Australia: Conservative immigration spokesman rejects "extremist" tag
THE opposition immigration spokesman, Scott Morrison, has rallied to the defence of "the mob" who oppose the carbon tax and boat arrivals and said "sound-minded" Australians were being demonised by Labor as extremists.
In a National Press Club address, he hit back at race-baiting claims and said the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, "needs to stop insulting Australians for disagreeing with her".
Reviving a theme from his election blog last August, Mr Morrison said "the mob" raised families and paid taxes. The Liberals would stay faithful to them because they were the same people as Menzies' forgotten people and Howard's battlers.
However the extremist tag has caused ructions within the Liberal Party, particularly after the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, appeared beside offensive posters at a rally opposing the carbon tax and Mr Morrison made comments on talkback radio about asylum seeker funerals.
Questions about "the moral burden" of decisions in the immigration debate should also be applied to the government's policies, Mr Morrison said yesterday.
"What we are seeing in the absolute mess and misery of our detention network - of those who are drowning at sea, or crashing against rocks at Christmas Island, or those who are wasting in camps as group after group come … I don't accept that as a morally acceptable outcome," he said.
Another boat, carrying 37 asylum seekers, was intercepted yesterday and will be taken to Christmas Island, the first since riots broke out this month.
Refugee advocates said yesterday a man held at the Curtin detention centre was in hospital after trying to hang himself.
A 20-year-old Afghan man took his life at the same centre on Monday, and another 20-year-old Afghan committed suicide at the Scherger centre in Queensland a fortnight ago.
A mental health adviser, Professor Louise Newman, has warned of "suicide clusters" in detention centres and has asked the Immigration Department to review its policy. The government has said the deaths would be investigated.
Linda Briskman, chairwoman of human rights at Curtin University in Perth, said mandatory detention had criminalised people seeking refuge.
Refugee groups expressed concern that overcrowding at North West camp on Christmas Island, which was partly responsible for riots, was now occurring at mainland detention centres. About 300 men from Christmas Island arrived at the Curtin centre at the weekend.
Ms Gillard said she was "determined" to have a mandatory detention system and it was "the right thing" for Australia.
The Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young said asylum applications should be processed on the mainland because it was cheaper, easier and faster. "We have very vulnerable people locked up with very little access to information."
Canadian Minister defends anti-smuggling ad Tamil group deems 'xenophobic'
Immigration Minister Jason Kenney is defending his party's use of an ad that a Tamil group has called "xenophobic." The ad touts the Tories' proposals to crack down on human smuggling and features an image of the cargo ship MV Sun Sea which brought 492 Tamil migrants to B.C. last summer.
"Canada welcomes people who want to build a better future," the announcer says. "But our openness doesn't extend to criminals who target Canadian generosity."
A statement from the National Council of Canadian Tamils on Wednesday said the ad appeals to the "worst instincts of Canadians to score political points and votes" and urged the Tories to remove the ad and to apologize for labelling the asylum-seekers as criminals. "This election ad is xenophobic and borders on racism," said Krisna Saravanamuttu, a council spokesman.
But Kenney, who spent part of Wednesday morning watching the India-versus-Pakistan cricket match at an East Vancouver restaurant serving South Indian and Sri Lankan cuisine, defended the ad and said the "vast majority" of Canadians support a crackdown on smuggling.
"Anyone who's coming to Canada illegally is breaking our laws. It's illegal migration," he told reporters. "It's not the right way to come to Canada, especially if they're paying a criminal network — a gang of criminals and often thugs — who run the smuggling syndicates. "We make no apology for making that point in the course of this election campaign," the Conservative candidate added.
Kenney added that there are asylum-seekers around the world waiting to come to Canada through the United Nations Refugee Agency. "We bring in about 14,000 of those people a year. It's not fair to them if someone in the same region pays a smuggler 50-grand, frankly, to jump the refugee queue."
Following the arrival of the Sun Sea last year, the Tories put forward an anti-smuggling bill, which proposes tougher penalties against human smugglers and more restrictions on migrants who use them. Opposition parties immediately denounced the bill as "draconian" and said it would deprive legitimate refugee-seekers of certain rights.
In the television ad, the Tories accuse the opposition of being "weak on border security."
A new Center for Immigration Studies report finds that, 13 years after welfare reform, the share of immigrant-headed households (legal and illegal) with a child (under age 18) using at least one welfare program continues to be very high. This is partly due to the large share of immigrants with low levels of education and their resulting low incomes – not their legal status or an unwillingness to work. The major welfare programs examined in this report include cash assistance, food assistance, Medicaid, and public and subsidized housing.
The findings also show wide variation in welfare use by country of origin, with immigrants from some countries making extensive use of such programs, while those from other countries have relatively low use rates. Welfare use also varies by state, with Arizona, Texas, California, New York, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Oregon, and Colorado having some of the highest levels of welfare use among immigrant households.
The report, “Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children: A Look at Cash, Medicaid, Housing, and Food Programs,” is authored by Steven A. Camarota, Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies. It will be released Tuesday, April 5, at 9:00 a.m. during a panel discussion at the National Press Club, 14th & F streets, N.W. Please RSVP to press@cis.org.
Panelists:
Steven A. Camarota, Director of Research, Center for Immigration Studies?
Mickey Kaus, blogger and author, KausFiles.com at the Daily Caller
Iain Murray, Vice President for Strategy, Competitive Enterprise Institute
Moderator: Mark Krikorian, Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies
The above is a press release from 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. Contact: Bryan Griffith, 202-466-8185, press@cis.org. The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent research institution which examines the impact of immigration on the United States. The Center for Immigration Studies is not affiliated with any other organization
Texas Republicans Take Harder Line On Immigration
In Texas, the Republican Party is changing its tactics on illegal immigration. The relatively welcoming, tolerant attitude embraced by George W. Bush when he was governor is waning. It has been overtaken by a flood of Arizona-style get-tough measures, with nearly 100 immigration bills written or filed. And while legal challenges will surely follow if many of those measures pass, the debate in Texas is clearly shifting.
The Bush Strategy
The state is now more than ever in the nation's conservative vanguard. Among its most conservative leaders is state Rep. Leo Berman from northeast Texas. Though Berman's district is far from the Mexico border, he's leading the charge on immigration. One of his bills would "stop giving automatic citizenship to children born in Texas."
There's also a voter ID bill; a bill that would require elementary-school children to prove their citizenship upon enrolling — data that would then be turned over to state and federal authorities; and another Berman bill that would make English the official state language.
"That will shut off the state printing anything in any language but English," he says, "and that's going to save millions of dollars right there."
This is a significant change in strategy for the Texas GOP. In the mid '90s, Texas Republicans watched as their counterparts in California went on an anti-illegal immigration crusade and lost control of the state.
But in Texas, the economy was booming; the suburbs of Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio were exploding; and thousands of illegal immigrants sat astride 2-by-4s, nail guns in hand, building those neighborhoods.
So, then-Gov. Bush and his man Karl Rove crafted a different strategy from their California colleagues: Hispanic friendly. The result? In 1998, George W. Bush crushed his Democratic opponent, getting nearly half the Hispanic vote — a triumph that placed him on the path to the presidency one year later.
The young governor learned his political style at his father's knee. Not only was George H.W. Bush a former president of the United States, he was a Texas oilman. And for generations, those independent oil producers, along with farmers and Texas ranchers, have employed inexpensive, hard-working Mexican laborers.
But in the halls of the Texas Capitol in 2011, Bush's approach is considered insufficiently conservative by most Republicans. The one powerful interest group that still thinks Bush had it right is the Texas Association of Business. "If suddenly all the undocumented workers [in the state] were simply to go back to their home of origin, it would be disastrous for the Texas economy," says Bill Hammond, president of the group.
It is no exaggeration to say the membership of Hammond's group supplies the Texas Republican Party with a large measure of its fiscal lifeblood. On behalf of his clients, the thousands of big- and small-business owners in Texas, Hammond roams the state Capitol, trying to impart a bit of reality about the Lone Star State's economy. "The impact on the Texas state economy of immigrant labor is about $17 billion a year," he says. "That's an enormous segment of our economy, and we simply would not be able to function without these people."
Until this year, Hammond and his Republican allies in the Texas Legislature have been able to kill most immigration bills in committee. Hammond would like to expand the immigration pipeline to allow more workers to legally enter the state. That proposal currently has zero chance. "Today, 56 percent of Texans under the age of 25 are minorities. The growth in the population has been largely Hispanic over the last 10 years," he says. "I believe the Republican Party is throwing away their future."
A Plea To Tone Down The Rhetoric
Republican state Rep. Aaron Pena represents the border city of Hidalgo. "The tone of the debate is basically saying, 'We don't want you ... This is a war over our culture. These people bring diseases into our country.' "
He says the six Hispanic Republicans in the Texas House have been trying to convince some of their colleagues to tone down the anti-Hispanic rhetoric. "Many times, you won't see our handiwork out in public," he says. "It's done behind the scenes."
Pena says there are plenty of Texas Republicans who quietly share his concerns about the tone of the debate and its long-term effect on Hispanic voters.
But now, there are plenty who don't, including Leo Berman. "Most Hispanics right now do vote Democrat, there's no question about it," Berman says. "So what vote are we going after? We're going after a vote that doesn't vote Republican anyway."
It's too early to tell how many of the dozens of bills will become law. While the Texas House seems hot for immigration bills, the Senate seems less so. It's distracted by a $27 billion budget deficit that's threatening to gut the state.
U.S. President Barack Obama sought to assure Hispanic Americans on Monday that he will not abandon his efforts to overhaul U.S. immigration policy or preserve government financial support for education.
Congress narrowly failed last year to pass the "Dream Act," which would have provided a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who were brought to the United States as children.
The vote was a bitter disappointment to many Latin Americans, the fastest growing ethnic group in the United States and an increasingly important voting bloc.
"We have to have a pathway for citizenship for those who are just looking for a better life and contributing to our country, and I'll continue to fight for that," Obama said, to applause from a crowd at a Washington, D.C., school.
Obama's "town hall" in English and Spanish -- Obama used a translator -- sponsored by a Spanish-language television network, was part of a White House campaign to make the case that spending on education is essential to the future of the United States as Obama and his Democrats try to negotiate a budget deal with Congressional Republicans.
Republicans want to cut $61 billion in spending during the year ending Sept. 30, and Democrats argue that the rival party's plans would cut a variety of essential programs, including education.
Canada proposes new rules of engagement for marriages involving immigrants
The Harper government has quietly proposed that people coming to Canada to join their partner must stay in the relationship for two years or more before being formally granted permanent residence. The planned regulatory move — which follows a series of town halls and online consultations — represents a federal bid to stamp out fraudulent marriages that are used to dodge immigration laws.
Under the proposal, a spouse or partner from abroad who has been in a relationship with the Canadian sponsor for two years or less would be granted only "conditional permanent residence." The newcomer would then have to remain in a bona fide relationship with their sponsor for two years or more following arrival — or risk having their permanent residence status revoked. In turn, this could lead to their removal from Canada.
A federal notice published just before the election writ was issued Saturday says the measure would "send a message that Canada is taking a strong stance against marriage fraud, and immigration fraud in general."
It would also bring Canada's policies in line with those of other countries, such as the United States, Britain and Australia, all of which already have a form of two-year conditional status for those in new relationships, the notice says.
The director of a legal clinic that serves the Asian community says the move will hurt women in violent relationships. "It's going to be disastrous for women who are abused," said Avvy Go of the Metro Toronto Chinese and Southeast Asian Legal Clinic.
The federal notice says that given concerns about violent relationships, "a process for allowing bona fide spouses and partners in such situations to come forward without facing enforcement action" would be developed should the new measure be put in place.
But Go says many vulnerable women simply won't report abuse by their partners. In addition, she doesn't trust immigration officers "who are not trained to deal with domestic violence situations" to decide whether or not a woman has actually fled an abusive relationship.
The public has 30 days to comment on the federal proposal. The government says while most relationships are believed to be legitimate, the spousal sponsorship process is open to fraud. In some cases, both parties may be using the system for immigration purposes. In others, the sponsor thinks the relationship is genuine while the sponsored partner intends on breaking up shortly after gaining permanent residence status.
The government says "firm figures" on the extent of marriage fraud are not available. However, about 16 per cent of the 46,300 immigration applications processed last year were refused for various reasons. Many were rejected because the relationship was considered a sham, while others were refused for reasons including criminal history, security and medical issues, the government says.
Last fall, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney held town hall meetings in Vancouver, Brampton, Ont., and Montreal to discuss marriages of convenience. His department also consulted the provinces and territories. An online consultation drew 2,342 responses from the general public and 89 from interested groups.
The federal notice says respondents "expressed considerable concern" about marriages of convenience. "Most considered the issue to be a threat to the integrity of Canada's immigration system."
As an additional measure, the government proposes to introduce a "sponsorship bar" that would prevent sponsored partners and spouses from sponsoring a new partner for five years.
California site for 'maternity tourists' shut down
For months, neighbors noticed a number of pregnant Asian women coming and going at all hours at an upscale townhouse development in suburban Los Angeles.
They finally found out the home was being used as a maternity center for Chinese mothers paying thousands of dollars to give birth in the United States so their children would automatically gain U.S. citizenship, city officials said.
The discovery of the center where women stayed before and after delivering their babies at local hospitals was unusual and a possible sign that birthright citizenship is being exploited as a lucrative business, an immigration activist said.
"What this could suggest is ... they're taking it to the next step," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates stricter limits on immigration. "Whoever is organizing this type of operation is buying or leasing a home to become a clearing house. That's a serious problem."
But it's not illegal. Women from other countries have long traveled to the U.S. legally on tourist or student visas and given birth because U.S. law automatically entitles children born on U.S. soil to citizenship.
While some stay under the false assumption that they too can gain citizenship if their child is U.S.-born, many return to their home countries convinced a U.S. birth certificate will afford their child more opportunities in the future. Often, the women are wealthy and able to pay the steep costs of the trip and medical care.
Krikorian noted that some travel agencies abroad are known to arrange such trips for individuals but not to specialized clinics such as the one in San Gabriel.
Officials in the suburb that's home to a large Asian population shut down the house for building code violations earlier this month after receiving a complaint about excessive noise, overcrowding and possible building permit violations, said Clayton A. Anderson, the city's neighborhood improvement services manager.
Inspectors found seven newborns being kept in clear plastic bassinets in a kitchen converted to a nursery.
Just two mothers answered their bedroom doors when inspectors visited, he said. They told inspectors that they were Chinese and Taiwanese nationals and spoke little English. Other mothers were out shopping.
The mothers told officials their families had paid to send them to the United States to give birth, Anderson said. He did not know how much the trips had cost.
After being interviewed by county child welfare workers, the women and babies were taken to another location since the townhomes were deemed unsafe for occupancy because structural walls had been breached.
The three homes, part of a five-unit condo development on a quiet residential street, had adjoining inside walls removed, and rooms were divided so mothers had separate spaces, Anderson said.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not plan to investigate because the case did not involve fraudulently obtained visas, agency spokeswoman Virginia Kice said.
Republican lawmakers have moved to limit automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S. Earlier this year they said they hoped to trigger a Supreme Court review of the Constitutional amendment that grants automatic birthright citizenship or force Congress to take action with legislation they drafted on the issue.
Iowa Republican Rep. Steve King sponsored a bill that would limit automatic citizenship to people with at least one parent who is a citizen, a legal permanent resident or a military veteran, but there has been little movement on the legislation since it was introduced.
Some states, too, have tried to take steps to limit birthright citizenship. Last week, Arizona's state Senate rejected illegal immigration bills that included measures intended to produce a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on who is entitled to U.S. citizenship at birth under the Constitution.
Rep. Judy Chu, a Democrat in Southern California, said traveling to this country to give birth is not a common practice and defended automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S.
Chapman University law professor Maria Cianciarulo, who specializes in immigration, said she's never heard of a specialized maternity house, noting that birthing tourism is a tiny fraction of the flow of immigrants and tourists into the United States.
Workers at the San Gabriel house were busy Thursday restoring it to its original state as ordered by the city.
Property manager Dwight Chang was fined $800 for construction without a permit and operating a business in a residential zone. He told city officials that he had rented the townhomes to a woman. A phone message left at Chang's business, Ta Way Development in Arcadia, was not immediately returned.
Inability to deport 'undesirable' illegals frustrates U.S.
Convicted killer Loeun Heng walked out of a Massachusetts detention center a free man last fall. The illegal alien from Cambodia was supposed to be deported after serving almost a decade in prison for killing a 16-year-old boy in a Boston suburb. But Cambodia is among several countries that won't take their citizens back when the United States wants to jettison them.
Officials from Immigration and Custom Enforcement, or ICE, detained Heng for six months as they tried to ship him out. They failed.
Since 2008, ICE has been forced to release 1,741 illegal immigrants because their home countries would not allow deportation, said Harold Ort, an ICE spokesman in Newark.
Heng, 26, and three other men in the Blood Red Dragons gang attacked, stabbed and beat 16-year-old Charles Ashton Cline-McMurray in Revere, Mass., on Oct 13, 2000. Prosecutors worry ICE won't be able to deport the other killers when they get out of prison.
In the wake of Heng's release, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee will hold hearings on the immigration issue.
Mark Krikorian, executive director for the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based think tank, said U.S. policy is being dictated by unfriendly, uncooperative foreign governments — such as Cuba, Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos — that continuously refuse to allow their undesirable citizens to be deported.
The U.S. House Immigration Reform Caucus is examining the issue.
