End Times and Current Events

General Category => North America => Topic started by: Psalm 51:17 on October 10, 2011, 08:53:29 am

Title: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 10, 2011, 08:53:29 am
Dream Act passes in California



On Sunday, Gov. Jerry Brown of California passed the state's Dream Act into law, allowing for undocumented students to receive public funding to attend college.

Read more

Title: Ariz schools' ethnic studies program ruled illegal
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 28, 2011, 08:45:49 am


PHOENIX (AP) — An administrative law judge ruled Tuesday that a Tucson school district's ethnic studies program violates state law, agreeing with the findings of Arizona's public schools chief.

Judge Lewis Kowal's ruling marked a defeat for the Tucson Unified School District, which appealed the findings issued in June by Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal.

Kowal's ruling, first reported by The Arizona Daily Star, said the district's Mexican-American Studies program violated state law by having one or more classes designed primarily for one ethnic group, promoting racial resentment and advocating ethnic solidarity instead of treating students as individuals.

The judge, who found grounds to withhold 10 percent of the district's monthly state aid until it comes into compliance, said the law permits the objective instruction about the oppression of people that may result in racial resentment or ethnic solidarity.

read more

Title: Re: Ariz schools' ethnic studies program ruled illegal
Post by: Mark on December 28, 2011, 12:01:15 pm
The judge, who found grounds to withhold 10 percent of the district's monthly state aid until it comes into compliance

Is it me or does it just seem that the Judicial branch every where has way to much power?

Title: Re: Ariz schools' ethnic studies program ruled illegal
Post by: Kilika on December 28, 2011, 12:59:35 pm
It is a world of law afterall. And us being so focused on the law versus the Spirit, it may seem even more legalistic. But the judge isn't ruling out of line or anything. Normal stuff. He has that authority because it involves a state branch that's relates to schools, which are run by the state and county, at least the public ones.

Do they have too much power? In some cases I think so. Or maybe better put that there isn't enough oversight on their rullings and how the run their courtrooms.

I'm kind of shocked he ruled that way though. That's the ruling it should be, because that program they had down there is a total sham, designed especially for Latino kids only, to educate the incoming "immigrants" and relatives of residents and illegals already here.

The Latino community has a "good 'ole boy" network set up down south, and here, and they actively use it politically all the time. Just ask Joe Arpio, and the border property owners!

Title: Report: Obama Admin Will Circumvent Congress With New Illegal Immigration Rule
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 12, 2012, 05:50:26 pm


Report: Obama Admin Will Circumvent Congress With New Illegal Immigration Rule

WASHINGTON (The Blaze/AP) — Are you ready for even more Congressional criticism of the Obama administration? The White House is crafting plans surrounding a rule change to help reduce the time illegal immigrant spouses and children are separated from citizen relatives while they try to win legal status in the United States, a senior administration official said Thursday.

Currently, illegal immigrants must leave the country before they can ask the government to waive a three- to 10-year ban on legally coming back to the U.S. The length of the ban depends on how long they have lived in the U.S. without permission. The L.A. Times has more:

…Obama is attempting unilateral steps meant to bring about what he sees as an immigration system that is fairer and less destructive to families.
The proposal is likely to win plaudits from a crucial constituency in the 2012 election: Latinos.
Obama won two-thirds of the Latino vote in 2008, and he needs this fast-growing constituency energized and excited about his reelection.

read more


Title: Supreme Court upholds key part of Arizona immigration law, strikes down rest
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 25, 2012, 11:54:21 am
Read about the ruling today - so basically the AZ law enforcement can ask about immigration status during stops, but en yet the REST of this bill was struck down by the USSC(ie-making it a state crime for illegals to find work). And while the liberals Sotomayer and Breyer upheld the main provision, the conversatives Scalia, Thomas, and Alito DIDN'T?

Does any of this MAKE SENSE? Again, they can pull people over during stops to check for immigration statuses, but these same illegals can still find work in the state? And it's the LIBERALS that FAVORED this bill? And Jan Brewer called this a "Victory" ???



The Supreme Court upheld a key part of Arizona's tough anti-illegal immigration law in a 5-3 decision on Monday that allows police officers to ask about immigration status during stops. That part of the law, which never went into effect because of court challenges, will now immediately be enforced in Arizona. Other parts of the law, including a provision that made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work, will remain blocked, as the justices affirmed the federal government's supremacy over immigration policy.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's swing vote, wrote the opinion, and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. Conservative Justices Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas partially dissented, saying the entire law or most of the law should have been upheld.
In the opinion, Justice Kennedy wrote that the federal government's "power to determine immigration policy is well settled." But he also showed concern for what he described as Arizona's outsize burden in dealing with illegal immigration, seeming to sympathize with their decision to butt in on immigration enforcement. "Arizona bears many of the consequences of unlawful im­migration," he wrote. "Hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens are apprehended in Arizona each year." But, ultimately, the justices found that Arizona cannot mete out their own state punishments for federal immigration crimes.
"Arizona may have under­standable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law," Kennedy writes in the opinion's conclusion.
The police immigration checks are allowed, however, because state police would simply flag federal authorities if they find an illegal immigrant. Kennedy did not rule out that these checks may be implemented in an illegal way, which means more lawsuits may be forthcoming.

Nevertheless, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer cast the decision as a "victory" for the state. "I am confident our officers are prepared to carry out this law responsibly and lawfully. Nothing less is acceptable," she said in a statement, adding that officers have been trained not to racially profile in their stops.
Erika Andiola, an activist and undocumented immigrant in Arizona, said that the Latino community will not be happy with the decision, as the immigration checks portion of the law was most unpopular with them. "It's another message to the Latino community that if you look brown you're a perfect target for the police," she said.
The Obama administration sued to block Arizona's law, called SB1070, shortly after it passed two years ago, saying it interfered with federal authority over immigration. The law made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work or fail to carry proper immigration papers. It also requires police officers to check immigration status and make warrantless arrests for immigration crimes in some cases. A federal judge prevented those aspects of the law from going into effect, but the law became a lightning rod around the country, sparking boycotts and counter-boycotts and opening up a debate about the nation's illegal immigrant population.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on June 25, 2012, 01:17:46 pm
Again, they can pull people over during stops to check for immigration statuses, but these same illegals can still find work in the state?

Yep, pretty much! Buy cars, go to school, get state medical coverage, you know all the citizen stuff.  ::)

But that issue shouldn't have been part of the bill in the first place. That's another legal argument to handle seperately I think.

Cops are not allowed to stop just to check immigration status. They never have been, nor were they going to by this bill. That's the argument the latino lobby here in the Phoenix area has been trying to claim, and it's not true. They have been trying to claim that cops are just running around and pulling over latinos, which is simply not true.

They are now allowed to check citizenship status during a detention for criminal investigation or arrest, as it should be if they are going to have territorial/citizenship rules. Otherwise, what's the point of borders?

Erika Andiola, an activist and undocumented immigrant in Arizona, said that the Latino community will not be happy with the decision, as the immigration checks portion of the law was most unpopular with them. "It's another message to the Latino community that if you look brown you're a perfect target for the police," she said.

We get these type inflammatory comments all the time around here. Now let's see illegals like this person run her mouth at a traffic stop. And I bet they won't be having any illegals at protests at the state capital any more like they have had openly in the past.

Title: Sean Hannity, John Boehner, GOP changing tune on immigration reform?
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 09, 2012, 09:40:50 am


Well, that was fast.

Just two days after President Barack Obama sailed to re-election over Mitt Romney, boosted by more than 70 percent of the Latino vote, some Republicans are striking a new tone on illegal immigration.

Conservative Fox News and radio host Sean Hannity said Thursday that his views on immigration have "evolved." Hannity continued:

We've gotta get rid of the immigration issue altogether. It's simple for me to fix it. I think you control the border first, you create a pathway for those people that are here, you don't say you gotta go home. And that is a position that I've evolved on. Because you know what—it just—it's gotta be resolved. The majority of people here—if some people have criminal records you can send 'em home—but if people are here, law-abiding, participating, four years, their kids are born here ... first secure the border, pathway to citizenship ... then it's done. But you can't let the problem continue. It's gotta stop

Meanwhile, in an interview with ABC News' Diane Sawyer, House Speaker John Boehner said he is "confident" the two parties can agree to a deal on immigration.

"This issue has been around far too long," Boehner said. "A comprehensive approach is long overdue, and I'm confident that the president, myself, others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all."

Just two years ago, Boehner said it was worth considering amending the U.S. Constitution to end birthright citizenship, because he said it might discourage people from illegally crossing the border
. ::)

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who supports immigration reform, said on CBS on Friday that Republicans had sent "mixed messages" about immigration. "On the immigration issue, which turned out to be very important, and some issues about women, too, some mixed messages were sent," she said.

The party has been searching for answers about why Mitt Romney lost what seemed like a very winnable election. Many within the party have pointed to the GOP's demographics problem: Romney lost every group except for white voters, which is a shrinking portion of the electorate. Latinos this year made up 10 percent of all voters, according to the national exit poll, a share that will only grow each election. Like other groups, Latino voters care most about jobs and the economy, but 35 percent of them listed immigration reform as their top issue in a poll conducted by Latino Decisions.

Latino voter and advocacy groups have said they expect both Obama and congressional Republicans to work together to pass immigration reform in 2013.

Eliseo Medina, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union, told reporters that Latino voters had sent a message to Obama. "We expect leadership on comprehensive immigration reform in 2013," he said. "To both sides we say: 'No more excuses.'"

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on November 09, 2012, 10:00:13 am
im quite sure the whole conservative movement will move closer to the left, as that is where the country is. The America of old is dead and gone and it will not resurface. America is not part of the end times world, and you are starting to see why.

Next they will start to support gay marriage and baby sacrifices... Come Lord Jesus come...

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 09, 2012, 10:10:04 am
im quite sure the whole conservative movement will move closer to the left, as that is where the country is. The America of old is dead and gone and it will not resurface. America is not part of the end times world, and you are starting to see why.

Next they will start to support gay marriage and baby sacrifices... Come Lord Jesus come...

The election coverage of "conservative" FOX News was also telling...they were the FIRST network to call the race for Tammy Baldwin, the first openly gay Senator elected.

I have no idea why especially Christians find FOX a credible news source.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on November 09, 2012, 12:05:02 pm
It's simple for me to fix it. I think you control the border first, you create a pathway for those people that are here, you don't say you gotta go home.

Uh, Sean, they have to go back. What they are doing is tresspassing! Every single illegal immigrant is a law breaker. Is it not US policy that criminals aren't allowed in the country, and if they violate the law, they get deported? Every law enforcement agency in this country will tresspass you and remove you if you don't have the right to be there. So why are these intruders on US soil still here?

You don't tell a burgler that it's okay for him to stay once he's in your house!  ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 18, 2012, 04:06:00 pm

Jindal: Liking people is key to expanding GOP tent

Former Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez has a more nuts-and-bolts approach to bringing in some of the largest and fastest growing groups of Americans: He's forming a super PAC to support Republican candidates who back comprehensive immigration reform, including legalizing the status of an estimated 11 million immigrants in the U.S. without authorization.

"We are the party of prosperity, of growth, of tolerance," Gutierrez said in remarks taped Friday for CNN's "State of the Union." ''These immigrants who come across, and what they do wrong is risk their lives, and they come here and they work because they want to be part of the American dream. That is what the GOP is."

Gutierrez said he is working with Charlie Spies, who created the largest super PAC supporting Mitt Romney, Restore Our Future, on a super PAC to back candidates that support "a path, a process for legalization of workers who are here undocumented."

"First they have to be legalized," Gutierrez said. "Then you have to find a way to get into a line for the green card. ... There will be requirements. And we'll have to negotiate some sort of requirements."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 18, 2012, 04:15:45 pm
Rev 17:16  And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the ****, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
Rev 17:17  For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.
Rev 17:18  And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 25, 2012, 08:47:03 pm

House to consider limited GOP immigration bill


WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans still smarting from their poor showing among Hispanics in the presidential election are planning a vote next week on immigration legislation that would both expand visas for foreign science and technology students and make it easier for those with green cards to bring their immediate families to the U.S.

Republican leaders made it clear after the election that the party was ready to get serious about overhauling the nation's dysfunctional immigration system, a top priority for Hispanic communities. Taking up what is called the STEM Jobs Act during the lame-duck session could be seen as a first step in that direction.

The House voted on a STEM bill — standing for science, technology, engineering and mathematics — in September, but under a procedure requiring a two-thirds majority. It was defeated, with more than 80 percent of Democrats voting against it, because it offset the increase in visas for high-tech graduates by eliminating another visa program that is available for less-educated foreigners, many from Africa.

Republicans are changing the formula this time by adding a provision long sought by some immigration advocates — expanding a program that allows the spouses and minor children of people with permanent residence, or green card, to wait in the United States for their own green cards to be granted.

There are some 80,000 of these family-based green cards allocated every year, but there are currently about 322,000 husbands, wives and children waiting in this category and on average people must wait more than two years to be reunited with their families. In that past that wait could be as long as six years.

The House proposal would allow family members to come to the U.S. one year after they apply for their green cards, but they wouldn't be able to work until they actually got the card. It applies to the families of green card holders who marry after getting their residency permits.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 05, 2012, 10:58:13 am

Bush wades into immigration debate, says immigrants ‘invigorate our soul’



Former President George W. Bush made a rare foray into public policy on Tuesday when he urged the nation's leaders to take a "benevolent" approach to reforming the nation's immigration system.

Bush, who has maintained a low political profile since departing office four years ago, spoke briefly about immigration at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, a talk that was part of a daylong conference on immigration and the economy.

"America can become a lawful society and a welcoming society at the same time," Bush said, according to the Texas Tribune. "As our nation debates the proper course of action on immigration reform, I hope we do so with a benevolent spirit and keep in mind the contributions of immigrants.

"Not only do immigrants help build the economy, they invigorate our soul," Bush added.

Bush has said one of his major regrets about his presidency is that he did not manage to pass immigration reform. In 2007, he hammered out a deal that would have put millions of illegal immigrants in the country on a lengthy path to citizenship. The measure died in the Senate when Bush couldn't persuade enough members of his own party to vote to consider it.

Immigration reform is again a hot topic in Congress after President Barack Obama won more than 70 percent of the Hispanic vote in November. Some leading Republicans have said the party must address reform in order to stay competitive with the growing demographic. Last week, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, introduced a bill that would give young illegal immigrants visas if they join the military. So far, it's faced criticism from immigrant groups, who say they won't accept reform bills that don't provide full citizenship.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2012, 12:56:24 pm


By Cynthia Tucker | Cynthia Tucker – 13 hrs ago.


But since Obama won re-election with a hefty assist from Latino voters, several GOP leaders have noted that the party's hostility to immigration reform is a burden. And their constituents may be ready to abandon that stance, too.
A November exit poll showed that 65 percent of voters favor giving illegal immigrants a shot at legal status; while 79 percent of Democrats support the idea, 51 percent of Republicans do as well.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 15, 2012, 09:47:41 pm

Obama Quietly Grants Amnesty To More Than 100K Illegal Immigrants…
December 14, 2012

The administration has issued stays of deportation for 102,965 illegal immigrants under President Obama’s new non-deportation policy, officials announced Friday.

Another 157,151 applications are still under review under the policy, officially known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which grants a tentative legal status to illegal immigrants who qualify — though it does not grant them a path to citizenship.

Read more via The Washington Times...

