Dispatches from the Lunatic Fringe

While the rest of the nation will spend much of election night glued to their TV screens or computer monitors awaiting results from key battleground states, William Gheen and his octogenarian army at the anti-immigrant hate group, ALIPAC, will be monitoring police-band radios and setting up an on-line "command post" in anticipation of the "unrest and mayhem" that he believes will result on election day.

Warning that "police departments across the nation are going on high level tactical alerts for election day and the day after," Gheen assures his followers that his internet "command post" will "remain functional .. in the event of any major national man made or natural disaster"

One can imagine Gheen spending Nov 5th scanning the skies for the black helicopters he's sure will be circling his home any minute.

I have just one word of warning for Gheen's army of the aged:

When he starts talking about selling all your worldly possessions and moving to the "new compound" in the hills of Montana, don't accept the new white Nike's and black sweat suits

…. And whatever you do, stay away from the purple kool aid

ALIPAC's RED ALERT for Election Day 2008
Monday, November 3, 2008 11:43 AM

Friends of ALIPAC,

Many thanks to all of you who have contributed and worked hard on this year's candidate endorsement and support efforts. It has been a lot of hard work and you all deserve a great deal of thanks.

… For Election Day, election night, and the day after, we request that our core activists gather on the alipac.us website in the Discussion Groups area. We need our supporters from across the nation to help us monitor the situation.

Our goals will be to

A. Report election results regarding the over 170 candidates we have endorsed.

B. Report any problems with voting or election integrity issues.

C. Monitor and report any unrest or mayhem that may occur across the nation.

We have compiled the many reports in the media that police departments across the nation are going on high level tactical alerts for election day and the day after. The 2008 elections have been filled with stories of violence and aggression, unlike any prior modern election. The majority of these reports of actual assaults and vandalism are from Obama supporters towards McCain supporters. Again, we are not taking sides, this is just what is being reported.

In response to the attacks, ALIPAC's President William Gheen stated yesterday, "Some of the radical left are engaging in the equivalent of burning crosses in yards during this election."

To review our collection of information about what law enforcement agencies are preparing for and have responded to already, please visit this link...

Acts of Violence and Threats: Police Prepare for Unrest
http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-798881.html#798881


While we hope and pray that election day will go smoothly and without any major incidents, we believe in being prepared for all contingencies.

We have made arrangements for the ALIPAC.us website to remain functional or only be down for a limited time, in the event of any major national man made or natural disaster.

We ask that our supporters monitor election results, local police radio bands, and local news casts to report any significant developments. We also ask that you submit any personal observations or eye witness accounts into our General Discussion Area, in the Discussion groups at alipac.us

Our moderators will mark initial reports as UNVERIFIED, until they can be confirmed by multiple or official sources. Once we have confirmed reports, they will be marked CONFIRMED.

We advise all of our supporters to use caution regarding any unverified information that may circulate on the web. We will work quickly to try and verify any reports you submit.

With your help, we have the ability to quickly and accurately share information about what is really happening in the country.

Let's all say a prayer for America tonight, do our best on election day, and then organize to observe and report.

May God save America,
The ALIPAC Team

It must be exhausting to live in such a state of perpetual fear, paranoia, and hate.

Read More...

Summary only...

Auntie Zeituni: A Symbol of Everything Wrong with Immigration Debate.

With three days left until the election, this morning the Associated Press broke a story about Barack Obama's long-lost paternal aunt who apparently has been living in the country without proper immigration authorization.

The details couldn't be juicier for the right-wing, red-meat crowd. She over-stayed a visa. Attempted to get asylum status due to the tumultuous state of her native country but was denied. Lives in public housing and donated a small sum to her nephew's campaign. Presenting a veritable cornucopia of right-wing stereotypes and frames from which to attack Obama, the wingnuts appear to be having a field day.

From the left, the counter arguments have been varied. Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic argues that the story will have little effect swaying independents towards McCain, while Liza Sabater of Culture Kitchen and Zachary Roth of TMP Muckracker examine the grubby little hands of Rupert Murdoch and Karl Rove all over the smear campaign. At The Sanctuary, Kyle argues against the nativist bend in how the story's been presented and calls for Americans to stand up against intolerance.

All of these arguments are good ones, but they each only represent a single aspect of the big picture that is the story of Auntie Zeituni.

Obama's Aunt is emblematic of everything wrong with immigration, both systemically and as a political issue.

Without knowing the specifics of her case it's hard to say why in fact her status is what it is, but we do know that:

1. The authorities have know about her status for some time

2. DHS was ordered not to deport until after election

3. The second leaker came out of the Administration

4. The timing of the story was orchestrated by Murdoch/Rove for maximum political effect.

Basically, the authorities have kept her under wraps until they could use her as a pawn for political gain.

And here is where I see her as symbol for the whole immigration debate.

The right wing has used 12 mil people as political pawns from the start of this current debate. If we look at everything they've done from passing HR4437, which they knew would never get through the Senate, to the failed CIR attempts, to the current fascists crackdowns...it's all been nothing more than political theater. played against the backdrop of real human suffering.

And now they wheel out Obama's Aunt.

They could have finished her case and deported her ages ago if that was in fact their intent. But it wasn't. They're intent was to keep her around to use as a pawn to whip up the base, and peel off independents.

And is that really any different from anything else that's been going on for the last few years to the rest of the migrant population?

Of course not.

They've been demonized, harassed and persecuted in an attempt to maintain political power.

All those on the right who have claimed to want to solve this "problem" with enforcement, and those who claim to want to "fix" the system, have in reality showed very little concern for accomplishing that task. They still believe that there's too much political gain from perpetuating the current situation. ..And Obama's aunt is a prime example of that. She's just another person of color stuck in a failed system, that doesn't work, who can be used at the appropriate time to beat down a political foe

Read More...

Summary only...

Study Released About New Demographic Powerhouse.

Much has been made of Barack Obama's mixed-race heritage. For better or worse, more ink and pixels have been expended during this campaign discussing race than perhaps any other topic. We've seen both overt and covert attempts to appeal to voter's baser instincts by some, and insightful and thought provoking analysis of our emerging multi-racial and multi-cultural nation by others.

Only those living under rock for the past year would not be familiar with Obama's family history. The son of a black father and white mother who married young then divorced, he lived in Indonesia as a child with his stepfather, then returned to Hawaii to be raised by his maternal grandparents.

While it's well know that Obama's father was Kenyan, little is made of the fact that he is the child of an immigrant …. Yet, this makes him part of one of the fastest growing, and politically important demographics in the nation.

Today in California, half of all teens have at least one immigrant parent, and throughout the nation the number of 18-25 year olds who can trace their ancestry in this country back no further than their parents grows daily. Among all Latinos, 40% have immigrant parents, and Asians, 90%.

Obama, in a way, represents the leading edge of a demographic boom of children born of immigrant parents who will continue to come of age far into the future with ramifications politically, socially, and culturally, that could be monumental.

A new study, released today by the Immigration Policy Center, entitled, "The New American Electorate: The Growing Political Power of Immigrants and Their Children", looks not only at the growing power of this demographic, but the vast numbers of newly naturalized citizens, and the Latino and Asian communities from which they come.

At a time when federal, state, and local elections are often decided by small voting margins—with candidates frequently locked in ferocious competition for the ballots of those “voting blocs” that might turn the electoral tide in their favor—one large and growing bloc of voters has been consistently overlooked and politically underestimated: New Americans. This group of voters and potential voters includes not only immigrants who have become U.S. citizens (Naturalized Americans), but also the U.S.-born children of immigrants who were raised during the current era of large-scale immigration from Latin America and Asia which began in 1965 (the Post-1965 Children of Immigrants).