"How many more innocent people have to die because of these failed policies? What part of illegal don't people understand?" said U.S. Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-California, who chairs the reform caucus. "Illegal immigrants should be kept behind bars until they are deported. A deputy sheriff was killed last year in my region by an illegal alien who slipped through our system. We must fight to ensure that criminal aliens are not released into the public," Bilbray said.
A local member of the reform caucus, U.S. Rep. Jason Altmire, D-McCandless, declined comment after repeated requests for an interview. "It's disappointing and frustrating that federal authorities have been unable to deport Loeun Heng. Our understanding is that ICE took every possible step in this case, but circumstances like Heng's really erode public confidence in the system," said Jake Wark, a spokesman for Suffolk County District Attorney Don Conley.
Last month, as he was being led from a Westmoreland County courtroom, a convicted sex offender from Vietnam told his lawyer that he will never be deported. Dung Le, 40, pleaded guilty to failing to register on time as a sex offender in Pennsylvania. He was sentenced to one to five years in prison. "He's of the opinion he won't be deported," defense attorney Patricia Elliott said.
Le might be right. In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that immigration detainees must be released from custody if they cannot be deported within six months.
That ruling centered on German national Kestutis Zadvydas, a cocaine dealer imprisoned for 16 years. In 1994, immigration officials tried to deport him to Germany and then Lithuania, his parents' country of origin. Neither country wanted him. By a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled the United States had to release Zadvydas from custody, saying it was unlikely he would ever be deported.
Ort said ICE is forced to release illegal aliens if they are unable to deport them within the 180-day period. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, they can ignore that requirement under very limited circumstances, "including a threat to national security, adverse foreign policy consequences or contagious disease concerns."
"There has been a lax attitude toward enforcement," said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform in Washington. "We no longer have a choice. We as a matter of law should be in control of our own immigration policy."
Krikorian said Congress needs to change immigration law to close the loophole left open by the Supreme Court. "Congress needs to push back. We need to make sure that countries that don't take people back know we're not going to issue entrance visas to their citizens," Krikorian said.
Le might slip through the loophole. Le came last year to work at a Rostraver nail salon. He legally entered the United States in 1993, according to ICE records. In 2004, he was convicted in Vermont of a felony count of lewd and lascivious behavior for improperly touching a woman at a nail salon where he worked. He served about one year in a Vermont jail and then left the United States, ICE said.
Ort said Le tried to return through Honolulu International Airport on Oct. 15, 2005, when he applied for admission back into the country. Le was ordered to appear before an immigration judge. U.S. Immigration Judge Dayna Beamer in Honolulu ordered that Le be deported back to Vietnam. He was released in 2006 when immigration officials could not do so.
Le resurfaced in Rostraver and was arrested after he was late in registering as a sex offender with Pennsylvania State Police.
"Every alien's removal requires the cooperation of another country. Thus, the difficulties involved in deporting aliens with final orders of removal are not unique to Mr. Le's case. In fact, some countries flatly refuse to accept their nationals back into their communities, while others might simply prolong and delay the issuance of the necessary travel documents for repatriation," Ort said.
It is believed convicted killer Heng is living somewhere near Boston. Local officials are concerned about two other defendants who pleaded guilty in the gang slaying, two more illegal aliens who would be subject to deportation upon release.
Viseth Sao pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to life in prison, but he is eligible for parole in 2016. Savoeun Heng, 26, and Savoeun Po, 26, pleaded guilty to manslaughter. Savoeun Heng received a 12- to 14-year sentence. Po was sentenced to eight to 10 years.
ICE will try to deport Savoeun Heng and Savoeun Po upon their release.
Whites will be a minority in the U.S. by 2050 as black and Hispanic birth rates soar
Whites in America will be outnumbered by 2050 by rising numbers of ethnic minorities, according to official figures. Hispanic, black and Asian people accounted for 90 per cent of all births in the U.S. between 2000 and 2010.
In 40 years’ time they will comprise more than half the population due to their higher birth rates and immigration.
In ten states – Mississippi, Georgia, Maryland, Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, California, New Mexico and Hawaii – more than half of children are already non-white.
The figures come from the U.S. Census Bureau, which last year carried out its first survey of America for a decade. It found that in 2010 whites were still the nation’s largest group, comprising 64 per cent of the population, down from 69 per cent in 2000.
Hispanics went from 13 to 16 per cent and were the second largest group whilst blacks remained stable at around 12 per cent.
The Hispanic population surpassed the 50million mark after adding 15 million to their numbers.
‘This is a group that’s young, whose growth is driven increasingly by births and not immigration,’ said D’Vera Cohn, of the Pew Research Center, which has analysed data from the census.
The battle is not over in the Arizona immigration war
By Sen. Russell Pearce. He is a Republican in the Arizona Senate. He wrote the state’s immigration law, SB 1070, as well as the Legal Arizona Workers Act and Proposition 200
The Arizona Senate on March 18 voted down five immigration bills I supported — most notably, one addressing the issue of birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.
While I was disappointed with last week’s votes, it was not the last word on illegal immigration in Arizona. I am not backing off from in demanding our laws be enforced. I know that the Arizona-led battle to enforce U.S. immigration laws cannot be won overnight.
I introduced what is now SB 1070 to no avail every year between 2005 and 2009, before it finally passed and was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last April. While SB 1070 has garnered unprecedented national attention, it was not the law that “started it all.”
Prior to SB 1070, I introduced many other measures that addressed illegal immigration — and eventually became law. In 2004, 56 percent of Arizona voters approved Prop 200, which denies certain government benefits to illegal immigrants and prevents voter fraud.
In 2007, then-Gov. Janet Napolitano signed the Legal Arizona Workers Act, which mandates E-Verify to all employers, ensuring they did not hire illegal workers. Additional laws that punish human smugglers; deny illegal immigrants bail, and set up a statewide task force to deal with illegal immigrant gangs passed prior to SB 1070.
These were all uphill battles. But we persevered.
Much has been made of an open letter that 60 chief executive officers of Arizona businesses sent me, urging the Legislature not to “pass any additional immigration legislation.” They focused on the supposed negative effects of a boycott of Arizona. But it is not unreasonable to suspect that a desire for cheap labor was also a factor.
Citing this letter, a New York Times editorial credited business opposition to the defeat of my bills, arguing “The reversal has to do with money, of course. The bills were dead once the state’s business lobby weighed in against them.”
There is no doubt that the business interests influenced some GOP lawmakers. But this is nothing new. All of my past immigration laws overcame strong opposition from the Chamber of Commerce and other special interest groups.
But despite the cheap labor lobby’s continued opposition to immigration enforcement, the Republican Party of Arizona, and across the nation, has moved strongly in the direction of enforcement. In 2004, Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) was the only member of the Arizona congressional delegation to support Prop 200. The Arizona Republican Party, though not the grass roots, opposed the initiative as well.
Seven years later, the state GOP, four of the five Republican congressmen (except Rep. Jeff Flake), and both Republican senators — John McCain and Jon Kyl — support SB 1070.
More important than the politicians, SB 1070 has the support of the citizens of Arizona — and the United States. These sentiments have not waned. Two recent polls by Rasmussen and the Pew Research Center both show Americans supporting SB 1070 by a 2-1 margin.
The naysayers want to believe that the enthusiasm for Arizona’s tough stand was just a temporary temper tantrum that already has expired. But until our borders are secured, and our immigration laws are enforced, the people of Arizona will not rest.
While last week’s votes were a setback, we have fought these battles before and prevailed. We will prevail again.
U.S. may strengthen identity verification system for workers
The federal government is exploring the possibility of using a credit rating giant like Equifax to verify the identity of American workers, a move that could make it far more difficult for undocumented immigrants to get work using stolen Social Security numbers.
The plan by the Department of Homeland Security, which is still preliminary and would probably require congressional approval, could have far-reaching consequences. The government already allows employers to check the legal status of employees using a system known as E-Verify, but hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants beat the system by using stolen Social Security numbers.
If workers had to use the verification systems in place to apply for a mortgage or a bank account, they would not only have to present a Social Security number to an employer, but also answer questions about their personal history and financial background to establish their identity.
On Monday, the government announced that it would begin allowing individuals in the District, Virginia and four other states to voluntarily use a system provided by Equifax to verify their identity. Once they did that, they could access a federal database to verify their authorization to work. The move will help the small number of legally authorized immigrants and U.S. citizens who encounter problems each year when an employer runs their Social Security numbers through the E-Verify system.
By giving workers the ability to check their records before they apply for a job, authorities said that citizens and immigrants who are authorized to work will be able to take care of spelling mistakes and other common errors. The voluntary program will be piloted in the District, Virginia, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho and Mississippi. It will be expanded nationwide in the coming months.
Alejandro Mayorkas, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said the government planned to use the initiative to evaluate how the third-party verification system worked, with a view to making the tool available to employers.
Mayorkas added that only Congress could compel employers to use third-party verification systems. The main E-Verify system is also voluntary for employers, but House Republicans have indicated that they would like it to be mandatory.
Private identification systems might reduce Social Security number fraud, but Mayorkas said he has concerns about how the federal government would deal with errors in third-party databases.
Neither employers nor the federal government will gain information about worker queries under the new self-check system. Mayorkas also said that employers will not be permitted to force employees to do self-checks.
A city that has taken numerous steps to crack down on illegal immigration is now joining a string of Southern California municipalities that are signing up to tap a federal database aimed at tighter scrutiny of employees' immigration status.
Escondido's measure is modest compared to how others have embraced the free E-Verify tool, an online federal database now used voluntarily by employers nationwide. The north San Diego suburb's City Council voted 4-1 Wednesday to require all city contractors to use the screening for new hires and earlier this month began doing the same for all new city employees earlier this month.
The city will urge _ but not require _ private businesses to perform enhanced checks on new hires. Lancaster, north of Los Angeles, became the first city in Southern California to require private businesses to use E-Verify in January 2010 and was followed by others including Murrieta, Temecula and Lake Elsinore in the economically battered Inland Empire.
"We don't really want to be a heavy-handed government," said Escondido Mayor Sam Abed, a Lebanese immigrant and former IBM Corp. employee who has made illegal immigration a signature issue. "It's in their self-interest. We hope businesses will realize the benefit."
The proposal has sparked a familiar, if relatively muted, debate in Escondido, a city of 140,000 people that is about 50 percent Latino. Supporters say tougher immigration enforcement is overdue, while critics worry about fueling anti-immigrant sentiment.
In 2006, the City Council voted to require landlords to verify tenants' immigration status. The city dropped the measure before it took effect when a federal judge questioned whether it would survive legal scrutiny.
That same year, police introduced drivers' license checkpoints that resulted in seizures of hundreds of cars a year. Illegal immigrants cannot get drivers' licenses in California, so many lose their cars.
And last year, the city formed an unusually close alliance with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which has two agents stationed at police headquarters to respond when people who are pulled over a traffic citation or questioned for other violations are found to have deportation orders or criminal records.
Police say they have turned over more than 400 illegal immigrants to ICE since the alliance, called Operation Joint Effort, began in May.
E-Verify allows employers to run a worker's information against Department of Homeland Security and Social Security databases to check whether the person is permitted to work in the U.S. The Obama administration has made cracking down on employers who hire people here illegally a central part of its immigration enforcement policy.
Much of the criticism of E-Verify has focused on whether U.S. citizens and legal immigrants with permission to work were falsely flagged as illegal workers. Immigration officials have been taking steps to improve such inaccuracies.
Al's Towing, which has a contract to tow vehicles for the police department, signed up E-Verify when owner Josh Park learned the city might make it mandatory. Previously, he examined a job applicant's documents and gave his blessings as long as they looked legitimate to his naked eye. Now, he says, he has an extra safeguard to ensure his employees are legally entitled to work.
"We were required by law to verify to a certain extent, this just allows you to check it," said Park, one of more than 250,000 employers nationwide _ including about 100 in Escondido _ who have enrolled in E-Verify. "Before, there was no tool to use."
Juan Gonzalez, an illegal immigrant from Mexico who makes about $75 a day as a laborer, says the new measure will have limited impact because it is limited to city contractors and doesn't apply to those who hire him.
"There is work, but it's on the farms, landscaping, tearing off roofs _ the kind of work that many people won't do for $10 an hour," he said.
Border agents catch 13 illegal immigrants all wearing marine uniforms 'embroidered with the name Perez'
Border Patrol agents have caught 13 illegal immigrants wearing U.S. Marine uniforms at a checkpoint near San Diego. The immigrants were in a van that was stopped along Interstate 8 on March 14. The van had a U.S. government licence plate with an altered number, Border Patrol spokesman Michael Jimenez said.
He did not know where the group obtained the military uniforms. There are reports that each of the 13 uniforms were embroidered with the surname 'Perez'.
'This effort is an example of the lengths smugglers will go through to avoid detection, and the skilled and effective police work of the agents and the customs and border protection,' he said.
Two U.S. citizens who were with the immigrants were arrested on suspicion of alien smuggling. Three of the immigrants were being held in federal custody as witnesses and the others were returned to Mexico, their country of origin, he said.
The Naval Criminal Investigative Service and Border Patrol were conducting a joint investigation of the incident. NCIS spokesman Ed Buice said he couldn't discuss details, but 'there are several obvious questions that need to be answered.' It is not known if the two U.S. citizens who were arrested have been in the military.
Officials believe the van entered the U.S. at Calexico. The vehicle is registered in Yucca Valley California. The fake number plates actually belong to a van registered to the U.S. Marine Corps.
Australian Labor Party government goes to water as boats threaten sovereignty
THE Gillard government has made a spectacular mess of policy towards illegal immigrants and is now in danger of forfeiting a key element of Australian national sovereignty.
The key to the boatpeople phenomenon is to realise that it is not about refugees. It is instead a determined illegal immigration. Piece by piece, the illegal immigrant industry is bending back the Gillard government, breaking its will and breaking its policies.
It was the Rudd government that changed policy decisively in August 2008. It closed the offshore processing centre in Nauru and abolished temporary protection visas.
As a result, people-smuggling to Australia got back into business big time. In the 2 1/2 years since the government changed policy, nearly 11,000 boatpeople have arrived. Last year, asylum applications to Australia increased by 76 per cent. Among industrialised countries overall there was a decline. In 2009, while the global number of applications was static, they increased in Australia by 30 per cent. With the end of the monsoon season, there have been some six boats this month alone, carrying more than 330 people in total.
The government deals with this matter in a consistently dishonest fashion, giving up morsels of information only under pressure. Here are some facts. In the year to August 2010, some 45 per cent of illegal immigrant boatpeople had spent more than three months outside their country of origin. Of this 45 per cent, some 88 per cent had spent more than a year outside their country of origin.
In other words, they were not fleeing directly from persecution. Many Afghans who have come to Australia have never lived in Afghanistan, or at least not for a very long time. Life in Australia is infinitely preferable to Pakistan, but deciding to migrate to Australia is not the same as being a refugee.
The vast majority of the world's refugees will never achieve permanent resettlement in a foreign country. Nor does the refugee convention envisage that they should. Rather, they should be protected as near to home as possible until they can safely return.
Everything the government tells you about this matter is likely to be a wrinkle on the facts, a spin, an angle, and it is likely to contain much less than meets the eye.
For example, Julia Gillard went to the election promising to turn back the boats and set up a regional refugee processing centre in East Timor. There is little prospect of that centre ever coming into existence and no prospect of it ever having an effect on the illegal immigrant trade.
Recently, Immigration Minister Chris Bowen trumpeted an agreement with Afghanistan that would allow failed asylum applicants to be returned. The problem was the Afghan government thought it meant no such thing.
So, how many failed Afghan asylum-seekers have been returned against their will since 2007? Absolutely none. How many Afghans have gone back voluntarily? The answer is five.
More than 80 per cent of illegal immigrants arriving by boat come with no documents, yet nearly all need documents to get to the country they take the boat from. This naturally makes security checks extremely difficult. It also underlines what everyone in the field knows already, that the entire process of granting someone refugee status is almost completely subjective and easily scammed. There is a whole industry based on learning the right answers to questions Australian officials ask. In the first nine months of last year, more than 40 per cent of Afghans were rejected as refugees in their primary assessment but after all appeals were exhausted 96 per cent were accepted. Yet in the same period, some 9577 Afghans applied offshore to come to Australia as refugees and only 951 were accepted and given visas.
What is happening on Christmas Island exactly parallels what has happened in Europe in the past couple of decades. A determined illegal immigration presented itself as an asylum issue and gradually beat back the will of European governments to enforce control of their borders. This determined illegal immigration often used extravagant protest and even self-harm techniques to engage European compassion.
And it worked, just as it is working on Christmas Island. Bowen fatuously declaims that no one engaging in riots and breakouts will benefit from their actions.
Exactly the reverse is true. The government has effectively surrendered its policy and moved hundreds of people to mainland Australia. The Age newspaper obediently called for the end of mandatory detention.
Here are three other lies from the government. It says mandatory detention is not meant as a deterrent. Yet when, in April last year, it suspended asylum applications by Sri Lankans and Afghans, it was precisely to achieve a deterrent effect. Since the government now will not send any Afghans home, this is the only deterrent. The illegal immigrants know this and are whittling it away.
Second, Bowen, who recites cliches like a metronome, keeps talking about "an international solution for an international problem", by which he means the Bali process. But we have had co-operation, often expensively bought, on this issue from our neighbours for many years.
What changed is that Australia put the ultimate prize of permanent immigration to this country back on the table for people-smugglers to sell. It is an Australian problem and the only solution is in Australia's hands: no permanent resettlement in Australia for those who arrive illegally.
