Border and limits
- Thread starter Southpaw
- Start date
<font size="5"><center>Cherokee County Georgia
to consider illegal immigrants law</font size></center>
By CHRISTOPHER QUINN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 12/04/06
Cherokee County commissioners say they know their proposal aimed at punishing landlords who rent to illegal immigrants could entangle them in an expensive and lengthy court fight.
They are divided over whether the potential cost is justified.
"Is it worth it to defend [the ordinance]?" Commissioner Derek Good said last week. "It very well could be."
The proposal is on the agenda for Tuesday night's meeting. The five-member commission could vote on the plan — which would be the first such ordinance in Georgia — after that evening's discussion.
Advocates of the proposal point to the cost of education in Cherokee — an estimated $7,693 a year per student — and say the county could save millions each year by trimming the number of illegal immigrants.
"That is local taxpayers dollars going for educational support," Good said.
He hopes the proposal would dissuade illegal immigrants from coming to Cherokee. It would require landlords to check the immigration status of renters and provide information to the county if asked. Those who rent to illegal immigrants could face fines, having business licenses suspended, and being prevented from collecting rents.
Some commissioners don't see the logic in Cherokee taking up a legal battle that is already being fought by cities in other states.
"I can't see us paying half a million dollars [in legal fees] while someone else is paying to get the ruling, " said Commissioner Jim Hubbard.
Commissioner Karen Mahurin, who sponsored the county's proposal last month, said other cities' experiences inspired her to try the ordinance in Cherokee. One of those is Hazleton, Pa.
Louis J. Barletta, Hazleton's mayor, said in an interview, "We can't afford not to [fight it in court]. Illegal immigration is destroying our city."
Hazleton, about 30 percent of whose 30,000 residents are believed to be immigrants, adopted ordinances regarding landlords and employers of illegal immigrants. One ordinance made English the official language.
Barletta said he has seen crime shoot up and faces increased educational and public service costs because of immigrants.
For example, he said, the city's budget for teachers of English as a second language was $500 in 2000. Last year, it was $875,000, he said. He said he is not sure what percentage of immigrants are not legal.
A murder committed by an illegal immigrant last spring spurred him to action, Barletta said. Earlier the same day, an illegal resident was arrested firing a gun on a city playground.
The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups sued and obtained a restraining order in October to keep the city from enforcing the ordinances.
"The ordinance that's been enacted by Hazleton is unconstitutional. It's counterproductive. It's contrary to federal law," Lucas Guttentag of the ACLU recently told CBS News' "60 Minutes." "It's going to lead to discrimination and divisiveness in that community, and it's not within the power of local governments to enact these kind of ordinances."
Escondido, Calif., has also been sued over its ordinance and is under a restraining order.
Barletta said Hazleton has received more than $50,000 in donations from around the country to defray court costs, though he said he did not know how much the legal bills have cost so far.
Barletta said he realizes his city is being watched closely by both sides of the issue.
"We are prepared to fight this to the highest court in the country," Barletta said.
In Cherokee, a public hearing on the county's landlord proposal drew a large crowd and passionate debate last month.
Critics have already questioned whether the county's measure would be legal or constitutional.
Tisha Tallman, regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund in Atlanta, has said her organization would fight the ordinance.
No one knows for sure how many illegal immigrants live in Cherokee. Nearly 10 percent of the 183,000 residents are foreign-born, according to 2005 census estimates. A third — about 5,700 of those 17,715 immigrants — are U.S. citizens, but it's unclear how many of the others may be here illegally.
Meanwhile, Mahurin has added another issue for discussion Tuesday night: a proposal to declare English as the official language of Cherokee County.
"This has grown from an issue in Arizona and Texas and California to one that someone in Woodstock and Canton can understand," she said.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/met...XUbTTUWUXUWUZT[UbUWUcUVUZUaU[UcTYWVVZV&urcm=y
to consider illegal immigrants law</font size></center>
By CHRISTOPHER QUINN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 12/04/06
Cherokee County commissioners say they know their proposal aimed at punishing landlords who rent to illegal immigrants could entangle them in an expensive and lengthy court fight.
They are divided over whether the potential cost is justified.
"Is it worth it to defend [the ordinance]?" Commissioner Derek Good said last week. "It very well could be."
The proposal is on the agenda for Tuesday night's meeting. The five-member commission could vote on the plan — which would be the first such ordinance in Georgia — after that evening's discussion.
Advocates of the proposal point to the cost of education in Cherokee — an estimated $7,693 a year per student — and say the county could save millions each year by trimming the number of illegal immigrants.
"That is local taxpayers dollars going for educational support," Good said.
He hopes the proposal would dissuade illegal immigrants from coming to Cherokee. It would require landlords to check the immigration status of renters and provide information to the county if asked. Those who rent to illegal immigrants could face fines, having business licenses suspended, and being prevented from collecting rents.
Some commissioners don't see the logic in Cherokee taking up a legal battle that is already being fought by cities in other states.
"I can't see us paying half a million dollars [in legal fees] while someone else is paying to get the ruling, " said Commissioner Jim Hubbard.
Commissioner Karen Mahurin, who sponsored the county's proposal last month, said other cities' experiences inspired her to try the ordinance in Cherokee. One of those is Hazleton, Pa.
Louis J. Barletta, Hazleton's mayor, said in an interview, "We can't afford not to [fight it in court]. Illegal immigration is destroying our city."
Hazleton, about 30 percent of whose 30,000 residents are believed to be immigrants, adopted ordinances regarding landlords and employers of illegal immigrants. One ordinance made English the official language.
Barletta said he has seen crime shoot up and faces increased educational and public service costs because of immigrants.
For example, he said, the city's budget for teachers of English as a second language was $500 in 2000. Last year, it was $875,000, he said. He said he is not sure what percentage of immigrants are not legal.
A murder committed by an illegal immigrant last spring spurred him to action, Barletta said. Earlier the same day, an illegal resident was arrested firing a gun on a city playground.
The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups sued and obtained a restraining order in October to keep the city from enforcing the ordinances.
"The ordinance that's been enacted by Hazleton is unconstitutional. It's counterproductive. It's contrary to federal law," Lucas Guttentag of the ACLU recently told CBS News' "60 Minutes." "It's going to lead to discrimination and divisiveness in that community, and it's not within the power of local governments to enact these kind of ordinances."
Escondido, Calif., has also been sued over its ordinance and is under a restraining order.
Barletta said Hazleton has received more than $50,000 in donations from around the country to defray court costs, though he said he did not know how much the legal bills have cost so far.
Barletta said he realizes his city is being watched closely by both sides of the issue.
"We are prepared to fight this to the highest court in the country," Barletta said.
In Cherokee, a public hearing on the county's landlord proposal drew a large crowd and passionate debate last month.
Critics have already questioned whether the county's measure would be legal or constitutional.
Tisha Tallman, regional counsel for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund in Atlanta, has said her organization would fight the ordinance.
No one knows for sure how many illegal immigrants live in Cherokee. Nearly 10 percent of the 183,000 residents are foreign-born, according to 2005 census estimates. A third — about 5,700 of those 17,715 immigrants — are U.S. citizens, but it's unclear how many of the others may be here illegally.
Meanwhile, Mahurin has added another issue for discussion Tuesday night: a proposal to declare English as the official language of Cherokee County.
"This has grown from an issue in Arizona and Texas and California to one that someone in Woodstock and Canton can understand," she said.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/met...XUbTTUWUXUWUZT[UbUWUcUVUZUaU[UcTYWVVZV&urcm=y
<font size="5"><center>Texas talks tough on illegal immigrants</font size>
<font size="4">Lawmakers push some of the harshest immigration-related
measures in the United States.</font size></center>
Los Angeles Times
By Miguel Bustillo, Times Staff Writer
February 27, 2007
AUSTIN, TEXAS — The Lone Star State has long welcomed Latino immigrants, no matter how they got across the state's 1,200-mile border with Mexico.
Back when California voted to cut public services to illegal immigrants, then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush was preaching that immigrants were equal players in the state's economy.
But the atmosphere has changed markedly in Texas, home to about 10% of the nation's illegal immigrants.
Now, a growing chorus of Republicans and some Democrats is pushing some of the harshest immigration-related measures in the United States — laws that would not only deny public services to illegal immigrants but strip their American-born children of benefits as well.
The proposal to deny services to American citizens, which is thought to be the first in the country, is part of a push to challenge the citizenship given automatically to children born in this country to illegal immigrants.
Prior rulings have affirmed that nearly all such children were entitled to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. But some legal scholars have questioned whether the amendment, which redefined national citizenship to include the children of slaves after the Civil War, should cover babies born to foreign parents.
The Pew Hispanic Center estimated last year that more than 3 million U.S. citizens were born to illegal immigrant parents.
"The Texas bill could be a vehicle to get this before the courts, and we strongly support that," said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which has been pushing Congress to revisit the 14th Amendment. "There is no question that it is time for a review, given the number of people entering the country illegally and giving birth."
Texas' shift toward a more incendiary brand of immigration politics comes at a time when many state lawmakers are frustrated that Washington has failed to stop illegal immigration. Few think President Bush's moderate proposals, which include a guest worker program and enhanced border security, will help much, even if they are approved by Congress.
State Rep. Leo Berman, the Republican legislator who wrote the bill to deny benefits to the children of illegal immigrants, admits that his goal is to set off a fight in the federal courts.
His legislation has been compared to Proposition 187, which was ruled unconstitutional after California voters approved it in 1994, but it goes further. It would deny citizens born to illegal immigrants numerous state services, including unemployment benefits and the ability to obtain professional licenses.
"A pregnant illegal alien can wait at the border, check into a hospital in Texas, give birth without paying a penny, and be rewarded for her illegal behavior," Berman said. "That's outrageous."
Berman's bill is one of more than two dozen proposals targeting illegal immigration in Texas. Other measures would tax money that illegal immigrants wire abroad; require patients to prove they are in the country legally before receiving state medical services; eliminate in-state college tuition breaks for illegal immigrants; and require state agencies to do a thorough accounting of how much illegal immigration is costing the state. Texas is home to about 1 million to 2 million illegal immigrants.
"Why should illegal immigrants, who by virtue of being in the country have broken the law, be able to get the same state services as a citizen?" asked state Sen. Royce West, a Democrat from Dallas who is proposing one of several measures to tax remittances to Mexico. He said his legislation was one way to raise money for healthcare programs.
Texas politicians say that proposing such laws would have been unimaginable a decade ago. During his days as governor, Bush regularly praised the cultural and economic contributions Latino immigrants were making to the state. His political strategy paid off: He won 40% of the Latino vote in 1998, a number previously considered unreachable for a Republican.
Bush's approach was a stark contrast from the immigration politics in California during the tenure of Gov. Pete Wilson, who backed Proposition 187, using it to win reelection.
"California has always been more liberal than Texas, but yet the treatment of immigration issues has been night and day," said Rogelio Saenz, a sociology professor at Texas A&M University.
The Texas Republican Party added hard-line immigration language to its platform last year in response to the demands of its conservative base. It included the line "No amnesty! No how. No way," and a call to "suspend automatic U.S. citizenship to children born to illegal immigrant parents," the idea now proposed by Berman.
Latino leaders say they are stunned by the Texas proposals to deny services to children. They promise retaliation at the ballot box.
"How could anyone be so mean-spirited?" said Rosa Rosales, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, the nation's oldest Latino civil rights group, which originated in Texas. "We're just going to have to get the community out to show these representatives that we matter."
For undocumented Texans such as Ofelia Lopez, the state's push to get tough on illegal immigrants elicits sadness as much as fear. Lopez , who crossed into the U.S. from Mexico seven years ago with the hope that she could give her children a better life, has two daughters, one 3 years old and one 6 months old, who are U.S. citizens.
"I don't think the solution is to deny children the opportunity to become better people. That's not going to help anyone," said Lopez, 35, who also has a 15-year-old daughter born in Mexico who is attending a Texas high school. "That's not going to stop people from coming here. People are coming here because it's the only way to survive."
Last year, state lawmakers nationwide proposed a record 570 immigration measures, and 84 were signed into law, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The group predicts that immigration will again be among the hottest state issues in 2007.
In Texas, Democratic state Rep. Pete Gallego, head of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus in the House, said that though some of the new proposals were harsh, a few might have momentum, particularly the bills to tax wire transfers.
"People are appalled at how hard core some of these things are," Gallego said. "We will have a fight."
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a conservative Republican who talked tough on illegal immigration during his reelection campaign last year, has tempered his rhetoric in recent weeks, and sounded a message of compassion and unity during his oath-of-office address last month. He has singled out Berman's proposal as divisive.
Berman counters that his bill may not make him the darling of Austin's lobbyists or the governor, but he is convinced his cause is popular.
"My mail is running 30 to 1 in favor of what I am trying to do," he said.
"This problem is costing Texas money. Texas has to act."
miguel.bustillo@latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...0,6925334.story?page=1&coll=la-home-headlines
<font size="4">Lawmakers push some of the harshest immigration-related
measures in the United States.</font size></center>
Los Angeles Times
By Miguel Bustillo, Times Staff Writer
February 27, 2007
AUSTIN, TEXAS — The Lone Star State has long welcomed Latino immigrants, no matter how they got across the state's 1,200-mile border with Mexico.
Back when California voted to cut public services to illegal immigrants, then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush was preaching that immigrants were equal players in the state's economy.
But the atmosphere has changed markedly in Texas, home to about 10% of the nation's illegal immigrants.
Now, a growing chorus of Republicans and some Democrats is pushing some of the harshest immigration-related measures in the United States — laws that would not only deny public services to illegal immigrants but strip their American-born children of benefits as well.
The proposal to deny services to American citizens, which is thought to be the first in the country, is part of a push to challenge the citizenship given automatically to children born in this country to illegal immigrants.
Prior rulings have affirmed that nearly all such children were entitled to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. But some legal scholars have questioned whether the amendment, which redefined national citizenship to include the children of slaves after the Civil War, should cover babies born to foreign parents.
