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...

To my Lou Dobbs Democrat friends

In last election cycle one of things we kept hearing about was the rise of a new demographic, the "Lou Dobbs Democrat." Dems, who for one reason or the other found Lou's mix of protectionism and reactionary populism appealing. Taking up the anti-"illegal" immigrant mantra of the right, our Lou Dobbs Democratic friends like to wrap their enforcement-only positions in the trappings of labor politics. ….they just want to protect American jobs and workers.

Most, if not all, opposed any attempt at forging a comprehensive plan for reforming our failing immigration system, and many in fact favored the strict and punitive legislation introduced by the Nativist Right. Just yesterday they were joining in the chorus of those claiming that the DREAM Act, a bill that would have provided thousands of undocumented kids the chance to earn a legal place in society, was nothing more that another "amnesty" from the far left.

But now today, they must come face to face with reality. Their longtime allies on the right who have opposed any meaningful reform, and instead call for harsher penalties and stricter enforcement, are planning on stabbing them in the back.

The very architect of the most punitive of any immigration legislation passed so far is about to give it one more try.

James Sensenbrenner plans on reintroducing the House bill that started the whole immigration debate almost two years ago. When originally passed, HR4437 caused such controversy that millions took to the streets to oppose it.

Of course at the time, Lou Dobbs and his new Lou Dobbs Democratic allies cheered the bill. It would, they said, restore the rule of law, and secure our borders …and of course protect the jobs of US workers and the middle class.

But now our wayward Democratic friends are about to learn a harsh lesson in reality. Sennsenbrenner has slightly modified the bill in two very import ways:

The first is to readjust the census so that only citizens are counted. This of course will cause redistricting and the loss of Democratic congressional seats in the areas that have heavy legal immigrant populations (legal permanent residents)…and where will those seats be lost for the most part? Blue states of course, the Northeast, California, Illinois, and most important of all, the emerging blue areas of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada.

And what else does Mr Sensenbrenner add to his new bill?....oh yeah, he doubles the number of H1b guestworkers allowed into the country to work in high-skilled jobs.

That's correct…those who have argued all along against guestworkes, and particularly H1B, high-skilled guestworkers, now think that we really do need them ….you know ..to do those jobs US computer programmers and electrical engineers won't do.

Become an Original Cosponsor of the Border Enforcement, Employment Verification, and Illegal Immigration Control Act

Dear Colleague:



In 2005, I introduced H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act. This bill put immigration reform on the national agenda. Although the bill passed the House by a vote of 239-182, the Senate failed to act on it.

My constituents have made clear to me that immigration is a pressing issue. In fact, they recently rated it as the biggest threat to our national security. Although some in the House may have given up on immigration reform, we cannot afford to sweep this problem under the rug. It is in this vein that I again attempt to raise awareness of the serious problem that Americans face.

Next week I will introduce new immigration legislation. My new bill offers real solutions to end illegal immigration by securing our nation’s borders and cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Many of the provisions in the new bill received bipartisan support in the 109th Congress.

The Border Enforcement, Employment Verification, and Illegal Immigration Control Act requires DHS to gain operational control over U.S. borders through the deployment of physical infrastructure, additional surveillance coverage and more effective deployment of personnel. This bill will help restore the integrity of our Nation’s borders and re-establish respect for our laws by holding violators accountable, including human traffickers, employers who hire illegal immigrants, and alien gang members who terrorize communities throughout the country.

I believe that the new legislation contains improvements over H.R. 4437. For example, it does not make illegal presence a felony. It authorizes $300 million annually in grants to states and localities for procurement of necessary items to facilitate their assistance in enforcing the immigration laws. It changes the census count to only include U.S. citizens, not those with work visas or “green cards” and those who entered the U.S. illegally, and it doubles the number of H1-B visas for skilled workers from 65,000 to 130,000.

I hope you will join me in sponsoring the Border Enforcement, Employment Verification, and Illegal Immigration Control Act to ensure that we secure our borders and turn off the job magnet that attracts illegal immigrants across the border. Please contact Michael Lenn at michael.lenn@mail.house.gov if you have questions regarding this legislation or wish to add your name as an original cosponsor.



Sincerely,
F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
Member of Congress

So to my friends in the Programmer Guild and the IEEE who fought tooth and nail to kill meaningful immigration reform I say …good job there folks.

To our New-Democrat Netroots champions who sided every time with the right on immigration issues claiming they were protecting US workers I say ….way to go.

To our centrist DLC Democratic leadership who see immigration as "the third rail of politics" and don't want to touch it, I say …hope that redistricting works out OK for you

And to all my Lou Dobbs Democrat friends I say …job well done. Perhaps this time when millions of "illegal aliens" pour into the streets to oppose Sensnebrenner's new bill, maybe you'll be there right with them chanting si se puede.

Read More...

Summary only...

The immigration issue: two years out.

This October will mark the second anniversary of the publication of "Respect for the Law & Economic Fairness: Illegal Immigration Prevention", by Republican spinmeister, Frank Luntz.

