to update laws to match constantly changing social, economic, and demographic realities. The qualifications desired of immigrants in 2009 may not be the qualifications desired in 2012 or 2020, so the ability to review the points system and revise as needed/desired would become crucial.

Proposed Points System and Its Likely Impact on Prospective Immigrants, Immigration Policy Institute

In light of MPI's criteria for effective point systems, we must look at exactly what has been proposes in the current legislation.

The proposed merit system is intended to replace the current "employment based" system for allotting green cards which has relied on employer sponsorship as well as other criteria for determining eligibility. Under the proposed legislation the current number of employment based green cards of 140,000 would be replaced as follows:

Merit worldwide ceiling: Sets 3 different worldwide ceiling levels.

First five fiscal years post-enactment will be set at the level made available during FY05 ( 247K).

• 10K set aside for exceptional Y guestworker visa holders (although Y program won’t be up and running for at least 18 months – 2 years)


• 90K set aside for reduction of employment-based backlog existing on date of enactment


Next 3 or 4 fiscal years (until first undocumented Z visas can start adjusting), sets level at 140K

• 10K set aside for exceptional Y visa holders


• 90K set aside for employment-based reduction of backlog existing on date of enactment


Once undocumented start adjusting (outside the worldwide ceilings), sets level at 380K

• 10K set aside for exceptional Y visa holders

These future green cards would then be issued using the following merit based point criteria:

Section 502. Merit-Based Evaluation System for Immigrants

Eliminates employment preference categories 1, 2, and 3 and replaces it with a merit-based preference system.

Eliminates the labor certification process. Maintains the special immigrant and EB-5 categories but cuts their numbers (total of 7,000 available annually).

Merit points are initially assigned as follows with a total of 100 points that could be earned:

Employment: 47 maximum total points can be earned for:

• U.S. employment in a specialty occupation (20 points)


• U.S. employment in a high demand occupation (16 points)


• U.S. employment in a science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) or health-related field, current for at least one year (8 points)


• From employer willing to pay 50% of LPR application fee: U.S. job offer or U.S. employer attestation for current employee (6 points)


• U.S. work experience (2 points per year/10 points max)


• Age of worker between 25-39 (3 points)

Education: 28 maximum total points can be earned for:

• Advanced Graduate degree (20 points)


• Bachelor’s degree (16 points)


• Associate’s degree (10 points)


• High School diploma/GED (6 points)


• Certified vocational degree (5 points)


• DOL registered apprenticeship (8 points)


• Associate’s degree or above in STEM field (8 points)

English/Civics: 15 total points can be earned for:

• Native English speaker or TOEFL score 75 or above (15 points)


• TOEFL score 60-75 (10 points)


• Pass USCIS Citizenship test in English and civics (6 points)

Extended Family: for those with total of 55 or above in above categories, 10 total points can be earned for:

• Adult (21 or over) child of USC (8 points)


• Adult (21 or over) child of LPR (6 points)


• Sibling of USC or LPR (4 points)


• Visa application in any category above after May 1, 2005 (2 points)

In addition, the following allocation has been set aside for the new Z visa category:

Agricultural Work: 25 total points can be earned for:

• Agricultural work for 3 years, 150 days/year (21 points)


• Agricultural work for 4 years, 150 days for 3 years, plus 100 days for 1 year (23points)


• Agricultural work for 5 years, 100 days per year (25 points)

U.S. Employment: 15 total points can be earned for:

• 1 point per year of lawful U.S. employment

Home Ownership: 5 total points can be earned for:

• 1 point per year of ownership of place of residence in U.S.

Medical Insurance: 5 points total can be earned for:

• Current medical insurance for entire family (5 points)

Gives DHS authority to establish regulations regarding petition process for merit-based system and creates a standing commission on immigration and labor markets for evaluating the relative weighting and selection criteria included in the point system. Petitions that have not been granted within a 3 year period are deemed denied.

Section-by-Section Summary of the Senate “Grand Bargain” Bill , AILA

Given the details as presented thus far in the legislation it has obviously not met MPI's first test. The legislation makes no mention whatsoever of a "pass mark" or how these points are to be evaluated. Are the top 140,000 applicants in a given fiscal year to be accepted? Is there a minimum "grade" that must be attained? Will the "pass mark" float? These are all questions that should be answered in the legislation before any serious consideration of this proposal can be made.