The Pew Hispanic Center estimated last year that more than 3 million U.S. citizens were born to illegal immigrant parents.
"The Texas bill could be a vehicle to get this before the courts, and we strongly support that," said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which has been pushing Congress to revisit the 14th Amendment. "There is no question that it is time for a review, given the number of people entering the country illegally and giving birth."
Texas' shift toward a more incendiary brand of immigration politics comes at a time when many state lawmakers are frustrated that Washington has failed to stop illegal immigration. Few think President Bush's moderate proposals, which include a guest worker program and enhanced border security, will help much, even if they are approved by Congress.
State Rep. Leo Berman, the Republican legislator who wrote the bill to deny benefits to the children of illegal immigrants, admits that his goal is to set off a fight in the federal courts.
His legislation has been compared to Proposition 187, which was ruled unconstitutional after California voters approved it in 1994, but it goes further. It would deny citizens born to illegal immigrants numerous state services, including unemployment benefits and the ability to obtain professional licenses.
"A pregnant illegal alien can wait at the border, check into a hospital in Texas, give birth without paying a penny, and be rewarded for her illegal behavior," Berman said. "That's outrageous."
Berman's bill is one of more than two dozen proposals targeting illegal immigration in Texas. Other measures would tax money that illegal immigrants wire abroad; require patients to prove they are in the country legally before receiving state medical services; eliminate in-state college tuition breaks for illegal immigrants; and require state agencies to do a thorough accounting of how much illegal immigration is costing the state. Texas is home to about 1 million to 2 million illegal immigrants.
"Why should illegal immigrants, who by virtue of being in the country have broken the law, be able to get the same state services as a citizen?" asked state Sen. Royce West, a Democrat from Dallas who is proposing one of several measures to tax remittances to Mexico. He said his legislation was one way to raise money for healthcare programs.
Texas politicians say that proposing such laws would have been unimaginable a decade ago. During his days as governor, Bush regularly praised the cultural and economic contributions Latino immigrants were making to the state. His political strategy paid off: He won 40% of the Latino vote in 1998, a number previously considered unreachable for a Republican.
Bush's approach was a stark contrast from the immigration politics in California during the tenure of Gov. Pete Wilson, who backed Proposition 187, using it to win reelection.
"California has always been more liberal than Texas, but yet the treatment of immigration issues has been night and day," said Rogelio Saenz, a sociology professor at Texas A&M University.
The Texas Republican Party added hard-line immigration language to its platform last year in response to the demands of its conservative base. It included the line "No amnesty! No how. No way," and a call to "suspend automatic U.S. citizenship to children born to illegal immigrant parents," the idea now proposed by Berman.
Latino leaders say they are stunned by the Texas proposals to deny services to children. They promise retaliation at the ballot box.
"How could anyone be so mean-spirited?" said Rosa Rosales, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, the nation's oldest Latino civil rights group, which originated in Texas. "We're just going to have to get the community out to show these representatives that we matter."
For undocumented Texans such as Ofelia Lopez, the state's push to get tough on illegal immigrants elicits sadness as much as fear. Lopez , who crossed into the U.S. from Mexico seven years ago with the hope that she could give her children a better life, has two daughters, one 3 years old and one 6 months old, who are U.S. citizens.
"I don't think the solution is to deny children the opportunity to become better people. That's not going to help anyone," said Lopez, 35, who also has a 15-year-old daughter born in Mexico who is attending a Texas high school. "That's not going to stop people from coming here. People are coming here because it's the only way to survive."
Last year, state lawmakers nationwide proposed a record 570 immigration measures, and 84 were signed into law, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The group predicts that immigration will again be among the hottest state issues in 2007.
In Texas, Democratic state Rep. Pete Gallego, head of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus in the House, said that though some of the new proposals were harsh, a few might have momentum, particularly the bills to tax wire transfers.
"People are appalled at how hard core some of these things are," Gallego said. "We will have a fight."
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a conservative Republican who talked tough on illegal immigration during his reelection campaign last year, has tempered his rhetoric in recent weeks, and sounded a message of compassion and unity during his oath-of-office address last month. He has singled out Berman's proposal as divisive.
Berman counters that his bill may not make him the darling of Austin's lobbyists or the governor, but he is convinced his cause is popular.
"My mail is running 30 to 1 in favor of what I am trying to do," he said.
"This problem is costing Texas money. Texas has to act."
miguel.bustillo@latimes.com
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...0,6925334.story?page=1&coll=la-home-headlines
<font size="4">Feds to bolster war on gangs<font size><font size="3">
The D.A. and L.A. city attorney want to deport illegal
immigrants even before trial. Data on suspects will be shared.</font size>
Los Angeles Times
By Patrick McGreevy and Richard Winton, Times Staff Writers
April 5, 2007
Suspected gang members who are in the country illegally and are arrested for even minor crimes could face quicker deportation under new policies unveiled Wednesday by the top two prosecutors in Los Angeles.
City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo and L.A. County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said they are partnering more closely with federal immigration officials and attorneys to identify the gang members for deportation, adding that illegal immigrants appear to make up a significant portion of the gang population.
FULL STORY: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gangs5apr05,0,4405847.story?coll=la-home-headlines
`
The D.A. and L.A. city attorney want to deport illegal
immigrants even before trial. Data on suspects will be shared.</font size>
Los Angeles Times
By Patrick McGreevy and Richard Winton, Times Staff Writers
April 5, 2007
Suspected gang members who are in the country illegally and are arrested for even minor crimes could face quicker deportation under new policies unveiled Wednesday by the top two prosecutors in Los Angeles.
City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo and L.A. County Dist. Atty. Steve Cooley said they are partnering more closely with federal immigration officials and attorneys to identify the gang members for deportation, adding that illegal immigrants appear to make up a significant portion of the gang population.
FULL STORY: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-gangs5apr05,0,4405847.story?coll=la-home-headlines
`
Tough talk is good news, too bad for the illegal immigrants who are doing honest work, they wont stand a chance once new policy goes into effect.
GYH,
I agree with you that it would be tough for (otherwise) law abiding and hard working illegal immigrants, but we cannot keep doing what we are doing. Also, many illegals are criminals.
I agree with you that it would be tough for (otherwise) law abiding and hard working illegal immigrants, but we cannot keep doing what we are doing. Also, many illegals are criminals.
<font size="5"><center>Protesters Press for Path to Citizenship</font size></center>
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: May 1, 2007
Filed at 1:50 p.m. ET
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Demonstrators demanding a path to citizenship for an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants rallied around the nation Tuesday, hoping to spur Congress to act before the looming presidential primaries take over the political landscape.
From Phoenix to Detroit, hundreds of people carried American flags in the streets.
Organizers say immigrants feel a sense of urgency to keep immigration reform from getting pushed to the back burner by the 2008 presidential elections.
''If we don't act, then both the Democratic and Republican parties can go back to their comfort zones and do nothing,'' said Angelica Salas, director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. ''They won't have the courage to resolve a major situation for millions of people.''
Hours before the march was set to begin in Chicago, dozens of demonstrators began arriving carrying American flags, signs and placards, including one that read ''We may not have it all together, but together we can have it all.''
Melissa Woo, a 22-year-old American citizen who immigrated from South Korea, carried a Korean flag over her shoulder as she criticized politicians for ''buckling at the knees.''
''Us immigrants aren't pieces of trash, we're human beings,'' she said. ''To be treated as less than human is a travesty.''
Thomas Rodriguez, of Aurora, stood in Union Park wearing a shirt that said: ''We are hard workers. We're not criminals.''
The 38-year-old has had no legal status since he came to the United States from Mexico in 1989 and is an employee at a Japanese restaurant in Chicago.
''Recent raids have worried me,'' he said. ''We worry deportations are leaving too many young people without parents.''
In southwest Detroit, hundreds of people wore red and white, and carried American flags to a rally.
''Most of the undocumented people come here as a necessity of survival,'' said Rosendo Delgado, of Latinos United, one of the groups organizing the march. ''For them, it's the only choice.''
A mariachi band played in Phoenix as marchers walked from the fairgrounds toward the state Capitol.
''We want just reform,'' said Mayela Ruiz, another illegal immigrant. ''I've been here 15 years. I've worked hard, paid my taxes. I've had no problems with the law and I'm afraid to leave my house. I want a law that would allow me to work and live in freedom but not like a slave.''
Democratic Party Chair Howard Dean was scheduled to speak in Miami to a coalition of immigrant groups, while Ricardo Chavez, the brother of famed agricultural labor leader Cesar Chavez, was expected address crowds in Milwaukee.
In Washington, D.C., about 400 members of Asian groups from across the country were set to make a lobbying push with lawmakers.
This year's turnout was expected to be lower than the 1 million people who gathered for last year's May 1 activities.
No rallies were planned in Atlanta, where 50,000 marched last year, because many immigrants were afraid of the raids and of a new state law set to take effect in July. The law requires verification that adults seeking non-emergency state-administered benefits are in the country legally, sanctions employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, and requires police to check the immigration status of people they arrest.
''There's a lot of anxiety and fear in the immigrant community,'' said Jerry Gonzalez of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials.
In New York, groups planned an ''American Family Tree'' rally, where immigrants would pin paper leaves on a large painting of a tree to symbolize the separation of families because of strict immigration laws.
The event is a response to a White House immigration reform proposal in March, said Chung-Wha Hong, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition.
That plan would grant illegal immigrants three-year work visas for $3,500 but also require them to return home to apply for U.S. residency and pay a $10,000 fine. It has been roundly criticized by immigrant groups.
Two large demonstrations were planned in Los Angeles County -- home to an estimated 1 million illegal immigrants. Some groups in the area have called for an economic boycott and hoped for a repeat of last year, when thousands of immigrants and students stayed away from work and school in a sign of solidarity.
Other groups have rejected the boycott, arguing it puts immigrants' livelihoods at risk and deprives children of valuable classroom time.
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Cardinal Roger Mahony, head of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles, both strong immigrant supporters, urged students to stay in school.
Despite divisions over tactics and other issues, immigration groups and supporters said the diverse events will show the movement is stronger than ever.
''Just because the 12 million people who don't have legal residency don't attend a march doesn't mean they don't want it,'' said Eduardo ''Piolin'' Sotelo, a popular Spanish-language disc jockey. ''I tell my listeners that no matter what they do, just don't stop doing something.''
After last year's protests, reform legislation stalled in Congress and bipartisan proposals for illegal immigrants to gain citizenship have gotten more conservative.
Organizers said Tuesday's turnout will be lower because stepped-up raids in recent months have left many immigrants afraid to speak out in public -- a major change over rallies in 2006 when some illegal immigrants wore T-shirts saying ''I'm illegal. So what?''
''These raids have torn apart families,'' said John Crockford, a member of the Central California Coalition for Immigrant Rights.
In Fresno, organizers planned a rally focusing on children whose parents had been deported. The San Joaquin Valley is home to thousands of seasonal workers who work illegally each year in the fields and construction industry.
In Los Angeles, marches were set to include demands for a legalization program, a stop to the raids and an anti-Iraq war message. City and transportation officials were planning for as many as 500,000 people in downtown, believing it could be the largest in the city so far this year.
------
Associated Press writers Jeremiah Marquez in Los Angeles; Garance Burke in Fresno, Calif., Laura Wides-Munoz in Miami, Sophia Tareen in Chicago, Giovanna Dell'Orto in Atlanta and Amanda Lee Myers in Phoenix contributed to this story.
------
On the Net:
http://www.mayday2007.org
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Immigration-Protests.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: May 1, 2007
Filed at 1:50 p.m. ET
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Demonstrators demanding a path to citizenship for an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants rallied around the nation Tuesday, hoping to spur Congress to act before the looming presidential primaries take over the political landscape.
From Phoenix to Detroit, hundreds of people carried American flags in the streets.
Organizers say immigrants feel a sense of urgency to keep immigration reform from getting pushed to the back burner by the 2008 presidential elections.
''If we don't act, then both the Democratic and Republican parties can go back to their comfort zones and do nothing,'' said Angelica Salas, director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles. ''They won't have the courage to resolve a major situation for millions of people.''
Hours before the march was set to begin in Chicago, dozens of demonstrators began arriving carrying American flags, signs and placards, including one that read ''We may not have it all together, but together we can have it all.''
Melissa Woo, a 22-year-old American citizen who immigrated from South Korea, carried a Korean flag over her shoulder as she criticized politicians for ''buckling at the knees.''
''Us immigrants aren't pieces of trash, we're human beings,'' she said. ''To be treated as less than human is a travesty.''
Thomas Rodriguez, of Aurora, stood in Union Park wearing a shirt that said: ''We are hard workers. We're not criminals.''
The 38-year-old has had no legal status since he came to the United States from Mexico in 1989 and is an employee at a Japanese restaurant in Chicago.
''Recent raids have worried me,'' he said. ''We worry deportations are leaving too many young people without parents.''
In southwest Detroit, hundreds of people wore red and white, and carried American flags to a rally.
''Most of the undocumented people come here as a necessity of survival,'' said Rosendo Delgado, of Latinos United, one of the groups organizing the march. ''For them, it's the only choice.''
A mariachi band played in Phoenix as marchers walked from the fairgrounds toward the state Capitol.
''We want just reform,'' said Mayela Ruiz, another illegal immigrant. ''I've been here 15 years. I've worked hard, paid my taxes. I've had no problems with the law and I'm afraid to leave my house. I want a law that would allow me to work and live in freedom but not like a slave.''
Democratic Party Chair Howard Dean was scheduled to speak in Miami to a coalition of immigrant groups, while Ricardo Chavez, the brother of famed agricultural labor leader Cesar Chavez, was expected address crowds in Milwaukee.
In Washington, D.C., about 400 members of Asian groups from across the country were set to make a lobbying push with lawmakers.
This year's turnout was expected to be lower than the 1 million people who gathered for last year's May 1 activities.
