Thursday, November 30, 2006



CNN Lou Dobbs - video:ACLU and Anonymous Donors Prepared to Kill Off Entire Towns with Hefty WarchestCities and towns that have passed measures aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration are facing big challenges, bigger than many realized at first. Well-funded groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union are challenging those measures in court, forcing small towns to find ways in which to raise money to fight those challenges by activist groups. Richly-endowed groups like the American Civil Liberties Union are taking the cities to court, challenging the ordinances that those cities and others like them are proving. It's become a fight of the Davids versus the Goliaths. Mayor Lou Barletta in Hazleton, Pennsylvania said: "Unfortunately, the cost of attorneys' fees can be very substantial, particularly if the case goes to trial. I think it's very reasonable to assume a minimum of $100,000, and likely as much as $2 million or $3 million." The three groups most active in challenging the cities laws are the ACLU, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. The combined assets of those groups, $270 million, with undisclosed pro bono legal help available for member law firms. And while the towns have to answer to taxpayers, those groups have to answer to donors who usually remain anonymous. And there is a financial incentive for these groups to challenge the laws. Win or lose, their legal fees are usually included in the settlement.


Homeless, Felons on Probation Help Fill Poultry Jobs After Immigration Raid
Atlanta Journal Constitution - November 27, 2006


Stillmore — Felons on probation and homeless men have filled some of the poultry jobs left by illegal Mexican laborers deported in raids two months ago.

About 40 convicted felons from the Macon Diversion Center are bused in each day to work at the Crider Poultry plant in Stillmore — the focus of the raids.

Additionally, 16 men from the Garden City Rescue Mission in Augusta have come to work in the plant. Several from the mission have become shift leaders, said Lavond Reynolds, director of men's housing for the mission.

"Compared to the attrition rate [at the plant] in general, these guys have really stuck so far," Reynolds said. The mission might send another 15 soon.

Still, that's just a drop in the bucket. The Crider plant is operating at about 450 employees — less than half its preraid level of 1,000, company president David Purtle said.

The Mexican population in Stillmore has plummeted since immigration officials first visited the Crider plant in May, town residents said. Immigration agents estimated that 700 workers were using fraudulent IDs. The company began checking documents and confronting employees. Many were fired and hundreds of illegal immigrants left town on their own throughout the summer.

Then, over Labor Day, federal agents rounded up and deported more than 125 illegal immigrants working at the Crider plant or living in Emanuel and surrounding counties.

That left Crider with a big labor gap, and finding workers to fill the jobs has been a challenge. Among the efforts and changes at the plant since the raids:

• The company outsourced 250 jobs in its raw deboning operation to Alabama.

• Some processing has slowed because of the downturn in the work force.

• Crider has turned to an outside company to hire about 100 workers to clean the plant each night.

• The company raised starting wages by about 40 cents and now offers attendance bonuses to new hires. Before, it took a year to be eligible for the extra pay. (Starting base pay is $6 an hour; most workers earn more through bonuses and overtime.)

• The company is spending more on hiring and training as turnover is high among new employees.

For instance, Crider advanced money to house the homeless men from the mission in trailers and to turn on their utilities. The company also pays to bus state probationers from Macon each day and is busing workers from surrounding communities.

Purtle said about 50 percent of applicants since the raids either did not pass the drug test or reference checks. Many of those who did have poor attendance or quit quickly.

"Our challenge is — in hiring unskilled people — their ability to understand what's expected of them," Purtle said. "Attendance is important. No acting up, no mouthing off. They just haven't learned."

The raids not only affected the chicken plant, but the surrounding community.

At least two landlords near Stillmore who rented to immigrants have put their properties up for sale. The Hispanic-run stores in town are operating at reduced hours.

"There's no people anymore," said Liliana Santos, 24, the clerk behind the counter at Salinas Surcusal No. 2 in downtown Stillmore.

"They don't have any jobs," she said in Spanish.

"Before, people would be walking around downtown," said Manuel Mendoza, 22, who stopped to buy tortillas. The store's jukebox played Mariachi music to an empty sideroom pool hall.

Mendoza has been in the United States 10 years and says he has a Social Security card and a job making pallets for $8.50 an hour. His hometown of Oaxaca, Mexico, has descended into anarchy with armed fighting in the streets, and he is in no hurry to return home.

Pastor Ariel Rodriguez drives around Stillmore, explaining what happened to each of the Mexican families that used to live in trailers and apartments.

"The majority of people have gone to Kentucky," he said. They knew a priest who used to live in the area and followed him up there, Rodriguez said. Other residents have gone back to Mexico.

At least one local businessman said his business has gone up since the raids. The churn of new folks applying and working at Crider has brought new customers to Mighty Mike's Hot Stop gas station and convenience store in town.

"They come in here and shop," said manager Willie Gordon. "Our inside sales have gone up $3,000 per week since the raids."

It's been a mixture of new clientele. But Gordon, who is African-American, attributes a good part of the increase to more black workers coming into town. Gordon notes: "You gotta be legal now."

SOURCE: Atlanta Journal Constitution


Protesters decry illegal immigration
Man died after collision blamed on undocumented driver
BY CHARLES F. BOSTWICK, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated:11/25/2006 06:27:59 PM PST


PALMDALE - More than 50 people carrying American flags and signs that read "Stop illegal immigration" demonstrated Saturday at an intersection where a young Palmdale man was fatally injured in a crash blamed on an unlicensed, uninsured undocumented immigrant who tried to walk away after the collision.

The protesters said local government officials should do more to deter illegal immigration, including turning over to federal authorities undocumented immigrants who have been arrested on suspicion of drunken driving and similar crimes rather than releasing them to await trial.

"If they release drunk illegal-alien drivers after they sober up, they're setting us up for more deaths of American citizens," said Frank Jorge, founder of the Antelope Valley Independent Minutemen, which organized Saturday's demonstration.

With songs such as Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA" and the Eagles' "Lying Eyes" playing on loudspeakers, the demonstrators stood along 10th Street West at Avenue O, beside a memorial cross and candles for 20-year-old Tyler Lundin of Palmdale. Passing motorists honked and waved.

"It's been overwhelmingly positive," Jorge said of the response from passers-by. "I don't think I've

seen anybody give us a thumbs-down or a middle finger."
Lundin died four days after an Oct.22 crash in which his pickup truck collided with a compact car that turned left in front of it. The car's two occupants tried to walk away after the crash, but they were caught and detained by several people who witnessed the crash, sheriff's deputies said.

Wilfredo Briswela, 22, of Rosamond, who prosecutors said is an unlicensed, uninsured, undocumented immigrant, has been charged with vehicular manslaughter, punishable by up to a year in jail, and felony hit-and-run, punishable by up to four years in prison. He's in jail in lieu of $100,000 bail awaiting trial.

Littlerock resident Susan Zaks stood beside Lundin's roadside memorial with a hand-lettered sign reading, "The cost of illegals."

She said she is not against immigrants - her father and his parents came to the United States from England, her mother's parents from Russia and her husband from Israel - but wants immigrants to comply with U.S. immigration laws.

"I want everyone coming in the front door, just like my father, my grandparents and my husband did," Zaks said.

By federal law, immigrants - legal or illegal - are deported after they serve their sentences for serious crimes including murder, robbery, child molestation and some thefts.

But Los Angeles County sheriff's officials said they do not routinely check the immigration status of people arrested for misdemeanors or cited for offenses such as driving without a license, though they routinely impound vehicles driven by people without licenses.

Jorge, a Mojave resident, said the Antelope Valley Independent Minutemen was founded to try other tactics not used by the nationally known Minuteman Project, whose members have staked out border crossings used by people entering the United States illegally.

The group's first demonstration was in September at east Palmdale's Four Points intersection, where they protested loitering by day laborers whom they presumed to be mostly, if not entirely, undocumented immigrants.