Intended as a blueprint for winning the 2006 midterm elections, the 25-page memo laid out a strategy to provide cover for Republican candidates hampered by waning poll numbers. Luntz'a plan was to blame "illegal aliens" for all the nations social and economic ills, enabling a shift of attention from an unpopular war, unpopular economic policies, and an unpopular President.

Cleverly framing the issue in reactionary populism, Luntz's strategy pitted hard-working, tax-paying, "real Americans" against shiftless "illegals" looking for a free ride at the nations expense.

Of course with hindsight, we now know this strategy failed politically, polarizing and fracturing the Republican party. But Luntz's handiwork has had a lasting effect on national discourse and led to a level of societal toxicity that could have lasting effects well beyond his political machinations.

By December 2005, Congress passed the first in a series of "immigration reform" measures aimed at whipping up the electorate… the punitive, enforcement-only, Sensenbrenner Bill (HR4437). … a bill so vile it brought millions into the streets the following spring to oppose it.

In the following two years, three other major pieces "immigration reform" legislation have been proposed, two in the Senate, last years Kennedy-McCain Bill (s. 2611), and this years "Grand Compromise" (s.1639). With the reintroduction of the STRIVE ACT about to take place in the House, a third now joins them.

But each of these legislative efforts has been highly flawed. This in large part due to the work first done by Luntz in 2005. Having set the tone and timbre of the debate early on, every successive piece of immigration legislation in the last two years has moved further and further to the right.

In an attempt to find the "sweet spot" in Republican politics that would appease the restrictionist wing of the party and their followers, who have been the subjected to an unprecedented propaganda campaign, while still leaving enough concessions to make the business wing happy, every imaginable kind of "compromise" and concession has been put forward..

The list of compromise proposals is long. Touchbacks, triggers, more guestworkers, heavy fines, English-only, Z Visas, Y Visas, more walls, conditional status, the merit system, are but a few. All of them having no real purpose except to reconcile the two opposing factions within the Republican Party.

The Democrats have faired no better on this issue.

While almost universally accepting the notion of "comprehensive reform", what is meant by that catch-all term seems to vary greatly from one Democratic politician to the next. Very few have been willing to step beyond the confines of the debate as currently framed and propose the sweeping kind of reform called for.

Nothing is mentioned addressing the neo-liberal free-trade policies that have been the root cause of much of the inter-hemispheric migration taking place today.

None seems willing to counter the talking points of the extreme far-right that are clearly based on xenophobia and ethnocentrism.

None will step up and tie immigration reform to a broader policy of workers rights for all US workers, whether native or foreign-born.

None seem willing to close the loopholes in immigration policy that have allowed unscrupulous employers to game the system in regards to work visas and manipulate US labor markets to the detriment of both foreign and native-born workers in certain sectors.

They have forgotten the very roots of their party… A party built on the sweat and sacrifice of working people of all nation origins, races and creeds.

Now content to triangulate positions based upon some misguided belief of where the "magic middle" exists on any given issue, the Democrats have conceded the field to the opposition on immigration reform as just they have on many other important issues.


This lack of strong Progressive and Liberal voices has allowed for national polarization. As the debate has unfolded over the past few years, the bulk of the discussion has been dominated by voices from an increasingly unfriendly traditional media. From right-wing talk radio personalities to TV news commentators and pundits, a constant flow of anti-immigrant rhetoric has proliferated. The list of prominent anti-immigrant voices is long and a daily barrage of misinformation and propaganda from Lou Dobbs, Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, and FOX news has managed to poison any meaningful national discussion.

Even in the "New Media," which has increasingly become dominated by a rapidly growing Progressive internet presence, strong pro-reform voices have not come to the forefront.

While Progressive bloggers have had exponential growth in both numbers and political influence over the past few years, the immigration reform community has not benefited from this explosive growth.

This in part is due to the very lack of cohesive message that plagues the movement in general.

Like the broader Democratic Party, Progressives and Reformers have been all too willing to accept an ever moving target, determined by those opposed to any sort of reform, when considering what immigration reform should and shouldn't look like.

Thus far the reform movement has yet to become any more than a loose confederation of groups and advocates, often with agendas at opposition to one another. The movement is yet to put forth a cohesive set of goals and expectations beyond the vague concept of "comprehensive reform".

In order for any large scale movement demanding reform to be effective, a firm set of unified goals and expectations must be set.

Rather than always reacting to what legislation has been presented to us, the movement must define a firm set of goals as to what true immigration reform should be, then take those goals and march with them. These goals, once set, should become the cornerstone on which meaningful reform is built and should be presented to our political leadership to become the bedrock on which policy is crafted.

The time is now for those who truly want to advance the cause of immigration reform to come together and begin the hard work of crafting just such policy.

Policies that will address what future immigration should encompass.

Policies that will ensure that not only the immediate concerns of those here today are addressed, but also the concerns of those who will follow in the future.

Policies that look at the global realities of how US economic and foreign policy decisions effect and contribution to worldwide migration.

Policies that will ensure that all workers, both US and foreign-born are treated with dignity and economic justice.