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 08, 2013, 02:38:54 pm

Why Evangelicals are the new partners for immigration reform

Advocates for immigration reform should seek support from an unlikely source – evangelical Christians. Their political agenda is broadening as Hispanic congregants – documented and undocumented – increase and pastors speak of immigration as a religious concern

Most Congress-watchers have low expectations for America's legislative branch over the next two years, and with good reason. The 2012 election again showed a divided electorate, and political stalemate and partisan rancor abound in Washington.
Despite this difficult climate, political support is rapidly building in favor of legislation that has confounded presidents and Congresses since 1986: comprehensive immigration reform. Advocates trying to build a winning coalition for reform should seek support from an unlikely source – evangelical Christians.
Evangelicals have been a key Republican voting bloc for several decades. According to exit polls, about 1 in 4 voters in November's election was a white Evangelical, and they voted overwhelmingly Republican.
Although most Americans associate theologically conservative Christians with cultural issues such as abortion and gay marriage, the evangelical political agenda is broadening. Immigration reform is one issue that has steadily gained momentum.
What might account for this change?
For one, pastors and religious leaders are talking more about the issue as a religious concern. Many scriptural passages relate to immigration – including the famous 40-year wilderness journey of the children of Israel to the Promised Land. But most evangelical churches and organizations have only recently begun to underscore the biblical connection to immigration.
New pro-immigrant movements are seeking to educate and activate evangelical clergy and voters by emphasizing themes of love, justice, and welcome for the stranger that resound throughout the Hebrew Bible and New Testament.
Another factor that explains increasing awareness of immigrant issues is simple math.
Much like the nation, evangelicalism is becoming more ethnically diverse. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, 13 percent of Hispanic Americans describe themselves as evangelical Protestants. Immigrant churches are growing rapidly, and many denominations have created new structures and leadership posts designed to serve Hispanic congregants. Immigration – including illegal immigration – touches the lives of many in the pews, and church leaders want to help.
Also, greater numbers of Evangelicals are worshiping alongside documented and undocumented immigrants, getting to know them and listening to their stories.
Perhaps the strongest sign of Evangelicals' advocacy is the emergence of new organizations and coalitions focusing on the issue.
In October 2011, Cedarville University, a conservative Christian college in Ohio, hosted the "G92" immigration conference. Taking its name from the Hebrew word for immigrant, ger, which appears 92 times in the Hebrew Bible, the conference has spawned a new movement designed to mobilize Christian college students to advocate on behalf of all immigrants. Leaders are planning half a dozen events across the country in 2013.
The Evangelical Immigration Table, founded in June 2012 by nine heads of evangelical organizations, is networking with evangelical leaders from across the spectrum to support immigration reform. Founders include the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, a large umbrella group representing many denominations and associations; Richard Land, an outspoken conservative and Southern Baptist leader; and Jim Wallis, bestselling author and leader of the left-leaning social justice organization Sojourners.

**FYI, Richard Land is a CFR member!
In June 2012, the Table released a wide-reaching, seven-point plan for immigration reform that included a call for secure borders, protection of family unity, and a path toward legal status or citizenship. It also left out many of the thorniest details, such as what steps a pathway to legal status would include and who would be eligible.
Even so, as religion writer Lisa Miller said in The Washington Post, the plan is "a document of exceptional accord among groups that rarely find themselves on the same side of anything."
The week after the presidential election, the Table sent letters to President Obama and congressional leaders asking for a meeting within the first 92 days of the president's new term to move forward reform legislation. Change is clearly afoot.
Of course, evangelical voters are not monolithic, and their views on illegal immigration vary widely. Data from a 2010 Pew Research Center study suggest that grass-roots Evangelicals are divided, but a majority (54 percent) now favor policies that include some sort of pathway to citizenship.
This majority is likely to grow. Researcher Ruth Melkonian-Hoover's analysis of polling data suggests that white Evangelicals who worship alongside immigrants (she did not distinguish between legal and illegal) are less likely to view immigrants as a threat. When pastors preach positive messages about immigrants, congregants' opinions shift, and support for a path to legalization rises sharply.
Since the November election – heavily influenced by Hispanic voters – legislators have more political space to advocate for immigration reform. Some Republicans are joining the effort out of desire to reach Hispanics. Others who previously felt strong political pressure to avoid the issue now feel more freedom to advocate for reform.
Evangelical elites from across the ideological spectrum are beginning to come together to advocate for immigration reform. Millions of Americans in the pews may soon follow their lead, and, if so, wise legislators will pay attention.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 11, 2013, 08:57:34 pm


Carlos Gutierrez: GOP Needs Immigration Reform to Survive

Carlos Gutierrez, who served as Commerce secretary in President George W. Bush’s second term, was one of that administration’s leading proponents of immigration reform. Born in Cuba, he was a top adviser to Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney on Hispanic outreach. Before his tenure at Commerce, Gutierrez was chairman of the board and chief executive officer at Kellogg. Edited excerpts of his interview with National Journal follow.
interview excerpts in link above

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 14, 2013, 04:15:24 pm

54,000 Mexicans sign petition for US gun control
Associated Press – 1 hr 33 mins ago

MEXICO CITY (AP) — More than 54,000 Mexicans have signed a petition calling on the United States to take further steps to combat weapons trafficking.
Mexico says the majority of guns used by the country's violent drug cartels are smuggled over the border from the United States.
Mexico's best-known anti-violence activist and a prominent intellectual presented the petition at the U.S. embassy Monday.
Activist Javier Sicilia said "The United States is partly responsible for our humanitarian tragedy."
About 70,000 people have died in Mexico in drug violence since 2006, according to the written copy of a speech presented by Mexico's interior secretary in December.
Before the activists presented their petition, President Barack Obama said Monday he would present a new U.S. gun control plan within days.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 14, 2013, 05:24:34 pm

All aboard? Paul Ryan supports Marco Rubio’s immigration reform outline


Former vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan says he supports "the principles" of an immigration reform proposal from Republican Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a sign that the party may be coalescing around its own plan to overhaul the nation's laws.
"Senator Rubio is exactly right on the need to fix our broken immigration system," the congressman wrote on his Facebook page on Monday, with a link to a Wall Street Journal article that includes Rubio's key immigration goals. "I support the principles he’s outlined: modernization of our immigration laws; stronger security to curb illegal immigration; and respect for the rule of law in addressing the complex challenge of the undocumented population. Our future depends on an immigration system that works."
Republicans and Democrats are both in the early stages of building coalitions for support for what could be a major immigration bill later this year.
Rubio and Ryan, considered among Republicans to be possible future presidential candidates, appeared together at a dinner in Washington, D.C., in December, where they both outlined their visions for the party's future.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 14, 2013, 05:49:39 pm

Evangelical coalition seeks immigration overhaul


NEW YORK (AP) — Prominent evangelical leaders announced a new effort Monday to persuade conservative Christians and lawmakers they should support overhauling U.S. immigration laws.
Called "I Was A Stranger," the campaign asks churches to spend 40 days studying Scripture related to immigration, centered on the Matthew 25 exhortation to clothe and feed the stranger. Organizers hope to create a groundswell of support for changes that balance national security with keeping immigrant families together.
The coalition includes the National Association of Evangelicals, which represents about 40 denominations; the public policy arm of the 16 million-member Southern Baptist Convention; Esperanza, the Latino evangelical economic development group; pastor Bill Hybels of the influential Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois; and writer Max Lucado. Sojourners, the liberal-leaning evangelical advocacy group, is also participating.
"In the Anglo churches, there are so many more Hispanic people that we know and love," said the Rev. Joel Hunter, senior pastor of Northland church, which serves about 15,000 congregants in the Orlando, Fla., area. "There's a readiness, even in the Anglo churches, to address this."
Many evangelical leaders have actively supported reform in recent years as the number of immigrants has increased in their churches. However, rank-and-file congregants have been slower to take up the issue beyond demands for stronger national borders. In surveys, white evangelicals have generally ranked border security as their top priority. However, about four in ten have told pollsters they would favor an approach giving equal weight to national security and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
The evangelical push on the issue comes amid renewed interest in immigration reform from Congress and the White House. In the immediate aftermath of the November election, congressional Republicans suggested the time was right for reform talks. President Barack Obama, who won a record share of Hispanic voters, renewed his pledge to prioritize immigration reform.
Evangelical leaders said they are not backing any specific proposal right now.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2013, 03:25:24 pm


White House: Rubio immigration moves may ‘bode well’ for action

The White House praised Republican Sen. Marco Rubio’s proposals for an overhaul of immigration policy and said they “bode well” for bipartisan action early in President Barack Obama’s second term.
Obama “expects to move very quickly on immigration after the inauguration,” press secretary Jay Carney told reporters. The president is expected to lay out some principles on the issue in his Feb. 12 State of the Union speech.
“The reports about Sen. Rubio’s ideas bode well for a productive bipartisan debate,” Carney said. “We hope that it signals a change in the Republican approach to this issue, because if we are going to get this done it’s going to take more than just a handful of Republicans working across the aisle.”
The press secretary had been asked about proposals from Rubio—whose name sits near the top of the 2016 field of Republican presidential contenders—to undertake sweeping changes in the way America handles immigration. According to the Wall Street Journal, Rubio backs tightening border controls but making it easier for high-skilled workers and seasonal farm workers to enter the country, and favors giving the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. a path to getting a work permit and, eventually, citizenship.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 26, 2013, 10:02:27 am
While gun control continues to appear to be gridlocked(despite all the recent events), seems like immigration reform is on the contrary(slowly making headways even among the GOP)...


White House, senators launching immigration push


WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama will launch a campaign next week aimed at overhauling the nation's flawed immigration system and creating legal status for millions, as a bipartisan Senate group nears agreement on achieving the same goals.

The proposals from Obama and lawmakers will mark the start of what is expected to be a contentious and emotional process with deep political implications. Latino voters overwhelmingly backed Obama in the 2012 election, leaving Republicans grappling for a way to regain their standing with an increasingly powerful pool of voters.

The president will press his case for immigration changes during a trip to Las Vegas Tuesday. The Senate working group is also aiming to outline its proposals next week, according to a Senate aide.

Administration officials say Obama's second-term immigration push will be a continuation of the principles he outlined during his first four years in office but failed to act on. He is expected to revive his little-noticed 2011 immigration "blueprint," which calls for a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants that includes paying fines and back taxes; increased border security; mandatory penalties for businesses that employ unauthorized immigrants; and improvements to the legal immigration system, including giving green cards to high-skilled workers and lifting caps on legal immigration for the immediate family members of U.S. citizens.

"What has been absent in the time since he put those principles forward has been a willingness by Republicans, generally speaking, to move forward with comprehensive immigration reform," White House press secretary Jay Carney said. "What he hopes is that that dynamic has changed."
The political dynamic does appear to have shifted following the November election. Despite making little progress on immigration in his first term, Obama won more than 70 percent of the Latino vote, in part because of the conservative positions on immigration that Republican nominee Mitt Romney staked out during the GOP primary. Latino voters accounted for 10 percent of the electorate in November.

The president met privately Friday morning with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to discuss his next steps on immigration. Among those in the meeting was Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Calif., who said Obama told lawmakers "immigration reform is his number one legislative priority."
That could bump back the president's efforts to seek legislation enacting stricter gun laws, another issue he has vowed to make a top second term priority.

The Senate immigration group is also pressing for quick action, aiming to draft a bill by March and pass legislation in their chamber by August, said the aide, who requested anonymity in order to discuss private deliberations. The Republican-controlled House would also need to pass the legislation before it went to the White House for the president's signature.

Senate lawmakers working on the immigration effort include Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois and Robert Menendez of New Jersey; and Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Marco Rubio of Florida, according to Senate aides. Democrat Michael Bennet of Colorado, and Republicans Jeff Flake of Arizona and Mike Lee of Utah have also been involved. It's not clear whether all those involved will sign on to the principles the group hopes to roll out next week.

Those principles are expected to include a process toward legalizing the status of unauthorized immigrants already in the country; border security; verification measures for employers hiring workers and ways for more temporary workers to be admitted into the country.

It's unclear whether the group will back the pathway to full citizenship that the president is seeking. Schumer and Graham have previously supported requiring illegal immigrants to admit they broke the law, perform community service, pay fines and back taxes, pass background checks and learn English before going to the back of the line of immigrants already in the system in order to legalize their immigration status.

Several of the senators negotiating the immigration principles are veterans of the failed comprehensive immigration reform effort under then-President George W. Bush. That process collapsed in 2007 when it came up well-short of the needed votes in the Senate, a bitter outcome for Bush and the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Democrats' leader on the legislation.

Some Republicans still lament that result as a missed opportunity for the party that could have set the GOP on a different path to reach more Latino voters.

Rubio is a relative newcomer to Senate negotiations on the issue, but he's seen as a rising star in his party and a potential 2016 presidential candidate. As a charismatic young Hispanic leader his proposals on immigration have attracted wide notice in recent weeks. And as a conservative favorite, unlike McCain or Graham, his stamp of approval could be critical to drawing in other conservative lawmakers.

A Republican aide said that Rubio has made clear in his interactions with the Senate group that he couldn't sign on to proposals that deviated from the principles he himself has been laying out in recent media interviews, including border security first, a guest-worker program, more visas for high-tech workers and enforcement in the workplace.

As for the illegal immigrants already in the country, Rubio would have them pay a fine and back taxes, show they have not committed crimes, prove they've been in the country for some time and speak some English and apply for permanent residency. Ultimately citizenship too could be in reach but only after a process that doesn't nudge aside immigrants already in line, and Rubio hasn't provided details on how long it all might take.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on January 27, 2013, 01:50:48 am
It's unclear whether the group will back the pathway to full citizenship that the president is seeking. Schumer and Graham have previously supported requiring illegal immigrants to admit they broke the law, perform community service, pay fines and back taxes, pass background checks and learn English before going to the back of the line of immigrants already in the system in order to legalize their immigration status.

And THAT is what Obama really wants, to flood the US with a bunch of newly legal residents that would be "forever grateful" for his giving them citizenship. Personally, I see nothing wrong with the Schumer/Graham plan. I'm not sure about "back taxes" as I don't see how they could do that. Sure, admit they broke US law by coming here illegally, pay a fine for that crime, obviously a criminal check, and yes, they got to learn at least basic English instead of depending on translators as it is now. There is even a law on the books that medical facilities are suppose to provide a translator, which that needs to change. They need to bring their own translator till they can speak English.

I also think there should be a delay in them getting any government benefits because as it is, the illegal immigrant community is over-running the health care system and hardly any of them pay their bills. Maybe even require they pay into a fund that pays back money for all that free assistance they got as illegals that they weren't entitled to.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 27, 2013, 01:51:12 pm

Senate Immigration Proposal to Include Pathway to Citizenship


Two senators at the center of negotiations over comprehensive immigration reform, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) said on Sunday that a pathway to citizenship is an essential component of a comprehensive reform bill.

"That has to be also part of it," McCain told ABC News' Martha Raddatz on "This Week" when asked whether a pathway to citizenship would be a component of reform. "There's a new appreciation on both sides of the aisle including, maybe more importantly on the Republican side of the aisle, that we have to enact comprehensive immigration reform."

McCain said that a small group of Senators will release the principles of a comprehensive, not "piecemeal," reform bill this week.
"I'm very pleased with the progress," McCain said. "It's not that much different from what we tried to do in 2007."

Menendez, who met with President Obama on Friday along with other members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus leadership, said that the president expressed his full commitment to reform.

"The president made it very clear in that discussion that this was a top legislative priority for him in this session of the Congress and that he expects to work with all of us in an effort to achieve that goal and he's fully committed to it."