Finally, Bowen actually slanders the Howard government for its compassion. John Howard stopped the boats with his Nauru processing centre because illegal immigrants came to believe that going to Nauru would not get them to Australia. Once the trade in boats stopped, Howard then generously let the remaining people on Nauru come here. That is not remotely like Christmas Island where everyone knows if they get there they get to stay in Australia.
Once the government caves in on mandatory detention, as it surely will soon enough (if by no other means than speeding the process up), the numbers coming to Australia illegally will increase by the thousands.
With chain family migration this will be tens of thousands of people self-selecting to come here, not being selected by our program (which I have always argued should be bigger).
That is a catastrophic loss of Australian sovereignty and a comprehensive failure by the Gillard government.
In a major revamp of its student immigration system, the UK government has announced tougher English language criteria, limits on work entitlement and an end to the post-study route, through which students were allowed to remain in the UK for two years after they completed their courses.
While the new English language rules will become effective from next month, all UK education institutions that want to recruit foreign students will have to become highly-trusted sponsors by April 2012, and accredited by statutory education inspection bodies by the end of 2012.
"It has become very apparent that the old student visa regime failed to control immigration and failed to protect legitimate students from poor quality colleges. The changes I am announcing today re-focus the student route as a temporary one, available to only the brightest and best. The new system is designed to ensure students come for a limited period, to study not work, and make a positive contribution while they are here," UK home secretary, Theresa May , said while announcing the changes.
In a move that will impact Indian students planning to study in the UK, the two-year post-study leave to remain in the UK is being discontinued. International graduates will, however, be allowed to remain in the UK if they have skilled job offers under the Tier II work permit category.
"The students will be given three to four months after they finish their studies to look for a job. But graduates will not be allowed to take up unskilled jobs and will need a Tier II sponsor," UK Border Agency regional director in Delhi, Chris Dix said.
Further, while students at universities and publicly-funded colleges will retain current work rights, others will no longer have the right to work while they study in the UK. In 2009, there were 57,000 student visas issued in India for the UK. The number went down to 41,350 in 2010.
Immigration detainees in Britain win only £1 damages
Two immigration detainees have been awarded nominal damages of £1 each for being illegally imprisoned for two years under a secret policy operated by the Home Office.
The majority judgment by the supreme court criticised the previous government's reliance between 2006 and 2008 on unpublished regulations governing the detention of foreign national prisoners pending deportation.
The token compensation reflects the court's belief that the men, one Congolese and one Jamaican, would have been held in prison anyway under other laws.
Walumba Lumba entered the UK illegally in 1994, the court said. He was later convicted of wounding with intent and sentenced to four years in jail. He had been due for release in 2006 but was held in prison under the Home Office's secret rules. He left the country "voluntarily" last month.
Kadian Mighty, a Jamaican citizen, was originally granted leave to remain in the UK in 2003, but that permission was revoked after he was convicted of drug dealing and jailed. He was also detained after the end of his sentence, pending removal from Britain, but released in July 2008.
"Following adverse publicity in April 2006, the [home] secretary adopted a new policy which was not published," the supreme court said in a summary of the decision. "Between April 2006 and September 2008, the secretary of state applied this unpublished policy, which imposed a near blanket ban on release of foreign national prisoners.
"... The secretary of state is liable to both appellants in the tort of false imprisonment as the statutory power to detain them was exercised in breach of public law duties. The appellants are, however, only entitled to nominal damages assessed at £1. They are not entitled to exemplary damages."
The supreme court found it was illegal to operate a clandestine policy which is "inconsistent with her published policy and which applies a near blanket ban on the release of foreign national prisoners". Jacqui Smith was Labour's home secretary between June 2007 and June 2009.
Three of the nine judges, Lords Phillips, Brown and Rodger, dissented from the judicial majority on the question of whether the treatment of the men amounted to false imprisonment.
Lumba's case had been backed by the Public Law Project, a legal charity that aims to improve access to justice. It said: "The secret policy required detainees to be held indefinitely and regardless of whether they posed any risk to the public.
"Lord Dyson … held that there is 'clear evidence that [UK Border Agency] caseworkers were directed to conceal the true reason for detention during this period and, in a reference to the then home secretary, Jacqui Smith, that there was a "deliberate decision taken at the highest level to conceal the policy."
Responding to the judgment, Jo Hickman, Lumba's solicitor, said: "This decision is a vindication of the rule of law and of the fundamental principle that no one should be deprived of their liberty by the abuse of executive power.
"The supreme court has made clear that all detention decisions must be properly, openly and lawfully made, or the resultant detention will be unlawful. This is a principled judgment in the context of individual liberty, and will help guard against any further abuse of the Home Office's detention powers."
The Home Office has amended its published policy several times since then. In September 2008 it declared there should be a presumption that all foreign national prisoners would be detained – bringing it into line with its unpublished policy. In January 2009, however, as a result of this case, references to any presumption of detention were dropped.
After a decade of playing one on television, I, along with my brother Aaron, was blessed a few months ago to become a real Texas Ranger in the presence of Gov. Rick Perry, fellow Texas Rangers and many others.
Perry mentioned at that induction: "As the drug cartels have turned up the heat on the other side of that border over the past few years, we have invested significant state resources to secure our border, looking to local police departments, county sheriffs, game wardens and even Texas Military Forces. However, when it was time to take the fight to the bad guys, there was only one choice to lead our efforts, so we formed our Ranger recon teams. It is reassuring to know that our Rangers are on the job, especially in light of ongoing reports of deteriorating conditions, with kidnappings, assassinations and terroristic acts just miles from Texas communities."
Only weeks later, on Jan. 31, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano asked public officials to stop exaggerating claims of violence on the U.S. side of the border and "be honest with the people we serve." She added: "Let's stick with the facts. We need to be upfront and clear about what's really happening along our borders."
The latest statistics show that 34,000 people have been killed in Mexico because of organized crime and drug trafficking during the past five years alone, and officials expect that number to rise. Yet we don't expect that escalating violence to increasingly spill over into the U.S.?
Consider just a few recent tragedies in my own state of Texas:
--In April 2010, on a street in Fort Hancock, Texas, four Hudspeth County employees were working on a remote unpaved road, when an unknown gunman fired from across the Rio Grande. (In a January 2011 letter to the U.S. House of Representatives' Judiciary and Homeland Security committees, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott described the shooting as "yet another incident involving cartel-related gunfire.")
--In June 2010, El Paso's City Hall was struck by at least seven shots fired from across the border in Ciudad Juarez, the epicenter of Mexico's ongoing drug war.
--In August 2010, at least one stray bullet from Mexico hit a building at the University of Texas at El Paso.
--In October 2010, U.S. tourist David Hartley reportedly was shot by a Mexican gunman.
--In November, the University of Texas at Brownsville temporarily canceled classes because of ongoing gunfire across the border in Matamoros, Mexico.
And what about violence in other border states? Exaggerating border violence?
I agree with Rep. Ben Quayle, R-Ariz., who said that for cattle ranchers, the daily reality of drug and human smugglers traversing their property is "far more impacting" than Napolitano conveys. Quayle went on to say, "Statistics and averages might mean something to government bureaucrats and analysts in Washington, but try telling the people who deal with these realities every day that the violence along the border has subsided."
Because of the feds' ineptness and passivity, it's no wonder that half the states in our union are taking matters into their own hands regarding border enforcement and immigration. Arizona-style laws have been proposed in approximately 24 other states. A total of 346 laws and resolutions related to immigration were approved by state lawmakers in 2010, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. More than 100 immigration-related bills are pending in Texas.
Texas Department of Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples just launched ProtectYourTexasBorder.com, where users can upload pictures and videos about their experiences with suspected drug traffickers at the Mexican border. The goal of the website is to warn the public about not only the dangers to farmers and ranchers but also the potential impacts on the nation's food supply.
According to the Texas Department of Agriculture, at the Texan border alone there are:
--Close to 8,200 farms and ranches, covering more than 15 million acres.
--Producers of beef, fruits and vegetables that are essential to the nation's food supply.
--Counties that account for about half the state's fruit and vegetable production and about 4 percent of the state's total agricultural income.
--Farms and ranches that make more than $700 million in agricultural sales every year.
Exaggerating border violence?
The only ones exaggerating are the feds -- under-exaggerating the threat and severity of border violence and over-exaggerating their success of securing the United States' southwestern border.
In fact, this past Thursday, Napolitano continued her same Obama-victorious-song-and-dance act at the U.S.-Mexico Congressional Border Issues Conference, boasting of (as summarized by her office) the Obama administration's "unprecedented efforts to strengthen security along the Southwest border, which include increasing the number of Border Patrol agents from approximately 10,000 in 2004 to more than 20,700 today."
But while the Obama administration continues to embellish its record, PolitiFact pointed out that it's actually stealing its predecessor's glory: "President George W. Bush was responsible for adding many of the agents on the ground now."
Paul Babeu, sheriff of Pinal County, Ariz., put it well when he said that Napolitano's talking points about security on the border have "more to do with political pivoting for the 2012 elections than (they do) with what is happening on the border."
Ms. Napolitano, the truth is it's you who is misleading the public. Playing down border violence and trumping up Washington's successes may be effective for campaign rhetoric, but it's killing our citizens -- literally. At least I can agree 100 percent with you on this point: As you said back on Jan. 31, let's "be honest with the people we serve. ... Let's stick with the facts. We need to be upfront and clear about what's really happening along our borders."
A news release was published by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) on February 9, 2011. It details how 11 members of the extremely violent transnational gang, MS-13 were indicted for a series of serious crimes- indeed some of the most serious crimes an individual could be charged with. The victims of these crimes were violently attacked. Some were stabbed while others were shot. Some of the victims of these thugs died because of their injuries.
What is beyond my comprehension is how ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) could post a news release without making a single reference to the immigration status of any of the 11 alleged members of MS-13 especially when the news release identified MS-13 as being a "transnational gang!"
Not a single word was written about the nationality of any of those who were arrested. Not a single word was written to describe any possible immigration law violations. Not a single word was written to make note as to how any of these "transnational" criminals entered the United States. Here is the paragraph that appears in the news release that describes the transnational nature of MS-13:
"Today's indictment is the product of tremendous cooperation and efforts of HSI special agents and local law enforcement officers. As a result, these violent gang members will now be brought to justice to face very serious federal charges," said Executive Associate Director James Dinkins of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). "HSI is committed to enhancing the public safety of the residents in the national Capitol Region by attacking and dismantling transnational gangs such as MS-13."
As I have previously noted in other commentaries I have written about the long list of failings of the federal government to address the importance of enforcing immigration laws: when the agency that bears the primary responsibility for enforcing our nation's immigration laws ignores those immigration laws, you know our nation is in extreme trouble!
The immigration laws of our nation are intended to prevent the entry of aliens into our country whose presence would be harmful to our nation and our citizens. It is a certainty that the transnational criminals who were discussed in this news report not only represent a threat to the well being of our nation and our citizens is not mere conjecture. The threat they pose has been established by virtue of the nature of the crimes for which they stand accused.
If ICE is ignoring the immigration status of these thugs then it must be presumed that they may not even make the most rudimentary efforts of lodging detainers for those suspected gang members if they are determined to be illegal aliens. No matter the outcome of the criminal proceedings - likely involving trials, they will be removed (deported) from the United States after they complete their jail sentences (presuming that they are found guilty or that they will be removed even if they are found "not guilty" at trial).
Additionally, it is entirely possible that if any of these defendants are illegal aliens that they may have also violated other laws that involve their immigration status. For example, if an illegal alien is found to be in possession of a firearm, such a violation of law can easily be prosecuted on the federal level under the auspices of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(5). The maximum penalty for this crime is ten years in jail.
I made a significant number of arrests when I was a federal agent and the elements of the crime are extremely easy to prove. Other members of transnational gangs may have also been previously deported and then reentered the United States without authority. If such an alien has a prior criminal conviction that resulted in that alien's deportation, then that crime carries a maximum penalty of 20 years of incarceration. This crime is even easier to prove than the firearms charge I noted previously.
The problem is that if ICE did not even think to discuss the immigration component of these cases, then I have to presume that ICE is ignoring these charges.
Additionally, as I have noted on many previous occasions, when an individual is arrested for any crime, the next issue that has to be addressed is the issue of appropriate bail that should be set. While it is very likely that a murder suspect may be held without bail, others of these criminal suspects may not be charged with crimes of that magnitude. A bail hearing generally only deals with two issues- danger to the community and risk of flight. Danger to the community can be shown by the nature of the crime that the person stands accused of. Risk of flight is often far more nebulous and difficult to demonstrate to a judge or magistrate.
However, information about a defendant's immigration status and relating factors, such as information contained in a defendant's immigration file can very often provide conclusive and compelling evidence of risk of flight. As an INS special agent, I was often called upon to testify at bail hearings. When I was able to provide evidence of previous instances when a defendant was encountered by immigration authorities and provided multiple false names and utterly fictitious addresses, it quickly became evident that the defendant in question presented an extreme risk of flight. This could be bolstered when I was able to provide specific instances when the defendant posted bond in an immigration case and then forfeited the bail and failed to show up for hearing.
The point is that the immigration component of these cases is extremely important and yet, there was no mention in the press release about the citizenship or immigration status of any of the 11 defendants who are accused of belonging to a pernicious transnational gang. Here is how the press release described the gang:
"According to the indictment, MS-13 is a transnational gang with members in most of the states within the United States, El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico. It is alleged that MS-13 engages in racketeering activity to include murder, narcotics distribution, extortion, robberies, and obstruction of justice, among other crimes."
The most fundamental question that must be asked is why was there not a single mention of immigration in a press release that was issued by Immigration and Customs Enforcement? Even if any of the defendants are citizens of the United States, given the fact that the press release noted that MS-13 has members in El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Mexico in addition to the United States, then the press release needed to address the issue of citizenship. This failure is unacceptable!
Australia: Immigration support plummets in Victoria, survey finds
There is a lot of crime from African refugees in Melbourne
SUPPORT for immigration has plummeted in Victoria, a survey shows. With the nation marking Harmony Day today, the Monash University study has revealed that 52 per cent of Victorians believe the migrant intake is too high.
This compared with only 30 per cent in 2007, according to the Mapping Social Cohesion 2010 survey.
Rampant population growth was a major federal election issue last year, and state Opposition leader Daniel Andrews admitted last week that the Brumby Government's mishandling of it was a key reason for Labor's state election loss.
More than half of all Victorians rated the Federal Government's record in providing roads, rail and housing needed for future growth as poor or very poor, the survey found. Just under a quarter thought it had a good or very good record while a similar percentage believed it was neither good nor poor.
The national survey, conducted in June last year, revealed that 47.3 per cent of Australians agreed immigration was too high, compared with 36.3 per cent three years earlier. But it also found that 64 per cent of Victorians agreed with the statement that “accepting migrants from many different countries makes Australia stronger". This was down from 70 per cent in 2007.
Report author Prof Andrew Markus, from Monash's Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation, said there was surprising support for immigration given the extent of public debate over the issue last year. “On past record, the level of negative sentiment may well have reached the range 55-60 per cent," he said.
The survey also found that a small majority of Australians, 53 per cent, thought it was important that Christianity stay as the main religion. About 40 per cent believed it was unimportant while 7 per cent said it was neither important or unimportant.
The survey was sponsored by the Scanlon Foundation, a charitable organisation created by Melbourne businessman Peter Scanlon to promote “a larger cohesive Australian society".
1. Birthright Citizenship for the Children of Visitors: A National Security Problem in the Making? (Backgrounder)
2. Immigrant Gains and Native Losses in the U.S. Job Market, 2000 to 2010 (Congressional Testimony)
3. Looking Carefully at the Proposed Immigrant Entrepreneur Bill (Blog)
4. Pushing the Envelope (Blog)
5. Prof. Matloff Busts 'Best and Brightest' Ballyhoo for H-1B Workers (Blog)
6. The Criminal Alien Constituency (Blog)
7. Salt Lake Chamber – Enemy of the Taxpayer and Utah Children (Blog)
8. Ariz. Sheriff Babeu and His (Not Federal) Immigration Task Force (Blog)
9. Attrition Works, Respected Think Tank Edition (Blog)
10. Going Really Green (Blog)
11. Secure Communities, Please (Blog)
12. Advocates for More Immigration Outline New Strategies (Blog)
13. ICE's Morton Envisions a 'Culture of Compliance' (Blog)
21 March, 2011
The 'crime visa': How 18,000 illegal immigrants to the USA got legal status by being the victim of a crime
More than 18,000 illegal immigrants, plus 14,000 of their relatives, have gained U.S. visas under a new law since 2009 because they were victims of crime.
While many immigrants may still be unaware of the U visa, word is spreading fast in some communities. The controversial rules state that if you are a victim of crime and you cooperate, or are 'helpful' with authorities, then you stand a good chance of getting a U visa.
Since 2009, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has issued 18,654 and rejected 5,639 U visas — a 77 per cent approval rate. Congress has put a ceiling on the number available annually at 10,000 and this year the USCIS looks on course easily to reach that figure, having received 3,331 applications in the first quarter.
Supporters of the visa says it helps in fighting crime. All too often crimes ranging from robbery and domestic violence to rape and murder have gone unreported because the victims were in the U.S. illegally.
The visa rewards people who may have worked hard, they say, and it helps keep families united because relatives of the crime victim can also get the papers saying they can stay in America.
Critics of the visa say it has created a legal minefield that is being increasingly played out in courtrooms across the country. They also argue that it is wrong to be writing out so many visas at a time when so many Americans cannot get a job.