Unless we, as Progressives and reformers, begin this needed dialogue amongst ourselves and start the hard work of reaching consensus, will forever be playing catch-up behind the likes of Lou Dobbs and Pat Buchanan as they continue to frame the national debate with the words of Frank Luntz and the Republican spin machine.

Read More...

Summary only...

Making sense of the GOP's immigration schizophrenia

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

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




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




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

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

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

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

Link

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

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

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

Link

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

From Larry King Live:

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

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

--snip--

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

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

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

Link

What will it take "unite" these warring factions?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read More...

Summary only...

Hillary on HR 4437: "this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself"

After months of skirting the issue of immigration reform, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) yesterday spoke at a news conference in Manhattan flanked by a multicultural group of 30 immigrant leaders. Clinton, who had been criticized by immigrant activists for remaining silent on the issue until her remarks before an Irish rally on March 8th , vowed to oppose a bill passed in December by the House (HR 4437) that would make unlawful presence in the United States - currently a civil offense - a felony. The Senate is set to consider a version of that legislation put forward by Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN), as well as several other bills seeking to address the issue of immigration reform

Clinton did not specifically endorse any competing legislation, including a bill co-authored by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and another by Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), saying she hoped the Senate Judiciary Committee would produce a compromise incorporating the best elements of all the bills and would remove the harsh penalties contained in the House measure

(more below the fold)

tags: immigration, HR4437, Clinton, Frist, S.2454, Sensenbrenner

"It is hard to believe that a Republican leadership that is constantly talking about values and about faith would put forth such a mean-spirited piece of legislation," she said of the measure, which was passed by the House of Representatives in December and mirrored a companion Senate bill introduced last week by Senator Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican and the majority leader.

"It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scripture because this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself," she said. "We need to sound the alarm about what is being done in the Congress."

-snip-

Mr. Frist's bill, like the House measure, would make it a crime to be in the United States without proper papers and would add guards and fencing along the Mexican border, and speed deportation.

Some versions, including one proposed by Senator Arlen Spector of Pennsylvania, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, would expand the definition of alien smuggling to include help to illegal immigrants already here.

Mr. Frist has set a Monday deadline for the Senate Judiciary Committee to complete its own, broader version of immigration legislation, which could include "a path to earned citizenship" for illegal residents who qualify, and a guest worker program for foreigners, as well as new enforcement provisions. But even if a committee bill emerges in time, unless a majority of the committee's Republicans vote for it, he has vowed that he will not let it reach the Senate floor. Instead, Mr. Frist, who is also considered a 2008 presidential contender, said he would seek a vote on his bill, without debate.

-snip-

Mrs. Clinton said she and New York's other senator, Charles E. Schumer, were trying to build momentum toward a bipartisan bill that would include a legalization provision that many Republicans would support in defiance of Mr. Frist. But any form of legalization is anathema to supporters of the House measure, co-sponsored by two Republican representatives, Peter King of Long Island, and F. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin.

Mrs. Clinton said, "We want the outcome to be that they're on the wrong side of politics as well as on the wrong side of history and American values."

New York Times

Read More...

Summary only...

Who's afraid of the big bad wolf?

It has long been speculated that much of the motivation that has fueled the increased anti-immigration rhetoric coming from certain political leaders, and their calls for more restrictive policies to protect our "broken borders", has had far more to do with political expediency than actual concern for national security, job loss, or economic stress put on society by increased immigration. Although the aforementioned rationales are commonly given by these "closed border" advocates, a new analysis of Congressional voting patterns by The American Immigration Law Foundation shows that those representing districts least likely affected by the influx of undocumented immigrants are the first to champion restrictive immigration policies.

An analysis of the Congressional representatives who supported HR 4437 reveals that those representing districts with the fewest number undocumented immigrants generally supported the restrictive immigration plan, while those with large numbers of undocumented immigrants in their districts were more apt to oppose it.

more below the fold
Tag: immigration

Representatives From Districts With Fewer Than 5,000 Undocumented Immigrants Were Most Likely To Support The Bill

There are 96 congressional districts that have fewer than 5,000 undocumented immigrants. Most of these districts are largely rural and located in sections of Appalachia, the Midwest, and the Mississippi Valley that are experiencing little economic growth and low levels of immigration in general. Constituents in many of these districts face tough economic times, but the cause is not immigration. Immigrants are attracted to regions of economic dynamism and job expansion. This is why greater numbers of undocumented immigrants are found in western states that have agricultural, livestock, fishing, and tourist economies that need the kinds of less-skilled labor that undocumented immigrants often provide.

Undocumented immigrants in the 96 lowest-immigration districts make up no more than 0.8 percent of the population (each of the 435 congressional districts has roughly the same total population: about 650,000 as of 20001). The votes on H.R. 4437 in these districts tell you something about immigration politics in the United States today. The supposed threat from undocumented immigration is enough to rally voters and move levers of power even in areas where the actual impact is miniscule. Among representatives from districts with the smallest populations of undocumented immigrants, 74 percent (71 out of 96) voted for the bill: 90 percent of Republicans (56 out of 62) and 44 percent of Democrats (15 out of 34)

Representatives From Districts With More Than 50,000 Undocumented Immigrants Were Most Likely To Oppose The Bill

The voting pattern of the representatives from the 61 congressional districts with 50,000 or more undocumented immigrants tells a different story. These districts for the most part are located in densely populated urban areas such as New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles, and are relatively small in geographic size compared to rural districts that include many counties. In these high-immigration districts, the undocumented alone can account for as much as one-fifth of the total population. As a result, representatives who hail from these areas are familiar with undocumented immigrants and their impact on local communities. Among representatives from districts with the largest populations of undocumented immigrants, a mere 5 percent (3 out of 61) supported the bill: none of the 53 Democrats and only 3 of the 8 Republicans.

