Republican House considers altering birthright citizenship

MoonHowler

msnbc.com:

The 14th Amendment to the Constitution doesn’t leave much in the way of wiggle room: the rights of American citizenship are given to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.” It’s a principle generally known as “birthright citizenship,” and after its enactment following the Civil War, the Supreme Court has protected the tenet many times.
But as Republican politics moved sharply to the right, and anti-immigration sentiments within the GOP became more extreme, the party’s “constitutional conservatives” decided the principle, championed by Republicans nearly 150 years ago, needs to go. Shortly after the “Tea Party” gains in 2010, ending birthright citizenship was added to the far-right’s to-do list.

Read More

McAuliffe to Veto Anti-dream Act Legislation

MoonHowler

Washingtonpost.com:

 Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) said he would veto a bill barring undocumented immigrant students from receiving in-state tuition at state universities, which passed a Senate committee Thursday.

A spokesman for the governor called the legislation, put forward in the House and Senate by two Loudoun County Republicans, “counterproductive and mean-spirited.” The Senate version advanced Thursday morning out of the Senate Education and Health Committee on a party-line vote of 8 to 7.

McAuliffe “is focused on expanding economic opportunity to Virginians from all walks of life, not targeting some for discrimination,” spokesman Brian Coy added.

In his first State of the Commonwealth address Wednesday night, McAuliffe called for passage of a state version of the so-called Dream Act that would grant in-state tuition to some students who were brought to the country illegally as children. Attorney General Mark R. Herring (D) has already ruled that students who qualify for deferred action under President Obama’s recent executive order can apply for the tuition discount.

“The Senators who voted for this measure should meet some of the young people they are trying to punish,” Herring said in a statement Thursday.

Herring is right.  Black and Ramadan should have to meet some of the kids they are attempting to discriminate against.   I think they would feel like worthless dogs if they ever met some of these kids that have worked so hard to become something.

Read More

Eric Byler Weighs in on the Past, Present and Future of Immigration Reform

MoonHowler

Guest contributor Eric Byler weighs in on the Immigration Resolution, the tragic fatal wreck, and comprehensive immigration reform. He has been out in Phoenix as well as other areas, watching the immigration issue unfold before his eyes. He has talked to many people and heard a variety of opinions in his travels.

Any statements and opinions by guest contributors do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the administrators of moonhowlings.net.

 

The fact that this drunk driver was turned over to ICE in 2008, after the
“Immigration Resolution” was put into effect, brings up some real
questions about the wisdom of expensive policies at the local level
that redirect the time and resources of local law enforcement toward a
focus on immigration status rather than public safety. For 2 months
in the spring of 2008, the policy in Prince William County was very
similar to that proposed in Arizona’s SB 1070. But we corrected our
course on April 29, 2008 so that we check the status of ALL
individuals who are arrested for an underlying crime, rather than
people out on the streets who have not committed underlying crimes but
fit a “probable cause” standard. Just about everyone in our county
agrees that the repeal of the “probable cause” mandate made for a more
effective, more fiscally responsible, and more legally defensible
policy. Still it did not prevent this tragedy.

Read More

Immigration’s New Year–NY Times 1/5/10

MoonHowler

The following editorial appeared in the New York Times on yesterday, January 5, 2010.

The Editorial is printed in its entirety.

The quest for overhauling immigration received two very welcome lifts on New Year’s Day.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City, at his inauguration, pledged to help the Obama administration pass immigration reform. Mr. Bloomberg is a force to reckon with, as he proved with his national campaign against illegal guns. On the same day, four young people in Miami, current or former students at Miami Dade College, began their own determined march to Washington in an effort to bring pressure from the grass roots.

Three of the four were brought to this country illegally as children. Like thousands of other young people, they bear no blame for their status, and they are frustrated that their hard work and bright promise lead to a brick wall. Their protest for a chance to become Americans is courageous because it exposes them to possible arrest and deportation. “We are risking our future because our present is unbearable,” one of them, Felipe Matos, told The Times.

Read More

Prince William County Signs Onto Comprehensive Immigration Reform Position Statement

Elena

Virginia Association of Counties’ (VACo), Position Statement on Comprehensive Immigration Reform

VACo maintains a strong commitment to ensuring the security and safety of our communities. Legislative reforms must recognize the contributions of immigrants to a complex economy as well as the costs associated with welcoming immigrants into our communities. The U.S. Congress must enact comprehensive immigration reform that provides a funding stream sufficient to address the fiscal impact on state and local governments for any guest worker program and earned legalization program. The states and local governments require a national immigration system that is fully funded at the federal level, recognizes the realities of the marketplace, eases the fiscal stress on states and localities, and properly secures our borders. It is important that the federal government establish a clear and understandable path to citizenship for those who are eligible.