These immigrants and their children have a powerful and highly personal connection to the modern immigrant experience that most other Americans do not. It’s one thing to hear family stories about a grandfather or great-grandfather coming to the United States during the much-romanticized “Ellis Island” era of immigration from Europe that ended decades ago. It’s quite another to belong to a family that is experiencing first-hand the political and economic realities of immigration today. The ranks of registered voters who are New Americans, or Latino or Asian, have been growing rapidly this decade and are likely to play an increasingly pivotal role in elections at all levels in the years to come, particularly in battleground states like Florida, Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico. As recent public opinion polls reveal, anti-immigrant political rhetoric is likely to motivate many New Americans to cast ballots in November, but is unlikely to win many votes for candidates perceived as anti-immigrant.

Link(pdf)

To get some idea of the current size of this population and the growing political potential in holds, one need only look at a few key statistics.

• New Americans were 8.6 Percent of All Registered Voters in 2006
  - 7.6 million were Naturalized Americans, accounting for 5.6 percent of registered voters.
  - 4.1 million were Post-1965 Children of Immigrants, accounting for 3.0 percent of registered voters.


• Latinos and Asians Accounted for 9.3 Percent of All Registered Voters in 2006
  - 9.3 million Latinos comprised 6.8 percent of registered voters.
  - 3.3 million Asians accounted for 2.5 percent of registered voters.

In the past two years, an additional 3 mil new naturalized citizens have become eligible to vote, and conservative estimates put the number of currently registered Latino voters at 11.7 million. Each month, nationally, 40,000 Latino teens turn 18 and become eligible to vote. Obviously, when all these groups with immigrant family ties; New immigrants, their children, Latinos and Asians are looked at on whole, their growing numbers and growing political power makes them a key demographic not only in 2008, but for the future.

New Americans (including both naturalized citizens and the children born to immigrants in the United States since 1965), Latinos, and Asians are increasingly important to the outcome of elections at the federal, state, and local level in the United States. Yet immigration and the ongoing racial and ethnic diversification of the American electorate have received relatively little attention from pundits and analysts discussing the 2008 vote and the electoral outlook for future elections. However, as naturalized citizens and their families grow into sizable portions of the electorate, political candidates who fail to recognize the growing importance of New American, Latino, and Asian voters increasingly undermine their own campaigns.

The U.S.-born children of immigrants in particular are increasingly important in the voting booth. These children occupy a unique position in U.S. society in that they have watched one or both of their parents navigate a new society and culture. As a result, they are personally connected to the struggles of immigrants and to the ways in which U.S. society reacts to and treats immigrants. There were nearly four million of these Post-1965 Children of Immigrants registered to vote in 2006.

Immigrants who have become U.S. citizens (Naturalized Americans) and the U.S.-born children of immigrants are closely connected to, and many are a part of, the Latino and Asian communities in the United States. Latinos and Asians include not only immigrants and their children, but also families that have lived here for many generations. In general, Latinos and Asians have a close connection to the immigrant experience because they are immigrants themselves, or their parents were immigrants, or they live in neighborhoods where friends and extended-family members are immigrants.

Apart from sheer growth in their numbers, two key factors are transforming New American, Asian, and Latino voters into a potent electoral force which is changing the nature of elections and political campaigns nationwide.

First, immigrant communities can now be found throughout the United States. No longer concentrated in just a few states like California, Florida, New York, and Texas, immigrants are becoming a sizable portion of the population in states like Nevada, Washington, and North Carolina. Second, contemporary elections are often won by very thin voting margins. In 2004, for example, President Bush carried Ohio by just 119,000 votes, or 2 percent of all registered voters, while Senator John Kerry won Michigan by a margin equaling 3 percent of registered voters.

The combination of wide geographic dispersion and increasingly close elections means that New American, Latino, and Asian voters can play a crucial role in elections taking place in “battleground” states where neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party has a decisive edge.

Link(pdf)

“The campaigns, pundits and press have spent this entire election cycle searching for a new and weighty voting bloc." said Angela Kelley, Director of the Immigration Policy Center, speaking on the release of the report. "Their search is over. Step aside Soccer Moms and NASCAR Dads. New Americans are ready to vote. This group has been decades in the making and they are certain to flex their voting muscles this year”

And for any of those with doubts about the pivotal role immigration reform, and how politicians deal with it, plays in motivating this growing and politically active demographic, one simple statistic should end them: In 2006, 45% of all Latino voters between the ages of 18 and 24 either took part in, or had close family members take part in, the large-scale immigration marches that took place throughout the nation. ….Giving new meaning to the slogan, "Today We March – Tomorrow We Vote".

READ COMPLETE STUDY HERE(pdf)

READ MORE about "The New American Electorate: The Growing Political Power of Immigrants and Their Children" from Henry Fernandez at Think Progress

WATCH VIDEO of IPC panel discussion of report on C-Span HERE

Read More...

Summary only...

Making the Immigration Argument in a New Economic Reality.

Come January 20, 2009 a new administration will take office in perhaps the most precarious times the nation has faced since the 1930's. Fighting two seemingly endless wars and with an economy on the verge of collapse, it is not an enviable position for any leader.

While both candidates have avoided the immigration debate like the plague during the campaign, it has moved down the list of important issues for voters, replaced by more pressing issues like healthcare or the economy. But in order to address these more pressing concerns in any meaningful way, the new government will need to tackle immigration once and for all.

We cannot talk about supplying health care for 46 million uninsured Americans, and perhaps double that number that are underinsured, without addressing what is to become of the health needs of an additional 12mil undocumented immigrants. We cannot talk about fixing a broken economy and real economic justice for working Americans without addressing the 8 million workers living in the shadows and working in an underground economy.

The opponents of any kind of real economic change or healthcare reform will surely use the old canards about "illegal immigrants" to not only distract the American public from addressing the real problems that need to be addressed, but as an excuse to derail real reforms and change. It is for this reason that immigration reform must be dealt with sooner rather than later.

But after years of toxic and divisive debate, are the American people ready for a real and practical discussion of this issue? Or will they get bogged down, as in the past, in meaningless sloganeering and petty tribalism and xenophobia?

I think the answer depends not on the actions of the anti-immigrants right, who will inevitably try to turn all the collective fears and insecurities of the American public towards the immigrant population, but on the actions those looking for truly rational, fair, and practical reform.

It's safe to assume that no matter what happens in the Presidential race (although it appears we have a pretty good idea how that will end up), the American people are demanding change.

Additionally, both houses of Congress will be vastly different than they are today. Perhaps at no time in recent memory has there been a greater mandate for Washington to effect change of a seismic nature than the one that is about to be delivered.

Against this backdrop, those looking for meaningful immigration reform must see this as a new opportunity to reframe the debate. If they fail to do so, anti-immigrant forces will surely do it for them.

Six months from now we will be faced with a new paradigm.

Either immigration reform becomes just one part of comprehensive plan to revitalize a new 21st century America … just one component of an aggressive plan to address not only the nation's economic health but it future direction, or the anti-immigrant forces will have prevailed and we will be mired down in a divisive debate that will stunt all other reforms.

For us to reframe the debate, we have to acknowledge that current economic conditions put this issue in a precarious position and that increased blowback from the right is inevitable.

I would suggest that rather than trying to counter right wing framing (ie: immigrants are an economic drain, and in tough times we need to limit immigration and crack down on the undocumented), we should turn the presumed "strengths" of their arguments back in on them... sort of an "immigration debate jujitsu".

We have spent vast resources trying to debunk right wing framing, yet it still prevails. I suggest we need to turn this argument inside out to effectively make the case for meaningful reform.


Security:

Over the past 20 years we have continually increased spending on added border security, yet the numbers of the undocumented have continued to increase. Only now, with an economic downturn have we seen decreasing numbers. This of course is the result of basic free market principles.

But in a current economic crisis we can no longer afford to spend vast sums of money on failed security measures like walls and random high-profile (and high cost) "show raids" that target a few hundred undocumented immigrants who unluckily work at the wrong place at the wrong time.

These raids have only led to misery and destruction of hard working families. They have done nothing to curb the flow of undocumented workers.

