The primary version of this blog is HERE. The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email John Ray here. Other mirror sites: Political Correctness Watch, Dissecting Leftism, Greenie Watch, Australian Politics, Socialized Medicine, Tongue Tied, Food & Health Skeptic, Education Watch and Gun Watch. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing). The archive for this mirror site is here or here.
****************************************************************************************



31 December, 2008

Immigration officials curtail sedation of deportees after criticism, lawsuits

Federal immigration officials, over the past year, have dramatically curtailed the controversial practice of sedating deportees with powerful anti-psychotic medication. The move followed court challenges and a public outcry over the practice, which often involved the use of Haldol, a drug used to treat schizophrenia. Data collected through Freedom of Information Act requests by The Dallas Morning News show that Immigration and Customs Enforcement sedated only 10 people in the past fiscal year. Haldol was used in only three cases. Over the past six years, through October, federal immigration personnel sedated 384 deportees, an average of 64 a year, the government disclosed. Of those cases, 356 involved the use of Haldol.

U.S. officials defended the sedation policy but declined to discuss it in detail, including the frequency with which sedation has been used, which led The News to request the information through the Freedom of Information Act. U.S. officials say the procedure is done on the recommendation of medical personnel and now requires a court order - a change made when the American Civil Liberties Union began opposing the procedure and after Julie L. Myers, then assistant homeland security secretary, learned of the cases. "When we do ask the court to involuntarily sedate, it is both necessary to effectuate removal and medically appropriate," said Pat Reilly, a spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, an agency within the Department of Homeland Security.

Critics said there had been no effective oversight of the process, and some continue to say that the policy violates medical ethics. They praised the use of the court order and sedation restrictions. "What you are seeing here is that the courts have proven once again that sunshine is the best disinfectant," said Wade Henderson, a lawyer and the president and chief executive officer of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights in Washington, D.C.

Though the agency has dramatically reduced its use of Haldol to sedate deportees, the practice remains controversial. Haldol is used to treat schizophrenia and such psychotic symptoms as hallucinations, delusions and hostility. It is sometimes used in hospital emergency rooms to manage acute agitation and psychosis. Medical authorities say the use of Haldol carries potential complications. The drug can trigger such adverse reactions as muscular spasms and a condition known as neuroleptic malignant syndrome that can result in a coma and even death if left untreated.

Scott Allen, an internist and co-founder of the Center for Prisoner Health and Human Rights in Providence, R.I., said he opposes sedation except for deportees with schizophrenia or other mental illness. "The medical community needs to assert itself and make clear the medical ethics of involuntary chemical restraint: It is not acceptable," he said. As for its decline in use, Dr. Allen said, "That is certainly encouraging, but it enforces the impression they were overusing forced medication in the past."

New policy: ICE established the policy of requiring a court order for involuntary sedation of detainees during removal with "no exceptions" in January. ICE said it restated a policy from June 2007. Ms. Myers, who resigned as assistant homeland security secretary last month, said she moved toward a policy of "getting a court order so only in the narrowest of circumstances would we proceed like this." She defined the narrow circumstances in which sedation would be used as those in which the agency believes that "based on the advice of medical professional, that this is the only way to have a safe and secure deportation, and a court agrees with that." The policy went into effect in June 2007 after the Los Angeles Daily News reported that two detainees had been forcibly drugged in an effort to sedate them for a deportation flight.

Last year, the ACLU sued the U.S. government on behalf of the two immigrants, one from Senegal and another from Indonesia. Attorneys for the men believe both were given Haldol. The case was settled for $55,000 in total for the two, and the government admitted no wrongdoing or liability.

In November 2007, the federal government attempted to get a court order to sedate an Albanian man who resisted deportation and boarding from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, screaming he would be killed if he were sent back to Albania. The man, a political-asylum seeker, was aided by U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler, who wrote a private bill that effectively stalled the Albanian's deportation until early 2009....

More here



Mo. immigration restrictions take effect in 2009

Missouri businesses are about to get a shove toward a federal database for screening newly hired employees for illegal immigrants. And cities will risk getting punished if they become havens for illegal immigrants.

Those new laws taking effect Thursday are part of a broader effort by Missouri lawmakers to crack down on illegal immigrants and those who employ them. Starting in 2009, public employers - including state and local governments - must use the E-Verify database that searches records from the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security to determine whether someone can work.

Private businesses won't have to use the database unless they have a government contract worth more than $5,000, receive state loans or tax breaks, or have been caught hiring an illegal immigrant. But even those that don't have to use E-Verify will have a big incentive to start. Employers caught "knowingly" hiring an illegal immigrant risk losing their business licenses, unless they had used E-Verify to screen their new hires.

Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor who helped draft the law, said lawmakers showed foresight in going after illegal immigrants at cusp of the recession. Federal statistics released earlier this month show the state's unemployment rate hit 6.7 percent in November.

Source





30 December, 2008

Fewer illegal immigrants caught sneaking into US

The number of people caught trying to sneak into the USA from Mexico is at its lowest level since the mid-1970s, signs of tougher enforcement and a weaker U.S. economy, officials say. The Border Patrol caught 705,000 people along the U.S.-Mexico border in fiscal year 2008, which ended Sept. 30, according to new agency figures. That's nearly 2,000 a day and the lowest number since 1976, when 675,000 people were caught entering illegally between San Diego and southern Texas, the figures show.

The Border Patrol has long used the number of apprehensions as an indicator of how many people try to cross U.S. borders illegally. The latest figures show that recent steps - including building a fence, adding more Border Patrol agents and prosecuting more people caught sneaking across the border - are deterring illegal crossings, officials say. The weak U.S. economy also is discouraging migrants, officials and analysts say. "We're definitely making it tougher on them," Border Patrol assistant chief Lloyd Easterling says. "I'm not telling you that we've won the war, but we are making headway."

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a Dec. 19 speech that there's been "a collapse in the number of people who come across the border illegally." Chertoff cited a weaker U.S. economy and "tough enforcement," including the addition of 6,000 Border Patrol agents since 2006 and the construction of 526 miles of fence along the U.S.-Mexico border since 2007. About 97% of illegal border crossers enter through Mexico, and about 90% are Mexican, Border Patrol figures show.

Josiah Heyman, a border expert at the University of Texas-El Paso, said that "economic conditions of the U.S. affect migration. Word gets back to Mexico really fast what the job opportunities are or are not," Heyman said. "It's possible we've crossed some threshold where it's risky and expensive to try to get to the U.S. (illegally) so it's beginning to discourage people." Illegal migrants often pay a smuggler about $2,000, Heyman said.

Border apprehensions have fluctuated widely for decades. They peaked at 1.7 million in the mid-1980s, fell to about 1 million in the late 1980s, and hit 1.6 million again in 2000. Border Patrol staffing has climbed steadily to 18,000 agents from 4,000 in 1993, agency figures show. The Congressional Research Service said in May that the number of apprehensions is "the most reliable" measure of illegal crossings but doesn't give a full picture because "there are no reliable estimates" of those who evade capture. About 11.9 million illegal immigrants live in the USA, according to an October estimate by the Pew Hispanic Center.

Source



AZ: So far, no employers busted by hiring law

When the state's employer-sanctions law took effect nearly a year ago, it threatened to shut down businesses that hired illegal workers. But not a single employer has been taken to court in Arizona, mainly because the landmark law is too difficult to enforce, authorities say. In Maricopa County, where the law led to raids on a dozen businesses and the arrest of 159 workers and a manager, investigators have not been able to assemble enough evidence showing that employers actually knew the arrested workers were illegal, which the sanctions law requires.

A few employers have resisted turning over their hiring records or talking to investigators. As a result, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas wants the Legislature to give prosecutors subpoena power to investigate cases under the employer-sanctions law, which is enforced by filing a civil lawsuit. That would make it easier for investigators to force employers to turn over records. Authorities have obtained records up to now with criminal search warrants, allowed because the raids were carried out as a probe into immigrants' criminal identity theft. But Thomas said officers need subpoena power to make a civil case directly against an employer and prove intentional hiring of illegal workers. Employers in violation can have business licenses suspended or revoked.

Business groups oppose the change, saying the sanctions law is already the toughest in the nation and most employers are complying. Giving law enforcement more powers would lead to further harassment of businesses when the state's economy is already suffering, they say.

The limit on investigative powers is not the only reason for a lack of action against employers. To a large degree, the state's faltering economy so far has rendered the sanctions law moot because construction, manufacturing, hospitality and other industries that rely heavily on immigrant labor are laying off employees, not hiring them, prosecutors say. The law applies only to hires made after Dec. 31, 2007, and many of the 151 illegal immigrants arrested in the 12 raids had been hired earlier, authorities say.

Still, supporters say the law is fulfilling its purpose of turning off the job magnet that draws illegal immigrants to Arizona. Employers fearful of losing their business licenses are taking extra steps to make sure they aren't employing illegal workers, which in turn has driven many undocumented immigrants and their families to leave the state, officials said. "I think it's a good deterrent," said Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who has partnered with Thomas to crack down on illegal immigration. "People are worried about it and worried about us going into business establishments and arresting employees on identification theft and forgery."

Critics, however, contend that the Legal Arizona Workers Act is being used as an excuse to target only illegal workers, not employers, an ineffective way to fight illegal immigration. "It (raises) the question: After all the expense and resources put into this law, were the employers the real target?" said Phoenix immigration lawyer Gerald Burns. "Probably not. It was to instill fear and to vet out suspected undocumented workers or drive them out of the state."

More here





29 December, 2008

Why Can't I Get Off This List?

By Juan Fernando Gomez

I call it the little room. In most cases it's actually not that small, but my claustrophobia seems to kick in as soon as the immigration officer separates me from the other passengers on my flight and escorts me through a door into my own private travel hell. As you sit in crowded airports waiting for your long-delayed flights, cursing yourself for traveling over the holidays, remember: It could be worse. You could be me. My ordeal begins before the plane touches down in the United States, some time between the moment when the flight attendant begins handing out blank immigration and customs forms and when I hear the wheels disengaging in the belly of the plane. Will I sail through immigration and customs, I wonder, or will this be the time that they get me? Might I even be whisked off to Guantanamo?

The crazy thing is that I have done nothing wrong. I am a U.S. citizen and have no criminal record. I pay my taxes (well, except for those few years when, right out of grad school, I was convinced that taxes did not apply to me). I don't litter. The problem is that I happen to share a name with at least one shady character on the Terrorist Screening Center's watch list. At least, that's the list that I believe I am on, although no official will tell me for sure. My name is common in Latin America, the Spanish equivalent of John Smith. It also seems to be particularly popular among law-breakers. I once sneaked a peek at an immigration officer's computer and saw an entire screen full of my doppelgangers. Who knows how many of them were bad guys and how many were law-abiding saps like me?

It doesn't help that my travel habits are similar to those of people who actually belong on a watch list. I grew up in Medell¡n, Colombia, during the height of the Pablo Escobar drug wars and have worked for the better part of the past decade in some of the most dangerous places in the world. In countries such as Afghanistan and Colombia, I help farmers find legal, profitable and sustainable alternatives to growing coca and poppies, the raw material for cocaine and heroin. So I guess it's understandable that my passport -- packed with added pages and stamps marking my entry into and exit from countries such as Cambodia, Bolivia and Haiti -- raises eyebrows.

It seems to me, though, that airport security should know enough to tell me from the terrorists. I'm not easily offended, but being treated like a dangerous criminal every time I enter the country is getting a little old.

The airport routine is always the same, whether I'm in Miami, Washington, Atlanta or any other city. I step off the plane after sitting in coach for hours, my knees bruised from hitting the seat in front of me, and watching films that I swore I'd never pay to see. I'm always cautious as I wait in the immigration and customs line. On the Transportation Security Administration's Web site is a running total of the number of people arrested each week for suspicious behavior or fraudulent travel documents. (For the week ending Dec. 21, 15 people were arrested due to suspicious behavior or fraudulent travel documents and 19 guns were found at checkpoints.) I would hate to be hauled in for scratching my nose or for tying my shoe while in line. So I do my best to act relaxed, as if I were just coming home -- which is exactly what I'm doing.

The real terror begins when my toes touch the yellow line, where I wait to be called forward. Approaching the immigration officer before being summoned could make me appear too eager (and often earns me a stern reprimand). On the other hand, any hesitation could be interpreted as a sign that I'm afraid of facing the law. So I walk up to the officer and nonchalantly hand over my bright blue passport. Seconds feel like hours as he starts hitting the "page down" key on his computer, scanning screen after screen, periodically glancing at me and my passport. This is when I break out in a cold sweat, which makes the officer even more dubious. When he reaches for a yellow highlighter and marks my customs slip, I know I'm headed to the little room.

I'm so familiar with airport-security personnel that I often recognize the officers who escort me. In Miami, I cringe to see the large female officer who once screamed across the room that her advice, if I wanted to spare my family some trouble, was not to name my son Juan. Of course, not all officers are like that. I occasionally run into a young woman who stopped me once a few years ago. New to the job and eager to help, she took down my information and assured me that I would never be stopped again. But she was wrong; upon my next entry into the country, I was held for longer than ever before.

The little room in Miami is my favorite, partly because it has vending machines and partly because it is always full of people who, like me, seem familiar with the routine of being waylaid by airport security. Most of us are cleared within minutes or hours, though the process continues to be intimidating and cold. Others are taken into still smaller rooms, where I can only imagine what happens. Maybe I should stop watching all those bad in-flight action movies.

The room at Dulles is particularly intimidating. I recently landed there before dawn, after an overnight flight, and found myself alone except for two young guys in plastic handcuffs. While they seemed nice enough, I couldn't help but wonder about the company I was keeping.

Time and time again, I've been cleared for entry into the United States. So why does my name remain on the list? Will I have to go through this for the rest of my life? In desperation, I always ask airport-security officers how my name can be removed. I've heard it all, from writing to my congressman (as if that would do any good) to filling out a form (never mind that no one has been able to produce the document or tell me where I can find it). The most honest answer came from a young, Afghan American officer at Dulles a couple of weeks ago: "There's absolutely nothing you can do."

It's not the countless missed connections that bother me or the fact that I have to politely decline offers from well-meaning travel companions to wait for me, because they don't know that they might be waiting for hours. It's the powerlessness of being unable to clear my name and of having to go through this humiliation over and over.

I heard rumors that the Terrorist Screening Center watch list would hit 1 million people by the end of 2008, but the TSA Web site states that the real number is actually closer to 400,000 and that there are fewer than 16,000 people on the "selectee" and "no-fly" lists used by the TSA. The site also asks, "Got Feedback?" Well, I have plenty of feedback, but I'm a little scared of the consequences of saying what I really feel.

Source



From a new threat assessment by DHS:

Terrorists will continue to try to evade U.S. border security measures and place operatives inside the mainland to carry out attacks, the 38-page assessment said. It also said that they may pose as refugees or asylum seekers or try to exploit foreign travel channels such as the visa waiver program, which allows citizens of 34 countries to enter the U.S. without visas.

Long waits for immigration and more restrictive European refugee and asylum programs will cause more foreigners to try to enter the U.S. illegally. Increasing numbers of Iraqis are expected to migrate to the U.S. in the next five years; and refugees from Somalia and Sudan could increase because of conflicts in those countries, the assessment said.

Because there is a proposed cap of 12,000 refugees from Africa, officials expect more will try to enter the U.S. illegally as well. Officials predict the same scenario for refugees from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Intelligence officials predict the pool of radical Islamists within the U.S. will increase over the next five years due partly to the ease of online recruiting means. Officials foresee "a wave of young, self-identified Muslim 'terrorist wannabes' who aspire to carry out violent acts."

The U.S. has already seen some examples of these homegrown terrorists. Recently five Muslim immigrants were convicted of plotting to massacre U.S. soldiers at Fort Dix in a case the government said demonstrated its post-Sept. 11 determination to stop terrorist attacks in the planning stages.

The Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah does not have a known history of fomenting attacks inside the U.S., but that could change if there is some kind of "triggering" event, the Homeland assessment cautions.

A 2008 Interagency Intelligence Committee on Terrorism assessment said that Hezbollah members based in the U.S. do local fundraising through charity projects and criminal activity, like money laundering, smuggling, drug trafficking, fraud and extortion, according to the homeland security assessment.

Source





28 December, 2008

NYT dreaming

There are several sobbing articles about immigration in the NYT at the moment but the comment from Newsbusters below on one of them gives you an idea of their calibre

Sure, its revenues might be plunging along with its share price, but the New York Times is still good for something. In these somber days of winter, the Gray Lady, her name notwithstanding, can still inject the sunshine of humor-albeit of the unintentional variety. Take its current editorial, Getting Immigration Right -- please. With jobs at a premium and the collapse of the Big Three automakers attributable in no small part to the role of the unions, the Times naturally comes out in favor of:

* making it easier for illegals to get into the country to compete for what jobs are left, and

* granting the right of illegals once here to . . . unionize.

The teaser on the Op-ed web page drew me in: "In a time of economic crisis, it is especially vital to uphold workers' rights, even for those here illegally." The body of the editorial didn't disappoint on the promise of more liberal looniness. Annotated excerpts:

[H]omeland security secretary Janet Napolitano of Arizona and commerce secretary Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who understand the border region and share a well-informed disdain for foolish, inadequate enforcement schemes like the Bush administration's border fence.

That's funny. I don't seem to remember Pres.-elect Obama praising the pair's disdain for border fences at their announcement ceremonies. Maybe some Republican senators will get into this during their confirmation hearings.

[The Bush administration's] campaign of raids, detentions and border fencing was a moral failure. Among other things, it terrorized and broke apart families and led to some gruesome deaths in shoddy prisons. It mocked the American tradition of welcoming and assimilating immigrant workers.

We don't want people to die gruesome deaths in shoddy prisons. But the Times must be joking if it looks at the Bush years as ones of tough immigration enforcement. As for the American tradition of welcoming immigrants, yes, by all means: in respect of legal immigrants. Does the Times editorial board plan to spend spring break on the border, welcoming illegals as they slip into our country?

And finally, as promised in the teaser, the Times bemoans the fact that "illegal immigrant workers are deterred from forming unions. And without a path to legalization and under the threat of a relentless enforcement-only regime, they cannot assert their rights."

Let's review. Under the NYT's immigration plan:

* border fences would be discarded.

* illegals would be welcomed.

* once in, they would be accorded worker rights including that of forming unions.

Could someone please explain how this is anything but an open-borders policy and an abandonment of national sovereignty? The Times' bleeding-heart liberalism could be cause for some much-needed mirth, but for the fact that the editorial goes out of its way to praise Obama's pick for Labor Secretary, Hilda Solis, as a "staunch defender of [illegal] immigrants" and someone who "promises a clean break" from Bush immigration policies. Cheers!

Source



Soft-touch Britain

They know that once they set foot in Britain they are there to stay. Britain finds heaps of reasons why it cannot deport them. It might violate their right to a good family life, for instance. I'm not joking! Google "Chindamo" if you doubt it

Britain was last night warned to brace itself for a new wave of illegal immigrants from France as thousands prepared to cross the channel. More than 2,000 are in and around Calais and the surrounding area and all are determined to claim asylum in the UK. And only a change in Britain’s open door immigration and asylum policies will stop more coming, the French charity C’Sur claims. Spokesman Father Jean-Pierre Boutoille told the Daily Express: “There are more than 2,000 migrants in the Calais region and they are all determined to get to Britain. “They will keep coming for as long as Britain maintains its strange asylum and immigration systems. He added: “Many are ill with tuberculosis and scabies.”