The inverse relationship between support for H.R. 4437 and the actual presence of undocumented immigrants in a representative’s district represents a widespread voting pattern. Among all Democrats, those who voted in favor of the bill had roughly 10,000 undocumented immigrants in their districts. Democrats who opposed the bill, on the other hand, had about 37,400. Among all Republicans, the same pattern holds: those voting for H.R. 4437 had an average of 14,500 undocumented immigrants in their districts, while those who voted against the bill had an average of 30,800

Overall 67% of all those who supported the bill from both parties came from districts with fewer than 15,000 undocumented immigrants while 62% of those opposed came from districts with more than 15,000.

As this pattern illustrates, the constituencies of most representatives who supported H.R. 4437 experience relatively little impact from undocumented immigration. As a result, these representatives are free to ignore the need for genuine immigration reform and focus instead on fostering a public image of being “tough” on undocumented immigrants.

Given these statistics, it becomes obvious that those who are most likely to take a hard line on immigration are doing so more out of a need to find a new "enemy" on which to scapegoat the failures of the present administration and its policies. Those from these generally rural and economically depressed areas find it much easier to blame the nonexistent undocumented immigrants in their districts for the economic woes of their constituents than to deal with the macro economic issues of globalization and loss of manufacturing jobs due to shifting economic realities.

Just as the right wing created a phantom boogieman out of the Gay community in the last election cycle to supply themselves with a wedge issue on "family values", they are once again setting up a divisive issue to distract and misdirect the American people away from the real issues that effect them.

Read More...

Summary only...

HR 4437: King promised changes, but none made

Back in late December, in reaction to an outpouring of concern from church groups and humanitarian aid organizations, co-sponsor of HR 4437 , Rep. Peter King (NY) promised that the bill would be reworded to guarantee that aid workers would be free from prosecution.

It appears that Mr King has changed his mind.
more below the fold
Tag: immigration

KING SAYS HE'LL REWORD BILL
Says he didn't mean to target humanitarian groups after outcry over measure aimed at illegal immigration

Newsday Dec 31, 2005
By Bart Jones and J Jioni Palmer
Staff writers

After an outpouring of criticism from churches and relief groups, Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) said Friday he is willing to reword the legislation he co-sponsored that would have made it illegal to assist undocumented immigrants.

The bill calls for building a 698-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border, turning undocumented immigrants into felons and permitting "deputization" of local and state police officers as immigration agents.

But it also included a provision that makes it a crime for anyone to assist undocumented immigrants to "come or remain" in the United States.

Immigrant advocates and officials from churches and relief agencies said this could lead to the imprisonment of priests, nuns, social workers, doctors and Good Samaritans who may provide these immigrants with anything from counseling to a ride to the grocery store.

King said that was never the intention of the provision, which he said targets gangs that smuggle undocumented immigrants into the country.

The measure "is not aimed at humanitarian groups at all," said King, who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. "If there are any specific words they want changed, I can assure you that will be done."

King said the groups were misinterpreting the bill and that "the church is developing a persecution complex here ... If an alien smuggling ring gets a guy into the country and he stops at St. Brigid's at a soup kitchen, we're not going to lock up the pastor of St. Brigid's. They're not part of the smuggling ring."

Some church workers greeted King's words with relief Friday, although they said they were still outraged by the bill in general and do not believe they were misinterpreting its broad language.

"If we can discuss it, excellent," Yanira Chacon, a church outreach worker at St. Brigid's in Westbury, said in Spanish. "The ideal for me is that this bill doesn't pass at all."

Church and immigrant groups call the bill the harshest piece of anti-immigrant legislation in 70 years. Supporters say it would help bring under control a situation of anarchy at the border that has swelled the number of undocumented immigrants in the country to 11 million, including an estimated 100,000 on Long Island.

King said the bill is unlikely to be passed in its present form by the Senate, which he expected to add provisions for a guest-worker program granting temporary visas mainly to low-skilled workers.

However, he did say "a significant portion of it has to become law otherwise no immigration reform bill will pass the House

Newsday (pay link)
alternate link

An examination of the modified bill that was presented to the Senate on January 27, 2006 reveals that no changes have yet been made, and in fact it puts many humanitarian workers in great legal jeopardy.