Additionally the costs of detaining and processing even these relatively few undocumented immigrants has been astronomical...if these policies were taken to the wide-scale levels that would be required to forcibly remove over 12 million as suggested by those who oppose meaningful reform...the costs would make the recent economic bailout efforts look minor in comparison.

We need instead practical reform so that law enforcement dollars can be spent protecting citizens from criminal elements both domestic and foreign as opposed to prosecuting and persecuting hard working immigrants. We need to reform the system so that those who wish to come here to work and make a better life are able to do so legally. With wait times for new arrivals reaching 20 years, and no provisions made for those in many countries to ever enter legally, all the money the government could print will never be enough to seal the border.

We need the tax revenues/ Out of the shadows:

All those living and working in this country need to have the opportunity to contribute equally to the nations well being. We can no longer afford to have whole segments of the economy operating underground. Unscrupulous employers can no longer be allowed to use lack of immigration status as a means to cheat both employees and the American people. We have all seen the deplorable working conditions and the labor, health, safety violations, that have occurred in the few high profile "show raids" that have taken place. Not to mention the questionable record keeping and accounting practices that hide profits from taxation.

While not all undocumented workers work under such horrid conditions, with the vast majority working for the small businesses that line many American main streets, the very nature of their immigration status forces otherwise law abiding employers to skirt the law and engage in questionable practices to fill their labor needs.

Like the policies of Prohibition in the 20's and 30's, today's failed immigration system makes "criminals" out of million of hard working people both native and foreign born. And like Prohibition, has set the stage for an underground economy that allows the truly criminal and unscrupulous to cheat and steal from the American people.

The only way to remove 12million people from the underground economy is to make them full, participating, members of society and bring them out of the shadows by allowing them access to legal status.

This is not a matter of granting "amnesty" to those who have entered without authorization …. It's a matter of recognizing the reality that 12mil people living productive lives and working in this economy are not about to pick up and leave simply because ant-immigrant forces want them to … and that we all benefit by having them contributing fully in the light of day.

Economic Justice/ Workers Rights:

After a decade of stagnating wages, tax policies that favor the wealthiest Americans while penalizing the vast majority of working people, and an American dream that seems to be slipping out of reach for most working Americans, we need to once again restore the rights of working families to make a better life.

All workers, regardless of immigration status, deserve a safe workplace, a wage they can live on and support their families, the ability to make a better life for their children and provide them with a quality education, and the ability to access affordable healthcare. These are basic rights. These are the rights American workers fought long and hard to achieve. From the beginnings of the union movement in the nineteenth century, until nearly the end of the 20th, each generation of workers fought to make life better for the next. … and they succeeded.

But in the last 30 years American workers have been moving backwards rather than moving forward.

While the contributing factors to this decline in worker's standard of living are many, from outsourcing to union busting, deregulation to the dismantling of the progressive tax system, for us to turn this tide and return to the road towards economic justice, we need to include all workers. As long as nearly eight million workers are left out in the cold, and demagogues can turn worker against worker, no equity will be achieved.

In those industries that rely heavily on immigrant labor, this is most important.

The conditions we have seen in the factories and meatpacking plants that have been targeted by ICE speak volumes. Those conditions exist not because there are easily exploitable workers available….the exploitable workers are there because they are the only ones left willing to work under those horrendous conditions. They go where the work is, be it rural Iowa or N. Carolina.

Having driven out the unions with union busting tactics, or relocating to rural, right to work states with little regulation and government oversight, and high poverty rates, these companies proceeded to chip away at worker protections and rights until only the most exploitable and vulnerable in society would work there.

The largest pork processing plant in the nation, Smithfield's facility in Tar Heel, N. Carolina, readily hires a mix of undocumented workers, and prison labor to fill its labor needs. This is because conditions are so deplorable only those with little or no other options will work there.


This cycle needs to end.

To raise the standards for all workers, the vulnerability that comes with undocumented status must end. Once these workers are brought out of the shadows and allowed to join with all other workers to demand the conditions and compensation due them, all workers will benefit.

Conclusion:

This is just a start at examining possible framing changes that will move the immigration debate away from one dominated by restrictionists to one based on reality and progressive ideas.

Of course there are many more areas to explore such as Globalization and Neo-Liberal economic policies that drive migration globally and lower standards for all workers, including those in first-world nations. Or the need to address economic and social justice in sender nations and the role US policy plays in that dynamic. And these are other areas where new framing is needed.

Despite all the divisive rhetoric we’ve heard during this election cycle, and the reliance of some on the old attack politics of the past, it's becoming more and more evident that the majority of the American public are rejecting the calls to tribalism and simplistic slogans. They want meaningful and practical change, and are willing to listen, learn, and work towards that change. Never before in recent memory have the American people been so engaged. Certainly, the economy, the war, the heath care crisis, and many other problems have helped to wake them from their years of complacency. But, no matter what the reason, they have awakened from a long sleep and are ready to work for change.

If we are to be part of that change and make immigration reform part of a New Deal for the 21st century, we will need to take the lead, and make the American people understand that immigration reform is part and parcel of any real and meaningful change for the future.

Read More...

Summary only...

Tomorrow We Vote - Latino Voter Registration

In the spring of 2006 millions took to the streets in cities, large and small, across the nation. Carrying signs proclaiming, "Today We March – Tomorrow We Vote," they voiced their opposition to legislation intended to criminalize 12 million undocumented immigrants, divide families, and foster a climate of fear and intimidation. They demanded instead that meaningful, humane, and responsible, immigration reform be enacted.

Two and a half years later, no such legislation has passed, replaced instead by a toxic and divisive debate that has led to increased raids, illegal detentions, hate crimes, and the very climate of fear and intimidation the marchers took to the streets to oppose. These events have galvanized the Latino community like never before and set the stage for what could be a seismic shift in the American electorate.

Recently released data on voter registration points to the dawn of a new political reality.


Unable to pass new restrictive and punitive legislation, the Right resorted to a mix of increased discriminatory local regulation, increased workplace raids, reinterpretation of federal statutes to allow for civil rights violations, and a media campaign to attempt to legitimize their deportation agenda with the general public. And while they have had some success in riling up their base and redirecting their fears and prejudices towards a fabricated "brown menace" and away from failed economic and foreign policy decisions, the issue has proven to be an electoral non-starter. Campaigns that have relied on restrictionist rhetoric have been utterly unsuccessful..

But now it appears that the dogs of hate unleashed by the anti-immigrant crowd are about to turn around and bite their masters. It’s now becoming evident that they woke a sleeping giant and ignited a flame that has fired up the nation's largest minority like never before. This November, Latinos, and other ethnic groups with large immigrant populations, hold the key to victory in not only the obvious swing states, but a few that some might find surprising.

The passion of the immigration debate has galvanized immigrants and motivated them to apply for citizenship in record numbers. As a result, millions of new voters are preparing to cast their first ballots in November. These new citizens are joining long-time U.S. citizens of Latino background who are newly energized to turn out for the first time in years. Combined with the U.S.-born children and grand-children of immigrants who are coming into voting age, this wave has created a formidable force of Latino voters in 2008. Political scientist and Latino voting expert Matt Barreto of the University of Washington predicts turnout of over 9 million Latino voters in 2008, compared with 7.6 million Latino voters in 2004

Link

The protests of 2006 were the largest in US history and elicited different reactions from various groups. Knuckle draggers on right, like Lou Dobbs and Pat Buchanan, saw the marches as the greatest threat to "White European" hegemony in the history of the republic and went ballistic riling up their base to oppose the "brown menace." Progressives and the rest of the liberal chattering classes sat there, jaws agape, wondering how this ragtag group, seemingly without formal organization, or inside-the-beltway guidance, managed to put millions in the streets while they had had such limited success in mobilizing their own forces for similar efforts in opposition to the war.

Latino, immigrant advocacy, and civil/human rights organizers saw something different. They saw the birth of a movement. A movement Washington insiders played little, if any, roll in organizing – a true grassroots effort, born of the streets. Organizers across the spectrum, from well established DC advocacy groups to local community organizations to grassroots groups that sprung up in the wake of the marches, all saw the potential of this new movement and quickly started to mobilize.....particularly in the areas of naturalization of new immigrants and voter registration. And they are now about to reap the rewards of those efforts.