Both sides would agree on the curious irony that what could be the worst thing to happen to you, being a crime victim in a land where you are trying to stay under the radar, could actually turn out to be the best thing that could happen to you.
Brazilian Mardoqueu Silva was 21 and had overstayed his tourist visa by four years when he landed a job as a pizza delivery man.
On one delivery he was robbed at gunpoint in a ghetto area. First it was a lone gunman. Then a group of others showed up. Mr Silva handed over all he had, jumped in the car and sped back to the pizzeria and quit the job. His boss called the police, officers drove him back to where the mugging occurred and Mr Silva identified the man with the gun.
The hold-up haunted him. He married another undocumented Brazilian and left San Francisco for the town of Tracy, where he became a hairdresser and spent much of his time listening to customers complaining about 'illegals.'
One day in 2009, the deeply religious Silva was reading the Bible and was struck by the line in Romans 13:1: 'Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities.' He went to the Oakland office of immigration attorney Robert Lewis and declared the illegal status of himself and his wife. They sat and chatted and Mr Lewis fired several questions at Mr Silva, including: Have you ever been a crime victim? 'Actually,' Mr Silva answered, 'I have.' Then the process of applying for the then-new U visa began, sfweekly.com reports.
Now Mr Silva attributes his visa to an intervention of God through the U.S. government. He opened a bank account, got his driver's licence and plans to go back to Brazil for the first time in 20 years to see his family. He's also been an offered a job as assistant pastor at a Seventh-Day Adventist church in Jacksonville, Florida, which he's accepted.
The U visa was intended to improve immigrants' unwillingness to call law enforcement. But critics ask why people who broke the law to be here should get legal status for doing what most citizens would do anyway. 'How many Americans are victims of violent crime and don't get squat when the trial is over?' says Richard McCain, who was tried and acquitted for domestic violence against his Mexican-born male partner. 'What does the illegal immigrant get? A chance to live here as an American.'
Some say it's unfair to those who wait abroad for years for visas.
Defence lawyers say some applicants are defrauding the system by taking cases to court they otherwise wouldn't in the hope of getting a visa. 'Getting status in the United States is such a big deal that it really can create an incentive, sometimes just to exaggerate, and sometimes to flat out fabricate,' says Stephanie Wargo, a San Francisco lawyer who handled a sexual assault case in which the complaining witness was applying for a U visa. 'I don't know the solution, but it is a problem.'
One of the criticisms of the programme is that it is too generous in handing out visas. Jessica Vaughan, the director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, a conservative think tank, attacks the provision that says crime victims can apply for a U visa even after they've been officially told they're being deported. 'It's their last-ditch Hail Mary pass to avoid being sent home,' she said.
Victims can get legal status for their spouses and children, even those living in another country. Victims under 21 can sponsor their parents and unmarried siblings under 18. In cases of murder or manslaughter, spouses and children can apply as 'indirect victims,' even if they didn't witness the crime.
Rioting "refugees" on Australian island should be prosecuted
RIOTERS responsible for damaging large sections of the Christmas Island immigration detention centre should face criminal action, the Federal Opposition says. Accommodation marquees and buildings were burnt down during a riot by up to 300 detainees in the past week. Federal Police used tear gas and "bean-bag" bullets to quell the riots.
"Crimes were committed during these past seven days on Christmas Island," Opposition Immigration spokesman Scott Morrison said in Canberra today. "These crimes need to be prosecuted and the consequences need to be imposed." Mr Morrison said anyone involved in the riot should have their applications for asylum suspended immediately.
The call for legal action was backed by Labor MP Kelvin Thompson. "I certainly think that people who behave in that way are not suitable to be permanent residents of Australia," he said.
However, backbench colleague Amanda Rishworth did not go as far. "In terms of the individual cases obviously that's an individual matter that'll be worked through," she said.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard said it was up to the Australian Federal Police to decide whether charges should be laid. It was not for government to "make a guess", she said in Canberra. "Police have to go through the proper procedures."
Ms Gillard said she expected the police to investigate the riot on Christmas Island in exactly the same way as they would consider a similar incident in any capital city.
I must say that the prospect of having a Brit cook one's food is rather terrifying
The new British immigration rules leading to clamp down on migrant chefs can threaten Britain’s takeaway food industry, said a report in ‘The Guardian’. Immigration minister Damian Green has announced decision to tightens rules on recruiting skilled cooks which closes door to senior care workers, the paper said.
The future of those traditional staples of British cuisine, Indian and Chinese takeaways, have been thrown into doubt by new Home Office restrictions on the overseas recruitment of skilled migrants.
The immigration minister has decided to halt the recruitment from overseas of migrant chefs from outside Europe to work in any establishment that provides a takeaway service. When the Labour government made a similar proposal in 2008 to restrict the influx of skilled cooks and chefs, it provoked a demonstration in London’s Trafalgar Square by thousands of people from the Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani, Turkish and Chinese communities.
The change is proposed as part of a package of further immigration restrictions, which will see eight jobs removed from the official shortage occupation list under which skilled migrants from outside Europe can come to work in Britain. The package will reduce the number of jobs open to non-European skilled migrants from 500,000 to 230,000 - fewer than 1% of the UK labour force. About 5,500 skilled migrants who came to the UK in 2010 to work in shortage occupations will be excluded by the new rules.
More than one million jobs were open to skilled non-EU migrants when the government’s migration advisory committee produced its first shortage occupation list in 2008. The eight occupations being removed from the the official shortage list include high-integrity pipe welders, airframe fitters, electricity industry site supervisors, skilled meat boners and trimmers, skilled senior care workers and skilled sheep shearers.
The change means the list will now mainly include skilled engineers, jobs in medical, nursing and veterinary professions, maths and science teachers, visual effects and computer animators and certain ballet / contemporary dancers and musicians. Green said: “”This government is also determined to get people back to work and provide business with the skills they need from the British workforce - reducing the need for migrants at the same time as we reduce their number.”
Letter written by an Arizona teacher is stirring a heated debate about racism and immigration
A letter from a teacher is the latest bombshell in the state's immigration debate. It was read on the Senate floor where five illegal immigration bills were defeated Thursday.
Even though the bills failed, the letter lives on stirring debate and prompting one Valley organization to question the judgment of the senator who read it. It came up during a debate of a bill that would have required schools to check each student’s legal status.
Senator Lori Klein explained many people misinterpreted the bill’s intent. She said they never wanted to deny anyone an education, but rather get a handle on how many students are in the country illegally so Arizona can tally the cost to educate them.
On Friday night Klein told me they simply thought it is important to understand how much federal and state tax dollars are spent on educating undocumented children, “Where is it going and who are we educating and I think that's a fair question I get asked by my constituents,” Klein said.
During her floor speech she read a letter from a person identifying himself as a West Valley substitute teacher. The author’s name is omitted from the letter. He details events that took place in an 8th grade Glendale classroom with "almost all Hispanic and a couple of black children."
He later writes, “Most of them stated they were in the country illegally, White Americans are racist, and that they came here for a better life.”
The author says his wife and children are Hispanic. He says the students were tearing pages out of textbooks, throwing pencils, generally not prepared for class and speaking Spanish in class.
The author, who addressed the letter to Senate President Russell Pearce, wrote, “I asked the students to stop speaking Spanish in class because it was impolite to speak a language in front of people who may not speak that language. Their response was that Americans better learn Spanish and their customs because they are taking their land back from us.“
Tonight I asked Senator Klein why she read the letter. “They apparently had little regard for him, they were rude to him and basically engaging in behavior that isn't appropriate in any school," she told me. "It shows how little regard some of these people have for the education they are getting for free from the American taxpayers, that’s why I read the letter.”
But the letter also included this sentence, “I have found that substitute teaching in these areas most of the Hispanic students do not want to be educated but rather be gang members and gangsters.”
It is statements like that which had people calling Bill Straus, regional director of the Anti-Defamation League. “I’ve gotten e-mails and phone calls throughout the day yes,” Straus told me.
I asked him what people were saying and he replied, “Asking what, if anything, is the Anti-defamation league is going to do. We have a state senator that gets up and reads this hateful pile of trash. I’d be curious to know if there really is a substitute teacher because quite frankly I’ve read a lot of stuff like this.
"Our organization monitors extremist groups, individuals. I’ve seen a lot of things like this, it's not that out of the ordinary. What is out of the ordinary that it gets the credibility of a state senator reading it word for word on the floor of the senate, it’s a disgrace,” Straus said.
Klein stressed that the letter is not her opinion, that she merely was presenting it to show what one teacher says he’s dealing with and that the point of reading it wasn’t to offend but to inform.
“To say that all Hispanics kids don't want to learn is not true,” said Klein. "I was reading that letter verbatim, I did not have time to edit it.” [He said "most", not "all"]
She added that his letter showed that some of some of the things he is experiencing are, “not an anomaly. According to him it’s endemic in certain areas in Phoenix which is very sad. It should be sad because I know there are a lot of wonderful Hispanic families who treasure their kids and their education.”
Klein also said, “Not one of us on the senate floor is racist or has anything other than the hope that people who are here in this country will appreciate what they are in getting in terms of their education to get ahead in life. Do we want people here legally and go through the legal channels? Absolutely! We think that's the right way to handle it, however we are here in this situation where we are educating people and we want to be able to understand exactly to what level and who we are educating and we want to make sure people are actually getting educated.
"We hope they are appreciating the education because if they were to have a pathway to citizenship, which they are, I mean many of these young boys can join the military and be given the ability to become legal citizens, so we certainly want people to be educated.
"This was not a racist thing to find out how many people are being educated, it was a matter of letting the taxpayers know the cost.
Australian government threatens to revoke rioting refugees' visas
Unlikely that they'll have the balls to follow through with the threat, though
THE Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen, has warned that 200 asylum seekers involved in violent protests on Christmas Island may have their visas revoked or blocked on character grounds, even if it had already been found they were genuine refugees.
The tough line came as another 70 Australian Federal Police officers were dispatched to the remote island, bringing total police numbers to 188, after two administration buildings and seven tents were burnt down in angry clashes.
The main detention centre is now under the control of police, who were yesterday unable to conduct a headcount and were unsure how many detainees remained at large on Christmas Island. Hundreds of detainees not involved in the violence were expected to be housed in the island's recreation hall, and the Phosphate Hill family detention centre.
Mr Bowen said the situation was "challenging" and condemned the "violent and unacceptable behaviour by an organised group" on Thursday night.
Accelerants, bricks, pavers, concrete, poles and a wheelie bin full of rocks were used by about 200 detainees, wearing cloth over their faces to avoid tear-gas, who advanced on police, the AFP deputy commissioner of national security, Steve Lancaster, said. Another 300 detainees and staff had sought refuge in the gym, but the gym was then attacked by the protesters with rocks, Mr Lancaster said. Police used tear-gas and a "higher volume" of beanbag bullets to restore order, he said.
Mr Bowen said: "Character considerations will be taken into account for those on Christmas Island who have organised and perpetrated this sort of activity." He said the majority of the centre's 1850 detainees were not involved.
After a week of escalating clashes, Mr Bowen said an independent review into security breaches, staffing adequacy and the appropriateness of centre's management company, Serco, and the department's response, will be headed by a former secretary of the Defence Department, Allan Hawke, and a public servant, Helen Williams. The police use of beanbag bullets and tear-gas, will be subject to a separate AFP investigation and the Commonwealth Ombudsman.
The opposition's immigration spokesman, Scott Morrison, said the protesters should have their visa applications suspended. "Those acting up should go to the back of the line," he said.
The Immigration Department is seeking to contact the family of a 20-year-old Afghan man found dead at the Scherger detention centre in Queensland. Protests had also broken out during the week at the Darwin and Curtin detention centres.
The chief executive of the Refugee Council of Australia, Paul Power, said a circuit-breaker was needed, and the unrest "had unfortunately been predicted" amid long processing delays for visas. He was concerned at Mr Bowen's threat that visas may be rejected on character grounds. "We don't know what crimes have been committed and who they have been committed by … many hundreds weren't involved," he said.
A letter was given to all detainees on Thursday that promised security checks would be sped up, and all ASIO checks would be completed by the end of April. The letter said reviewers would be sent to Christmas Island next week to assess rejected claims - only if calm was restored.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said it did not condone the use of violence by asylum seekers, but "remains deeply concerned by the underlying impact of mandatory detention on the psycho-social health and welfare of the many people being held for prolonged periods in isolated parts of Australia".
A refugee advocate, Pamela Curr, said the protests had been sparked by a decision by Serco to lock down roller doors between different parts of the centre last Friday to prevent movement because of a lack of staff.
Business opposition played big role in Arizona Senate’s defeat of bills on illegal immigration
Dozens of Arizona CEOs from hospitals, construction companies and other major businesses joined to turn back new get-tough legislation on illegal immigration, citing worries that emphasis on the issue could hurt the state’s struggling economy and cost jobs.
The result Thursday was something much different from a year ago, when Arizona’s governor enacted a tough local enforcement measure that put the state at the heart of a fierce national debate over the issue. This time, numerous Republican senators joined with Democrats in rejecting bills dealing with health care, government benefits and everyday activities like driving.
Besides business groups’ opposition, others factors came into play: There isn’t an election looming this fall, some GOP senators had never been too enthused by the severity of some of the bills and many lawmakers have simply become tired of the issue.
Getting the clear “vote no” signal from so many major employers provided political cover to lawmakers whose constituents could demand explanations for votes against the bills, said Bill Hart, an analyst for the Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University. “They’ll be able to say the top business CEOs in Arizona were very forcefully against it,” and that packs some punch as the state continues to deal with economic troubles, he said.
Arizona’s approval last year of the get-tough illegal immigration law, known as SB1070, produced protests, boycotts and court fights. The business CEOs cited concerns in a letter hand-delivered to lawmakers on Tuesday that more of the same would come from new legislation, with possible economic fallout to tourism and the hosting of industry conventions.
“They really wanted to go on record letting the legislators know what they needed,” said Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce president Todd Sanders, adding that it wasn’t hard to get business leaders to sign on. “For us the surprise was how fast the replies came back — ‘sign me up.’”
The letter — a joint product of the Phoenix chamber, its statewide counterpart and another business group — said the best answer to the illegal immigration issue is federal action on border security, identity theft, a workable employment verification system and creation of a guest work program. Several senators mentioned the letter during Thursday’s floor session.
Republican legislators had already been saying for months that boosting the Arizona’s economy and fixing the state’s budget troubles were bigger priorities than illegal immigration. “The Legislature and the people ... are also suffering from immigration fatigue,” said Sen. John McComish, a Phoenix Republican who voted against the bills. “We’re totally distracted and it’s divisive.”
Also, specific provisions of the bills defeated Thursday troubled lawmakers. Requiring hospitals to report people being treated if they lack insurance and could not produce documentation of legal status could burden hospitals, some senators said.
Others questioned whether two of the five bills, which were aimed at forcing a U.S. Supreme Court ruling against automatic citizenship for U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, would produce the desired result.
Business lobbying on the issue included reminding lawmakers of commitments made last fall that economic development and fixing the state budget would be the big priorities for this year’s session, Sanders said.
Eight in ten new jobs in Britain have gone to foreign workers during past year
More than 80 per cent of the jobs created last year were taken by people who were not born in this country, official figures revealed yesterday. In 2010, employment rose by 210,000 compared with the previous year, but 173,000 jobs went to those born in countries from Poland to Pakistan. Only 39,000 of the new jobs – less than one in five of the total – were taken by people born in Britain.
Sir Andrew Green, from the think-tank MigrationWatch, said: ‘These numbers point out the importance of controlling foreign immigration and of driving up the skills of British workers and the incentives for them to take the jobs.’
Overall, the employment figures painted a bleak picture of a jobs market struggling to recover from a deep recession and facing a faltering recovery. Graeme Leach, chief economist at the Institute of Directors, said: ‘This is the jobless and joyless recovery.’
The figures, published by the Office for National Statistics, showed that unemployment rose to a 17-year high of 2.53million, with an extra 27,000 people joining the search for work between November and January. But the claimant count, which measures those receiving Jobseeker’s Allowance, dropped by 10,200 to 1.45million.
Employment dropped among most age groups, but the number aged 65 and over with a job continued to rise sharply, increasing by 56,000 to a record 900,000. The figures show youth unemployment hit another all-time high, with the number of 16 to 24-year-olds out of work rising by 30,000 to 974,000.
Illegal migrants to Britain paid £2,000 to go home... but can ask to come back in two years
Illegal immigrants ‘bribed’ thousands of pounds to leave the country will be allowed to apply to return after just two years, it emerged last night. The amount of time before they can re-apply for entry is being reduced from the current five-year minimum. Critics said the combination of payouts and swift returns could amount to a ‘fare-paid holiday at taxpayers’ expense’.
The new rules will apply to illegal immigrants who have entered the country without permission, failed asylum seekers and visa overstayers. It is estimated there are around one million currently in Britain and over the past two years nearly 10,000 have taken advantage of departure handouts.
The biggest payouts are to failed asylum seekers who can claim up to £1,500 in ‘reintegration assistance’ including a cash ‘relocation grant’ of £500. Asylum seekers with children can claim up to £2,000 per person. Last year the cost of running the scheme and making the payments totalled £16million – excluding payments to other illegal migrants, who can receive up to £1,000 worth of assistance.
However there are fears the changes could see many migrants returning despite having already benefited from a taxpayer-funded scheme.
To qualify for the new rules they will have to leave within six months of the date of their final legal appeal. But this definition of a ‘prompt’ departure means many could still have been here for many years before leaving.