No rallies were planned in Atlanta, where 50,000 marched last year, because many immigrants were afraid of the raids and of a new state law set to take effect in July. The law requires verification that adults seeking non-emergency state-administered benefits are in the country legally, sanctions employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, and requires police to check the immigration status of people they arrest.
''There's a lot of anxiety and fear in the immigrant community,'' said Jerry Gonzalez of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials.
In New York, groups planned an ''American Family Tree'' rally, where immigrants would pin paper leaves on a large painting of a tree to symbolize the separation of families because of strict immigration laws.
The event is a response to a White House immigration reform proposal in March, said Chung-Wha Hong, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition.
That plan would grant illegal immigrants three-year work visas for $3,500 but also require them to return home to apply for U.S. residency and pay a $10,000 fine. It has been roundly criticized by immigrant groups.
Two large demonstrations were planned in Los Angeles County -- home to an estimated 1 million illegal immigrants. Some groups in the area have called for an economic boycott and hoped for a repeat of last year, when thousands of immigrants and students stayed away from work and school in a sign of solidarity.
Other groups have rejected the boycott, arguing it puts immigrants' livelihoods at risk and deprives children of valuable classroom time.
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Cardinal Roger Mahony, head of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles, both strong immigrant supporters, urged students to stay in school.
Despite divisions over tactics and other issues, immigration groups and supporters said the diverse events will show the movement is stronger than ever.
''Just because the 12 million people who don't have legal residency don't attend a march doesn't mean they don't want it,'' said Eduardo ''Piolin'' Sotelo, a popular Spanish-language disc jockey. ''I tell my listeners that no matter what they do, just don't stop doing something.''
After last year's protests, reform legislation stalled in Congress and bipartisan proposals for illegal immigrants to gain citizenship have gotten more conservative.
Organizers said Tuesday's turnout will be lower because stepped-up raids in recent months have left many immigrants afraid to speak out in public -- a major change over rallies in 2006 when some illegal immigrants wore T-shirts saying ''I'm illegal. So what?''
''These raids have torn apart families,'' said John Crockford, a member of the Central California Coalition for Immigrant Rights.
In Fresno, organizers planned a rally focusing on children whose parents had been deported. The San Joaquin Valley is home to thousands of seasonal workers who work illegally each year in the fields and construction industry.
In Los Angeles, marches were set to include demands for a legalization program, a stop to the raids and an anti-Iraq war message. City and transportation officials were planning for as many as 500,000 people in downtown, believing it could be the largest in the city so far this year.
------
Associated Press writers Jeremiah Marquez in Los Angeles; Garance Burke in Fresno, Calif., Laura Wides-Munoz in Miami, Sophia Tareen in Chicago, Giovanna Dell'Orto in Atlanta and Amanda Lee Myers in Phoenix contributed to this story.
------
On the Net:
http://www.mayday2007.org
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Immigration-Protests.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
<font size="5"><center>Questions and answers
about the new immigration bill</font size></center>
By Dave Montgomery
McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Sat, May. 19, 2007
WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled Senate next week will plunge into its first confrontation over immigration when it debates a comprehensive bill crafted by a bipartisan group of senators and endorsed by President Bush.
Here's a guide for the upcoming debate:
QUESTION: Millions of illegal immigrants would be quickly legalized under this bill. Isn't that amnesty?
ANSWER: Depends on the perspective. The Bush administration and the bill's supporters say no, because illegal immigrants would pay fines and fees and would have to meet other conditions if they eventually want to get on a path to citizenship.
An array of critics, including many Republican lawmakers, assert otherwise. They say the financial penalties are designed primarily to give proponents political cover to deflect the amnesty tag. They say any process that lets illegal immigrants become legal is amnesty.
Q: How would legalization work?
A: Within six months after the law's enactment, illegal immigrants would be placed on probationary status and could work legally while the Department of Homeland Security completes background checks.
After the government certifies that certain border-security measures - so-called triggers - are in place, the illegal immigrants could pay a $1,000 fine and receive a Z visa that would be renewable every four years. They would be permitted to stay in the country indefinitely if they obey the law and stay employed.
Q: Could they become citizens?
A: First they'd have to get a "green card," which would make them legal permanent residents of the United States. Z card holders could ultimately apply for a green card - but not until the government clears out a current backlog of more than 5 million other green card applicants, which will take eight years.
Then they would return to their home country to file their application, demonstrate proficiency in English and pay an additional $4,000 fine. Those who measured higher in a merit-based system giving weight to education and professional skills would have the edge.
The DHS estimates that a Z card holder's total wait time for a green card would be anywhere from nine to 13 years. They could also get approval to go to Mexico or Canada to apply if conditions prohibit them from returning to their home country.
Q: There are an estimated 12 million immigrants now in the United States. Will they all be eligible for Z visas?
A: Not likely. The DHS estimates that between 15 to 20 percent of those now in country would be disqualified because they'd fail to pass criminal-background checks.
Illegal immigrants, while on probation, would have a year - possibly two - to apply for Z cards. Those who failed to apply would be subject to deportation if they were arrested.
Q: What's the rationale for the legalization program?
A: The Bush administration and supporters of the bill say there is virtually no other option to deal with such a large shadow population dispersed across the country.
Mass deportation, they say, is unworkable and prohibitively expensive, while allowing undocumented immigrants to step forward makes them tax-paying legal workers and ends criminal enterprises associated with illegal immigration, including document forging and human smuggling.
Opponents of the bill say that rigid enforcement of existing penalties against employers of illegal immigrants would dry up the job pool and send undocumented aliens home. They also argue that the bill's enactment won't stop illegal immigration.
Q: Explain the trigger mechanisms.
A: They were included at the insistence of conservatives who wanted assurances that border enforcement will be significantly toughened before the legalization and guest-worker provisions take effect.
They include increasing the number of Border Patrol agents to 18,000 installing 70 ground-based radar and camera systems along the Southwestern border, and creating an electronic verification system to screen employment eligibility.
One politically troublesome pre-requisite is the construction of 370 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border. Several leading House Republicans say it should be much longer - at least 700 miles - and many border-state landowners don't want it at all.
Barring any setbacks, the triggers are expected to be in place within 18 months of enactment.
Q: How will this bill affect me?
A: Perhaps the most broad-based effect is through the creation of the electronic verification system, which will require employers to match photo IDs, such as a passport or tamper-proof driver's license, against a national database.
Within 18 months of enactment, employers would be required to verify new hires. That includes anyone who changes jobs. After three years, employers would be required to verify all employees.
Privacy groups are suspicious that the plan could lead to a national ID system, a charge that the bill's supporters adamantly dismiss.
Q: Explain the guest-worker plan.
A: The bill enables U.S. employers to bring in up to 400,000 foreign workers a year to fill what they say is a chronic shortage in low- and unskilled jobs. The cap could be raised to 600,000 if the government determines that the need exists.
They would be given two-year Y visas, which could be renewed two more times for a total of six years. They would be required to return home for a year between each renewal. A limited number could be eligible for green cards, based on merit, but most would be required to go home permanently at the end of six years.
The provision is another lightning rod in the bill. Employers and pro-immigration groups believe the workers should be allowed to apply for green cards. Others believe the entire guest-worker program should be knocked out because it takes jobs from U.S. workers.
Q: There's been considerable attention about a merit-based system and its impact on family reunification. How would that work?
A: The current immigration system is heavily tilted toward family-based immigration, which allows citizens and legal immigrants to petition to bring in other family members, including siblings, parents and adult children.
Of the estimated 1.1 million immigrants admitted annually, roughly 750,000 are family members. The rest are admitted for employment, as refugees, for asylum and other factors.
Critics say this pattern of "chain migration" has created an enormous backlog of family applications that has overwhelmed the immigration system. Some applicants have been waiting for up to 22 years for a green card.
Consequently, the Bush administration wants to shift toward a system in which future immigrants would be admitted on the basis of their ability to contribute to U.S. society and the country's economic needs.
Points would be awarded on a number of factors, including education or experience in a profession or occupation in high demand in the United States. The concept is patterned after point-based systems in other countries, including Canada and Australia.
U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents could bring in immediate families - spouses and minor children - but adult children and siblings would no longer be eligible. Visas for parents of U.S. citizens would be capped at 40,000.
The issue looms as one of the most acrimonious in the coming Senate debate. Pro-immigration groups, Hispanic organizations and humanitarian groups say the bill would severely undercut family reunification. But Republicans advocating a merit system say they plan to stand firmly behind the provision.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17251969.htm
about the new immigration bill</font size></center>
By Dave Montgomery
McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Sat, May. 19, 2007
WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled Senate next week will plunge into its first confrontation over immigration when it debates a comprehensive bill crafted by a bipartisan group of senators and endorsed by President Bush.
Here's a guide for the upcoming debate:
QUESTION: Millions of illegal immigrants would be quickly legalized under this bill. Isn't that amnesty?
ANSWER: Depends on the perspective. The Bush administration and the bill's supporters say no, because illegal immigrants would pay fines and fees and would have to meet other conditions if they eventually want to get on a path to citizenship.
An array of critics, including many Republican lawmakers, assert otherwise. They say the financial penalties are designed primarily to give proponents political cover to deflect the amnesty tag. They say any process that lets illegal immigrants become legal is amnesty.
Q: How would legalization work?
A: Within six months after the law's enactment, illegal immigrants would be placed on probationary status and could work legally while the Department of Homeland Security completes background checks.
After the government certifies that certain border-security measures - so-called triggers - are in place, the illegal immigrants could pay a $1,000 fine and receive a Z visa that would be renewable every four years. They would be permitted to stay in the country indefinitely if they obey the law and stay employed.
Q: Could they become citizens?
A: First they'd have to get a "green card," which would make them legal permanent residents of the United States. Z card holders could ultimately apply for a green card - but not until the government clears out a current backlog of more than 5 million other green card applicants, which will take eight years.
Then they would return to their home country to file their application, demonstrate proficiency in English and pay an additional $4,000 fine. Those who measured higher in a merit-based system giving weight to education and professional skills would have the edge.
The DHS estimates that a Z card holder's total wait time for a green card would be anywhere from nine to 13 years. They could also get approval to go to Mexico or Canada to apply if conditions prohibit them from returning to their home country.
Q: There are an estimated 12 million immigrants now in the United States. Will they all be eligible for Z visas?
A: Not likely. The DHS estimates that between 15 to 20 percent of those now in country would be disqualified because they'd fail to pass criminal-background checks.
Illegal immigrants, while on probation, would have a year - possibly two - to apply for Z cards. Those who failed to apply would be subject to deportation if they were arrested.
Q: What's the rationale for the legalization program?
A: The Bush administration and supporters of the bill say there is virtually no other option to deal with such a large shadow population dispersed across the country.
Mass deportation, they say, is unworkable and prohibitively expensive, while allowing undocumented immigrants to step forward makes them tax-paying legal workers and ends criminal enterprises associated with illegal immigration, including document forging and human smuggling.
Opponents of the bill say that rigid enforcement of existing penalties against employers of illegal immigrants would dry up the job pool and send undocumented aliens home. They also argue that the bill's enactment won't stop illegal immigration.
Q: Explain the trigger mechanisms.
A: They were included at the insistence of conservatives who wanted assurances that border enforcement will be significantly toughened before the legalization and guest-worker provisions take effect.
They include increasing the number of Border Patrol agents to 18,000 installing 70 ground-based radar and camera systems along the Southwestern border, and creating an electronic verification system to screen employment eligibility.
One politically troublesome pre-requisite is the construction of 370 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border. Several leading House Republicans say it should be much longer - at least 700 miles - and many border-state landowners don't want it at all.
Barring any setbacks, the triggers are expected to be in place within 18 months of enactment.
Q: How will this bill affect me?
A: Perhaps the most broad-based effect is through the creation of the electronic verification system, which will require employers to match photo IDs, such as a passport or tamper-proof driver's license, against a national database.
Within 18 months of enactment, employers would be required to verify new hires. That includes anyone who changes jobs. After three years, employers would be required to verify all employees.
Privacy groups are suspicious that the plan could lead to a national ID system, a charge that the bill's supporters adamantly dismiss.
Q: Explain the guest-worker plan.
A: The bill enables U.S. employers to bring in up to 400,000 foreign workers a year to fill what they say is a chronic shortage in low- and unskilled jobs. The cap could be raised to 600,000 if the government determines that the need exists.
They would be given two-year Y visas, which could be renewed two more times for a total of six years. They would be required to return home for a year between each renewal. A limited number could be eligible for green cards, based on merit, but most would be required to go home permanently at the end of six years.
The provision is another lightning rod in the bill. Employers and pro-immigration groups believe the workers should be allowed to apply for green cards. Others believe the entire guest-worker program should be knocked out because it takes jobs from U.S. workers.
Q: There's been considerable attention about a merit-based system and its impact on family reunification. How would that work?
A: The current immigration system is heavily tilted toward family-based immigration, which allows citizens and legal immigrants to petition to bring in other family members, including siblings, parents and adult children.
Of the estimated 1.1 million immigrants admitted annually, roughly 750,000 are family members. The rest are admitted for employment, as refugees, for asylum and other factors.
Critics say this pattern of "chain migration" has created an enormous backlog of family applications that has overwhelmed the immigration system. Some applicants have been waiting for up to 22 years for a green card.
Consequently, the Bush administration wants to shift toward a system in which future immigrants would be admitted on the basis of their ability to contribute to U.S. society and the country's economic needs.
Points would be awarded on a number of factors, including education or experience in a profession or occupation in high demand in the United States. The concept is patterned after point-based systems in other countries, including Canada and Australia.
U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents could bring in immediate families - spouses and minor children - but adult children and siblings would no longer be eligible. Visas for parents of U.S. citizens would be capped at 40,000.