Introduced in November 2009 by County Board Member J. Walter Tejada, Arlington, VA

VACo approved and adopted in November 2009 as VACo’s Position Statement on Immigration Reform

My first question is this….Does Corey know? This “Position Statement” seems purposefuly vague, vague enough that I don’t think any elected official would be willing to stand up in opposition.

Who could be against “securing the safety of our comminities” ?

So, what I am wondering, is how does this “statement” turn in to actual meaningful legislation?

Also, I am wondering, who actually affirmed our vote from Prince William County, do they have the authority to sign onto such a statement?

Border Security and Environmental Protection on a Collision Course

MoonHowler

In a remarkably candid letter to members of Congress, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said her department could have to delay pursuits of illegal immigrants while waiting for horses to be brought in so agents don’t trample protected lands, and warns that illegal immigrants will increasingly make use of remote, protected areas to avoid being caught.

The above quote from the Washington Times makes one take note. In fact, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) has been crusading to shore up the gaps between DHS border control and environmental rules coming from the Dept. of the Interior. He confirms his displeasure over border initiatives to install towers associated with the virtual fence being denied because of wilderness designation.

Read More

Janet Napolitano Calls for Immigration Overhaul

MoonHowler

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has called for an overhaul of US immigration policy early next year. The move is expected to rekindle the immigration flames, which could be problematic in an election year.

Additionally, opponents and conservative media is billing any reform initiative as giving illegal immigrants amnesty. The Huffington Post quotes Napolitano:

Ms. Napolitano said the immigration landscape has changed sharply since 2007, when attempts at a comprehensive overhaul failed because many members of Congress lacked confidence in the government’s ability to enforce existing laws, she said. Immigration overhauls backed by the Bush administration and some congressional leaders from both parties foundered in part because critics portrayed them as rewarding illegal immigrants with “amnesty” for violating U.S. law.

Since then, government statistics show a 23% drop in the number of illegal immigrants caught trying to enter the U.S. in the past year, and a 67% decline since 2000, a trend Ms. Napolitano attributed to the weak economy and stronger enforcement. The government has also stepped up efforts to audit employers’ compliance with immigration laws, she said.

“These are major differences that should change the immigration conversation,” said Ms. Napolitano. Without congressional action, “what I fear is we will see another wave of illegal immigration” when the economy improves, she said. “When Congress is ready to act, we will be ready to support them.”

The Washington Times, a conservative newspaper, puts a different spin on Secretary Napolitano’s words:

Declaring success in border security and immigration enforcement, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Friday that the federal government has done its work and now it’s time for Congress to pass a broad bill to legalize illegal immigrants.

Her speech signals President Obama will make good on his promise to push Congress to pass an immigration bill next year – adding yet another hot-button issue to an already long and contentious list.

Ms. Napolitano said members of Congress and voters who balked at an immigration bill two years ago, fearing a repeat of the 1986 amnesty that only made the problem worse, can be assured this time is different. She said in those two years, the flow of illegal immigrants across the border has dropped dramatically and the government is doing more to catch fugitive aliens inside the U.S.

I have tried for several days to find a direct quote that sounds like what Ms. Napolitano was quoted as saying in the Washington Times. I have not been able to find it. It sounds incendiary to me and quite a stretch from what actually was said.

Here is the link to what DHS Secretary Napolitano did say. It is too lengthy to post here.

Geraldo Expresses Disgust with Lou Dobbs

MoonHowler

Geraldo called his boss because of the rumor that Lou Dobbs was leaving CNN and coming on over to Fox.
The boss said NO.

Geraldo defends the presence of immigrants in this country and reviles the defamatory tone used when discussing comprehensive immigration reform.  He blames Lou Dobbs for setting the tone that affects all Latino people.

Geraldo stated the following which was reported in the Huffington Post:

Rivera told the crowd, “One of the aspects of our reality in the United States right now is the defamatory tone of the immigration debate and how that immigration debate has slandered an entire race of people. It has been reckless beyond imagining, it has been reckless beyond precedent.”

He then trained his sights on Dobbs: “Lou Dobbs, a man who was an accomplished journalist, and who left to start his own venture in the digital media… and then came back to CNN, and nobody was watching his program. He discovered that one of the ways he could get people to watch was to make of the image of a young Latino trying to get into this country a profoundly negative icon. Lou Dobbs is almost singlehandedly responsible for creating, for being the architect of the young-Latino-as-scapegoat for everything that ails this country.”