They also protested the September 2005 death of off-duty paramedic Michael Sprinkles, whose motorcycle was hit by a compact car driven by an undocumented immigrant who had been deported in 1999 for crimes committed in the United States and had a driver's license under one of his many assumed names.

The group's members have also appeared before the Lancaster and Palmdale city councils, and Jorge said he thinks their pressure is responsible for a Lancaster decision to reject Mexican matricular consular cards as identification for city business, and for Palmdale officials' consideration of requiring companies with city contracts to verify they are not employing people who are in the United States illegally.


Department of Justice "Unaware" of Congressional Request to Investigate the Prosecution of Two Border Patrol Agents
During the last year, Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean were criminally prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to serve years in prison for doing their job — protecting America from drug and illegal alien smugglers at our southern border. Those who have been following the case with us have been dismayed at the injustice of criminally prosecuting border patrol agents while granting immunity to a drug smuggler, who was carrying 743 pounds of marijuana into the U.S., to testify against the agents. The smuggler — who received medical care at William Beaumont Army Medical Center in El Paso, Texas — is now suing the Border Patrol for $5 million for violating his civil rights.

For months FAIR has been working with members of Congress to raise awareness of this case. One member who has been leading the charge is Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC). Over the past four months, Congressman Jones has written seven letters to the Bush administration regarding the Ramos and Compean case: three to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, one to Press Secretary Tony Snow, and three to President Bush himself. Indeed, one of the letters sent to Attorney General Gonzales was signed by 22 members of Congress; another by six members. However, during a radio interview on The Keith Larson Show (WBT Charlotte) this week, Attorney General Gonzales stated that he was "unaware" of the Congressman's letters.

However it may be that Attorney General Gonzales has not seen these letters, this inattention to the plight of two Border Patrol agents who risked their lives daily to protect our country from smugglers bringing drugs, guns, and illegal aliens into our country is unacceptable. Agents Ramos and Compean have been ordered to surrender to federal authorities on January 17th, 2007 to begin serving their prison sentences.

Please call Attorney General Gonzales and ask him to recommend to President Bush that these agents be pardoned! You can reach the Office of the Attorney General at (202) 353-1555.


Lou Dobbs Tonight -- CNN -- November 29Wian: ...New Senate leader Harry Reid says an immigration bill will be among the first 10 introduced in the Senate. Reid: It was tremendously heartwarming to see how the Hispanic community throughout America responded to what we tried to do, we Democrats tried to do. We won big-time with the Hispanics. We won because they accepted what we were trying to do, comprehensive immigration reform. [....]Wian: He also says there will be no additional funding for the border fence bill signed by President Bush. Ironically, that bill was passed in part because of frustration with previous pro-amnesty protests. Watch Transcript




Metro makes numerous day laborer arrests

Nov 29, 2006 06:53 PM CST

Metro makes numerous day laborer arrests click below,


http://www.kvbc.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?ClipID1=1093014&h1=Metro%20makes%20numerous%20day%20laborer%20arrests&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=168166&LaunchPageAdTag=News&activePane=info&playerVersion=9&hostPageUrl=http%3A//www.kvbc.com/Global/story.asp%3FS%3D5746964%26nav%3D15MV&rnd=29052590





Some businesses in the east part of the valley are fed up with day laborers. A Wal*Mart and a Home Depot on Charleston and Lamb have complained that the men have been fighting in their parking lots and stealing from the shelves.

In the middle of this holiday shopping season, police say they can't let this go on any further. And so, in response, massive arrests were made Wednesday. One officer says this was the largest arrest of day laborers that he knows of, more than a dozen men. The men were taken into custody for trespassing.

There could have been more arrests. As many as fifty people show up on any given day looking for work. The Home Depot says that's not all the men do. Sometimes, according to Home Depot, they're seen fighting, drinking alcohol, and intimidating customers. That is, running up to a truck or jumping in it, thinking its occupants are offering work.

The Wal*Mart across the street says the laborers are stealing. Not inconspicuously, but simply picking up something and walking out with it.

Police have tried to do their part. First, by passing out fliers that say, in Spanish, "Leave, unless you're shopping", but that hasn't worked. So Wednesday, all those trespassing were taken in.

"Hopefully we got the message across that if you don't have lawful business at Home Depot or Wal*Mart, at these private businesses, hanging out on the property is not going to be allowed," said Metro's Sergeant Paul Gambini.

Day laborers say they're just here to make some money. Like everyone else, they have bills to pay and a family to feed.

Metro says the arrests were only response to business complaints and their officers are not going around town, rounding up day laborers for simply hanging around.




********Reply,

(What The Fuck) Are you doing "poping" out 3 babies if you can't take care of them, let alone dress yourself right!!!

"I need work" Let me tell you something a $8, $9, and even $10 an hour job can't support 3 kids pal!

This is also one of the main problems in this damn country and we don't need anymore illegals, "poping" out babies!!!!


Opinion


The costs of illegal immigration

By Bill Leonard, State Board of Equalization



The Claremont Institute has posted a short piece about the cost of illegal immigration to society, which I encourage you to read:

http://www.claremont.org/projects/local_gov/Newsletter/crimeimmigration.html

Along with some excellent statistics about the financial burden of illegal immigration, the Claremont folks cut to the central philosophical issue of allowing unfettered illegal immigration of around 500,000 people per year. They remind us that the American social compact is that government operates by the consent of the people and those who are not citizens therefore do not have the same obligation that citizens have with respect to how we act towards each other. They write:

“While the principles of the Declaration of Independence guarantee all human beings certain natural and unalienable rights, only parties who have consented to our government deserve the full rights of citizenship. Illegal immigrants are not part of the social contract giving legitimacy to this government. American citizens have not given their consent to higher taxes, crowded schools, jammed emergency rooms, clogged roads, unlawful turning of single-family homes into hotels or apartments into tenements, forced multicultural amenities such as bilingual education and multilingual ballots, or welfare and other services subsidizing poverty-prone immigrants. Above all, they never consented to higher crime rates.”

A couple of the statistics cited in the piece:

In 1997, the National Academy of Sciences found that immigrant-headed households placed a net annual fiscal burden on California native-born residents of $1,178 per household.


While the poverty rate is going down for all groups of American citizens, the number of poor Hispanics is up by 3 million since 1990. Last year 13 million Hispanics lacked insurance. They're 60 percent of the rise since 1990 (source: Paul Samuelson).

I agree with the assertion that a certain level of legal immigration is helpful for the American economy -- and there are cultural benefits as well. But the Claremont Institute reminds us that the reason America works is because of liberty. Illegal immigration undermines liberty insofar that liberty only works if people uphold their obligations as citizens. Without this relation between the governed and the government, we cannot be a free people.

The financial cost of illegal immigration is horrendous, but perhaps more important is how illegal immigration undermines the foundation of our democratic republic. While illegal immigrants from Mexico may be importing a hard work ethic, they also import the cultural after-effects of the Mexican revolution that has made Mexico such an illiberal country.

Wednesday, November 29, 2006


Representatives Lofgren and Jackson Lee are Main Contenders to Chair Immigration Subcommittee
Congressional Quarterly reported this week that the two major contenders to Chair the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims are Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX). Jackson Lee, who is currently ranking member on the panel, is not commenting on her bid to become the next subcommittee chairwoman, but immigration lawyers who have worked with her are speaking up in her behalf. Rep. Zoe Lofgren has stated through her spokeswoman that she also might pursue the Immigration Subcommittee chairmanship. Lofgren is ranking member of the Homeland Security Intelligence Subcommittee, but is exploring whether to assume that chairmanship or pursue the Judiciary Subcommittee position instead. Regardless of the outcome, the Immigration Subcommittee will likely take a new direction on immigration reform as both Lofgren and Jackson Lee have been strong supporters of guest worker amnesty legislation. Lofgren or Jackson Lee will replace the outgoing Subcommittee chairman, Congressman John Hostettler (R-IN).