In 2008 alone, over 900,000 new naturalization petitions were approved. Of those, the vast majority plan on voting.

The We Are America Alliance (WAAA) expects significant Latino turnout for Election Day 2008. ...(and) is in the process of registering 500,000 new citizen voters and mobilizing one million to cast ballots on Election Day. WAAA is focusing its efforts on thirteen states with a high number of immigrant and Latino citizens, aided by last year’s surge in naturalization applications. Link

WAAA's numbers are impressive:

• Over 83,000 new voters in Florida


• 70,000 in California


• 35,000 in Pennsylvania


• 25,000 in Texas


• 25,000 Illinois


• 18,000 in Arizona


• 17,000 in New York


• 35,000 in Colorado


• 52,000 In Nevada (almost 2.5 times the amount that state was decided by in the 2004 presidential election - George W. Bush won Nevada by 21,500 votes).


• 40,000 in New Mexico (George W. Bush won by 6,000 votes in 20040

And these numbers reflect the efforts of only one group focusing mostly on new immigrants. Others, such as Voto Latino are concentrating on the broader Latino community and Latino youth vote. And then there are the efforts of the various campaigns and political parties to register Latino voters.

Yesterday, Democracia USA, one member of the We Are America Alliance, announced the final tallies of it's registration efforts in 7 States.

Democracia U.S.A. (D-USA), a national non-partisan Hispanic voter registration and civic engagement organization, today released its final Hispanic voter registration figures for 2008, which enumerate the organization’s efforts over the past year and shows an average 7.6% increase in voter registration in the seven states where it operates, totaling a one percent increase in the entire Hispanic electorate. D-USA operations in Arizona, Florida, Nevada, New Jersey and Pennsylvania reported the following increases in registrations:

Arizona 2%
Florida 6%
Nevada 11%
New Jersey 6%
Pennsylvania 10%

These increases demonstrate an overall trend across the country of emerging political activism and interest among Hispanics as their numbers increase state-by-state.

In Florida, the Hispanic voting population in the Orlando media market quadrupled between 1990 - 2008 from 66,000 to 234,000 and Central Florida Hispanics show an acute tendency to vote for the candidate not the party, making it the most swing prone voting bloc in the nation. The percentage of Miami Dade’s overall Hispanic electorate grew from 44% in 2000 to 50% in 2008, while the percentage of native-born Cubans within this group fell from 75% in 2000 to 58% in 2008.

In Pennsylvania, a D-USA Hispanic voter trend study noted an increase of 84,000 Hispanics registering to vote between 2006 and 2008 with a statewide Hispanic electorate total of 294,000. Democracia USA’s three regional offices in Philadelphia, Reading and Pennsauken, NJ. registered over 50,000 new voters in Pennsylvania and Southern New Jersey in that same timeframe.

Finally, since 2000, Hispanic voters in Nevada have more than doubled, now making them 11% of the state’s total electorate.

Link

According to Jorge Mursuli, President and CEO of Democracia U.S.A., new registrants in Florida have been trending decidedly Democratic. In 2004, 47% of registrants listed themselves as Independents, with the remainder splitting relatively evenly between Democrats and Republicans. In 2008, 58% of new registrants are registering as Democrats, with Republicans garnering numbers in the low 20% range.

We won't know the full effects of all these efforts until after the election, but it's become quite obvious to most following these trends that the Republican Right and their media lapdogs have overplayed their hand, underestimating the blowback their anti-immigrant/anti-Latino rhetoric would cause.

A recent poll from NDN, conducted by Bendixen & Associates, asked Latinos, “How important is the immigration issue to you and your family?” In Florida, 79% of Latinos viewed immigration as important (51% “very important”); in Colorado, 74% viewed immigration as important (42% “very important”); in New Mexico, 80% viewed immigration as important (43% “very important”); and in Nevada, 86% viewed the issue as important (58% “very important”).

... In 2004, George W. Bush won approximately 40% of the Latino vote nationwide, but polls today show weaker support for the Republican Party among this demographic. The Pew Hispanic Center recently found that Latinos favor Senator Obama over Senator McCain 66% to 23%.x In their research, 76% of Latino registered voters rated Senator Obama favorably, in comparison to a 44% favorability rating for Senator McCain.i Obama leads among Latinos in the Gallup daily tracking poll by an average of 59% to 30% over the past month. And a Wall Street Journal poll shows Latino voters favoring Obama over McCain 63% to 30%, while the poll shows the candidates tied with the general electorate.

These numbers are repeated in the hotly-contested “battleground” states. In Colorado, Senator Obama leads McCain among Latinos 56% to 26%; in Nevada, 62% to 20%; and in New Mexico, 56% to 23% according to the NDN poll. In Florida, a state where George W. Bush won a majority of Latino support in 2004, Latino voters’ preference is now evenly divided between the two candidates. And a new NALEO Educational Fund survey shows Latino voters who have made up their minds favoring Obama 63% to 15% in Colorado; 55% to 14% in Nevada; and 61% to 20% in New Mexico, with the candidates in a near statistical tie in Florida. Link

Obama's strong showing among Latino voters follows a general trend where Democrats are viewed as more concerned about issues that effect Latinos ... and particularly the hot button topic of immigration.

When asked “which party has done a better job on immigration” by NDN/Bendixen, Latino voters favored generic Democrats by the following margins: in Florida, 48% to 29%; Colorado, 48% to 14%; New Mexico, 46% to 19%; and Nevada, 58% to 20%.

The NALEO Educational Fund poll finds that nearly two-thirds of Latino voters in Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada believe the Democratic Party has the most concern for the Latino community, while only 6%, 4%, and 7% respectively chose the Republican Party. In Florida, 40% of Latino voters say the Democratic Party has more concern for the Latino community, while 20% choose the Republican Party and one-third say there is no difference. And a Pew Hispanic Center survey found that 49% of Latinos “say that the Democratic Party has more concern for Hispanics, while just 7% say the Republican Party has more concern. Since 2004, the share of Hispanics who say that the Democratic Party has more concern for Hispanics has increased by 14 percentage points.”

Link

For many Latinos, their concern about immigration has just as much to do with the tone of the debate as policy specifics. Polling shows that Latinos favor a comprehensive approach immigration reform at about the same rates as the general population. But as Cecilia Muñoz, Senior Vice President at the National Council of La Raza recently said, immigration “tends to determine who the good guys are and the bad guys are for Latinos.”

This is perhaps most evident in one of the most conservative groups within the Latino community; Evangelicals ... a group that according to the Pew Hispanic Center accounted almost entirely for Bush's increased share of the overall Latino vote in 2004, which grew from 35% in 2000 to 40% in 2004.

Evangelicals are one of the fastest growing segments of the Latino community. In 2004, they represented about one-third of the Hispanic electorate (up from one-quarter in 2000), and 63 percent voted for Bush—the first time on record that a Republican presidential candidate won the Latino evangelical vote.

Latino evangelicals are a distinctive demographic. They tend to be more affluent, more educated and more acculturated than other Hispanics. They're also more likely to be citizens and more likely to vote. "They punch above their weight when it comes to electoral impact," says Luis Lugo of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Politically, they tend to be highly conservative on social issues like abortion and gay marriage—in fact, more conservative than white evangelicals, according to various studies—but liberal on economic matters, such as publicly funded health care

... This year, the trend lines are disconcerting for Republicans. Bush was an appealing figure to Hispanic evangelicals—full of religious ardor, devoted to a conservative "life" agenda and appreciative of Latino culture. Yet many of them have soured on him as a result of the economic crisis and the war in Iraq. Moreover, GOP stridency on illegal immigration has made the party appear anti-Hispanic. The platform Republicans adopted at their convention didn't help. It called for declaring "English as the official language in our nation," and with regard to immigration, it emphasized border security and rejected "en masse legalizations." (Rev. Samuel) Rodriguez uses adjectives like "xenophobic," "nativist" and "anti-immigrant" to describe it. McCain has struggled in this environment. Though he championed immigration reform for years, he dialed back his support during the primaries.