The issue looms as one of the most acrimonious in the coming Senate debate. Pro-immigration groups, Hispanic organizations and humanitarian groups say the bill would severely undercut family reunification. But Republicans advocating a merit system say they plan to stand firmly behind the provision.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17251969.htm
QueEx said:
Hmmm...That's will be the new R.F.I.D. that will be implemented in May of next year for everyone....then later on down the line, the verichip which is now voluntary, but it will be mandated for those who refuse....
All of this is so the North American Union can be established...then the nwo later.
<font size="5"><center>Now We Can Get to Work</font size><font size="4">
Responsible immigration reform is within reach</font size></center>
National Review
By James Jay Carafano
June 8, 2007
The Senate abandoned a wrongheaded effort to enact comprehensive immigration reform on Thursday night. The bill’s defeat represented more than stopping bad legislation. It actually put the Congress two thirds of the way towards doing what needs to be done to solve the problem.
The reason the legislation failed was simple: It would have granted amnesty to the 12 million or more illegally in the United States and done little to secure the border, enforce the law, or encourage lawful migration. Together that was a recipe for disaster that would have left us worse off than we are now. Indeed, it was the strategy we tried in 1986; it failed miserably. It would have failed again.
Rather than just throwing up its hands, throwing around blame, and throwing out the hope of comprehensive reform, Congress should try an alternative approach:
This strategy is not only realistic. It is within our grasp. Most of the authorities required to beef-up border security and workplace enforcement are already on the books, approved by Congress. In addition, the defeat of the Senate bill is a rejection of amnesty. What is needed to complete the picture is practical and realistic legal alternatives to undocumented workers. That means more visas for high-skilled labor and a temporary-worker program. These initiatives must be based on the labor needs of the marketplace and not driven by bureaucratic direction from Washington, nor undermined by the unrealistic requirements demanded by organized labor.
By creating more realistic and flexible legal alternatives for working in the United States, Congress can deliver on its promise to address comprehensive immigration and border-security reform. That would be a real achievement that the Congress and the president could be proud of. And unlike the Senate’s “crash and burn” bill, it will actually help make America safer and more prosperous.
— James Jay Carafano is a senior research fellow for defense and homeland security at the Heritage Foundation.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzA2NzExMGJlMjlkN2JlMDkxYzU4NzBmOTEyOWE5MTU=
Responsible immigration reform is within reach</font size></center>
National Review
By James Jay Carafano
June 8, 2007
The Senate abandoned a wrongheaded effort to enact comprehensive immigration reform on Thursday night. The bill’s defeat represented more than stopping bad legislation. It actually put the Congress two thirds of the way towards doing what needs to be done to solve the problem.
The reason the legislation failed was simple: It would have granted amnesty to the 12 million or more illegally in the United States and done little to secure the border, enforce the law, or encourage lawful migration. Together that was a recipe for disaster that would have left us worse off than we are now. Indeed, it was the strategy we tried in 1986; it failed miserably. It would have failed again.
Rather than just throwing up its hands, throwing around blame, and throwing out the hope of comprehensive reform, Congress should try an alternative approach:
(1) Deny amnesty to people here illegally that will help deter future illegal migration and make the point that we insist everyone respect the rule of law.
(2) Enforce workplace laws on the books and gain back control of our southern border.
(3) Create more practical and flexible legal opportunities to come and work in the United States. Together these measures offer a real strategy for breaking America’s addiction to undocumented labor.
(2) Enforce workplace laws on the books and gain back control of our southern border.
(3) Create more practical and flexible legal opportunities to come and work in the United States. Together these measures offer a real strategy for breaking America’s addiction to undocumented labor.
This strategy is not only realistic. It is within our grasp. Most of the authorities required to beef-up border security and workplace enforcement are already on the books, approved by Congress. In addition, the defeat of the Senate bill is a rejection of amnesty. What is needed to complete the picture is practical and realistic legal alternatives to undocumented workers. That means more visas for high-skilled labor and a temporary-worker program. These initiatives must be based on the labor needs of the marketplace and not driven by bureaucratic direction from Washington, nor undermined by the unrealistic requirements demanded by organized labor.
By creating more realistic and flexible legal alternatives for working in the United States, Congress can deliver on its promise to address comprehensive immigration and border-security reform. That would be a real achievement that the Congress and the president could be proud of. And unlike the Senate’s “crash and burn” bill, it will actually help make America safer and more prosperous.
— James Jay Carafano is a senior research fellow for defense and homeland security at the Heritage Foundation.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzA2NzExMGJlMjlkN2JlMDkxYzU4NzBmOTEyOWE5MTU=
<font size="5"?><center>Immigration Bill Faces Crucial Vote</font size></center>
Jun 28, 8:23 AM (ET)
Asociated Press
By CHARLES BAINGTON
WASHINGTON (AP) - Conservative Republican senators and a handful of Democrats are trying to put a final knife in President Bush's plan for legalizing millions of unlawful immigrants.
A broad immigration bill, embracing what critics call amnesty, survived a series of unfriendly amendments Wednesday. Supporters pointed to the bill's tighter borders and workplace rules to keep it alive.
Both sides agreed the crucial vote occurs Thursday. Supporters must gain 60 votes in the 100-member chamber to limit debate and clear the way for a roll call on final passage, perhaps by Friday. Anything less will likely doom the legislation until a new president and Congress take office in 2009.
Bush's allies passed a similar test Tuesday, but several senators said they simply were agreeing to let debate continue for a couple of days, and they made no promises to support the legislation on Thursday or beyond.
The revived immigration measure could grant legalization to the estimated 12 million unlawful immigrants if they pass background checks and pay fines and fees. It also would toughen border security and institute a new system for weeding out illegal immigrants from workplaces.
It faces challenges from the left as well as the right.
Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., was among those disappointed Wednesday. The Senate voted 55-40 to reject his amendment that would have made it easier for some immigrants to obtain visas for family members left behind in their home countries.
"This action does nothing to allay my concerns about the increasingly right-wing tilt to these proceedings, and it makes it more difficult to vote in favor of invoking cloture on the bill," Menendez said, referring to Thursday's crucial vote to limit debate.
While Menendez and a few other Democrats may oppose the bill, the main opponents have been Bush's fellow sunbelt Republicans. GOP Sens. David Vitter of Louisiana, Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Jeff Sessions of Alabama led the charge, often backed by Texans Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn.
Late Wednesday, they applauded the Senate's refusal to reject a fairly low-key amendment that, because of parliamentary rules, left leaders no choice but to halt action until Thursday's showdown vote.
"They tried to railroad this through today, but we derailed the train," DeMint said. Asked if he was poised to kill the bill Thursday, DeMint replied, "we hope to."
The bill's bipartisan supporters, who include liberals such as Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and conservatives such as Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said they would push hard to survive Thursday's vote. But they were frustrated by the lack of enthusiasm shown by many in the president's party.
Some noted the virtual absence throughout Wednesday's floor debate of Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who has declined to say how he would vote on the measure.
McConnell left GOP colleagues including Arlen Specter, R-Pa., to contend with the Vitter-DeMint-Sessions group, while Democrats were represented in the chamber most of the day by Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20070628/D8Q1QHE00.html
Jun 28, 8:23 AM (ET)
Asociated Press
By CHARLES BAINGTON
WASHINGTON (AP) - Conservative Republican senators and a handful of Democrats are trying to put a final knife in President Bush's plan for legalizing millions of unlawful immigrants.
A broad immigration bill, embracing what critics call amnesty, survived a series of unfriendly amendments Wednesday. Supporters pointed to the bill's tighter borders and workplace rules to keep it alive.
Both sides agreed the crucial vote occurs Thursday. Supporters must gain 60 votes in the 100-member chamber to limit debate and clear the way for a roll call on final passage, perhaps by Friday. Anything less will likely doom the legislation until a new president and Congress take office in 2009.
Bush's allies passed a similar test Tuesday, but several senators said they simply were agreeing to let debate continue for a couple of days, and they made no promises to support the legislation on Thursday or beyond.
The revived immigration measure could grant legalization to the estimated 12 million unlawful immigrants if they pass background checks and pay fines and fees. It also would toughen border security and institute a new system for weeding out illegal immigrants from workplaces.
It faces challenges from the left as well as the right.
Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., was among those disappointed Wednesday. The Senate voted 55-40 to reject his amendment that would have made it easier for some immigrants to obtain visas for family members left behind in their home countries.
"This action does nothing to allay my concerns about the increasingly right-wing tilt to these proceedings, and it makes it more difficult to vote in favor of invoking cloture on the bill," Menendez said, referring to Thursday's crucial vote to limit debate.
While Menendez and a few other Democrats may oppose the bill, the main opponents have been Bush's fellow sunbelt Republicans. GOP Sens. David Vitter of Louisiana, Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Jeff Sessions of Alabama led the charge, often backed by Texans Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn.
Late Wednesday, they applauded the Senate's refusal to reject a fairly low-key amendment that, because of parliamentary rules, left leaders no choice but to halt action until Thursday's showdown vote.
"They tried to railroad this through today, but we derailed the train," DeMint said. Asked if he was poised to kill the bill Thursday, DeMint replied, "we hope to."
The bill's bipartisan supporters, who include liberals such as Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and conservatives such as Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said they would push hard to survive Thursday's vote. But they were frustrated by the lack of enthusiasm shown by many in the president's party.
Some noted the virtual absence throughout Wednesday's floor debate of Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who has declined to say how he would vote on the measure.
McConnell left GOP colleagues including Arlen Specter, R-Pa., to contend with the Vitter-DeMint-Sessions group, while Democrats were represented in the chamber most of the day by Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20070628/D8Q1QHE00.html
<font size="5"><center>Employers brace for crackdown on immigrants</font size><font size="4">
Restaurants and hotels worry they will lose workers</font size></center>
By DAN RICHMAN
P-I REPORTER
Restaurants, hotels and other low-wage Washington businesses could be hit hard by tough new immigration rules released Friday, union officials here said, echoing concerns from labor groups and employers across the country.
Among the most worrisome are new requirements on employers over whether a worker's name and Social Security number match federal records.
The new rules, which take effect in 30 days, say that, under some circumstances, employers will be required to fire employees with non-matching Social Security numbers or face legal sanctions.
Several employers declined this week to talk about the changes, perhaps fearing they would invite unwanted attention if they acknowledged hiring undocumented workers.
But unions providing those employers with workers -- many of them undocumented -- said the companies are alarmed.
"The companies I deal with in the janitorial industry are very concerned about this, because some of them get no-match letters. But you can't just by that expect to know whether a person is documented," said Sergio Salinas, president of Service Employees International Union Local 6.
"They are trying to comply, but they say it could happen they have undocumented workers, and they're worried they won't be able to continue their business normally."
SEIU Local 6 represents 3,700 cleaners and security guards at commercial buildings in King County and in Tacoma. Among them are a significant number of undocumented workers, Salinas said.
"Normally the cleaning industry is an entry-level job for immigrants," he said. "We don't know and we don't want to know if they're here illegally. That's for the employer to find out."
Under the rules issued by the Bush administration, employers who receive a so-called no-match letter must be able to show within 90 days why an employee's Social Security number does not match the government database. The reason could be a clerical error or a name change because of marriage. However, if legal status can't be confirmed, the employee must be fired.
Employers who don't comply could be fined up to $10,000 per worker or face criminal penalties.
"There has been ambiguity about how employers should respond" when a worker's name and number don't match the database, said Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Veronica Valdes in an interview Thursday. "We're going to eliminate that. We're not going to accept excuses."
Some employers are worried because names and Social Security numbers often don't match the Social Security Administration database owing to typos, clerical errors, misunderstandings or cultural differences in naming practices.
Under the new rules, employers effectively become surrogates for the government, charged with determining the validity of documents workers give them and facing penalties if they're wrong, the unions said. The unions also fear that employers will fire workers indiscriminately rather than risking federal sanctions.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said they were forced to beef up enforcement after Congress failed to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
"We're going as far as we possibly can without Congress acting," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.
Recognizing the crackdown could hurt some industries, particularly agriculture, Gutierrez said the Labor Department will try to make existing temporary worker programs easier to use and more efficient.
The American Farm Bureau Federation, an industry group representing 75 percent of U.S. farmers, estimates at least half the nation's 1 million farm workers lack valid Social Security numbers. Losing them would devastate the industry, particularly fruit and vegetable growers, which rely heavily on manual labor, farmers said.
Other new rules beef up security at the U.S. borders, strengthen efforts to keep out gang members, toughen requirements that temporary workers leave the country when their visas expire and standardize the naturalization test.
But attracting the most attention are the changes in how employers must respond to no-match letters.
United Here Local 8 in Seattle, a union of 5,000 Washington hotel and restaurant employees, attacked the rules. Research analyst Stefan Moritz called them "increased enforcement measures without any solution in terms of a path to citizenship."
He predicted that the rules "will definitely be a factor in the hospitality industry."
Employers of construction workers worry they're being pushed into serving as the government's proxy for determining a worker's citizenship, said Eric Franklin, a spokesman for the Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters, which represents about 8,500 carpenters in Western Washington.
"The documents workers give you often appear to be authentic," Franklin said. "If they later turn out not to be, how were employers supposed to know that? The devil is in the details, and there will be lawsuits for years to come if these rules go into effect."
The building trades are filled with undocumented workers, many of whom have moved from agriculture because the money is better, Franklin said.
Restaurants in Washington employ about 178,000 workers, some undocumented, "working and paying taxes -- but we're not giving them a pathway to citizenship," said Anthony Anton, chief executive of the Washington Restaurant Association.
Conservative groups lauded the move, saying it would be welcomed by those tired of watching illegal immigrants and their employers go unchallenged.
"We wish they had done this earlier, but even at this late stage, they have an opportunity to regain the confidence and support of the American public," said Dan Stein, president of Federation for American Immigration Reform.
Immigrant-rights organizations blasted the new rules as counterproductive.
"They would simply drive folks who are fired further underground, or the employers will pay them off the books," said Shankar Narayan, policy director for Seattle's Hate Free Zone, a rights organization serving the Pacific Northwest.
"We know the fired employees won't simply leave the country. They'll stick around to find even more marginal jobs."