Migrants who refuse to leave and have to be kicked out will still face a ten-year ban on applying to re-enter the country. And those who take longer than six months to leave voluntarily will still be banned from returning for five years. All those who apply to return will have to qualify for a visa.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the MigrationWatch think-tank, said: ‘This is a bizarre idea that has appeared completely out of the blue. It could well amount to a fare-paid holiday at taxpayers’ expense. Those few illegal immigrants who are removed should stay removed.’
Last night ministers defended the policy shift, saying it would act as an incentive for migrants to leave more quickly. Officials also pointed to savings made in the costs of immigration detention and support and the forcible removal of migrants.
Immigration minister Damian Green said: ‘It is much better value for the taxpayer if we can get people who have no right to be here to leave voluntarily. ‘Overall it’s good news all round. It means they’re in this country for a shorter period of time, which is good for confidence in the immigration system, and it saves money, so that’s why we’re reducing the number of years for which they are subsequently banned for having been here illegally in the first place.
‘We expect those with no right to be in the country to leave voluntarily. Where we need to enforce someone’s return they will still be subject to an automatic ten-year ban on re-entering the UK. ‘Anyone applying for a UK visa will have to meet our strict immigration rules and their immigration history will be taken into account.’
The announcement came as ministers unveiled measures to encourage migrant millionaires. Those who invest £5million will be allowed to settle here after just three years. A £10million cash injection will mean a fast-track visa after just two years.
Mr Green has also announced a new access route for ‘exceptionally talented’ migrants. Up to 1,000 visas will be available for brilliant individuals such as artists and scientists.
UK immigration concession for New Zealand, Australian shearers
I was wondering how this would work out. Britain has millions of sheep and not all of them walk on two legs. Experienced and highly skilled antipodean shearers have become essential to getting the flock shorn in recent years. That the seasons occur at opposite times of the year in Britain and Australia makes it a logical arrangement
Sheep shearers from New Zealand and Australia should have no problems coming to the UK for the season due to an transitional scheme put in place by the UK Border Agency.
A UK immigration concession has been arranged for overseas skilled shearers to stop a UK skills shortage.
Each year hundreds of skilled shearers are recruited from the southern hemisphere for the shearing season in the UK, however efforts to tighten up Britain's immigration laws meant sheep shearing was removed from a list of approved occupations for a UK Visa.
Chief Executive of the National Association of Agricultural Contractors, Jill Hewitt, said her organisation had been working with government to put the scheme in place which will allow shearers to come on a seasonal temporary basis.
“The NAAC has been actively involved in the process and is confident the UK will not suffer from a shortage of shearers this year,” she said. “We are working closely with shearing contractors in the UK, and shearing associations in New Zealand and Australia, to try and ensure the smooth passage of shearers to the UK.”
British High Commission communication manager, Chris Harrington, said shearers will be allowed to enter the United Kingdom on a concessionary basis, which means they do not have to get a visa but must prove to a British immigration officer that they are genuine shearers.
Bills in Indiana General Assembly Aim at Ending Illegal Immigration
Legislators in the Hoosier State have jumped on board the pro-legal immigration bandwagon in a big way. By a vote of 31-18, the state Senate of Indiana passed Senate Bill 590, a measure that if enacted would make 18 changes to current state law, including mandating an “English only” policy “in public meetings, public documents, by officers and employees of state or political subdivisions in performing their duties, and providing information communicated electronically by the state or a political subdivision"; empowering law enforcement to investigate the immigration status of an individual reasonably suspected of being illegally present in the state, provided that such person is the subject of “a lawful stop, detention, or arrest of an individual for a violation of a state law or local ordinance”; and imposing fines on businesses that knowingly hire someone without legal permission to work in the United States.
This bill is very similar to SB 1070 passed last year in Arizona. The author of SB 590, State Senator Mike Delph defended his proposal to local media: "I think the totality of the bill will lead to self deportation for those who are unlawfully in the country and quite frankly, Hoosier taxpayers should [not] have to fund the final costs and [burden] for those who have chosen to break our law."
Predictably, protesters have lined up to challenge the measure and threaten economic sanctions against the state should the bill become law.
On Tuesday, more than 200 protesters held a so-called “no hate” rally on the steps of the Indiana Statehouse.
One woman attending the rally, Alicia Nieves, insisted, “We are advocating for our rights, for our ability to live in dignity. Documented and undocumented we will stand together to fight these bills but we will make sure this never happens again.” There was no word as to whether Ms. Nieves considers the enforcement of the law and the protection of state borders as evidence of “living in dignity.”
Another protester, Francisco Valdiosera, entered the United States illegally, but gained legal status during the amnesty program offered by President Ronald Reagan in 1986. Valdiosera is now an educator and worries that if SB 590 becomes law, many students now illegally present would be prevented from making valuable contributions to American society. Said Valdiosera: "I feel that I've been contributing to American society, and a lot of these young kids are going to be great contributors to American society. They are going to be taxpayers at a higher tax bracket. All in all, they are going to be an asset to our community."
The greatest asset to any community, it could be argued, is a citizenry devoted to living according to the rule of law and protecting themselves from any faction devoted to excluding themselves from the enforcement thereof.
While giving the appearance of a spontaneous rally of concerned citizens joining together in peaceful protest, in actual fact the gathering on the steps on the south side of the Indiana State House in Indianapolis was organized by Indiana United, a group purportedly formed to fight the enactment of SB 590.
Many of those attending the protest were students who were brought to the United States as toddlers by parents entering the country illegally. These young people “consider themselves Americans.” Constitutionalists, however, know that, unfortunately for these children, America is a nation of laws and not a nation where one’s legal status is decided ad hoc based on the feelings of that person.
As with similar demonstrations in Arizona and other states, the protest in Indianapolis was only the stage for sympathetic storytelling. The real aim of these organized events is to threaten the economic vitality of the state.
Evidence of this intent is found in the statement of one of the attendees: "We are very much against it," said Craig Hughes, the owner of St Elmo's Steakhouse in downtown Indianapolis. Hughes warns that the bill will drive away business from Indianapolis, resulting in a loss of revenue for the city. He told a local news channel: "[The city] spent $245 million in expanding the convention center and here we are with four committed confirmed major groups coming to Indianapolis Convention and Visitors Association that are going to walk away from that commitment based upon our stance on the immigration issue."
Senator Delph disagrees: "I don't think the state of Indiana should be held hostage by outside groups threatening to cancel conventions. I think we need to stand up for the basic [principle of] the rule of law. We should put [principle] ahead of profit.” Not exactly the sort of hotheaded rhetoric that should logically spark a protest.
Also present at the staged event on Tuesday were some of the lawmakers opposed to the measure.
"How embarrassing is it for someone's political gain to have someone taking advantage of the bigotry and racism that still exists in our society? How embarrassing," complained State Senator Vi Simpson, a Democrat from Ellettsville.
Undaunted, many protesters fired another shot at those advocating the statutory protection of the rule of law:
"We will never forget the lawmakers who voted for these bills that seek to destroy our futures," stressed Alicia Nieves. In light of such threats, lawmakers are fortunate that many of those attending this rally who espouse such notions are in the country illegally and thus are prohibited from casting ballots.
House Bill 1402, a companion bill to SB 590, was written by State Representative Linda Lawson, a Republican representing the First District, and is sponsored in the upper chamber by State Senator Jim Buck (R-Kokomo). The measure is scheduled to be deliberated by a Senate committee today at 1:30 p.m. (CDT). The measure was overwhelmingly approved by the Indiana House of Representatives by a vote of 75-14.
If passed, HB 1402 would exclude students who entered the United States illegally from benefiting from the $3,500 to $18,700 per-year discount in tuition offered to legal residents of the state of Indiana who attend state colleges and universities. Under the current law, anyone who has lived in Indiana for the past 12 consecutive months is eligible for the benefit.
The efforts by Indiana lawmakers to protect their constituents and to statutorily express the will of those legally residing in their state are commendable. The notion, however, that it is a state responsibility to enforce federal immigration standards (as is mandated by SB 590) is erroneous. As has been explained before in The New American, there is no constitutional basis for the widely-held belief that the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction over immigration. In fact, the absence of any enumeration of such a power in the Constitution means that the power to legislate in that area remains with the states and the people per the Tenth Amendment.
Birthright Citizenship for the Children of Visitors: A National Security Problem in the Making?
A new report by the Center for Immigration Studies examines the issue of the U.S. policy to grant citizenship to the children of temporary visitors.
Entitled “Birthright Citizenship for the Children of Visitors: A National Security Problem in the Making?,” the Backgrounder includes original estimates on the number of annual births to temporary visitors, whether birth tourists, students, guestworkers, or Mexican citizens with border-crossing privileges. The report suggests that this policy is a national security vulnerability and discusses how U.S.-born, but raised-abroad terrorists can (and have) used their citizenship against us.
Key findings: Nearly 200,000 children are estimated to have been born to women lawfully admitted as temporary visitors from all over the world in 2009. By comparison, according to other studies, more than 300,000 children are born each year to illegal aliens.
Short-term visitors, including women who come as birth tourists expressly for the purpose of having a U.S.-citizen child, account for about 20 percent of these births (39,000). While most foreign tourists stay for two weeks or less, according to DHS statistics a large number of people who are admitted as tourists stay for periods of three months or more, including an estimated 780,000 women of child-bearing age.
Another 20,000 annual births are estimated to young foreign women who are admitted as short-term residents, such as students, guestworkers, exchange visitors, investors, and other categories that allow for multiple years of U.S. residence.
The cohort that accounts for the largest number of births to foreign visitors is Mexican women who hold Border Crossing Cards (BCCs). An estimated 130,000 births are estimated from this group of women, who have virtually unrestricted access to U.S. cities and towns in the southwest border region. Because the identities of BCC holders are not checked upon entry and the exits are not tracked, the cards frequently are used fraudulently by imposters seeking illegal entry.
Any discussion of the issue of birthright citizenship for the children of foreign visitors must consider the national security implications, including the cases of Anwar al Awlaki, the U.S.-born cleric now residing in Yemen, and Yaser Esam Hamdi, the U.S.-born enemy combatant captured in fighting in Afghanistan and released from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia in 2004. Both Al Awlaki and Hamdi were born in the United States to parents admitted as temporary residents on non-immigrant visas and were raised, and radicalized, abroad.
The above is a press release from 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. Contact: Jessica Vaughan, jmv@cis.org, (508) 346-3380. The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent research institution which examines the impact of immigration on the United States. The Center for Immigration Studies is not affiliated with any other organization
How the UK Border Agency lost track of 180,000 migrants on expired visas
An astonishing 181,000 migrants whose right to live in Britain has expired could still be here, auditors have found. The figure includes workers, students and their relatives whose visas have run out in the last two years, and who have been refused permission to stay on.
The National Audit Office, which uncovered the statistic, said immigration officials ‘cannot be sure’ how many have gone home. It found the UK Border Agency knew where all the failed applicants had lived in Britain – but has not checked if they are still there. Worryingly, the only action taken has been letters sent to 2,000 people in the North East, Yorkshire and the Humber, asking them to leave.
The figure, revealed in a highly critical report into Labour’s points-based immigration system, will raise concerns about the number of illegal migrants in the UK, and the lack of measures to make them leave. The supposedly ‘tough’ system, modelled on Australia’s, was designed to cut economic migration by as much as 12 per cent. In fact, it has increased by 20 per cent. The number of foreign students has risen by nearly a third.
Tory MP Philip Davies said the revelations proved the system was a ‘complete shambles’, adding: ‘This goes to show what an absurdly lax regime has been run.’
Immigration minister Damian Green said the Government was making ‘radical reforms’ to the system, including ‘the introduction of an annual limit on economic migrants, sweeping changes to the student visa system, and a shake-up of the family and settlement route’. He added it was also committed to reintroducing exit checks by 2015. ‘We are determined to reduce net migration to the tens of thousands, and clampdown on abuses,’ he said.
The report raised further concerns over the resident labour market test, which requires employers to advertise a job to Britons before looking overseas. Immigration officials were unable to check if companies advertised roles here for the minimum period of four weeks.
Rules which allowed 90,000 migrants to stay for two years looking for work after completing their studies were also given a scathing assessment. The report said: ‘It is not clear that the department foresaw the risk this posed to control of the border, or whether it took adequate steps to mitigate the risk.’
Labour MP Margaret Hodge, who chairs the Public Accounts Committee, said: ‘The Points Based System is a welcome simplification of the previous system of 39 different types of work visa. However, gaps in data, poor risk management and inefficient processes mean that we cannot be certain that it either ensures proper controls or meets the UK’s need for skilled labour.’
Britain limits the importation of workers to highly skilled categories
The number of jobs open to migrants from outside the European Union is to be halved, ministers will announce today. Foreigners are currently able to obtain work permits for around 500,000 posts that bosses say cannot be filled by British or EU workers.
But from April that will fall to 230,000 when non-graduate jobs are taken off the Home Office ‘shortage occupation list’.
Non-EU beauty salon managers, estate agents, florists, pipe fitters, steel erectors and welders will be among those barred. The Home Office has commissioned an expert review of all the remaining categories on the list.
If the Migration Advisory Committee finds there are enough unemployed British workers with the required skills, tens of thousands more posts could be closed. Ministers want to ensure that priority access to Britain’s labour market is granted only where there are real skills shortages.
Immigration minister Damian Green said the Government was determined to cut dole queues and make sure migrants were not the ‘first resort’ for firms with vacancies.
Firms looking to fill jobs which appear on the shortage list do not have to advertise to British workers first, and applicants do not have to meet an earnings test.
Others taken off the list because they are not graduate level include sheep shearers, senior care workers and meat boners.
Mr Green said: ‘These changes to the shortage occupation list will ensure that only skilled workers are coming to the UK through Tier 2 of the points-based system. ‘It will allow firms to bring in people with necessary skills without migrants becoming the first resort to fill a wide range of available jobs.
‘This Government is also determined to get people back to work and provide business with the skills they need from the British workforce – reducing the need for migrants at the same time as we reduce their number.’
Last week, Mr Green attacked Labour for failing to impose controls on Eastern European workers when the EU expanded in 2004. He said the ‘mistake’ would never be repeated and much tougher restrictions would apply in future. More than 1.15million Eastern European workers have signed up to the Home Office’s worker registration scheme.
Mr Green said the job categories listed as skilled under Tier 2 will be cut from 192 to 121. Midwives, chartered surveyors and management accountants stay on the approved list.
Officials estimate around 65 per cent of the 8,400 work permits issued last year to workers on the shortage list would not have qualified under the new rules.
The shake-up is part of efforts to cut net migration – the number that migration adds to the population every year – to the tens of thousands by 2015. Last year it hit 226,000.
The student visa system will also be modified so only the ‘brightest and the best’ can come to Britain. Home Office figures suggest more than a quarter of those at private colleges flout immigration rules.
Professor David Metcalf, of the Migration Advisory Committee, said: ‘Placing limits on migration requires we are far more selective and ensure only highly skilled migrant workers can come to work in the UK.’
1. A Day in the Life of an Arizona Rancher: Border Fences, Illegal Aliens, and One Man’s Watchtower (Video)
2. Like Nike, States Just Do It! (Blog)
3. One of the World's Smallest Navies Thwarts Illegal Entries to the U.S. (Blog)
4. The State of E-Verify (Blog)
5. In Two Weeks, 295 Apprehensions in the Ajo SBInet Sector (Blog)
6. Columnist Laments Mexico's Double Standard (Blog)
7. A Slip? Deliberate? USCIS Positions English Document in Second Place (Blog)
8. Why Do Black Congressmen Vote Against Limiting Immigration? (Blog)
9. And the Oscar for Uninformed Immigration Commentary Goes to ... the Dairy Farmer from Utah (Blog)
10. Secure Border Initiative Proves Itself Again (Blog)
11. State OKs Migration of Same-Sex Partners, But for Diplomats Only (Blog)
12. Utah Legislative Leaders & Special Interests Force Through Amnesty/Guestworker Program (Blog)
13. The Very Model of a Modern Illegal Alien? (Blog)
14 March, 2011
Retail giant Tesco recruits store bosses from SLOVAKIA after British workers shun supermarket jobs
Most Australians will believe this: Unemployed Brits too lazy and hooked on welfare to work
Tesco is recruiting staff for its UK stores from Slovakia after bosses claimed no suitable British candidates were available, it emerged last night. The supermarket chain has offered 12 weeks' training, plus help with immigration paperwork and housing, in a bid to lure English-speaking recruits from eastern-Europe.
Bosses deny that they are turning abroad for cheap labour. They claim that they are struggling to fill roles with British candidates - despite the 2.5million lining up for unemployment benefits.
UK store managers' salaries range from £26,000 to £60,000 a year. The average wage in Slovakia is £7,500. The country, formerly part of communist Czechoslovakia, has has an unemployment rate of 14.5 per cent.
The vacant posts are in London, where unemployment is 6.3 per cent. The chain is looking for at least 238 staff to fill posts across the capital.
A Tesco spokesman told the Sun: 'We make every effort to recruit from local communities, but we can't always fill vacancies. 'It is much more expensive to recruit from Europe. We do it as a last resort.'
Illegal immigrants to Australia break out from detention
The wisdom of the former conservative government in locating detention facilities on a remote island is demonstrated
Two plane loads of police and security staff have flown to Christmas Island to counter two breakouts by more than 200 immigration detainees who smashed through security doors and fences.
More than 150 broke out of the immigration detention centre on Friday night and while many of them have returned to the centre another group of fewer than 100 also got out and many are still at large.