SEC. 202. ALIEN SMUGGLING AND RELATED OFFENSES.
(a) IN GENERAL- Section 274 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324) is amended to read as follows:

`ALIEN SMUGGLING AND RELATED OFFENSES
`SEC. 274. (a) Criminal Offenses and Penalties-

`(1) PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES- Whoever--

`(A) assists, encourages, directs, or induces a person to come to or enter the United States, or to attempt to come to or enter the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such person is an alien who lacks lawful authority to come to or enter the United States;

`(B) assists, encourages, directs, or induces a person to come to or enter the United States at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security, regardless of whether such person has official permission or lawful authority to be in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such person is an alien;

`(C) assists, encourages, directs, or induces a person to reside in or remain in the United States, or to attempt to reside in or remain in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such person is an alien who lacks lawful authority to reside in or remain in the United States;

`(D) transports or moves a person in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such person is an alien who lacks lawful authority to enter or be in the United States, where the transportation or movement will aid or further in any manner the person's illegal entry into or illegal presence in the United States;

`(E) harbors, conceals, or shields from detection a person in the United States knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such person is an alien who lacks lawful authority to be in the United States;

`(F) transports, moves, harbors, conceals, or shields from detection a person outside of the United States knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such person is an alien in unlawful transit from one country to another or on the high seas, under circumstances in which the person is in fact seeking to enter the United States without official permission or lawful authority; or

`(G) conspires or attempts to commit any of the preceding acts,

shall be punished as provided in paragraph (2), regardless of any official action which may later be taken with respect to such alien.

`(2) CRIMINAL PENALTIES- A person who violates the provisions of paragraph (1) shall--

`(A) except as provided in subparagraphs (D) through (H), in the case where the offense was not committed for commercial advantage, profit, or private financial gain, be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both;

`(B) except as provided in subparagraphs (C) through (H), where the offense was committed for commercial advantage, profit, or private financial gain--

`(i) in the case of a first violation of this subparagraph, be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both; and

`(ii) for any subsequent violation, be imprisoned for not less than 3 years nor more than 20 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both;

`(C) in the case where the offense was committed for commercial advantage, profit, or private financial gain and involved 2 or more aliens other than the offender, be imprisoned for not less than 3 nor more than 20 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both;

`(D) in the case where the offense furthers or aids the commission of any other offense against the United States or any State, which offense is punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year, be imprisoned for not less than 5 nor more than 20 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both;

`(E) in the case where any participant in the offense created a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to another person, including--

`(i) transporting a person in an engine compartment, storage compartment, or other confined space;

`(ii) transporting a person at an excessive speed or in excess of the rated capacity of the means of transportation; or

`(iii) transporting or harboring a person in a crowded, dangerous, or inhumane manner,

be imprisoned not less than 5 nor more than 20 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both;

`(F) in the case where the offense caused serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of title 18, United States Code, including any conduct that would violate sections 2241 or 2242 of title 18, United States Code, if the conduct occurred in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States) to any person, be imprisoned for not less than 7 nor more than 30 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both;

`(G) in the case where the offense involved an alien who the offender knew or had reason to believe was an alien--

`(i) engaged in terrorist activity (as defined in section 212(a)(3)(B)); or

`(ii) intending to engage in such terrorist activity,

be imprisoned for not less than 10 nor more than 30 years, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both; and

`(H) in the case where the offense caused or resulted in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for not less than 10 years, or any term of years, or for life, or fined under title 18, United States Code, or both.

`(3) EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION- There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over the offenses described in this subsection.

`(b) Employment of Unauthorized Aliens-

`(1) IN GENERAL- Any person who, during any 12-month period, knowingly hires for employment at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that the individuals are aliens described in paragraph (2), shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.

`(2) ALIEN DESCRIBED- A alien described in this paragraph is an alien who--

`(A) is an unauthorized alien (as defined in section 274A(h)(3)); and

`(B) has been brought into the United States in violation of subsection (a).

Thomas/Library of Congress

As written, the bill would make activities such as providing undocumented immigrants with food, medical care, counseling, or even transportation to a doctor or grocery store a crime punishable with up to five years imprisonment.

We obviously should not accept Mr. King at his word. Hopefully church groups and humanitarian aid services will not be lulled into a false sense of security by Mr. Kings assertions

Read More...

Summary only...

One more piece in the "Immigration Reform" puzzle

One of the underlying problems with the recently passed "Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005" (H.R. 4437) has always been the shear impracticality of it. Let's set aside the questions of constitutionality, infringement on basic human rights, lack of judicial checks and balances and inherent racism of HR 4437, and simply examine it from a practical point of view. The bill, as written, would appear to be totally unenforceable.

But leave it to the Bush administration to turn to a familiar "friend" to remedy that situation: Halliburton
more below the fold
Tag: immigration


The bill, in theory, calls for the arrest and possible detention of millions of undocumented immigrants.

Mandatory Detention
Under current law, individuals who arrive without documents, including asylum-seekers, are subject to mandatory detention. Again this applies mainy to those arriving at airports or by sea. 60% of detainees are held in local jails under contract to the federal government, where they are generally not segregated from the criminal population even if they are asylum-seekers and others with no criminal record.

Under this new bill, the mandatory detention policy would be extended to all non-citizens who are detained at any port of entry or anywhere “along” the border for any reason.