Link

Today, a coalition of leading Latino Evangelical organizations released a report looking at polling trends among Latino Protestants, 80 percent of whom self-identify as born-again and/or attended an Evangelical denomination.

"The Biblical mandate to welcome the immigrant could not be clearer and we draw our values from our Bibles," said Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, who spoke during the press conference announcing the survey results. "This poll powerfully demonstrates that immigration is a profoundly religious issue for Hispanic evangelicals. We will vote our faith and we will vote our values. It's time that all candidates take notice."

"Latino Protestant voters are demonstrating a faith-based politics that puts moral solutions above ideology and sound bites," added Katie Paris, Director of Communications Strategy at Faith in Public Life, a sponsor of the poll. "Consequently, they are commanding the attention of both parties and defying the outdated stereotype that people of faith are mired in partisanship," she concluded.

• Latino Protestant registered voters favor Democrat Barack Obama over Republican John McCain by a 17-point margin (50.4 percent to 33.6 percent with 10.4 percent still undecided). This margin of support for Obama is slightly lower than his lead among the Latino population overall.
  
  This is a dramatic shift from 2004 when George W. Bush soundly won the Latino Protestant vote. According
  to 2004 post-election survey data, Bush won 63 percent of these voters, up from 32 percent in 2000



• 76.8 percent say their religious beliefs are important in influencing their views on immigration (54.6 percent say very important). Only 19 percent say their religious beliefs are not important in influencing their views on the issue.

Like all other voters, Latinos are most concerned about the economy, healthcare, education and Iraq. But the underlying specter of the xenophobia and racism that marked the immigration debate has led them to more readily question if they have any future in the Republican party.

Back in 2005, when there was still talk of "the permanent Republican majority" and Jim Sensenbrenner and his colleagues in the House Immigration Reform Caucus were pushing through Tom Tancredo's deportation bill, HR4437, one must wonder if they had any idea what waking the sleeping giant would really mean to their party's future.

More info on the Latino vote, and registration efforts in various swing states:
FL
NM
CO
PA
FL
CO

Read More...

Summary only...

So called "Grassroots Hispanic Group" endorses McCain

In the heat of last weeks discussions of the Spanish language air wars going on between the two presidential candidates, a little tidbit of info started to show up with some frequency in my in-box.

It seems that a "Hispanic" advocacy group was weighing into the fray with not only an admonishment of both candidates dirty little war of words …but an endorsement of Sen. McCain.

In fact this "grassroots" group picked up on McCain's discredited "Obama killed reform with poison pill amendments" statement as one of its chief reasons for throwing their support behind the Arizona Senator:

"It's time to turn down the rhetoric and the highly-charged television
commercials, and get down to the real facts," said Jose Nino, Co-Chairman
of the Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity Institute. "Voters deserve to know
the truth on the critical issue of immigration reform, and let the chips
fall where they may."

"While Senators John McCain and Barack Obama both have expressed their
support for the doomed bipartisan immigration reform compromise that
Congress rejected this Session, only one candidate remained true to his
commitment -- John McCain.

“Virtually every Hispanic organization from the League of United Latin-American Citizens (LULAC) to the National Council of La Raza has recognized that Sen. John McCain risked his entire political career by defying much of his Party and supporting comprehensive immigration reform, including a Guest Worker Visa program.

“Barack Obama, despite his promises of support, was absent from much of the debate on the compromise, then turned his back on the proposal, siding instead with organized labor on a series of ‘poison pill’ amendments that even his supporter, Sen. Edward Kennedy, opposed. Among the proposals Obama supported were amendments that would have cut the number of Guest Worker Visas in half, and would ultimately have killed the program after just five years.

“In the heat of the campaign, overheated rhetoric and campaign promises should never eclipse the truth – and when it comes to comprehensive immigration reform, the truth is that Sen. McCain has shown courage and leadership, while Sen. Obama, despite his promises, ultimately sided with those who oppose comprehensive reform.”

HAP Institute Press Release

I had heard the views of many of the leading Latino and pro-migrant advocacy groups who were involved in last years negotiations over reform, and knew for a fact that they were not standing by McCain's re-writing of history. I wondered exactly who this Hispanic Alliance of Prosperity (Progress) Institute was.

A quick look at their webpage showed that this was unlike any Latino advocacy group I had seen before.

I stopped first at their Take Action page to see what issues were of most concern to Latinos according to this group. …Voter registration? …. Immigration? …. Education?

Not quite

The Action page leads off with an obviously old call to sign an on-line petition in support of Alberto Gonzales.

Next is an action item to contact the Texas legislature to prevent the Texas Public Utilities Commission from reviewing a utility buyout by a private investment group called Texas Energy Future.

Then there's a call to support a piece of Florida legislation deregulating telecom and broadband services.

Clicking further, the featured "action items" included a petition for more oil drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, and a letter writing campaign in support of the Columbia Free Trade Agreement

Of course they frame these issues as crucial ones of concern to all Latinos:

As a Hispanic American consumer, I am concerned about continually rising energy costs, and realize that the cost of energy is related directly to supply.

The U.S has access to an abundant supply of domestic oil and natural gas which government has deemed “off limits” for production.

or

As a Hispanic American, I am keenly aware of both the benefits and challenges of America’s diplomatic and trade relationship with Latin America. This agreement will promote the long sought and elusive concept of “fair trade” and propose a win-win scenario for businesses and workers on both sides of the border. I ask that you bring the Colombian Fair Trade Agreement up for a vote this year in 2008 without any further delay.

Not exactly the usual fare at a Latino advocacy web page I thought… offshore drilling? ... telecom and utility deregulation? ... but what the hell, I figured I'd go explore a little further and look at their issues page. Perhaps there I would find a more traditional approach to advocacy.

Again, not quite

Although some of the more traditional advocacy issues were covered, for the most part, the positions taken were not exactly those of the more mainstream Latino organizations.*

Trade - (Free Trade) - " HAPI supports Free and Fair trade and believes it fosters economic benefits to U.S. businesses and U.S. consumers. …. HAPI was a key advocate and major player supporting and voicing the Pro-Business and Hispanic Pro- CAFTA positions and a leading advocate for the Colombia Free Trade Agreement currently pending before Congress."

Education- (School Choice/Vouchers/Assimilation ) - " HAPI supports empowering parents with the authority to make decisions related to the allocation of tax dollars for the education of their child and placing their children in the school best suited for the needs of the family…. Through enhanced economic and social assimilation, enhanced self sufficiency is fostered."

Immigration- (Enforcement/Guest workers) - " HAPI supports strong national security measures without jeopardizing the U.S. economy. HAPI advocates for a balance that will accommodate both critical interests. A vital component of legislation should include a guest worker program that is realistic to deploy"

Media, Technology, Information Platforms (Deregulation) - " HAPI believes that the enhanced use of media, technology and information applications must be included in a 21st Century Hispanic agenda. …HAPI supports regulatory environments that ensure consumer access and affordability to these platforms and supports products and services that best serve the needs of the community."

Homes and Communities - (Ownership Society) – "HAPI supports ownership society tenets vital for asset creation, and ensuring access to affordable housing. Research validates the connection between housing stability as a cornerstone to family stability."

OK, this was not what I expected from an advocacy group. Since when is telecom and broadband deregulation a top issue on anyone's issue list, outside of possibly those who own them?

A little more checking around found some other odd activities from the Hispanic Alliance for Progress.

For instance, in 2005 they organized a rally in support of controversial Judge, Priscilla Owen in her bid to get a Supreme Court nomination.

In 2004 they sponsored a "Hispanic Safety and Health Summit" with the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and OSHA that was boycotted by every major worker safety advocacy organization, labor group, and Hispanic organization because they claimed it was organized by the Bush Administration as a blatant election year play for Hispanic votes.