About 2.5 million unauthorized workers arrived in the U.S. between 2000 and 2005, according to an April 2006 report from the Pew Hispanic Center.
"There's an economic reality that employers can't meet their labor needs given the unreasonable visa caps, so it's hardly surprising some employers are hiring undocumented folks," Narayan said.
"It's a system not satisfactory for either workers or employers."
RULES AT A GLANCE
The 26 rules announced by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement affect border security, guest-worker programs, the workplace and assimilation into U.S. culture. Among other things, they:
* Reduce the number of documents usable to prove citizenship.
* Raise fines 25 percent on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants and expand investigations into such employers.
* Mandate a revised naturalization test.
The new employment rules are at goto.seattlepi.com/r910.
This report includes information from The Associated Press and Cox News Service. P-I reporter Dan Richman can be reached at 206-448-8032 or danrichman@seattlepi.com.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/327216_labor11.html?source=mypi
Restaurants and hotels worry they will lose workers</font size></center>
By DAN RICHMAN
P-I REPORTER
Restaurants, hotels and other low-wage Washington businesses could be hit hard by tough new immigration rules released Friday, union officials here said, echoing concerns from labor groups and employers across the country.
Among the most worrisome are new requirements on employers over whether a worker's name and Social Security number match federal records.
The new rules, which take effect in 30 days, say that, under some circumstances, employers will be required to fire employees with non-matching Social Security numbers or face legal sanctions.
Several employers declined this week to talk about the changes, perhaps fearing they would invite unwanted attention if they acknowledged hiring undocumented workers.
But unions providing those employers with workers -- many of them undocumented -- said the companies are alarmed.
"The companies I deal with in the janitorial industry are very concerned about this, because some of them get no-match letters. But you can't just by that expect to know whether a person is documented," said Sergio Salinas, president of Service Employees International Union Local 6.
"They are trying to comply, but they say it could happen they have undocumented workers, and they're worried they won't be able to continue their business normally."
SEIU Local 6 represents 3,700 cleaners and security guards at commercial buildings in King County and in Tacoma. Among them are a significant number of undocumented workers, Salinas said.
"Normally the cleaning industry is an entry-level job for immigrants," he said. "We don't know and we don't want to know if they're here illegally. That's for the employer to find out."
Under the rules issued by the Bush administration, employers who receive a so-called no-match letter must be able to show within 90 days why an employee's Social Security number does not match the government database. The reason could be a clerical error or a name change because of marriage. However, if legal status can't be confirmed, the employee must be fired.
Employers who don't comply could be fined up to $10,000 per worker or face criminal penalties.
"There has been ambiguity about how employers should respond" when a worker's name and number don't match the database, said Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Veronica Valdes in an interview Thursday. "We're going to eliminate that. We're not going to accept excuses."
Some employers are worried because names and Social Security numbers often don't match the Social Security Administration database owing to typos, clerical errors, misunderstandings or cultural differences in naming practices.
Under the new rules, employers effectively become surrogates for the government, charged with determining the validity of documents workers give them and facing penalties if they're wrong, the unions said. The unions also fear that employers will fire workers indiscriminately rather than risking federal sanctions.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said they were forced to beef up enforcement after Congress failed to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill.
"We're going as far as we possibly can without Congress acting," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.
Recognizing the crackdown could hurt some industries, particularly agriculture, Gutierrez said the Labor Department will try to make existing temporary worker programs easier to use and more efficient.
The American Farm Bureau Federation, an industry group representing 75 percent of U.S. farmers, estimates at least half the nation's 1 million farm workers lack valid Social Security numbers. Losing them would devastate the industry, particularly fruit and vegetable growers, which rely heavily on manual labor, farmers said.
Other new rules beef up security at the U.S. borders, strengthen efforts to keep out gang members, toughen requirements that temporary workers leave the country when their visas expire and standardize the naturalization test.
But attracting the most attention are the changes in how employers must respond to no-match letters.
United Here Local 8 in Seattle, a union of 5,000 Washington hotel and restaurant employees, attacked the rules. Research analyst Stefan Moritz called them "increased enforcement measures without any solution in terms of a path to citizenship."
He predicted that the rules "will definitely be a factor in the hospitality industry."
Employers of construction workers worry they're being pushed into serving as the government's proxy for determining a worker's citizenship, said Eric Franklin, a spokesman for the Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters, which represents about 8,500 carpenters in Western Washington.
"The documents workers give you often appear to be authentic," Franklin said. "If they later turn out not to be, how were employers supposed to know that? The devil is in the details, and there will be lawsuits for years to come if these rules go into effect."
The building trades are filled with undocumented workers, many of whom have moved from agriculture because the money is better, Franklin said.
Restaurants in Washington employ about 178,000 workers, some undocumented, "working and paying taxes -- but we're not giving them a pathway to citizenship," said Anthony Anton, chief executive of the Washington Restaurant Association.
Conservative groups lauded the move, saying it would be welcomed by those tired of watching illegal immigrants and their employers go unchallenged.
"We wish they had done this earlier, but even at this late stage, they have an opportunity to regain the confidence and support of the American public," said Dan Stein, president of Federation for American Immigration Reform.
Immigrant-rights organizations blasted the new rules as counterproductive.
"They would simply drive folks who are fired further underground, or the employers will pay them off the books," said Shankar Narayan, policy director for Seattle's Hate Free Zone, a rights organization serving the Pacific Northwest.
"We know the fired employees won't simply leave the country. They'll stick around to find even more marginal jobs."
About 2.5 million unauthorized workers arrived in the U.S. between 2000 and 2005, according to an April 2006 report from the Pew Hispanic Center.
"There's an economic reality that employers can't meet their labor needs given the unreasonable visa caps, so it's hardly surprising some employers are hiring undocumented folks," Narayan said.
"It's a system not satisfactory for either workers or employers."
RULES AT A GLANCE
The 26 rules announced by the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement affect border security, guest-worker programs, the workplace and assimilation into U.S. culture. Among other things, they:
* Reduce the number of documents usable to prove citizenship.
* Raise fines 25 percent on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants and expand investigations into such employers.
* Mandate a revised naturalization test.
The new employment rules are at goto.seattlepi.com/r910.
This report includes information from The Associated Press and Cox News Service. P-I reporter Dan Richman can be reached at 206-448-8032 or danrichman@seattlepi.com.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/327216_labor11.html?source=mypi
Southpaw said:
Banking on illegal immigrants
Banks are seeing an untapped resource in providing home loans to undocumented U.S. residents
August 8, 2005: 3:39 PM EDT
By Shaheen Pasha, CNN/Money staff writer
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The banking industry is opening its doors to a controversial new market: illegal immigrants.
Despite heated political debate in Washington over illegal immigration in the United States, an increasing number of banks are seeing an untapped resource for growing their own revenue stream and contend that providing undocumented residents with mortgages will help revitalize local communities.
It's a win-win situation, they say.
But skeptics worry about the message these home loans send to illegal immigrants: break our laws and we'll reward you with a home.
"It's institutionalizing illegality," said Marti Dinerstein, president of Immigration Matters, a New York-based think tank. "Now there's no distinction being made between the people that follow all the rules and those who break our laws by entering the country or overstaying their visas."
Dinerstein also worried that lack of knowledge on the part of illegal immigrants could pave the way for abuse in the form of predatory lending.
But advocates of the practice say the benefits outweigh any potential downside.
According to the Center for Immigration Studies, one million illegal immigrants cross the U.S. borders every year. About 500,000 illegal immigrants lose that status every year either by getting legitimate green cards or returning to their native countries. That leaves a 500,000 annual net increase of illegal immigrants – a market that has unmet banking needs.
"This is a huge untapped market with people that live and work in this country and are capable of buying homes to realize the American dream," said Chan Peterson, executive vice president and head of community banking at Banco Popular, one of the earliest banks to enter this field.
He added that there's a common misperception that illegal immigrants will be more likely to default on their loans than a documented resident. But the company has found that there is no higher rate of default in this loan portfolio than any other market the company serves.
"There's a pride that comes with people moving from renting to owning and we've found that these borrowers are driven to hang on to their homes," Peterson said.
Bill Schumer, vice president of product development at Fifth Third Mortgage Co., a unit of Fifth Third Bancorp. (Research), said the company entered the marketplace due to the belief that providing these low-to-moderate income loans will help revitalize communities in the United States, as borrowers buy more run-down properties and rebuild.
He added that by introducing this segment of the population to home ownership education, they are also building a foundation to cross-sell their other products.
"We've been at this program for the last 8 or 9 months and 68 percent of these borrowers have established three or more banking services with us," he said.
While Schumer wasn't willing to disclose how many of mortgages the company provides, he said the product has been well received in the marketplace and is already 4 percent above the level the bank had targeted for the year. And it's growing.
That's not surprising, said Alenka Grealish, manager of the banking group at Celent, an independent research and consulting firm.
Grealish said while the mortgage banking business in the U.S. continues to be red hot, veterans know that it's a highly cyclical industry that moves with interest rate trends. She said that forward-looking banks are already considering how to grow their business when the pipeline of traditional mortgages begins to dry up.
"Illegal immigrants are here to stay and banks are recognizing that," she said. "If you do a niche market well and know how to price it, banks can have some attractive margins."
She added that while criticism is rampant, banks are careful to follow guidelines that the government already has in place.
Case in point: the government's issuance of individual taxpayer identification numbers, or ITINs.
ITINs are a nine-digit tax processing number issued by the Internal Revenue Service to individuals who are required to have a U.S. taxpayer identification number but who don't have, and aren't eligible to obtain, a social security number. Since the IRS doesn't require legal residency to obtain an ITIN, many illegal immigrants use this form of identification to pay U.S. taxes and buy homes.
"Illegal immigrants are a huge gray area and it becomes even more gray when you start issuing ITINs," Grealish said. "There's complicity already within the government in which they're saying that they're kind of fine with these people here as long as they pay their taxes."
The IRS for its part says that ITINs aren't valid for identification purposes outside of the tax system. But there are no explicit rules banning the use of ITINs in obtaining mortgages.
Banco Popular's Peterson added that it would be discriminatory to deny a loan based on an ITIN.
For now, community banks are leading the charge when it comes to providing home loans for illegal immigrants. Banking experts say that community banks often have the bilingual capabilities and are more in tune with local community needs and markets.
And larger banks are holding out for secondary markets such as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to agree to buy illegal immigrant mortgages from the banks – thus lowering their risk.
Bank of America (Research), which accepts ITINs to open interest-bearing deposit accounts, currently isn't offering a mortgage product to this market but the banking giant is looking into it, said spokeswoman Julie Davis.
"Banks are counting on the fact that we do a lousy job with interior enforcement," said Celent's Grealish. "Once you're in the country and you haven't done anything wrong, the chances of being deported are very slim. Banks are banking on that."
<font size="5">Building the border fence</font size>
A U.S. boundary marker is covered behind a new section of pedestrian barrier fencing near the
Santa Teresa Point of Entry on the U.S. and Mexico border near Sunland Park, N.M.
U.S. Border Patrol supervisory agent Rick McPherson looks along
a new section of pedestrian barrier fencing as work crews
continue new fence construction near Sunland Park, N.M.
Work crews continue construction of a new section of pedestrian
barrier fencing near the Santa Teresa Point of Entry.
Border Patrol agent Rick McPherson checks out the New Mexico fence.
Work crews continue construction.
U.S. Border Patrol supervisory agent Rick McPherson checks out
the new fence.
Adrian Hernandez builds his new shanty — part home, part auto repair shop — in Rancho Anapra,
Mexico. Hernandez, 52, lives on the wrong side of one of the largest and most expensive
projects in Homeland Security history.
Tom Pennington / Fort Worth Star-Telegram / MCT
"If it were easy I would already be on the other side working, but it's not easy," said Adrian
Hernandez, a Mexico City native who moved here three years ago hoping to plot his escape to
the U.S. "The fence is holding me back a lot. What can you do? I just have to wait until the right
moment."
Two young Mexicans play on a section of old pedestrian barrier fencing on the U.S. and Mexico
border near Rancho Anapra, Chihuahua Mexico. Area residents claim the water culvert that runs
under the border is a common crossing point for migrants entering the U.S. illegally.
A U.S. boundary marker is covered behind a new section of pedestrian barrier fencing near the
Santa Teresa Point of Entry on the U.S. and Mexico border near Sunland Park, N.M.
U.S. Border Patrol supervisory agent Rick McPherson looks along
a new section of pedestrian barrier fencing as work crews
continue new fence construction near Sunland Park, N.M.
Work crews continue construction of a new section of pedestrian
barrier fencing near the Santa Teresa Point of Entry.
Border Patrol agent Rick McPherson checks out the New Mexico fence.
Work crews continue construction.
U.S. Border Patrol supervisory agent Rick McPherson checks out
the new fence.
Adrian Hernandez builds his new shanty — part home, part auto repair shop — in Rancho Anapra,
Mexico. Hernandez, 52, lives on the wrong side of one of the largest and most expensive
projects in Homeland Security history.
Tom Pennington / Fort Worth Star-Telegram / MCT
"If it were easy I would already be on the other side working, but it's not easy," said Adrian
Hernandez, a Mexico City native who moved here three years ago hoping to plot his escape to
the U.S. "The fence is holding me back a lot. What can you do? I just have to wait until the right
moment."
Two young Mexicans play on a section of old pedestrian barrier fencing on the U.S. and Mexico
border near Rancho Anapra, Chihuahua Mexico. Area residents claim the water culvert that runs
under the border is a common crossing point for migrants entering the U.S. illegally.
<font size="5"><center>
As border fence goes up,
illegal traffic slows down</font size></center>
A young woman climbs the fence to get a better look at
U.S. Border Patrol agents working the other side. Tom
Pennington / Fort Worth Star-Telegram / MCT
By Jay Root | McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Sunday, May 18, 2008
RANCHO ANAPRA, Mexico — When mechanic Adrian Hernandez finishes building his new shanty — part home, part auto repair shop — nobody in tiny Rancho Anapra will live closer to the United States. Nor, in his mind, any farther away.