A spokesman for the Immigration Department yesterday said a chartered aircraft flew in more security staff from the department and Serco, the private company running the centre, on Saturday night.
A second aircraft was scheduled to leave Perth later yesterday with Australian Federal Police reinforcements. The spokesman said that in line with policy, the department did not disclose the numbers of personnel being deployed to Christmas Island.
The spokesman confirmed security doors and fences had been damaged but said it was "not major damage" and the centre was calm.
Jamal Daoud, a spokesman for the Social Justice Network, said that he had been told by people who had been contacted by detainees that the asylum seekers had "destroyed all inner doors with electrical locks" in parts of the centre on Friday night and then smashed fences to get out.
The aim of the escapees was to be photographed by residents in order to make Australians aware of the "tragic situation of refugees in detention centres".
Mr Daoud, citing an email he had received from a Darwin detainee who had heard from people inside the Christmas Island centre, said the refugees were taking the action because they had all lost hope of obtaining a protection visa as the number of asylum seekers was increasing and the immigration processing was very slow.
There are now 2562 people held in Christmas Island, which was originally designed to house 500.
The department's spokesman, Sandi Logan, said yesterday that the detainees should be aware that the protest action would not influence decision-making concerning their bids for refugee status.
The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, said the situation was "well in hand". The escapees had "nowhere to go other than to other parts of the island". "At all times they were watched by our staff up there and the AFP officers will obviously be working to get people back into the facility," Ms Gillard said.
The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, said "this is the kind of thing that happens when you've got thousands of people in immigration detention and the only way to ensure that this … doesn't happen is to stop the boats".
Oklahoma House Passes Arizona-style Immigration Bill
The Oklahoma House overwhelmingly passed a bill patterned after the controversial Arizona law that allows local law enforcement officers to inquire about people's immigration status adding Oklahoma to the list of state's who have considered or passed Arizona-style illegal immigration laws. The House voted 85-7 for the bill, despite concerns from some members it didn't go far enough to target businesses that hire undocumented immigrants.
"My goal is for this bill to focus on public safety," said Rep. George Faught, R-Muskogee, who co-chairs a joint House and Senate committee charged with developing a comprehensive anti-illegal immigration bill.
The bill stiffens the penalties for human smuggling and allows law enforcement to seize property used to harbor or transport undocumented immigrants. It also allows state and local law enforcement officers to inquire about an individual's immigration status, but only if the officer has completed a federal training program.
State Rep. Randy Terrill, a fierce critic of illegal immigration, said he believes the proposal was watered down at the request of business interests and called the bill a "sellout to the State Chamber of Commerce."
Fred Morgan, the chamber's president, said his group believes illegal immigration should be addressed at the federal level, but that the organization is not actively supporting or trying to derail any of the immigration bills at the state Capitol. "We do want to make sure that any legislation that comes out doesn't impose hardships on legitimate businesses," Morgan said. To that end, lawmakers in Utah passed a bill this week that would allow undocumented immigrants to work and live in the state.
An opponent of the Oklahoma bill, state Rep. Rebecca Hamilton, said she fears victims of human smuggling or abuse will be too frightened to report crimes to police for fear of being deported. "You are taking an entire segment of the population of this state and putting them outside the protection of the law," said Hamilton, a Democrat who represents a heavily Hispanic district in south Oklahoma City. "You're making it impossible for the victim to go to the police."
The bill now heads to the Senate, which is expected to consider a separate sweeping anti-illegal immigration bill next week. Republican House Speaker Kris Steele indicated it's likely both bills will end up being rewritten in a House and Senate conference committee. "This is not the final version of what our immigration reform bill ultimately will be," said Steele, R-Shawnee. "It's a work in progress, and there's no secret about that."
Tony Blair changes his tune over immigration saying it produced a 'challenge'
Tony Blair yesterday admitted for the first time that mass immigration has produced a ‘challenge’ which causes alarm to millions. The former prime minister acknowledged there was a ‘debate’ over the impact of immigration and whether British generosity in allowing it had been abused.
Mr Blair said immigration had produced both a cultural and economic ‘challenge’. He made his admission in an article in which he accepted that ‘there is a perception of failure’ over the issue. The view contrasted strongly with his stance as prime minister. In the 2005 election campaign he insisted immigrants had made a ‘huge contribution’ to Britain and condemned opponents for ‘exploiting people’s fears’.
In his 690-page autobiography published last year he devoted only one page to the controversial subject. Yesterday, however, in Roman Catholic journal The Tablet, Mr Blair declared that immigration – 3.2million came to live in Britain during Labour’s years in power – was a matter of major importance.
He said: ‘A new type of debate is taking shape. While it can centre on immigration or protectionism, it is above all about issues to do with culture and integration – issues that are altogether more vigorous and potentially more explosive. ‘In Europe, the debate is about whether our attempt to integrate cultures has succeeded or failed and, insofar as there is a perception of failure, it is about whether our “generosity” in allowing inward migration and encouraging multiculturalism has been abused.’
Last night Douglas Carswell, MP for Clacton, said: ‘What a pity that Tony Blair waited until he left office to address an issue of concern to millions of people in this country.’
And Sir Andrew Green, of MigrationWatch, said: ‘Having ignored the development of mass immigration for 12 years, Mr Blair has now discovered that Labour’s legacy has left us with huge problems, both economic and social.’
The leader of the French National Front, Marine Le Pen, has ridiculed talk of the US and Australia as "multicultural", insisting that both nations demand submission to a single set of values.
In an interview with The Saturday Age in Paris, Ms Le Pen - who has eclipsed French President Nicolas Sarkozy in the popularity stakes - argues that where true multiculturalism has existed, it ends in war.
"The only places where real multiculturalism existed … the Balkans, Lebanon … it ended up in conflict," she says.
"The United States is not a multicultural nation or a multicultural society. In reality, it is unicultural - it has one culture, it is a culture in which each citizen has a unique relationship with the American nation. Isn't it the same in Australia? This is expressed directly and also requires the submission by the individual of a series of values which must be accepted by everybody."
Ms Le Pen, a 42-year-old criminal lawyer, argues that multiculturalist policies were created by Anglo-Saxon politicians to help them define - and capture - ethnic communities in voting blocs. She says this approach, which she described in French as "communautarisme", has benefited only the political class and its adoption in France is partly to blame for its economic and social woes.
"This model of multiculturalism is one which other countries, including the Anglo-Saxon nations, are now moving away from. Look at what [British Prime Minister] David Cameron has said recently, see what Mrs Merkel in Germany says."
Harnessing post-credit-crunch insecurity, Ms Le Pen has forced Mr Sarkozy so far to the right on immigration and law and order that he has alienated his own centre-right supporters.
She says Australia appears to have avoided the immigration pitfalls faced by France, Italy and other European nations by carefully safeguarding immigration numbers.
She laments the erosion of the "long and noble" tradition of post-colonial assimilation, which ''feeble, slack" French governments allowed to be watered down into an "Anglo-Saxon model" of integration.
Ms Le Pen also rails against being branded a racist. ''It is time that we question the politician's rhetoric that if you question immigration it means you are a racist. This is not true. Immigration is a worldwide problem, it is a phenomenon that transcends nations.''
As the results of the 2010 census are gradually rolled out, we are getting a clearer picture of how the U.S. population has changed over the past decade. But how is the U.S. population going to look in the future, say in 2050? The Pew Research Center released a study back in 2008 which deserves more attention than it got at the time.
The Pew study started with the official baseline population estimate for 2005 of 296 million, and noted that figure included 36 million foreign-born. If we accept the conventional wisdom of the time that there were 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S., that would be one-third of the foreign-born population.
The study projected that by 2050 the U.S. population would grow to 438 million if we simply do nothing and allow present trends to continue. That would be an increase of 142 million over the baseline 2005 population of 296 million, a 48% increase over 45 years.
Reasonable people can differ on whether this level of population growth is too little, too much, or about right. More people means more consumers buying things, more available workers, and more taxpayers. But more people will also require us find more jobs for workers, more educational opportunities for children, and more highways and parking lots for people to drive and park their automobiles.
We will have to import more millions of barrels of petroleum from the Middle East, and drill more wells in the deep ocean floor, to try to meet the demand for gasoline. We will have to burn additional tons of coal to provide electricity to the homes and electronic devices of our additional population. And we will have to bear the environmental impact of the additional population in pollution, greenhouse gases and climate change, and waste disposal.
But here's the punch line of the Pew study: 82% of the projected population growth of 142 million over 45 years is attributable to post-2005 immigration. Only 18% of the growth is attributable to the natural growth of the baseline 2005 population. And if nothing changes, fully one-third of the immigration will continue to be illegal entrants or visa overstayers.
So if we want either more or less population growth, the easiest way to get there is through adjusting our immigration laws and policies. That is the context in which the national debate over immigration is continuing.
Britain closing the door after the horse has escaped
The ‘mistake’ of giving millions of new EU citizens immediate rights to work in Britain will not be repeated, Damian Green vowed last night. The immigration minister said the toughest possible restrictions – normally a seven-year ban on taking a job – would apply to nations trying to join the union. They include Turkey, Croatia, Iceland, Macedonia and Montenegro.
In 2004, when eight eastern European nations became members, Labour ruled there would be restrictions only on the rights of their citizens to claim benefits. Virtually every other EU state – with the exception of Ireland and Sweden – kept their jobs market closed. That meant around one million Poles came to the UK because they were barred from countries such as neighbouring Germany. Labour had estimated the figure would be 13,000 each year.
Mr Green told the Mail: ‘This Government will push for stringent controls to stop workers from new member states from being able to access our labour market – we will not repeat the mistakes of the past. ‘It is in no one’s interest to see another unplanned influx from abroad. We need to protect the interests of British workers.’ EU rules allow members to close labour markets to citizens of accession states for up to seven years.
It came as ministers confirmed that migrants from the eight countries that joined the EU in 2004 will be entitled to full benefits in the UK for the first time from May. Officials estimate that as many as 100,000 migrants could claim tens of millions of pounds between them. Currently migrant workers from the A8 countries cannot claim out-of-work benefits unless they have completed 12 months of work in the UK.
The changes to EU rules by other member states are likely to have a significant impact on migration to Britain. Last year, net migration into the UK rose by 36 per cent to 226,000. An estimated 572,000 entered on a long-term basis in the year to June 2010 while 346,000 left. It leaves ministers with a mountain to climb if they are to meet the pledge to reduce net migration to the ‘tens of thousands’. They have no control over the number of arrivals from within the EU.
But, if significant numbers of Poles stopped arriving each year – or left the UK for Germany or Austria – that would make the task much easier.
Poland’s labour minister, Jolanta Fedek, said last month she did not expect the lifting of labour market restrictions to trigger another wave of emigration. She said it was more likely that the estimated 300,000 to 400,000 Poles working in Germany illegally would come clean.
German economists have predicted about 100,000 people from the A8 countries will come to their country after May but experts have said they did not expect migrants who had settled in other countries to relocate there in large numbers.
Joachim Moller, director of the Labour Market Institute, at the Federal Labour Office, told the International Herald Tribune: ‘Even though the German economy is now strong again and in need of workers I just cannot see people just moving around like that.’
Mr Green said: ‘We are in the process of delivering major reform to bring immigration down to the tens of thousands with the introduction of a new limit on economic migrants from outside the EU, alongside new proposals to reform other routes of entry, including students, families and marriage.’
Since 2004, more than 1.15million immigrants from Eastern Europe have signed up to a Home Office worker registration scheme.
Gov. Rick Scott's pledge to bring an Arizona-style immigration law to Florida probably won't happen, but a House committee voted Thursday to bring him the next-best thing.
The new Florida immigration reform plan would require police to check the immigration status of a person who is under arrest or is the subject of a criminal investigation.
That language stops short of Arizona's controversial law, which requires police to determine a person's immigration status whenever the officer makes "any lawful contact" with the individual.
To critics, Florida's proposal will essentially allow for the same type of racial or ethnic profiling that they say is the inevitable product of Arizona's law.
But proponents say Florida just needs to crackdown on illegal immigration to ensure the nation's laws are followed. Like the Arizona law, the House proposal requires all employers to verify employees' work status.
"My feelings for this issue and my passion for this issue is not just for the rule of law," said Rep. William Snyder, R-Stuart. "It's not just about jobs — which it is to some extent — it's about what we've allowed to occur in our country." Snyder said it "turns my stomach" to hear arguments about how food and labor are cheap because farms, hotels and construction foremen hire undocumented immigrants and pay them less. Snyder compared the arrangement to slavery.
Snyder didn't have to sell the bill too hard in the House Judiciary Committee, where he's chairman and where Republicans outnumber Democrats, who cast the lone nay votes in the 12-6 approval.
Snyder's bill is the first of a handful of immigration measures cropping up in the Florida Legislature. A Senate bill, sponsored by Miami Republican Sen. Anitere Flores, will be voted on Monday, but it doesn't require law enforcement officers to check the immigration status of arrestees or criminal suspects in cases of "reasonable suspicion." Instead, the Senate bill would require jail, prison and other detention officers to check the status of an inmate.
Subhash Kateel, an advocate from the Florida Immigrant Coalition, said the Senate bill was marginally better than the House proposal, but both are too close to the Arizona law. "In the end, the problems you see with people who are stopped for driving while black will happen," Kateel said.
Lawmakers are under intense pressure to crack down on illegal immigration — an issue that polls well, except among Hispanics, who happened to be a prized voting bloc in the state. Gov. Scott made an Arizona-style immigration law a cornerstone of his primary campaign and expects the GOP-led Legislature to deliver a bill he can sign.
But big business also opposes the measure, with the Associated Builders and Contractors, Associated Industries of Florida, Florida Retail Federation, Florida United Business Association, and Florida Chamber of Commerce speaking against the House bill Thursday. The employers said they didn't like the regulations requiring them to use the federal government's eVerify system, which can have errors.
Florida Chamber lobbyist Adam Babington said Florida's reputation could be tarnished. "The debate is not helpful to the state," he said.
But Bill Landes, activist with Florida Minuteman, said Florida needs to make sure legal residents aren't losing their jobs to those who aren't lawfully in the state. "This is real life," he said. "These are your citizens out here who are doing without work, working constructions working the hotel/motel."
Denmark's new immigration minister: become like us or stay away
Either foreigners make an effort to become Danish or they can just stay away from Denmark, according to Søren Pind, the new immigration minister. Only hours after taking over as immigration minister after Birthe Rønn Hornbech was fired yesterday, Pind declared himself ready to tighten up the immigration laws.
According to Pind, it should be set in stone that Denmark has room for foreigners that adopt and respect Danish values, norms and traditions; if they don’t, they shouldn’t be here at all. “The way I see it, when you choose Denmark, you choose Denmark because you want to become Danish,” Pind told Jyllands-Posten newspaper.
He highlighted a misunderstood notion of integration, where traditional Danish values have been compromised in an attempt to accommodate foreigners. This, he said, is a threat to Denmark as a nation. “In my view, a mixture of cultures and the trails it carries with it makes the whole thing crackle, and I will do everything I can to fight that,” he said.
This is great news for the Danish People’s Party (DF). “There are several areas where tightening measures are needed, so Søren Pind’s statement is definitely good for us to hear,” said DF’s immigration spokesperson Peter Skaarup.
In the opposition, Socialist People’s Party (SF) immigration spokesperson Astrid Kragh said that the nation is under threat if Søren Pind fails to realise that he needs to focus on high-priority tasks involving ghettos, education of non-ethnic youths and unemployment among foreigners.
Murdered Border Agent Brought Beanbag to a Gunfight
In a story that is creating a firestorm in the United States, a policy requiring U.S. Border Patrol agents to use non-lethal bean bags as an initial weapon may have led to the murder of a decorated federal agent who was viciously gunned down by a heavily armed group of illegal immigrants in Arizona.
The deadly gun battle took place on December 14, but the Department of Homeland Security has kept details from the public under the often-invoked premise that it's an “ongoing investigation,” according to officials at Judicial Watch, a Washington-based public interest group.
This week the newspaper, the Arizona Star, obtained FBI files relating to the case and the details are sure to ignite rage among those who favor securing the increasingly violent southern border.
The murdered agent, Brian Terry, and his colleague encountered five illegal border crossers at around 11:15 p.m. in an area known as Peck Canyon, northwest of Nogales, Arizona. The illegal aliens refused commands to drop their weapons and the two federal agents proceeded to fire beanbags, as per Border Patrol policy to use non-lethal force against illegal aliens entering the U.S.
The illegal immigrants, who were heavily armed with sophisticated assault weapons such as AK-47s, responded to the beanbags with gunfire and agent Terry was mortally wounded -- shot in the back. The agents eventually returned fire but it was too late for Agent Terry.
Terry was a member of a highly trained tactical unit (Bortac) that was targeting a violent gang that robbed and assaulted other criminals such as drug runners, human traffickers and illegal aliens.
"This is indicative of the current administration: they are more concerned with the safety and well-being of lawbreakers than they are about protecting American law enforcement officers," claims former police detective Peter Perotta.
"This is what happens when you have a community organizer in the White House, instead of a Commander in Chief, who surrounds himself with like-minded department heads to lead law enforcement agencies," said the decorated cop.
Judicial Watch also noted that a separate news report -- this time in the L.A. Times --indicates that the gun used to murder Terry was actually part of a federal experiment that allowed firearms from the U.S. to be smuggled into Mexico so they could eventually be traced to drug cartels. Instead, federal law enforcement officers have lost track of hundreds of guns which have been used in numerous crimes.