So just how will this merit system effect future immigration patterns?

MPI looked at the demographic data from recent immigration and found that the merit system as written will favor certain immigrant groups while making it much more dificult for others to enter.

Some Initial Observations From The Data

The question everyone is trying to answer can be posed most simply (and directly) as follows: In applying the new admissions’ criteria to those who entered during the past 15 years, what would the impacts be on groups with different skill and education mixes?

Immigrants from many Asian countries would likely fare well under a points system as it is currently being described.

• Two-fifths of all recent Asian immigrants to the United States (i.e., those who entered since 1990), and at least one-third from the top five Asian sending countries are in the age range (25-39) that would garner points under the proposed system.

• Over half of recent immigrants from China, the Philippines, and Korea, and 76 percent from India have a bachelor’s or higher degree. If we add those with associates’ degrees, the strong educational advantage of a points system for Asians widens further. (Vietnam is the only significant exception in this regard.)

• The majority of recent immigrants from the Philippines and India report speaking English “very well” and would fare well under a points system.

• About half of recent immigrants from India work in IT, science and engineering, or healthcare occupations, while another 20 percent work in other professional occupations. About one-quarter of recent immigrants from the Philippines work in healthcare occupations. Employment within each of these occupations is preferred under the proposed points system. About one-quarter of recent immigrants from China work in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics occupations, while another quarter work in other professional occupations.

Immigrants from Latin American countries will likely face more difficulties in obtaining entry through the points system, depending on how categories are weighted. Age and occupational characteristics may benefit immigrants from this area, while formal educational attainment and English ability may become barriers.

• More than two-fifths of recent Central American/Caribbean and South American immigrants are in the preferred age range of 25-39. Forty-eight percent of recent Mexican immigrants and 53 percent of recent Salvadoran immigrants are 25 to 39 years of age, as are 48 percent of recent immigrants from both Brazil and Ecuador.

• The vast majority of recent immigrants from South America have at least a high school diploma, and 31 percent have a bachelor’s or higher degree. However, just 45 percent of recent immigrants from Central America and the Caribbean have a high school diploma or higher. Cuban and Dominican immigrants are exceptions in this regard, with high relative rates of college education compared to other countries in the region.

• The vast majority (about 80 percent) of Central American/Caribbean recent immigrants and a strong majority (about 60 percent) of South American recent immigrants lack English proficiency. The trend holds true for the top five sending countries from both areas, with the exception of immigrants from Venezuela, 44 percent of whom report that they are proficient in English. Only 15 percent of recent Mexican immigrants are proficient in English.

• The occupations common among Central American and Caribbean immigrants may earn points under the “high demand” occupation category. Most of the occupations expected to experience the highest job growth over the next ten years require only on-the-job training. The majority of Central American/Caribbean immigrants work in such lowerskill, high-growth occupations as construction, extraction, transportation, service, manufacturing, and installation. Extremely small shares of immigrants from the largest sending countries in the region work in preferred science, engineering, or health occupations.

• The occupations of South American immigrants follow a similar trend to those for Central American and Caribbean immigrants, though slightly higher shares of South Americans work in mid-level or high-skill occupations.

While the United States has received relatively few immigrants from Africa, those who have entered have language, age, and educational characteristics that could help them earn points for entry.

• As with the other world regions examined, about two-fifths of recent African immigrants fall in the preferred age range of 25-39.

• Recent African immigrants tend to be well educated. Thirty-eight percent of all recent African immigrants have a bachelor’s or higher degree, and fully two-thirds have some college education. Those from Nigeria, Egypt, and South Africa have the highest levels of educational attainment among the top African sending countries: over half from each have a bachelor’s or higher degree. Fewer Ethiopian immigrants have bachelor’s degrees – under a quarter – but 60 percent do have some college education.

• English proficiency tends to vary by country but is high overall. Eighty-seven percent of recent Nigerian immigrants, and 96 percent of South African immigrants are English proficient, while just over half from Ethiopia and Egypt are English proficient. Looking at all recent African immigrants, two-thirds are English proficient.