And last night the Immigration Minister Phil Woolas was urged to make good his promise to crackdown on illegal migrants. UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said: “We will now see if Phil Woolas is serious about getting tough on illegal migrants.” He added: “What is France doing allowing these camps to be set up in northern France. "There is no reason for them to be there other than for the facilitation of migrants into the UK illegally.” Matthew Elliott from the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: “The British immigration system needs urgent reform – at present it is costly, inefficient and badly administered.

“Returning asylum seekers in a speedier and more efficient way would be better for everyone – fairer to taxpayers, who foot the bill and fairer to genuine asylum seekers who want a speedy resolution to their claim and more effective at deterring false claimants who will be removed quickly. Without reform our immigration system will buckle as new waves of illegal immigrants seek to exploit the system.”

Small camps have sprung up close to the ferry ports of Calais and Dunkirk, but also next to important road transport routes to Britain. There are also groups in Cherbourg and in Ostend, Belgium. Yesterday the Daily Express found migrants from Iraq and Afghanistan at the new camps close to the main Brussels to Calais motorway at Grande Synthe and Teteghem and migrants from Ethiopia and Eritrea at a new camp close to the main Lille to Calais motorway at Steenvoorde.

All told how they had spent thousands of pounds getting so far and who they were determined to start a new life in Britain. In Dunkirk Afghan Iqbal said: “I was a soldier for the Northern Alliance in the war against the Taliban. Now I must get to Britain. I cannot go back to Afghanistan.” In Grande Synthe Iraqi Mahmed said: “I had to leave my home in northern Iraq because my life was in danger. I will go to England. I have spent a lot of money getting this far and I will not stop until I get there.”

Last night the Home Office said the immigration services were working to stop illegal immigrants getting into the country. A UK Border Agency spokesman said: “We already have one of the toughest borders in the world and we are determined to ensure it stays that way.”

Source





27 December, 2008

Nebraska gov. passes the buck

While touting the benefits of E-government "as the way of the future" now that Nebraska drivers can renew their license plates online, Gov. Dave Heineman declined to use his executive power and require the use of a federally-funded, online employee verification program to combat illegal immigration in the state. Heineman will not issue an executive order that requires state contractors and subcontractors to use the free E-Verify system to screen out applicants who might be illegal immigrants. "I don't think you need to do an executive order," Heineman said. "I think we ought to have that discussion at the Legislative level. Let them send me a bill I can sign into law."

That bill will likely come from Omaha Sen. Brad Ashford, who, in a recent hearing on illegal immigration, said he would include E-Verify in a bill next Legislative session. E-Verify is run by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and it matches information provided by a prospective employee to the U.S. Social Security database. E-Verify often determines eligibility immediately, and is generally considered more than 90 percent accurate, although one study puts it at 99.4 percent.

Heineman does not have to wait for the Legislature. He could issue an executive order for state contracts, similar to the order Pres. Bush enacted on 200,000 federal contractors and subcontractors starting in 2009. Governors in other states, such as Rhode Island and Minnesota, have required the use of e-Verify by executive order.

Although Heineman he would "strongly consider" E-Verify, he deferred to the Legislature to hammer out a plan. "Sen. Ashford has conducted a number of hearings," Heineman said. "I think we're moving forward with a consensus on what we might be able to do on immigration reform."

That reform is not likely to include any enactment of 287g, a federal program in which Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials train state and local authorities on how to detain and process any illegal immigrant they encounter in their daily police work. "Right now there's just no support in the local law enforcement community," Heineman said. "If there's not support from them, I just don't see us heading in that direction. But better cooperation, better collaboration between ICE and our local and state law enforcement - I believe that is necessary, to make sure we better understand each of us does." Heineman did not specify which local law enforcement was not in favor of the 287g program.

How does that happen outside the federal program designed to foster cooperation? Heineman pointed to a Fremont task force that successfully worked with ICE on a number of issues. The task force, however, had to use Sen. Ben Nelson as a go-between to kick-start the process, though. Would all local law enforcement agencies have to travel such channels? "They shouldn't have to," Heineman said. ".Unfortunately, sometimes, it doesn't always work the way it should, but if we can be a conduit to have better cooperation, we will."

Source



Sheriff Joe not worried by new Federal administration

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio says scrutiny of racial and ethnic profiling by incoming President Barack Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder will not deter his get-tough approach to illegal immigration. "I'm not stopping," said Arpaio. The Republican sheriff said he plans to continue crime sweeps and raids aimed at illegal immigrants and businesses that employ them.

The Obama administration and Holder are expected to increase the focus on racial and ethnic profiling by police. Critics of Arpaio's immigration enforcement argue the sheriff's office targets Hispanics and such actions take away from more serious investigations.

Arpaio said his immigration sweeps are nondiscriminatory and if people have complaints they can contact federal authorities. "Go ahead and take them to the FBI," said Arpaio, who just won reelection to a fifth term. Arpaio said another immigration sweep will soon occur.

The U.S. Justice Department under Obama is expected to put a greater focus on discrimination, corporate corruption and consumer protection cases compared with the Bush administration's priorities in national security, child pornography, sex rings and immigration.

Public opinion polls generally show support in Maricopa County for Arpaio's get-tough policies. There are an estimated 579,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona, most coming from Mexico, according to the Center for Immigration Studies. The U.S. recession and housing troubles have reduced the flow of migrants and sent some undocumented workers back to that country. Arizona also is a key entry point into the U.S. for drug traffickers and other smugglers as northern Mexico cities are besieged by drug cartels, which reach into the Phoenix area with gun purchases and other activity.

Source





26 December, 2008

U.S. immigration bureaucracy gets a richly deserved kick in the butt

Or so it sounds from the report below. There must be some profoundly defective human beings there

In a snow-capped house brightly festooned for Christmas, Ahmed Weisi had but one wish: U.S. citizenship. Would this be his year? The 59-year-old Iraqi-born man has been a permanent legal resident of the United States since 1987. He is married to a New Jersey-born woman, Joan, and their son, Marc, is 21.

For 15 years, Weisi felt no need to upgrade his status from green-card holder to citizen. He was educated in Austria and held Austrian citizenship, which seemed good enough. The Sept. 11, 2001, attacks stirred American patriotism that until then Weisi didn't know was in him, he said Monday over tea and Christmas cookies at his home in rural Hunterdon County, N.J. "If I want to defend this country, be involved with this country," he recalled saying to himself, "I have to be a citizen."

In 2005, Weisi started the process to get U.S. citizenship. He had an application interview on Jan. 11, 2006, and passed the 10-question exam with flying colors - aceing the name of the chief justice, John G. Roberts Jr. Then Weisi's name was forwarded to the FBI for a background check. Although by law the Customs and Immigration Service is supposed to respond within 120 days, Weisi's case lingered. As a person of Middle Eastern origin, he expected close scrutiny in a post-9/11 world, he said, but also worried that he might experience unfair discrimination. Each time he checked on the status of his application at the Newark, N.J., Customs and Immigration office, he was told it was "pending" with no further details.

Weisi speaks seven languages, ran a New Jersey trucking firm, and holds a Department of Homeland Security-issued license to transport hazardous materials, including explosives and medical waste. Last year, with the trucking business in a slump, he offered his services to the U.S. military, and began going on six-month assignments for the Army and Navy in Iraq, where he translates Arabic as a Department of Defense civilian contractor. He has worked at Camp Bucca, the sprawling prison known in Army-speak as a "theater internment facility." It's a dangerous job that has him wearing camouflage and body armor, traveling with the troops, hopping in and out of moving helicopters, looking warily for improvised explosive devices, and participating in the interrogations of enemy combatants. Between deployments he comes home to his 200-year-old house in woodsy Whitehouse Station for rest and relaxation.

But this month, when Weisi returned home early for medical treatment because of a helicopter-related injury to a knee and a shoulder, he went to Customs and Immigration and was stunned to learn that his citizenship request had been denied on the ground that his six-months-and-a-day deployment from Nov. 15, 2007, to May 16, 2008, disqualified him because he spent too much time outside the United States. An application for citizenship requires continued residency. Despite exemplary military service, a hazmat license, special training at Fort Meade, and a high-security clearance to be able to work for the Department of Defense, Weisi's U.S. citizenship, it seemed, was not to be. "I was depressed. I felt like I was treated as less than human," he said.

Up to that point, Weisi had represented himself. With his wife's encouragement he got a lawyer, Audrey Allen of the Conshohocken firm Halberstadt Curley. To Allen, who specializes in immigration matters, the case seemed lacking in basic fairness. And given its long duration, it seemed a little absurd. "If this person is a real threat to security," she said, "do you want them hanging out here for six years while you're checking their background?"

Weisi's wife also sent letters about the case to elected officials, including U.S. senators and representatives from New Jersey, local officials, and even President Bush and Vice President Cheney. Her husband came back from his preparatory training for Iraq carrying a record of his DNA and a form indicating where his remains were to be shipped in the event he was killed, she said. With each deployment he puts his life on the line for the United States and deserves better treatment, she added angrily.

On Tuesday, out of the blue, better treatment arrived. Weisi got a call at home from the head of the Newark naturalization unit. He said the woman told him that it had come to their attention that his application had been "erroneously denied" and that the matter could be rectified that day. He and Joan piled into their car and raced to Newark. Allen raced north from Conshohocken, too. Maybe the letters to elected officials had helped. Maybe hiring a lawyer, who brought media attention, did the trick. Maybe Customs and Immigration simply recognized the error and wanted to correct it. In any case, the spotlight was shining to their advantage.

At the Newark office they met with a district adjudications officer whom Allen described as kind and apologetic. He handed Weisi a printed legal motion to reopen the case, meaning the immigration service, on its own and without Weisi's having to file a formal appeal, had decided to countermand the decision denying him citizenship. Then, as in a dream, all the pieces began to fall into place.

Weisi was led to the swearing-in room, a cavernous space, where usually hundreds of immigrants take the oath of citizenship together, but on Tuesday it was just him in a mostly empty building that seemed to have been kept open only to accommodate him. In fact, when he arrived, he had to go through a back door. A judge was brought in to preside. Weisi was handed a small copy of the Constitution and his naturalization certificate, signed by President Bush. He raised his right hand. He renounced allegiance to any other nation. He swore to bear arms for the United States in time of war, which seemed funny to him, because in Iraq he often is required to carry a gun. "The ceremony was really moving," Allen said. "Usually these are done a few times a year with hundreds of people." On Tuesday,. "it was just the three of us and the officer who was called in especially to swear in Ahmed. Joan snapped pictures," Allen said. "It was miraculous how he was treated. And it goes to show how [Customs and Immigration] can move mountains when it decides to get something done on account of its years of errors on a case."

Efforts to reach agency officials were unsuccessful yesterday. Voice and e-mail messages left at the regional press office were not immediately returned. By 8 a.m. yesterday, Weisi was at the passport office in Philadelphia. It took 21/2 hours for the precious blue booklet with the gold embossed lettering to be issued on an expedited basis, which is a good thing, he said, because he expects to be sent back to Iraq in about a week. As a citizen, he will earn higher pay.

"As sweet as it sounds," Weisi said, don't be tempted to think of his citizenship as a magical gift just in time for Christmas. "This was my right," he said, getting angry all over again. "I have proof of all the monkey business they did."

Source



Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) and temporary work visas (H1Bs)

The New Year will begin with Democrats dominating the Hill in numbers last seen several decades ago. Furthermore, with Dixiecrats no longer the power they were in the 1960s and 1970s, the Democratic caucus tilts evermore to the left. We examine below two implications of this new left wing ascendancy on immigration matters in the 111th Congress.

CIR Redefined:

Comprehensive Immigration Reform as formulated for almost a decade, and as delineated in McCain-Kennedy and Kennedy-Kyl, has three parts: Legalization, Enforcement, Increased legal channels. Lets see what each of these meant and how that meaning will change in the 111th Congress.

Legalization includes some way to bring into legal status the vast majority of the undocumented population, frequently in mixed-status families (with undocumented, LPRs and USCs), it also includes DREAM. This part of CIR remains unchanged in the new Congress.

Enforcement includes massive border expenditure, massively increased enforcement in the interior especially against errant employers and an employment card (a de facto national ID card). This part of CIR remains largely unchanged, however there will be less emphasis on border security and more emphasis on anti-employer measures.

Increased legal channels has two sub parts - increased permanent immigration quotas for both family-based and employment-based (particularly large increases for employment-based) and increased temporary employment-based immigration quotas for both skilled and unskilled workers (massive numbers for the unskilled). This part of CIR will be changed almost beyond recognition. Increases in permanent numbers will likely be postponed for the distant future, those legalized may have to wait for a decade or two before naturalizing. This will have the unintended effect of exacerbating the waiting times for employment-based immigration from India, China, Mexico and Phillipines, with EB3 for India and China becoming essentially extinct until Congress returns to this issue.

The biggest change will likely be in temporary employment-based immigration. Gone is the hope for increased H1B numbers, gone also is the idea that CIR will address the single-most dysfunctional part of our immigration system - a lack of legal channels for unskilled workers. The original draft of McCain-Kennedy made provisions for 400,000 temporary unskilled visas per year, the Senate cut it in half before passing McCain-Kennedy to the House which refused to even discuss it. The left-wing 111th Congress is unlikely to make any provisions at all for temporary employment numbers, especially in the midst of a severe economic recession. One exception will be that CIR will still include AgJOBS, which will likely be the only sop to increased legal channels once promised under the CIR banner.

H1Bs

Impact on H1Bs: The new Congress is likely to be more unfriendly on H1Bs than any post-IMMACT Congress. This is true for several reasons - firstly, H1Bs have been the single most criticized part of employment immigration in the last decade; secondly, in the middle of a severe economic recession, cutting H1B numbers, or even suspending or eliminating the H1B program, may be a way for Congress to deflect criticism for legalization (by implying that legalizing helps US workers in the unionized sector, and cutting the H1B program helps US workers in the tech and skilled sectors); thirdly, Congress can easily do all the above without in any way endangering those in H1B status currently in the US, since Congressional action would likely be directed against future H1B flows.

In fact, Congress might well free the current H1B workers from their employers by legislating unlimited portability at the H1B stage without requiring a new petition to USCIS. This point is particularly important since success for CIR might well hinge on the active assistance of the Immigrationvoice.org community which would benefit from such portability. ImmigrationVoice is the only pro-immigration lobby with a record of success in sending faxes/calls to Congress in numbers even remotely approaching the anti-immigration side.

In the larger view of all immigration benefits, asking employers in the middle of a severe recession to do without new H1Bs for a couple of years is a small price to pay for legalizing millions of the undocumented. In any event, we believe that those hoping for increased H1B numbers from the 111th Congress will be disappointed.

With Democrats controlling 58% of the membership in the new Senate and 59% in the new House, immigration politics are about to be changed to a great degree.

Source





25 December, 2008

U.S. Immigration officials encourage crime

Times were festive at the Birchwood Manor Monday as the Morris County Crimestoppers organization held its annual cocktail party/fundraiser. But that didn't stop real news from being discussed. Robert Bianchi, the county prosecutor, spoke about the continuing saga involving the deportation of a man charged with sexual assault prior to him answering the charges in court. The suspect, a Honduran national in this country illegally, was arrested last summer and made bail. Morris authorities notified the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, which was routine. ICE deported him before the criminal case against him proceeded.

Was that routine? Who knows, but the initial findings indicate it may very well be. The emotional debate over the still unsolved immigration issue veers off in many directions. But no sensible person should suggest that a man charged with a crime should be deported without answering for it. What a clever way to commit a serious crime and get away with it. Get a judge to return you to your home country where presumably all will be forgotten about.

Speaking Monday night, Bianchi used an extreme example to make his point. (He needed an extreme example, because many in the crowd ignored the speeches and concentrated on the open bar and the roast beef and turkey carving stations. Well, who could blame them?). Bianchi still tried.

He wondered aloud what would have happened if illegal immigrant Porfirio Jimenez, who was just convicted of murdering a 10-year-old Morristown boy, had somehow made bail after his arrest. Would he have been deported, too, before facing trial, the prosecutor asked. It was a scary prospect, although the chances of Jimenez making bail would have been remote.

Still, it's clear that ICE has to rethink its priorities. Immigration judges should not deport suspects who have criminal charges pending against them. That should be a no-brainer. As this saga unfolded over the last few days, Rep. Rodney P. Frelinghuysen, R-Harding, got into the act, saying in a statement that, "It is outrageous that the suspect is not in this country to face these heinous charges." Well said, but how do we get ICE to change its thinking, congressman? That's the hard part.

Source



What a disgrace: More UK immigration delays for Gurkhas

Brits love the Gurkhas. It is just their horrible Leftist government which sees no virtue in a warrior people

The Gurkha Justice Campaign Team has another fight on its hands after having heard that Gurkhas who retired before 1997 may have to face a further three month delay to find out if they will be able move to the UK. The government is expected to apply to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal for a further three months in which to consider the cases. The visa application is expected to be made on 7 January 2009. The cases were initially expected to be settled by the end of the year, after the High Court ruled that policies used to exclude Gurkhas who retired before 1997 from settling in the UK, were unlawful.

Following the High Court ruling the government has stated, "we have taken the judgment on board and are determined to get the amended guidance right to ensure it is fair to all Gurkhas. This has involved consultation across Government...once we have published the guidance we will review the cases as soon as possible."

The Gurkha Justice Campiagn Team, headed by actress Joanna Lumley, whose father was a Gurkha, has received huge public support for their campaign to allow all Gurkhas the automatic right to a UK visa. They say the extra three months is an `"unacceptable" delay.

Source





24 December, 2008

The latest from CIS

1. Everyone is encouraged to check out our new YouTube page: here. And for all those who have a Facebook account, or for those who plan to get one, you are encouraged to become fans of CIS. See here

********

2. Secretary Chertoff's Stocking Stuffer: States Get Infusion of Secure ID Monies

EXCERPT: This week's announcement indicates Secretary Chertoff is feeling more than the holiday spirit; he clearly recognizes the continued momentum of the states towards REAL ID compliance, and wants to do what he can before his tenure is over. The grant monies -allocated simply based on the number of licenses a state issues - will enable states to keep moving forward while submitting requests for a competitive process for the remaining $50 million or so of the FY09 monies that remain in the Driver's License Security Grant Program. The allocations are fair and practical based on the consumer demand so many states are concerned about. Note that this year's "Part I" grants are not competitive, as is the usual practice. Nor do states have to wait, or write proposals to get this money. DHS made it available, and that is that.

********

3. Mark Krikorian on National Security. Speech at David Horowtiz's Restoration Weekend

********

4. Hello, I Love You, Won't You Tell Me Your Name: Inside the Green Card Marriage Phenomenon

EXCERPT: After September 11th, the existential question of "Why do they [foreigners] hate us?" was hotly debated in the American media without any real conclusion ever being reached. This Backgrounder seeks to answer the opposite question: "Why do they love us?" Marriage to an American citizen remains the most common path to U.S. residency and/or citizenship for foreign nationals, with more than 2.3 million foreign nationals gaining lawful permanent resident (LPR) status in this manner between 1998 and 2007.

********

5. "Surge Two": Northward Flood of Mexicans Likely to Increase after U.S. Election

EXCERPT: For cognoscenti of U.S. military policy, allusions to "the Surge" spark images of the five army brigades that President Bush dispatched to join 4,000 Marines in order to secure Baghdad and al Anbar province in Iraq. Off the radar screen is the likelihood of "Surge Two" during the months, if not weeks, after the next American president is sworn into office on January 20. This possible movement will entail not weapons-hefting soldiers and Marines in camouflage gear, but hundreds of thousands of T-shirt wearing, backpack-carrying Mexicans seeking to escape mushrooming insecurity at home. What might induce Mexicans to risk life and limb even though the U.S. economy teeters on the brink of a financial precipice, the employment picture appears grim even for Americans, and state legislatures are amplifying their crackdowns on lawbreakers in response to constituent sentiment? How will the next U.S chief executive and Congress respond to the pressure sure to build on America's southern border?