Back to top

Homeland Security Announces Only Partial Implementation of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative
Last week, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and State Department announced the publication of regulations that will partially implement the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative is the Bush Administration's plan to carry out The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. The Act requires DHS and the State Department to develop and implement a system for all travelers, including U.S. citizens, to present a passport or other documents that denote identity and citizenship when entering the United States from countries in the Western Hemisphere.

Currently, U.S. citizens are exempt from carrying passports when returning from Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean. Non-U.S. citizens arriving from those countries may gain entry by showing only minimal identification. Under the new regulations announced last week citizens of the United States, Canada, Mexico and Bermuda who enter the United States by air from the Western Hemisphere will have to present passports, with certain narrow exceptions.

The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative was, according to the Intelligence Reform Act, also supposed to apply to citizens arriving in the U.S. by land and sea. DHS has announced that a "separate proposed rule addressing land and sea travel will be published at a later date." This delay was authorized two months ago, when Congress added a provision to the FY2007 Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill approving the delay of the land/sea portion of the Initiative by 17 months, until June 2009. During this time, DHS will be working on fine-tuning an alternative to a passport, called a PASS card, that will be authorized for land and sea travel between the U.S. and Mexico and Canada. DHS has stated that while the deadline for land and sea travel has been extended, it is working to implement the new rules by the original deadline, January 2008.

Back to top

USCIS Announces Pilot Program For New Citizenship Test
Last week, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) announced plans to test launch a new citizenship test this winter. The test will continue to be an oral test, conducted in English, but the contents will change to focus more on the applicants' grasp of principles of American democracy, rather than on facts or trivia. USCIS officials hope to use the pilot program to work out any problems and refine the exam.

The pilot will be conducted in ten cities across the U.S.: Albany, NY; Boston, MA; Charleston, SC; Denver, CO; El Paso, TX; Kansas City, MO; Miami, FL; San Antonio, TX; Tucson, AZ; and Yakima, WA. To pass, applicants must correctly answer six out of ten questions asked. If they fail, they may take the old test, which typically has a high pass rate. The new test is currently scheduled to be given to all applicants for naturalization beginning in 2008.

Some immigrant advocacy groups have criticized the new test as the creation of another barrier to citizenship. Over 220 such groups recently sent a letter to the USCIS, arguing that the new citizenship test will set the bar too high for those with less education. USCIS officials and other observers say that focusing on fundamental principles and values is a way to gauge an applicant's "attachment" to the United States and will promote participation in government by newly naturalized citizens.

Back to top

Governors Ask Bush Administration to Follow Through on Commitment to Cover Incarceration Costs
Last week, the governors of ten states signed a letter urging the federal government to fully fund the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) in the administration's FY2008 proposed budget. SCAAP is a federal program through which the federal government grants money to the states to cover the incarceration costs of criminal aliens.

Increasing funding for SCAAP was one of the many enforcement provisions that stalled during the Congressional battle over the granting of amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. In their letter, the ten Governors state they are concerned that the President's prior budgets have failed to provide funding for SCAAP and request the Bush Administration fund the SCAAP program at $950 million for FY2008. The letter continues:

We are committed to continuing to work with your Administration and the Congress to protect our nation. However, until the federal government can achieve its goal of restoring safety and security throughout our border regions, every effort should be made to compensate the state and local governments who have stepped up to fill this gap by policing the regions and incarcerating criminal aliens at their own considerable expense.

The letter to President Bush was signed by Governors Schwarzenegger (CA), Napolitano (AZ), Richardson (NM), Vilsack (IA), Gregoire (WA), Bredesen (TN), Corzine (NJ), Kulongoski (OR), Henry (OK), Sebelius (KS), and Vila (Puerto Rico).

Back to top


Immigration officials gird for rush to altar
By Brian DonohueNovember 29, 2006


Some people marry for love. Others for companionship. Some for money.And for a growing number of undocumented immigrants, marriage is for something else: a green card.Federal immigration officials call it marriage fraud--the crime committed when foreign nationals marry U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents solely so their new spouses can sponsor them for legal permanent residency.As the United States cracks down on illegal immigrants and tightens restrictions on other routes toward legal residency, federal immigration agencies are bracing for a wave of people marrying for a path to citizenship."A lot of people say, `I can't do anything through my employer, I can't legalize my status any other way, let me get married, it's the only way I can do it,"' said Robert Frank, a Newark, N.J., immigration attorney. "There is a certain percentage of people who are so desperate that they're going to do that. And that's going to grow."While Department of Homeland Security officials are stepping up efforts to tackle fraud, experts and even immigration officials concede that conniving couples often have the upper hand.Perhaps no aspect of immigration enforcement, it seems, is tougher than proving two people are not really in love.Immigration investigators and federal prosecutors have focused only on the large-scale fraud rings, allowing individual cheaters to walk away."It's hard to prove," said Andrea Quarantillo, who heads the New York office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. "The truth of the matter is, there is more work than we have staff for."A well-worn trackGetting married for a green card is nothing new.Hollywood seized on the phenomenon in 1990 with the movie "Green Card," about a couple who get married out of convenience, only to fall in love.The majority of those filing marriage petitions are legitimately married, officials say. Doubtless, they add, thousands are scamming the system.Officials are studying the extent of fraud. Previous studies of other benefit programs have found rampant abuse.And a computer analysis of marriage benefit applications filed in 2000 found 25,000 potential marriage fraud cases among pending applications, according to a report by the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress that audits federal programs.Immigration officers like Ernest DeStefano provide virtually the only level of defense.A dozen times a day, the Newark-based officer pulls a file from a rotating roster, then calls a couple from the waiting room packed with scores of couples. For the next half-hour, he fires questions at them to determine whether their marriage is authentic.Who woke up first this morning?Where did you spend last Thanksgiving?What are your in-laws' names?"I asked one guy when he last spoke to his in-laws," said DeStefano, a district adjudications officer at immigration services. "He told me a week ago. That was funny, because they'd been dead for four years."In some fraud cases, the sponsor is simply doing a favor for a friend. In others, the foreigner may have paid thousands of dollars to the spouse, who may be working for a fraud ring or just out to make some quick money.In the saddest cases--and the toughest for agents to prove fraudulent--the foreigners have duped their spouses into thinking they're actually in love with them, just to get a green card."It can be heartbreaking sometimes," said Anouchka Castro, supervisory immigration officer for immigration services in Newark. "You're sitting across the table from them, and you know one person is in it for real, and one person's in it for the green card."Some couples make their fraud obvious by trying a little too hard.Castro recalls flipping through one couple's photo album: "On one page, there's a picture of the couple at the zoo. Then you turn the page and you've got full frontal nudity. There's a photo of both of them in bed and you're wondering, `Who took this picture?"'Along with the answers to interview questions, investigators rely on a range of evidence to verify the couple share a "common life," bank account or address.It is dicey territory. Couples in arranged marriages, common in many cultures, cannot be expected to know many details because they may hardly know each other. In other cultures, household finances are kept in the husband's name."There's no recipe for what's a bona fide marriage," Quarantillo said. "We respect the fact that there are different arrangements for people. What we're interested in is: Is this an arrangement that would come about if immigration was not an issue?"Enforcement weakEven when a case shows strong evidence of fraud, the system for punishing the cheaters is largely toothless, the Government Accountability Office found last year.Over the past several years, authorities have busted large green-card marriage rings from coast to coast that made millions of dollars by providing spouses and fake documents to foreigners.But those arrests were the rare exceptions. The GAO report found that few perpetrators of immigration fraud were prosecuted criminally. In addition, administrative sanctions such as fines or the threat of deportation "are not being used."Mike Cutler, a former immigration officer, described the situation as vastly different from the 1970s, when he and other agents were encouraged to put violators behind bars."In the '70s, if we found someone committed marriage fraud, the follow-up was, we went out and arrested them," said Cutler, now a fellow with the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington think tank that advocates lower immigration levels."Now there's almost nobody out there knocking on doors. If they get away with it, they get a green card. If they get denied, nobody's looking for them. Where's the disincentive?"- - -Down the aisle toward citizenshipMarrying a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident is the single largest path toward citizenship.Last year, 259,144 of the 1.1million legal immigrants admitted to the U.S. obtained their papers by marrying a U.S. citizen, up from 123,000 a decade ago. Tens of thousands more obtained legal status by marrying green-card holders, or legal permanent residents.Since Congress toughened the law in 2001, only foreigners who enter the U.S. legally are eligible for marriage benefits. That includes visitors and guest workers holding valid visas and people who have overstayed their visas--a category that accounts for an estimated 40 percent of the nation's 12 million illegal immigrants.-- Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J.
Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune

Tuesday, November 28, 2006


Boston Globe:Democrats Clash on Immigration Policy - Tensions in Party Rise to the Surface As the Democratic Party prepares to take power on Capitol Hill in January, tensions are surfacing over the details of plans to overhaul the nation's immigration policies. Statements by incoming members such as Claire McCaskill, the Democratic senator-elect from Missouri, could provide an early warning of the difficulties ahead. In a September television spot, McCaskill sat at a kitchen table and looked directly into the camera. "Let me tell you what I believe in," she said. "No amnesty for illegal immigrants." Democratic leaders presented a largely united front on immigration this year, providing crucial support for a measure that would have allowed illegal immigrants to gain citizenship -- a bill critics attacked as "amnesty." Now, the citizenship provision is just one of several aspects of the complex debate that are being questioned by some members. While party leaders insist that rewriting immigration law remains a priority, they acknowledge that building consensus on how to do that will be tricky. They must deal with competing camps within the party and address concerns raised by core constituencies -- hurdles that could block passage of a final bill.


Star-Telegram / AP:Variety of Immigration Bills Await Texas Lawmakers Texas lawmakers are poised to pounce on illegal immigrants when they start their next session in January, filing a slew of get-tough bills including one designed to challenge the automatic citizenship of babies born in the United States. The bill by Republican state Rep. Leo Berman of Tyler would bar the babies of illegal immigrants from receiving state benefits such as food stamps, health care or public housing. Other proposals would tax money that is wired to Mexico or Central and South America, end a policy that lets undocumented college students qualify for in-state tuition rates, and authorize the state attorney general to sue the federal government to recover money Texas has spent dealing with illegal immigration.


Courier-Post:Riverside Joins the Rebellion - Approves Illegal Immigrant Ordinance The township committee, overcoming last minute opposition from Mayor Charles Hilton Jr., on Wednesday night approved a revised illegal-immigrant ordinance. Hilton called for the committee to essentially kill the ordinance, which is the target of two lawsuits, so that the immigration issue could be considered by newly-elected committee members in 2007. Hilton said it would be "morally and ethically wrong to ignore the views of the voters." The Republican mayor and his running mate Committeeman James Ott, were easily defeated Nov. 7 by Democrats Lorraine Hatcher and Thomas Polino. The Democrats, who will have a 3-2 edge on the committee, do not take office until January. But on Wednesday, committee members voted 4-1 to give final approval to the measure. Hilton cast the opposing vote. In his remarks, Hilton said the revised ordinance should be tabled "with the intent that it should expire." "I think our ordinance was the right thing to do and the problem still needs to be addressed," he said. But several residents urged the committee to approve the measure.

Monday, November 27, 2006


CNN Lou Dobbs - video:Nashville Joins the Rebellion, Cracks Down on Illegal AliensNashville, Tennessee, is joining the ranks of cities trying to tackle an influx of illegal aliens. The city council is considering three measures. One is an English-first ordinance. And another would hold landlords responsible for renting to illegal aliens. And a third would punish businesses that hire illegals. Now, the proposals must pass one more vote to become law. And such local efforts are deemed necessary because the federal government won't enforce laws already on the books. But in an ironic turn, the feds may be able to overturn what the locals are trying to do in court. as these towns fight illegal immigration on their own, they are faced with massive legal challenges. Challenges that come from a variety of legal activists, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Kris Kobach of the Immigration Reform Law Institute said: "Unlike so many small towns and cities across America over the past few decades that have rolled over whenever the ACLU marched in town with their legions of attorneys, these towns, Hazleton, Pennsylvania; Valley Park, Missouri; Escondido, California, have said, no, we're going to fight, we're going to pay the cost." Hazleton has only a half a dozen lawyers on its side, standing against 24 in opposition in its ordinances to fight illegal immigration. The mayor of Hazleton says he's committed to taking the fight to the Supreme Court of the United States if necessary in an effort to affirm the town's right to impose sanctions based on federal laws.

Sunday, November 26, 2006


CNN Lou Dobbs - video:Pahrump, Nevada Joins the Rebellion - Passes Anti-illegal Immigration Ordinances; Entire State May Follow!Dozens of cities from Hazleton, Pennsylvania, to Farmers Branch, Texas, to Escondido, California, are trying to crack down on illegal immigration. Add Pahrump, Nevada, to that list. Pahrump is a city of 33,000, about 60 miles west of Las Vegas, Nevada. It's seemingly light years away from the nation's border security crisis. But this month, Pahrump's civic leaders jumped into the fray, approving an ordinance denying taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal aliens, outlawing the display of a lone foreign flag, and declaring English the town's official language. The debate in Pahrump has mirrored the nation's struggle to cope with the consequences of illegal immigration. Many in town say the measures go too far. For instance, foreign flags will be allowed to fly in Pahrump as long as they're below an American flag. The measure is in response to the street protests earlier this year where Mexican flags often outnumber the stars and stripes. Outside, activists say the restriction is unconstitutional, despite its foundation in law. Nevada state lawmakers are planning to introduce similar legislation statewide. One ordinance supporter says Pahrump's new laws are part of a groundswell, intended to force the federal government to finally secure the borders of the United States.

Saturday, November 25, 2006


US citizenship: not a trivial question
The Monitor's View


"What is the most important right granted to United States citizens?" That's a sample question on the current citizenship test, which is being revised. The query is meaningful, requiring some familiarity with constitutional rights. But not all of the test questions are so thought provoking.


Others seem more a quiz of historical trivia than of understanding. Or they're an exploration of the obvious or mindless. Some examples: "Who said 'Give me liberty or give me death'?"; "What color are the stars in our flag?"; "What is the name of the President's official home?"

The US Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services is moving in the right direction by pushing aspiring citizens toward a better understanding of the democratic and civic principles that underlie American society.

A revised pilot test will be distributed this winter in 10 cities, including Miami, Boston, and Tucson, Ariz. Immigrants who volunteer to take the new test will have to answer questions that delve more deeply into the meaning of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The test will roll out nationally in 2008.

Impetus for the new test came from a bipartisan congressional commission that studied immigration issues in the 1990s. The commission, headed by the late Rep. Barbara Jordan of Texas, underscored "effective Americanization of new immigrants, the cultivation of a shared commitment to the American values of liberty, democracy and equal opportunity."

The US is not the only country to grapple with citizenship tests that aim to improve the "shared commitment" of naturalized citizens to their new country's "values."

In recent years, several countries in Europe have adopted citizenship tests, which try to better integrate newcomers. The tests vary greatly from country to country, but they all have to do with establishing acceptance of a country's common values.

But what is meant by "values"? On a continent dealing with a culture clash between Muslim immigrants and Europeans, some of the tests gauge a would-be citizen's cultural values.

In the German state of Baden-W├╝rttemberg, for instance, interviewers probe applicants about their views on gays and women. Such questions seem targeted at Muslims and intended to weed them out.

Thankfully, this is not the direction that the new US test takes. America thrives on its cultural diversity, its freedom of thought and religious practice. What is properly being tested is the understanding of civic values - the democratic principles and citizen responsibilities - that make such freedom possible.