He added that a pathway to "earned legalization" is an "essential element" of an immigration reform bill.

"First, Americans support it in poll after poll. Secondly, Latino voters expect it. Thirdly Democrats want it. And fourth Republicans need it," Menendez said.

McCain added that he believes Obama's use of the presidential podium on behalf of immigration reform at an event in Las Vegas planned for Tuesday will aid efforts to pass a bill.

"I think it helps," McCain said. "I think its important that we all work together on this."

"Believe it or not, I see a glimmer of bipartisanship out there," he added.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 27, 2013, 08:39:37 pm
Illinois becomes fourth state to allow driver's licenses for undocumented



Reuters) - Illinois Governor Pat Quinn on Sunday signed a law allowing undocumented immigrants to apply for driver's licenses, in a move he said would improve road safety.

Undocumented immigrants can also obtain driver's licenses in New Mexico and Washington state, while Utah allows driving permits.

"Despite the stalemate on immigration reform in Washington D.C., Illinois is moving forward," Quinn said in a statement. "This common sense law will help everybody, regardless of their background, learn the rules of the road, pass a driving test and get insurance."

In Washington, Democratic and Republican senators are preparing a bipartisan plan to overhaul U.S. immigration laws. On Sunday, Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona said on ABC's "This Week" program that such a plan could be introduced as early as this week.

Illinois' law will require undocumented immigrant drivers to take a driving test and carry car insurance in a state where an estimated 250,000 illegal immigrants are believed to be driving, supporters of the law said.

Unlicensed, uninsured drivers are believed to be involved in about 80,000 accidents in Illinois each year, resulting in $660 million in damage, according to the Illinois Highway Safety Coalition.

The driver's license legislation met strong opposition from state Republicans when it was first introduced in Illinois. But their position softened since President Barack Obama won re-election with large support from Hispanic voters and Illinois Democrats made big gains in the state legislature.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on January 28, 2013, 02:59:19 am
These people are here ILLEGALLY ( as in they are intruders, trespassers, lawbreakers), yet these politicians want to give them what citizens have earned? This is just insane. The only explanation for this is these certain politicians don't care one bit about the law. It's all about what THEY want according to their personal political agenda.

This is one of the craziest things in our country right now. Our law says a person must enter the country a certain way, yet the government keeps looking the other way as if no law has been broken, and it seems all for the sake of votes and the demands of the UN that countries don't discriminate.

And what really tells me the federal government is the problem, is local sheriffs like Joe Arpaio keep arresting illegals, and federal I.C.E. keeps turning them lose, or they outright refuse to come get them and deport them.

When the federal government isn't doing what the law says, and refuses to listen to the states or it's citizens, you have tyranny, and by declaration, that means citizens have the right and duty to put off the current, and form a new government, which simply means clean house of the tyrants and criminals.

I hate to say it, and never really thought that I would, but America has been taken over, and basically invaded by the enemy. The only thing missing in this invasion is the gunfire. Which the only real way to take over a country without firing a shot is to get the population to allow it via their treasonous government.

I don't know how all this will play out in the grand scheme, but unless Americans actually stand up and try to take their country back, this country is done for.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 28, 2013, 08:18:26 am
Wow...that was somewhat quick... ::)


Senators reach agreement on immigration reform
By ERICA WERNER | Associated Press – 35 mins ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — A bipartisan group of leading senators has reached agreement on the principles for a sweeping overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, including a path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in this country.

The deal, to be announced at a news conference Monday, also covers border security, non-citizen or "guest" workers and employer verification of immigration status.

Although t**** details remain to be negotiated and success is far from certain — the legislation could run into trouble in the Republican-controlled House — the development heralds the start of what could be the most significant effort in years toward overhauling the nation's inefficient patchwork of immigration laws.

President Barack Obama also is committed to enacting comprehensive immigration legislation and will travel to Nevada on Tuesday to lay out his vision, which is expected to overlap in important ways with the Senate effort.

The eight senators expected to endorse the new principles Monday are Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, **** Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado; and Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and Jeff Flake of Arizona.

Several of these lawmakers have worked for years on the issue. McCain collaborated with the late Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on comprehensive immigration legislation pushed by then-President George W. Bush in 2007, only to see it collapse in the Senate when it couldn't get enough GOP support.

Now, with some Republicans chastened by the November elections which demonstrated the importance of Latino voters and their increasing commitment to Democrats, some in the GOP say this time will be different.

"What's changed, honestly, is that there is a new, I think, appreciation on both sides of the aisle — including maybe more importantly on the Republican side of the aisle — that we have to enact a comprehensive immigration reform bill," McCain said Sunday on ABC's "This Week."
"I think the time is right," McCain said.

The group claims a notable newcomer in Rubio, a potential 2016 presidential candidate whose conservative bona fides may help smooth the way for support among conservatives wary of anything that smacks of amnesty. In an opinion piece published Sunday in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Rubio wrote that the existing system amounts to "de facto amnesty," and he called for "commonsense reform."

According to documents obtained by The Associated Press, the senators will call for accomplishing four goals:

—Creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already here, contingent upon securing the border and better tracking of people here on visas.

—Reforming the legal immigration system, including awarding green cards to immigrants who obtain advanced degrees in science, math, technology or engineering from an American university.

—Creating an effective employment verification system to ensure that employers do not hire illegal immigrants.

—Allowing more low-skill workers into the country and allowing employers to hire immigrants if they can demonstrate they couldn't recruit a U.S. citizen; and establishing an agricultural worker program.

The principles being released Monday are outlined on just over four pages, leaving plenty of details left to fill in. What the senators do call for is similar to Obama's goals and some past efforts by Democrats and Republicans, since there's wide agreement in identifying problems with the current immigration system. The most difficult disagreement is likely to arise over how to accomplish the path to citizenship.

In order to satisfy the concerns of Rubio and other Republicans, the senators are calling for the completion of steps on border security and oversight of those here on visas before taking major steps forward on the path to citizenship.

Even then, those here illegally would have to qualify for a "probationary legal status" that would allow them to live and work here — but not qualify for federal benefits — before being able to apply for permanent residency. Once they are allowed to apply they would do so behind everyone else already in line for a green card within the current immigration system.

That could be a highly cumbersome process, but how to make it more workable is being left to future negotiations. The senators envision a more streamlined process toward citizenship for immigrants brought here as children by their parents, and for agricultural workers.

The American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement that the framework agreed on by the senators could provide important protections for illegal immigrants who are exploited by employers and live in "constant fear" over their immigration status.

But the ACLU took issue with the proposal to require employers to use an electronic employment-verification system, calling it "a thinly disguised national ID requirement" that would undermine employees' privacy and lead to discrimination against those "who look or sound 'foreign.'"

Such legislation could also face long odds in the House, which is dominated by conservative Republicans and which has shown little interest in immigration reform.

The debate will play out at the start of Obama's second term, as he aims to spend the political capital afforded him by his re-election victory on an issue that has eluded past presidents and stymied him during his first term despite his promises to the Latino community to act.

"As the president has made clear for some time, immigration reform is an important priority and he is pleased that progress is being made with bipartisan support," a White House spokesman, Clark Stevens, said in a statement. "At the same time, he will not be satisfied until there is meaningful reform and he will continue to urge Congress to act until that is achieved."

For Republicans, the November elections were a stark schooling on the importance of Latino voters, who voted for Obama over Republican Mitt Romney 71 percent to 27 percent, helping ensure Obama's victory. That led some Republican leaders to conclude that supporting immigration reform with a path to citizenship has become a political imperative.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 28, 2013, 10:16:01 pm
These people are here ILLEGALLY ( as in they are intruders, trespassers, lawbreakers), yet these politicians want to give them what citizens have earned? This is just insane. The only explanation for this is these certain politicians don't care one bit about the law. It's all about what THEY want according to their personal political agenda.

This is one of the craziest things in our country right now. Our law says a person must enter the country a certain way, yet the government keeps looking the other way as if no law has been broken, and it seems all for the sake of votes and the demands of the UN that countries don't discriminate.

And what really tells me the federal government is the problem, is local sheriffs like Joe Arpaio keep arresting illegals, and federal I.C.E. keeps turning them lose, or they outright refuse to come get them and deport them.

When the federal government isn't doing what the law says, and refuses to listen to the states or it's citizens, you have tyranny, and by declaration, that means citizens have the right and duty to put off the current, and form a new government, which simply means clean house of the tyrants and criminals.

I hate to say it, and never really thought that I would, but America has been taken over, and basically invaded by the enemy. The only thing missing in this invasion is the gunfire. Which the only real way to take over a country without firing a shot is to get the population to allow it via their treasonous government.

I don't know how all this will play out in the grand scheme, but unless Americans actually stand up and try to take their country back, this country is done for.

Ultimately, Churchianity has promoted this agenda the most. The Southern Baptist Convention and Emergent Church leaders, in particular, have been pushing for immigration reform recently. Both SBC leader Richard Land and EC leader Bill Hybels went to Capitol Hill recently to lobby for just that. And to boot, there's CFR member Rick Warren that has pushed Catholicism to his 1000s of Purpose Driven member churches - no surprise here b/c Catholicism is the predominant "christian" denomination in Mexico, and the CFR has been pushing for a North American Union for quite some time now(which Land also is a member of). And of course Pope John Paul II endorsed immigration reform in the 90's.

All the broad paths lead to Rome...Judgment must begin at the house of the Lord...

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 28, 2013, 11:27:52 pm


Immigration reform: Will 'amnesty' produce more illegal immigration?
Supporters of immigration reform that includes of a path to citizenship say that the US is not as attractive a destination as it once was for illegal immigration.

Immigration reform is in the air. A bipartisan Senate group unveiled its proposals on Monday, and the president is scheduled to announce his own package on Tuesday. Both contain provisions for legalizing some 11 million undocumented immigrants now in the US.

But, just as there promises to be no easy consensus on a final deal, there is little agreement about how much the overall reforms will actually stem the flow of illegal immigration across America’s borders. Critics of the proposals say a path to citizenship invites more undocumented migrants, while supporters of the move to legalize many who have lived and worked in the US for years say it is not an open invitation to new illegal immigration.

Critics point to the lessons from the last time Congress tackled his issue, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), a 1986 law that legalized 3 million undocumented immigrants. Both sides acknowledge the law produced substantial fraud, leading to nearly triple the number of new residents created by the law.

"The message will go out,” says Ira Mehlman, Seattle-based national spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), “telling people to bring their rent receipts and pay stubs real or not.” The situation will be a replay of the 1986 law, only on a larger scale, he says. It’s simple math, says Mr. Mehlman, adding, “how can you possibly do background checks on 11 million people? It just won’t happen.”

This expectation sells this target population short, says Jorge-Mario Cabrera, spokesman for the Coalition for Humane Immigrants Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA). “Nobody wants to go where they are not wanted and cannot legally find a job to support them or their family,” he says. “I do not foresee a wave of illegal immigration, because most of these people realize the political situation in the US is very dire when it comes to undocumented immigrants.”

Census data released at the end of 2012 show a slowing of the immigration tide. The number of undocumented immigrants fell to 11.1 million, down from a high of some 12 million in 2007, following more than a decade of increases. A Pew Center analysis of these data finds that “there is net zero migration taking place from Mexico to the United States,” points out Villanova University immigration specialist Catherine Wilson, via e-mail.
The proposed reforms will not encourage illegal immigration in the future for three reasons, says David Koelsch, director the Immigration Law Clinic at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law.

The proposed pathways to legal status will be long and expensive, he says via e-mail, “So any reward for future illegal immigration is distant.”
The birth rate in Mexico is in rapid decline and domestic industry's wages are rising, “making the US less attractive,” he says.

The US economy is still not recovered, "so there is not a strong draw for illegal immigration,” he adds. A sustained 1.75 to 2.25 percent growth rate does not even keep our native population employed, he says.

The reality “is that our border is more secure than it has been in years past and as immigration talks heat up, our border agents and patrol will be well aware of the need for greater vigilance,” says immigration lawyer and law professor Michael Wildes, who is managing partner of Wildes & Weinberg in New York City and represented the government in immigration cases in his time as a US Attorney.

The law needs to have enough teeth that it doesn't open the door to greater illegal immigration, he adds. “Whether that means tougher sanctions or steeper fines is up to Congress to decide. But the penalties need to be more stringent because once a pathway to citizenship is defined, there is even less of an excuse for employers to hire undocumented workers and for folks to come here illegally and remain illegal.”

While the numbers tell a story of declining illegal immigration, still a path to citizenship for those now in the country illegally may be a political problem for those who want to pass comprehensive immigration legislation, says David Mark, editor-in-chief of the website, Politix.

“It just seems like common sense to most people that if you make it easier to become legal, that will attract others as well,” he adds. “It is naive to think otherwise.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on January 29, 2013, 04:54:09 am
says Jorge-Mario Cabrera, spokesman for the Coalition for Humane Immigrants Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA). “Nobody wants to go where they are not wanted and cannot legally find a job to support them or their family,” he says. “I do not foresee a wave of illegal immigration, because most of these people realize the political situation in the US is very dire when it comes to undocumented immigrants.”

What a load of Latino propaganda that is!  ::)

"Very dire"? This guy is delusional. The situation for illegals hasn't been better.

And it keeps getting better, like in Illinois (Obama's home state!) where they just passed law that allows driver's license for illegals.

I am so sick of this junk by these people, and the government not enforcing it's own laws. The hypocritical attitudes are so obvious it grates on the nerves.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 07, 2013, 03:15:37 pm

Mar_3:26  And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

1Pe_4:17  For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?