The giant border fence going up 30 yards to the north of him has made it harder than ever to use this once-busy smuggling corridor to reach the United States, residents and law enforcement officials say.
"If it were easy I would already be on the other side working, but it's not easy,'' said Hernandez, a Mexico City native who moved here three years ago hoping to plot his escape to the United States. "The fence is holding me back a lot. What can you do? I just have to wait until the right moment.''
Hernandez, 52, is an example of the impact of one of the largest and most expensive projects undertaken in the short history of the Department of Homeland Security, which took over border security responsibilities when it was created in 2002.
Last week, as Hernandez was piecing together his shack with recycled wood crates and discarded wire, forklifts manned by hard-hat wearing contractors were lifting giant sections of steel mesh into place along a stretch of border in Sunland Park, N.M.
Tetra Tech Inc., a California-based company that helped build the border wall near San Diego, is close to completing this $12 million, 3.4-mile section near the international Santa Teresa Point of Entry, federal officials said. It's part of a $460 million contract awarded to Tetra Tech and others last year to erect a border fence for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The project includes a total of 53 miles of fencing designed to impede foot and vehicle traffic in the Border Patrol's El Paso sector, which includes all of New Mexico and the two westernmost counties of Texas.
Homeland Security is furiously working to complete construction of a planned 670 miles of fence along the southern border before the Bush administration ends in eight months. Critics, particularly in Texas, are working just as hard to derail the project, citing environmental concerns, private property seizure and a hefty price tag.
A group of Texas border-area mayors filed a lawsuit in Washington on Friday aimed at stopping construction. The suit by the Texas Border Coalition alleges that Homeland Security violated landowners' rights and didn't adhere to provisions requiring consultation with local communities and governmental entities.
According to a 2007 study by the Congressional Research Service, the fence could cost as much as $70 million a mile to build and maintain over the next 25 years. At 670 miles, that would run as high as $47 billion, which doesn't include the cost to acquire land.
The fence near Rancho Anapra replaces an old fence that Border Patrol agents readily acknowledge did little to deter migrants and dope smugglers. The new one rises 15 feet to 18 feet out of the Chihuahuan desert, reinforced by steel bollards and six feet of reinforced concrete beneath.
As recent as a year ago, residents here say their dusty Mexican village — a poor neighborhood on the outskirts of Ciudad Juarez — was a popular staging ground for migrants and dope smugglers. But the fence project and a corresponding spike in the law enforcement presence across the border have slowed the illegal traffic considerably.
It hasn't stopped crossings altogether, though.
A convenient hole in the border barrier lies about 50 yards, across a muddy, trash-strewn road, from the home of Maria de los Angeles Mendoza. Even with the increased vigilance, some slip through it, she said.
"They hide down in the grass, and they go under here, smugglers included,'' she said, pointing to the rectangular opening of a concrete storm drain that empties out onto the U.S. side. Those who don't get caught hop a freight train out or catch a ride to nearby El Paso, she said.
Joe Romero, a Border Patrol agent in El Paso, said no system is foolproof. But he said the fence will help agents gain a valuable advantage as they pursue immigrants trying to gain illegal entry into the United States — or suspected criminals fleeing back into Mexico.
"Five seconds can mean the difference between apprehending somebody or having them get away,'' Romero said. "This area used to be notorious for a lot of human as well as narcotic smuggling, and we've seen quite a dramatic decline.''
Federal authorities report the largest sustained drop in apprehensions along the southern border in years_ down 18 percent in the first quarter of 2008, following declines in the two previous fiscal years.
Though it's impossible to tell from the apprehension data how many people are actually getting through, officials say increased enforcement at job sites, an economic downturn and a huge increase in agents stationed along the border are driving down the illegal traffic.
Critics of the border wall, however, use the same figures to dispute the notion that barriers are needed. Only 370 of the 670 miles have been built. If apprehensions are dropping without a complete fence, why build they rest, they ask.
"It sounds good, but I think a fence just gives a false sense of security,'' said Eagle Pass Mayor Chad Foster, a lead critic of the project as head of the Texas Border Coalition, the group that sued the government Friday. "All we're doing is securing against maids and groundskeepers."
(Root reports for The Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Dave Montgomery contributed.)
McClatchy Newspapers 2008
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/37424.html
As border fence goes up,
illegal traffic slows down</font size></center>
A young woman climbs the fence to get a better look at
U.S. Border Patrol agents working the other side. Tom
Pennington / Fort Worth Star-Telegram / MCT
By Jay Root | McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Sunday, May 18, 2008
RANCHO ANAPRA, Mexico — When mechanic Adrian Hernandez finishes building his new shanty — part home, part auto repair shop — nobody in tiny Rancho Anapra will live closer to the United States. Nor, in his mind, any farther away.
The giant border fence going up 30 yards to the north of him has made it harder than ever to use this once-busy smuggling corridor to reach the United States, residents and law enforcement officials say.
"If it were easy I would already be on the other side working, but it's not easy,'' said Hernandez, a Mexico City native who moved here three years ago hoping to plot his escape to the United States. "The fence is holding me back a lot. What can you do? I just have to wait until the right moment.''
Hernandez, 52, is an example of the impact of one of the largest and most expensive projects undertaken in the short history of the Department of Homeland Security, which took over border security responsibilities when it was created in 2002.
Last week, as Hernandez was piecing together his shack with recycled wood crates and discarded wire, forklifts manned by hard-hat wearing contractors were lifting giant sections of steel mesh into place along a stretch of border in Sunland Park, N.M.
Tetra Tech Inc., a California-based company that helped build the border wall near San Diego, is close to completing this $12 million, 3.4-mile section near the international Santa Teresa Point of Entry, federal officials said. It's part of a $460 million contract awarded to Tetra Tech and others last year to erect a border fence for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The project includes a total of 53 miles of fencing designed to impede foot and vehicle traffic in the Border Patrol's El Paso sector, which includes all of New Mexico and the two westernmost counties of Texas.
Homeland Security is furiously working to complete construction of a planned 670 miles of fence along the southern border before the Bush administration ends in eight months. Critics, particularly in Texas, are working just as hard to derail the project, citing environmental concerns, private property seizure and a hefty price tag.
A group of Texas border-area mayors filed a lawsuit in Washington on Friday aimed at stopping construction. The suit by the Texas Border Coalition alleges that Homeland Security violated landowners' rights and didn't adhere to provisions requiring consultation with local communities and governmental entities.
According to a 2007 study by the Congressional Research Service, the fence could cost as much as $70 million a mile to build and maintain over the next 25 years. At 670 miles, that would run as high as $47 billion, which doesn't include the cost to acquire land.
The fence near Rancho Anapra replaces an old fence that Border Patrol agents readily acknowledge did little to deter migrants and dope smugglers. The new one rises 15 feet to 18 feet out of the Chihuahuan desert, reinforced by steel bollards and six feet of reinforced concrete beneath.
As recent as a year ago, residents here say their dusty Mexican village — a poor neighborhood on the outskirts of Ciudad Juarez — was a popular staging ground for migrants and dope smugglers. But the fence project and a corresponding spike in the law enforcement presence across the border have slowed the illegal traffic considerably.
It hasn't stopped crossings altogether, though.
A convenient hole in the border barrier lies about 50 yards, across a muddy, trash-strewn road, from the home of Maria de los Angeles Mendoza. Even with the increased vigilance, some slip through it, she said.
"They hide down in the grass, and they go under here, smugglers included,'' she said, pointing to the rectangular opening of a concrete storm drain that empties out onto the U.S. side. Those who don't get caught hop a freight train out or catch a ride to nearby El Paso, she said.
Joe Romero, a Border Patrol agent in El Paso, said no system is foolproof. But he said the fence will help agents gain a valuable advantage as they pursue immigrants trying to gain illegal entry into the United States — or suspected criminals fleeing back into Mexico.
"Five seconds can mean the difference between apprehending somebody or having them get away,'' Romero said. "This area used to be notorious for a lot of human as well as narcotic smuggling, and we've seen quite a dramatic decline.''
Federal authorities report the largest sustained drop in apprehensions along the southern border in years_ down 18 percent in the first quarter of 2008, following declines in the two previous fiscal years.
Though it's impossible to tell from the apprehension data how many people are actually getting through, officials say increased enforcement at job sites, an economic downturn and a huge increase in agents stationed along the border are driving down the illegal traffic.
Critics of the border wall, however, use the same figures to dispute the notion that barriers are needed. Only 370 of the 670 miles have been built. If apprehensions are dropping without a complete fence, why build they rest, they ask.
"It sounds good, but I think a fence just gives a false sense of security,'' said Eagle Pass Mayor Chad Foster, a lead critic of the project as head of the Texas Border Coalition, the group that sued the government Friday. "All we're doing is securing against maids and groundskeepers."
(Root reports for The Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Dave Montgomery contributed.)
McClatchy Newspapers 2008
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/37424.html
<font size="5"><center>
Immigration fence seen as dead end for wildlife</font size><font size="4">
Activists fear big cats, tortoises will be cut off from water at Rio Grande</font size></center>
An ocelot display at the Santa Ana Wildlife Refuge visitor center
near Alamo, Texas, shows what kind of wildlife lives along the
border.
updated 7:35 p.m. CT, Mon., May. 21, 2007
ALAMO, Texas - Nancy Brown drives the government truck slowly past mossy ponds, thick shrouds of beard-like Spanish moss and majestic ebony trees, gleefully identifying the song of the kiskadee and the gurgling call of the chachalaca.
As the truck rounds a bend near the greenish-brown Rio Grande, a bobcat scampers ahead, disappearing into the lush subtropical foliage. Lizards dart about. A tortoise lazes in the sun. Somewhere in the forest, well-camouflaged by evolution, are ocelots and jaguarundi, both of them endangered species of cats.
These are some of the natural wonders in the Rio Grande Valley that Brown and other wildlife enthusiasts fear could be spoiled by the fences and adjacent roads the U.S. government plans to erect along the Mexican border to keep out illegal immigrants and smugglers.
Environmentalists have spent decades acquiring and preserving 90,000 riverfront acres of Texas scrub and forest and protecting the area's wildlife. Now they fear the hundreds of miles of border fences will undo their work and kill some land animals by cutting them off from the Rio Grande, the only source of fresh water.
A fence could also prevent the ocelots and other animals from swimming across the water to mate with partners on the other side.
Tourists bring $150 million a year
"If you have a fence that runs several miles long, if you are a tortoise or any animal that can't fly over or go through it, then you have a pretty long distance that you have to go to get water," said Brown, an outreach manager at the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge, 225 miles south of San Antonio. Also, "any destruction of any brush is very damaging."
In addition, some worry that the barrier — described in some plans as triple-layer metal fencing — will damage the tourism industry along the Rio Grande.
The wild cats, reptiles and at least 500 species of birds attract visitors from around the world who bring the impoverished region $150 million a year. Depending on how far inland the fence is built, it could create a no man's land north of the river, hurting tourism.
While the Department of Homeland Security said it has not made any final decisions on where the fence will go, meetings this week with the Border Patrol have wildlife officials convinced that some of the 70 miles planned for the Rio Grande Valley will be erected on the string of wildlife refuges along the border.
Power to waive regulations
Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke said environmental concerns will be taken into account in the final decisions. But Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has used his authority to waive environmental regulations for security reasons in other states, and Knocke said he would do so in the Rio Grande Valley if necessary.
"We do have to be mindful of the fact that we are remedying a problem that has been more than two decades in the making," he said.
The refuges show signs of immigrant activity — food wrappers and water jugs, discarded wet clothing, the plastic bags used to carry a change of clothing across the river. Similar evidence is found up and down the river, despite the presence of Border Patrol agents and the sensors and cameras that make up the current "virtual" fence.
The fence idea "is wholly incongruous with a 30-plus-year investment by the federal government, the citizens and the landowners of the Rio Grande Valley who have worked hard to protect their special land and waters," said Carter Smith of the Nature Conservancy. The organization said the government should instead use more border agents, sensors and cameras.
President Bush called for about 700 miles of fence along the U.S.-Mexico border, and Homeland Security is committed to completing 370 miles by the end of 2008. Congress has budgeted $1.2 million for the fences.
11 ecosystems
Close to $100 million has been spent creating, restoring and maintaining the refuges, wildlife officials said.
"The bottom line is the wildlife corridor took us many years to put together," said Karen Chapman of Environmental Defense. "It represents work, hard work, by a number of federal, state and local agencies and citizens of the Valley. And when we were working to put that wildlife corridor together, nobody was doing it with the thought that someday it was going to be stuck behind a wall."
The four-county Rio Grande Valley contains 11 distinct ecosystems, Brown said.
"From a biological standpoint this area is really, really impressive," she said. "You have a coastal climate meeting a desert climate meeting the temperate and the tropical."
© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/05/bush_accuses_ob_1.html
Immigration fence seen as dead end for wildlife</font size><font size="4">
Activists fear big cats, tortoises will be cut off from water at Rio Grande</font size></center>
An ocelot display at the Santa Ana Wildlife Refuge visitor center
near Alamo, Texas, shows what kind of wildlife lives along the
border.
updated 7:35 p.m. CT, Mon., May. 21, 2007
ALAMO, Texas - Nancy Brown drives the government truck slowly past mossy ponds, thick shrouds of beard-like Spanish moss and majestic ebony trees, gleefully identifying the song of the kiskadee and the gurgling call of the chachalaca.
As the truck rounds a bend near the greenish-brown Rio Grande, a bobcat scampers ahead, disappearing into the lush subtropical foliage. Lizards dart about. A tortoise lazes in the sun. Somewhere in the forest, well-camouflaged by evolution, are ocelots and jaguarundi, both of them endangered species of cats.