“Illegal Presence” and “Aggravated Felonies,”
Section 203 of HR 4437 calls for the creation of a new federal crime of “illegal presence”. As defined in the bill it includes any violation, even technical, of any immigration law or regulation. Even if the immigrant was to fall “out of status” unintentionally, or do to paperwork delays. In essence, the bill makes every immigration violation, however minor, into a federal crime. As drafted, the bill also makes the new crime of “illegal presence” an “aggravated felony” for immigration purposes. This classification would have the further effect of restricting ordinary undocumented immigrants (including those with pending applications) from many forms of administrative or judicial review. Those convicted of an "aggravated felony" would be subject to indefinite detention and/or expedited removal.

Indefinite Detention
Indefinite detention currently applies to non-citizens ordered removed from the United States whose countries refuse to accept them or who have no country because they are stateless. Most often they come from countries without good relations with the United States.

HR 4437 would permit indefinite detention of an increased broad class of non-citizens, including:

• those with a contagious disease
  
• any non-citizen convicted of an “aggravated felony,” (see above)
  
• non-citizens whose release would pose foreign policy problems
  
• non-citizens charged even with very minor immigration violations who, based on secret evidence, are deemed a national security risk.

MORE

So how does the DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement plan to hold the possible millions of undocumented immigrants that HR4437 would place into the detention system? At the present time ICE runs only fifteen detention facilities throughout the continental US. Certainly if HR4437 were to pass, this small number of facilities would be overwhelmed within the first months, if not weeks of enactment.

This has always been one of the great practical stumbling blocks in this ill-conceived bill. It would take a monumental shift in ICE's capabilities to incarcerate the immigrants charged with the various new crimes as outlined in HR4437.

Thanks to Halliburton, this capability is about to grow significantly.

Halliburton Subsidiary Gets Contract to Add Temporary Immigration Detention Centers
New York Times

A spokesman for the corps, Clayton Church, said that the centers could be at unused military sites or temporary structures and that each one would hold up to 5,000 people.

"When there's a large influx of people into the United States, how are we going to feed, house and protect them?" Mr. Church asked. "That's why these kinds of contracts are there."

-snip-

In recent months, the Homeland Security Department has promised to increase bed space in its detention centers to hold thousands of illegal immigrants awaiting deportation. In the first quarter of the 2006 fiscal year, nearly 60 percent of the illegal immigrants apprehended from countries other than Mexico were released on their own recognizance.

Domestic security officials have promised to end the releases by increasing the number of detention beds. Last week, domestic security officials announced that they would expand detaining and swiftly deporting illegal immigrants to include those seized near the Canadian border

Advocates for immigrants said they feared that the new contract was another indication that the government planned to expand the detention of illegal immigrants, including those seeking asylum.

"It's pretty obvious that the intent of the government is to detain more and more people and to expedite their removal," said Cheryl Little, executive director of the Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center in Miami. .

Once again Halliburton looks to become the direct beneficiary of Republican sponsored legislation and policy.

Halliburton's involvement in HR 4437 also raises numerous questions:

As we have already seen in Iraq, KRB has not only a terrible track record in regards to billing issues and its ability to actually accomplish its missions; many of its contracts appear to be nothing short of sweetheart deals made with the DOD. Was this another example of that?

Additionally, a serious examination of Halliburton's future effect on this legislation must be watched. As it moves through the Senate will KRB's involvement place undue pressure on legislators to prevent the more draconian measures in the bill from being thoroughly debated?

Once again it looks like we're about to see policy being formulated more for the benefit of the corporations with ties deep inside the Whitehouse, rather than for the benefit of the American people. Unfortunately it looks like millions of hard working immigrants, whose only wish is to make a better life for themselves and their families, will become the next pawns in the big money games being played in Washington.

Read More...

Summary only...

King claims HR4437 not to punish humanitarians: I say prove it

Rep Peter King (R-NY3rd), co-sponsor of HR4437 has claimed he never intended it to target humanitarian groups who aid undocumented immigrants and he will be looking into rewording the bill. It is now time for Mr King to put up, or shut up. He has an opportunity to prove that he respects the rights of those who help their fellow man, or can show himself to be a simple bully who has no real respect or compassion for human life . He claims those who voiced concern with hr4437 over reacted ... I say prove it

(more below the fold)
tag: immigration



The bill which has now moved on to the Senate calls for the reclassification of immigration offenses to federal crime status, permits "deputization" of local and state police officers to enforce immigration laws and allows for “Expedited Removal” and "Mandatory Detention" of undocumented immigrants. It also included a provision that makes it a crime for anyone to assist undocumented immigrants to "come or remain" in the United States.

Immigrant advocates and officials from churches and relief agencies have criticized the bill saying it could lead to the arrest and imprisonment of priests, nuns, doctors, social workers and Good Samaritans who may provide immigrants with anything from counseling to medical care, or even a ride to the store or doctors office.

The recent arrests of the Daniel Strauss and Shanti Sellz in Arizona by agents of the US Border Patrol after trying to take three desperately ill immigrants they found wandering in the desert to a nearby hospital has only confirmed these fears. Strauss and Sellz currently face up to a fifteen year prison sentence for the "transport of illegal aliens."