Catholic bishops conflicted over gays, immigration

The nation's Roman Catholic bishops are in a difficult position as the debate over immigration reform gets underway: The immigrant-built American church, known for advocating a broad welcome for migrants and refugees, could end up opposing reform because it would recognize same-sex partners.
Proposals by President Barack Obama and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus include the same-sex partners of Americans among those who would be eligible for visas. The Human Rights Campaign and other gay advocates welcomed the recognition, arguing current laws unfairly treat people in gay or lesbian relationships "as strangers." The idea has the backing of the National Council de la Raza and other liberal Latino groups.
But Catholic bishops, with the support of evangelicals and other theological conservatives, have sent a letter to Obama protesting his proposal. In a sign of the sensitivity of the issue, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops would not provide a copy of the statement, saying the signatories agreed not to make the letter public. Sister Mary Ann Walsh, a spokeswoman for the bishops, would say only that recognition of gay couples in the president's reform proposals "jeopardizes passage of the bill."
Galen Carey, public policy officer for the National Association of Evangelicals, which represents 40 denominations and has been lobbying for new immigration laws, said, "Our view is immigration reform is not the place to have this discussion." The theologically conservative Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod also signed the Catholic bishops' letter.
"The issue of immigration on its own is so controversial, so polarizing," said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez of the evangelical National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. He was in the Las Vegas audience last week when Obama presented his plan. "Let's not play politics with 11 million undocumented immigrants."
It is far too early to know how much of a factor gay relationships will become in what is expected to be a complicated and emotional debate. The plan unveiled last week by eight leading Democratic and Republican senators did not mention same-gender partners. Many other major religious groups lobbying for reform, such as The Episcopal Church, either support gay marriage or don't make homosexuality a focus. In a conference call this week with reporters, White House Domestic Policy Council director Cecilia Munoz was asked whether Obama would support a bill that didn't acknowledge same-sex partners. Her only response: "The president's position on that is very clear."
Still, endorsements from traditional denominations may carry more significance in the current political climate, in which conservative-leaning lawmakers are worried about political damage from backing a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
"The bishops' support, I think, is going to be critical for swinging moderates in the House to support this bill," said Stephen Schneck, a political scientist at Catholic University of America and chair of the anti-abortion Democrats for Life, who was part of the Catholics for Obama re-election effort.
It seems unlikely the bishops would accept any provision for same-sex partners— even for an issue as important to the church as immigration. In their drive for greater orthodoxy among Catholics, bishops have made preserving traditional marriage a priority. Last week, San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, who leads the bishops' marriage efforts, said the struggle against gay marriage is a gift from God "and by overcoming it we may achieve spiritual greatness." He made the comments in an interview with The Catholic Herald, a news outlet in Britain.
The bishops' stand against Obama's health care law provides some indication of their thinking when they view a core moral teaching in conflict with a long-held social justice goal.
For decades, the bishops had advocated for improved access to health care, especially for the poor. But church leaders concluded that the president's plan, known as the Affordable Care Act, would provide financing for ending pregnancies. The administration and Democratic supporters of the law insisted the bishops were wrong, and said no taxpayer money would fund abortion coverage. But the bishops ultimately opposed the legislation.
Yet, immigration seems even more critical than health care to the church.
Americans church leaders have spent decades lobbying for revisions that would keep families together and fulfill what the church considers the duty of all countries, especially wealthier ones, to do as much as possible to help the poor and persecuted. The church and Catholic groups run a network of aid programs for migrants, refugees and illegal immigrants, taking positions that recognize the country's right to protect its borders, but that still fall "to the left of the Democratic Party," Schneck said.
This position is rooted in papal and Gospel teachings so extensive that evangelicals often borrow the theological framework for their own advocacy. In a 2003 joint plea for immigration reform, called "Strangers No Longer," U.S. and Mexican bishops stated, "Regardless of their legal status, migrants, like all persons, possess inherent human dignity that should be respected."
The issue is of special historic importance to the American Catholic church, which was built by waves of Irish, Italians, Poles and others. The immigrant presence in the pews is now growing as American-born white Catholics drop out in significant numbers. Researchers estimate that a third of the 66 million U.S. Catholics are Latino.
"This is an issue that has been a huge priority for the church for a really long time," said Kristin Heyer, a professor at Santa Clara University in California who studies immigration and Catholic social thought. "The wider Catholic community, in addition to the bishops, has mobilized in a major way."
Ultimately, the controversy could split Catholics, in much the same way that Catholics divided over health care. Despite enormous pressure from the bishops, the Catholic Health Association, a trade group that represents hospitals, provided critical backing for the president's health care legislation. Surveys have found that large majorities of lay Catholics back same-sex marriage or civil unions.
Given the importance of Latinos to the U.S. church, political observers wonder how bishops could explain their opposition to Hispanic parishioners.
Kim Daniels, an attorney and director of Catholic Voices USA, a conservative-leaning lay group that defends church teaching, has been urging Catholics across the political spectrum to drop their differences and get behind immigration reform. Still, she said, "being Catholic in the public square means standing up for all our issues."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 08, 2013, 08:09:10 pm


Condoleezza Rice forming bipartisan immigration group

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is working to put together a group of high-profile Republicans and Democrats to find on bipartisan solutions to the immigration problem, a source familiar with the plans said on Friday.
Rice, a political science professor at Stanford University in California and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, is setting up the group with former Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, a Republican, and two Democrats, former Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros, the source said on condition of anonymity.
Formation of the group comes as President Barack Obama and both houses of Congress confront how to overhaul U.S. immigration laws in ways that both toughen security along the U.S.-Mexico border and provide a pathway to citizenship for as many as 11 million illegal immigrants.
Rice gave a well-received speech at the Republican National Convention in Tampa last summer but has not shown many political aspirations since leaving the State Department at the end of the George W. Bush administration four years ago.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 10, 2013, 02:08:23 pm


Among US evangelicals, surprising support for immigration reform

With Hispanic attendance at their churches rising, some evangelical leaders are among the loudest advocates of one of President Barack Obama's top priorities.

WASHINGTON — Thou shalt compromise, at least on immigration reform.

That is the message being heard from some leading evangelicals in the United States. After decades of promoting traditionally conservative causes like opposition to abortion, many evangelical leaders are now wielding their formidable influence to persuade Republican lawmakers to back one of President Barack Obama's top priorities.

With Hispanic attendance at their churches rising, these evangelicals are among the loudest advocates of a U.S. immigration reform. A group of pastors has launched a 40-day campaign to have churchgoers pray, read scripture passages about welcoming the stranger and lobby their members of Congress, many of them in the conservative South.

"We have pastors preach in pulpits to parishioners in Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas — in all the wonderful red states across America," that aiding immigrants, illegal or not, is a Christian duty, said Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, one of the country's most prominent Hispanic evangelicals.

While evangelicals have been a major force in Republican politics for years, Republican lawmakers will take some persuading to back the sort of immigration reform supported by President Barack Obama, which includes a "pathway" to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally.

Conservatives in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives want to focus the debate initially on securing the border with Mexico and making sure illegal immigrants are not rewarded with an amnesty.

"Some of them don't necessarily see or acknowledge the changing demographics or the electoral merits of passing immigration reform, but I do think that many of these religious leaders could push them in that direction by really referencing the humanitarian interest, or moral argument," said Republican strategist Ford O'Connell.

Rodriguez and other pastors are speaking to members of Congress "on a daily basis" to ask them to legalize the status of 11 million undocumented immigrants.

Targeted lawmakers include Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, who chaired a House hearing on immigration last week, and Rep. Raul Labrador of Idaho — a leading Tea Party thinker on immigration.

Unlikely as it may have seemed at the height of the "culture wars" of the last two decades, these evangelicals are attempting to nudge Republicans to the center. The effort is well timed, coming as the Republican Party strives to improve its appeal to Hispanic voters who went solidly Democratic at 2012 elections.

"This is one area where social conservative input is extremely welcomed by the Republican Party," said O'Connell.

Pastors are asking worshippers to email their lawmakers and tell them: "I am a Christian, a conservative and I vote. I want you to support immigration reform this year," said Rodriguez.


Support for an immigration overhaul among Christian conservatives has been growing over time. In 2011, the 16 million-member Southern Baptist Convention — the country's largest Protestant body — called for "a just and compassionate path to legal status" for illegal immigrants while urging the government to secure U.S. borders.

A Public Religion Research Institute poll in 2010 showed white evangelicals support, by a margin of 2-1, an immigration reform that would allow illegal immigrants to become Americans.

After the election, a group of evangelical leaders signed a letter to Obama endorsing "a path toward legal status and/or citizenship" for immigrants. Among the signers was Tim Daly, president of the Focus on the Family ministry.

Immigration is providing a rare foray into bipartisanship for evangelical veterans of fights over gay marriage and abortion like lawyer Mathew Staver, vice president of Liberty University, founded by evangelical leader Jerry Falwell in Lynchburg, Virginia. Staver's Liberty Counsel group threatened to sue a Florida library in 2000 for promoting witchcraft by encouraging young people to read a "Harry Potter" novel.

As recently as last November, Staver wrote on Liberty Counsel's website that Obama won re-election because, "Millions of Americans looked evil in the eye and adopted it."

But now he acknowledges that Obama deserves credit, along with the Republican head of the House Judiciary Committee and Senators from both sides of the aisle, for drawing up plans for an immigration overhaul

James 1:8  A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

"I think it is incumbent upon us to work together and I applaud the bipartisan committee in the Senate and I applaud the leadership of Bob Goodlatte," Staver said. "I applaud President Obama too, I just don't want to use this as a political ping pong."

But any talk of an alliance between the White House and evangelicals to win immigration reform is stretching it.

Christian conservatives strongly oppose a proposal by Obama to give spousal visas to same-sex foreign partners of American gays and lesbians. And evangelical leaders disagree among themselves on whether to grant undocumented immigrants the full right to U.S. citizenship or allow them some other, more limited, legal status in the United States.

Neither option is acceptable to some conservative evangelicals, like Iowa pastor Cary Gordon who opposes loosening immigration laws and accuses his co-religionists of "unbiblical naivete."


Much of the Christian case for helping illegal immigrants is based on stories of Biblical "immigrants" like Abraham and Moses and passages such as Matthew 25:35: "I was a stranger and you invited me in."

"The scriptures command us to take care of the immigrant. It's not just one verse here or there, it's a repeated command throughout the Biblical text," said Matt Soerens of the World Relief organization, who lectures churches on immigration.

U.S. Representative Doug Collins, an Air Force Reserve chaplain, says hospitality to foreigners is fine but must be balanced with respect for immigration laws.

"Scripture also teaches very clearly that there is government and civil authority and that there is an understanding of rule of law," said Republican Collins, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee.

He represents a strongly conservative district in Georgia which has seen a spike in undocumented workers in the poultry and construction industries and opposes giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.

The evangelicals' pro-immigration passion reflects changes in the conservative Christian movement which, while still predominantly white, has taken on a Latin tinge.

Rodriguez, the pastor, who heads a U.S. Hispanic organization with 40,000 member churches, gave a benediction at the Republican National Convention in Tampa last year.

While some two-thirds of U.S. Latinos are Catholic, Hispanics form the fastest-growing group in evangelical churches and are seen as a bulwark against dropping attendance.

Rodriguez put the number of Hispanics in the United States who are either "born-again" or evangelical Christians at between 10 million and 16 million, and growing fast.

While numbers are hard to come by, "there are lots of indirect pieces of evidence" that point to the growth of Latino evangelicals, said Victoria DeFrancesco Soto, who studies Hispanic politics.

Six percent of evangelicals were Latinos in 2007, according to a Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life poll. Eight percent of evangelical or "born-again" voters in a Reuters/Ipsos exit poll at last November's election said they were Hispanic.

Worshipping together with newly arrived Christians — as well as the new emphasis on Biblical teachings on immigration — is melting conservatives' doubts about illegal immigrants, said Danny Carroll, an Old Testament professor at an evangelical seminary in Colorado.

He is part of a congregation at a church in Aurora that is attended mostly by white Americans on Sunday mornings. In the afternoons, the church then hosts separate services with their own pastors for Hispanic, Korean, Filipino and Russian immigrant groups

"Once a quarter, all these congregations get together for a worship service so all of a sudden you are sitting next to someone with a different face, different color, different language. Once you put a human face on it, the whole conversation changes," he said.

Editing by Fred Barbash, Tiffany Wu and Todd Eastham.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 10, 2013, 02:17:46 pm
Jer 20:4  For thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will make thee a terror to thyself, and to all thy friends: and they shall fall by the sword of their enemies, and thine eyes shall behold it: and I will give all Judah into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall carry them captive into Babylon, and shall slay them with the sword.
Jer 20:5  Moreover I will deliver all the strength of this city, and all the labours thereof, and all the precious things thereof, and all the treasures of the kings of Judah will I give into the hand of their enemies, which shall spoil them, and take them, and carry them to Babylon.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 10, 2013, 07:11:03 pm


Cantor: children of illegal immigrants should get U.S. citizenship
By Andy Sullivan | Reuters – 2/10/13

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A top U.S. Republican lawmaker said on Sunday he would support granting citizenship to children who are in the country illegally in a sign that conservatives who oppose immigration amnesty will be playing defense as Congress takes on immigration reform in the coming months.
Representative Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, said Congress could make quick progress on immigration if lawmakers agreed to give citizenship to children - an idea he opposed when it came up for a vote in 2010 as the DREAM Act.
"The best place to begin, I think, is with the children. Let's go ahead and get that under our belt, put a win on the board," Cantor said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Cantor is leading an effort to improve his party's image as many Republicans worry they will be consigned to irrelevancy in coming years if they do not reach out to the fast-growing Latino electorate, which strongly supports immigration reform.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 11, 2013, 04:17:43 pm

Marco Rubio: The Republicans' New Voice


A struggling Republican party is hanging ever more hope for its revitalization on Sen. Marco Rubio, a Cuban-American seen by many as a top contender for its 2016 presidential nomination.

Rubio is fast becoming a star. Republican leaders picked the 41-year-old to give the party’s response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday. That’s an honour typically reserved for the party’s most impressive rising figures.

He’s young, a deft communicator and may have the political talents needed to span a growing split in Republican ranks, to patch over divisions between the no-compromise, small-government, low-tax Tea Party wing and the more pragmatic, old-line establishment. He also could have the kind of national appeal that chips away at middle-of-the-road support for Democrats.

But that kind of moderation might end up alienating his strong base among the most conservative Republicans and could damage his presidential aspirations in party primaries in 2016.

Still, he is clearly in the political spotlight. Time magazine put Rubio’s picture on its latest cover, calling him the “Republican Savior.”

A charismatic politician like Rubio embodies the skills his party sees as necessary if it is to somehow remodel its image after a poor showing in the November election. He stands out in a party that tends to hand power to older white men. And his race and full-throated backing for immigration reform, including a path to citizenship for illegal residents, could improve the party’s poor standing with Hispanics, a growing part of the electorate. In the 2012 election, Obama captured 71 per cent of the Hispanic vote. Opponent Mitt Romney pulled down just 27 per cent after saying he favoured “self-deportation” of illegal immigrants: making their lives in the country so difficult that they wouldn’t want to stay.

Asked this week about his White House ambitions, Rubio was coy.

“I really believe that if I do the best job that I can in the Senate, in a couple years I’ll be in a position to make a decision about whether I want to run for re-election, leave politics and give someone else a shot, or run for some other position,” he said.

Rubio is unquestionably conservative, yet he avoids the divisive, over-the-top rhetoric that frightens moderates.

“Ultimately, the real answer is to convince people that what we stand for, that free enterprise and limited government is the best way to create the conditions for their dreams to be possible,” he said.

He proved his talent for selling himself and his immigration ideas with an appearance on the talk-radio program of Rush Limbaugh, long a beacon for the most conservative Americans. Limbaugh and his admirers are intense opponents of relaxing immigration laws, particularly of offering citizenship to illegal immigrants — a move they equate with granting amnesty to criminals.

But Rubio proved persuasive. When he was done, Limbaugh praised the senator

What you are doing is admirable and noteworthy,” Limbaugh said. “You are recognizing reality. I’m just worried the president is trying to change reality.” Limbaugh didn’t note that Obama’s plan differs little from the one backed by Rubio.

While being vague about his plans, Rubio has been trying to cultivate Republicans who would be critical in a presidential run. Right after the November election, he visited Iowa, the Midwestern state that holds the first-in-the-nation caucus that will mark the start of the long process of choosing a presidential candidate in 2016. In December, he and other potential candidates spoke at a high-profile dinner attended by top Republicans.

Rubio’s speech suggested that poverty and education might be central to a 2016 campaign.

“The path to a prosperous and growing American middle class,” Rubio told the dinner gathering, “is the combination of a vibrant economy that creates these middle-class jobs and a people with the skills needed for these new jobs.”

Rubio had been a darling of his party’s Tea Party wing after his 2010 victory in the race for the Florida Senate seat, a political battle that saw him humiliate Florida’s once-popular Republican Gov. Charlie Crist, who ran as an independent after it became clear that Rubio would win the Republican nomination.

While Rubio took a hard line against immigration reform then, things have changed.

Many centrist Republicans, realize that party positions on an array of issues — immigration perhaps first and foremost — no longer appeal to much of America’s increasingly diverse electorate. They know they must remodel the party’s image. By taking a softer stand on immigration, though, the party might win more Hispanic support.

But many bedrock conservatives still see a change on immigration as a renunciation of party ideals. Some prominent Republicans have already denounced Rubio’s stance. Sen. David Vitter said Rubio is “amazingly naive on this issue.” Rick Santorum, a former senator and Republican presidential contender, said Rubio was playing with “a dangerous group.”