Opinion: Buying Time on Immigration

MoonHowler

From The Washington Post

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

 

Monday, May 4, 2009

 

On many questions, President Obama’s approach is full speed ahead. On immigration reform, he prefers to take things one step at a time. There really is no alternative.  Immigration is politically vexing because it splits both parties and scrambles the usual ideological alignments. There is no clear majority on this issue. Roughly a third of Americans strongly favor granting illegal immigrants a way to become citizens, while another third is strongly opposed.  An ambivalent middle knows the status quo is unsustainable and wants a comprehensive solution, yet is also upset about the government’s failure to stop illegal immigration.

Moving us in that direction is not about doing favors for illegal immigrants. It’s about strengthening the American community. Obama needs to use the time he is buying himself to make that case.

 

The Obama administration has particular worries of its own. Obama won last year with overwhelming support from Latino voters who helped him carry such swing states as New Mexico, Colorado and Nevada. Latino political leaders are appropriately insistent that the president keep his promise to fix immigration and end a system that, in Obama’s words, “keeps those undocumented workers in the shadows.”

 

But the president’s lieutenants are well aware that Obama also won in swing states where there is less sympathy for a path to legalization (Indiana, North Carolina and Ohio) and do not want to throw immigration reform into an already combustible legislative mix.

So Obama has been sending two signals simultaneously: Yes we can, but not quite yet.

Read More

S.P.L.C. Receives Kudos

MoonHowler

S.P.L.C. Receives Kudos

The Editorial Board of the New York Times gave kudos to the Southern Poverty Law Center for their report “The Nativist Lobby,” which was released on Tues. S.P.C.L. examines the connects between three Washington-based organizations that have advocated for severe restrictions to immigration from Hispanic countries as well as restrictions for those who are here already.

The three groups examined are ones you will be very familiar with:
Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies and Numbers USA — a lobbying group, think tank, and grassroots organizer, respectively. In fact, these organizations all had a hand in policy setting when the Immigration Resolution was ushered in. The criticism is strong.

Read More

BOCS Chairman Stewart Not Too Happy With McCain Rally

MoonHowler

According to the Gainesville-Times, Corey Stewart is not too happy with the McCain Campaign because Senator McCain did not address the immigration issue. McCain supports a pathway to citizenship and co-sponsored an Immigration Reform bill in 2007 which went down in defeat.

Apparently, Corey Stewart felt that the McCain Campaign dissed him and his fellow Republican leaders at the October 18 rally at the County Complex:

…Stewart resented what he perceived as the McCain camp’s attempt to distance itself from the county’s crackdown.
“We had no real place other than getting introduced through a long line of people,” Stewart said of his fellow Republican county supervisors, referring to an honorees list read by Clerk of the Circuit Court Michele McQuigg.
Though she had asked the audience to hold their applause until the end, Stewart’s name was the only one cheered after she read it.
“I don’t feel that proper protocol was respected, and I think that’s going to hurt him, frankly. The local Republicans know how to win elections here,” said Stewart.
“I’m very, very disappointed in McCain’s campaign here,” he added.

Earlier in the week Stewart bragged that he has practically begged the McCain campaign to come to Prince William County. The Gainesville-Times further elaborates on the immigration issue in Prince William County and how it relates to Stewart.

One issue noticeably absent from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain’s speech to supporters in Prince William on Saturday was illegal immigration.
Unlike the majority of the Republican base, McCain has supported a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
So for him to stop in the county that was the national hotbed for illegal immigration controversy just last year and not talk about the issue troubled of Board of County Supervisors Chairman Corey Stewart (R).

Stewart complained :

“But I think that clearly McCain’s campaign has tried to distance itself on Prince William County’s local crackdown on illegal immigration,” he said. “And I think that’s a blunder. And I use that word very strongly and I mean it.”

In order to connect with the crowd on illegal immigration, “All he had to say was ‘Protect the borders’ and unlike [Democratic president nominee Sen.] Barack Obama, he does not favor workforce rights and giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. That’s all he had to say,”

Does this mean that Corey is going to just get angry and support Obama? Somehow I can’t see that happening. What I do see here is a sore loser. I wonder what he thinks about the campaign choosing Tito the Builder over him?

Did Corey think the McCain Rally was his very own little pep rally, just for him and his buds? Let’s hope Corey doesn’t trip over his lip.

Washington Times: (Republican) Convention to duck immigration

Alanna

According to an Associated Press article in the Washington Times, the Republican Party will also most likely remain silent on the issue of immigration because the positions between both Presidential candidates are so similar.