After the outpouring of criticism from churches and relief groups, Rep. King has backed down and said he is willing to reword the legislation.

King said that it was never the intention of the provision, which he said targets gangs that smuggle undocumented immigrants into the country.

The measure "is not aimed at humanitarian groups at all," said King, who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. "If there are any specific words they want changed, I can assure you that will be done."

King said the groups were misinterpreting the bill and that "the church is developing a persecution complex here ... If an alien smuggling ring gets a guy into the country and he stops at St. Brigid's at a soup kitchen, we're not going to lock up the pastor of St. Brigid's. They're not part of the smuggling ring."

Some church workers greeted King's words with relief Friday, although they said they were still outraged by the bill in general and do not believe they were misinterpreting its broad language.

-snip-

King said the bill is unlikely to be passed in its present form by the Senate, which he expected to add provisions for a guest-worker program granting temporary visas mainly to low-skilled workers.

However, he did say "a significant portion of it has to become law otherwise no immigration reform bill will pass the House."

Now it is to be seen exactly what Mr. King means by "re-wording". As one who was born and raised in Mr. King's home town and lives in his district, I look on with skepticism at anything he does.

Perhaps as Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee he could call the DHS and intercede on Mr. Strauss and Ms. Sellz behalf. Maybe we should all drop him a note at: Pete.King@mail.house.gov to let him know that one way he could show that we are not suffering from a "persecution complex" would be to make sure that those already facing jail time for the "transport of illegal aliens" while only trying to save lives, were set free. Their hearing will be Tuesday Jan. 10th, so it might be a good idea to reach out to Mr. King ASAP so he has ample opportunity to show us he's not the hypocrite we know him to be.

[UPDATE] You might want to phone or fax him at:

Phone: 202-225-7896
Fax: 202-226-2279

Read More...

Summary only...

The fly in Mr. Sensenbrenners ointment.

Sponsored by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) the 'Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005" " (H.R. 4437) was passed last Friday in a late-night vote of 239 to 182 with 38 Democrats voting for it. The bill, which also incorporates the border security legislation approved by the Homeland Security Committee last month, (H.R. 4312), allows for some of the most far-reaching changes in US immigration policy in the past thirty years.

Not only are there many very troubling provisions in this bill, the ability to enforce it in any reasonably equitable way seems to be impossible given the current state of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service.

The bill would:

• Increase security forces and surveillance along the border.
  
• Give the power to immigration officials within 100 miles of the border to expel without a hearing anyone believed to be a recently arrived illegal immigrant.
  
• Expand mandatory detention to apply to all non-citizens arriving at a port of entry or “along” the border.
  
• Limit the basic rights of immigrants to judicial review, even by the constitutionally guaranteed writ of habeas corpus.
  
• Criminalize all violations of immigration law, even if the violation was unintentional or the result of processing delays
  
• Give additional powers to detain non-citizens indefinitely without judicial review, potentially placing many non-citizens in a legal black hole that subjects them to a life sentence after having served a criminal sentence, or, in some cases, without ever having been convicted of a crime.

(more below the fold)
tag: immigration



“Expedited Removal”: Deportation Without a Lawyer, Hearing, Or Court Review
Expedited removal under current immigration laws is applied to non-citizens arriving at airports with apparently improper documents, to un-documented non-citizens arriving by sea, and a few other narrow categories of non-citizens. Basically, if you show up at JFK without paperwork, you are put on the next plane back without having any sort of hearing or review.

H.R. 4312 will expand on the policy of “expedited removal,” and grant powers to even low-level immigration officers to remove individuals anywhere along the border. It would require the border patrol to pick up and deport, without any administrative hearing, anyone within 100 miles of the border that an agent thinks is an undocumented immigrant who has been present less than 14 days. How the officers are to determine the legal status of the deportees is not addressed in the legislation. The de facto result of this legislation is that anyone within 100 miles of the border (north or south) who is suspected of being here illegally could by deported without any sort of hearing or reviews.

Mandatory Detention
Under current law, individuals who arrive without documents, including asylum-seekers, are subject to mandatory detention. Again this applies mainy to those arriving at airports or by sea. 60% of detainees are held in local jails under contract to the federal government, where they are generally not segregated from the criminal population even if they are asylum-seekers and others with no criminal record.

Under this new bill, the mandatory detention policy would be extended to all non-citizens who are detained at any port of entry or anywhere “along” the border for any reason.

“Illegal Presence” and “Aggravated Felonies,”
Section 203 of HR 4437 calls for the creation of a new federal crime of “illegal presence”. As defined in the bill it includes any violation, even technical, of any immigration law or regulation. Even if the immigrant was to fall “out of status” unintentionally, or do to paperwork delays. In essence, the bill makes every immigration violation, however minor, into a federal crime. As drafted, the bill also makes the new crime of “illegal presence” an “aggravated felony” for immigration purposes. This classification would have the further effect of restricting ordinary undocumented immigrants (including those with pending applications) from many forms of administrative or judicial review. Those convicted of an "aggravated felony" would be subject to indefinite detention and/or expedited removal.