That creates a potential risk for Rubio. Pushing for an immigration overhaul could alienate the very voters that produced his overwhelming Senate victory. Those same voters would be critical for him to win his party’s presidential nomination.

The American system of primary elections to decide a party’s candidate for elected offices tends to favour candidates on the extremes of the political spectrum. Primary voters often prefer candidates most committed to their ideologies, rather than moderates whose broad appeal boosts prospects for victory in the general election.

That tendency could also doom chances of passing an immigration overhaul like the one favoured by Rubio. Key Republican senators, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn of the border state of Texas, have withheld judgment until a draft of any proposal is ready. They are among Republicans facing re-election in 2014 who could see challenges from more conservative rivals. Republicans have already lost several congressional seats after long-standing moderate members lost primaries to right-wingers, who were then defeated by Democrats in the general election.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 12, 2013, 10:09:55 am


Republicans support path to citizenship—unless it’s Obama’s idea ::)

About 60 percent of Republicans in a Washington Post poll said they think the nation's illegal immigrants should be able to gradually earn their citizenship, a centerpiece of a new immigration reform blueprint proposed in the Senate.
But when President Barack Obama is mentioned, much of that Republican support vanishes.
When the question mentions that Obama proposed the path to citizenship, only 39 percent of Republicans said they backed such a move.
The polling suggests that the more closely associated the president is with immigration reform, the harder it might be for Republicans to drum up conservative support for a bill. Obama campaigned on passing immigration reform in his second term and will almost certainly stump for the issue in his State of the Union speech Tuesday night.


1Cor 5:6  Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
1Co 5:7  Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Co 5:8  Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Mat 12:30  He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 12, 2013, 07:31:38 pm
Gal 5:9  A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.


Baby steps: House Republicans launch Spanish-language Twitter handle

The House Republican Conference on Tuesday announced the launch of a Spanish-language Twitter account, @GOPespanol, as part of the party's nationwide outreach program to minority voters.
The act is a small one, of course, but it's in line with a broader effort to bring Hispanic voters into the party after it lost a bruising national election in 2012. (More than 70 percent of Hispanic voters voted to re-elect President Barack Obama.)
“GOPespañol is part of our commitment to take our conservative message and values to every corner of America—to young people and seniors, to Hispanics and African-Americans, to men and women alike," Conference Chair Rep. McMorris Rodgers of Washington said in a written statement.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 12, 2013, 07:53:08 pm
Flashback from July 18, 2010!

Obama courts 4 evangelical leaders to push ILLEGAL immigration

No, these are NOT *real* evangelists...

Normally on the opposite side of political issues backed by the Obama White House, these leaders are aligning with the president to support an overhaul that would include some path to legalization for illegal immigrants already here. They are preaching from pulpits, conducting conference calls with pastors and testifying in Washington — as they did last Wednesday.

I am a Christian and I am a conservative and I am a Republican, in that order,” said Matthew D. Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a conservative religious law firm. “There is very little I agree with regarding President Barack Obama. On the other hand, I’m not going to let politicized rhetoric or party affiliation trump my values, and if he’s right on this issue, I will support him on this issue.”

When President Obama gave a major address pushing immigration overhaul this month, he was introduced by a prominent evangelical, the Rev. Bill Hybels of Willow Creek Community Church in Illinois. Three other evangelical pastors were in the audience, front and center.

Their presence was a testament, in part, to the work of politically active Hispanic evangelical pastors, who have forged friendships with non-Hispanic pastors in recent years while working in coalitions to oppose abortion and same-sex marriage. The Hispanics made a concerted effort to convince their brethren that immigration reform should be a moral and practical priority.

Hispanic storefront churches are popping up in strip malls, and Spanish-speaking congregations are renting space in other churches. Some pastors, like Mr. Hybels, lead churches that include growing numbers of Hispanics. Several evangelical leaders said they were convinced that Hispanics are the key to growth not only for the evangelical movement, but also for the social conservative movement.

“Hispanics are religious, family-oriented, pro-life, entrepreneurial,” said the Rev. Richard D. Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the Southern Baptist Convention’s public policy arm. “They are hard-wired social conservatives, unless they’re driven away.

“I’ve had some older conservative leaders say: ‘Richard, stop this. You’re going to split the conservative coalition,’ ” Dr. Land continued. “I say it might split the old conservative coalition, but it won’t split the new one. And if the new one is going to be a governing coalition, it’s going to have to have a lot of Hispanics in it. And you don’t get a lot of Hispanics in your coalition by engaging in anti-Hispanic anti-immigration rhetoric.”

Congress is unlikely to pass an immigration law this year. Republicans and Democrats who face re-election in November are skittish about the issue, given the broad public support for Arizona’s new law aiming to crack down on illegal immigration.

The support of evangelical leaders is not yet enough to change the equation. But they could mobilize a potentially large constituency of religious conservatives, an important part of the Republican base better known for lobbying against abortion and same-sex marriage. They already threaten the party’s near unity on immigration.

“These cross-cutting clusters are just splinter groups, so far,” said Larry J. Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. “Support for the Arizona law is so strong within the G.O.P. that it will be difficult for the comprehensive-immigration-reform evangelicals to have much short-term impact.”

But some evangelical leaders said their latest strategy was to push a handful of lame-duck Republicans to join Democrats — probably after the midterms — to pass an immigration bill on the ground that it is morally right.

Although other religious leaders have long favored immigration overhaul — including Roman Catholics, mainline Protestants, Jews and Muslims — the evangelicals are crucial because they have the relationships and the pull with Republicans.

My message to Republican leaders,” said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, the president of the evangelical National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference and one of the leaders who engaged his non-Hispanic peers, “is if you’re anti-immigration reform, you’re anti-Latino, and if you’re anti-Latino, you are anti-Christian church in America, and you are anti-evangelical.” [/color]

About 70 percent of Hispanics in the United States are Catholic, but some 15 percent are evangelicals, and they are far more likely than the Catholics to identify themselves as conservative and Republican.

Evangelicals at the grass-roots level are divided on immigration, just as the nation is. But among the leaders, recent interviews suggest that those in favor of an immigration overhaul are far more vocal and more organized than those who oppose it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/19/us/politics/19evangelicals.html?_r=2 (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/19/us/politics/19evangelicals.html?_r=2)


Uhm...you're WRONG Mr. Rodriguez...

James 2:1  My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 13, 2013, 09:54:19 pm


Immigration reform: Congress, Obama, and public are not so far apart

Both the bipartisan Senate plan and President Obama's proposal on immigration reform – which he's expected to mention in his State of the Union address tonight – show how Republican and Democrats aren’t as far apart on policy as politics might have us believe

In spite of some disagreement among lawmakers on the best path forward, momentum for US immigration reform continues to grow – and is moving in one clear direction. A bipartisan group of senators unveiled a framework for reform a few weeks ago, and shortly thereafter President Obama announced his own policy push on immigration, which he is expected to touch upon again in his State of the Union address Tuesday. In the House, a range of ideas are being floated, but a bipartisan bill is expected to emerge soon.
Both the Senate and White House proposals are remarkable for what they share, particularly with respect to providing a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in this country. And despite some important differences, they are even more remarkable for establishing a united front on what kinds of solutions are seen as reasonable and politically viable in the coming debate over immigration reform.
In short, the two plans, particularly the Senate proposal, show how policymakers aren’t as far apart on policy as politics might have us believe. And they chart a way to bring lawmakers together – particularly on the pivotal issue of citizenship.
House Republican leaders are already struggling to find a way to distinguish themselves from these proposals without sounding too extreme, but their tentative forays into a “no citizenship for the undocumented” proposal are likely to place them outside the mainstream of the debate – and public opinion.
At the core of both the White House and Senate proposals is a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States today. Both proposals also include border reform, updating the legal immigration system and reducing current backlogs, and expanding employment-based visas to include more green cards for high-skilled workers.
There are differences, as well. For example, Mr. Obama’s framework makes more overtures to progressives, including support for equal treatment of same-sex couples for immigration purposes, curbing border patrol abuses involving racial profiling, and immigration court reform.
The Senate proposal is more centrist, making the path to citizenship conditional on first completing enhanced border-security measures and requiring legalization applicants to go to the “back of the line” before obtaining their lawful permanent resident status – or eventual citizenship. Because extraordinary backlogs in visa processing currently exist, most people expect the Senate to authorize additional visas to reduce the backlog. Nonetheless, legalization applicants would likely wait many years to receive their “green cards.” Obama’s plan calls for a more straightforward path to citizenship with fewer strings attached.
The Senate proposal also explicitly calls for a reformed and expanded temporary-worker program flexible enough to meet the demand for jobs when the economy is good and to scale back accordingly when it is not.
In short, the Senate proposal seeks to balance often conflicting interests and concerns – border security vs. legalization, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants vs. fairness to those who went through legal channels, and the need for immigrant skills and labor across the whole economic spectrum vs. concern for worker protections and increasing opportunities for native-born workers.
The Senate plan aims to earn buy-in from both Republicans and Democrats on issues such as border enforcement, visa reforms, and temporary workers to garner broader support for full reform and legalization.
The strong support for legalization that includes eventual citizenship, however, is emerging as the issue that some House Republicans balk on, as evidenced by the first hearing in the House Judiciary Committee on immigration in the 113th Congress. Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R) of Virginia called citizenship an “extreme” solution for the 11 million. It’s a sentiment echoed by Rep. Raul Labrador (R) of Idaho, who argues that he is the voice of immigration reform for House Republicans, and that those who come to the country illegally don’t merit citizenship.
Opponents to offering undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship argue that doing so rewards lawbreaking and encourages a new wave of illegal immigration. They argue that the 1986 legalization program, in which roughly 3 million undocumented immigrants received legal status, failed to end illegal immigration, as its supporters promised.
What is often left out of that critique, however, is that the 1986 law did not address the question of future immigration flow – the management of permanent and temporary immigration to the United States. When jobs or family are located within the US, but when no visas are available, new enforcement measures alone will not stop illegal immigration.
Thus, those opposed to citizenship are missing the larger point of immigration reform and aren’t necessarily reflecting the views of all Republicans. For instance, Darryl Issa (R) of California, who is generally a hardliner on immigration matters, has endorsed a path to citizenship. Majority Leader Eric Cantor, who has stayed mum on the Senate proposal, endorsed citizenship for "DREAMers" and the children of the undocumented last week.
In other words, House Republicans are in disarray on the issue, and it is likely to get more confusing soon when a long rumored House bipartisan bill that has been in the works for several years is unveiled. That bill is widely expected to endorse a path to citizenship – as well it should, given that poll after poll shows the majority of the public supports citizenship for the undocumented.
In fact, the possible problems created by leaving 11 million people in a permanent limbo status – one in which they can never fully participate in American democracy by voting or becoming US citizens – goes to the core of American values. Once the public accepted that we must build a new immigration system that allows unauthorized immigrants to transition to a lawful permanent resident status, the debate over citizenship was already a non-starter.
Americans won’t accept an in-between category that creates second-class status for 11 million of their neighbors. It’s just not in our nature to think that such positions are a fair or practical basis for building healthy and productive communities.
It’s likely that the trial balloons denouncing a path to citizenship sent aloft by House Republicans last week are exactly that – efforts to see just how much the electorate cares and how far Republicans will have to move to appear “in the center.”
But based on competing proposals from the Senate, Obama, and even from within the House, it will become clear in the coming weeks that opposition to citizenship really is off the political map entirely.

Title: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his k
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 14, 2013, 08:28:15 pm
Mat_12:26  And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?



Why GOP Sees a Conspiracy As Environmental Groups Join Fight Against Immigration

Groups opposing proposals to legalize undocumented immigrants receive grant money from environmentalist population-control groups. It’s not a secret. You can find the evidence right there on the foundation websites. The immigration groups don’t deny it either.
Republicans who are advocating for a comprehensive immigration overhaul see the environmental link to these groups as a smoking gun that undermines their conservative credentials, even though the groups themselves don’t adopt liberal or conservative labels. But because Numbers USA, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, and the Center for Immigration Studies all argue for reducing immigration into the United States, they tend to align with many Republicans on the issue.
These groups also receive money from foundations that are concerned about overpopulation. The Colcom Foundation funds all three groups; it also gives money to Negative Population Growth and the Conservation Fund. The Weeden Foundation funds the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association as well as the Environmental Paper Network; it also consistently funds CIS and has given grants to Numbers USA in the past.
The three groups that want reduced immigration are not, in fact, conservative. They are “single-issue” organizations whose members hold a variety of viewpoints on climate change, population growth, and abortion. “We are an immigration policy group. We see [immigration growth] as a precursor for rapid population growth, which most people think isn’t good for the country. We are being attacked by both sides,” said FAIR Media Director Ira Mehlman. “As individuals, we are interested in a lot of different things.”
Republicans think I’m a liberal. Democrats all immediately think I’m a conservative Republican,” said Roy Beck, the executive director of Numbers USA. He laughs at the conspiracy theories being floated by Republicans who disagree with his perspective on immigration.
An example of the criticism being aimed at the trio by conservative immigration-reform advocates: These groups are in no way conservative. They were founded, and are funded and staffed, by radical environmentalists and zero-population activists,” said Alfonso Aguilar, executive director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles.
Beck is flattered by the attention. “To think that I would be able to run an organization for 17 years with a secret purpose—a proabortion, white nationalist agenda. It’s amazing,” he quipped.
Steven Camarota, director of research at CIS, is a scholar on population numbers. He has consistently argued that low-skilled immigrants are a drain on the economy. Even without changes in the current immigration laws, he predicts that the country will add 100 million new residents over the next 50 to 60 years. “If they get this legislation, it might be more,” he said. “What you can’t argue is that it won’t have an effect.… You can say more population creates more business in the same way you can say it creates more congestion, sprawl. The question is, are there trade-offs? It’s a very important question.”
Camarota will be hard at work parsing legislative language once the Senate Judiciary Committee produces a draft immigration bill, trying to determine exactly how many new U.S. residents it would produce. In the past, those numbers have scared Republicans and Democrats from supporting similar legislation.
Beck points out that liberals also don’t like his group. America’s Voice, a liberal organization advocating for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, routinely calls the trio of reduced-immigration groups “restrictionist” and “anti-immigrant.”
“That’s very helpful to us for fundraising,” Beck said. “Look how important people think we are!”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 16, 2013, 10:07:07 pm

Report: Bill would set an 8-year path to residency


WASHINGTON (AP) — A newspaper report says that a draft of an immigration bill prepared by the White House lays out an eight-year process for illegal immigrants to become legal permanent residents.
In a story published online Saturday, USA Today says the draft bill would allow illegal immigrants in the U.S. to apply for newly created "Lawful Prospective Immigrant" visas. The bill would also provide more security funding and require that businesses verify the immigration status of new hires within four years.
President Barack Obama has said he will send an immigration bill to Congress if lawmakers do not move on the issue "in a timely fashion."
A White House spokesman, Clark Stevens, says in a statement Saturday that a final immigration bill has not been prepared but that progress is being made.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 17, 2013, 02:20:23 pm

White House presses ahead on immigration overhaul


WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama's chief of staff says the White House hasn't proposed "anything to Capitol Hill yet" on immigration even as a leading Republican criticizes a reported draft proposal regarding illegal immigrants.
That draft, according to USA Today, would create a visa for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States and allow them to become legal permanent residents within eight years.
Obama aide Denis McDonough tells ABC's "This Week" that the White House is working with a bipartisan group of senators.
GOP Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida says if such a measure was proposed, it would be "dead on arrival" in Congress.
McDonough says "let's make sure that it doesn't have to be proposed" because the White House and Congress are able to work out a deal.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 17, 2013, 02:23:36 pm


White House calls draft immigration plan a backup

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans and Democrats alike on Sunday predicted President Barack Obama would fail if he pushed forward with his own effort to overhaul the nation's immigration system and urged the administration to hold off while lawmakers work on a bipartisan measure.
Republican Sen. John McCain predicted the administration's efforts would come up short if the White House went forward with a proposal to put the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. on a long pathway to citizenship. Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, who met with Obama on Wednesday at the White House to discuss progress, urged his allies in the administration to give a bipartisan group of eight lawmakers the time to hammer out a deal on their own.
Obama's newly appointed top aide, chief of staff Denis McDonough, said the White House would only send its plan to Congress if the lawmakers stumble in their efforts and cast its efforts as a backup plan.
"Well, let's make sure that it doesn't have to be proposed," McDonough said of the president's pitch, first reported on USA Today's website late Saturday.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 18, 2013, 05:15:12 pm


Texas Democrats & Republicans Say Immigration Reform Needed

NORTH TEXAS (CBSDFW.COM) – President Obama’s former advisor says it was probably a mistake that the Commander in Chief’s immigration plan was made public. Regardless, Democratic state Representative Rafael Anchia (Dallas District 103) says it’s time for immigration reform.
“Our broken immigration system has very negative impacts on a number of states, like Texas. So what we need to do is create a system that matches willing workers with willing employers, in a legal and transparent system.”