The new US questions have not yet been released, but there's concern that they'll be too difficult for some immigrants. It should be remembered, though, that immigrants have a great desire for citizenship, and study hard to achieve it. And there are already many substantial questions on the current test (the answer to the "most important right" question, by the way, is "the right to vote" - a right that helps protect the other rights).

A test with more meaning and less trivia will benefit America's new citizens, and their country


Poll: Majority of Utahns Favor Stricter Immigration Measures
November 24th, 2006 @ 6:10pm

(KSL News) -- A new Dan Jones poll for KSL-TV shows Utahns hold to strict positions on illegal immigration.

91% of Utahns polled say Utah lawmakers should enact more restrictive measures - such as requiring employers to verify an employee's legal status.

A slim majority of Utahns support keeping a law that allows undocumented college students to pay in-state tuition if they attend high school in the state. 40% would like the law repealed.

You'll find more analysis of the poll, and what it could mean for the upcoming legislative session, in today's Deseret Morning News.

Friday, November 24, 2006

Illegal Alien Chaos in Maywood

Pat Buchanan Rages at Ames, IA Part 2 of 2 (1999) "THE LAST TRUE RUNNER"!!!

Pat Buchanan Rages at Ames, IA Part 1 of 2 (1999) "GOD BLESS Buchanan, A TRUE AMERICAN"!!!

Tech Industry Urges Congress To Pass Immigration, Other Reforms Before Adjournment

The Information Technology Association of America says lawmakers in the 109th Congress need to act on a number of issues the group says are critical to the United States' global competitiveness.

By Paul McDougall InformationWeek
Nov 20, 2006 04:00 PM


A lobby group backed by IBM, Microsoft, Intel, and other tech industry giants is urging Congress to pass a new research and development tax credit and increase the supply of H1-B immigrant visas before the current session adjourns.
The ITAA president Phil Bond, in a statement released Monday.
Patent laws and international trade are also on the group's reform agenda.
In its statement, the ITAA noted that the federal research and development tax credit expired almost a year ago and has not been renewed. "Until it's extended, companies cannot accurately plan to finance new or continued research and development initiatives within America's borders," according to the ITAA.
On immigration reform, the group wants Congress to increase the number of H-1B visas issued to skilled workers. "The best and the brightest are taking their skills elsewhere, often to global competitors of American-based companies," the ITAA said. Federal law currently caps the H-1B visa program at 65,000 workers annually. An additional 20,000 are set aside for foreign workers who hold graduate degrees from American universities. A bill currently in the Senate, known as the SKIL act, would raise the H-1B cap to 115,000 workers.
The tech industry also wants to see legislators take action to staunch what the ITAA says is a flood of "opportunistic lawsuits" by patent trolls. The ITAA wants Congress to pass the Hatch-Leahy patent reform proposal, which would grant patent protection to those inventors who are first to file their claims. Under the current system, patent holders can be sued by individuals who claim they invented a product before the patent was issued.
The ITAA said Congress needs to step up efforts to establish free trade agreements with what it has identified as hot new growth markets for the tech industry. Specifically, the group said lawmakers need to pass legislation that would support more open trade with Vietnam and Peru. "If our companies are to grow, they need to be able to compete in those and other markets unhindered," said the ITAA.
The ITAA has drawn criticism in the past from groups representing programmers and other tech industry workers who claim the organization puts the needs of its big corporate members ahead of the rights of American workers and small businesses, who in many cases are opposed to increased immigration and changes to the patent system.

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Border Politics

WILL A NEW CONGRESS CONFRONT REAL IMMIGRATION REFORM?
By Marc Cooper

Six-term Phoenix-area Rep. J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz., spent much of the last year trying to surf what he saw as a mounting anti-immigration wave. His hastily written book calling for U.S. troops along a fenced-off border, ``Whatever It Takes: Illegal Immigration, Border Security and the War on Terror,'' came out just in time for what he no doubt believed would be an easy re-election run. But it turned out that Hayworth fenced himself right out of office -- he lost Nov. 7 to a Democratic rival who had proposed a more liberalized immigration policy.
Hard-liner Hayworth's defeat was no aberration. His was only the most dramatic of a string of electoral losses by conservatives who radically misjudged the national mood on immigration. Also in Arizona, Republican Randy Graf, who boasted of his support from a Minuteman PAC, failed to take an open congressional seat that had been in GOP hands for 22 years. Again, his Democrat opponent campaigned on a less restrictive border policy and won in a southern Arizona district that is ground zero for illegal immigration. A similar defeat was handed out to anti-illegal immigration crusader Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., and to more than a dozen other Republicans who had campaigned on ardent close-the-border platforms.
An issue that many House GOP conservatives had fancied as the perfect wedge to help cleave a midterm victory wound up splitting their own party and contributing to its loss of Congress. Along with Social Security privatization, the get-tough immigration issue has proven to be one of the great political fizzles of the last few years.
So now that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, and the Democrats control the House agenda, and with more pro-reform Democrats also in the Senate, isn't passage of a more liberal and modern border policy a slam-dunk in the next Congress?
Hardly. Passage of comprehensive reform remains iffy, and it might now be the Democrats' turn to see their party torn apart over immigration issues. It was easy for Democrats to advocate liberalized reform when they were in the minority and knew the programs they voted for weren't going to pass. It's a far different challenge for them now that they hold legislative power and might be tempted to weigh the political risks and shirk the responsibilities of bold leadership.
Earlier this year, a common sense and comprehensive immigration reform measure supported by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., by business interests and at least a sizable chunk of organized labor, won approval in the GOP-controlled Senate. The legislation received at least some support from the White House, and the Senate leadership compromised with Democrats to push the measure through. Not only would border security have been strengthened, but also a guest worker program would have provided legal entry for hundreds of thousands of migrants.
And most important, a long period of national denial would have come to an end with the earned legalization of millions of undocumented workers. But the more ideological leadership in the House blocked the bipartisan reform, mocking it as ``amnesty'' for lawbreakers. Instead, they settled only for more troops along the border and a 700-mile-long wall.
It's not as though the Democrats have an admirable recent track record on immigration. Indeed, the current policy of allowing increasing numbers of impoverished immigrants to run a horrendous gantlet across a brutal desert, only then to employ them in low-wage jobs with no legal standing, is as much -- if not more -- a creation of the Democrats as the Republicans.
In the wake of the public fear provoked by the Oklahoma City bombing, President Clinton supported and signed the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which imposed draconian restrictions on the judicial rights of illegal and legal residents. Two years earlier, Clinton, concerned that he would pay the political price for images of desperate Mexicans streaming across the border, had ordered a series of clampdowns at traditional crossing zones from San Diego to El Paso.
Then-California Gov. Pete Wilson had just won re-election by riding the crest of anti-immigrant Proposition 187, which made illegal residents ineligible for social services and public school education, and Clinton -- who had lost his first re-election campaign as Arkansas governor after being accused of being soft on illegal immigrants -- didn't want to be caught once again on the wrong side of a hot-button issue.
The Clinton administration blockades of urban border areas remain in effect today, but they have had no effect on the actual number of illegal crossings. Their primary impact has been to divert the human traffic into the most remote, most perilous, out-of-sight-out-of-mind, routes cutting through mountainous desert. In the last 12 years, the annual death toll of border crossers -- succumbing to heat and dehydration -- has risen 10-fold to a staggering 500 per year (Compare this to the death toll of less than 300 in the entire 28-year history of the Berlin Wall).
The legacy of the ``unintended consequences'' of the Clinton policy looms over migrant gathering areas south of the border, where displays of shrine-like hand-painted crosses memorialize those who have perished in transit. Even a cursory trip to the Mexican border -- many of which I have made over the past five years as a reporter -- reveals that a most hypocritical, and often deadly, charade is being played out.
On a recent visit to the binational Arizona border town of Nogales, I stood on the U.S. side of a 2.5-mile-long, 12-foot-high wall erected by the Clinton administration that divides the town in two. Constructed with steel landing mats salvaged from the gulf war, reinforced by 13 surveillance towers with 28 remote controlled cameras, and its surroundings peppered with countless seismic, metal, directional and infrared sensors, it stands as a monument to folly.
U.S. Border Patrol Agent Sean King, who brought me there, said there are ``thousands'' who still cross illegally every year through the heart of the city. They go around, through or literally under the wall. ``We know of 168 sewer points,'' he said, that are used as tunnels.
Agent King and I made this trip just a few weeks after the House had approved a 700-mile version of the same wall. ``I don't see it working, just on this fence alone,'' he said pointing to a jumble of welded patches on the wall in front of us. ``We already have a welding crew of 5 or 6 agents working around the clock to fill in the holes. Can you imagine what it would mean to maintain a 700-mile long wall in the middle of nowhere?''
Perhaps the new Democratic-led House will find something better to do with the $2 billion or more it will cost to build that wall. But comprehensive reform has been egregiously omitted from Speaker Pelosi's much-touted legislative agenda.
Legalizing millions of undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. would carry obvious political benefits for whichever party took the lead. The Latino vote is burgeoning and has become a crucial vote in the increasingly swing states of the Mountain West and the Southwest. Coveting that vote was one reason why George W. Bush revived the dormant immigration debate in 2004 and made his dramatic call for a guest worker program.
But there are also risks and liabilities. When the Republican right flank rose in revolt against Bush's moderate immigration views, the president's resolve faltered and he quickly watered down his proposals. There's no reason to believe that Democrats didn't take note. Much of the Democratic electoral strategy this year was aimed at successfully winning over middle-of-the-road suburban and rural voters. These are precisely the constituencies that Democrats might be most afraid of alienating if the party is seen as capitulating to illegal immigrants.
Another potential fault line on immigration runs smack through the middle of one of the Democrats' most powerful political pillars -- organized labor. The AFL-CIO originally supported the McCain-Kennedy reforms, but it eventually opposed the guest worker programs that emerged from the bipartisan accords in the Senate. AFL-CIO officials argued that legalized low-wage workers would take jobs from Americans. But the powerful 1.2 million-member Service Employees International Union, which split from the AFL-CIO, has taken a strong lead in pushing immigration reform, including guest worker programs. Democrats, who reap tons of dollars and legions of campaign foot soldiers from both union factions, could easily be torn by the crosscurrents.
In any scenario, eventual passage of a sweeping reform bill will require a measure of political courage and risk-taking that has been sorely absent from Washington in recent years. The question is whether or not the realities of immigration will finally force decisive action. Once the near-exclusive realm of human rights and Latino advocacy groups, liberalized immigration reform has now become a top priority not only for powerful unions like the SEIU but also for the American business community. Corporate America -- not traditionally seen as the champion of the downtrodden and hungry -- now believes that its very future is staked on access to a growing, young and hard-working immigrant workforce.
We're about to see if any of the pragmatism of the business lobby will be transmitted to the liberals now taking control of Congress. It would be a great historical irony if the new majority Democrats found themselves to the political right of the Chamber of Commerce in confronting one our most pressing national problems.