In their letter to OSHA, members of the Coalition for Hispanic Worker Safety noted that the conference was organized with virtually no input from major Hispanic advocacy organizations or grassroots worker groups. “This is clearly not a serious effort to address the epidemic of workplace injuries and illnesses suffered by our community,” said Jayesh Rathod, Staff Attorney of CASA of Maryland. Planners chose not to invite groups like ours because they knew we would raise serious concerns about the administration’s dismantling of workplace safety rules,” Rathod added.

Link (PDF)

So who exactly who is this "grassroots Hispanic advocacy group" now endorsing John McCain?

From Right Wing Watch:

The Hispanic Alliance for Progress Institute (HAPI) claims to be a grassroots organization but its Board of Advisors and Policy Board are made up of high-level Republican political operatives with deep ties to various Republican administrations. As part of the "National Coalition To End Judicial Filibusters," HAPI— in conjunction with the Committee for Justice, Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform, James Dobson's Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, and others— supported the use of the so-called "nuclear option" to eliminate Senator's ability to filibuster against President George W. Bush's right-wing judicial nominees.

… its Board of Advisors and Policy Board are made up of high-level Republican political operatives with deep ties to Republican administrations (Reagan, Bush I and Bush II). HAPI's boards are composed almost entirely of Republican players, including lobbyists, donors, and political appointees.(Chairman, Manuel) Lujan and his former boss, President George H.W. Bush, launched the organization at a 2004 gala in New York City.

And that Board of Advisors and Policy Board ….. Who is it made up of?

CHAIRMAN
Hon. Manuel Lujan, Jr., New Mexico

CONGRESIONAL ADVISORY BOARD
Congressman Joe Barton, TX
Congressman Henry Bonilla, TX
Congressman John Boehner, OH
Senator Richard Burr, NC
Congressman Ken Calvert, TX
Senator Saxby Chambliss, GA
Congressman Tom Cole, OK
Senator John Cornyn, TX
Senator Pete Domenici, NM
Congressman Elton Gallegly, CA
Congressman Louis Gohmert, TX
Congressman Doc Hastings, WA
Congressman Jeb Hensarling, TX
Congressman Darrell Issa, CA
Senator John Kyl, AZ
Congressman Jerry Lewis, CA
Senator Mel Martinez, FL
Congressman Gary Miller, CA
Congressman Michael Oxley, OH
Congressman Steve Pearce, NM
Congressman Pete Sessions, TX
Congressman Heather Wilson, NM

BOARD OF ADVISORS
Mr. Adrian Arriaga, Texas
Ms. Rosemary Barbour, Mississippi
Mr. George P. Bush, Texas
Mr. Jose Canchola, Arizona
Mr. Pedro Celis, PH. D., Washington
Mr. Lupe Cruz, California
Hon. Patricia Diaz Dennis, Texas
Hon. Robert A. Estrada, Texas
Mrs. Grace Flores-Hughes
Hon. Lou Gallegos, New Mexico
Hon. Raul A. Gonzalez, Texas
Mr. Abel Guerra, Florida
Hon. Jimmy Gurule, Indiana
Mr. Steve Gutierrez, Michigan
Dr. Venicio Madrigal, Louisiana
Ms. Margaret Martin, Texas
Mr. Jacob Monty, Texas
Mr. Jose Nino, Maryland
Mrs. Rita Nunez, New Mexico
Hon. Robert Pacheco, California
Mr. Cesar Remond, Illinios
Mr. Louis Sanchez, Florida
Mr. Rudy Sandoval, Texas
Mr. Jerry Silva, California
Dr. Josh Valdez, California
Mr. Massey Villareal, Texas

POLICY BOARD
HON. Ted Cruz, Texas, Chairman
Mr. Juan Carlos Benitez, DC
Mr. Victor Cabral, DC
Mr. Troop Coronado, CA
Mrs. Ann Costello, DC
Ms. Raquel Egusquiza, DC
Mr. Henry Gandy, DC
Mr. Mike Hernandez, Texas
Mrs. Bobbie Kilberg, Virginia
Ms. Laura Lawlor, Texas
Mr. Glenn Lemunyon, DC
Mr. Joseph Samora, DC
Mrs. Leslie Sanchez, DC
Mr. Scott Styles, Virginia

CORPORATE BOARD MEMBERS
Bank of America
BellSouth
Ford
AT&T
AIG (American International Group)
Information Technology Industry Council
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Altria Group, Inc.
American Petroleum Institute
IBC Bank
Case New Holland
DCI Group
Coca-Cola Companies
R.J. Reynolds
National Association of Manufacturers
National Association of Realtors

Can you say …ATSROTURF?

* (note …this organization has two web pages running at the same time, with two different URLs and slightly different content…it also operates under two different names: Hispanic Alliance for Progress and the Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity ...not exactly a surprise)

Read More...

Summary only...

Obama boxes McCain into a corner: The Spanish language air wars

After spending most of the campaign season trying their damnedest to stay as far away from the thorny issue of immigration reform as possible, both presidential candidates have now picked it as their weapon of choice in some key battleground states….but only in the Spanish language media.

With polls numbers showing McCain's support amongst Latinos somewhere in the Bob Dole range, and crucial swing states like Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and Florida starting to slip out of range, the McCain camp decided earlier this week to go on the offensive and try to cash in on his long abandoned credentials as an immigration reformer….but it may turn out to be the biggest mistake of his campaign.

Taking an ad buy in Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona, McCain launched a Spanish language ad entitled "Which Side Are They On?" depicting a revisionist history of the failed attempt to pass comprehensive immigration reform in 2007. The ad claims that Democrats in general and Obama specifically, sabotaged his efforts to enact reform through the use of "poison pill" amendments and asks Latinos if Obama is really on their side .

Translation: Announcer: "Obama and his allies in Congress say they're on the side of immigrants. But are they? News reports say their efforts were like 'poison pills' that caused immigration reform to fail. The result: No to the guest worker program, to the road to citizenship, to secure borders. No reforms passed. Is that being on our side? Obama and his allies in Congress: Ready to block immigration reform but not ready to govern." McCain (speaking in English): "I'm John McCain and I approved this message."

Of course anyone who followed the issue even casually knows that anti-immigrant forces within the Republican Party and right-wing media worked tooth and nail to kill the legislation. … but truth is not a crucial component in campaign ads….if it was we would have never seen the first Bush, let alone the second.

After a day or so of attempting to refute McCain's false claims, Obama fired back with his own truth-challenged ad… and managed to box McCain into a corner from which he may not be able to effectively extricate himself.

Translation: Obama: "I'm Barack Obama and I approved this message." Announcer: "They want us to forget the insults we've put up with, the intolerance. They made us feel marginalized in a country we love so much. John McCain and his Republican friends have two faces. One tells lies just to get our vote, and the other, even worse, continues the failed policies of George Bush, putting the interests of powerful groups above working families. John McCain, more of the same Republican deceptions."

Admittedly, tying McCain to Limbaugh is beyond a stretch and leaves Obama open to accusations of being no better than his opponent in the truth department ….But, in a pure political sense, the ad is strategically brilliant.

Up until now, McCain has been totally unwilling to define his current position on immigration. Having run as rapidly as possible from his previous record on reform during the primaries, he has lately managed play both sides of the field according to who he's pandering to at the moment without firmly taking a stance.

He talks to his base about enforcement first and governors certifying the borders hermetically sealed before there can be any talk of reform (knowing, as they do, that that will never happen), while telling Latinos not to worry, Tio Johnny will take care of everything (wink, wink).

It's reached the point that earlier this week during the conference call sponsored by the leading Latino and immigrant-rights advocates, NCLR, MALDEF, and Americas Voice to discuss McCain's bogus ad, the majority of time was spent not on the ad, but rather trying to figure out just where McCain stands at the present time. ...and in the end, no one could definitively answer the question.