Just last week, Anchia and Houston-District 143 Representative Ana Hernandez Luna filed a comprehensive immigration reform resolution in Austin. “Make sure that people play by the rules, that they undergo background checks, that they learn English and American civics. Those are all the things that we advocated for in our house concurrent resolution,” Anchia explained. “We advocated in broad strokes comprehensive immigration reform that included both a guest worker program and a path to legal status, for the 11 million or so that are in this country undocumented.”
In Texas, where we’ve been fighting the immigration battle nonstop for more than a decade, Republicans like Brad Bailey, a Texas GOP precinct chair, also say that now is the time for reform. He said claims by his fellow conservatives that any reform plan is ‘amnesty’ for people who have broken the law, are not helpful and not true. “By having to come out of the shadows, for having to pay a fine, for having to pay back taxes, for having to serve a probationary term for breaking the law, you’re serving your debt to society.”
Bailey said conservatives and Republicans need to support immigration reform, because the current system is broken and has begun to hurt the country’s economy.
Republicans accuse the Obama administration of meddling in bi-partisan Congressional plans for immigration reform, to score political points. Anchia said it’s time to focus on the bigger plan… not the political bickering. “Little by little consensus will begin to form, whether through the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” (a group of U.S. senators composed of four Democrats and four Republicans) or through a proposal from the White House, about what is politically doable.”
Ultimately, Anchia said there needs to be a clear signal from Congress and The President that when it comes to immigration reform something is going to get done. “Our broken immigration system has very negative impacts on a number of states, like Texas. So what we need to do is create a system that matches willing workers with willing employers, in a legal and transparent system.”
Texas House Concurrent Resolution 44 urges the U.S. Congress to “swiftly enact and fund comprehensive immigration reform that creates a road map to citizenship.” Both Anchia and Hernandez Luna said the resolution takes a middle-of-the-road, or even conservative stance, that they are hoping House Republicans will support.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 19, 2013, 08:55:59 pm


Obama’s backup immigration reform bill: 13-year max for citizenship

Illegal immigrants would face a maximum of a 13-year wait to become citizens if the Obama administration's version of immigration reform passed, according to a leaked draft of the bill obtained by the Miami Herald.
The unfinished bill, first published by USA Today over the weekend, was drafted as a backup plan in case Congress fails to vote on legislation, according to White House chief of staff Denis McDonough on Sunday. Under the plan, undocumented immigrants would have to pay a fine, enroll in a Department of Education-approved English and U.S. civics course (or prove their English skills are already up to par) and pass a background check to gain temporary legal immigration status.
Once approved, immigrants would have to wait either eight years or until current legal immigration backlogs are cleared (whichever comes first) before gaining permanent legal status, commonly referred to as a green card. Once immigrants gain green cards, they must wait five years before applying for citizenship.
Under the 1986 immigration reform law that eventually legalized 2.7 million immigrants, the waiting period before being allowed to apply for a green card was just 18 months.
Sen. Marco Rubio, one of four Republicans in the Senate's bipartisan working group on immigration, said in a statement that Obama's bill is “dead on arrival” in part because it does not contain the same border security provisions the working group wants. Under the senators' still-evolving plan, undocumented immigrants could not get permanent legal status before the border is declared secure by a panel of experts and politicians. Immigrant rights groups have argued this border security trigger could mean decades-long waits for citizenship for the country's illegal immigrants.
Groups that oppose immigration reform say the senators' plan does not differ all that much from the president's, because both agree that most of the country's 11 million illegal immigrants should have an eventual path to citizenship.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on February 20, 2013, 03:49:37 am
Obama advances globalist '2-ocean' plan
Grandiose expansion of 'North American Union' pushed by Bush

President Obama has revived George W. Bush’s Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America effort with a grandiose trade plan that transcends the continent to encompass both the Atlantic and Pacific spheres.

In his State of the Union address Feb. 12, Obama announced a two-ocean, globalist free-trade agenda.

“To boost American exports, support American jobs and level the playing field in the growing markets of Asia, we intend to complete negotiations on a Trans-Pacific Partnership,” he said. “And tonight, I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union – because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/obama-advances-globalist-2-ocean-plan/#Pe4ab9DvPQWYCxG4.99

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 20, 2013, 09:18:16 am
Obama advances globalist '2-ocean' plan
Grandiose expansion of 'North American Union' pushed by Bush

President Obama has revived George W. Bush’s Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America effort with a grandiose trade plan that transcends the continent to encompass both the Atlantic and Pacific spheres.

In his State of the Union address Feb. 12, Obama announced a two-ocean, globalist free-trade agenda.

“To boost American exports, support American jobs and level the playing field in the growing markets of Asia, we intend to complete negotiations on a Trans-Pacific Partnership,” he said. “And tonight, I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union – because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/obama-advances-globalist-2-ocean-plan/#Pe4ab9DvPQWYCxG4.99

When Bush II was in office, he couldn't even barely get off any kind of illegal immigration reform bill off the ground.

We are definitely living in some interesting times now...

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 20, 2013, 10:38:32 am


McCain defends immigration plan to angry residents

PHOENIX (AP) — Arizona took center stage in the national immigration debate Tuesday as Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano toured the state's border with Mexico and Sen. John McCain defended his proposed immigration overhaul to an angry crowd in suburban Phoenix.
The presence of the top officials is the latest sign that Arizona will play a prominent role in the immigration debate as President Barack Obama looks to make it a signature issue of his second term.
Napolitano toured the border near Nogales with the highest-ranking official at U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the incoming chairman of the Senate's homeland security committee and an Arizona congressman. Napolitano, Arizona's former governor, said afterward that comprehensive immigration reform will strengthen the nation's border against criminals and other threats.
Also Tuesday, McCain hosted two town hall meetings in Arizona, during which he defended his immigration plan to upset residents concerned about border security. A bipartisan group of senators — including Arizona Republicans McCain and Jeff Flake — want assurances on border security as Congress weighs what could be the biggest changes to immigration law in nearly 30 years. Arizona is the only state with both of its senators working on immigration reform in Congress, a sign of the state's widely debated border security issues.
Immigration activists and elected officials say it's only natural for Arizona to continue to take the forefront in the national conversation on immigration after years of internal debate on the topic.
"No state in this country has had more experience with enforcement-only immigration laws than Arizona," said Todd Landfried, executive director of Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform, which opposes the state's tough immigration laws.
During a heated town hall gathering in the Phoenix suburb of Sun Lakes, McCain said the border near Yuma is largely secure, but he said smugglers are using the border near Tucson to pump drugs into Phoenix. He said immigration reform should be contingent on better border security that must rely largely on technology able to detect border crossings.
McCain said a tamper-proof Social Security card would help combat identity fraud, and noted any path to citizenship must require immigrants to learn English, cover back taxes and pay fines for breaking immigration laws.
"There are 11 million people living here illegally," he said. "We are not going to get enough buses to deport them."
Some audience members shouted out their disapproval

One man yelled that only guns would discourage illegal immigration. Another man complained that illegal immigrants should never be able to become citizens or vote. A third man said illegal immigrants were illiterate invaders who wanted free government benefits.
McCain urged compassion. "We are a Judeo-Christian nation," he said. McCain's other town hall meeting took place in Green Valley, south of Tucson.
Arizona gained international recognition as an epicenter of the U.S. immigration debate when it passed its tough anti-immigrant law in 2010. A handful of other states — including Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah — have since adopted variations of Arizona's law.
Arizona has the nation's eighth-highest population of illegal immigrants, according to the Pew Research Hispanic Center. In 2010, illegal immigrants represented roughly 6 percent of the state's population.
Activists said Arizona's anti-immigrant laws inspired many illegal immigrants to demand more rights. Last week, some college students rallied outside Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's office for driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.
"They no longer are afraid to come and say, 'I am not able to vote, but I can make my voice heard, and they have to listen to me,'" said community organizer Abril Gallardo.
A report released in January showed the U.S. Border Patrol's Tucson sector remains the busiest along the U.S.-Mexico border. The Tucson sector accounted for 38 percent of all drug seizures and 37 percent of all apprehensions along the border.
Brewer said last week the border cannot be declared safe until the people living near it feel secure from drug and human trafficking.
But Democratic Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona told Latino and black community leaders at a Phoenix luncheon Tuesday that Arizonans need to spread the word on how much more secure the border has become.
"There are lots of folks who don't live in Arizona who have no idea what the border is like," Sinema said.
Napolitano toured the border Tuesday afternoon with U.S. Customs and Border Protection Deputy Commissioner David Aguilar, Democratic Rep. Ron Barber of Arizona and Democratic Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware. Carper is the incoming chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
She said in a statement after the tour that border crossings are down 50 percent since 2008 and 78 percent since their peak in 2000.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on February 20, 2013, 02:09:40 pm
Activists said Arizona's anti-immigrant laws inspired many illegal immigrants to demand more rights. Last week, some college students rallied outside Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's office for driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.

That's basically true. Well, at least the "activists" that sponsor these various demonstrations by illegals are getting bolder because they know the feds won't do anything, and they stir up Latinos, including illegals, with protests and demonstrations.

McCain said a tamper-proof Social Security card would help combat identity fraud, and noted any path to citizenship must require immigrants to learn English, cover back taxes and pay fines for breaking immigration laws.

Aside from McCain being a total nutcase, he is right about a couple things, like learning English and paying fines for breaking immigration laws. But I think each one needs to leave the country and re-enter if they choose with some kind of waiting period. Why should these people be rewarded and move ahead of the line for breaking the law? That simply wouldn't be fare to all the millions of legal immigrants.

Tamper-proof SS card? Of course he would suggest such a thing. So John, what do you have in mind, say insert a device in a person's forehead?  ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 20, 2013, 08:12:03 pm
Churchianity, believe it or not, is the one that endorses illegal immigration reform. But on the contrary, it's mostly the unbelievers that are AGAINST it?

It seems like whatever up is down, and down is up nowdays... :-\


Majority of U.S. citizens say illegal immigrants should be deported


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - More than half of U.S. citizens believe that most or all of the country's 11 million illegal immigrants should be deported, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday that highlights the difficulties facing lawmakers trying to reform the U.S. immigration system.
The online survey shows resistance to easing immigration laws despite the biggest push for reform in Congress since 2007.
Thirty percent of those polled think that most illegal immigrants, with some exceptions, should be deported, while 23 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be deported.
Only 5 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the United States legally, and 31 percent want most illegal immigrants to stay.
These results are in line with other polls in recent years, suggesting that people's views on immigration have not changed dramatically since the immigration debate reignited in Congress last month, according to Ipsos pollster Julia Clark.
"It's not Americans' views that are shifting. It is that the political climate is ripe for this discussion," after the November election when Hispanics voted overwhelmingly in favor of Democratic President Barack Obama, she said.
"Democrats feel that the time is right to capitalize on their wins and Republicans feel that they had a bad blow and are eager to reach out to Hispanics," she added.
Polls show that most Americans back immigration reform, although they often have different ideas of what that means, with some people favoring looser immigration laws while others want to see greater border security.
A group of eight U.S. senators are working on a bipartisan deal to enact immigration reform, the first major attempt since a similar overhaul died in Congress six years ago.
The senators' proposal calls for a full path to citizenship for illegal immigrants once they pay back taxes and a fine and wait in line behind others applying to become Americans.
A plan by Obama has similar provisions, but the senators want any move to relax immigration laws dependant on boosting security on the southern border.
Attitudes toward immigration are polarized by party, according to another the Reuters/Ipsos poll. Seventy-five percent of Republicans think all or most immigrants should be deported, compared to 40 percent of Democrats who think the same.
Republican Senator John McCain, one of the eight senators in the group, had his own encounter with citizens angered by illegal immigration on Tuesday when residents of his state of Arizona complained bitterly at a town hall meeting about the lack of security on the border with Mexico.
One man asked why troops had not been deployed to the border.
"Why didn't the army go down there and stop them? Because the only thing that stops them I'm afraid to say, and it's too damn bad, is a gun," the man said,
Another resident, Keith Smith, got into a testy exchange with McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate whose views on immigration have fluctuated over the years.
"Cut off their welfare and all their stuff and they'll go back," Smith said, referring to undocumented workers.
McCain had been trying to explain his position: "You're not telling these people the truth. They mow our lawns, they care for our babies, they clean . . . that's what those people do," he said.
The Arizona lawmaker, whose position on immigration hardened during the 2010 midterm elections before softening again, is a key part of the Republican side of the senators' bipartisan immigration effort.
Wednesday's Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted Friday through Tuesday and surveyed 1,443 Americans over the age of 18.
The precision of the Reuters/Ipsos online poll is measured using a credibility interval. In this survey, the poll has a credibility interval of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 21, 2013, 11:11:32 am
This news item is on the front page of the Dallas Morning News(which I get) this morning(so a new article) - when I opened up the paper and saw it, felt pretty disgusted.



Conservative evangelical Christians sign on for immigration overhaul pitch

AUSTIN — After years of silence and even hostility to modifying immigration laws, conservative evangelical Christians have become unlikely allies in pressing for a path to citizenship for those here illegally because, they say, the Bible told them so.

A coalition of religious leaders in Texas and elsewhere, many with strong credentials as social conservatives, is engaging congregations in a coordinated call for Congress and the White House to deal with 11 million illegal immigrants.

“Circumstances culturally and politically have thrown evangelicals back on their biblical authority to ask, ‘What does the Bible really say about this?’” said George Mason, senior pastor of Wilshire Baptist Church in Dallas. “There may be lots of political positions that differ on how we accomplish it, but they want to be on the side of God in their minds.”

While moderate and liberal religious groups have long been a part of the immigration debate, the increasingly active involvement of conservative evangelicals marks what Mason called “a sea change” by an important group that could help move Washington toward political consensus.

**Rev 13:1  And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.  :-\

“I can assure you our folks are strongly conservative — an overwhelming majority vote Republican and conservative in every way, socially and politically,” said David Fleming, pastor of Champion Forest Baptist Church in Houston. “But this is an issue that transcends that category.”