• About 15 percent of African immigrants work in preferred health occupations (27 percent of Nigerian immigrants do so) while the great majority of African immigrants work in low-skill occupations. Very small shares work in science or engineering occupations, though those from South Africa have higher rates of professional occupations than immigrants from other parts of Africa.

Proposed Points System and Its Likely Impact on Prospective Immigrants, Immigration Policy Institute

While there will certainly be intense debate over this hotly contested issue in Washington, we can only hope that those trying to craft this legislation do so not solely with an eye to the next election cycle, or the local polls in their state or district... but with the best interests of both the American people and those who will be future Americans in mind.

Related:

Annual Immigration to the United States: The Real Numbers, MPI, May, 2007

Selecting Economic Stream Immigrants through Points Systems, MPI, May, 2007

A "high demand occupation" as defined in the legislation is one listed on the Bureau of Labor Statistics top 30 projected 10 year growth occupations:

BLS Occupations with the largest job growth, 2004–14

41-2031Retail salesperson
29-111 Registered nurses
25-1000 Postsecondary teachers
43-4051 Customer service representative
37-2011 Janitors and cleaners, except maids and housekeeping cleaners
35-3031 Waiters and waitresses
35-3021 Combined food preparation and serving workers, including fast food
31-1011 Home health aids
31-1012 Nursing aids, orderlies and attendants
11-1021 General and operations managers experienced
39-9021 Personal and home aides
25-2021 Elementary school teachers, except special education
13-2011 Accountants and auditors
43-9061 Office clerks, general
53-3032 Laborers and freight stock, and material movers, hand
43-4171 Receptionists and information clerks
37-3011 Landscaping and groundskeeping workers
53-3032 Truck drivers, heavy and tractor trailer
15-1031 Computer software engineers, applications
49-9042 Maintenance and repair workers, general
31-9092 Medical assistants
43-6011 Executive secretaries and administrative assistants
41-4012 Sales representatives, wholesale and manufacturing, except technical and scientific products
47-2031 Carpenters
25-9041 Teachers assistants
39-9011 Child care workers
35-2021 food preparation workers
37-2012 Maids and housekeeping cleaners
53-3033 Truck driver light or delivery services
15-1051 Computer systems analysts

Occupational employment
projections to 2014, table #3 Bureau of Labor Statistics

Read More...

Summary only...

AILA Releases Detailed Summary of Immigration Reform Compromise

The American Immigration Lawyer Association has just released a section by section summary of the immigration compromise legislation announced last Thursday. A daft of the legislation was made available over the weekend, but given its complexities, it has fueled as much misinterpretation and speculation by those without the legal expertise to interpret it correctly, as it has shed light on exactly what the compromise means.

The AILA now breaks down the complete bill, section by section, and summarizes its contents in plain English for those of us who have struggled to get firm grip on exactly what it contains.

I've posted a copy for download HERE

Now that the contents of the proposed compromise are available, I will be posting up more detailed analysis of this compromise shortly.

Read More...

Summary only...

A look at proposed Merit-Based system in Immigration Reform Compromise

One of the most controversial aspects of the proposed immigration reform compromised announced Thursday is the switch from an immigration system based upon family ties and family reunification to one based on a "merit system" that gives greater weight to educational level, jobs skills, and English proficiency.

Advocates of the compromise claim that the "merit system" will insure that those who qualify for Permanent Residence Status (green card) under the new system would be those who can make the greatest contributions to society.

Those opposed the plan claim it's a high-risk, large-scale social experimentation that would have adverse effects on families and disregards a fundamental, longstanding principle of American immigration policy and of real family values. Additionally they claim it would establish a class of workers who lack family and community roots that would seriously undermine efforts to integrate new immigrants into the American way of life.

There have come assurances from those advocating for the compromise that the "merit system" can still honor the tradition of family values. But from a look at the way points will be allocated under the new system, I don't believe that to be the case. 75% of the points are allocated for education and skills, 15% for English proficiency, and only 10% of the points are allocated for family ties.

Link to Draft Copy of Bill - The Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007


The following is the breakdown of the point allocations under the new merit system.