********

6. Taking Back the Streets: ICE and Local Law Enforcement Target Immigrant Gangs

EXCERPT: This report describes the exceptional public safety problems posed by immigrant gangs and looks at how one jurisdiction, Virginia, has used immigration law enforcement tools successfully to check their further proliferation. The authors conducted extensive research on immigrant gang characteristics and activities, analyzed arrest data from Operation Community Shield (OCS), and interviewed dozens of federal, state, and local law enforcement officers around the country who are involved in gang suppression. They were assisted by consultants with federal law enforcement experience and by research interns. 3 This report is a product of a larger study on immigrant gangs in Virginia (forthcoming), supported by a grant from the U.S. Department of Justice.

********

7. Taking Back the Streets: ICE and Local Law Enforcement Target Immigrant Gangs

DETAILS: A new Center for Immigration Studies Backgrounder finds that immigration law enforcement has been highly effective in fighting gang activity around the country. Local law enforcement agencies that shun involvement with immigration law enforcement are missing an opportunity to protect their communities, according to the authors, Jessica Vaughan and Jon Feere. Since 2005, ICE has arrested more than 8,000 immigrant gangsters from more than 700 different gangs under an initiative known as Operation Community Shield.

********

8. If It's Fixed, Don't Break It: Moving Forward with E-Verify

EXCERPT: The E-Verify program is well on its way to fixing a 20-year-old problem of determining legal employment eligibility in a manner employers can support. Arguably E-Verify is the most successful programmatic upgrade to U.S. interior border systems, assisting employers in abiding by the law and weeding out those that don't. Fast, efficient, and easy to use, E-Verify helps employers have confidence that their hiring choices are within the law and less likely to be disrupted by a worksite raid. Enabling employers to make better decisions about the legality of their hires also helps the federal government better prioritize enforcement tools. Illegal immigrants are dissuaded from applying for jobs that use E-Verify, thus making it less likely - the more prevalent in use E-Verify becomes - that illegals will settle into a job, only later to be arrested and land in deportation hearings that lead to family disruption while simultaneously draining enforcement and immigration court resources.

********

9. Allowing Non-Citizens to Vote in the United States? Why Not

EXCERPT: In recent years, a concerted effort has been gathering force to allow new immigrants to the United States to vote without becoming citizens. It is being mounted by an alliance of liberal (or progressive, if you prefer) academics and law professors, local and state political leaders most often associated with the Democratic Party or other progressive parties like the Greens, and community and immigration activists. They are working in tandem to decouple the legal standing to vote from American citizenship. . . . The list of possible virtues put forward by advocates for allowing non-citizens to vote is a long one. However, to date, there has been no real assessment of these claims and no analysis of the possible impact of implementing these proposals on the immigration process itself, or more generally on American national politics and political culture. That is the purpose of this analysis.

********

10. Immigration-Related Theses and Dissertations, 2007

EXCERPT: It is the mission of the Center for Immigration Studies to examine, inform, and critique American immigration policy. In the pursuit of this goal, the Center seeks to provide the latest immigration news and research for all involved in the debate over this complex issue. In addition to its e-mail news services, reports and books, the Center disseminates an annual list of doctoral dissertations and theses inspecting some aspects of immigration in order to keep those involved abreast of the most recent developments in emerging scholarship. This compilation contains dissertations completed in 2007.

The above is the latest press release from Center for Immigration Studies, 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org





23 December, 2008

Australia: The spooks and the immigration authorities should talk to one-another

That seems to be the main conclusion of a just released official report. ASIO is Australia's "intelligence" (stupidity?) organization, similar to the CIA

The judicial inquiry into the bungled arrest of Mohamed Haneef on terrorism charges has found he should not have been charged and has recommended sweeping changes to the Australian Federal Police, immigration intelligence and the nation's anti-terrorism laws. The inquiry also found it would have been "prudent" to defer the cancellation of Dr Haneef's visa and his deportation.

The report, which is yet to be released, is critical of the prosecution case against Dr Haneef, identifies failures of criminal intelligence, and recommends a standing review of the anti-terrorism laws and sweeping controls for the AFP and the intelligence services in relation to immigration. But the report, commissioned by the Rudd Government, has cleared the Howard government of any improper behaviour, conspiracy or political motivation in ordering the detention and later deportation of the Indian doctor from the Gold Coast in July last year.

While finding flaws in the actions of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, the former immigration minister Kevin Andrews, the Department of Immigration and the AFP, the report finds there was no conspiracy nor political motivation in the decision to cancel Dr Haneef's Australian work visa and send him back to India after the terrorism charges against him were dropped. The report concludes there was insufficient evidence for the CDPP to lay charges against Dr Haneef in the first place.

Former NSW Supreme Court judge John Clarke QC, who chaired the inquiry, has found there should be clearer guidelines for laying terrorism charges, more co-operation between the police and intelligence agencies, direct ASIO advice to the immigration minister on deportation cases and a standing review of the terrorism laws and federal police. Mr Clarke's report is expected to be released this week, with the departments and agencies involved having already received their copies.

While making a key finding that charges should not have been laid against Dr Haneef on the evidence available, the Clarke inquiry recommends the anti-terrorism laws should be clarified on the issue of how charges should be laid. In what official sources described yesterday as a "forensic" and exhaustive inquiry, Mr Clarke recommends changes to the "silo" approach by the AFP and ASIO, suggesting a full-time co-ordinating body for intelligence, and effectively making his style of inquiry permanent to oversee the anti-terror laws and their application. Government spokesmen refused to comment on the Clarke report yesterday.

Mr Clarke finds Mr Andrews did not reflect deeply enough on the Immigation Department's advice about Dr Haneef, but finds he was never given ASIO's report on the case by his department. Another key recommendation is that ASIO advice on deportation cases should go to the minister for consideration before they exercise ministerial discretion in ordering a deportation.

Mr Andrews was roundly criticised last year for his decision to detain and then deport Dr Haneef, "in the national interest", after the terrorism charges against the doctor were dropped. The Howard government was accused of racism and scaremongering over the case.

More here



Is the U.S, immigration problem fixing itself?

I think the writer below is a bit optimistic but he has a point

America's immigration problem is, at its root, an embarrassment of riches. Too many Americans need too many things - things which they're willing to pay for in money from their heretofore securely-salaried careers, but unwilling to pay for in labor. "Labor" is the domain of jobs, positions which Americans long ago eschewed for "careers." It was a rejection born of the luxury to choose, born of the opulence of option. Mexican immigrants, having not yet paid their Ameri-generational dues, took jobs that Americans wouldn't.

It's an argument most often used by immigrant apologists - and because of that it reeks of dogmatic, impractical tolerance - but it's nonetheless completely accurate. But the party's over - for us and for them. And that's just it:

Who is "us" and who is "them" is increasingly unclear, the lines blurred by rising unemployment. Here's what Bob Gray, a California-based food grower, had to say about the situation in a recent Wall Street Journal article:

In particular, Mr. Gray has observed an influx of U.S.-born Latinos and other workers who previously shunned field work. "These are domestic workers who appear to be displacing immigrants," says Mr. Gray. A similar situation has emerged in U.S. cities from New York to Los Angeles, where unemployed, nonimmigrant laborers are seeking informal work that typically has been performed by low-skilled immigrants that once commanded a 50% premium over the hourly minimum wage.

The thing is, those "careers" - so often in public relations or consulting or new media - are the first to wind up on the chopping block when companies look to cut back. What's still standing are the labor-intensive jobs, those which for so long have been filled by illegal immigrants. All of a sudden, those jobs are pretty attractive to Americans robbed of work choice.

For the first time in a decade, unskilled immigrants are competing with Americans for work. And evidence is emerging that tens of thousands of Hispanic immigrants are withdrawing from the labor market as U.S. workers crowd them out of potential jobs. At least some of the foreigners are returning home. "We see competition from more nonimmigrant workers," says Abel Valenzuela, a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles who studies day laborers.

And that's creating some competition between illegals and Americans, as both groups seek work in the same fields for the first time ever. That sounds on its face like it's a bad thing, but remember that we mentioned the word "competition" - and even in our post-capitalist economy (well, insomuch as it even exists) that's still a good thing. Faced for the first time with no job prospects, immigrants are finally returning to their birth countries.

Among Hispanic immigrants who entered the U.S. between 1990 and 1999, the survey found that 217,000 quit the labor force between the third quarter of 2007 and the third quarter of 2008. Since population falls as a result of individual death or emigration from the U.S., "these trends suggest that at least some foreign-born Latinos are not only leaving the labor force but, perhaps, also returning to their countries of origin," the report said. "There is definitely a lot of talk about leaving," says Mr. Jemio, who helps manage the Hollywood day-laborer center. "People are on their last hope."

This, at least, we can be thankful for during this time of economic despair. The immigration problem is appearing to fix itself, using as its tool the free market system - a system which, by the way, needs as much positive PR as it can get in these days of New Deal-esque socialism.

Political leaders (mostly Republicans) have been saying all along that something must be done about illegal immigration, and they've wanted that "something" to be the government actually enforcing its own laws. In that way, they turned to the government for a solution. Sure it would be nice if the government enforced its own immigration laws. But, though it would be welcomed, it's not necessary. The free market is taking care of it, now that it's been given some time to do that.

If only the government had taken such a hands-off approach to the economy, maybe we'd soon see the free market eventuality prove itself right in that regard, too.

Source





22 December, 2008

Illegal immigrant tries to flee Britain SIX times... and costs taxpayers $500,000 to keep him there

More British bureaucratic insanity

Like thousands of others arriving here, Rashid Ali dreamt Britain would be a land of opportunity. But when he failed to gain asylum, he just wanted to go home to Morocco. With no money, job or passport, the illegal immigrant resolved to flee Britain by stowing away on cargo ships. Yet after six failed attempts he is still there - because the UK authorities have forced him to stay. He was supposed to have been deported in 2005 after he was caught stowing away for the fifth time and was jailed for stealing a coat and some food. But instead the 30-year-old was then held at an immigration detention centre for three years - at a cost to the taxpayer of $500,000.

Now he could be jailed again after being caught hiding on another boat two days after being released. Yesterday a judge said it beggared belief that the Home Office had failed to repatriate him. At Bristol Crown Court, Judge Michael Hubbard, QC, vowed to 'kick some backsides', saying: 'The sooner he gets back to Morocco, the better for everybody. 'We will write to the minister for the relevant office and see if we can have a senior civil servant here to explain the situation.' Ali arrived in Britain in 2004 claiming to be Algerian, because he thought he would have a better chance of gaining asylum. When his claim was rejected, he was unable to go home because he had torn up the identity documents proving he was Moroccan.

Desperate to get back, he squatted in an abandoned factory by the docks at Avonmouth, Bristol, and tried to find a passage home on ships. But four times his stowaway attempts were thwarted - the furthest he got was Ireland - and he found himself back in Bristol. After being returned to Avonmouth for a fifth time, he stole some food and a coat to keep warm. He was jailed for nine months and a magistrate ordered that he be deported after serving his sentence. Instead, on his release he was sent to a detention centre for almost three years.

In October this year he was finally freed - and two days later police found him hiding on a sixth boat leaving Bristol. He was charged with stealing a mobile phone and jacket and damaging a door at the docks, which he admitted. Judge Hubbard adjourned sentencing and remanded Ali in custody until January 31 in the hope of getting an explanation from immigration officials. The judge said: 'It beggars belief that during that time in detention it wasn't sorted out for him to return home. Can we not use this court to kick some backsides and have something done?'

Source



Kyl reluctant to take lead on immigration plan again

Sen. John McCain and other bipartisan immigration reformers may have to revamp U.S. border policy without the help of Arizona's junior senator. In 2007, Sen. Jon Kyl surprised critics and angered many supporters by negotiating and championing controversial comprehensive immigration-reform legislation. But after taking a pounding from conservative activists, Kyl is not eager to stick his neck out again for a temporary-worker program and steps toward legalization for millions of undocumented migrants in the country. Nationwide public outcry ultimately killed last year's measure. Although the timing is unclear, the incoming Democratic-controlled Congress is expected to give it another try with a new version.

President-elect Barack Obama is an immigration-reform supporter who promised Latino voters during the campaign that he wouldn't wilt under public opposition. But the support of high-profile conservatives such as Kyl, the Senate's No. 2 Republican, would help blunt the impact of a voter backlash. McCain, whom Obama defeated for the presidency, is signaling a willingness to work with the new president on the hot-button issue.

Action, though, may not come in the early days of the new administration, which is fixated on the economy. Another potential complication: Senate immigration point man Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., is battling brain cancer and is focused on health-care legislation. "The president will set the agenda. He's just been elected with a significant majority, and the Democrats have made significant gains in both houses, so it will be up to them to decide where comprehensive immigration reform will be on the agenda," McCain said Thursday during a meeting with Arizona Republic editors and reporters. "I stand ready to work with them at the first opportunity, but for me to say that that's what we're going to take up is not in keeping with the results of the last election."

Kyl isn't saying no to immigration reform out of hand, but he supports a position first articulated by McCain during the campaign: that Congress must convince the American people that the borders are secure before pursuing other reforms that critics view as benefiting illegal immigrants. He also credited Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Kennedy for their willingness to make concessions, particularly on restricting family "chain migration," upon which Kyl says few other countries base their immigration systems. With chain migration, immigrants can facilitate visas for relatives.

Kennedy's conciliatory attitude prompted Kyl to make concessions, too. He agreed to a proposed pathway to citizenship for many who are now in the country illegally. Kyl prefers a system based on the U.S. marketplace's need for temporary workers and had opposed such a pathway in 2006. "I doubt that the public thinks we're there yet, and I'm not sure that the same basic trade-offs will be agreed to again," Kyl said. "I don't know whether the Obama administration would be willing to consider the same changes, but they were critical to my support for the ultimate bill. And if they alter the agreement significantly, and I suspect they will do so, then the equation for trade-offs becomes totally different."

Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano is Obama's choice to replace Chertoff at the Department of Homeland Security. With Democrats holding commanding advantages in the House and the Senate, the urgency to win over minority Republicans to pass priorities such as immigration reform is reduced. Still, Kyl, recently re-elected to a new term as Senate minority whip, would add significant bipartisan clout to any immigration plan. He is the highest-ranking Arizonan on Capitol Hill since the late Republican Rep. John Rhodes was House minority leader in the 1970s.

McCain paid a political price for embracing comprehensive immigration reform: His fundraising dried up so much that by mid-2007, his presidential campaign was in danger of collapsing. McCain stands by his earlier call for the tactical shift that emphasizes border security. But he said a guest-worker plan could be pursued at the same time. "I think we are already making significant strides." McCain said "I don't think it has to be, quote, completed. "I think we have to assure the American people that our borders are being secured and, at the same time, we can establish a temporary-worker program that works."

Immigration advocate Elias Bermudez, founder of Phoenix-based Immigrants Without Borders and a Republican, expects McCain to remain the GOP leader on immigration reform. But he said Kyl understands the political importance of not driving away Latinos from the Republican Party with anti-immigration rhetoric. "I don't think the Democrats need Republican votes to pass this," Bermudez said. "Kyl will probably try to put in his two cents' worth as to what he believes is needed in immigration reform. . . . Remember, we are not looking for 'amnesty.' We are asking for an official mechanism whereby people are able to come here legally to work."

McCain agreed that Republicans must not alienate Hispanics, noting that President Bush won 43 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2004. McCain got 31 percent this year. "In (swing states) Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico and Florida, the margin of defeat was the difference in the Hispanic vote between 2004 and 2008," McCain said. "We Republicans . . . have got to recruit and elect Hispanics to office. And we need to correct the impression that many Hispanic citizens have, and that is that we don't like Hispanics."

Source





21 December, 2008

U.S. Workers Crowding Out Immigrant Laborers

A year ago, a day-laborer center adjacent to a Home Depot here teemed with Latin American immigrants who showed up and found a sure day's work painting, gardening or hauling. These days, more than immigrants are packing the Hollywood Community Job Center: Unemployed Americans are joining them. There's little work for anybody. "Everybody is coming to look for work," says Rene Jemio, outreach coordinator for the hiring hall. "It's not just your average immigrant anymore; it's African-Americans and whites, too."

For the first time in a decade, unskilled immigrants are competing with Americans for work. And evidence is emerging that tens of thousands of Hispanic immigrants are withdrawing from the labor market as U.S. workers crowd them out of potential jobs. At least some of the foreigners are returning home. "We see competition from more nonimmigrant workers," says Abel Valenzuela, a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles who studies day laborers. "Employers are also paying less than in previous years," he says.

In the third quarter of 2008, 71.3% of Latino immigrant workers were either employed or actively seeking work, compared with 72.4% in the same quarter a year earlier, according to a new study by the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research organization. The 1.1-percentage-point drop "marks a substantial decrease in the labor-market participation of Latino immigrants," says Rakesh Kochhar, the Pew economist who prepared the report.

Since 2003, the labor force participation rate -- the employed or job-seeking share of the population -- among foreign-born Hispanics had been consistently on the rise. The decline in the third quarter of 2008 "is a testament to the character and depth of the current recession triggered by the housing slump," says the Pew report. "The recession has truly put Hispanic immigrants in a state of flux," says Mr. Kochhar, who based his analysis on data from the Current Population Survey produced jointly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau.

At the Hollywood center, even a year ago, contractors and homeowners employed 30 to 40 workers each day. Now, it isn't unusual for only three or four to get hired, organizers say.

In Houston, where post-hurricane cleanup work is drying up, "the situation is getting more difficult by the day," says Salvador Perez, a 45-year-old Mexican day laborer who has been in the U.S. since 2003. "I like this country for the work opportunity, but now I can barely scrape together a few dollars to send home to my family after paying for rent and food."

Latin American workers bore the brunt of the collapse of the construction sector, which employs 20% to 30% of all foreign-born Hispanics in this country. As the housing market tumbled last year, they lost jobs in ever-greater numbers. Competition has become fierce even in agriculture, where farmers had struggled in recent years to hire enough immigrants to harvest crops, sometimes letting fruit wither on the vine. Growers across the country are reporting that farmhands are plentiful; in fact, they are turning down potential field workers. "For the first time since 9/11, we have applicants in excess of our requirements," says Bob Gray, chief executive of Duda Farm Fresh Foods Inc., a grower, packer and shipper based in Salinas, Calif. In particular, Mr. Gray has observed an influx of U.S.-born Latinos and other workers who previously shunned field work. "These are domestic workers who appear to be displacing immigrants," says Mr. Gray.

A similar situation has emerged in U.S. cities from New York to Los Angeles, where unemployed, nonimmigrant laborers are seeking informal work that typically has been performed by low-skilled immigrants that once commanded a 50% premium over the hourly minimum wage. The unemployment rate for immigrant Latinos was 6.4% in the third quarter of 2008, compared with 4.5% during last year's third quarter. However, the rise in unemployment for this group would have been even greater "if not for the fact that many of these workers withdrew from the labor market," says the Pew report. If they hadn't exited the U.S. labor market, the Pew study estimates, their unemployment rate for the third quarter would have been 7.8%, 3.3 percentage points higher than the same quarter last year.