Does this include pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-gay rights people like Mitt Romney and John McCain? ::) Oh - Bush I and II were Skull and Bones, and Reagan was a 33rd Degree Freemason. And Mormon Romney is pro-universal healthcare. WHOOPS!

“I’ve had people say to me and write me, ‘You’re going to get fired because you’re out of step with your people,’” said Fleming. “Look, I pastor these people. I know their hearts. And if you can show them from the Scriptures that we’re to be both just and compassionate and, practically speaking, must solve the problem, they’ll say of course we do.”

White evangelical Protestants have been among the least supportive religious groups on a comprehensive immigration approach. A Pew Research poll conducted six years ago found a majority of white evangelicals believe immigration to be a threat to American culture and a burden on the economy.

But a recent survey found considerable evangelical support for keeping families together and following the biblical injunction to welcome the stranger — two themes in a campaign by a national network of diverse religious leaders, the Evangelical Immigration Table

Gospel of Matthew

The network has launched an effort featuring a passage from the Gospel of Matthew that includes videos, sermon notes, prayer guides and lobbying efforts in Washington to press a bipartisan solution that balances border security with respect for families.

Several thousand congregations in 40 states have been encouraged to read at least one Scripture a day pertaining to immigration. In one video, Southern Baptist leader Richard Land makes the argument that immigration reform can be consistent with conservative values.

The Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, called the “I Was a Stranger” project linking liberal and conservative faith groups “historic” and “unprecedented.”

In his recent State of the Union speech, President Barack Obama made immigration reform a top priority for his second term. Both members of Congress and the White House have advanced ideas for providing a pathway to legal status, creating a guest-worker program and further securing the border.

Critics insist that security “triggers” be met before any path to citizenship is instituted. And there remains considerable resistance among conservatives to overhauling the law. At a town-hall meeting in a Phoenix suburb Tuesday, Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, an architect of a bipartisan plan in the Senate, faced a hostile crowd demanding deportation.

“We are a Judeo-Christian nation,” McCain said, as the crowd shouted that illegal immigrants must never be allowed to vote or become citizens.

Fleming said the immigration debate has been held hostage to two polar opposite views.

“One was to grant everyone amnesty and throw away the law and let everybody do what they want. That didn’t seem like a workable solution and certainly didn’t conform to my biblical worldview,” he said. “But the other extreme was just as impractical, and that was to build a fence and deport 15 million people by tomorrow. Two different poles and both of them throwing rocks at each other.”

Election loss

Politically, many Republicans have come around to the idea of an immigration overhaul following election losses in which the party has failed to attract a growing Hispanic voting constituency. Business leaders want changes that will provide a reliable source of low-wage workers. And local police have resisted acting as de facto border agents, which diverts resources from dealing with crime.

The effort to engage evangelicals is framed in biblical terms. The Evangelical Immigration Table dovetails with other groups, including the National Immigration Forum, an alliance of religious leaders, business and law enforcement, under the rubric “Bibles, Badges and Business.”

The goal is a system that’s both fair to immigrants who are here legally and compassionate to those who are not that provides eventual “earned” citizenship and border security.

Dedicated Christians may disagree on what the solution is, but everybody acknowledges there must be a solution,” said the Rev. Rick Scarborough, an East Texas evangelist and head of the politically conservative Vision America.

Scarborough said he has been “conflicted” on the issue as both a socially conservative Republican and a Christian pastor. But he said if a solution couples border security and a requirement that illegal immigrants seeking naturalization go to the back of the line, “the majority of evangelicals will sign on.”

One caution, he said: “The majority of the Republican leadership has to understand that this is not going to win a majority of Hispanics to their cause. The Democrats have won that argument.”

When congregations hear a conservative pastor encourage support for immigration policies from the pulpit as a moral, not political issue, it can have considerable influence, he said.

“If not, we pastors ought to resign our posts,” he said.


Have these people even read the book of Matthew, by any chance?

Mat 4:17  From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mat 3:16  And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
Mat 3:17  And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Mat 23:13  But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 21, 2013, 11:29:42 am
When Cruz ran for Senate last year, they painted one of his opponents in the GOP primaries(David Dewhurst, sp) as a "moderate". Dewhurst also is the same guy who's the LT Governor here in Texas(where Rick Perry is governor). And at the same time, they threw in Craig James, a former NFLer-turned-ESPN-analyst into the mix(even though James didn't do much, he pretty much "played his role").

Overall, as you can see, the whole dog-and-pony-show ended up turning out into this Tea Partier's favorite(Cruz), and is ultimately playing his part in this Hegelian Dialectic game.

Gen 3:1  Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?


Sen. Ted Cruz says Obama wants immigration bill to fail to hurt GOP

Sen. Ted Cruz said Wednesday that President Barack Obama wants Congress to fail at overhauling the nation’s immigration system so Republicans will suffer with Hispanic voters in upcoming elections.
“His objective is to push so much on the table that he forces Republicans to walk away from the table because


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 21, 2013, 07:48:12 pm


Behind-the-scenes deal pushes immigration reform closer to reality

The US Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO came up with a framework for solving one of the thorniest issues in immigration reform. The agreement shows momentum is growing.

A compromise agreement announced Thursday between the nation’s largest labor union and the top advocate for American business underscores the enormous momentum now behind immigration reform.
The agreement touches on what was seen to be potentially one of the biggest stumbling blocks in the immigration reform debate – namely, how the country should handle the flow of low-skilled, temporary foreign workers.
In finding middle ground, the AFL-CIO and the US Chamber of Commerce – two powerful organizations often at loggerheads – have taken a “strong step forward” in resolving the issue, says Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum. Moreover, they have added to the impression that important stakeholders – seeing immigration reform as increasingly likely – are putting aside public posturing in order to hammer out solutions.

“This particular slice of the pie is the most important piece: What does our immigration system look like moving forward?” Mr. Noorani says. “Every day, [the Chamber and the AFL-CIO] are going to continue to put more meat on these bones.... For them to agree, even on the bones, means that they've been engaged in a really serious negotiation.”
Praise for the deal came from both sides of the aisle – House majority leader Eric Cantor (R) of Virginia and Sen. Charles Schumer (D) of New York. "We are very hopeful that an agreement can be reached on a specific proposal in the next few weeks," said Senator Schumer, a member of the bipartisan Senate group working on an immigration compromise, in a statement.
The principles of the agreement call for creating an independent commission that would study the labor market and propose tweaks to the number of lower-skilled workers admitted to the country. Currently, the number of temporary workers allowed into the country is set predominantly by quotas that continue at stable rates from year to year no matter the economic condition in the US
The problem with the current system, all sides agree, is that it leaves worker shortages when the economy is surging and allows too many workers to enter the country when economic activity slackens. The AFL-CIO and the US Chamber of Commerce addressed this in their joint statement on Thursday.
“Our challenge is to create a mechanism that responds to the needs of business in a market-driven way, while also fully protecting the wages and working conditions of U.S. and immigrant workers,” it read.
While important details remain to be worked out, the Chamber and AFL-CIO said Thursday that the goal was achievable.
“The power of today’s technology enables us to use that knowledge to craft a workable demand-driven process fed by data that will inform how America addresses future labor shortages,” the two groups said in the statement.
Interestingly, the general concept of a commission to propose changes to visa numbers is one whose intellectual foundation lies within the labor movement. It is the brainchild of Ray Williams, a secretary of Labor under President Carter and a co-founder of the liberal Economic Policy Institute (EPI).
But Chamber and AFL-CIO leaders, who attested to a productive working relationship during frequent meetings during the last several months, both broadly endorsed the concept Thursday.
“We recognize that there is no simple solution to this issue,” the statement says. “We agree that a professional bureau in a federal executive agency, with political independence analogous to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, should be established to inform Congress and the public about these issues.”

In 2011, the US admitted more than 2 million temporary workers, a figure that swells to more than 3 million when the workers’ families are included, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Roughly half of those, ranging from seasonal agricultural workers to nurses to electrical engineers, could be governed by a new flexible-visa regime.
But deciding which low skilled workers would have an opportunity to obtain permanent residency or, eventually, citizenship, will be a key debate. The groups also have not come to an accord on high-skilled workers.
Liberal groups were supportive of the agreement.
“We salute the notion of using real world data about labor markets and demographics to determine the future flow of employment-based immigrants and temporary foreign workers,” said Ross Eisenbrey, a vice president and economist at EPI, in an e-mailed statement. “This is an important step forward for achieving comprehensive immigration reform.”
Critics say that fine-tuning such a system is beyond the reach of any government agency.
It is over-ambitious, but it’s more than that,” Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, told the Monitor earlier this month. “It’s based on an idea that we can manage government by experts. It just doesn’t work. Everybody who has tried it everywhere crashes and burns.”
The AFL-CIO and Chamber statement does not explicitly put the commission in control of visa levels, offering that such a body would be able to “advise” on such issues. The ideal system would “automatically” adjust to economic changes, according to the principles released Thursday.
“We are now in the middle – not the end – of this process,” the groups’ statement concludes, “and we pledge to continue to work together and with our allies and our representatives on Capitol Hill to finalize a solution that is in the interest of this country we all love.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 22, 2013, 01:01:35 pm


Carlos Gutierrez resigns from Citigroup to head up Republican immigration reform effort

Former U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez has left his job at Citigroup to head up a political action committee designed to support Republicans who back immigration reform.
The recently formed super PAC, called Republicans for Immigration Reform, will financially back Republicans who embrace "common-sense" comprehensive reform, which includes giving legal status to most of the nation's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants. It's conceivable that conservative politicians who vote for a pathway to citizenship for this group could face primary challenges from people running to the right of them on immigration, for instance. In those cases, Gutierrez told The Washington Post, the PAC will provide "backup" to Republicans who supported reform.
Gutierrez, who served as secretary of commerce under George W. Bush, immigrated from Cuba with his family when he was 6 years old. He served as CEO of the Kellogg company and more recently as vice chairman of Citigroup.
"The upcoming immigration reform debate will be one of the most important public policy discussions America engages in this century," Gutierrez said in a statement. "In this spirit and understanding, I've decided to dedicate my full time and energy to Republicans for Immigration Reform and this critical legislative effort."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 23, 2013, 03:46:48 pm

Will Americans Soon Not Be Able To Buy, Sell Or Get A Job Without A Global ID Card?

 By Michael, on February 21st, 2013

A plan being pushed in Congress right now by senators from both major political parties would force all Americans to get a biometric national ID card.  It is being promoted as a key "immigration reform" measure, but the truth is that a national ID card is much more about the government's endless appetite for more control over the American people.  If this national ID card plan is passed by Congress, you will not be able to get a job without one.  So how are you going to survive if you can't work?  In addition, this national ID card would undoubtedly soon be used to identify us for all sorts of other purposes.  For example, have you tried to open up a bank account lately?  They make you jump through all sorts of hoops to prove that you are who you say that you are.  So what would happen if the government decided to require you to show your national ID card before opening up a bank account?  If you refused to get a card, how would you be able to function in society without a bank account?  Would you try to conduct all of your transactions in cash only?  That might work for a while.  And of course you would not be able to drive or get on a plane without your national ID card.  So forget about going anywhere.  Are you starting to get the picture?  Unfortunately, the push for a national ID card in the United States is only a small part of the overall push toward a "global ID card" that is happening all over the planet.  The eventual goal is to have a "universal ID" that every man, woman and child on the planet will be forced to take.
That is why it is so important for the American people to speak up about this.
Right now, all of the big mainstream media outlets are lining up on the side of a national ID card.  For instance, just check out this short excerpt from a recent Washington Post article entitled "The case for a national ID card"...

An effective solution would be to issue tamper-proof, biometric ID cards — using fingerprints or a comparably unique identifier — to all citizens and legal residents. Last week, both President Obama and a bipartisan group of eight senators seeking immigration reform urged something along those lines, without calling it a universal national identity card. That’s a major step forward.

And of course the Wall Street Journal is reporting on this too...

Key senators are exploring an immigration bill that would force every U.S. worker—citizen or not—to carry a high-tech identity card that could use fingerprints or other personal markers to prove a person's legal eligibility to work.
The idea, signaled only in vaguely worded language from senators crafting a bipartisan immigration bill, has privacy advocates and others concerned that the law would create a national identity card that, in time, could track Americans at airports, hospitals and through other facets of their lives.

According to investigative reporter James Tucker, there are those in the Obama administration that are optimistic that they will be able to get a national ID card through Congress now that Ron Paul has left the House of Representatives...

At a recent reception in Washington, D.C., an AMERICAN FREE PRESS source overheard Thomas E. Donilon, a White House national security advisor and past Bilderberg member, speaking of Paul’s retirement and the good chance that the global card could now be shepherded through Congress. Paul’s son, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), would not object to the plan, added the individual with whom Donilon was talking. He was referring to the fact that Senator Paul has backed off from the strong pro-nationalist positions of his father because he is fantasizing about being elected president in 2016.

So will anyone in Congress step up and fight this on behalf of the American people?
Let's hope so.
But of course there are many other large nations that are actually far ahead of the United States when it comes to implementing this global ID card scheme.
Just check out what is going on in Indonesia...

Since the start of the government of Indonesia’s multi-modal biometrics-based National Electronic ID Card (e-KTP) program in August 2011, record enrollments are being achieved across the country’s population of 172 million ID-eligible residents.
More than 103 million people have been enrolled and de-duplicated in one year with 80% or 140 million residents of the eligible population already enrolled and 85% already processed. Statistics show that over 1 million de-duplication transactions are being achieved in a single day in the data center and 600,000 enrollments being achieved in a single day in the field. In addition 60 million ID cards have been printed.

And India is currently collecting biometric information on more than a billion people...

In India, a massive effort is underway to collect biometric identity information for each of the country’s 1.2 billion people. The incredible plan, dubbed the “mother of all e-governance projects” by the Economic Times, has stirred controversy in India and beyond, raising serious concerns about the privacy and security of individuals’ personal data.
The plan is moving ahead at a clip under the auspices of the National Population Register (NPR) and the Unique ID (UID) programs, separately governed initiatives that have an agreement to integrate the data they collect to build the world’s largest biometric database. Upon enrollment, individuals are issued 12-digit unique ID numbers on chip-based identity cards. For residents who lack the necessary paperwork to obtain certain kinds of employment or government services, there’s strong incentive to get a unique ID. While the UID program is voluntary, enrollment in the NPR program is mandatory for all citizens.

Are you starting to understand what is happening?
This is a global effort.
At this point, there are approximately 100 countries that now issue mandatory ID cards, and undoubtedly this campaign to gather the biometric information of every person on earth will continue to spread.
In fact, soon you may not even be able to log in to your favorite Internet sites without a fingerprint or an iris scan.
Does that sound crazy to you?
It doesn't sound crazy to the major technology firms that are a part of the Fast Identity Online Alliance...

Imagine logging on to your eBay account with your fingerprint. Or perhaps accessing your Facebook account via an iris scan.
It might seem a bit much for the average computer user, but it may not be that far off if an initiative is successful.
The use of biometric data as an added security measure is just one of the solutions being proposed by a consortium of firms who have come together to form the Fast Identity Online (FIDO) Alliance.

We live in a world that has become obsessed with information and obsessed with security.
At first, we may all just be forced to carry around ID cards, but eventually cards will not be considered to be good enough.
Cards are easily lost, they can be stolen, and they can be forged.
But what about an electronic tattoo?
Wouldn't that be much more secure?
That is the argument that will be made.
And the advancements that have been made in the field of electronic tattoos lately have got a lot of scientists very excited...