It comes from a draft copy of the legislation that is unverified and my not be complete …but does give us an idea of how those working on the legislation are looking at the different areas and how they plan on assessing the points.

Category	Description	Max pts
Employment Occupation National interest/ critical infrastructure Employer endorsement Experience Age of worker	U.S. employment in Specialty Occupation (DoL definition) – 20 pts U.S. employment in High Demand Occupation (BLS largest 10-yr job growth, top 30) – 16 pts U.S. employment in STEM or health occupation, current for at least 1 year – 8 pts (extraordinary or ordinary) A U.S. employer willing to pay 50% of LPR application fee either 1) offers a job, or 2) attests for a current employee – 6 pts Years of work for U.S. firm – 2 pts/year (max 10 pts) Worker’s age: 25-39 – 3 pts	47

Education (terminal degree)

M.D., M.B.A., Graduate degree, etc. – 20 pts Bachelor’s degree – 16 pts Associate’s degree – 10 pts High School diploma or GED – 6 pts Completed certified Perkins Vocational Education program – 5 pts Completed DoL Registered Apprenticeship – 8 pts STEM, assoc & above – 8 pts

28

English & civics	Native speaker of English or TOEFL score of 75 or higher – 15 pts TOEFL score of 60-74 – 10 pts Pass USCIS Citizenship Tests in English&Civics–6 pts	15
Extended family (Applied if threshold of 55 in above categories.)	Adult (21 or older) son or daughter of USC – 8 pts Adult (21 or older) son or daughter of LPR – 6 pts Sibling of USC or LPR – 4 pts If had applied for a family visa in any of the above categories after May 1, 2005– 2 pts	10
		100
Supplemental schedule for Zs Agriculture National Interest U.S. employment exp. Home ownership Medical Insurance	Worked in agriculture for 3 years, 150 days per year – 21 pts Worked in agriculture for 4 years (150 days for 3 years, 100 days for 1 year) – 23 pts Worked in agriculture for 5 years, 100 days per year – 25 points Year of lawful employment – 1 pt (max 15pts) Own place of residence – 1 pt/year owned (max 5pts) Current medical insurance for entire family (5pts)	25 15 5 5

To see how this new system would work, not only for new applicants, but also the millions of Z card holders who will be part of the proposed "amnesty" program who would eventually be eligable for green cards - one need only check the chart.

A 25 year old foreign applicant with a job prospect, a high school diploma and limited or no English proficiency would receive 15 pts ...par for the course for most unskilled workers from Mexico or Central America (and most traditional immigrants for the last 100 years)...If he/she never finished high school..knock that down to 9pts

The let's take the case of a 30 year old Z card holder with a high school diploma, whose been employed in th US for five years, has an employer sponsor and is now fluent in English - he/she would get a maximum of 45pts.

That's pretty indicative of the max level that most unskilled/semi-skilled worker could attain.

Even someone here 15 years with the same qualifications as our 30 year old plus owning his/her own home and carrying family health insurance would max out at 65 pts.

Compare this to a recent college graduate with a BA from anywhere in the world (16pts), who also spoke English (15pts) and could compete in any of the top 30 fastest growing professions in the nation (16pts), and a willing employer (8pts) ... they would start with a minimum of 55pts.

Add in higher degree, STEM, and a specialty employment and that number goes up to 71 pts...before setting foot in the country

The legislation doesn't mention any parameters as how the merit system "grades" would effect these two applicants, but it's safe to assume that with a finite number of green cards available each year, the low-skilled workers from areas like Mexico and Central America who currently make up the bulk of both legal and undocumented workers would end up somewhere on the bottom of the priority list.

It is quite clear that this is a dramatic change from the family based immigration of the past 40 years. It is also quite clear that it is meant to change the demographic make-up of future immigration. ...favoring high-skilled people who speak English over the working-people and the poor that have made up the bulk of the immigrant population for over two hundred years.

For more detailed information on how the merit system will work and how it will effect future immigration demographics see: MPI releases data on merit based point systems for immigration

Read More...

Summary only...

What's going on behind those closed doors.

If Harry Reid has his way, tomorrow the Senate will finally take up the issue of immigration reform. After months of closed door negotiations between the Administration and Senate leaders, it's beginning to look like an actual compromise is close to being reached and may finally come up for debate.