Among them were at least three guns found at the Peck Canyon scene of Terry’s murder. The weapons were traced through their serial numbers to a gun shop in Glendale, Arizona, which led to a Phoenix man (Jaime Avila) that the feds repeatedly allowed to smuggle firearms into Mexico.
Known as Operation Fast and Furious, the disastrous project was run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), according to Judicial Watch officials.
New Mini-Documentary Highlights an Arizona Rancher’s Life Amongst the Scramble of the Border and Illegal Immigration
The Center for Immigration Studies has produced its first web-based film that looks in depth at what it is like to live as an Arizona rancher amongst the isolation and dangers posed by illegal immigration. “A Day in the Life of an Arizona Rancher: Border Fences, Illegal Aliens, and One Man’s Watchtower,” released one year after the March 2010 tragic murder of rancher Robert Krentz, unravels the mindset of a rancher trying to balance the complexities of illegal immigration when dealing with protecting himself, his family and his property from unknown, constant and potentially dangerous trespassers who in Arizona are nearly always illegal aliens.
Richard Humphries, a lifelong Arizona resident and former narcotics cop living thirty miles north of the southeast Arizona border in Cochise County, became concerned enough with illegal activity on his land to build a watchtower to help himself and federal law enforcement track illegal aliens on his 75 acre ranch. This film relates Mr. Humphries’ humane approach to curbing illegal immigration in his own words, chronicling stories about a 150 mile car chase of an illegal alien load; a close call at his front gate; a thirsty and scared woman who had lost her coyote; and a rancher’s view of the Border Patrol tasked with interdicting illegal aliens across a still-porous border. The film’s introduction provides a reality check on the extent that border fencing does and does not exist from Douglas to Nogales, and a view of ‘Los Corrales’ from the U.S. side of the border, a holding refuge for the smuggled.
This is the fourth mini-documentary by Janice Kephart, the Center's National Security Policy Director. It is a two part film, running less than 20 minutes in total. In aggregate, Ms. Kephart’s films have nearly 700,000 views. Her prior three mini-documentaries are as follows:
Her first Arizona-based video, “Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border: Coyotes, Bears, and Trails,” (July 2009) focuses on the environmental impact of illegal immigration on federal lands.
“Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2: Drugs, Guns and 850 Illegal Aliens,” (July 2010) features footage of gun and drug smuggling up to 80 miles inside the Arizona border, showing the reality of an insecure border.
'Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 3: A Day in the Life of a Drug Smuggler,' (September 2010) focuses on new drug cartel travel methods through footage obtained by Ms. Kephart in travels with her hidden camera guide into three drug running corridors.
The above is a press release from 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. Contact: Janice Kephart, 202-466-8185, jlk@cis.org. The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent research institution which examines the impact of immigration on the United States. The Center for Immigration Studies is not affiliated with any other organization
Immigration critic Pauline Hanson returning to Australian politics
Ms Hanson is making a comeback to politics, standing for a NSW upper house seat in the March 26 election.
NSW Premier Kristina Keneally greeted the news by saying state Labor would direct no preferences to Ms Hanson, accusing her of harbouring racist views. "We absolutely condemn the sorts of racist and discriminatory policies which come from Ms Hanson and parties like One Nation," Ms Keneally said. The NSW Liberal Party has also said it would offer no preferences to Ms Hanson.
But Ms Hanson has told told Fairfax Radio Network: "I'm not racist. No one can ever comment or make a comment on any racist statement I have ever said," she said today. "I have ... as an Australian ... a right to question immigration and multiculturalism, which I don't believe is helping our country.
"I believe in people coming here, assimilating, becoming Australians and be proud of this country and abide by the laws of the land. "I don't think there's anything wrong with that."
Ms Hanson said the major political parties feared her. "Why? Because they know I've always spoken out, I expose them for what they are," she said. "They want to hold on to their power and the positions. "It is in the people's interest of NSW to ensure that I am on the floor of NSW."
Ms Hanson is to stand for an upper house seat with a group of 16 independents but conceded it would be a "battle" to get elected.
Ms Hanson said she had been thinking about making a political comeback since last year, with voters urging her to stand. Parliamentary accountability and law and order reforms would be high on her agenda.
"Something I'd like to consider and put to the government is the separation of powers of the police force to the Parliament," she said. "I don't think the police force should be controlled by a minister of police. "They could look at separating them. So they [police] can get on and do their job."
She also said she was "completely against" Prime Minister Julia Gillard's planned carbon tax.
On the subject of Ms Keneally, Ms Hanson said, "I think she's a very nice lady but she doesn't know what she's talking about."
David Oldfield, a founder of the One Nation Party in 1996 with Ms Hanson, challenged anyone listening to his radio program on 2UE this morning to come up with any statement of hers in the past that was racist. He strongly criticised Ms Keneally's accusations that Ms Hanson's policies were racist and discriminatory, saying the Premier's comments were the opposite of freedom of speech.
His listeners agreed, welcoming her back into politics. "Congratulations to Pauline Hanson. I think our government needs a good shake-up. She's truthful ... I think give her a go, because this country is such a mess," one listener said. Another listener said Ms Hanson was just repeating what others were saying to "stop bringing these immigrants into Australia".
One caller raised Ms Hanson's refusal to sell her Queensland home to a Muslim buyer last year "because I don't believe that they are compatible with our way of life, our culture" as an example of racism, but Mr Oldfield dismissed his comments, saying: "What's racist about that?"
"If Pauline Hanson, doesn't like Muslims, she has a right not to like Muslims," he said, comparing it to whether Ms Hanson liked or did not like rainy days. "Technically speaking, Muslims are not a race," he added. Mr Oldfield said he, like the Oxford Dictionary, defined racism as one race viewing itself as superior than another race, citing the Nazis' belief in supremacy over the Jews.
Ms Hanson has spoken out strongly against multiculturalism and immigration in the past. In her maiden speech to Federal Parliament in 1996, she called for multiculturalism to be abolished and said Australia was "in danger of being swamped by Asians".
"I and most Australians want our immigration policy radically reviewed and that of multiculturalism abolished. I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians. Between 1984 and 1995, 40 per cent of all migrants coming into this country were of Asian origin. They have their own culture and religion, form ghettos and do not assimilate."
In 2006, she said she was concerned about immigrants from South Africa with diseases. "We're bringing in people from South Africa at the moment. There's a huge amount coming into Australia, who have diseases; they've got AIDS," she said. [There is indeed a high incidence of AIDS in South Africa and some other African nations]
"They are of no benefit to this country whatsoever; they'll never be able to work. And what my main concern is, is the diseases that they're bringing in and yet no one is saying or doing anything about it."
THE average time spent processing refugee claims has blown out to 165 days - nearly twice the government's 90-day target for appeals by asylum seekers. And the average time spent in detention for all unauthorised arrivals - including those whose claims have been rejected - stands at 213 days.
Information provided to The Australian Online by the Immigration Department confirms the numbers of boat arrivals are straining the detention network, causing blow-outs to processing times and longer stays for asylum seekers in detention.
In just over two years, 3438 visas have been granted to boat people with the majority coming from Afghanistan. Since 2008, only 190 asylum seekers had been removed from Australia including 15 who were removed involuntarily. At the end of last week there were still 6194 asylum seekers in detention 2526 on Christmas Island and 3668 in mainland facilities.
The department said the longest time in detention for a current detainee was almost three years. The person was doing a second stint in detention after being turned back once before. There are currently five boat people who have been in detention for two years or more.
The government announced last week it would open up a new $10 million detention facility 35 km southeast of Darwin because the current detention network was under pressure.
Immigration Minister Chris Bowen said the new 1500-bed facility was necessary to prevent overcrowding in existing facilities.
1. The Carnegie Corporation and Immigration: How a Noble Vision Lost Its Way (Backgrounder)
2. Jessica Vaughan on Illegal-alien Murderer Who Was Set Free (Video)
4. Mojitos vs. Mogen David: Mi Primer Pensamientos de Hispanic Jews and Patriotic Assimilation (Blog)
5. My Great-Grandfather, President Obama, and Preserving Our Federal Lands (Blog)
6. USCIS Involves White House as It Streamlines H-1B Process (Blog)
7. House Panel Has Lively Session on Illegals' Impact on Black Workers (Blog)
8. Saintly Leadership? (Blog)
9. Should Employer Fines Be Cut Because of the Recession? (Blog)
10. Hatch Bill Targets Several Loopholes (Blog)
11. Multi-Tasking Coast Guard Does a Lot Besides Stopping Illegal Entries (Blog)
7 March, 2011
A hidden agenda
Australia is a nation of migrants and has had an unceasing flow of them from the beginning. It has a higher proportion of its population foreign-born than any other nation except Israel. It was one of the few nations to take Jews fleeing from Hitler.
So it is mildly surprising to see an article in a major Sri Lankan newspaper headed "Secrets of Australian immigration history" -- an article that denounces Australian immigration policy in round terms.
It is particularly surprising when one considers that there are these days large numbers of Sri Lankan nationals risking life and limb in order to get to Australia as illegal immigrants. The illegals obviously think Australia is a pretty good place.
So what is going on? Simple: The Sri Lankan government and many Sinhalese are embarrassed by the flight of many of their Tamil citizens and want to put them off fleeing to Australia! As Tamils have a history of implacability and turning to terrorism to get what they want, I rather hope that the propaganda succeeds
Some excerpts below. They present a very warped view of Australia, albeit with some element of truth:
The Australian government’s white Australia policy which was eventually abandoned by the government in the 70s was very similar to Adolf Hitler’s ideology of racial purity. The only difference being the Australian Government did not round up Jews and send them to gas chambers, but strongly believed in a white superior race and wanted to maintain this status quo and had taken some extraordinary steps to enforce this.
Present times
Australian migration is open to all nationalities nowadays, provided there is a skill to offer to Australia or in some cases humanitarian grounds and there are laws to prevent discrimination based on the individual’s ethnic origins in Australia.
But majority of Australians still look at non white nationalities as a threat to the Australian way of life and often treat them as second-class citizens. In a recent times, the Sydney suburb of Cronulla witnessed race riots. Quite unfortunately most of perpetrators of Cronulla riots were white Anglo young Australians and they rioted against migrants of any ethnicity under theme of “we were born here you were flown here”.
At the time the Prime Minister of the day failed to condemn the riots and saw the situation as young people expressing their misguided view in a democratic country. New South Wales Police contained the riots with great difficulty which were caused by migrants using a beach in Cronulla usually inhabited by white Australian young males.
Mandatory detention
The current Australian policy is mandatory detention of any person seeking asylum in Australia. Thousands of displaced refugees are currently detainees. Some of them were stationed at an offshore detention centre called Christmas Island and a recent investigation by Australian Government Ombudsman had found these detainees to be held under very poor conditions.
In some instances, women and children were detained for long periods while immigration officials look into their asylum request. Quite unfortunately refugees from a number of countries including Sri Lankans are facing these difficult circumstances in Australia. Australia is the only country in the developed world which has a mandatory detention policy for refugees and asylum seekers. In conclusion modern Australia has allowed immigration to non white nationalities with great reluctance.
Unfortunately due to inability to fill the country with white Anglo Saxon British subjects, the Government was forced to allow the immigration to non white ethnicities. If this was not done Australia as a nation would have faced difficult economic circumstances and would likely have been classified as a Third World country. Australia had taken the decision to remain as an economically wealthy but moving away from white Australia policy with great reluctance and resistance.
Michigan Bill Requires Police and State Agencies to Check Immigration Status
Michigan has become one of the latest states to debate whether to require law enforcement officers to check the immigration status of people they approach for an offense and whom they suspect may be here illegally. A proposed bill in the House known as No. 4305 also would require government agencies to verify the immigration status of people older than 18 years of age who apply for federal, state or local public benefits.
As in many of the roughly 20 other states considering bills that target illegal immigration, the Michigan bill has drawn criticism by immigrant rights groups and religious leaders who say it would create a climate of fear and division.
An editorial in the Midland Daily News said “the bill fails the stink test.” But the measure's supporters say undocumented immigrants, who number an estimated 200,000 in Michigan, are a drain on the state that in recent years has been plagued with one of the nation’s highest unemployment rates and an exodus of its residents.
Republican Rep. Dave Agema of Grandville said the bill he introduced in February was a "common sense" measure to help ensure that federal immigration law is enforced in Michigan. The measure would require law enforcement officers to make a "complete, full and appropriate attempt" to verify a person's immigration status after the person is stopped for another offense and officers have probable cause to suspect the person is in the country illegally.
People who don't have a driver's license or other documentation and are suspected to be illegal immigrants could be turned over to federal custody. Agencies or officials that adopt policies limiting or restricting the enforcement of federal immigration law could face fines.
Agema said illegal immigration is costly to Michigan through higher costs for health care, education and human services.
Opponents say the bill would hurt Michigan's business climate and reputation by creating an atmosphere where even legal immigrants feel unwelcome.
Michigan's law enforcement officers already have the power to contact federal immigration officials if they've stopped someone that they have probable cause to believe is in the country illegally.
But Michigan State Police say there's no state immigration law that makes that a requirement or spells out procedures to follow if they suspect they've stopped an illegal immigrant.
The Michigan debate comes on the heels of a series of arrests of undocumented immigrants in the city of Kalamazoo by agents with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.
The Hispanic American Council, the Kalamazoo area’s largest Latino advocacy group, told reporters that the raids -- which took place over several days -- had triggered fear in the local Hispanic community.
The roughly 20 immigrants who were arrested included people who had criminal records, while others had failed to leave the United States after being ordered deported.
The Utah Legislature has approved an immigration package that includes an enforcement law reminiscent of Arizona’s but is tempered by a bill for a guest worker program for illegal immigrants.
The measures, approved by the State Senate and House on Friday night, would allow illegal immigrants to get a permit to work in the state. They also include a requirement that the police check the immigrant status of anyone stopped for a felony or serious misdemeanor.
Supporters said that the package balanced economic needs and compassion; opponents argued that it would probably encourage more illegal immigration.
State lawmakers initially balked at the enforcement measure because of a likely backlash feared by some. But State Representative Stephen Sandstrom, a Republican, garnered enough support after amending it to focus on more serious crimes.
An Arizona law approved last year drew nationwide attention over provisions requiring the police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person’s immigration status if they had reasonable suspicion they were here illegally. A federal judge ordered that aspect of the law put on hold.
Representative Bill Wright, a Republican who sponsored the Utah bill creating the guest worker program, said that if the state could secure a federal waiver, the program could become a model for the rest of the country. The bill would allow illegal immigrants to get a permit to live and work in Utah with their families.
The most vocal critic of that provision, Representative Chris Herrod, a Republican, said that a guest worker program would draw more illegal immigrants to the state. “People think we’ll be seen as compassionate,” Mr. Herrod said. “People will actually see us as weak. They will see we don’t care about the rule of law.”
British visa restrictions may close courses, universities warn
An alliance of vice chancellors from 16 universities is urging Home Secretary Theresa May to abandon proposals to reduce immigration by restricting visas issued to foreign students and raising language requirements. Foreign students are a source of much-needed income for universities, and are charged up to eight times more than British undergraduates.
Figures show students from outside Britain and the EU pay an average of £10,463 in tuition fees – a rise of 5.6 per cent on last year. It has led to a surge in the number of foreign students. A 2009 report from Universities UK, which represents vice chancellors, shows that in 1998/9 there were just 117,290 international students at UK universities. By 2007/8 the figure had risen to 229,640 – an increase of 96 per cent.
In a letter to the Observer this weekend, the vice-chancellors express their "profound concern" at the proposals, arguing they would have a devastating effect on universities' incomes and ability to run the best courses for British, as well as overseas students.
They said: "International students coming to universities contribute over £5bn each year to the UK economy through tuition fees and off-campus expenditure. "Reductions in student numbers will lead to reductions in income and jobs. "Without international students, many university courses, particularly science and engineering courses, may no longer be viable. This will in turn reduce the courses available to UK students.
"International students bring extensive cultural and political benefits to the UK. When they return to their countries at the end of their studies, they become cultural and economic ambassadors for the UK. "At a time of financial austerity, this issue is of immeasurable importance to the UK."
The proposals would affect students from outside the EU applying for visas under what is known as tier four of the points-based system. These accounted for two-thirds of the 273,000 visas issued to students in 2009.
A Home Office spokeswoman said: "Any criticism can only be based on speculation as no decisions have yet been made on the changes to the student visa route. "However, universities that are confident in the product they have to offer genuine students should have nothing to fear from policies that root out abuses in the student visa system."
Mexican President Joins Obama in Calling for ‘Comprehensive’ Reform Legalizing Illegal Aliens in U.S.
Interfering in the internal affairs of another country contravenes the treaty of Westphalia, which Democrats support when it suits them. Will they condemn Calderon over this? Don't hold your breath
Mexican President Felipe Calderon yesterday joined President Barack Obama in calling for “comprehensive” immigration reform, a term used to describe reform that includes granted legal status to illegal aliens in the United States.
“We have also discussed immigration, an issue on which both countries have responsibilities,” Obama said, standing next to Calderon during a White House joint news conference.
“As I told President Calderón, I remain deeply committed to fixing our broken immigration system with comprehensive reform that continues to secure our borders, enforces our laws--including against businesses that break the law--and requiring accountability from undocumented workers,” Obama said. “And we have to conduct this debate in a way that upholds our values as a nation of both laws and immigrants. So I’m eager to work with Republicans and Democrats to get this reform done, which is vital to the U.S. economy.”
Obama has long supported a “comprehensive immigration reform” that supporters call a “pathway to citizenship” for illegal aliens and opponents call “amnesty.” But such legislation--backed by the immigration lobby and some pro-business organizations--was defeated in Congress during 2005 and 2007, and was deeply unpopular with the public.