These are some of the natural wonders in the Rio Grande Valley that Brown and other wildlife enthusiasts fear could be spoiled by the fences and adjacent roads the U.S. government plans to erect along the Mexican border to keep out illegal immigrants and smugglers.
Environmentalists have spent decades acquiring and preserving 90,000 riverfront acres of Texas scrub and forest and protecting the area's wildlife. Now they fear the hundreds of miles of border fences will undo their work and kill some land animals by cutting them off from the Rio Grande, the only source of fresh water.
A fence could also prevent the ocelots and other animals from swimming across the water to mate with partners on the other side.
Tourists bring $150 million a year
"If you have a fence that runs several miles long, if you are a tortoise or any animal that can't fly over or go through it, then you have a pretty long distance that you have to go to get water," said Brown, an outreach manager at the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge, 225 miles south of San Antonio. Also, "any destruction of any brush is very damaging."
In addition, some worry that the barrier — described in some plans as triple-layer metal fencing — will damage the tourism industry along the Rio Grande.
The wild cats, reptiles and at least 500 species of birds attract visitors from around the world who bring the impoverished region $150 million a year. Depending on how far inland the fence is built, it could create a no man's land north of the river, hurting tourism.
While the Department of Homeland Security said it has not made any final decisions on where the fence will go, meetings this week with the Border Patrol have wildlife officials convinced that some of the 70 miles planned for the Rio Grande Valley will be erected on the string of wildlife refuges along the border.
Power to waive regulations
Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke said environmental concerns will be taken into account in the final decisions. But Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has used his authority to waive environmental regulations for security reasons in other states, and Knocke said he would do so in the Rio Grande Valley if necessary.
"We do have to be mindful of the fact that we are remedying a problem that has been more than two decades in the making," he said.
The refuges show signs of immigrant activity — food wrappers and water jugs, discarded wet clothing, the plastic bags used to carry a change of clothing across the river. Similar evidence is found up and down the river, despite the presence of Border Patrol agents and the sensors and cameras that make up the current "virtual" fence.
The fence idea "is wholly incongruous with a 30-plus-year investment by the federal government, the citizens and the landowners of the Rio Grande Valley who have worked hard to protect their special land and waters," said Carter Smith of the Nature Conservancy. The organization said the government should instead use more border agents, sensors and cameras.
President Bush called for about 700 miles of fence along the U.S.-Mexico border, and Homeland Security is committed to completing 370 miles by the end of 2008. Congress has budgeted $1.2 million for the fences.
11 ecosystems
Close to $100 million has been spent creating, restoring and maintaining the refuges, wildlife officials said.
"The bottom line is the wildlife corridor took us many years to put together," said Karen Chapman of Environmental Defense. "It represents work, hard work, by a number of federal, state and local agencies and citizens of the Valley. And when we were working to put that wildlife corridor together, nobody was doing it with the thought that someday it was going to be stuck behind a wall."
The four-county Rio Grande Valley contains 11 distinct ecosystems, Brown said.
"From a biological standpoint this area is really, really impressive," she said. "You have a coastal climate meeting a desert climate meeting the temperate and the tropical."
© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/05/bush_accuses_ob_1.html
<font size="5"><Center>
Immigrant tide may be turning</font size><font size="4">
Illegal aliens seem fewer as jobs dry up, law cracks down</font size></center>
The News & Observer
Kristin Collins and Lorenzo Perez,
Staff Writers Comment on this story
November 23, 2008
North Carolina's decade-long influx of illegal immigrants may be waning as the economy falters and law officers crack down.
Fewer migrants are crossing the nation's southern border, U.S. and Mexican officials say. And some of those who had made homes in North Carolina are returning to their home countries -- pushed by unemployment, the loss of driver's licenses or the deportation of family members.
"There is no work here," said Jose Ramirez, 40, who visited the Mexican consulate in Raleigh this week to make sure his passport was in order. He said he hasn't found a job in two months and, after four years working in construction and restaurants, most recently in Wilmington, he was planning to return to his home in Veracruz. "When I was working in restaurants, I was sometimes able to send home $800 a month," he said. "But there is no work left."
For North Carolina, there are not yet enough data to show whether the immigrant population is shrinking. Census figures that could shed more light are not yet available.
But local and national indicators strongly suggest that the rate of growth of illegal immigrants has at least slowed considerably.
In a study released this fall, the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington estimated the U.S. illegal immigrant population at 11.9 million in March 2008, down from 12.4 million in 2007. The study's authors cautioned that the dip was within the margin of error, but they said there is evidence of a sharp slowing in population growth.
Another Washington research group, the Center for Immigration Studies, found a similar decline.
The Mexican government said last week that the number of its citizens who left to live abroad this year was down more than 40 percent since 2006. The U.S. Border Patrol said it caught 18 percent fewer immigrants trying to cross the border in the fiscal year that ended in September. And money sent home by Mexicans living in the United States has dropped significantly in the past few months, Mexican officials say.
In North Carolina, sheriff's departments have helped deport more than 3,000 illegal immigrants this year. The Mexican consulate in Raleigh has seen a surge in Mexican citizens applying for passports and seeking to secure dual citizenship for U.S.-born children -- both steps that would ease a return to Mexico.
The N.C. Department of Public Instruction released figures Friday showing that the number of Hispanic students grew by less than 9,000 this year in North Carolina. For each of the past four years, Hispanic enrollment had grown by more than 13,000.
Jobs hard to find
Freddy Garcia of Raleigh recently saw his brother-in-law deported to Mexico after he was pulled over for speeding. And last week, Garcia said, the man's wife and children reluctantly followed, selling all their possessions and giving up their hopes of buying a home in North Carolina.
Garcia, 28, is supporting his wife and three young children by working two jobs, one on an asbestos removal crew and another in a restaurant. But he said he is worried about the future and is also planning a return to Mexico.
"The situation here has gotten difficult, and the jobs are harder to come by," he said. "Things are getting ugly."
Garcia said he will send his wife and children, two of whom are U.S.-born, back to Mexico within the next six months. He will follow soon after.
Miguel Munoz, a Durham lawyer, said several Hispanic clients who have lived in North Carolina for years told him they plan to go home for Christmas and won't be coming back.
He said some of his clients no longer have driver's licenses -- a change in state law makes it impossible for illegal immigrants to renew them -- and they are afraid of law enforcement programs that allow officers to check immigration status.
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/1306223.html
Immigrant tide may be turning</font size><font size="4">
Illegal aliens seem fewer as jobs dry up, law cracks down</font size></center>
The News & Observer
Kristin Collins and Lorenzo Perez,
Staff Writers Comment on this story
November 23, 2008
North Carolina's decade-long influx of illegal immigrants may be waning as the economy falters and law officers crack down.
Fewer migrants are crossing the nation's southern border, U.S. and Mexican officials say. And some of those who had made homes in North Carolina are returning to their home countries -- pushed by unemployment, the loss of driver's licenses or the deportation of family members.
"There is no work here," said Jose Ramirez, 40, who visited the Mexican consulate in Raleigh this week to make sure his passport was in order. He said he hasn't found a job in two months and, after four years working in construction and restaurants, most recently in Wilmington, he was planning to return to his home in Veracruz. "When I was working in restaurants, I was sometimes able to send home $800 a month," he said. "But there is no work left."
For North Carolina, there are not yet enough data to show whether the immigrant population is shrinking. Census figures that could shed more light are not yet available.
But local and national indicators strongly suggest that the rate of growth of illegal immigrants has at least slowed considerably.
In a study released this fall, the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington estimated the U.S. illegal immigrant population at 11.9 million in March 2008, down from 12.4 million in 2007. The study's authors cautioned that the dip was within the margin of error, but they said there is evidence of a sharp slowing in population growth.
Another Washington research group, the Center for Immigration Studies, found a similar decline.
The Mexican government said last week that the number of its citizens who left to live abroad this year was down more than 40 percent since 2006. The U.S. Border Patrol said it caught 18 percent fewer immigrants trying to cross the border in the fiscal year that ended in September. And money sent home by Mexicans living in the United States has dropped significantly in the past few months, Mexican officials say.
In North Carolina, sheriff's departments have helped deport more than 3,000 illegal immigrants this year. The Mexican consulate in Raleigh has seen a surge in Mexican citizens applying for passports and seeking to secure dual citizenship for U.S.-born children -- both steps that would ease a return to Mexico.
The N.C. Department of Public Instruction released figures Friday showing that the number of Hispanic students grew by less than 9,000 this year in North Carolina. For each of the past four years, Hispanic enrollment had grown by more than 13,000.
Jobs hard to find
Freddy Garcia of Raleigh recently saw his brother-in-law deported to Mexico after he was pulled over for speeding. And last week, Garcia said, the man's wife and children reluctantly followed, selling all their possessions and giving up their hopes of buying a home in North Carolina.
Garcia, 28, is supporting his wife and three young children by working two jobs, one on an asbestos removal crew and another in a restaurant. But he said he is worried about the future and is also planning a return to Mexico.
"The situation here has gotten difficult, and the jobs are harder to come by," he said. "Things are getting ugly."
Garcia said he will send his wife and children, two of whom are U.S.-born, back to Mexico within the next six months. He will follow soon after.
Miguel Munoz, a Durham lawyer, said several Hispanic clients who have lived in North Carolina for years told him they plan to go home for Christmas and won't be coming back.
He said some of his clients no longer have driver's licenses -- a change in state law makes it impossible for illegal immigrants to renew them -- and they are afraid of law enforcement programs that allow officers to check immigration status.
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/1306223.html
Obama take notes: Israel to build 2 fences on porous Egyptian border
Ive been saying for many months now that considering the fact that, unlike Obama's Black supporters, the Latino community have presented their agenda to Obama and plan to demand what theyve asked for; when Obama and his crew starts the process of immigration reform, he'll try to legalize millions of those law breaking Boarder jumpers instead of sending there law breaking asses back to where they belong.
If you look throughout history...damn near every form of immigration has negatively effected Black folks that already reside in America. I Do a lot of business in Chicago & I see those negative effects in on a daily basis.
Chicago was considered a safe haven for illegals from Mexico, Europe, etc., but mainly Mexicans, by Mayor Harold Washington many years ago. But sadly...after he helped their law breaking asses out....and they gained political clout....they then turned their backs on the colored friend.
I know hustling people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, i.e. people that prospered off making Black folks feel like neva ending victims, believe in that Black and Brown coalition BS; but considering the status quo of the world that we live in...that aint gone eva happen!
...well not in our lifetime.
Therefore....i present this article with the hopes that Obama wil see it and take notes.
JERUSALEM – Israel's prime minister has ordered the construction of two massive fences along the long and porous southern border with Egypt, saying he wants to stem a growing flood of African asylum seekers and to prevent Islamic militants from entering the country.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the structure would help preserve Israel's Jewish majority, while providing a layer of protection along an open border with an area suspected of having an al-Qaida presence.
(i.e. theres to many colored nig-gers coming into a stolen land thats occupied by fake Jews)
"I decided to close Israel's southern border to infiltrators and terrorists after prolonged discussions," he said in a statement. "This is a strategic decision to ensure the Jewish and democratic character of the state of Israel. Israel will remain open to war refugees but we cannot allow thousands of illegal workers to infiltrate into Israel via the southern border and flood our country," he said.
The two fences will cover nearly half of the 150-mile (250-kilometer) border. One section will be near the Red Sea port of Eilat. The other will be in southwest Israel, near the Gaza Strip town of Rafah.
Government spokesman Mark Regev said government ministers approved the plan Sunday evening. He said a date hasn't been set for construction and it is unclear how long it would take to complete the fences.
The project is expected to cost about $400 million, according to local media reports.
The structure would come in addition to a massive fence surrounding the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, as well as a separation barrier that snakes along parts of Israel's more than 400-mile (680-kilometer) frontier with the West Bank, biting into chunks of the territory as it runs. Egypt has its own fence along Gaza's southern border, and is reinforcing the area with underground metal plates to shut down tunnels used to smuggle goods and weapons into Gaza.
The planned Egypt fence, like the West Bank and Gaza barriers, is rooted largely in security concerns, along with efforts to keep illegal migrants out, Israel says.
The military began planning the fence in 2005 after Israel pulled out of the Gaza Strip, fearing that militants would freely travel to Egypt and sneak into Israel. These concerns were underscored in early 2007, when a Gaza suicide bomber sneaked into Eilat through Egypt.
But the massive influx of African migrants into Israel in recent years has given the project added momentum. U.N. officials and human rights workers estimate some 17,000 to 19,000 people have poured into Israel through the southern border since 2005, most of them from Eritrea, Sudan and other war-torn African countries, searching for a better life in Israel's relatively affluent Western-style society.
Most of them live in crowded slums in Tel Aviv or Eilat, where many work as dishwashers and hotel bellboys.
The new arrivals have created a dilemma for authorities. On one hand, they strain Israel's social service system, and officials fear they could upset the country's demographic mix, possibly tilting it away from a Jewish majority. About three-quarters of Israel's 7 million citizens are Jewish.
On the other hand, Israel is a country created in large part as a refuge for Jews fleeing persecution, and many feel they cannot turn their backs on the Africans, believing the government must be more sensitive to their needs.
Advocacy groups also note that the asylum seekers are far outnumbered by foreign workers who have flown into the country legally and overstayed their visas.
Israel's policy toward the asylum seekers has been muddled, with frequent changes in rules and procedures.
At present, Africans who cross into Israel through Egypt are detained for several months in a nearby prison while their applications are processed.
Most are eventually given one-month visas to stay in Israel that they must renew every month, said Yonatan Berman of the Hotline for Migrant Workers, an advocacy group that helps the asylum seekers. They are not allowed to work, but the government turns a blind eye.
Israel requested Egypt tighten its border patrols. Amnesty International says Egyptian security forces have killed 39 people, mostly Sudanese and Eritreans, trying to cross into Israel between 2008 to mid-2009. More updated figures were not immediately available. Both countries have been criticized by human rights groups for their approach to the problem.