But, exactly what the nature of that compromise entails has been shrouded in some mystery. Earlier this year Bush began shifting his position to the right in order to garner support from some of the Republican immigration hardliners. With last years Republican point man, John McCain avoiding this issue like the plague, fellow Arizonan, Jon Kyl has stepped up to take his place. Kyl, who led last years Republican effort against comprehensive reform, now seems to have had a change of heart once the mid-terms were over and is advocating for a more comprehensive immigration policy.

But with Kyl as lead Republican negotiator, "comprehensive" might not mean what it did last year.

According to details coming from the Wall Street Journal, we can expect a bill that has not only moved the debate substantially further to the right, but is also much more restrictive, business friendly and worker exploitive.

The core bill, like the immigration-overhaul effort that failed in the last Congress, promises millions of undocumented workers now in the U.S. a path to citizenship. Under pressure from Democrats, heavy fines of $10,000 that would have been imposed on immigrants seeking to legalize their status have been cut in half. It would take from eight to 13 years to qualify for permanent residency under the bill, and conservatives have won restrictions to try to stem the tide of immigrants who may follow this mass legalization.

New border-security measures would be given top priority in the first 18 months after enactment. Current immigration rules that favor families would be replaced by a merit system making it harder for new citizens to bring in siblings and adult children. Even parents would find it harder; the number would be capped at 40,000 a year, less than half the number that typically come in annually.

In the same spirit, the White House has walked a fine line in negotiating a new guest-worker program whose Republican motto is "temporary means temporary." The draft plan would create a new temporary "Y" visa for as many as 400,000 people a year, who could come to work in the U.S. for two to three years but then must go home. There would be exceptions in special circumstances for a narrow segment of workers, about 10,000 a year.

In the talks, conservatives such as Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl want to bar most guest workers from reapplying for another Y visa after their time here. Critics say this would create a permanent class of persons coming and going with no chance of ever establishing residency. Democrats argue that U.S. interests are better served if a guest worker can reapply -- after going home -- and be given a chance to earn points toward getting permanent residence.

…snip…

The temporary-worker issue is among the last major stumbling blocks to be considered at a senators' meeting today. Giving ground could help win a deal with Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy, the lead Democratic negotiator. The administration last night said it was putting no pressure on Sen. Kyl on this issue.

The elaborate point system rewarding specialty or high-demand occupations is still evolving. Much depends on how many green cards the government is prepared to issue annually.

Wall Street Journal

It's too early to tell exactly where the negotiations will lead ….but from what's been coming out so far, it doesn't bode well meaningful reform.

Although we had all hoped that this years round of reform negotiations would finally produce the kind of practical, fair and humane legislation needed, clearly at this point it appears that no bill at all would be better than a bill that would allow for increased exploitation and division of families.

We can only hope that the Democratic leadership comes to it's senses and realizes that making compromises with this President on matters of conscience and public policy only leads to failure. Despite all the bluster and rhetoric of the far-right, the American people want an immigration policy that works ... not one crafted for political expedience.

Read More...

Summary only...

Immigration News Roundup: Feb 26 – Mar 4

This week brings us a varied set of stories. Mexican President Felipe Calderón announced a new comprehensive immigration policy coupled with reform of its policies towards the treatment of undocumented Central and South American migrants in Mexico. An organic farmer and author from Fresno, Ca. makes some suggestions on immigration policy while the Senate begins working on a new reform package. New enforcement policies make a small Arizona airport the nation's deportation capital and the Denver Post examines some of the costs of increased enforcement to the US justice system. Additionally, a new section has been added to the round-up with miscellaneous stories not widely covered by the MSM

• Mexican President Announces New Comprehensive Immigration Policy


• Farmer Explains Concerns for Immigration Reform


• Arizona Airport Becomes Nations Busiest Deportation Hub


• Senate Poised to Start Immigration Reform


• True Costs of Enforcement-Only Examined

Mexican President Announces New Comprehensive Immigration Policy

Felipe Calderón hopes to show visiting fellow president George W. Bush that he can accomplish the sweeping immigration reform Washington has failed to adopt - not just cracking down on the southern border but also creating a guest-worker program and improving conditions for illegal Central American migrants.