It appears that Obama has done us all a favor.

He has forced McCain into a corner where he must make a choice between two very unpleasant options.

He must either defend his previous record, reminding those who nearly denied him the nomination why they hated him in the first place, negating all the Palin picking, ass-kissing, and soul-selling he's done over the last year to win over the base …or …. Leave the ad unanswered and give up any hope whatsoever of getting the 40% Latino vote he has to have to even stand a chance at getting elected. …Tough times for Tio Johnny Huh?

Of course he could just tell the truth, and let everyone know where he actually stands on the issue and argue his position on the merits …..but then again, that's not how elections are really won, is it?

Read More...

Summary only...

Republican Platform Committee takes sharp turn to the right, and a dump on the Constitution

With all eyes turned to Denver and the historic events unfolding there, Republicans met to hammer out the details of John McCain's platform to be unveiled this coming week. One crucial question regarding just how much McCain would waver on some of his previously held positions in order to mollify the right-wing was answered with the release of the first draft of the immigration plank.

In sharp contrast to the 2004 platform, whose immigration plank clearly reflected the highly flawed Bush/McCain doctrine on immigration reform, relying heavily on a pro-business guest-worker program, a modified and somewhat limited path to citizenship for the 12 mill undocumented workers, and stricter enforcement with limited judicial review, this year's platform is based entirely upon increased enforcement, raids and deportation.

The current platform full-throatily endorses the "deportation through attrition" model so favored by hate groups like FAIR and their allies in the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus led by ex-FAIR lobbyist Brian Bilbray.

While the 2004 platform at least tried to leave a modicum of human dignity for migrant workers intact by paying lip service to " the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of immigrants" and the essential role they play in the nation's economic vitality, this years platform, after four years of a campaign of misinformation from anti-immigrant activists, reflects more the rants of Tom Tancredo and Lou Dobbs than a practical governing tool.

The Democratic platform released earlier left much to be desired in it's immigration language, but the striking differences between what came out of Denver, and what will come out this week in the Twin Cities speaks volumes to the effectiveness of the anti-immigrant forces over the last few years to shape national discourse.

In addition to a strict adherence to enforcing "the rule of law" as the chief mechanism for repairing a fatally flawed immigration system, the new platform calls for the full support of the error-filled E-Verify system that would leave millions of legitimate workers unable to prove their employment eligibility.

Additionally it calls for even less judicial oversight and adherence to basic constitutional protections- even in the wake of the revelations of the civil right abuses that took place in Postville. It calls for closer co-operation between state, local, and federal agencies on immigration matters, and penalties for "sanctuary cities" that "refuse to participate in what is an essential national security campaign." and unequivocally states that drivers licenses for undocumented workers and in-state tuition for children of undocumented parents are off the table….and of course warns Senator McCain not to even think about any "amnesty" program

Supporting Humane and Legal Immigration (2004 Platform)

The Republican Party supports reforming the immigration system to ensure that it is legal, safe, orderly and humane. It also supports measures to ensure that the immigration system is structured to address the needs of national security. America is a stronger and better nation because of the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of
immigrants, and the Republican Party honors them. A growing economy requires a growing number of workers, and President Bush has proposed a new temporary worker program that applies when no Americans can be found to fill the jobs. This new program would allow workers who currently hold jobs to come out of the shadows and to participate legally in America’s economy. It would allow men and women who enter the program to apply for citizenship in the same manner as those who apply from outside the United States. There must be strong workplace enforcement with tough penalties against employees and employers who violate immigration laws. We oppose amnesty because it would have the effect of encouraging illegal immigration and would give an unfair advantage to those who have broken our laws.

To better ensure that immigrants enter the United States only through legal means that allow for verification of their identity, reconnaissance cameras, border patrol agents, and unmanned aerial flights have all been increased at the border. In addition, Border Patrol agents now have sweeping new powers to deport illegal aliens without having first to go through the cumbersome process of allowing the illegal alien to have a hearing before an immigration judge. We support these efforts to enforce the law while welcoming immigrants who enter America through legal avenues.

2004 Republican platform (PDF)

Enforcing the Rule of Law at the Border and Throughout the Nation (2008 Platform)

Border security is essential to national security. In an age of terrorism, drug cartels, and criminal gangs, allowing millions of unidentified persons to enter and remain in this country poses grave risks to the sovereignty of the United States and the security of its people. We simply must be able to track who is entering and leaving our country.

Our determination to uphold the rule of law begins with more effective enforcement, giving our agents the tools and resources they need to protect our sovereignty, completing the border fence quickly and securing the borders, and employing complementary strategies to secure our ports of entry. Experience shows that enforcement of existing laws is effective in reducing and reversing illegal immigration.

Our commitment to the rule of law means smarter enforcement at the workplace, against illegal workers and lawbreaking employers alike, along with those who traffic in fraudulent documents. As long as jobs are available in the United States, economic incentives to enter illegally will persist.

But we must empower employers so they can know with confidence that those they hire are permitted to work. That means that E-Verify must be renewed and receive the federal government’s full support. It does not mean a national ID card.

The rule of law means guaranteeing to law enforcement the tools and coordination to deport criminal aliens without delay – and correcting court decisions that have made deportation so difficult.

It means enforcing the law against those who overstay their visas, rather than letting millions flout the generosity that gave them temporary entry.

It means imposing maximum penalties on those who smuggle illegal aliens into the U.S., both for their lawbreaking and for their cruel exploitation.

It means requiring cooperation among federal, state and local law enforcement and real consequences for self-described sanctuary cities, which refuse to participate in what is an essential national security campaign.

It does not mean driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, nor does it mean that states should be allowed to flout the federal law barring them from giving in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens.

We oppose amnesty. The rule of law suffers if government policies encourage or reward illegal activity. The American people’s rejection of en masse legalizations is especially appropriate given the federal government’s past failures to enforce the law.

Draft 2008 Republican Platform (PDF)

2008 Republican Platform Final (PDF)

While the platform itself demonstrates just how far to the right the Republican party has moved in the past four years, from the party of Bush/McCain to that of HR4437 and worse, it was during the amendment process of the Platform Committee that the true nature of the wingnuttery was most evident.

On the second day of deliberations nearly 45minutes were spent debating an amendment from Colorado representative Kandal Unruh that attempted to overturn the 14th amendment and deny citizenship to native –born children of undocumented parents. Despite repeated attempts by cooler heads to explain that the constitutional protections of the14th amendment are vital to our nation and that no platform plank could overturn the constitution, Unruh and her allies continuously riled against "anchor babies" and the need to protect the nation from the growing brown menace.

At another point, a heated discussion took place when an amendment was proposed to change the way the census is calculated for apportioning congressional seats and the receiving of government services.

Proponents of the amendment wanted to prevent non-citizens from being counted in any further censuses as they claimed it "skews" certain regions with large immigrant populations giving the "legal" residents undue government influence. Again, the anti-immigrant forces had to be reminded that the constitution clearly states that representation is based upon residence not citizenship. To their reasoning the undocumented don't even warrant the 3/5 count the Framers allotted to slaves ….. but then again with their opposition to the 14th amendment that might have been a moot point in their minds anyway

This followed on opening day of deliberations that was just as contentious and mired down in radical anti-immigrant arguments.

Two delegates wanted to harden the language surrounding the issue of amnesty. The draft read, “We oppose amnesty.” But, delegates from North Carolina and Colorado wanted to include opposition to “comprehensive immigration reform” because they believe it is a code word for amnesty. This sparked a heated discussion between members with a delegate from Washington DC who said that the Republican Party is a “not a xenophobic party, not an intolerant party. We are a compassionate party that insists on the rule of law and endorses federal law,” said Bud McFarlane. Kendal Unruh from Colorado, who wanted to include “opposition to comprehensive immigration reform” to the draft, seemed to take offense to that statement citing her missionary work and saying that she would “never have the label” of xenophobic “slapped on me.” She continued to press that the committee add the tougher language to stop “behind the door tactics” to prevent “amnesty” of illegal aliens.