CBS 60 Minutes - video:Welcome To Hazleton - One Mayor's Controversial Plan To Deal With Illegal Immigration One of the biggest issues facing the new Congress is what to do about immigration policy and what to do about the estimated 10 million illegal immigrants now living in the U.S. Not that long ago it was a problem in a half dozen border states, today it impacts virtually the entire country. Frustrated with the lack of action in Washington, local communities are taking matters into their own hands, by passing laws and ordinances specifically designed to drive illegal immigrants out of their towns. And they are doing by denying them places to live and work. It has raised all sorts of issues and touched off a legal fight that is likely to end up before the U.S. Supreme court. And it’s being fought of all places, in a city called Hazleton, an all-American town nestled deep in the Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania.
Comment:
Unreal!!

Tuesday, November 21, 2006


Immigrant rental law put on hold

SAN DIEGO (AP) - A federal judge Thursday temporarily blocked Escondido from enforcing a law that punishes landlords for renting to illegal immigrants.
U.S. District Judge John Houston said he had serious questions about whether the law would survive legal scrutiny and said it may inflict ''irreparable harm'' on tenants and landlords.
The law was scheduled to take effect today in the city where Hispanics make up 42 percent of the 142,000 residents.
Houston did not say how long his order would last, but said he would schedule a hearing in the case within four months.
The lawsuit was filed earlier this month on behalf of two Escondido landlords and two women who live in the country illegally but whose children are U.S. citizens. The suit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, alleges that the law illegally punishes landlords for renting to illegal immigrants.
Landlord Roy Garrett welcomed the decision.
''(Illegal immigrants) are there, it's reality, it is immoral to force them to leave,'' Garrett said.
An attorney for the city declined to comment.
The City Council voted 3-2 last month to require landlords to submit documentation of their tenants' immigration status to the city, which would then verify that information with the federal government.
If tenants are found to be illegal immigrants, landlords would be given 10 days to evict them or face suspension of their business licenses. Repeat offenders could face misdemeanor charges and fines.
Last month, the ACLU persuaded a federal judge to temporarily block the city of Hazleton, Pa., from enforcing a crackdown on illegal immigrants.
The lawsuit alleges that the Escondido ordinance -- which is modeled on Hazleton's -- violates federal and state laws and puts landlords in an ''impossible position'' of enforcing immigration laws.
''The ordinance is riddled with constitutional flaws and ignores the subtleties, complexities and primacy of federal immigration law,'' according to the lawsuit.
The city argues that the law aims to alleviate the ''significant and costly burdens on society'' that are posed by illegal immigrants. Officials have said it would only be enforced on leases signed after it takes effect.
More than 50 municipalities nationwide have considered, passed or rejected laws to crack down on illegal immigration.
In Hazleton, a pair of measures approved by City Council would impose fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants, deny business permits to companies that give them jobs, and require tenants to register with City Hall and pay for a rental permit. A federal judge temporarily prohibited the laws from taking effect, saying they posed ''irreparable harm'' to landlords, tenants and businesses that cater to Hispanics.
This week, the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch adopted a measure that would require tenants to submit documentation to the landlord when making or renewing leases. That measure takes effect Jan. 12.


Memo From Mexico, By Allan Wall

Give Me Your Poor, Your Tired, Your Middle-Class Mexicans
Who are today’s Mexican immigrants?


Are they the poorest people from Mexico, the most destitute, from the absolute bottom socioeconomic level of Mexican society?
Certainly most Mexican immigrants are poorer than Americans, and Mexico is a poorer country than the U.S.A. (though not that poor by international standards).
But the Mexicans who come to the U.S., both legally and illegally, are not the poorest of the poor. That’s because it costs some money to get to the border, about $2,000 to pay the smuggler, for example. The most destitute Mexicans don’t have the money to get to the border.
According to the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) most Mexican emigrants are not the poorest of the poor, but rather the upper tier of the lower class, the least poor of the poor. [Fencing in Human Capital, Investors.Com Oct. 13th, 2006]
But not all of them. A growing proportion of Mexican immigrants are from the Mexican middle class, and from urban areas. The average educational level of Mexican immigrants is rising, though it’s still lower than that of the U.S. According to one calculation, 1 in 15 Mexicans in the U.S. has a college degree.