Proving that controlled, regulated migration is possible is the immediate political goal of Calderón, who is unveiling the ambitious reforms shortly before Bush´s March 13-14 visit.

Calderón´s migration agency announced the first phase late Tuesday, pledging improvements to 48 detention centers in response to criticism that illegal Central American migrants are denied the same respect Mexico demands for its citizens in the United States.

…snip…

Calderón also will push Congress to make being undocumented a civil violation, rather than a crime, Salazar said. Republicans in the U.S. Congress have gone in the opposite direction, seeking to treat undocumented migrants as felons.

Meanwhile, Calderón has promised a new, more formal guest-worker program for Central American workers in Mexico.

"Just as we demand respect for the human rights of our countrymen, we have the ethical and legal responsibility to respect the human rights and the dignity of those who come from Central and South America and who cross our southern border," Calderón said shortly after taking office.

Details have not been released but migration experts expect an expansion of Mexico´s long-standing seasonal farm worker program, which issues at least 40,000 temporary visas a year, mostly to Guatemalans. Most work in coffee plantations in southern Chiapas state, and many often face problems getting payment, medical care and housing.

Migration experts say Calderón wants to stop those abuses while also allowing Central Americans to work in construction and service industries along the southern border.
El UNIVERSAL

Related:
Washington Post


Farmer Explains Concerns for Immigration Reform

For the sake of peaches, pass immigration reform

But whether I can grow a better peach depends on whether I have enough field workers, and that's where immigration reform comes in. In recent years, farm labor has been tight, with some workers lost to construction jobs and others because of increased border security. Some farmers have responded by increasing wages, yet there were still not enough people willing to work the harvests. Last year, pears in California rotted on trees; two years ago, my raisin harvest was endangered, and for the last three years, I've struggled with peach harvests, terrified that just as the fruit was at the peak of perfection, I wouldn't have enough workers. Some of my best fruit has fallen from my trees.

The agricultural industry supports federal legislation for a guest-worker program that would bring in temporary farm laborers when shortages arise. This remedy would fix short-term problems. However, a long-term solution lies in immigration reform that could change the nature of farming, especially when it comes to specialty crops and small-scale operations like mine.

..snip…

Agriculture makes a mistake, though, if our sole goal in immigration reform is to seek an abundant supply of cheap labor. Farmers must acknowledge the human capital in our fields. Investments in workers, such as training, can benefit all parties. Skilled positions can then be created for a more willing and able labor pool. With the right kind of reform, workers' worth would be redefined; they would no longer be invisible.

…snip…

As we once again debate immigration reform, agriculture has an opportunity to educate the public about the role farmers and workers have in growing food, in satisfying our hunger. We're all part of a food system at the dinner table, and the policy we create will affect the nature of each bite.
Washington Post

Arizona Airport Becomes Nations Busiest Deportation Hub

Bush policy turns Mesa airport into deportation hub

One by one the immigration detainees stepped off buses onto the tarmac as dawn broke one recent chilly morning. After deputy U.S. marshals pat searched each one, the detainees climbed single file aboard a large unmarked jetliner waiting nearby…

The scene is repeated almost daily at Williams Gateway Airport, the busiest air deportation hub in the nation, as the federal government ramps up efforts to quickly deport record numbers of non-Mexican undocumented immigrants to their home countries.

The taxpayer-funded flights have helped cut deportation times by months, removing about 51,300 non-Mexicans from Oct. 1, 2005 to Sept. 30, 2006, mostly to countries in Central and South America, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.

The flights, part of the Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System, have been key to ending the government's long-standing policy of releasing thousands of non-Mexicans into the U.S. pending immigration hearings and serve as a deterrent to illegal immigration, officials say.

Analysts say the flights are also central to President Bush's political efforts to curry favor with hard- liners in hopes of coaxing a comprehensive immigration bill out of Congress. The flights are expected to increase as the administration pushes for stronger enforcement.

The flights already have increased fivefold since 2001. They carried more than 116,000 passengers last fiscal year, enough to rival some small U.S. airlines. That total consists of the 51,300 non-Mexican deportations and 64,700 undocumented immigrants flown from the interior of the U.S. to centers like the one in Mesa to be deported.