Among Hispanic immigrants who entered the U.S. between 1990 and 1999, the survey found that 217,000 quit the labor force between the third quarter of 2007 and the third quarter of 2008. Since population falls as a result of individual death or emigration from the U.S., "these trends suggest that at least some foreign-born Latinos are not only leaving the labor force but, perhaps, also returning to their countries of origin," the report said. "There is definitely a lot of talk about leaving," says Mr. Jemio, who helps manage the Hollywood day-laborer center. "People are on their last hope."

Source



Houston firm to pay $21 million in immigration case

A Houston-based pallet manufacturing company has agreed to pay the federal government nearly $21 million to avoid prosecution for hiring illegal immigrants, the largest such settlement on record. IFCO Systems North America signed the agreement late Thursday in New York, effectively resolving the company's criminal liability in connection with one of the biggest workplace enforcement raids in the nation's history. The next-largest settlement on record for a company accused of knowingly hiring illegal immigrants was reached in 2005 with Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., for $11 million.

Andrew T. Baxter, the acting U.S. Attorney in Albany, N.Y., where the case originated, said the settlement "severely punishes IFCO for its serious immigration and employment violations, but it also allows the corporation to continue its operations, so that its lawful employees and innocent shareholders do not suffer the consequences of a business failure in this economy."

The government began its investigation of IFCO following a tip to ICE in February 2005, that illegal immigrants at an IFCO plant in Albany were seen ripping up their W-2 forms. On April 19, 2006, ICE agents arrested 1,187 illegal immigrants at more than 40 locations nationwide. Seven IFCO managers were also criminally charged with crimes including: knowingly hiring illegal aliens, transporting and harboring illegal aliens and conspiring to transport illegal aliens. All seven have pleaded guilty and are awaiting sentencing. Five additional IFCO managers were indicted in February 2008 for similar crimes and are awaiting trial. The IFCO settlement agreement concerns only the liability of the corporation and does not address any pending or possible future criminal charges against individual employees.

John P. Torres, acting assistant secretary of Homeland Security, said in a statement that the settlement sends a "powerful message that ICE will investigate and bring to justice companies which hire illegal workers." In all of fiscal year 2007, ICE secured fines and forfeitures of more than $30 million in worksite enforcement cases. ICE also arrested 863 people in criminal cases and made more than 4,000 administrative arrests - a tenfold increase over five years before.

Source





20 December, 2008

Left-run Spain slowly reversing course

Spain proposed changes to immigration laws on Friday to limit an influx of foreigners as it faces recession and the highest unemployment rate in the European Union. The measures, which must be approved by parliament, would allow police to hold illegal immigrants for up to 60 days pending deportation and make it harder for foreigners to bring relatives over to live in Spain. "In our difficult current situation, decisions have been taken to adapt immigration levels to the labour market," Labour Minister Celestino Corbacho told a press conference following a cabinet meeting on the reform.

Nearly 5 million immigrants have settled in Spain during the past decade, more than in any other European country, drawn by a construction boom that has collapsed in the global financial crisis. With unemployment expected to end the year at 13 percent and rise as high as 20 percent by 2010, Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero's government says there are not enough jobs for immigrants who make up 11 percent of the population.

The proposed reforms would impose higher fines for employers recruiting foreigners who do not have proper legal papers, but expand civil rights for foreigners already living legally or illegally in Spain.

Prior to his re-election this year, Zapatero heaped praise on immigrants and said they were responsible for half rapid economic growth that has reduced unemployment among Spaniards. But, this week the government started a campaign featuring posters of an immigrant and the caption "Have you thought of going back?".

Immigrants are finding it harder to secure jobs as layoffs force Spaniards to seek lower paid work previously done by foreigners, such as fruit picking, construction and waiting on tables. The government has offered among other incentives to pay jobless immigrants unemployment benefit in their home countries and part of the cost of their journey home. Unemployment is rising three times faster among immigrants than Spaniards and the government is wary of unrest after clashes between police and African migrants turned away from this year's olive harvest in Andalucia.

Source



Australia: Big "refugee" influx forces Federal backdown on detention

The Rudd Government has been forced to open the $400 million detention centre on Christmas Island in an embarrassing admission it is struggling to cope with an influx of boat people. Immigration Minister Chris Evans has previously resisted pressure to open the centre despite a steadily increasing number of arrivals, saying the 800-bed facility had been "inherited" from the Howard Government and was not suitable for children and families.Government MP Michael Danby, the head of a parliamentary delegation that visited the centre this year, said it resembled a stalag and was a "grandiose" waste of public money. "It looks like an enormous white elephant," he said at the time.

But the Immigration Department will today announce the latest boatload of 37 suspected asylum seekers, intercepted 200 kilometres north-east of Darwin on Tuesday, will be housed in the new centre. The 37 men are expected to arrive at Christmas Island over the weekend. There are already 135 Afghan, Iranian and Sri Lankan asylum seekers on the island, but they live in a construction camp, the old detention centre at Phosphate Hill, or in the community.

Seven boats have been intercepted in the past three months, with 164 suspected asylum seekers caught trying to enter Australia this year, up from 148 last year. The Rudd Government has come under intense pressure over its border protection scheme, with the Opposition claiming the scrapping of temporary protection visas has made Australia a "soft target" for people smugglers.

The Age understands the Government was extremely reluctant to open the centre, because it sends a message it is losing the battle against people smugglers and validates the Howard Government's decision to build it. Asked at a Senate committee hearing in May how many people it would take before it was opened, Senator Evans said: "It depends on what other options you have." In October he said the "common view" was that the construction camp, which had a range of communal facilities and "a bit more of a community feel", was a "better alternative".

In a statement to be released today, the Immigration Department says: "The Government's policy is to open the new facility when numbers and separation arrangements required it." But it says no women, children, or families will live in the new centre, consistent with the Government's policy, which prohibits children from being locked up in detention. It costs taxpayers $32 million a year to accommodate up to 30 detainees at the new centre.

In August, refugee advocates who toured the new centre said it was "extremely harsh" with a "high-security, prison-like character". Amnesty International and seven other groups wrote to Senator Evans at the time, saying "the very expensive security systems of the facility are quite unnecessary". "The damage that has been done to people's mental and physical health by detaining them in remote, high-security detention centres such as this has been documented repeatedly," they said.

Source





19 December, 2008

Immigration to Britain 'must be slashed' to keep population below 70m

Net immigration in to the UK has to be slashed by 80 per cent if the Government wants to keep the population below 70 million, the official statistician has warned. The balance of those settling here over those leaving must be cut to just 50,000 a year if the population is not to pass the landmark total. But that would require an enormous reduction from the current net level of 237,000 a year and makes a mockery of immigration minister Phil Woolas' pledge to keep numbers under control.

Karen Dunnell, the National Statistician, has revealed for the first time the dramatic changes required to keep population growth in check. It comes as the Home Office will today announce it is keeping restrictions in place for at least another year on low-skilled workers from Romania and Bulgaria.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said "This is a stunning admission which we have had to wring out of the statisticians. "The Government claims that they can hold the population of the UK under 70 million by means of their new points based system is blown completely out of the water.

Mr Woolas vowed in October that the Government would not let the population go above 70 million but on current projections it will pass that within two decades. But in a letter to MPs, Ms Dunnell said, assuming fertility and mortality projections remain the same, annual net migration would have to drop to 50,000 if the population is to stay below that level by 2081. But she added: "In practice, this may not be a realistic scenario."

Current long term projections have net migration at 190,000 a year, which would see numbers pass 70 million by 2028. But even that could be an overestimate as net migration last year stood at 237,000 - the second highest level on record.

Labour MP Frank Field, co-chairmen of the Cross Party Group for Balanced Migration, said: "This shows the huge scale of the task required to get our population back under control. These figures show that Ministers have yet to start taking decisive action".

Mr Woolas, said: "We have made it clear that the points based system will allow us to manage immigration which in turn will help contribute to future population projections and control. "The points system means only those with the skills Britain needs can come - and no more. If the new rules had been in place last year there would have been 12 per cent fewer people coming in through the equivalent route."

Source



Immigration to Australia tightened to save jobs

A GROWING jobs shortage and rising unemployment figures in Australia have forced the Rudd Government to start closing the gate on foreign workers. Jobs vacancies for skilled workers have plunged 50 per cent in Queensland as demand for professionals and tradespeople dries up and mining giants slash staff. Nearly 550 Queensland miners were axed on Tuesday and up to $30 billion in planned mining developments are in doubt because of the sudden downturn in world demand for the state's coal.

In response, the Federal Government has moved to tighten immigration laws to protect Australian jobs. This will involve the Government making it harder for skilled foreign workers to come to Australia, but fast-tracking those who meet critical shortfalls. Immigration Minister Chris Evans said the revised program would start in January and would better target the workers Australia needed. "In light of changing economic circumstances, the Rudd Government has reviewed the skilled migration program and consulted with business and industry along with state and territory governments Australia-wide about their skills need," Senator Evans said. "There were concerns that the permanent skilled migration program was not delivering the right skills to the right areas and there was an increasing use of the temporary skilled migration program by employees to meet their needs."

The 133,500 skilled migrants applying to work in Australia will now be required to have a job - sponsored by an employer or by a state government - before they arrive or meet a critical skills list, including medical, engineering and construction.

The move to save jobs for Australians comes as Treasurer Wayne Swan hit out at a bookmaker who offered $1.12 odds on Australia plunging into recession. "I think that sort of talk is utterly irresponsible," Mr Swan said. "What the Australian Government is doing in the face of the global financial crisis is everything we possibly can to strengthen our economy and to protect jobs in that environment."

On top of the mining job cuts in the Bowen Basin and northwest Queensland, it yesterday emerged about 80 staff at the Brisbane headquarters of collapsed childcare giant ABC Learning Centres had been sacked. The losses add to about 100 jobs tipped to go from ABC childcare centres next month.

The Employment Department's job index for skilled workers plunged by more than 50 per cent in Queensland in the past year, the second biggest decrease after NSW. Nationally, skilled vacancies have dropped by nearly 38 per cent as the financial crisis hit the broader economy. The biggest drop was for printing trades, which were down by 24.2 per cent, followed by metal trades at 15.8 per cent and wood trades at 14.1 per cent. The only occupation on the rise was medical and science technical officers, which rose by 0.8 per cent. The grim economic news follows moves by the US Federal Reserve to reduce interest rates virtually to zero to stimulate the economy out of recession. Professor of economic policy at Curtin University's Graduate School of Business Peter Kenyon said the resource sector would feel more pain in the short term.

Source





18 December, 2008

Sheriff Joe arrests aggressive nuts

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office deputies arrested four activists from ACORN Wednesday for allegedly disrupting a Maricopa County Board of Supervisors meeting. Protesters from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now were at the meeting to criticize Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's policies, including his focus on illegal immigration. ACORN and other critics say the immigration focus takes away from other priorities.

Arpaio said the four were warned by deputies not to disrupt the meeting and that Wednesday's disorderly conduct charges follow the arrest four ACORN protesters Monday. "They're always griping about me," said Arpaio.

ACORN political coordinator Teresa Castro said the group has been petitioning the county board to have formal, public discussions about Arpaio, but members only get to talk during public comment sessions. Castro said ACORN and other groups have been making such requests since June and just want to have their concerns heard.

Arpaio said his deputies were keeping order and protecting the supervisors during the Wednesday meeting. About 10 deputies were at the board meeting and between 30 and 40 protesters attended. One observer of the arrests - with ties to neither ACORN or the MCSO - said deputies appeared ready to act quickly to quell any disturbances.

Board Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox questioned the arrests. "I believe that the actions of law enforcement at today's meeting, particularly the arrest of citizens, were excessive and unwarranted," she said.

Arpaio has a tough stand on immigration and has initiated sweeps of day labor sites and areas where undocumented immigrants are said to congregate. He also has conducted raids on some Phoenix-area businesses accused of hiring illegal immigrants. Arpaio said he will continue his immigration efforts, noting his recent reelection to a fifth term as sheriff.

ACORN was in the forefront of national politics during the presidential campaign with some of its voter registration drives questioned. The group is active on housing market issues and has sought assistance for home owners facing foreclosure.

Source



Napolitano Poor on Immigration and Border Security

President-Elect Obama's pick to be secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Arizona Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano, has received media praise for being a "centrist," while the facts about her record as a policymaker continue to be overlooked. But don't be fooled by the hype. Gov. Napolitano talks tough, but her record of immigration enforcement is weak. While she may sound pro-enforcement, her policies reflect a pro-amnesty agenda.

Look at her record as governor. While she spoke openly about the need to address illegal immigration, Napolitano rarely put those words into action. Immigration enforcement efforts at the Department of Homeland Security may be phased out in an Obama Administration. All it takes is a little inaction. There are many ways to weaken enforcement, most requiring no new laws. Changes to regulations, funding cuts and limiting the scope of existing laws can all be part of an open borders effort to implement mass-amnesty. As governor, Napolitano engaged in many of these tactics while publicly criticizing Congress and the President for failing to do more on enforcement.

In a 2007 speech to the National Press Club, she claimed that the only realistic proposal for dealing with the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the U.S. "is to create a strict, stringent pathway to citizenship." But a pathway to citizenship is a pathway to amnesty, and the American people are firm in their opposition to this. According to a recent poll, 61 percent of American voters oppose a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. That's why the Senate amnesty bill was defeated last year. Napolitano supported that amnesty proposal.

The border fence is another issue on which Napolitano talks tough but presents a weak record. In the same speech before the Press Club, she opposed the border fence, our most practical line of defense, flippantly saying, "[S]how me a 50-foot wall, and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder." It's a great soundbite, but the fact is that the fence does make it much harder for illegal immigrants to enter the country. Opposing the fence because some illegal immigrants may find a way around it is like telling a family not to lock their door at night because burglars can always break in through a window. No one claims that the fence will prevent all illegal immigrants from entering, but it is working well. According to the Border Patrol, illegal crossings in Yuma, Ariz., and Santa Teresa, N. M., have decreased by over 70 percent as result of the fence. And in San Diego, the Border Patrol reports a 95 percent decrease in illegal immigrant apprehensions.

Napolitano's positions on both amnesty and the border fence are on the wrong side of public opinion. A recent ABC poll that found 77 percent of respondents believe the U.S. isn't doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into the country.

At a time when over 10 million American workers are looking for jobs, but an estimated seven million jobs are held by illegal immigrants, Napolitano's positions threaten American workers. In a 2007 press conference, Napolitano criticized worksite enforcement efforts, calling them "unfair." But when given the opportunity to provide employers with the tools they need to secure a legal workforce, she opposed mandating the program. It wasn't until Arizona voters passed a ballot initiative requiring employers to use the program that Napolitano signed the measure into law. As governor, she also vetoed a bill that would have barred Arizona and local agencies from accepting IDs issued by the Mexican Consulate -- IDs that are used almost exclusively by illegal immigrants to help them stay in the country.

After opposing initiatives that would ensure a legal work force, Napolitano suggested we "institute tamper-proof immigration documents to quell the fraudulent ID markets." But when Congress passed the REAL ID Act -- creating a uniform standard for identification cards to help with the detection of fraudulent documents -- Napolitano refused to allow Arizona to comply with the law.

Time and again, Napolitano has opposed policies that would reduce illegal immigration. As secretary of Homeland Security, Napolitano will have the authority to ensure that the federal government enforces immigration laws. But it will take more than tough talk to reduce illegal immigration. I hope the Senate will take a careful look at the governor's record on immigration enforcement during the confirmation process next year.

Source





17 December, 2008

Southwest border fence hits 500-mile mark

The government has completed 500 miles of fencing along the Southwest border, 170 miles short of its goal. At this pace, the administration expects to have at least 600 miles complete by Jan. 20, when Barack Obama takes over as president, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said earlier this month. The president-elect said last week that he wants to evaluate what's working on the border as he considers whether to continue building the 670 miles of fencing. But by Chertoff's estimation, there will not be much left to build.

Homeland Security officials earlier this year said the fence would not be completed by Dec. 31, as planned. About 160 miles have been built since August, despite calls by some groups to delay construction. As of Dec. 12,500 miles had been completed, said Customs and Border Protection spokesman Mike Friel. The fence along the U.S.-Mexico border is not intended to stop illegal immigration altogether, but make it more difficult for people to enter the U.S. illegally, Bush administration officials say. It has been controversial and has faced several lawsuits, none successful so far.

Congress authorized the fence in 2005 to help secure the border and slow illegal immigration, and gave the homeland security secretary the power to waive the federal laws. Obama, as a senator, voted for the fence. Congress has set aside $2.7 billion for the fence since 2006. But there's no estimate how much the entire system - the physical fence and the technology - will cost to build, let alone maintain.

In September, Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Ralph Basham told Congress his agency needed an additional $400 million to complete the project, citing higher costs for fuel, steel and labor. Congress approved the $400 million and the Bush administration believes it now has enough money to finish the fence.

The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks revived the immigration debate and advanced the idea of a border fence. Intelligence officials have said gaps along the Southwestern border could provide opportunities for terrorists to enter the country. The overall plan for security on that border includes additional Border Patrol agents, more enforcement of immigration laws, the fence and a high-tech "virtual fence" using surveillance technology. The administration has met its goal of adding 6,000 new agents to the Border Patrol force by the end of this year, bringing the total to about 18,000.

Boeing Co. has the contract for the technology portion of the fence, as well as for some construction work. The company's contract for the technology expires in 2009.

Source



Migrants account for almost all new British jobs

Virtually all the growth in new jobs in the last seven years has been accounted for by migrants, a study revealed. There are 1.34 million more people in work now than in 2001 but the number of UK-born workers in employment has actually fallen by 62,000 over the same period. In contrast there has been a significant surge in the number of migrant workers in employment - including almost half a million more Eastern Europeans, the study from Migrationwatch UK shows.

Critics said the latest figures make a mockery of Gordon Brown's pledge of "British jobs for British workers". Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: "From an immigration point of view this means that migration from Eastern Europe is moving into balance as we have been predicting but, from the point of view of British born workers, the damage to their prospects has already been done - at a time when jobs of almost all kinds are at a premium.

"This must have been staring the government in the face for a long time yet even last month they described the East European migrants as "helping to fill gaps in the labour market". Rather than come clean about the effect of massive immigration on the prospects of British born workers they have been spinning the statistics and camouflaging the true position with "tough talk" about immigration. 'Now that the cat is out of the bag they cannot possibly lift such restrictions as now exist on Romanian and Bulgarian workers."

In an analysis of the Government's own figures, the study showed between 2001 and 2008, employment in the UK grew by 1.342 million - made up of 253,000 more UK nationals in work and 1,087,000 more foreign workers in jobs. But the UK nationals figure includes migrants who hold British citizenship. When they are removed, the number of UK-born workers in employment actually fell by 62,000 over the period.

Of the growth in non-UK nationals in jobs, some 469,000 were from the so-called A8 Eastern European countries, including Poland and Slovakia, who joined the EU in 2004 and were granted full access to the British labour market. Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU in 2007 but the Government imposed restrictions on low-skilled workers. The effective quota is up for review at the end of the year and ministers are expected to announce on Thursday that it will remain in place. It comes as the Government is this week expected to say it is maintaining restrictions on migrant workers from Romania and Bulgaria which have been in place since the pair join the EU in 2007.

Source





16 December, 2008

Hard job: Tracing missing Mexican immigrants

Mexican official helps desperate people find their loved ones

Jorge Solchaga has the grim job of locating missing Mexican immigrants and notifying families of their fate. In a place like Arizona, that makes Solchaga a very busy man. Just about every day, ashen-faced relatives walk into his office at the Mexican Consulate in Phoenix asking for help finding a missing migrant in the desert, a family member picked up by immigration officials or a loved one held by smugglers. As head of the consulate's protection department, Solchaga is supposed to look out for the rights and well-being of the estimated 600,000 Mexicans, legal and illegal, living in Arizona.