Even Felipe Calderon, Mexico’s president-elect, has relatives north of the border. Calderon says he has a cousin and a brother-in-law in the U.S. but he won’t reveal their legal statuses! [Mexican job-seekers often from middle class AP Bill Weissert, May 7th, 2006]
As I pointed out in a recent Memo from Mexico the Pew Hispanic Center says most Mexican immigrants had jobs in Mexico before emigrating, and the Mexican government has admitted that Mexican emigration is driven by cultural factors and not just economics.
This is all consistent with my personal observations living here in Mexico. I have known several Mexicans who had jobs but emigrated anyway. I knew of an individual who owned a business but still felt compelled to emigrate—against his family’s wishes. So he moved illegally to the U.S. where he got on the dole. That’s family values for you!
Recently, another Mexican I know asked me to get him across the border illegally. This man already has a job in Mexico, but he wants to work illegally in the U.S. to earn money to remodel his house.
Then there’s a family I know that is quite well-off. (Politically-speaking however, they’re quite leftist.) The father of the family is an engineer with a good job and they’ve vacationed in Europe. A few years ago, a young man in that family spent some time working illegally in the U.S. heartland. Why? To make a statement? To raise some extra spending money?
Why do Mexicans migrate to the U.S.A.?
The vast majority are not seeking freedom, they aren’t rejecting their Mexican culture and nationality and they don’t want to become Americans. (But becoming a dual citizen is an attractive option because you can have your cake and eat it too.)
The answer is very simple. They want to make more money.
That’s perfectly understandable, isn’t it? The minimum wage in Mexico is $4 a day, so illegal aliens can earn sub-minimum wages north of the border and still make more than in Mexico.
According to the World Bank, GNI per capita in the U.S. is $43,740. In Mexico it’s $7130. (Which is still higher than the world GNI per capita of $6987.)
According to the CIA World Factbook, the U.S. GDP per capita is $41,600, while Mexico’s is $10,000, still higher than the world GDP per capita of $9,500.
Andres Rozental, of the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations and current adviser to Felipe Calderon, puts it quite bluntly when he says:
“There’s a huge wage differential, sometimes 10-to-1. Even if people have a job in Mexico, they will go to the United States.” [Recent immigrants educated, employed but seek better jobs, Laurence Iliff, DallasNews.com, June 6th, 2006]
After several decades of mass emigration from Mexico—the “ Mexodus”—the phenomenon has taken on a life of its own. A vast social network on both sides of the border supports it, and virtually the entire Mexican society either encourages it or fails to discourage it. Many young Mexicans grow up with the expectation that they will emigrate someday.
You can study Mexican emigration in relation to the Mexican economy, Mexican demography, Mexican politics and Mexican culture . But the main reason Mexicans emigrate is to make money—and the main reason they’re able to is that the U.S. governments allow and even encourages it.
Mexican professor Rodolfo Tuiran, former head of CONAPO (the National Population Council) hit the nail on the head when he said:
“Emigration is not going to be halted by job creation alone.” Recent immigrants employed, educated, By Laurence Iliff, The Dallas Morning News, June 11, 2006
That’s for sure. Mass immigration can only be halted if the U.S. government decides to halt it.
Will the Bush-Pelosi administration want to halt immigration?

Sunday, November 19, 2006




Chicago Sun-Times,




Supporters cheer return of 'Saulito'




Boy, 7, back from Mexican tour for immigrant momNovember 19, 2006BY STEFANO ESPOSITO Staff Reporter.



he 7-year-old ambassador returned to Chicago to a Northwest Side storefront church filled with supporters chanting "Saulito! Saulito!" Saturday night.Saul Arellano returned from a weeklong trip from Mexico to lobby Mexican lawmakers to allow his undocumented immigrant mother, Elvira Arellano, to stay in the United States.His supporters declared the trip a success, pointing to the Mexican Chamber of Deputies' approval of a resolution calling on the United States to suspend Arellano's --and other illegal immigrant parents' -- deportation. They were, however, a bit skeptical about whether a Democrat-controlled Congress might benefit Arellano's plight.A shy Saul first buried his face in his mother's chest, refusing to talk in front of a throng of reporters at the Adalberto United Methodist Church, 2176 W. Division. But he later spoke optimistically about the trip. Mexican lawmakers "said they were going to send a letter to President Bush," he said."It was very successful for us," added Emma Lozano, Saul's escort and president of the immigrants' rights organization Pueblo Sin Fronteras. "For [the Mexican Congress] to unanimously agree on anything is historic."After the multiple stays of deportation she got with the help of U.S. Senators Barrack Obama and Dick Durbin ran out, Arellano in August turned to the church to try to avoid deportation over an arrest for entering the country illegally and working here under a false Social Security number. Ever since, Arellano has been holed up in the church.Mother faces criticismArellano then dispatched Saul. He's traveled around the country, including to the gates of the White House, seeking amnesty for his mother.Arellano on Saturday responded to the criticism she has received for sending Saul on a quest to help. "A lot of people criticized that I'm sending Saulito from one place to another. They don't talk about his constitutional rights in this country and how they are being violated," she said.

Friday, November 17, 2006


CNN Lou Dobbs - video:In Texas, Farmers Branch Takes on Job Federal Government Won't Do Farmers Branch, Texas is the latest American town facing an unchecked flood of illegal immigration. The town has levied a fine on property owners who rent to illegal aliens. It's the first Texas town to take such an action. The deputy mayor of Farmers Branch, Tim O'Hare, has been called a racist and a Nazi for passing that ordinance. And the president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, John Trasvina, said the ordinance is objectionable because "we can't have our citizens and towns have an immigration policy anymore than they should have a military policy or a foreign policy." O'Hare said the federal government is failing to do its job: "We have a number of problems. Our county hospital Parkland here in Dallas, spent $22.4 million last year an non-emergency health care for illegal aliens. Our school district spent $14 million in the last two years building pre-K schools essentially to teach people how to speak English and our citizens finally just had enough and asked us to do something."

Thursday, November 16, 2006


Farmers Branch council OKs illegal-immigration measures

By PATRICK McGEE
STAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITER


FARMERS BRANCH -- Despite loud protests from scores of pro-immigrant demonstrators, the City Council adopted ordinances Monday night to crack down on illegal immigration and to make English the city's official language.
Opponents of illegal immigration cheered when the council voted unanimously to pass ordinances that will:
Require city officials to conduct nearly all official business in English.
Prohibit landlords from renting apartments to people who cannot prove their citizenship or legal status.
Have city police enter into a cooperative agreement with federal immigration officials to target "criminal aliens."
Hundreds of people on both sides were turned away from the council chambers because of a lack of space. They sometimes tried to out-shout one another in the City Hall lobby by chanting slogans. A police officer with a bullhorn told them that they had to be quiet or leave.
Other officers milled around the crowd that was thick with American flags, protest signs and camera crews. Police kept riot gear, transparent shields, helmets with face masks and batons behind the receptionist's desk in City Hall's spacious lobby.
Such scenes could soon come to cities in Tarrant County, because anti-illegal immigration activists in Arlington and Fort Worth said they will push for similar measures. Members of city councils in Fort Worth, Arlington and Bedford recently told the Star-Telegram that they worry that such proposals could attract lawsuits and turn their meetings into heated debates.
Hispanic groups addressed the Farmers Branch City Council during its work session in the afternoon.
Members of the League of United Latin American Citizens presented a petition with about 150 signatures urging the council to drop the anti-illegal immigration measures.
Members of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund told the council that approving anti-illegal immigration ordinances would be a mistake.
"We are here not only to say that these ordinances violate federal law, but that these ordinances drive unnecessary tension in the city," said Marisol Perez, a staff attorney for MALDEF.
MALDEF holds that such ordinances are not legal because immigration law is the federal government's responsibility. This month, the organization sued Escondido, Calif., for passing anti-illegal immigration ordinances.
LULAC members presented their petition and argued that Farmers Branch could not promote itself to prospective home buyers if it was sending an anti-immigrant message.
"It's hypocritical to promote Farmers Branch as a great city when you're promoting hateful legislation," LULAC member Carlos Quintanilla said. "You can't promote Farmers Branch as a great city when you're denying people the right to live in apartments, when you're denying children the right to speak their language."
But others showed up for the evening meeting voicing strong support for Councilman Tim O'Hare, the ordinances' architect.
Robin Bernier, who said she lives in Farmers Branch, wore a shirt that said "I support the Tim O'Hare proposals."
She said she wanted to see an ordinance that would prohibit illegal immigrants from renting property.
"They end up with five or 10 people in a house and five or six cars outside," she said. "It's just not right. We don't want them renting to illegals."
The ordinance on renting takes effect in January. Landlords will be fined $500 if they rent to illegal immigrants.
The ordinance on English as the official language will not entirely ban other languages from city business. For example, police officers and firefighters could speak foreign languages during emergencies to people not fluent in English.
O'Hare complained that some were smearing the English-only ordinances as something that would prohibit Catholic churches from celebrating Mass in Spanish.
"Shame on anyone that said that or reported that in the media," he said.
Councilman Charlie Bird said the English requirement is meant to help immigrants assimilate.
"You should learn English if you want to live in the United States," he said.
The third ordinance will have local police participate in a program called 287(g) with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
ICE spokesman Tim Counts said only the Los Angeles County Jail and the state police in Alabama and Florida have gone though 287(g) training.
Representatives for the Fort Worth and Arlington police departments said that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, and that they could alienate segments of the Hispanic community if they enforce immigration laws.
At the Sept. 26 Bedford City Council meeting, Bedford Police Chief David Flory said having his officers enforce immigration laws would be an "unfunded mandate," meaning that there wouldn't be any federal money for the increased policing.
He said Bedford does not need to pursue illegal immigrants.
"We really don't think we have a problem with illegal aliens in this particular city," Flory said. "We don't run across them very often."