The program is costly. In fiscal year 2006, ICE officials say the agency spent more than $70 million flying undocumented immigrants home or to the border. In addition, an October inspector general's report sampling flights from Mesa and other air deportation hubs found planes that frequently flew less than half full.
Arizona Republic

Senate Poised to Start Immigration Reform

Kennedy, McCain try again on immigration

Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John McCain are set to introduce a revised version of their sweeping plan to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, in a bill that's likely to restart a tense debate in Congress.

The measure, which is being drafted in consultation with the White House, will largely mirror the immigration bill that stalled last year, according to lawmakers and aides involved in the process. That measure was blocked primarily because House Republican leaders were adamantly opposed to provisions that would have allowed undocumented immigrants to become US citizens.

Though negotiations are still ongoing, this year's bill will most likely leave in place the 700-mile border fence, the creation of which was signed into law last year. It would also double the size of the US Border Patrol and add new means to crack down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants, a further attempt to assuage concerns about the nation's porous borders.

But the bill is likely to enrage advocates of a get-tough approach to immigration by allowing most of the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants already in this country to earn legalized status. Early drafts of the bill would allow them to become citizens after about 12 years if they meet requirements such as learning English, passing a criminal background check, and paying back taxes and a $2,000 fine….

The bill, set to be introduced in the House and Senate as soon as next week, will also include a "guest worker" program for immigrants to work in the United States under temporary visas -- an oft-stated goal of President Bush.
Boston Globe

Related Opinion:
LA Times
Contra Costa Times

True Costs of Enforcement-Only Examined

Fortress America: Part 1
As the U.S. builds walls and trains agents to bar its southern door from the rush of illegal immigrants, some see only a policy of prison shackles and razor wire.

Five days a week, Arce-Flores' courtroom witnesses a steady march of men and women in orange jumpsuits, the vast majority of whom are Spanish-speaking immigrants caught near the border.

During a pretrial hearing before another of Laredo's magistrate judges in early December, the judge dispatched 22 cases in four hours. Nearly all the immigrants were charged with a felony - illegal re-entry after a previous deportation or removal. And because all pleaded guilty, exchanges in court were mostly limited to how defendants were detained and a few questions by the judge about their education level and occupation.

…snip…

But it's not so much that the court is spending time jailing gardeners and construction workers, said Arce-Flores, who is one of the busiest federal judges in the country. It's that the enormous immigration caseload is like a large fire that sucks oxygen from a closed room.

Clerks are tired. U.S. marshals are overworked. While the average federal judge has 87 open felony cases at any one time on the docket, that average for each of the two full judgeships in Laredo is 1,400.

"Do you go after the mob or these guys on the border? Do you go after the Ecstasy distribution rings or these guys on the border?" said Charles L. Lindner, a California lawyer and past president of the Los Angeles Criminal Bar Association, explaining how the focus on federal immigration prosecutions is rippling through the system.

"We're short on (assistant U.S. attorneys) in the office here in Los Angeles because they're doing immigration in Laredo," Lindner said.

…snip…

Sitting in her court offices in Laredo, Arce-Flores pulls out a calculator from a large desk and begins tapping buttons - performing a quick estimate of what it costs taxpayers to jail the immigrants passing through her courtroom.

"If I have 30 people a day times five days a week, that's 150 people," she said.

Each costs about $90 a day to keep in jail, the judge said, and the maximum sentence for a misdemeanor offender is six months.

That's nearly $2.5 million, "for just for one week's work," according to Arce-Flores.

"But when they are discussing this in Washington, they keep saying, 'We need to detain every one of them; we need to give every one jail time,"' Arce-Flores said. "I don't think they realize the consequences."
Denver Post

This Weeks Miscellaneous Bits and Pieces

3 Honduran Kids in L.I. Face Deportation Forbes

Latinos: Councilman's online remarks "bigoted" Asbury park News

(Houston) Immigration raid nets 67 suspects Houston Chronicle

Bush talks trade, immigration with president of El Salvador North County Times

Napolitano: Congress must fix broken immigration system this year Arizona Daily Star

tags: immigration, news , immigration reform, Immigration studies

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...