But searching for missing immigrants has become the dominant part of his work. That is due to Arizona's unique environment as a border state with the highest rates of illegal immigration, migrant deaths, human smuggling and stepped-up immigration enforcement. This year, Solchaga has received requests to help find nearly 200 people who disappeared, up from about 150 for all of last year. Because many of the missing are in the country illegally, relatives often seek out Solchaga first rather than U.S. authorities. "It's a humanitarian thing, and also to be a public servant to help my countrymen," said Solchaga, leaning over a desk in his office at the consulate on West Camelback Road. "The family needs to know what happened to their lovely ones."

But it's not only Mexican immigrants seeking help from Solchaga and his staff of eight investigators. Increasingly, U.S. authorities are turning to him to help find relatives of Mexican children discovered in drophouses or identifying accident victims brought to hospitals, or corpses at the morgue. As a result, Solchaga is filling a void that serves two countries at once, the U.S. and Mexico. "We work very closely together. We help each other out," said Eduardo Preciado, assistant field-office director of detention and removal operations for the Phoenix office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The 40-year-old Mexico City native was thrown into his role as binational detective when migrant deaths soared in 2001 as heightened border security in California and Texas funneled more illegal-immigrant traffic through the deadly Arizona desert. At the time, Solchaga was working at the Mexican Consulate in Tucson. He was among the consular personnel called in to help U.S. authorities identify 14 bodies of people who had died in May 2001 after smugglers abandoned a group of illegal immigrants in 100-degree heat near Yuma.

The deaths were among the most ever recorded in a single incident along the U.S.-Mexican border and foreshadowed a wave of migrant deaths that continues to this day. Since 2001, the bodies of about 1,300 dead immigrants have been found in Pima, Pinal and Santa Cruz counties, but only about 900 have been identified, said Bruce Anderson, forensic anthropologist for the Pima County medical examiner. Solchaga began working regularly with Anderson's office, learning to sift through the clothing of the dead for evidence that might lead to relatives. Immigrants often sew money and phone numbers into the waistbands of their pants.

Like a forensic scientist on the television crime series CSI, Solchaga learned to examine corpses for scars, tattoos, dental fillings, moles, broken bones and other characteristics that could help relatives identify the bodies. His earlier training as a photographer came in handy. After taking photographs of a tattoo or scar, Solchaga would e-mail the images to relatives and sometimes the media to help bring the case to a close. Solchaga's work helped ensure the medical examiner was releasing the "right body to the right family," Anderson said. "We can't use clothing as a basis of ID because clothing can be exchanged." ....

Source



10,000 Polish women get abortions in Britain

Ten thousand Polish women had abortions in Britain last year, it has been reported, in procedures which are thought to have cost the NHS between 5million and 10m pounds. Thousands of the women are thought to have come to Britain specifically for the procedure, which is illegal in Poland. People coming to Britain as temporary workers are given a National Insurance number, which allows them to register with a doctor and have NHS treatment.

Britain is thought to be a particularly popular destination as terminations can be carried out as late as 24 weeks into a pregnancy. In several other EU countries, abortions can not be carried out after 12 weeks. A pill given to women under nine weeks pregnant costs the NHS about 500 pounds while an operation necessary for those further into pregnancy costs about 1,600 including after-care.

The figures were reportedly disclosed by the Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning. Aleksandra Jozefowska, a spokesman for the Federation, told The Sun: "On Polish internet sites you can find lots of information on how to obtain an abortion in Britain. And every week I have two or three phone calls from women who want to know about abortion in England."

One unnamed London doctor was reported to have told the newspaper: "As long as they get an NHS number, they haven't got a problem. They can say: 'I didn't know I was pregnant until I got here, I'm in an impossible situation and need help'."

Source





15 December, 2008

Settlement opens up amnesty for tens of thousands of immigrants to the USA

Many who entered the United States on valid visas but fell out of legal status between 1982 and 1988 are eligible for the amnesty offered under the 1986 immigration reform law.

For two decades, Anaheim businessman Erkan Aydin has taken on a task unimaginable for most immigrants like himself: trying to convince the U.S. government that he was here illegally. Aydin, 50, arrived in the United States from his native Turkey with a valid student visa in 1981, but fell out of legal status when he failed to enroll in school, he said.

The customer service representative has a powerful reason why he wants to be considered an illegal immigrant. It would make him eligible for the amnesty offered to 2.7 million illegal immigrants under the 1986 immigration reform law.

Thanks to a recent legal settlement, the chance to apply for amnesty is finally open to Aydin and tens of thousands of others who entered the country on a valid visa but fell out of legal status between 1982 and 1988. The settlement, approved this fall by a U.S. district court in Washington state, stems from a class-action lawsuit filed by attorney Peter Schey originally on behalf of an immigrant assistance program of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO. "I have been born again, like a new baby," Aydin said last week in his Anaheim car dealership office. "I will start a beautiful life in this beautiful country."

The landmark reform law offered a one-time amnesty to immigrants who were in the United States unlawfully from before 1982 to about 1988. But Congress was concerned that those who entered the country with a valid visa would argue that they fell out of legal status during that time simply to qualify for amnesty. As a result, Schey said, Congress created a rule requiring immigrants to show that their shift from legal to illegal status was "known to the government." That rule, however, created a new problem: How to prove that the government knew about their violations?

Nigeria native Olaniyi Sofuluke, for instance, came to the United States in 1981 on a student visa to study banking and finance at Troy State University (now Troy University) in Alabama. But, lacking funds, he soon dropped out to work as a dishwasher in two Atlanta restaurants until he could earn enough for his tuition and living expenses.

That violated his visa conditions and threw him into illegal status. The university was required to send a notice to the U.S. government that Sofuluke had dropped out but was not able to provide him with a copy when he requested one five years later. So immigration officials rejected his amnesty application, saying his violations were not known to the government.

Schey, however, successfully argued that because schools were legally required to send the notices, it should be presumed that the government received them and therefore knew about the violations. He also successfully argued that the government knew many immigrants had violated their status another way: by failing to furnish an address report every three months. The government's failure to produce the address reports showed that the immigrants had not filed them, violating the terms of their visa, he argued.

U.S. immigration officials accepted both arguments in the settlement. They have announced that immigrants whose cases involve violations known to the government may apply for amnesty between Feb. 1, 2009, and Jan. 31, 2010.

Although the settlement was announced in September, many immigrants are just learning about it. Sofuluke, now a Maryland administrator, just found out about it last week. "I couldn't even eat dinner, I was so full of joy," he said. "I've been in the twilight zone all of this time." As a banker in Nigeria, he said his colleagues would return from studying in the United States and regale him with stories about the land of opportunity. He devoured news about the United States in Time and Newsweek, he said, and finally got his chance to study here in 1981. He eventually earned an undergraduate degree in accounting and an MBA, started a dry cleaning business that employed 16 people, bought his own home and began doing volunteer work with the disabled. (He was given a work permit while his amnesty application was pending.) "You can find the greatest opportunities here," he said in a phone interview. "That's why we call America 'the golden egg.' "

The settlement marks Schey's third and final class-action lawsuit over the 1986 amnesty law. The previous lawsuits, both settled in 2003, resulted in more than 150,000 immigrants being allowed to apply for amnesty.

In the first lawsuit, Schey successfully challenged U.S. policy that effectively barred from amnesty applicants who traveled outside the United States roughly between 1986 and 1988. Although Congress specifically allowed a "brief, innocent and casual absence" during that period for, say, holiday visits, immigration authorities at the time essentially declared that anyone who left and reentered illegally was not "innocent" and therefore became ineligible for amnesty.

In the second lawsuit, Schey argued against the rejection of amnesty applicants who had returned home and reentered with a valid visa. Immigration officials at the time held that the reentry was legal, breaking the continued illegal residency required for amnesty. Schey argued, however, that the reentry was illegal because the immigrants would have to have lied about themselves when they applied for the visa to return.

Schey said that amnesty will allow countless immigrants to report crime without fear of deportation, to visit ailing parents back home and to leave exploitative jobs. "It will make an immeasurable difference in the lives of thousands of people," Schey said. "For many of them, it will be the first time since they entered the country 30 years ago that they will be able to move forward and end their underground existence." For Aydin, the settlement will give him the chance to fulfill a long-held dream of serving his adopted country in law enforcement or the military. Once he has his green card, he said, he plans to pursue a master's degree in criminal justice administration with an eye toward joining the Navy, Secret Service, FBI or CIA. "For many years, I wanted to serve this country, but I haven't had the opportunity," Aydin said. "Now I'm happy I'll finally have the chance."

Source



Extra judges drafted in to hear British immigration appeals

Extra judges are being drafted in to deal with more than 8,000 asylum and immigration appeals a year that threaten to overload the courts. The move is one of a series of steps to tackle the rise in appeals that have delayed other cases for a year or more. Lord Justice May, the President of the Queen's Bench Division, told The Times that as well as drafting in extra High Court judges, senior barristers and circuit judges had been appointed to sit as deputy High Court judges, doubling the normal number of judges on this work to 15.

The extra judicial manpower, which has already reduced delays, is an interim measure pending more drastic action by the Government. Ministers are expected to announce plans to move the bulk of immigration work out of the High Court altogether and into the new Tribunals Service, probably by next June. That will lead to High Court judges being relieved of thousands of cases a year, which will instead be heard by senior immigration judges and only occasionally, where absolutely necessary, by a High Court judge.

The rise in immigration work is partly because of the increased volume of immigration decisions made by the UK Border Agency, which is dealing with record numbers of applications. In 2006 it removed 16,330 failed asylum seekers, excluding dependants, and in 2007 deported more than 4,000 foreign prisoners. Another factor is the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act 2004, which replaced a two-tier system of appeals with a single-tier system. The High Court therefore became the only place of appeal from a tribunal. The volume of cases reflects that people do not accept the decision of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and seek to have the decision reconsidered or apply for judicial review.

A previous attempt by the Government to end the right of judicial review in immigration cases prompted widespread criticism and was thrown out of Parliament. But this move to devolve the work to the Tribunals Service could achieve the same result, although in a way that Lord Justice May, who took up his post in October, hopes will not be "controversial". He said: "This was a problem in terms of work overload because important cases were not being heard promptly and we had delays of up to a year."

The emergency measures have been in place for a few months, with judges being found from other areas to tackle the backlog, he said. "It was a matter of concern but it has improved." Between December 2007 and last month, the tally of cases waiting to be dealt with was cut by about 1,100 to 3,500, although that figure does not include hundreds not yet on the list as they are awaiting final decisions.

Philip Havers, QC, a leading specialist in judicial review challenges, said: "I had one case that was waiting nearly two years, involving a challenge by a doctor to the Health Service Commission. The Administrative Court was completely snowed under by immigration and asylum cases." But the delays have improved, he said. Now he was being offered a date next month or in February for a one-day case; or from February on for a two-day case. "That's as it should be - it has completely transformed." Steps would need to be taken to ensure that the problem did not arise again, he said.

Four regional administrative courts will be set up next year in Cardiff, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. Although driven by a wish to move work outside London, it will also relieve immigration cases. Senior judges have described the pressure on the High Court's Administrative Court, which hears the asylum and immigration cases, as "intense" and given warning that it is causing "unacceptable delays to the court's work".

The appeals backlog is adding to pressure on the Court of Appeal. Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls, has said that since 2005 the Court of Appeal has had a 77 per cent rise in applications to appeal in asylum and immigration cases. The increase has put "significant pressure" on the resources of the Court of Appeal both in terms of numbers of staff and lawyers who prepare the cases and in terms of judicial time, he said. It was "wholly disproportionate" for "such cases to be considered by the most senior judges who sit in the Court of Appeal," Sir Anthony said.

The Lord Chief Justice, then Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, first flagged up the "unacceptable delays" because of the pressure of asylum and immigration work in April. In 2007, the Administrative Court received 6,694 claims for judicial review - challenges to decisions by government or other public bodies. Asylum and immigration cases made up two thirds.

In addition, the court has to deal with another nearly 4,000 "reconsideration" cases, where asylum seekers are appealing against a refusal first by the UK Borders Agency and then by a senior immigration judge to have their case reconsidered. In all, that makes more than 8,000 cases, or two thirds of the workload of the Administrative Court. The vast majority, Lord Phillips said, "were found to have no merit in law" and failed.

The crisis prompted a threat last year by the Public Law Project, a group that brings judicial review cases, to ponder legal action against Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, stating that the delays amounted to a breach of article six of the European Convention on Human Rights which guarantees an effective court system. `What message does it send?'

Source





14 December, 2008

Homeland Security's Immigration Enforcement Actions Annual Report

Each year, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) undertakes immigration enforcement actions involving hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals (for definitions of immigration enforcement action terms, see Box 1). These actions include the arrest, detention, return, and removal from the United States of foreign nationals who are in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). These violations include: losing legal status by failing to abide by the terms and conditions of entry, or by engaging in crimes such as violent crimes, document fraud, terrorist activity, and drug smuggling.

Primary responsibility for the enforcement of immigration law within DHS rests with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). CBP is responsible for the inspections of all arriving persons and conveyances at ports of entry and the deterrence or apprehension of illegal immigrants between ports of entry. ICE is responsible for enforcing immigration laws within the interior of the United States.

This Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Report presents information on the apprehension, detention, return, and removal of foreign nationals during 2007. In summary:

DHS apprehended nearly 961,000 foreign nationals. Nearly 89 percent were natives of Mexico.

The annual number of foreign nationals apprehended by the Border Patrol decreased by 19 percent compared to 2006.

ICE detained approximately 311,000 foreign nationals.

More than 319,000 aliens were removed from the United States-the fifth consecutive record high. The leading countries of origin of those removed were Mexico (65 percent), Honduras (9 percent) and Guatemala (8 percent).

More than 891,000 other foreign nationals accepted an offer to return to their home countries without a removal order.

Expedited removals accounted for 106,200 or 33 percent of all removals.

DHS removed 99,900 known criminal aliens from the United States.

In this report, years are fiscal years (October 1 to September 30).

ICE physically removed approximately 244,000 foreign nationals during Fiscal Year 2007. CBP physically removed the others, which totaled 75,000.

Inspections

CBP Officers determine the admissibility of aliens who are applying for admission to the U.S. at designated ports of entry. CBP Officers may permit inadmissible aliens the opportunity to withdraw their application for admission or they can refer an alien to an immigration judge for removal proceedings. Officers have the authority to order certain aliens removed under expedited removal proceedings without further hearings or review by an immigration judge. The expedited removal order carries the same penalties as a removal order issued by an immigration judge.

Border Patrol

The primary mission of the Border Patrol is to secure approximately 7,000 miles of international land border with Canada and Mexico and 2,000 miles of coastal border of the United States. Its major objectives are to prevent entry into the United States of illegal aliens and foreign nationals suspected of terrorism and other criminal activity, interdict drug smugglers and other criminals, and compel those persons seeking admission to present themselves legally at ports of entry for inspection. Border Patrol operations are divided into geo-graphic regions referred to as sectors.

Investigations

The ICE Office of Investigations conducts criminal investigations that focus on the enforcement of a wide variety of laws that include immigration statutes. Special agents

Source



New Rule Expands DNA Collection to All People Arrested

Immigration and civil liberties groups condemned a new U.S. government policy to collect DNA samples from all noncitizens detained by authorities and all people arrested for federal crimes. The new Justice Department rule, published Wednesday and effective Jan. 9, dramatically expands a federal law enforcement database of genetic identifiers, which is now limited to storing information about convicted criminals and arrestees from 13 states. Congress authorized the expansion in 2005, citing the power of DNA as a tool in crime solving and prevention.

The FBI created its National DNA Index System in 1994 to store profiles of people convicted of serious violent crimes, such as rape and murder, but the system has been expanded repeatedly, first to include all convicted felons, then misdemeanants and state arrestees. The data bank contained more than 6.2 million samples as of August, and officials estimate that 61,000 cases have been solved or assisted using DNA.

The change could add as many as 1.2 million people a year to the national database, U.S. officials said. Supporters equate DNA collection to taking fingerprints or photographs at the time of booking. "We know from past experience that collecting DNA at arrest or deportation will prevent rapes and murders that would otherwise be committed," said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who authored that part the legislation.

But critics said the new rule raises constitutional and privacy concerns. U.S. officials said that probable cause that a person has committed a crime or indications that he is an illegal immigrant subject to removal from the country are appropriate standards for collecting DNA. But Barry Steinhardt, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's technology and liberty project, said the change "turns the presumption of innocence on its head."

Charles H. Kuck, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the U.S. rule "casts civilly detained immigrants as criminals, requiring them to submit to DNA testing even in cases where there is no suggestion of any criminal violation."

The incoming Obama administration also will have to decide whether to make it a priority to expand the DNA database or process a backlog of samples submitted by people already convicted of crimes, he said.

This month, the European Court of Human Rights unanimously ruled that a British policy to collect fingerprints and DNA of all criminal suspects, including those later deemed innocent, violated privacy rights.

Source





13 December, 2008

The ADL weighs in to the immigration debate

The ADL is an organization formed to defend Jews from discrimination and I support that aim. Jews are however overwhelmingly Leftist voters and it was in fact a group of far-Leftist Jews who in 1950 concocted the myth that conservatives were responsible for Nazism, despite the fact that Hitler was a socialist who won his elections on a platform of peace and equality. And the ADL is just as good at irrationality as those 1950 scholars.

I reproduce below a post in which the ADL fulminate about how some blog commenters made intemperate comments about illegal immigrants. Most and maybe all of the comments would be entitled to protection under the free speech provisions of the first amendment so the ADL seems to feel the need to suppress such comments by the good ol' tried and true method of comparing them to Nazism.

But that is a false analogy. The Jews of Hitler's Germany had done nothing legally wrong. But illegal immigrants in the USA today HAVE done so. They have disobeyed the American laws that require permission for foreigners to settle in the USA. So an attitude of hostility that would have been unjustified towards Jews in 1930s Germany may be perfectly well-justified towards lawbreakers in America today.

Jews are generally smart people so the article below is testimony to how Leftism rots the brain. So when they say things like "ADL has noticed", be aware that you are not listening to honest testimony.

And, sadly, the dishonesty is not limited to false analogies. They quote studies saying that first generation immigrants are less crime-prone than are native-born Americans. There are huge and fatal omissions in that claim. 1). The statistics concerned include ALL immigrants, not just illegal ones and illegal immigrants are almost certainly under-representerd in the data. 2). It is the CHILDREN of the illegals who are the bigger problem. They are VERY crime-prone. 3). The "native-born" statistics quite properly include blacks. And blacks are far and away the most crime-prone ethnic group in the USA. Hispanics in fact lie in between blacks and whites in crime-rate. And being less crime-prone than blacks is no honour. Details on that here.

I have got to put it plainly: The ADL are just another outfit of deceitful Leftist crooks

The Houston Chronicle made some important discoveries with its recent series by Susan Carroll on the failure of law enforcement officials to deport or keep in jail illegal immigrants who commit crimes. Certainly the Chronicle's investigation pointed out shortcomings in our legal and immigration systems that need to be fixed. The release of any criminal who goes on to commit more crimes, whether he or she is in this country legally or not, can be called a miscarriage of justice.

What concerns us at the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is despite Carroll's attempts to reach readers with the results of research that "found that recent immigrants are far less likely than their U.S.-born counterparts to commit crimes and end up in prison," anti-immigrant bigots seized on parts of her series to insult, stereotype, and even advocate violence against immigrants and others they perceived to be immigrants, especially Hispanics. Here are some examples of the comments from Chronicle blogs:

"This is a no-brainer to me. Start with the jails and get all those people deported, then construction companies, garbage companies, landscape companies, restaurants and must I go on?"