Wednesday, November 15, 2006


"So Long, Texas -- Hello, Mexico!"
I think this is a very humorous and certainly revealing look at the illegal immigration and border security crisis in this country through the music of Johnny Tex and the Texicans.


Monday, November 13, 2006


Chicago Tribune

Immigrant's son to lobby in Mexico to keep her in U.S.
Published November 13, 2006


CHICAGO -- The 7-year-old son of a Chicago woman who has taken refuge in a Humboldt Park church as she fights deportation is expected to lobby on his mother's behalf in Mexico this week.
Saul Arellano traveled to Mexico on Sunday and is scheduled to meet with members of the Mexican Senate and Mexican House of Representatives on Tuesday as part of his mother's bid to stay in the United States, said Roberto Lopez, a member of Centro Sin Fronteras, an immigration rights group.
In August, Elvira Arellano defied a deportation order by taking refuge at Adalberto United Methodist Church, where she has lived with Saul, a U.S. citizen.
"He's going to be giving testimony, and they have a resolution in support of Saul and his mother to ask Congress and the U.S. to let them stay here together," Lopez said, noting that Mexican officials invited Saul abroad.
Arellano has said she does not want her son to grow up in Mexico, and her deportation would force him to leave the United States.
-------------------
Response: I did not know, knowingly that on top of all the facts of Elvira Arellano braking the law, using other peoples Social Security Numbers, being deported once already, and her list of wrong doings stretch that she would not be put in jail. On top of that using her son like a scape goat to go travel to Mexico to see if some other government from some other country can intervene in the situation. I didn't know other countries had say in what our laws should or should not be. What a joke and mockery this situation has become. If Elvira Arellano didn't want to bear a son in Mexico because Mexico is so bad she should of not had one in the bringing period! Another fact is many people want to live here not only her. What makes her any different from some starving people in other countries that want to come over? Nothing! I have a solution deport both of them and set an example by closing this loop hole once in for all; if your not legal your son is not legal.

Saturday, November 11, 2006

Lou Dobbs-video


CNN Lou Dobbs - video:Bush Believes Chances for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Are Better With Democrats - But Voters Took a Firm Stance Against It

President Bush today said recent success, as he put it, on achieving border security will bring the new Congress aboard when he presents his comprehensive immigration reform proposals. "Show me progress on the border and then we'll be interested in talking about other aspects. Well, there is progress being made on the border in terms of security, and I would hope we can get something done. It's a vital issue. It's an issue where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats." In effect, the president saying it's going to be much easier to get through his comprehensive immigration reform with a Democratic Congress than it was with a Republican Congress. But in the states that must deal with illegal immigration each and every day, voters are taking a much firmer line. And a new balance of power in Congress may bring new federal action on illegal immigration despite the president's position.

Feed up with Illegal immigration?


Feed up with Illegal immigration?


Your not the only one! This is a place to get your facts on what happens around the United States. This is not a racism blog, I do not hate immigrants, I hate "illegal aliens"! People who cut in front of the others in line!! People that don't give a crap about this country! Oh, and no there not called immigrants, migrants, or any other name you put on them! They have broke current laws and come here to demand a compromise in the changing of our current laws?? WTF is that? People that not only have totally disrespected the true Hispanics of this country, the ones that follow the rules, the ones who love, honer ,respect the true ethic's, culture, and valves of this country. One thing that is really annoying is how these Illegal Aliens try to say their fighting for their rights, like (Blacks) did in this country. (Blacks) endured more than illegal aliens ever did or do, let alone that there where no benefits in their package. I am feed up! We need Justice in this system, and that is not "Amnesty"!!If the government can't see that more than half the people don't want a "Comprehensive bill" which is "Amnesty" ,no matter how you slice and dice it, then start writing your local government and get involved in order to stop this massive take over by the illegal aliens! The middle class is being squeezed like "sweet oranges" on a hot summer day. We cannot let people going around living for free or multiplying like jack rabbits, knowing that they have no money to take care of there own kids. This is how Mexico and Africa any other foreign countries went broke ,and if you want to live in poverty don't stand up; because poverty is on its way how fast is up to you!!

Friday, November 10, 2006

Translating Help for Utah's Hispanic Voters


Translating Help for Utah's Hispanic Voters People who can't speak English and want to vote have a place to turn for help. November 6th, 2006 @ 2:24pm KSL Newsradio's Greg Neft reporting

"I was very confused," said voter Omar Milgareho. He could not understand he ballot, so he turned to the Utah Hispanic Democratic Caucus.
"Omar wouldn't be able to vote today, or his vote wouldn't count today, had he not had the assistance," said Chair Tony Yapias.
Yapias says anyone who needs it can call the caucus, "As long as I'm not an employer or union representative, it's within the legal means to do it," he said.
Milgareho says it was appreciated, "It helped me a lot," he said.
Yapias says his help is completely non partisan.

-------Response "Another example of making it easier and easier for the Hispanic community to not have to learn the language of the country THEY chose to live in. What a joke! I thought you had to pass a test to become a citizen of this country. I would think the test was in English. So if you can read enough to pass the test, why can’t you read enough to cast your ballot? Oh that’s right, these are people that were given amnesty 20 years ago, and STILL don’t WANT to learn enough English to cast a ballot. Why don’t they just have their children go to the polling place and translate the ballot for them, that’s what they do any other time? Am I angry about this? You bet I am. As the child of LEGAL immigrants, I know what my grand parents had to do to become citizens of this country, and it wasn’t having anyone else read the papers for them to fill out; it was learning English and doing it themselves. It meant learning English to take their driving tests, learning English to fill out job applications, and learning English to communicate in every day living. No one offered, nor did they expect to have anything done for them in Italian, their native tongue. They came to this country to live, so they were EXPECTED to learn English to survive. Why is it so different now for this ethnic group? Why make so many allowances for their failure to learn English"?
With all these programs Hispanics have like , News, TV, Newspapers, Magazines, Radio, music and talk shows, and the list goes on; why would any one from a Latin country want to bother with learning English and simulating in the country. Another thing is, if you can't understand what the heck the person you are voting for is saying what makes you think your making a smart decision? Ellis Island was no joke, and forget about the hand me downs. In today's world we must press 1 to proceed in English, what a joke!