Indefinite Detention
Indefinite detention currently applies to non-citizens ordered removed from the United States whose countries refuse to accept them or who have no country because they are stateless. Most often they come from countries without good relations with the United States.

HR 4437 would permit indefinite detention of an increased broad class of non-citizens, including:

• those with a contagious disease
  
• any non-citizen convicted of an “aggravated felony,” (see above)
  
• non-citizens whose release would pose foreign policy problems
  
• non-citizens charged even with very minor immigration violations who, based on secret evidence, are deemed a national security risk.

The bill also includes provisions to "combat the hiring of illegal workers"
The bill calls for an employment eligibility verification system in which employers will check the Social Security numbers and alien identification numbers provided by employees against Social Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) records in order to weed out fraudulent numbers and ensure that their employees are not working in the U.S. illegally. The system is modified from a voluntary pilot program currently in use. The bill also increases civil and criminal penalties for knowingly hiring or employing an illegal worker.

THE FLY IN MR. SENSENBRENNER'S OINTMENT.

The problem with all of HR 4437 (outside of its possible unconstitutionality, racist overtones, and a lack of judicial checks and balances) is that all of these new programs are predicated on the government having a reliable, accurate and easily accessible information management system to ensure that those who don't "belong" here are kept out, while those who do belong are not penalized.

Currently immigrants can wait for months and sometimes years to have their paperwork handled. Often they will fall "out of status" for long periods of time while they wait for the government to process their paperwork. Work permits expire, TPS status expires, and immigrants must wait for their new cards to be processed. Under 4437 all of these immigrants would automatically be subject to prosecution.

Then there is the problem of the computer systems and record keeping. The US Citizenship and Immigration Service, a branch of Homeland Security, has come under fire from outside analysts and government auditors for having one of the most ineffective data management systems in the entire government.

Thousands of airline passengers unexpectedly found themselves stranded in line at U.S. border checkpoints in August, after a Department of Homeland Security computer crashed.

The crash shuttered the government's main immigration database in Virginia, affecting scores of border entry points. The shutdown highlights the computer problems that the Homeland Security Department is grappling with, as it struggles to reshuffle myriad functions once performed by the now-defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Aging, incompatible systems and outdated processes have contributed to a backlog of approximately 1 million people waiting for a decision from the department's Citizenship and Immigration Services bureau. Computer problems at its Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau caused a snafu in which student visa holders were jailed overnight or barred from entering the United States.

But the problems are not limited to a one time crash

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service’s systems have come in for particular criticism from outside analysts and government auditors, who say these are simply not up to the task of serving the public, especially when coupled with a continuing reliance on paper forms. In some cases, for instance, information typed into one computer must be manually retyped into a second or third.

"All filings are paper-based, which means that everything you submit has to be keyed into the computer, which of course opens up the additional possibility of error, slows the process down and prevents some processes from being automated," said Crystal Williams, deputy director for programs at the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

-snip-

One problem is that applications for different types of immigration status are saved in separate records. These aren't interlinked, which means an application for a H1-B visa is not tied to the same person's application for a green card--causing more paperwork and delays, until the two records can be matched by hand.

Other procedures are equally inefficient. "Heaven forbid if an attorney should change their address," Williams said. "They have to send a change of address for every separate case they've got pending. (Once) I had between 500 and 1,000 cases pending at one time."

MORE

Combining this ineffectual information system with the new draconian measures proposed in the Sensenbrenner bill is nothing short of an invitation for abuse. Although presented under the guise protecting America from terror, this bill has far more to do with a xenophobic attempt to stop the flow of immigrants from Mexico and points south than protecting the US from radical Islamists.

Any attempt to “fix” the immigration problem through tougher penalties for both immigrants and employers is not a solution given the current state of the immigration bureaucracy and laws. When the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service can’t even process the paperwork it has and guarantee the validity of an immigrants status, how can we even contemplate giving them more power over peoples live and livelihoods.

When this bill now moves on to the Senate we must keep careful watch. This is one of the most disastrous pieces of immigration legislation in years, and if the Republicans can get it through the upper house without major modifications, the results will be significant.

ACTION ITEMS:

Contact your Senator
Contact the Media
Contact the Senate Judiciary Committee

American Immigration Lawyers Association

Justice for Immigrants The Catholic Campaign for Immigration Reform

National Immigration Forum

National Council of La Raza

MORE ON HR4437 FROM MIGRA MATTERS

King claims HR4437 not to punish humanitarians: I say prove it

HR 4437: King promised changes, but none made

Unions, Catholic Church and US Chamber of Commerce oppose HR4437

Congressmen with least immigrants in districts support HR4437… those with most oppose it

Cardinal calls for civil disobedience against HR4437

300,000 march against HR4437 in Chicago

Sensenbrenner's State relies on undocumented workers to keep farm economy running

US Begins Internment of Undocumented Immigrants

INFORMATION ON HR 4437

Major Provisions of HR 4437

Library of Congress:H.R.4437

Voting record on HR 4437

White House letter of support for HR 4437

ACLU on HR4437

NCLR on HR4437

Human Rights First on HR4437

Read More...

Summary only...