"All of our grandchildren's children are going to live in a third world country."

"We the taxpayers are footing the bill for these society leeches.The people from Katrina were bad enough. Our crime rate is still high."

"I got a great idea - just shoot them on the spot if they commit a serious crime in Texas."

These comments should offend all of us, and must be challenged. One only need look at the Holocaust to see the results of relentless, pervasive bigotry. The Nazis began their campaign with words and pictures against Jews, Slavs, political dissidents, Gypsies, Jehovah's Witnesses, homosexuals and the mentally and physically disabled.

Law enforcement officers in ADL's Law Enforcement in Society course, taught jointly with Holocaust Museum Houston and the Houston Police Department, review Nazi-created images to see how the Nazis used elaborate media campaigns to turn people against certain groups.

They include a newspaper photo of a "search for dissident contraband" in a Jewish neighborhood, and another photo of an official-looking man questioning a Roma woman for research in "criminal biology," a pseudo-science that maintained certain groups were more likely to be criminals because of the makeup of their blood. As images like that grew more pervasive, even well-educated people started to believe them. An estimated 11 million people died as the result of 12 years of hatred fueled by biased propaganda, and compounded by the silence of those who didn't speak out against the hate.

Unfortunately, we already see signs that anti-immigrant rhetoric has led to more overt and violent consequences. ADL has noticed an increase in such rhetoric among extremist groups in recent years, coupled with a marked increase in hate incidents and hate crimes against Latinos and those perceived to be Latinos. Further, the FBI has documented a disturbing four-year trend in the increase of hate crimes against Latinos from 475 in 2005 to 595 in 2007 nationally.

We caution readers to refrain from taking the Chronicle's well-intentioned and informative series, a series that found some real problems, and using those problems to justify prejudice and bigotry against all immigrants. As the reporters and columnists, including Carroll, Lisa Falkenberg and Rick Casey indicated, study after study has found that recent immigrants, even illegal immigrants, are less likely to commit crimes than American-born citizens. Harvard Sociology Professor Robert J. Sampson and his colleagues found in a study they completed several years ago that first-generation immigrants were 45 percent less likely to commit violence than were third-generation Americans. [See my comment of March 20 on the Sampson study].

Source



2011 British census to gauge the scope of immigration

Almost 500 million pounds will be spent on the biggest and most expensive census in an attempt to measure Britain's true immigrant population. Questions have been added to try to establish how long people have been living here, what passports they hold and their nationality. Ministers have been forced to admit that they have no idea how many immigrants are in Britain, which means that public services in areas of high migrant populations are often stretched because spending decisions are made using inaccurate data. For the 2011 Census, millions of pounds will be spent on a new mailing list to make sure that every property is included.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) will also hire about 35,000 temporary staff to track down people who fail to fill out their form. The full cost of the operation will be 480 million compared with 210 million in 2001.

Critics were unconvinced, however, that the extra money would make any difference. They say that the census is simply outdated as a vehicle for gathering comprehensive and up-to-date information, and unpublished data already held by government departments should be used instead.

Announcing plans for the census, which will take place on March 27, 2011, officials said they would devote considerable resources to getting back as many returns as possible. "Everyone who does not fill in the census will receive a knock on the door. We will have teams of 12-15 people who will visit households who have not returned their form and help them fill it in," said Glen Watson, the census director. Mr Watson said it was an offence punishable by a 1,000 pound fine not to fill in a census and hundreds of people have been taken to court in the past for refusing to complete the form.

However, a bigger problem is the far larger group who cannot be traced. In 2001 the ONS failed to find about one million people and were forced to extrapolate information from other returns. In addition, the first data is not published until about 18 months after census day, making it already out of date.

James Hulme, a spokesman for the New Local Government Network (NLGN), an independent think-tank, said: "We calculated that the Government could save about 250 million by drawing on records from existing public services, such as GP surgery lists and the electoral roll which is updated each year, rather than every ten years. At a time when the public finances are stretched, this is an ideal way of saving money."

Councils said that they did not want spending decisions to be made on the basis of the census. They were furious at being short-changed because resources were allocated on the basis of the 2001 Census.The Local Government Association said that improving alternative sources of information such as national insurance numbers would give a much clearer picture.

Source





12 December, 2008

Immigration Fraud Riddles Suspended Family Reunification Program

Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich is not the only one committing a fascinating form of fraud. In a little-noticed move last week, the State Department suspended an immigration program, disqualifying certain would-be immigrants from entering the country. Why? They were committing fraud in massive percentages.

Under current law, there are three categories of immigrants who can come to the United States as refugees. Categories one and two are people who, because of apparently exigent circumstances, are referred by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and other official and NGO groups. Category three allows in individuals from eligible nationalities who are granted access for purposes of family reunification with certain legal residents in the United States.

When immigrants bring in large numbers of family members, this is referred to as chain migration. The family reunification program has been available to people from a variety of continents and nationalities since the 1980s. In recent years, according to the State Department, more than 95 percent of the applications to the P-3 program have been Africans-primarily Somalis, Ethiopians, and Liberians.

But, after repeated reports that applicants were faking familial relationships to persons already in the United States, the State Department started testing the DNA of applicants to this program. The tests were able to confirm familial relationships in only 20 percent of cases, so six weeks ago the department suspended the program until officials figure out a better way to run it.

I'm not sure why the State Department decided to focus mainly on African immigrants. The State Department Web page cited above says it was prompted by repeated reports of fraud, particularly on the part of would-be Kenyan immigrants. But the fact the department was able to prove biological relationships among only 20 percent of those tested, mainly from Somalia, Ethiopia, and Liberia, is astounding. Perhaps the State Department should start testing so-called refugees from all continents, yes, Europe included. It is outrageous that American taxpayers should be forced to absorb the huge resettlement, education, and healthcare costs of persons who enter this country under fraudulent circumstances, no matter what their country of origin.

Source



Illegal Immigration Costs Colorado Nearly $1.1 Billion Annually Finds Newly Released Study from FAIR

A report prepared by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) finds that illegal immigration costs Colorado about $1.1 billion a year, or about $612 for every native-born household in the state. The report, The Costs of Illegal Immigration to Coloradans, looks at just three essential state provided services and programs: K-12 education, public health care, and incarceration from criminal illegal aliens.

According the report, illegal aliens in Colorado pay about $160 million in taxes, reducing the net costs to the state to $912 million annually. However, since most of the jobs currently held by illegal aliens would likely be filled by legal workers, at higher wages, the taxes paid by illegal aliens would have been collected anyway.

The release of The Costs of Illegal Immigration to Coloradans coincides with worsening fiscal news for the state. While the state spends more than $1 billion on services for illegal aliens, Colorado is faced with a $101 million budget shortfall for the current fiscal year.

-- Education. K-12 education for the estimated 84,000 children of illegal aliens attending Colorado public schools costs taxpayers $925 million. It costs the state an additional $68 million a year to provide for the special educational needs of non--English-speaking kids.

-- Health care. Uncompensated health care for illegal aliens costs Colorado $78 million a year.

-- Incarceration. In addition to the human and economic costs of crimes committed by criminal illegal aliens, incarcerating the perpetrators carries a $38 million annual price tag.

"Even in the best of economic times, $1.1 billion would be an unnecessary and unjustifiable burden on Colorado taxpayers," said Dan Stein, president of FAIR. "With Colorado, like nearly every other state, forced to cut vital programs and services these costs are simply untenable."

In recent years, Colorado has taken limited steps to enforce laws against illegal immigration, including having two police units trained to identify and detain suspected illegal aliens. Gov. Bill Ritter has also appointed a special panel to examine other options for local immigration enforcement. "The costs of illegal immigration in Colorado are ten times greater than the current fiscal shortfall," noted Stein. "Given the stark realities faced by the state, it is critical that Colorado take the necessary steps to reduce the $1.1 billion burden associated with illegal immigration." The full report, The Costs of Illegal Immigration to Coloradans, is available at www.fairus.org.

Source





11 December, 2008

Britain gives 'back door' amnesty for 180,000 asylum seekers who slipped through the net

Up to 180,000 asylum seekers are to be granted a 'back door' amnesty to live in Britain. They include failed refugees who should have been deported, and migrants whose claims were never even concluded by the Home Office. Instead, their files were lost or left unfinished as the asylum system went into meltdown.

Now officials are finally wading through the backlog, and have already granted more than 50,000 approvals. Based on the current rate at which cases are being rubber-stamped, the total number to benefit from the amnesty will be around 180,000. The approval rate is 40 per cent and rising, with all those who are successful gaining access to housing and other benefits. Local councils will be expected to find homes for many of them.

The major reason why so many of the claims are being approved is the Human Rights Act. Under it, those who have been here for many years can claim Britain is now their home and that they no longer have links to their country of origin. If their claims had been considered when they were first submitted, many might have been sent home.

The HRA, passed by Labour a decade ago, also prevents the removal of asylum seekers to countries where they could face torture or persecution, which is likely to apply to thousands of cases in the backlog.

Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve said: 'Whilst the Minister for Immigration tries to talk tough, the reality is that the Government is prepared to grant what amounts to an effective amnesty just to get the figures down. 'Despite all the spin, it is clear that Labour is no closer to getting a grip on illegal immigration.'

The 450,000 so-called 'legacy' cases were unearthed by former Home Secretary John Reid during a clean-up of the department he described as 'not fit for purpose'. He said he wanted all the cases - some of which date back to the mid-1990s - resolved by around 2011. Lin Homer, chief executive of the UK Border Agency, said that of nearly 130,000 cases concluded so far, 51,000 - or 40 per cent - had been approved. A further 53,000 had been closed because, for example, the claimant could not be contacted. Only 23,500 applicants have been removed.

Town halls have been warned to make the migrants a priority for council housing. They have been given a 'transitional grant' of 1.1million of taxpayers' money to help towards the cost, but the final bill is likely to be far higher. It is expected to be passed on in council tax rises.

The list of countries with most beneficiaries of the 'legacy' policy is headed by Turkey, with 2,400 successful claimants.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the pressure group Migrationwatch UK, said: 'We are only now getting the measure of the disaster that befell the asylum system in recent years. 'It is frankly absurd that tens of thousands of people should be given full access to the welfare state for no other reason than the administrative chaos that ruled in the Home Office.'

It also emerged yesterday that seven of the most dangerous criminals involved in the foreign prisoner scandal have been given permission to stay in Britain. They are rapists, killers and paedophiles. One of the main reasons for being allowed to stay is that under human rights law they have a right to a family life. In total, out of 1,000 offenders involved in the Home Office fiasco, only 336 have been deported to date.

Tory MP James Clappison said: 'The fact that even the most serious criminals have been allowed to stay makes a mockery of Labour's original promise that they would be found and deported.'

The revelations, made in a letter to Parliament's home affairs committee, came as a study showed that allowing every illegal immigrant living in the UK to stay would cost 2billion a year. Migrationwatch estimated the cost of a full immigrant amnesty could rise to 4billion once newcomers started families. The think-tank also released results of a poll which found that 70 per cent of those questioned opposed a blanket amnesty for all the estimated 700,000 illegal migrants.

A UK Border Agency spokesman said: 'We have improved our performance and are now resolving several thousand old asylum cases every month. We are well on track to complete all 450,000 cases by 2011. 'We will continue to prioritise those who may pose a risk to the public, and then focus on those who can more easily be removed, those receiving support, and those who may be granted leave. 'We will no longer pay to support to those who have had their cases concluded. Those who are granted the right to stay should seek work and those who have been refused will be removed.'

Source



Texas' new guidelines for immigrant licenses under fire

Opponents of strict new driver's license requirements for foreign nationals are calling on state leaders to rescind the rules, which will make immigrants' licenses and identification cards look different from those issued to U.S. citizens. Under the new requirements, which were approved by Texas' Public Safety Commission and went into effect Oct. 1, foreign nationals must provide documentation of their immigration status before they can get a license, and each time they renew it. The licenses and identification cards, which are now vertical instead of horizontal for immigrants, are stamped with the words "temporary visitor" and list the date the person's legal residency expires.

"We ask them to assimilate, to be part of American society," said Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio. "Yet by having a different driver's license ... we're telling them they're not part of the same United States that everybody else is."

Supporters say the new guidelines - which ban the Department of Public Safety from issuing or renewing licenses for any immigrant who is here illegally, or who has permission to stay in the country less than six months - are necessary to protect the country from terrorism. The Sept. 11 attackers had valid driver's licenses even though their visas were expired. Texas' new policy follows a Dallas Morning News report last year that hundreds of foreign nationals had traveled to Dallas between 2003 and 2005 to obtain fraudulent Texas driver's licenses. The ringleader of the scam took advantage of a loophole in state policy that allowed immigrants to get licenses with only a foreign passport and a visa, even if the visa had expired.

Gov. Rick Perry indicated no willingness to change the policy. "Those who criticize these new rules fail to acknowledge the realities of the world in which we live, where we must know who is in our state and nation, whether or not they mean us harm," Mr. Perry said in a written statement.

But opponents say the "temporary visitor" language on the card could hinder immigrants' ability to rent housing or secure loans. "It encourages people to treat them differently," said Luis Figueroa, legislative staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. And they say the Public Safety Commission overstepped its authority by passing something akin to immigration policy. Several lawmakers are already planning legislation to try to counter the new guidelines. "It has already become evident that this rule has unintended, arbitrary consequences and needs to be scrapped," said Rep. Ruth Jones McClendon, D-San Antonio

Source





10 December, 2008

Immigration reform off the table?

Ted Kennedy has used his chairmanship of the Judiciary Immigration subcommittee for years to get a comprehensive immigration-reform bill passed into law. Now Kennedy has decided to focus on health care, and advocates for full legalization worry that the next administration will ignore immigration:

Sen. Edward Kennedy's (D-Mass.) allies on immigration reform regard his departure from the Judiciary Committee as a withering blow to their cause and are searching for a new champion on the controversial issue. Many are interpreting his decision to focus on healthcare as a setback to legislation that would put millions of illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship. .

While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in previous interviews has said the Senate will take up immigration reform in the 111th Congress, some proponents doubt President-elect Obama and Democrats will make the issue a top priority during the first years of his administration.

Rahm Emanuel, who will serve as White House chief of staff, predicted last year that immigration reform would not happen in the first term of a Democratic presidency. Emanuel, who has seen immigration as a dangerous issue for Democrats, repeatedly battled members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to block consideration of an immigration package in the House while he was a member of the House Democratic leadership.

This is a classic good news/bad news scenario for immigration-enforcement advocates. Kennedy's departure and Emanuel's ascension combine to make an Amnesty Lite bill much less likely. The Obama administration will want to focus on the economy and its expansive jobs program, looking for ways to gain Republican support, and will avoid the divisive immigration debate like the plague. They have no desire to see something unify the grassroots conservatives the way immigration did in 2006 and 2007 ever so briefly.

Raising immigration reform before the midterms would be the equivalent of Hillary Clinton's Health Care Task Force from Bill Clinton's presidency. Obama will be smarter than that. He'll have a tough enough time in 2010 as it is. Kennedy's decision may be a consequence of the politics of the question rather than its origin. He can see the writing on the wall as well as anyone else, and he wants to position himself for leadership on an issue that has some chance of being a priority.

The bad news? That leaves immigration and border enforcement in the status quo for probably at least four years. If Barack Obama wants to treat the jobs issue seriously, he'll have to address border and immigration enforcement immediately, but the chances of him alienating his own caucus in that effort approach zero. We'll have to wait until 2013 before anyone bothers to address this issue, either in an Obama second term or with a new Republican president.

Source



Eating the Free Soup Americans Won't Eat

This should come as no surprise: the illegal aliens who have been flooding into the country, supposedly to do work Americans aren't willing to do, are still here even though the work isn't. Westchester County, New York's Journal News weeps for the plight of the undocumented and unemployed in Port Chester:

Jose Antonio Correa folded his hands and bowed his head in prayer over a lunch tray. Correa, who is looking for carpentry work after losing his pizzeria job four months ago, is grateful for the hamburger and soup he gets at the Don Bosco Community Center.

... Selvin Maldonado, 35, gets a meal at the kitchen almost every day, now that he has been out of work for the past month.

... Ovidio Cifuentes, who last worked in Greenwich three weeks earlier, worried about not being able to send money home to his parents and girlfriend in Guatemala. He used to make $500 a week from painting and putting up gypsum wallboard. He eats at the soup kitchen to save the little money he has. "This is a place we can eat and we don't have the extra expense of buying food when we're not working," he said in Spanish.

Correa said not having a job stirs up the anxiety he felt when he decided to leave Honduras 10 years ago.

I'm feeling some anxiety too: over the implications of having allowed tens of millions of unskilled Third-Worlders, many of whom aren't even learning English, to pour across our unguarded border, now that the economy won't support them anymore. Out of sheer moonbattery we have imported a time bomb that will start going off within the next few years.

Source





9 December, 2008

U.S. to control illegal immigration from Canada



The U.S. is ready to launch a US $10 million drone to control part of its border with Canada. A Predator B aircraft, the first to patrol the United States' northern border, completed a flight from Arizona to North Dakota successfully on Saturday. The drone is set to control a part of the US - Canada border which goes along the upper edge of North Dakota and a slim part of Minnesota.

The vessel that weighs about 5 tons and can stay aloft for 18 hours, cost US $10 million. It will execute its first mission, designed to spot people crossing the border illegally, in January.

Similar unmanned aircraft have been successfully used along the country's southern border since 2005. Since then they have helped discover more than 8,000 kg of marijuana and 4,000 illegal immigrants, a spokesman for the Customs and Border Protection agency was quoted as saying by The New York Times.

When asked whether he expected to uncover a significant problem with drugs, border crossings or terrorism in northern North Dakota, John Stanton, the executive director of the agency's national air security operations said no one was sure. "We hope to actually use this aircraft to measure that," he said. "You don't know what you don't know."

Still, the safety of drones is questioned by experts. In 2006 a Predator B aircraft crashed in Arizona, barely missing a house. The incident was blamed on human error. A pilot had been operating the drone from miles away.

Source



Australia: Sixth boat belies strong border claim

Stupid new Leftist government has opened the floodgates again

BORDER Protection Command is scrambling to reinforce its patrols after the interception yesterday of the sixth people-smuggling boat to be caught in Australian waters since the Immigration regime was softened five months ago. The Indonesian boat, the biggest load of the year with 47 suspected asylum-seekers and a crew of three, was spotted yesterday off Broome in international waters by an RAAF Orion P3-C surveillance plane. Its arrival comes despite Kevin Rudd's claims last week that there had been no surge in unauthorised vessels this year, and at a time when the Royal Australian Navy is about to send thousands of sailors on extended Christmas leave.

HMAS Maryborough apprehended the vessel as it crossed into Australian waters. The patrol boat was escorting the vessel to Christmas Island, where the asylum-seekers - understood to be Afghans - will be detained and processed. A boat carrying 35 Afghan asylum-seekers and five crew was intercepted off Ashmore Reef - 600km north of Broome - on Thursday. They arrived at Christmas Island yesterday. The week before, a group of 12 Sri Lankans were caught off Steep Point near Carnarvon, on November 27. The total number of asylum-seekers detained this year stands at 127. Last year, 150 arrived on five boats, and in 2006, 60 asylum-seekers arrived in six boats.

The latest arrivals showed there was a "real problem" with border security, Malcolm Turnbull said yesterday. "We have seen six boats arrive since August, since the Government abolished temporary protection visas," the Opposition Leader said. "They were introduced in 1999 specifically for the purpose of discouraging people smuggling. This sixth vessel is a ... wake-up call to Mr Rudd that his policy in August has been a mistake."