…snip…

The immigration debate continued when the topic of English being the “accepted” language of the country opposed to the “official” language of the United States. The draft stated that English is the “common” and “accepted” language. The delegates from North Carolina and Colorado again wanted stronger language to make English the “official” language of the country.

Sam Winder from New Mexico wanted to add language that welcomed other languages, but did state that English was the official language of the country. Disagreement between the two sides continued, but a compromise was agreed on and put into the draft.


Faux Noize

Clearly, the anti-immigrant forces have full control of the Republican Party at this point and even the most basic constitutional questions are up for re-interpretation…. Or total disregard as the case may be.

After eight years of using the Constitution as toilet paper and systematically destroying almost all of it most basic principles and protections, the Republican party apparently still believes it has some more foul work left to do before that document can be relegated to the trash-heap of history.

Read More...

Summary only...

Democratic Platform Immigration Plank: The good, the bad, and the ugly

From the Democratic Platform Committee comes a draft of what will be Obama's immigration plank.

As expected, it's a mix of both good and bad.

On the good side there is a commitment to take up comprehensive reform within the first year, a plan to regularize the status of the 12mil undocumented migrants already living in the US, an acknowledgment that conditions in sender nations that foster increased migration must be dealt with, a reaffirmation of the commitment to the principles of family based immigration, an increase in the number of available visas, and a call to fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy.

On the bad side, the platform is still mired down in the language of enforcement and criminalization that marked previous failed efforts at reform.

Calls for increased border enforcement and security as a means to regulate migration, and promises of getting tough on those who "disrespect the law", while perhaps smart political theater, are not constructive ways to address a broken immigration system, and only add to the divisive and dehumanizing nature of the debate.

While mentioning the devastating effects of "raids that are ineffective, tear apart families and leave people detained without adequate access to counsel", the platform falls short of actually denouncing those raids and either calling for their end, or at the least, requiring a moratorium on them until reform is taken up and passed.

Additionally, with the fingerprints of centrist pollsters and spinmeisters all over it, it's notable to see the language shift from one of providing undocumented migrants the "opportunity" to become full members of society, (as has always been the verbiage) … to "require(ing) them to come out of the shadows and get right with the law" …this is no small difference.

While meaning essentially the same thing as a matter of policy, to require one to get "right with the law" implies an inherent criminality….and illegality …again fueling the same dehumanizing frames that have led to increased violence and hatred directed at immigrant populations.

Lastly, there are the labor aspects of this platform. While claiming to take a tough stance against those employers who exploit undocumented workers, the platform falls somewhat short of guaranteeing real protections for both native and immigrant laborers. It specifically targets those employers who fail to pay minimum wage…but makes no mention of a living, or prevailing wage.

This is an important distinction …to allow employers to pay immigrant workers a minimum wage, when it is far bellow the prevailing standards, is no less exploitive or destructive than failing to pay minimum wages for those jobs that warrant it.

While this platform is a decent starting point from which to proceed forward…it leaves too much to be desired as a declaration of leadership on this issue.

..but we are yet to see how the Republican's cobble together an immigration plank that satisfies it's anti-immigrant base while still allowing their standard-bearer a modicum of self-respect and credibility. …it should be quite a trick

text of immigration plank after the fold

..DRAFT..

Immigration
America has always been a nation of immigrants. Over the years, millions of people have come here in the hope that in America, you can make it if you try. Each successive wave of immigrants has contributed to our country's rich culture, economy and spirit. Like the immigrants that came before them, today's immigrants will shape their own destinies and enrich our country.

Nonetheless, our current immigration system has been broken for far too long. We need comprehensive immigration reform, not just piecemeal efforts. We must work together to pass immigration reform in a way that unites this country, not in a way that divides us by playing on our worst instincts and fears.

We are committed to pursuing tough, practical, and humane immigration reform immigration reform in the first year of the next administration.

For the millions living here illegally but otherwise playing by the rules, we must require them to come out of the shadows and get right with the law. We support a system that requires undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, pay taxes, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens. They are our neighbors, and we can help them become full tax paying, law-abiding, productive members of society.

At the same time, we cannot continue to allow people to enter the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. The American people are a welcoming and generous people, but those who enter our country's borders illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of the law.

We need to secure our borders, and support additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry.

We need additional Customs and Border Protection agents equipped with better technology and real-time intelligence.

We need to dismantle human smuggling organizations, combating the crime associated with this trade.

We also need to do more to promote economic development in migrant-sending nations, to reduce incentives to come to the United States illegally.

And we need to crack down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants, especially those who pay their workers less than the minimum wage.

It's a problem when we only enforce our laws against the immigrants themselves, with raids that are ineffective, tear apart families and leave people detained without adequate access to counsel.

We realize that employers need a method to verify whether their employees are legally eligible to work in the U.S., and will ensure that our system is accurate, fair to legal workers, safeguards people's privacy, and cannot be used to discriminate against workers.

We must also improve the legal immigration system, and make our nation's naturalization process fair and accessible to the thousands of legal permanent residents who are eager to become full Americans.

We should fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy that hampers family reunification, the cornerstone of our immigration policy for years.

Given the importance of both keeping families together and supporting American businesses, we will increase the number of immigration visas for family members of people living here and for immigrants who meet the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill, as long as appropriate labor market protections and standards are in place.

We will fight discrimination against Americans who have always played by our immigration rules but are sometimes treated as if they had not.

Read More...

Summary only...

Bloggers demand more than sound bites and platitudes

Recently both leading presidential candidates have increased their outreach to Latino voters with appearances at various events sponsored by prominent Latino organizations. Not surprisingly, the topics of immigration and immigration reform have played a central role in this outreach effort.

As an issue where both candidates feel they exhibit some strength with Latino voters, they have both attempted to utilize this perceived strength to make inroads into what most believe will be a crucial voting block this coming November.

But what we have received from both candidates thus far are vague promises and pleasant platitudes about "A Nation of Immigrants."

This is a complex issue, and as the history of failed efforts at reform clearly shows, it will take more than quick sound bites and quotes from Emma Lazarus to solve the problems with our failed current immigration system. In order to enact meaningful immigration reform that is practical, rational, fair and most of all humane, tough questions must be answered and problems dealt with.

Last month the Editorial Board of The Sanctuary requested both campaigns to take up this issue in a truly meaningful way and begin at answer those tough questions. We put together a comprehensive survey addressing 38 specific questions on the issue that have been long ignored by both the media and the candidates. …questions like:

• Would you support the addition of funding for stricter enforcement of general labor standards such as wage and hour or safety regulations as part of CIR legislation?



• Do you support the United American Families Act, the bill that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow permanent partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, including same-sex partners, to obtain permanent residency?



• Do you support the Detainee Basic Medical Care Act, the bill that would require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to develop procedures to ensure adequate medical care for all detainees held by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)?



• Would you support the incorporation of requirements that would tie both future economic aid and trade agreements to substantive benchmarks in sender nations that would alleviate some of the economic and humanitarian conditions that foster continued migration?

For too long candidates have been able to skirt tough questions and avoid discussions of specifics …particularly on hot button issues like immigration …crafting instead meaningless sound bites intended to placate and pander.

We at The Sanctuary have decided to do the job both Latino and immigrant-rights advocacy groups, and main stream media, refused to do …demand real answers to the tough questions that must be answered in order to finally address this thorny issue in a meaningful way.

10. Would you favor raising the 65,000 cap on high-skilled H-1B temporary work visas, in light of the fact that in the last two years, H-1B visas were quickly filled in a matter of days?

11a. If so, would you also favor limiting the number of H-1B professionals a company can hire?

11b. If so, would you also favor limiting the number of H-1B professionals employment brokers are allowed to recruit?

11 c. If so, would you favor including meaningful prevailing wage requirements keyed to the Service Contract Act and Davis-Bacon Act?

We are still awaiting their responses.

Read More...

Summary only...