In Cairo, Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, said his government had no objections to the fence, as long as it is on Israeli territory. "This is a matter which concerns Israel. This is something which Israel is building inside its territories, so let it be," he told reporters.
Security and crime concerns have also prompted Israel to erect the fences. Israeli officials frequently issue warnings urging citizens to avoid travel to the neighboring Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. The area is believed to be a stronghold for al-Qaida-inspired extremists who have aligned themselves with lawless Bedouin tribes in the area. In 2004, a total of 32 people were killed in a pair of hotel bombings in the Sinai.
Smugglers use the porous area to traffic women into Israel's prostitution trade, and it's also a main conduit for drugs entering the country.
But its many walls illustrate Israel's sense of isolation in a largely hostile region. The West Bank barrier in particular has sparked international criticism because it frequently juts into the West Bank, drawing accusations that Israel is using it to gobble up land claimed by the Palestinians.
There are also fences separating Israel from hostile Lebanon and parts of the Golan Heights, which Israel annexed after seizing the Syrian territory in the 1967 Mideast war.
"Defense against terror activity clearly requires a fence," Defense Minister Ehud Barak told Army Radio Monday. "Good fences make good neighbors," Barak said, noting only Israel's western border — the sea — did not need to be blocked off. "Along the sea we don't need a fence," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100111/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_egypt_fence
Ive been saying for many months now that considering the fact that, unlike Obama's Black supporters, the Latino community have presented their agenda to Obama and plan to demand what theyve asked for; when Obama and his crew starts the process of immigration reform, he'll try to legalize millions of those law breaking Boarder jumpers instead of sending there law breaking asses back to where they belong.
If you look throughout history...damn near every form of immigration has negatively effected Black folks that already reside in America. I Do a lot of business in Chicago & I see those negative effects in on a daily basis.
Chicago was considered a safe haven for illegals from Mexico, Europe, etc., but mainly Mexicans, by Mayor Harold Washington many years ago. But sadly...after he helped their law breaking asses out....and they gained political clout....they then turned their backs on the colored friend.
I know hustling people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, i.e. people that prospered off making Black folks feel like neva ending victims, believe in that Black and Brown coalition BS; but considering the status quo of the world that we live in...that aint gone eva happen!
...well not in our lifetime.
Therefore....i present this article with the hopes that Obama wil see it and take notes.
Israel to build 2 fences on porous Egyptian border
JERUSALEM – Israel's prime minister has ordered the construction of two massive fences along the long and porous southern border with Egypt, saying he wants to stem a growing flood of African asylum seekers and to prevent Islamic militants from entering the country.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the structure would help preserve Israel's Jewish majority, while providing a layer of protection along an open border with an area suspected of having an al-Qaida presence.
(i.e. theres to many colored nig-gers coming into a stolen land thats occupied by fake Jews)
"I decided to close Israel's southern border to infiltrators and terrorists after prolonged discussions," he said in a statement. "This is a strategic decision to ensure the Jewish and democratic character of the state of Israel. Israel will remain open to war refugees but we cannot allow thousands of illegal workers to infiltrate into Israel via the southern border and flood our country," he said.
The two fences will cover nearly half of the 150-mile (250-kilometer) border. One section will be near the Red Sea port of Eilat. The other will be in southwest Israel, near the Gaza Strip town of Rafah.
Government spokesman Mark Regev said government ministers approved the plan Sunday evening. He said a date hasn't been set for construction and it is unclear how long it would take to complete the fences.
The project is expected to cost about $400 million, according to local media reports.
The structure would come in addition to a massive fence surrounding the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, as well as a separation barrier that snakes along parts of Israel's more than 400-mile (680-kilometer) frontier with the West Bank, biting into chunks of the territory as it runs. Egypt has its own fence along Gaza's southern border, and is reinforcing the area with underground metal plates to shut down tunnels used to smuggle goods and weapons into Gaza.
The planned Egypt fence, like the West Bank and Gaza barriers, is rooted largely in security concerns, along with efforts to keep illegal migrants out, Israel says.
The military began planning the fence in 2005 after Israel pulled out of the Gaza Strip, fearing that militants would freely travel to Egypt and sneak into Israel. These concerns were underscored in early 2007, when a Gaza suicide bomber sneaked into Eilat through Egypt.
But the massive influx of African migrants into Israel in recent years has given the project added momentum. U.N. officials and human rights workers estimate some 17,000 to 19,000 people have poured into Israel through the southern border since 2005, most of them from Eritrea, Sudan and other war-torn African countries, searching for a better life in Israel's relatively affluent Western-style society.
Most of them live in crowded slums in Tel Aviv or Eilat, where many work as dishwashers and hotel bellboys.
The new arrivals have created a dilemma for authorities. On one hand, they strain Israel's social service system, and officials fear they could upset the country's demographic mix, possibly tilting it away from a Jewish majority. About three-quarters of Israel's 7 million citizens are Jewish.
On the other hand, Israel is a country created in large part as a refuge for Jews fleeing persecution, and many feel they cannot turn their backs on the Africans, believing the government must be more sensitive to their needs.
Advocacy groups also note that the asylum seekers are far outnumbered by foreign workers who have flown into the country legally and overstayed their visas.
Israel's policy toward the asylum seekers has been muddled, with frequent changes in rules and procedures.
At present, Africans who cross into Israel through Egypt are detained for several months in a nearby prison while their applications are processed.
Most are eventually given one-month visas to stay in Israel that they must renew every month, said Yonatan Berman of the Hotline for Migrant Workers, an advocacy group that helps the asylum seekers. They are not allowed to work, but the government turns a blind eye.
Israel requested Egypt tighten its border patrols. Amnesty International says Egyptian security forces have killed 39 people, mostly Sudanese and Eritreans, trying to cross into Israel between 2008 to mid-2009. More updated figures were not immediately available. Both countries have been criticized by human rights groups for their approach to the problem.
In Cairo, Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, said his government had no objections to the fence, as long as it is on Israeli territory. "This is a matter which concerns Israel. This is something which Israel is building inside its territories, so let it be," he told reporters.
Security and crime concerns have also prompted Israel to erect the fences. Israeli officials frequently issue warnings urging citizens to avoid travel to the neighboring Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. The area is believed to be a stronghold for al-Qaida-inspired extremists who have aligned themselves with lawless Bedouin tribes in the area. In 2004, a total of 32 people were killed in a pair of hotel bombings in the Sinai.
Smugglers use the porous area to traffic women into Israel's prostitution trade, and it's also a main conduit for drugs entering the country.
But its many walls illustrate Israel's sense of isolation in a largely hostile region. The West Bank barrier in particular has sparked international criticism because it frequently juts into the West Bank, drawing accusations that Israel is using it to gobble up land claimed by the Palestinians.
There are also fences separating Israel from hostile Lebanon and parts of the Golan Heights, which Israel annexed after seizing the Syrian territory in the 1967 Mideast war.
"Defense against terror activity clearly requires a fence," Defense Minister Ehud Barak told Army Radio Monday. "Good fences make good neighbors," Barak said, noting only Israel's western border — the sea — did not need to be blocked off. "Along the sea we don't need a fence," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100111/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_egypt_fence
Last edited:
As long as Democrats especially Left Wing Liberals continue to hold Majority Political Power, expect to see more Illegal Immigrants multiplying throughout the United States. To disagree otherwise is pointless.......
Mexican Drug Cartel Explodes Car Bomb at Border
Mexican Drug Cartel Explodes Car Bomb at Border
Four people have been killed in a car bomb set off by a mobile phone, Mexican authorities say. Police say the attack is the first of its kind by a drug gang against security forces.
2 burned alive..damn!!
Mexican Drug Cartel Explodes Car Bomb at Border
Four people have been killed in a car bomb set off by a mobile phone, Mexican authorities say. Police say the attack is the first of its kind by a drug gang against security forces.
2 burned alive..damn!!
Re: Mexican Drug Cartel Explodes Car Bomb at Border
Interesting... Isn't that 95% of the wealth owned by the top 5% talk the same as the U.S.? I understand that there's hardly any middle class in Mexico, but it's going to be a really hot summer for them over there.
Interesting... Isn't that 95% of the wealth owned by the top 5% talk the same as the U.S.? I understand that there's hardly any middle class in Mexico, but it's going to be a really hot summer for them over there.
Gaming the Border: A Report From Cochise County, AZ
Federal officials routinely assure the public that they are gaining control over the Arizona border. Despite these assurances, “Gaming the Border: a Report from Cochise County, Arizona,” shows why the border there remains porous, as illegal immigrants avoid the Border Patrol and walk around checkpoints on highways north of the border.
The video opens at the Cochise County ranch of John Lad More..d, whose family homesteaded the land in 1896. Ladd describes repeated sightings of illegal immigrants from his kitchen window. The report shows video of illegal immigrants running across his property to rendezvous with smugglers driving on nearby Highway 92.
The video also includes multiple scenes recorded by cameras hidden alongside trails through the 14,000-acre ranch. It shows not only dozens of illegal immigrants hiking northward, but also a group of three drug smugglers carrying bundles wrapped in burlap. That is the method smugglers commonly use to move marijuana to points where they rendezvous with vehicles that carry the load northward.
The illegal activity continues despite the fence that marks the border at the southern edge of the Ladd ranch. The report makes the point that the fence isn’t much of an obstacle, especially when the Border Patrol is not around.
Federal officials routinely assure the public that they are gaining control over the Arizona border. Despite these assurances, “Gaming the Border: a Report from Cochise County, Arizona,” shows why the border there remains porous, as illegal immigrants avoid the Border Patrol and walk around checkpoints on highways north of the border.
The video opens at the Cochise County ranch of John Lad More..d, whose family homesteaded the land in 1896. Ladd describes repeated sightings of illegal immigrants from his kitchen window. The report shows video of illegal immigrants running across his property to rendezvous with smugglers driving on nearby Highway 92.
The video also includes multiple scenes recorded by cameras hidden alongside trails through the 14,000-acre ranch. It shows not only dozens of illegal immigrants hiking northward, but also a group of three drug smugglers carrying bundles wrapped in burlap. That is the method smugglers commonly use to move marijuana to points where they rendezvous with vehicles that carry the load northward.
The illegal activity continues despite the fence that marks the border at the southern edge of the Ladd ranch. The report makes the point that the fence isn’t much of an obstacle, especially when the Border Patrol is not around.
Senate plan would deport illegal immigrants entering U.S. after 2011
Senate plan would deport illegal immigrants entering U.S. after 2011
Reuters – 7 hrs ago
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senators crafting an immigration bill have agreed that foreigners who crossed the U.S. border illegally would be deported if they entered the United States after December 31, 2011, a congressional aide said on Friday.
The legislation by a bipartisan group of senators would give the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally a way to obtain legal status and eventually become U.S. citizens, provided certain measures are met.
But of the unauthorized immigrants, those who entered after the December 2011 cut-off date would be forced to go back to their country of origin, said the aide, who was not authorized to speak publicly because the bill is still being negotiated.
"People need to have been in the country long enough to have put down some roots. If you just got here and are illegal, then you can't stay," the congressional aide said.
The lawmakers - four Democrats and four Republicans - are aiming to unveil their bill on Tuesday, one day before the Senate Judiciary Committee is to hold a hearing to examine the legislation.
Senators and congressional aides have said that most major policy issues have been resolved. But some details still need to be worked out, said sources familiar with the negotiations.
Support has been growing among lawmakers and the public for immigration reform since President Barack Obama was re-elected in November with help from the Hispanic community.
The last time U.S. immigration laws were extensively rewritten was in 1986 and those policies have been blamed for allowing millions of people to enter and live in the country illegally, while also resulting in shortages of high-skilled workers from abroad, as well as some low-skilled wage-earners.
Under the bill being crafted, security would first be improved along the southwestern border with Mexico. At the same time, the threat of deportation would be lifted for many who are living in the U.S. illegally. Within 13 years of enactment, those immigrants could begin securing U.S. citizenship.
The bill would increase the number of visas issued for high-skilled workers and create a new program to control the flow of unskilled workers. It would also make it harder for U.S. citizens to petition for visas for their extended families.
http://news.yahoo.com/senate-plan-deport-illegal-immigrants-entering-u-2011-034009429.html
Senate plan would deport illegal immigrants entering U.S. after 2011
Reuters – 7 hrs ago
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senators crafting an immigration bill have agreed that foreigners who crossed the U.S. border illegally would be deported if they entered the United States after December 31, 2011, a congressional aide said on Friday.
The legislation by a bipartisan group of senators would give the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally a way to obtain legal status and eventually become U.S. citizens, provided certain measures are met.
But of the unauthorized immigrants, those who entered after the December 2011 cut-off date would be forced to go back to their country of origin, said the aide, who was not authorized to speak publicly because the bill is still being negotiated.
"People need to have been in the country long enough to have put down some roots. If you just got here and are illegal, then you can't stay," the congressional aide said.
The lawmakers - four Democrats and four Republicans - are aiming to unveil their bill on Tuesday, one day before the Senate Judiciary Committee is to hold a hearing to examine the legislation.
Senators and congressional aides have said that most major policy issues have been resolved. But some details still need to be worked out, said sources familiar with the negotiations.
Support has been growing among lawmakers and the public for immigration reform since President Barack Obama was re-elected in November with help from the Hispanic community.
The last time U.S. immigration laws were extensively rewritten was in 1986 and those policies have been blamed for allowing millions of people to enter and live in the country illegally, while also resulting in shortages of high-skilled workers from abroad, as well as some low-skilled wage-earners.
Under the bill being crafted, security would first be improved along the southwestern border with Mexico. At the same time, the threat of deportation would be lifted for many who are living in the U.S. illegally. Within 13 years of enactment, those immigrants could begin securing U.S. citizenship.
The bill would increase the number of visas issued for high-skilled workers and create a new program to control the flow of unskilled workers. It would also make it harder for U.S. citizens to petition for visas for their extended families.
http://news.yahoo.com/senate-plan-deport-illegal-immigrants-entering-u-2011-034009429.html