On Friday, Mr Rudd's new National Security Adviser, former SAS commander Duncan Lewis, vowed to tackle the people smuggling problem "at source". "The issue of unauthorised boat arrivals is an enduring one for this country," he warned.

Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus yesterday announced a boost in patrol capability off the Top End and northwest coast. "The Government will also provide an additional navy vessel and surveillance aircraft to protect Australia's offshore maritime areas from illegal activity, including people smuggling," Mr Debus said. "The increase along with existing defence and customs assets already operating, will provide a significant deterrent to anyone seeking to break Australia's maritime laws or enter Australia illegally."

The surge in people smuggling boats follows an announcement last month by the navy of three months' leave for officers and other ranks over Christmas, a story which gained international prominence. The navy denied operational capability was being undermined but the announcement left an impression the RAN was shutting down for the festive season.

Border Protection Command's 12 aircraft fly more than 2400 missions every year and the new measures meant there were 17 navy and Customs vessels patrolling year round, Mr Debus said.

Source





8 December, 2008

Criminal illegals in Texas now more likely to be deported

After meeting Friday with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in Houston, local members of Congress said they were encouraged by ICE's progress in recent months to identify and detain illegal immigrants in local jails, but they called for more reform by the agency. The area's congressional delegation asked to meet with top ICE officials after a Houston Chronicle investigation last month exposed a breakdown at the Harris County Jail that resulted in illegal immigrants with criminal records avoiding deportation. The Chronicle investigation found that federal immigration officials allowed scores of violent criminals, including some ordered deported decades ago, to walk away from Harris County Jail despite the inmates' admission that they were in the country illegally.

The Chronicle examined arrest and immigration records for 3,500 inmates who told Harris County jailers that they were in the country illegally during a span of eight months, starting in June 2007. In 177 cases reviewed by the newspaper, inmates who were released from jail after admitting to being in the country illegally later were charged with additional crimes. More than half of those charges were felonies, including sexual assault and capital murder. The report also found dozens of cases in Harris County involving suspected illegal immigrants who posted bail and absconded on criminal charges.

ICE officials have said the agency has made significant improvements in recent months, including giving Harris County jailers in October access to a database that checks suspects' immigration history. The agency also trained Harris County jailers in August to help identify and file paperwork to detain illegal immigrants. In addition, the agency has improved cooperation and communication with county officials since the Chronicle's investigation was published, ICE officials said. "We believe with the support and the commitment of everyone our communities will be safer," said Ken Landgrebe, the head of ICE's Detention and Removal operation in Houston.

U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, said after the Friday meeting that the delegation wants ICE to provide information by January on measures to ensure that illegal immigrants charged with serious crimes are not making bail. Brady added that they also want to make sure illegal immigrants convicted of crimes - and eligible for deportation - are removed from the country. The delegation also wants a timeline from ICE officials on when an automated fingerprint check system that the agency implemented in Harris County Jail in October will be available in the rest of the state.

U.S. Reps. Michael McCaul, R-Austin; Gene Green, D-Houston; Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston; and Congressman-elect Pete Olson, R-Sugar Land, attended the briefing at ICE headquarters in Houston. U.S. Reps. John Culberson, R-Houston; Al Green, D-Houston; Ted Poe, R-Humble; and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison sent staff members to the meeting.

Sen. John Cornyn received a briefing Friday in Washington. "I am pleased that ICE and Harris County officials are moving quickly to address my concerns," Cornyn said in a statement. "ICE informed me that they have developed an effective working relationship with Harris County and other Texas law enforcement entities to ensure all criminal aliens housed in the Harris County system are screened for immigration and criminal history. Cornyn added that the newspaper's investigation is only the latest example of why comprehensive immigration reform must be a top priority in 2009. "This is a very, very important issue to our constituents," McCaul said. "When the Houston Chronicle investigation came out, it identified a lot of criminals who slipped through the cracks. Our No. 1 goal is to ensure that all criminal aliens are detained and deported as they should be under the law."

ICE identified more than 221,000 incarcerated criminals for potential deportation nationally last fiscal year, which ended in September. During the same time, ICE removed 107,000 convicted criminals. The Houston ICE office set a record by removing 8,226 illegal immigrants with criminal records from Southeast Texas last year, an increase of about 7.5 percent from fiscal 2007. Adrian Garcia, Harris County's sheriff-elect, did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Source



Don't Count On Economy To Stop Illegal Immigration

They are leaving. Illegal immigrants, that is. Analysts from both ends of the immigration debate, from the Center for Immigration Studies to the Pew Hispanic Center, agree. The "unlawfully present" population in the United States has shrunk - and it's getting smaller. According to Pew, there has been a drop in the annual flow of people illegally entering the country since 2005. And the numbers of those already here is going down. It peaked at 12.4 million in 2006 and is down by about 1 million now. What the analysts don't agree on is why. Good enough data simply aren't available to answer the question. There are a number of possibilities, though.

It could be simple economics, with fewer jobs translating into fewer illegal immigrants. Historically, whenever the U.S. economy has shrunk, fewer workers risk coming north to seek employment. They find economic opportunities at home or migrate to alternate destinations.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff wants part of the credit, too, citing "tighter border security, a significant expansion of the Border Patrol, the deployment of new technology, and increased interior enforcement are having an undeniable impact."

Contrarians, however, are quick to deny that. They seem eager to paint enforcement not only as ineffective but evil. According to Tom Barry of the Center for International Policy's "Americas Policy program," enforcing the "rule of law" is little more than a fig leaf for some anti-immigration types - one that allows its advocates to appear "ostensibly separate from the nativists, economic populists, and white supremacists that make up much of the base of the movement."

This is a remarkable claim. No doubt many in Congress - including Sens. Ted Kennedy and John McCain, who pushed for a comprehensive reform that included a number of border security and workplace enforcement measures (as well as all in Congress who voted to build a fence to help stop illegal entry from Mexico) - would be stunned to find out they're just fronting for the Ku Klux Klan.

Demonizing law enforcement and border security seems like an effort to poison the well for promoting serious further reforms. There are already whisperings that some policy-makers will try to roll back enforcement innovations such as the compacts between the Department of Homeland Security and state and local law enforcement.

The result of such efforts is that both Congress and the American people will become more reluctant to embrace any kind of immigration reform. Instead, they will suspect that the administration is offering "86" all over again. In 1986, Congress passed comprehensive reform that granted a general amnesty and promised more workplace enforcement and better border security. At the time, the number of illegals was about 3 million. Now it is more than three times that. Granting amnesty just encouraged more illegal immigration, while Washington did little to secure the border or enforce the law.

Failure to enforce the law, combined with an amnesty that brushed aside the rule of law (along with strong economic growth for more than a quarter of a century) created the crisis that we have today - a crisis that needs to be solved.

Presumably, no one thinks a depression is the answer (if there are no jobs, there would be no illegal workers). We need to get the economy growing again. As the economy recovers, if we want to continue to reduce illegal immigration, then we are going to have to have border control, enforce the law (not grant amnesty), and institute reforms that help provide sufficient legal avenues for employers to get the workers they need to help the economy continue to grow and prosper. And if we can do it with more workers being "lawfully present," so much the better.

Source





7 December, 2008

DREAM Over: Illegal Alien Student Amnesty Awakens to Fiscal Reality

Even as the illegal alien advocacy lobby is frantically trying to spin the election of Barack Obama as a mandate for a sweeping amnesty, they have all but conceded that the economic crisis and worsening unemployment have probably doomed their efforts. They've set their sights on the more modest goals of achieving amnesty for segments of the illegal alien population and using those to leverage further concessions down the road.

Advocates for illegal aliens believe that the Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act offers them their best hope to enact a mini-amnesty. The DREAM Act would confer amnesty on most illegal alien youths and just about anyone who could vaguely be described as a student, and guarantee them subsidized in-state tuition rates in their states of residence on the premise that as children, they are not responsible for being in the country illegally. It would also result in a de facto amnesty for many parents, and entitle these kids to sponsor other relatives in the future.

Just as suddenly as passage of the DREAM Act seemed to be within the grasp of the illegal alien amnesty lobby, it appears to be slipping away. America's higher education system - especially public universities and colleges - is facing a crisis. The nation's economic woes have hit state budgets hard, as revenues have fallen and demands on services and benefits have increased. Nearly every state has increased tuition rates and cut programs, and it's still not enough. "We have put the education system on a starvation diet, and each and every year it becomes weaker," said California's Lt. Governor John Garemendi. University of California Chancellor Charles Reed has publicly discussed exercising his authority to cut enrollment.

At precisely the time when California's higher education system is "on a starvation diet" and enrollment may be slashed, demand for seats is at an all-time high. For a growing number of families an education at a private university is simply unaffordable, making a seat at a state-run school all the more coveted. California's crisis is also a crisis for those pushing the DREAM Act. The state that is starving its higher education system and reducing enrollment already has its own version of the DREAM Act. For the past six years, illegal aliens have been able to fill seats at public universities and colleges at taxpayer subsidized in-state tuition rates. (A state court of appeals has ruled the policy unconstitutional, but California has yet to repeal it.)

Passage of the federal DREAM Act would put every starving, malnourished, or merely hungry state higher education system in the same predicament as California's. While public university budgets, programs, and seats fall victim to state budget crises, the DREAM Act would compel all states to provide seats and tuition breaks to newly-amnestied illegal aliens.

Backing the DREAM Act would be a body blow to the interests of the people who actually did elect Barack Obama: America's embattled middle class. Few issues personally concern as many Americans as whether their children will be able to get the college educations they need, and how they will pay for it. Those voters are not likely to be pleased by a bill that takes educational opportunities and resources away from their own kids and turns them over to the children of illegal aliens.

A wrongheaded idea even under the best economic circumstances, amnesty for illegal aliens - in one all encompassing bill, or piecemeal - would be a disastrous misstep for the fledgling Obama administration. An idea that was flatly rejected by the American public during a period of relative prosperity and low unemployment makes even less sense in a bad economy and governments at just about every level facing record shortfalls and deficits.

Because of the economic and fiscal realities that he will soon inherit, President Obama will be compelled to make decisions that are painful to a broad swath of the electorate. If the pain is dispensed equitably the public is likely to be understanding and forgiving. If hard-working, law-abiding Americans are asked to sacrifice while people who broke our laws are rewarded and political pressure groups are paid off, the reaction will quite different - especially if it hurts their own kids.

Source



OK sought for immigration raids

The Bush administration is urging a federal judge to let it implement a crackdown on suspected illegal immigrants in the workplace before President George W. Bush leaves office. In papers filed this week in U.S. District Court, the Department of Homeland Security argued for an accelerated schedule that could allow a regulation known as the no-match rule to take effect by mid-January.

The rule, which the department first proposed in August 2007, would threaten businesses with prosecution unless they fired employees whose Social Security numbers differed from their listings in the Social Security database. The rule has been held up by a lawsuit filed by the AFL-CIO, other unions and business groups led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Administration lawyers said in their filing that most issues have been resolved and further delays are unwarranted.

At a hearing Friday, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer will consider whether to expedite the case or follow a more conventional schedule, under which a ruling would not come until at least March. President-elect Barack Obama, who takes office Jan. 20, has not taken a position on the no-match rule.

Source





6 December, 2008

Life on the US/Mexican Border

Joe Johnson's family has lived and worked on the same property near Columbus, N.M., for almost 100 years. "Our grandfather came here in 1918, right behind Pancho Villa," he says proudly. Yet he also admits, "If it wasn't home, I would move away from it." The Johnson ranch lies right up against the Mexican border, and illegal immigration has turned what was already a hard way to make a living on drought-plagued rangeland into a nightmare of stolen cattle, broken water lines, ruined fences and grass fi res.

"In 2005, we had 500-plus people crossing our ranch every day," explains housewife, Teresa Johnson. "In 2006, we had 1,000-plus people crossing every day. These are not our numbers; these are Border Patrol numbers. They had counted foot traffic and the numbers of people they caught and things like that. So, you can just imagine what our fences look like.

"We were afraid for our kids to even walk out to the barn to feed animals. We had to go as a group. One time we walked into the barn and found 15 people sitting there. And the trash is unreal."

In addition to the usual backpacks, water bottles and clothing, the Johnsons have even found hypodermic needles and syringes in their water troughs. In fact, water sources are a major problem in areas where illegal traffic is heavy. You might think that people wandering through land that belongs to someone else would politely turn on a faucet, fill up their jug and turn off the water. Nope. "These people will cut pipelines, bathe in our water troughs and even defecate in our water troughs," explains Teresa.

"That's not to mention, they would tear off our float valves trying to get a drink of water," adds Joe. "And if we didn't catch this quickly, it would drain all of our storage systems. A lot of water in this area is pipelined in for miles. When it would drain, then it would airlock the pipelines. It might take a couple of days before we could get water flowing again."

"Keep in mind the expense of all this, " he says. "We've got about 10 miles of U.S.-Mexico border on the ranch. When the traffic was at its worst, we had to look at the fence at least once or twice a day. And that's just the border fence. Our time was consumed with it. If we weren't fixing fence, we were doctoring cattle or pumping water they had drained out."

Their water problems went far beyond broken floats. In 2005, the Johnsons lost 18 calves to a respiratory disease. At first, they were afraid that some illegals had brought in a disease (which could very well happen through contaminated clothing, shoes, etc.). They brought in the state veterinarian and the livestock board to help them figure out what was causing their cattle to become sick.

"What was happening is we were having cattle break into pasteurella pneumonia," Joe Johnson explains. "We had calves getting sick with this, and if you don't catch it quick, they die. What caused it was so much illegal traffic coming across. It was during the heat of the summer, so when the cattle would go to a water source, there might be 50 to 100 people there. They would drive my cattle away, scare them."

"Those people would eventually leave, and our cattle would start drifting back in to get another drink of water. Unfortunately, another big group of illegals would come in and run them off again," Johnson says. "This continued 24-hours a day, seven days a week. If traffic would have continued like that, or if it was to come back like that, it would probably put us out of business."

Luckily, about that time, the National Guard was sent into the area for two years. Due to their presence, along with an increase in Border Patrol numbers, the Johnsons say that conditions on their ranch have improved tremendously. However, the National Guard recently left, and Joe says his family is already starting to see traffic pick up a little. In the meantime, they're hoping that infrastructure being put in place will help keep traffic down. The Army Corps of Engineers has been putting vehicle barriers along the border, as well as pedestrian barriers. And the Johnsons also think the U.S. government's plan to fence off the border will help.

"The pedestrian barriers being built in certain areas, like around Palomas [Mexico] about 15 to 20 feet tall, I think can help," says Johnson. "I don't think anything as far as a fence is a sure thing to stop it, but I do believe a fence is very much a necessity, especially for livestock movement. Also, the vehicle barriers they're building in our area should help. We had a lot of vehicle crossings. I have one pasture that had six abandoned vehicles in it in 2006."

One particular vehicle crossing was especially scary. Teresa explains, "In January, there was a pickup that had been used for smuggling drugs, and it was on the Mexican side. They put a brick or something on the accelerator, tied the steering wheel to the door and put it in gear. They set it on fire, and it came across about three-fourths of a mile into the United States."

"I can't believe it got this far traveling across country, unmanned," she says. "We think it was aimed at one of the National Guard skyboxes. It got stuck in a rat den and burned to the ground. We couldn't believe that it didn't start a grass fire. This was in January, and we hadn't had any rain since September of last year, so it was very, very dry." Other times, they haven't been so lucky with fires. In July of 2005, three immigrants who were consequently picked up by the Border Patrol admitted to starting a fire that resulted in 100 acres of the Johnson's precious grassland being burned. That land has yet to recover. "They said the only reason they lit this fire re is because they were tired and thirsty and they wanted the Border Patrol to come pick them up," says Johnson. "So they lit a match. We've had other places on the ranch that have been burned as well, but they didn't catch the people who did it."

To add insult to injury, the Johnsons say the attitude of many illegals they have encountered on their property leaves much to be desired. For example, after a vehicle barrier was constructed about a mile long on the north side of their fence in 2005, Teresa says that in a matter of days the people on the other side of the border rolled up that mile of their fence, apparently thinking they had abandoned it. So she and her husband had to rebuild that stretch of fence to keep their cattle in.

"It was very expensive to replace that fence, and while my husband and I were building it, busload after busload of people were coming out of Palomas, which is the village south of Columbus, " Teresa explains. "They were crossing right in front of us. They had no fear. There would be 80 or 90 people get off this bus, urinate right in front of us, say all kinds of obscene things to us, give us the finger." "I'm sorry, but I think if you want to come over here, we're definitely not welcoming you with open arms with that kind of attitude," she says. "Used to, when they came through, they were half-starved, and you would feed them. That's just what you did. And then you would call the Border Patrol."

"But now," Teresa says, "they are demanding, and they want a ride-which we would never do. It's a totally different type of person coming across. It's so dangerous, not just for us but for them, too. We've had people here that were so dehydrated they didn't know who they were. They didn't know where they were. It was very sad." ....

Much more here



A small twitch of life from the British authorities

Police and immigration officers have arrested 32 suspected illegal workers during a raid on a plastics factory. Officers wearing stab vests surrounded Siva Plastics factory at Spitfire Quay, in Hazel Road, Southampton, Hampshire, after intelligence tip-offs. Thirty one male and one female Indian nationals were detained and proceedings have begun to remove them from the UK.

In a statement, Siva Plastics said it "believed that its recruitment policy was sufficiently robust". But a spokeswoman for the UK Border Agency said the company could now face a fine of up to 10,000 pounds per employee. Hugh Ind, area director for the UK Border Agency, said: "Illegal working hurts good business, undercuts legal workers, creates illegal profits and puts those employed at risk. "We have teams throughout the region who visit businesses to ensure they are not breaking the law. "Our message to employers is simple - if you employ illegal workers you could be named and shamed and face criminal charges."

A Siva spokesman said the company would co-operate fully with the UK Border Agency. "Siva also intends to provide assistance to the detained employees and their families," he said. "While Siva believed that its recruitment policy was sufficiently robust to ensure that no illegal immigrants were employed by it, in view of the current investigation... it is undertaking an immediate and comprehensive review of its recruitment policy. "Siva remains a committed and responsible employer and has never knowingly employed any illegal immigrant workers."

Source





5 December, 2008

Immigrants must learn English to qualify for a British passport

Immigrants who make little effort to integrate into society will wait longer before they can become British citizens under changes to citizenship rules. As part of the Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Bill, they will have to “earn” the right to a passport rather than simply achieving it through five years’ residence. The latest measure will end the automatic right to stay and replace it with a new system of “earned citizenship” and temporary residence.

Arrivals will have to demonstrate a good ability in English and a knowledge of life in Britain before becoming citizens. Immigrants who do no voluntary work will qualify only after eight years and those who become unemployed will be asked to leave.

The Bill will deny full access to social benefits, including social housing, to those who have not completed a new period of probationary citizenship of between one and five years. The aim is to link the gaining of a British passport to a greater commitment to the British way of life. Immigrants convicted of serious criminal offences could be barred from citizenship and those found guilty of minor crimes may face delays in having their applications processed.

The suggestion of a Bank Holiday to celebrate Britain appears to have been abandoned.

The Bill will also reduce the restrictions on people from overseas, but who have a British-born mother, applying to become a citizen. Children born to British mothers before 1961 will be able to apply for citizenship. Previously it was passed on through fathers.

The Government proposes to levy a top-up fee on immigrants to create a fund expected to run to 20 million pounds. Cash from the fund will be distributed to local authorities facing short-term pressure because of an influx of migrants.