Nevertheless, Calderon said he supports Obama’s desire to see such legislation pass.
“President Obama has always recognized, invariably recognized, the contributions of immigrants to the economy and society of the United States, and I recognize and value his clear and determined support for the adoption of a comprehensive migratory reform in this country, as well as his firm commitment to the human and civil rights of communities, regardless of their point of origin,” Calderon said. “I've expressed to him my concern for the proliferation of local initiatives that are against the interests or the rights of immigrant communities.”
Melanesian influx into Australia based on a failed legal claim
There are millions of them to Australia's immediate North who have a proven inability to get on with one-another so live in a very chaotic and poor society. Letting any of them into Australia would produce a flood of them. The Australian government is so far sending them all back, however
Australian immigration officials are advising a group of Papua New Guineans to scrap their plan to try to travel to Australia illegally in a few weeks' time. More than 100 Papuans will make the perilous journey to draw attention to their call to be granted Australian citizenship.
The trip's organiser says among them will be two fuzzy wuzzy angels who helped Australian soldiers during World War II.
Late last year, a similar flotilla, carrying a similar number of people, tried to cross the Torres Strait in small boats. Most of the dinghies were picked up by immigration officials or turned back to Papua New Guinea. One craft carrying 10 people managed to land on Cape York before those on board were arrested.
The group's organiser, Johnathan Baure, says it is only a matter of weeks before the group makes another attempt. "We have already more dinghies and even canoes," he told Radio Australia's Asia Pacific program. "There were two other guys who are going to go on this trip now and they are fuzzy wuzzy angels."
The group is trying to draw attention to their fight to gain Australian citizenship. They claim they were not given the choice of Australian citizenship when Papua New Guinea gained independence from Australia in 1975. Two Australian High Court battles have been lost over the issue.
Mr Baure does not deny the dangerous of the trip across open sea. "Every member of our community, I ask them and I repeat to them clearly that there is risk involved. Each one of them make their stance, and some of them decide to take their children," he said. "Obviously that is their right to decide and I have no control over that area."
It cost Australia's Immigration Department at least $250,000 to process and return the group that came across last December.
Department spokesman Sandi Logan warned that making another attempt would be futile and dangerous, and the boats will be confiscated and people detained. Mr Logan says those who believe they are eligible to gain Australian citizenship should lodge formal applications. "In fact there are a few claims at the moment - around 40 or so claims from this group - as a result of their last endeavour. That is the correct channel," he said.
After the last trip, Papua New Guinean officials charged Mr Baure with fraud and immigration offences, allegations he refutes. He appeared in court on Thursday to face the charges.
Mr Baure said that during the hearing, the judge accused the prosecution of being unprepared and ordered it to provide relevant documentation to the court within a fortnight before the case can continue.
Law Professor to Congress: Obama’s Failure to Enforce Immigration Law Is ‘Dereliction of Duties'
A Vanderbilt University law professor told a House committee on Tuesday that President Barack Obama's failure to enforce federal immigration law is a "dereliction of duties" that puts Americans at risk.
“President Obama’s failure to enforce federal immigration laws raises the question of whether we are a nation of laws or a nation without the courage of its convictions,” Professor Carol Swain said in her opening remarks. “This dereliction of duties places our citizens at risk, and it damages our national sovereignty and standing in the world.”
The hearing before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement focused on the impact of illegal immigration on American workers and unemployment in the United States.
“The failure to enforce immigration laws means that American citizens are unprotected from a massive influx of people of foreign-born persons who have entered the country without authorization and have openly stolen jobs, goods, and opportunities from law-abiding American citizens,” Swain said.
Instead of enforcing federal immigration law, the Obama administration is thwarting state and local efforts to do so, she testified.
“Not only is the current presidential administration not adequately enforcing immigration laws, it has used the power of the federal government to fight states and localities (that) have made good faith efforts to assist the federal government in performing its constitutional duties to protect the citizenry against domestic and foreign threats.”
Swain said an estimated 8 million illegal aliens are holding jobs in the U.S. labor market while 14 million Americans remain unemployed. Millions more Americans have given up looking for work, she added.
Ranking committee member Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) claimed in her opening remarks that Americans are not doing the kind of jobs that illegal immigrants often fill: “We know that even in this economy, Americans are not returning to the fields” Lofgren said.
“And the wage increase necessary to entice them there would make U.S. food products no longer competitive with imported products.” Lofgren said this would lead to farm closures and the “off-shoring of millions and millions of U.S. jobs.”
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, disagreed: “All credible studies show that competition from cheap foreign labor displaces American workers, including legal immigrants, or depresses their wages,” Smith said.
That seems to be the intended and quite addled message behind the announcement below -- As Australia's Labor Party government tries to deny the total constipation of their "refugee" policy. Labor won't do what it needs to do in order to stop the "boat people" arriving but it won't give many of them residence permits either. So it just keeps locking more and more of them up! And that means ever more prisons keep being needed
Immigration Minister Chris Bowen says that just because the government is establishing a new 1500-bed immigration detention centre in Darwin it doesn't mean it will necessarily be filled to capacity.
Mr Bowen says the first 500 places at the $9.2 million Wickham Point facility should be ready by mid-year. But, he says, the government can't say how many new asylum seekers it expects to have to house over the next few years. "It's very hard to predict exact numbers ... we don't make forecasts," he told ABC Radio.
"(But) it's well known that the number of boat arrivals has been high of recent times. It's well know that our detention network has been under pressure. "What we do do is prepare for foreseeable contingencies."
The immigration minister said the new centre would ensure against overcrowding but the 1500-bed facility "might not all be necessary or it might all be necessary".
Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says there's only one way to stop overcrowding and "that's to stop the boats and the boats will just keep coming unless the government changes policy".
He said opening a new Darwin detention centre was "yet another broken promise" by Labor. "They said there'd be no more onshore detention centres when plainly there are," he told the Nine Network.
Asylum seekers arriving by boat will still be processed offshore at Christmas Island before being transferred to the mainland.
U.S. Immigration officials announce new gang arrests
Immigration agents have arrested more than 600 gang members with ties to drug smugglers in the past three months, the largest such roundup since 1965, Immigration and Customs Enforcement said Tuesday.
ICE agents, working with state and local authorities in 168 cities, made 678 arrests from December to February in an effort dubbed "Project Southern Tempest," ICE Director John Morton said.
The latest roundup is part of a more than 5-year-old effort aimed at U.S. street gangs with ties to Mexican drug cartels and other drug traffickers.
Morton said Tuesday that nearly half those arrested in the last three months were also connected to street gangs with known ties to violent drug cartels in Mexico. Those cartels are battling each other and the government in Mexico in a struggle that has killed more than 35,000 people since Mexican President Felipe Calderon launched an offensive against the drug gangs shortly after taking office in late 2006.
Federal authorities have announced the results of more than half a dozen such operations in the last 2 1/2 years and touted them as blows to Mexican drug gangs. But an Associated Press review of those sweeps last year showed that the arrests have done little to stymie the drug trade or do more than inconvenience the major Mexican-based cartels.
ICE officials did not identify all of the gang members arrested or say which cartels they or their respective gangs were aligned with. But Morton said 13 gangs whose members were caught up in the latest operation are connected to the cartels. As a group, he said, the gangs have ties to all of Mexico's cartels. All told, members of 133 gangs were arrested.
Morton said 447 suspects face criminal charges, while 231 people were arrested on administrative immigration charges.
The announcement of the arrests comes less than a week after agents from ICE, the Drug Enforcement Administration and other federal, state and local authorities launched a nationwide search for suspects with ties to Mexican cartels.
DEA officials said that effort, which netted more than 650 arrests, was a direct domestic response to the Feb. 15 killing of ICE Special Agent Jaime Zapata in a roadside ambush along a Mexican highway.
The arrests announced Tuesday, Morton said, were not part that response. "We're pursuing gangs because they are involved in violent crimes affecting our communities in a big way," Morton said.
He added that U.S. authorities have made it clear they will continue to target cartel members working in the United States and street gangs aligned with those drug organizations.
Dozens of Latinos and Arab Americans joined faith leaders from around Michigan at the state Capitol Tuesday to call on lawmakers to reject an immigration bill in the state House that is similar to the controversial immigration law in Arizona.
The House Republican proposal would require police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is a suspicion that the person could be an undocumented worker.
Imam Mohammed Mardini of the American Islamic Center in Dearborn says that would divert law enforcement from serious crimes. "Do we really want legalized racial profiling?" he asks.
Mardini says the Arizona law has caused a lot of problems with how to determine who should be targeted. "One Congressman suggested that you could tell an undocumented immigrant by their shoes," Mardini says. "Let us face it - the police aren't going to be pulling over any suspected Canadians."
"There's nothing racist about this bill," says Republican state Representative Dave Agema. "I don't care who you are. They question you have to ask those people who are against this bill, 'What are you hiding? Why are you hiding who you're hiding?'"
"You're going to after anyone who happens to be here illegally and they've already broken a law, that's why the police officer has detained them," he says.
Agema says his proposal would save the state money in health care costs for illegal immigrants, but the protesters say it would cost the state money in additional law enforcement personnel.
Governor Rick Snyder says he wants to bring more immigrants to the state who have advanced degrees.
Opponents of tougher immigration laws from northern Michigan worry about justice, and possible repercussions for farmers.
Josh Wunsch, a cherry and apple grower on Old Mission Peninsula, worries the proposed law could make workers hard to find, particularly in good economic times. He says in 1990s, when jobs were plentiful, farm workers were scarce.
Migrant cover-up: Damning reports kept secret by British Labour Party
Reports show that mass immigration cut wages, raised tensions and that too many stayed too long
Labour is today accused of a ‘shocking’ cover-up over the impact of years of mass immigration as damning official research buried by the last government is revealed.
Ministers will publish three reports commissioned at the taxpayers’ expense by Labour politicians – but then apparently ‘sat on’ because of their inconvenient conclusions. Government advisers concluded immigration had depressed wages, threatened to increase community tensions and seen many incomers stay longer than intended.
The Coalition claims the unpublished reports, which cost more than £100,000 to produce, are extraordinary evidence of how Labour lost control of Britain’s borders and then tried to cover it up.
The revelations come as Labour leader Ed Miliband admitted his party got it ‘wrong’ on immigration while they were in power – with millions of families having their incomes squeezed as a result.
The last government was widely criticised for failing to impose any controls when ten countries joined the EU, underestimating the number of migrant workers coming to the UK as a result of the changes by a factor of ten.
Local government minister Grant Shapps, who will release research commissioned by the Department for Communities and Local Government before last year’s election, said: ‘This is a shocking cover-up by Labour. Labour ministers spent over £100,000 of taxpayers’ money on research reports into immigration, and when they didn’t like the results they tried to brush it all under the carpet.
‘The new Government is being more honest with the public and so we will be making these reports public. We are introducing a series of measures to get immigration under control. Labour’s uncontrolled immigration put unacceptable pressures on public services and harmed community relations.’
The first report, a DCLG ‘economics paper’, was commissioned in 2009 at a cost of £24,275, and looked into immigration and rural economies. Government advisers concluded that immigration had had a negative effect on the wages of British workers, particularly at the lower end of the income scale.
They also warned of a big increase in the number of National Insurance numbers being issued, with hundreds of thousands handed to illegal workers as there was no requirement for JobCentre staff to check whether a person was in the country legally.
In rural areas, migrants make up a third of food manufacturing workers, a quarter of farm workers and a fifth of hotel and restaurant workers, the report added. ‘There are challenges posed by language barriers, which can make access to services and integration within local communities more difficult,’ it said.
The inconvenient conclusions
‘Housing, healthcare and education could also be affected by an increase in local population, when some existing local services may already be under pressure.’
The largest clusters of migrant workers, the report said, were around Herefordshire, Lincolnshire and Cambridgeshire and, to an extent, Somerset and Devon.
‘Far from being an urban phenomenon, recent migrants have increasingly chosen to settle in the countryside, in many cases in areas without a history of migration,’ the report added.
The second report, prepared by the Government’s regeneration and economic development analysis expert panel, looked at the impact of the economic downturn on migration. It was commissioned in 2008 at a cost of £3,400.
The report showed that the number of migrants entering the country with dependants increased dramatically from 2007 to 2008. Ministers were also warned that community tensions were likely to increase in the event of an economic downturn.
The third report, commissioned last year at a cost of £78,500, was designed to measure international and internal migration using information from a national database of school pupils. It found that one in eleven pupils spoke English as a second language.
Yesterday, Ed Miliband admitted the Labour government’s open door policy towards immigration from Eastern Europe had put ‘pressure on people’s wages’ by bringing about an influx of cheap migrant labour.
He also conceded that Labour ministers had been ‘wrong’ to say that a maximum of 13,000 migrants a year would come to the UK from Eastern Europe following EU enlargement in 2004. In the event, more than 600,000 arrived in the following two years. And he warned that immigration had helped widen the gap between rich and poor by piling pressure on those in lower skilled jobs.
Labour’s former immigration minister Phil Woolas claimed last year that even at party gatherings, senior figures were reluctant to talk about one of voters’ chief concerns. ‘We had imposed a gag on ourselves,’ he said. And by the 2010 election, when the party did finally discuss the issue, ‘the public thought we were shutting the stable door after the horse had bolted and even worse that we were doing it for electoral gain’.
A new report from the Center for Immigration Studies shows that the Carnegie Corporation, a grant-making foundation whose mandate is to “promote the advancement and diffusion of knowledge and understanding,” has veered sharply away from that mission with dogmatic and intolerant efforts to influence U.S. immigration policy.
Titled “The Carnegie Corporation and Immigration: How a Noble Vision Lost Its Way,” the report shows that despite the stated commitment of Carnegie President Vartan Gregorian to “augment the sources of knowledge that may be drawn upon to inform American leaders and citizens about the issues on the nation’s agenda,” Carnegie funding on immigration – at least $57 million over the past decade – has been driven by rigid ideology and a simplistic refusal to acknowledge immigration’s costs and strains as well as its beauties and benefits.
The report's author, Pulitzer Prize winner Jerry Kammer, hails Carnegie’s funding of efforts to register naturalized immigrants and involve them in the political life of the nation. But he notes that Carnegie also funds such organizations as America’s Voice and the Center for New Community, which have sought to demonize those who disagree with Carnegie's views on immigration and exclude them from public debate. Kammer questions how such funding squares with Vartan Gregorian’s declaration that philanthropic organizations have a moral responsibility to ensure that their power “is used openly, wisely and responsibly in upholding society’s values rather than subverting them.”
Kammer concludes, “It is a loss for American democracy that Carnegie’s simplistic and ideologically bound approach to immigration policy has justified its funding of campaigns to smear those who dare to suggest more cautious immigration policy.”
The above is a press release from 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. The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent research institution which examines the impact of immigration on the United States. The Center for Immigration Studies is not affiliated with any other organization
1. Securing the Blessings of Liberty: Congress Should Consider Expanding Grounds for Exclusion and Deportation to Include Radical Beliefs (Memorandum)
2. Is the U.S. Immigration Debate Going in the Right Direction? (Op-ed)
3. Obama is transforming America through immigration (Op-ed)
4. Hearing on Immigration Issues Facing Colorado (Testimony)
5. Large Group Nabbed Right Where SBInet Is Operational (Blog)
6. Texas-Sized Jihadi Plot Foiled (Blog)
7. Too Much Immigration Staff Time Is Spent on Low-Priority Matters (Blog)
8. Indicting Hezbollah in Mexico (Blog)
9. John Lennon, a Marine General, and the Twisted Language of Immigration (Blog)
10. 'The Beast' and the Mexican Justice System (Blog)
Some very welcome legal immigrants to Australia
It was drizzling and 8C in County Meath yesterday but Irish carpenter Conor Foley was far from home, drinking very cold beer in a West Australian heatwave.
The 25-year-old and his girlfriend, Aisling Mooney, a beauty therapist, have been granted 457 work visas to stay in Australia for four years. It is news that has made them the envy of friends back in Ireland where a new wave of emigration is under way. "We have loads of friends who want to leave Ireland for economic reasons," said Ms Mooney. "For us, it's the lifestyle as well. Perth is just so outdoorsy and we have changed our whole way of living."
The latest exodus from Ireland coincided with the recession in 2008 that saw unemployment reach 13 per cent. It is predicted that the number of people leaving Ireland over the next two years will reach 100,000, more than twice the number that left in 2009 and last year.
In Friday's Irish election, ruling party Fianna Fail appears to have been dumped over the economic malaise that led to the IMF-EU bailout of $116 billion last year. The centre-right Fine Gael is expected to look to the centre-left Labour Party to form a coalition government.
Ms Mooney and Mr Foley are taking a keen interest in the result, but say Perth is a more optimistic place with better opportunities. They will stay regardless of what happens at home. "We want to become permanent residents, that is our next goal, and buy a house," said Ms Mooney.
Mr Foley's visa was sponsored by the large construction company he works for. His skills in building maintenance are in high demand as Western Australia's next round of resource projects looms. Ms Mooney is entitled to a visa because she is the partner of a skilled worker, but she has found her skills are sought after and has been in full-time work since their visas were issued.
The state Chamber of Commerce and Industry predicts Western Australia will need almost 500,00 extra workers over the next decade. State Training and Workplace Development Minister Peter Collier has said that attracting overseas workers would be critical.
Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.
The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:
1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.
2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.
3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.
4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.
5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: You usually CAN buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.
6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.
I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.