Personally, I believe McCain will be the better candidate to deal with this because Republicans will be more likely to work with him than with Obama.

ST. PAUL, Minn — It’s the unmentioned issue — Democrats were nearly silent on immigration during their convention, and on Sunday House Minority Leader John Boehner said the Republican convention won’t say much about it either.

“Probably nothing,” Mr. Boehner told reporters. “In every election cycle, some issues rise to the top and others fall to the wayside.”

The issue, which rocked the Senate in 2007, has fallen in importance in part because the election doesn’t offer voters much of a choice.

Both Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama and presumptive Republican nominee John McCain sharing similar positions: Both men support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, though Mr. McCain now says that must come after border security, while Mr. Obama says they must be combined.

At Democrats’ convention several speakers did mention the issue, including Sen. John Kerry, who criticized Mr. McCain for backtracking from the broad bill the Republican wrote along with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.

“Are you kidding? Talk about being for it before you’re against it,” he said.

NY Times: The Laws Cops Can’t Enforce

Alanna

This Op-Ed in the NY Times, hits the nail on the head. We owe it to our law enforcement officers to come up with a workable federal immigration policy that does not force police departments to succumb to political pressures to ‘reduce immigration by using racial profiling and harassment’.

Without a national immigration policy, a new culture of lawlessness will increasingly permeate our society. In cities, politicians will pressure police departments to reduce immigration by using racial profiling and harassment. At the same time, immigrants who fear that the police will help deport them will rely less on their local officers and instead give thugs control of their neighborhoods.

Many top law enforcement officials were part of the community policing revolution of the 1980s and ’90s. We have a deep concern for constitutional rights and social justice. We believe that effective policing requires residents, regardless of immigration status, to trust the police.

We are also students of the mistakes of our predecessors. Past police practices helped lead to the civil unrest of the 1960s, which tore our nation apart along racial and political lines. We do not want to repeat those mistakes.

…

America’s police officers deserve thoughtful federal leadership so that we can continue doing our best to provide our country with the security that defines a civilized society.

Commentary: How to fix our broken immigration system

Alanna

Ruben Navarrette Jr., a CNN contributor offers a reasonable response for fixing our immigration system.

SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) — In a recent commentary, I spelled out what bothers many Hispanics about the immigration debate. In response, many readers demanded to know — for all my criticisms — how I would go about fixing our broken immigration system. I thought they’d never ask.

First, let’s keep it real. Congress doesn’t have the appetite to reform the immigration system — no matter which party is running the show. It’s always the same story. After all the huffing and puffing, any workable solution needs to have two components: employer sanctions with teeth and a tamper-proof identification card for all U.S. workers to tell employers who is eligible to work. Republicans won’t allow the first; Democrats won’t allow the second. Game over.

But, if it were so inclined, here’s what Congress should do:

1) By way of enforcement — stiffen penalties against employers with a “three strikes” law (first offense, a warning; second, $10,000 fine; third, 10 days in jail); revise the 1996 Immigration Reform and Control Act by removing the word “knowingly,” as in employers only face punishment if they knowingly hire an illegal immigrant; create an identification card; instead of adding more border patrol agents (the agency can’t meet hiring goals as it is), give the agents already on the line better tools, including tunnel detection equipment; extend the deployment of the National Guard on the border, now set to expire on July 15; continue workplace raids but, for heaven’s sake, arrest an employer every once in a while; and speed up deportations.

2) By way of legalizing the undocumented — make it contingent on meeting enforcement goals, or “triggers”; establish a cutoff so that only those who can prove that they’ve been in the country for five years or more are eligible to apply for legal status and deport more recent arrivals; require applicants to learn English, pay a $5,000 fine, undergo criminal background checks, return to their home country to be processed, and take their place in the back of the line behind all those who are trying to enter the country legally; and, for those who are eventually given legal status, institute a lifetime ban on receiving welfare, Medicaid or food stamps but allow them to collect what they’ve contributed to Social Security.

3) By way of reforming the system for those who immigrate legally — increase the allotment of green cards and work visas, including H1B visas for highly skilled workers; triple the number of legal immigrants currently admitted from 1 million to 3 million, or 1 percent of the total U.S. population; abandon the current system of using family reunification as the main criteria for admitting new immigrants but don’t adopt the silly and offensive idea of a point system that rewards education and skills; instead, let the market drive the process by making labor demands the major criteria so (how’s this for radical?) we always have jobs for those who come here instead of admitting engineers and doctors if what we really need are teachers and nurses.

This isn’t brain surgery. But some of this will take courage and common sense. The bad news is, those can be scarce commodities in Washington.