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: “These proposed reforms are a tacit admission that the Government has failed in its seven previous immigration Bills. We need to re-establish controls over our borders so we can count people in and out.”

Source



New Zealand doesn't want fatties

New Zealand's immigration department has been accused of being size-ist, for turning away fat people. In the latest case, an American woman claims she was refused immigration, but told she could reapply if she lost weight. However, the Immigration Department says it is just trying to save the taxpayer money.

Connie Carrion from Cincinatti meets the criteria concerning jobs and education; however her application to reside in New Zealand was rejected. "My immigration case worker told me that if I lost weight, I could reapply or I could file an appeal, " she says.

On its website, the Immigration Department clearly says applicants have to be healthy. It does not specifically mention body weight, but in Carrion's case, it says her BMI or body mass index, was too high for her to be considered healthy. But more importantly she has type two diabetes, which could cost the tax payer up to 25,000 a year.

Carrion says she is appealing the decision and given that most appeals have worked, she reckons the scales are tipped in her favour.

Source





4 December, 2008

Chertoff: Twice as many agents on border

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on Wednesday declared success on President Bush's goal of doubling U.S. Border Patrol agents to 18,000 during his time in office, but said they will fall 10 percent short of putting barriers along 700 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border.

The secretary told reporters the progress they've made on enforcement has helped actually reduce the flow of illegal immigrants for the first time since right after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. "For the first time, we've reversed momentum and are moving in the right direction," he told reporters.

When Mr. Bush took office in 2001 the Border Patrol had about 9,000 agents. Mr. Chertoff said as of this week they are at 18,049. After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Congress fought to increase the size of the Border Patrol, among boosts to other immigration law enforcement agencies. The Bush administration initially balked, but after its own immigration plans faltered the president embraced the goal of increasing the Border Patrol. He even deployed the National Guard to the border as a stop-gap measure while the Border Patrol hired and trained agents.

Mr. Bush had tried to combine increased enforcement with a plan to legalize illegal immigrants, but that effort failed twice in Congress. The administration and members of Congress said voters were unwilling to accept legalization until they were assured enforcement would be improved.

The secretary said the Bush administration has since made great strides in security, though he said there still needs to be a program for future temporary workers enacted at some point. Still, he said it's unclear whether security has been improved enough for President-elect Barack Obama to take another stab at a broad immigration bill early in his term.

Source



Australian immigration debate 'set to flare again'

The debate about asylum seekers could flare again as Australia signals its doors are again open to people smugglers, former immigration minister Philip Ruddock says. Mr Ruddock, one of the key architects of the previous Howard government's hardline policy against asylum seekers, made the warning following an increase in boat activity in recent months. "I think we're about to see a very real and substantial debate about these issues in the Australian community again," he told reporters on Wednesday.

The federal government had relaxed measures aimed at effective border protection, he said. That was likely to send signals abroad that Australia was a more attractive destination for people smugglers, Mr Ruddock said.

People smugglers were corrupt, had little care for people's lives, and looked very closely at the opportunities that were open to them. "I'm sure that smugglers would be saying to people, `Look if we can get you into Australia, you'll be able to remain permanently, that's a very different outcome to what was in place."

Source





3 December, 2008

Fraudulent Vows: Inside the Green Card Marriage Phenomenon

Each year, tens of thousands of United States citizens and Legal Permanent Residents (LPR), at both home and abroad, meet and marry foreign nationals. Spouses of American citizens have priority over most other immigration categories, making marriage the quickest way to receive a green card. As the new Obama administration prepares to take office, the long dormant debate over levels of legal immigration is sure to resurface, but that debate is unlikely to include discussion of fraud amongst the most common path to American residency. The prevalence of such fraud contributes to illegal immigration, poses potential national security vulnerability, and clogs the system for legitimate applicants.

The Center for Immigration Studies, a non-profit research organization, has released a new Backgrounder detailing the ways the marriage-based green card categories are exploited and offers recommendations to protect the system from fraud. "Hello, I Love You, Won't You Tell Me Your Name: Inside the Green Card Marriage Phenomenon," was written by David Seminara, a former Consular Officer with the U.S. State Department who has adjudicated thousands of marriage-based green card applications in several countries. The Backgrounder is available for free online here

Among the findings:

# Marriage to an American citizen remains the most common path to U.S. residency and/or citizenship for foreign nationals, with more than 2.3 million foreign nationals gaining LPR status in this manner between 1998 and 2007.

# Marriage fraud for the purpose of immigration receives very little notice or debate in the public arena and the State Department and Department of Homeland Security have nowhere near the resources needed to combat the problem. Attention to fraud is not just for the integrity of the legal immigration system, but also for security reasons. If small-time con artists and Third-World gold-diggers can obtain green cards with so little resistance, then surely terrorists can do (and have done) the same.

# Marriage to an American is the clearest pathway to citizenship for an illegal alien. A substantial number of illegal aliens ordered removed (many of whom have criminal records) later resurface as marriage-based green card applicants. Waivers granted to those marrying U.S. citizens can eliminate ineligibilities for green cards, including the 3/10-year bar on entry for those with long periods of illegal presence.

# The decision-making authority for green card applications lies with the Customs and Immigration Service officials who rely almost exclusively on documents, records, and photographs, with little opportunity for interviews or investigations. Consular officers reviewing cases overseas conduct live interviews and can initiate local investigations, but may only approve petitions, not deny them.

The above is a press release from CIS [dave.seminara@gmail.com]



Obama's Plan for Immigration "Reform"

The new administration's Blueprint for Change devotes four pages to most of the political issues it encompasses, but on immigration there are two. But it says enough to know where Obama intends to take the country. Obama opens the section on immigration with an excerpt from a speech he made in 2007 on the Senate floor where he calls for reuniting immigrant families, implying that he believes the United States needs to continue both "chain migration" - whereby immigrants to the United States are allowed to sponsor an almost endless linkage of family members to become citizens - and enact an amnesty.

The amnesty is supposedly needed so that illegal immigrants won't be deported and forced to leave their American-born children behind. Never mind that this really only happens when deportees do not tell immigration officials that they have children here - usually because the deportee intends to return to the United States posthaste. Obama goes on to say, "Where we can bring in more foreign-born workers with the skills our economy needs, we should," signaling a likely increased wave of new legal immigrants.

Further details in the Blueprint bear out those assumptions. Within the first year of his term as president, Obama says he will "revive" George W. Bush's "comprehensive immigration reform," which includes promises to secure the border, fix the "broken immigration bureaucracy," and put "12 million undocumented immigrants on a responsible path to citizenship." The immigration "problem," as Obama sees it, has three main components: the number of illegal aliens has increased by 40 percent since 2000, and every year more than half-a-million new illegal immigrants arrive; the bureaucracy is "broken and overwhelmed," which forces legal immigrants to wait years for applications; and immigration raids, which have increased 10-fold, are ineffective, placing "all the burdens of a broken system" on immigrant families.

Obama doesn't see the problem as the burden that the masses of legal and illegal immigrants are putting on Americans. He ignores the $89.1 billion that Americans shell out in local, state, and federal taxes each year to pay just for the social benefits for the immigrants who have less than a high-school degree (this is the amount above what the immigrants pay in taxes). He doesn't acknowledge the depressed wages of Americans because of increased numbers of job seekers, even as inflation eats away at Americans' earnings, or the welfare paid to Americans who lose their jobs to the immigrants. And he fails to notice that America is brim-full of blue-collar workers. In 2005, 63,000 applicants applied for 2,000 jobs at a new Toyota plant in San Antonio before company officials stopped taking applications after two weeks. Since 2005, our country has hemorrhaged blue-collar jobs. We now have about half as many manufacturing jobs in America as in the early 1950s, yet we have twice the population.

To combat the problem he sees, Obama has proposed a variety of solutions. The first one seems reasonable enough: increase personnel, technology, and infrastructure at the borders and other ports of entry. (But every recent president has promised this, including George W. Bush, and no one has delivered.) Next he proposes increasing the number of legal immigrants allowed to enter the country. Obama and Biden say they "realize the need to increase the number of people we allow into the country legally to a level that keeps families together and meets the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill." This was written before the presently high unemployment levels, which the United States has not seen the likes of in decades. (Of course, in the United States the unemployment rate is very misleading, even at the best of times: when someone stops collecting unemployment, he or she is no longer considered to be unemployed. He or she is deemed to have left the workforce. This means that the vast bulk of the country could lose their jobs this month, but in a few months, official figures could show a low unemployment rate.)

The Blueprint continues, saying that Obama will remove the incentives to enter the United States illegally by cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. (Evidently he doesn't believe that free schooling, free healthcare, and other social services funded by taxpayers are incentives to illegal immigrants because these are not mentioned.) On his campaign website he points to a proposal he championed in the Senate to create a "new employment eligibility verification system so employers can verify that their employees are legally eligible to work in the U.S." Also on the agenda for immigration is a plan to bring undocumented workers "come out of the shadows." The illegals will pay a fine, learn English, and supposedly "go to the back of the line" for the opportunity to become citizens. Since the illegals will be allowed to live and work here legally in some manner until they are made citizens, one wonders how they are now at "the back of the line."

Obama dedicates part of his Blueprint for Change to his record on the issue to show that he is serious about combating the "problem." He starts by pointing out that during the most recent immigration debate, "Obama was a leader in seeking common-sense balanced immigration reform." While in the Senate he supported amendments that would have "prioritized keeping families together" and would have "held employers who hire undocumented immigrants responsible." He also apparently "pushed Congress to find common ground." He purports to have helped "fix the bureaucracy," by joining with Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a Democrat from Illinois, to introduce the "Citizenship Promotion Act" to "ensure that immigration application fees are both reasonable and fair." He also "introduced legislation that passed the Senate to improve the speed and accuracy of FBI background checks." His last headline in the section on his record is entitled "Respect families." In it, he reiterates that he has introduced amendments to "put a greater emphasis on keeping immigrant families together."

But what is in Obama's Blueprint only tells part of the story. On December 4, 2007, he told NPR that after illegal aliens pay their fine and get on his "pathway," "they can then stay here and they can have the ability to enforce a minimum wage that they're paid, make sure the worker safety laws are available, make sure that they can join a union." He also voted to let illegal aliens participate in Social Security, and he has consistently supported amnesty, including voting in favor of the DREAM Act in 2007, which gives citizenship to young illegal immigrants who go to college in the United States or join the U.S. military.

Source





2 December, 2008

For Obama, immigration reform takes backseat to economy

Immigrant rights groups, citing huge increases in Latino voter turnout, are claiming credit for helping propel Barack Obama into the White House. Now they want him to follow through on promises to "bring people out of the shadows" by overhauling the U.S. immigration system in his first year as president. But Mr. Obama is focused on the economic crisis and may not make immigration legislation a priority early in his administration. "The economy is going to be Obama's first, second, third, fourth and fifth priority," said Sean Theriault, an associate professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin.

The incoming president will enjoy solid Democratic majorities in Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said any immigration legislation would need substantial Republican support. Any proposal could stall in the Senate, where Democrats will probably lack a filibuster-proof majority and could see some party members defect amid concern that reform could be seen as amnesty for illegal immigrants.

During the campaign, Mr. Obama promised to provide more manpower and technology to monitor the southern border and major ports of entry. Mr. Obama also said he would work with Mexican officials to promote economic development to curb illegal immigration. A spokesman from the Obama transition team declined to comment on specific immigration policies.

While Mr. Obama will focus primarily on reviving the economy, he'll "prove his bona fides" to the immigrant communities he courted during the presidential campaign by tackling immigration as well, said Angela Kelley, executive director of the Immigration Policy Center.

John Amaya, legislative staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said he expects the Obama administration to "drop the hammer" on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants and be tougher on border security. Mr. Amaya said overhauling immigration laws is paramount to national security because it would bring illegal workers out of the underground economy and allow the government to keep track of the workers by offering them a path to legalization.

While it is unlikely an immigration overhaul would be approved in Mr. Obama's first 100 days in office, Ms. Kelley was optimistic that legislation could pass during his first term. She said that as in 2006, there would probably be support in the Senate for a measure to strengthen border security, increase the number of guest-worker visas and allow longtime illegal immigrants to gain citizenship. Two years ago, such a bill passed with the support of 23 Republicans and a significant number of Democrats.

State Rep. Rafael Anchia, a leader on immigration issues in the Texas House, said change in federal policy is essential to solving the labor needs of the country and matching employers to workers. The Dallas Democrat said federal reform could prevent states like Texas from trying to pass laws that can't fix the underlying system. "We're hopeful that progress on the federal front will lessen the desire for precipitous action at the state level," Mr. Anchia said.

Source



Australia May Ease Immigration Detention, Stop Charging Fees

Potential illegals are going to love this

Australia should limit the time asylum seekers can be held in detention to 90 days before they are considered for visas, hold detainees for a maximum of one year and stop charging them fees to recoup expenses, a parliamentary committee said.

Security and identity checks should be done within 90 days and detainees would only be kept beyond one year if they present an "unacceptable risk to the community," the parliament's Joint Standing Committee on Migration said. The government should stop charging asylum seekers A$125.40 ($80) a day for the cost of their detention and cancel all existing debts, some of which exceed A$100,000, according to the committee's report. "The impacts of prolonged immigration detention and failures in administration have been too high," committee chairman Michael Danby said today in an e-mailed statement. The committee also recommends regular health checks.

Australia in 2001 adopted a hard-line stance on asylum seekers, using the Navy to turn away Indonesian fishing boats as they traveled across the Timor Sea laden with about 2,200 refugees. That came ahead of a national election, when John Howard's Liberal-National coalition won a third term. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's Labor Party ousted the coalition in November 2007.

Immigration Minister Chris Evans, who will consider the report, in July said detention centers would only be used as a "last resort" for the "shortest practical time." Evans said a detainee would be reviewed every three months and no children would be kept in centers. Australia was holding 279 people in immigration detention as of Nov. 7, according to today's statement. Charging detainees for costs was found to be "harsh and without a reasonable rationale," deputy committee chairman Danna Vale said in the statement.

Source





1 December, 2008

Catholic Bishop twists scripture

How is Christmas an immigrant story? Joseph and Mary travelled within their own country for the birth. It is true that they later became refugees in Egypt but there was no Egyptian law against that that we know of. The bishop also seems inconsistent in saying that he is not for open borders and wants orderly border crossings rather than the present situation. So where does he differ from conservatives in that? It is true that Christians should in general treat others kindly but even Jesus drove the money changers from the temple when he believed that they were wrongly there. That behaviour seems pretty comparable to deporting illegals as far as I can see. I am inclined to think that the bishop simply wants to see his churches filled

The new bishop of Arkansas has a strong message for Roman Catholics: Christmas is an immigrant's story. "Does Jesus find a warm welcome in our communities?" writes Bishop Anthony B. Taylor, a Fort Worth native, in a pastoral letter read last Sunday in parishes across Arkansas. "What changes do we need to make here in Arkansas in order to ensure that today's Marys and Josephs - today's Marias and Joses - receive a warm welcome truly worthy of the Savior?"

Taylor, 54, was resting this weekend far from the ensuing political firestorm. Here to see siblings in Fort Worth, he visited the city where his family founded Taylor Dressed Beef Co. and where he spent kindergarten in St. Andrew's Catholic School. "I've had a few negative letters," he said.

So I see in the Arkansas newspapers and on the Web, where activists from Americans for Legal Immigration are openly publishing Catholic-bashing comments accusing Arkansas church leaders as "pedifiles" and the church of "looking for more alter boys."

Priests across Arkansas will follow Taylor's letter with sermons today, beginning a three-week series of Advent messages linking the Christmas story to civil rights and immigration. The title of Taylor's message is from Jesus' words in Matthew 25: "I Was a Stranger, and You Welcomed Me ...." Read his entire letter. It's on the diocese Web site at www.dolr.org. He tells Arkansas Catholics: "There must be no dividing lines in our parishes, no second-class parishioners - all are welcome, without exception."

His letter acknowledges that embracing immigrants "sometimes takes time to adjust ..... but it is precisely to this that Jesus calls us, one and all. In this, Jesus will use us to be a light to our nation."

Taylor has told Arkansas reporters that he thinks Catholics are "confused" on immigration. He wants worshippers to understand the church's message, particularly as a new Arkansas General Assembly considers bills to punish illegal aliens - not for any crime, but simply for remaining in the U.S. in civil violation of federal immigration law....

"I'm not for open borders," Taylor said. "I'm for orderly border crossings that allow the immigration we need to support our economy. If honest people can show they are not criminals and come into the country at the border crossing, then only criminals will run and hide and try to cross somewhere else. Then we can catch them."

More here



Immigration Watchdog Denounces Manipulation of Crime Data for Political Gain

Yesterday, the National Council of La Raza, MALDEF and other organizations held yet another news conference to try to silence the immigration policy debate in this country, reports the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). FAIR claims this outrageous behavior is part of a calculated strategy initiated after the defeat of the Senate's immigration amnesty bill last year. FAIR states these groups have three major goals:

1. Silence legitimate immigration policy debate by claiming efforts to advance interior immigration enforcement and state-local cooperation cause "hate crimes." They provide no proof whatsoever.

2. Manipulate the data regarding anti-Hispanic crime in this country in order to deflect from real immigration issues facing the American people.

3. Pressure the incoming Obama Administration first to halt all interior and worksite enforcement and then to endorse amnesty legislation and an increase in overall immigration.

"Let me be clear," said Dan Stein, President of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), "that we join with all responsible Americans in condemning the murder of Marcelo Lucero." Stein points out that La Raza and their allies maintain silence about ethnic and race-based gang violence and brutally violent crimes carried out by international drug cartels inside the United States. Today these irresponsible advocacy groups are cynically using Mr. Lucero's murder to promote their own policy agenda in an attempt to silence those they oppose. FAIR cites the following facts that refute their contentions:

According to FBI data there were 595 anti-Hispanic hate crime incidents committed in 2007 - an increase of 19 incidents, or 3.3 percent over 2006. The number of law enforcement agencies participating in hate crime reporting in 2007 increased by 621 or 5 percent. The Hispanic population in 2007 increased by 1.45 million, or 3.3 percent. With the Hispanic population currently at 45.2 million, a Hispanic in the U.S. has about a 1.3 chance in 100,000 to be a hate crime victim. According to the National Weather Service, the odds of being struck by lightning are 1 in 5,000. By contrast, there were 969 hate crimes incidents against Jews (out of an estimated population of about 5.5 million) and 772 incidents directed at homosexuals.

No link between anti-Hispanic hate crime and immigration debate.

"The organizations and individuals claiming that the small increase in the number of anti-Hispanic hate crimes have never presented one piece of evidence connecting these crimes to the debate about immigration," says Stein. "There is none. Nor is there any reason to believe that even if there were no debate about immigration policy that the same crimes would not have occurred," Stein says. FAIR challenges those making the accusations to present evidence of cause and effect.

A clear and orchestrated effort to silence debate about immigration policy.

From the very moment the Bush-Kennedy amnesty legislation was defeated in the senate in June 2007, pro-amnesty advocacy groups began making spurious accusations that the defeat of the bill was due to "a wave of hate." In truth, amnesty was defeated by the sentiment of the vast majority of Americans that granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens was wrong and did not serve the best interests of the country.

"The irresponsible conduct of these organizations is reprehensible," said Stein. "They simply do not want the immigration laws of this nation enforced. Rather than try to promote responsible solutions to today's immigration crisis, they persist in trying to stifle vital public debate in a manner that is directly fueling widespread frustration and anger," Stein concluded.

Source