Temporary electronic tattoos could soon help people fly drones with only thought and talk seemingly telepathically without speech over smartphones, researchers say.

Does that sound "cool" to you?
That is how these changes will be marketed to the public.  They will be sold as the "hip" and "cool" things to do.
But the truth is that these electronic tattoos are incredibly dangerous.  They can receive electrical signals from your brain, and they can also send electrical signals to your brain...

The devices are less than 100 microns thick, the average diameter of a human hair. They consist of circuitry embedded in a layer or rubbery polyester that allow them to stretch, bend and wrinkle. They are barely visible when placed on skin, making them easy to conceal from others.
The devices can detect electrical signals linked with brain waves, and incorporate solar cells for power and antennas that allow them to communicate wirelessly or receive energy. Other elements can be added as well, like thermal sensors to monitor skin temperature and light detectors to analyze blood oxygen levels.

This is very frightening stuff.
But most people just do whatever the "authorities" tell them to do without thinking about it.
So will you take a national ID card if Congress requires you to?
Will you take an electronic tattoo on your hand or your forehead someday if the authorities require it for "security" reasons?
The control freaks that run things just love to find new ways to watch us, track us and control us.
For example, just check out what is going on in New York City.  The following is from a recent article in the Telegraph...

Created by Microsoft and the New York Police Department, the Domain Awareness System, known as "the dashboard," is state-of-the-art crime fighting technology.
"The dashboard," instantaneously mines data from the NYPD's vast collection of arrest records, emergency 911 calls, more than 3,000 security cameras, license plate readers and portable radiation detectors and aggregates it into a user-friendly, readable form in the control room.
Eventually, that data will be able to be seen in real time by officers on laptops in their squad cars and on mobile devices as they walk their beat.

Could you imagine how much more intrusive such a system would be if "national ID cards" were constantly feeding information about all of us into their computers?
But the "authorities" insist that all of this "security" is making life so much "better" and "safer" for all of us.
Well, what about for 3-year-old Lucy Schulte?
She is a sweet little disabled girl in a wheelchair that has Spina bifida.  Recently she was getting ready to get on a plane to go to Disney World, but TSA workers decided that she was a potential terrorist and so they manhandled her and confiscated her stuffed toy.
You can see very disturbing video of this incident below...


Is this really want we want America to become?
For much more on how America is being transformed into a Big Brother police state, please see the following article: "29 Signs That The Elite Are Transforming Society Into A Total Domination Control Grid".
So what do you think about all of this?
Do you believe that a global ID card is a good idea or a bad idea?
Would you take a national ID card if Congress made it mandatory?
Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below...

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on February 24, 2013, 02:57:06 am
Right now, all of the big mainstream media outlets are lining up on the side of a national ID card.

The thing is, bible prophecy tells us this WILL happen. It's not something that people can prevent. It's a done deal. It's not if, but when.

And no, I would not take any new ID card, period. When my driver's license expires, I'm done. No new ID's for me.

So how are you going to survive if you can't work?

"...the just shall live by faith"

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 25, 2013, 07:26:39 pm
It seems like with each passing day, more people are getting on board...


Tech leaders plan virtual push on immigration

WASHINGTON (AP) — High-tech leaders including the former heads of AOL and Mozilla are organizing a "virtual march for immigration reform" aimed at pressuring lawmakers to enact sweeping changes to the nation's immigration laws.
The effort unveiled Monday is particularly focused on making it easier for the U.S. to attract highly educated immigrants and those aiming to work in high-tech fields.
Silicon Valley leaders and others have long complained of the difficulties of bringing high-tech workers to the U.S. and allowing them to stay once they're here, and immigration legislation taking shape on Capitol Hill is expected to address the issue.
The new effort, backed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's Partnership for a New American Economy, aims to collect supporters and organize a date this spring for them to flood lawmakers' offices via Twitter, Facebook, and other means.

So gun control is not the only agenda on Bloomberg's desk?
"What we're essentially doing is having tech leaders use technology to influence the debate," said John Feinblatt, Bloomberg's chief policy adviser. "In the in the old days, people used to hire a lobbyist."
The possibilities of such an approach were illustrated last year when Congress dropped legislation to crack down on online piracy after a massive campaign by Internet services and users.
The new effort brings together an array of high-tech heavy hitters including Steve Case, co-founder of AOL and chief executive of Revolution; John Lilly, former chief executive of Mozilla and partner at Greylock Partners; venture capitalist Mike Maples; and Brad Feld, managing director of the Foundry Group.
"We've got to make the case that in today's economy the currency is talent, and we need the talent in this country if we want to continue to be the great economic leader that we are," Feinblatt said.
The group's priorities for emerging immigration legislation include more visas for high-tech workers; a new visa for entrepreneurs, something some other industrialized nations already offer; and permanent resident status for immigrants who graduate from U.S. universities with degrees in science, technology, engineering and math.
These are all measures supported by President Barack Obama and are likely to be embraced to some degree in legislation being written in the Senate by a bipartisan group of negotiators.
Current law limits the number of immigrants who can come to the U.S. to work for high-tech companies and provides no straightforward path for top-tier graduates to stay here. More so than other areas of the immigration debate, such as border security and a path to legalization for the 11 million illegal immigrants already here, boosting high-tech immigration tends to enjoy bipartisan support, although there've been disputes in Congress over how to accomplish the goal.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 26, 2013, 04:11:04 pm

Immigration detainees released in budget crunch

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The Associated Press has learned that federal immigration authorities have released a number of detainees around the country to save money.
Gillian Christensen, spokeswoman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Washington D.C., said Monday that field offices have been directed to review their numbers of detained immigrants to ensure the jail populations stay within budgeted resources.
Christensen says an unspecified number of immigrants have been released and placed on more cost effective forms of supervision.
She says she did not have further details about those forms of supervision or how many people have been released.
Christensen says the agency will continue to pursue the cases in court and deport people when necessary.
Immigration activists say the agency most likely released detainees in California, Texas, Florida, and New Jersey.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 26, 2013, 04:26:36 pm
English requirement in immigration reform will test underfunded ESL system

The thorny topic of immigration reform has catapulted to the top of the to-do lists of both Republicans and Democrats, even as both sides continue to bicker over details. President Barack Obama and a bipartisan group of senators are eager to pass an immigration bill this year, with their main points of disagreement, deliberated in public and in private, centering around topics like border security, guest-worker programs and how long undocumented immigrants should have to wait before gaining citizenship.
There's one issue, however, both sides agree on: The nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants will need to know English before they can earn permanent legal status, commonly referred to as a green card. And therein lies a barely discussed problem with the potential to overwhelm states and put up a barrier to immigrants who want to legalize: The nation’s English as a Second Language system may not be up to the task.
Those familiar with the issue say the woefully underfunded adult ESL system would face challenges that could stretch it to its breaking point. They include the influx of millions of new students, a severe lack of clarity around funding, and the need for more flexible learning situations, as many immigrants—who often work several jobs—will find it difficult to attend classes.

The current ESL system is "cobbled together with toothpicks and Band-Aids,” said Paul Musselman, the president of Carnegie Speech, a virtual learning company that makes language software.
It would be “insane” to require illegal immigrants to learn English, added Leslie Robbins, the executive director of Riverside Language Program in Manhattan, which teaches legal immigrants intensive English courses. For one, she noted, the system is already overloaded. "There's not enough funding currently to deal with the numbers of people who both need and want English-language instruction," she said.
And Margie McHugh, an expert on immigrant integration issues at the Migration Policy Institute think tank, noted that the idea that somehow the system could accommodate 11 million new people is beyond anyone’s imagination."
McHugh estimated that, without schooling, about 55 percent of undocumented immigrants wouldn’t be able to pass the English portion of the U.S. citizenship test—which requires someone to understand English phrases when spoken to slowly and with repetition—if it were given today. That means about 4 million to 5 million people could simultaneously need instruction under the immigration reform law.
Politicians want to add a stricter English requirement in the reform bill in part to make sure undocumented immigrants are integrating and able to succeed economically. Immigrants who speak English well earn on average between 10 and 24 percent more than immigrants who don't, according to several studies, which means providing effective English courses could have a huge economic impact for the country as a whole and immigrants themselves. (Legal immigrants to the U.S. are not required to learn English to gain a green card, but must pass an English test in order to become citizens.)
But the current system in place for teaching English to the nations’ immigrants—state- and federally-funded classes provided by a patchwork of community colleges, public libraries and other community organizations—has been hit hard by state budget cuts since the recession began. Nationwide, 1.1 million people were enrolled in ESL courses in the 2006-2007 year, compared with just 730,000 people last academic year due to those cuts.
States may end up shouldering hefty costs associated with immigration reform if lawmakers don’t explicitly reimburse them in a bill. In 1986, Congress promised to reimburse state and local governments $4 billion in costs associated with the amnesty program, including providing adult ESL classes.

But even if the money's there, existing ESL classes on average have not proven to be all that effective at teaching its students English, in part because many immigrants don't have the time to attend classes frequently enough to make a difference.
Some techies as well as immigrant advocates, however, are hoping new language-learning software and online courses could help solve some of the issues, softening the blow to the ESL system if immigration reform passes.
“We need to get out there that there has to be a different way for people to learn English fast and with digital skills,” said Ada Williams Prince, the policy director for OneAmerica, a nonprofit immigration advocacy group. “It’s not enough to sit people in an ESL class."
A handful of colleges and community organizations are already experimenting with lower-cost digital ESL classes that use free online language programs instead of costly textbooks. They also allow teachers to have larger classes or, in at least one case, remove the need for ESL-trained teachers altogether.
A Gates Foundation-funded pilot program in Washington state—with the help of OneAmerica—taught 250 immigrants English in a 13-week program last year using free language-learning software provided by Livemocha, a Rosetta Stone-like online tool. Students were each given a laptop with a permanent Internet connection and worked in class with the help of a tech coach, but no formally trained ESL teacher. They also spent hours of their own time using Livemocha at home, with the goal of learning both digital and English skills at once.
This fall, another online ESL pilot program funded with $3.5 million by the Gates Foundation will begin in 10 community colleges, also in Washington. The colleges, partnering with Livemocha, will create an interactive curriculum including video and text chatting with native English speakers as a way to improve conversational skills. Each student will be given a laptop or tablet, but this time they'll be assisted by trained ESL teachers and tech coaches in classrooms.
The colleges hope the program will eventually be cheaper than traditional ESL classes, despite the costs of computers. They also hope the digital approach will be more effective than their previous textbook-based ESL classes, which have had a dismal track record of moving students to higher levels of English.
“We don’t believe it is more expensive to put technology in the hands of students than it is to put really not very exciting books in the hands of students,” Kathy Cooper, a policy associate at the Washington State Board for Community & Technical Colleges, said.
These types of online language programs weren't available 25 years ago when Congress passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which required the 2.7 million undocumented immigrants who were legalized under that law to enroll in at least 40 hours of English courses before obtaining green cards. No one knows how effective these courses were, because immigrants were not required to take a test at the end of them. But experts estimate it takes about 600 hours of instruction for someone to move from the bottom levels of English understanding to a conversational competence, which suggests 40 hours would not do much toward helping someone become fluent.
The Department of Education would have final say on which ESL classes are approved, but experts think it's possible it would approve online classes.
“I'm sure that if they go with a 40-hour seat time requirement that many people would try to come up with an online way for folks to fulfill that,” said the Migration Policy Institute's McHugh. She added that the Department of Education would have to create “appropriate safeguards” to make sure the programs were high-quality.
Of course, the digital divide creates its own share of problems: Immigrants are far less likely than nonimmigrants in the U.S. to have access to a computer or Internet connection. (That wouldn’t be an issue if students are provided with computers as they are in the Gates-funded programs.)
Some in the ESL field also cautioned that digital-language programs may make instruction better and more efficient, but it will not replace the need for a qualified teacher and classroom.
"When we use technology it’s an enhancement, not a replacement,” said Helene Rubenstein, the coordinator for ESL programs at the School of Visual Arts in Manhattan.
Whatever the solution, McHugh said she hopes Congress does not scrimp on funding. Good English classes, she noted, are necessary "if we really expect people to succeed in integrating or improving their long-term prospects of joining their mainstream workforce and community."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 26, 2013, 04:45:09 pm

Immigration detainees released in budget crunch

Apparent, it's the Dpt of Homeland Security that's behind this.



DHS releasing illegal immigrants before sequester

WASHINGTON (AP) — A week before mandatory budget cuts go into effect across the government, the Department of Homeland Security has started releasing illegal immigrants being held in immigration jails across the country, Immigration and Customs Enforcement said Tuesday.
Gillian Christensen, an ICE spokeswoman, said ICE has reviewed "several hundred cases" of immigrants being held in jails around the country and released them in the last week. They have been "placed on an appropriate, more cost-effective form of supervised release," she said.
Christensen said the agency's "priority for detention remains on serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a significant threat to public safety." She did not say how released immigrants were selected or what jails they were released from.
Tuesday's announcement of jail releases is the first tangible impact of the looming budget cuts for DHS.
The Obama administration has been issuing dire warnings about the impact of the sequestration and DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano told reporters at the White House Monday that across-the-board cuts would impact the department's core operations, including border security and airport screening operations
She also warned that DHS might not be able to afford to keep the 34,000 immigration jail beds mandated by Congress. On average last week, there were 30,773 people being held in ICE jails.
"I don't think we can maintain the same level of security at all places around the country with sequester as without sequester," said Napolitano, adding that the impact would be "'like a rolling ball. It will keep growing."
According to the National Immigration Forum, it costs the government about $164 a day to keep an illegal immigrant facing deportation jailed. In a report on immigration detention costs last year the advocacy group said costs for supervised release can range from about 30 cents to $14 a day.
Republicans lawmakers decried the releases Tuesday.
"It's abhorrent that President (Barack) Obama is releasing criminals into our communities to promote his political agenda on sequestration," House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte. "By releasing criminal immigrants onto the streets, the Administration is needlessly endangering American lives. It also undermines our efforts to come together with the Administration and reform our nation's immigration laws."
The administration asked for about $1.96 billion for immigration jail operations in the last budget. It amounts to about $5.4 million a day, according to the National Immigration Forum's report.
Christensen said Tuesday that released immigrants will still face deportation proceedings.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Boldhunter on February 26, 2013, 10:18:01 pm
Uh-Oh...There's this movie called "Olympus Has Fallen" coming out on 3-22-13 Sounds similar to their virals...

Jude 1:11 KJV

Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 26, 2013, 10:30:06 pm
Uh-Oh...There's this movie called "Olympus Has Fallen" coming out on 3-22-13 Sounds similar to their virals...

Jude 1:11 KJV

Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

Yeah, just saw the trailer for it on youtube - not something to recommend, but nonetheless more predictive programming...interesting Hollywood has yet again put China as the bad guys.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on February 27, 2013, 01:49:10 am
Yeah, that movie is about the White House being taken over or something. I guess they'd get better results naming it Olympus rather than "America Has Fallen". Don't want to be too in your face about it. But the reality is, yes, Olympus has fallen, from within, the country has been taken over, and not a single shot fired.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 27, 2013, 07:54:04 pm

2/27/13 Immigration reform: A GOP point man envisions (circuitous) path to citizenship

GOP Rep. Bob Goodlatte outlines a possible sequence of steps on immigration reform, at the end of which undocumented immigrants could seek US citizenship, standing in line with all others. A compromise both right and left can support?

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R) of Virginia opposes a unique path to citizenship for the more than 10 million undocumented immigrants in the United States today –but that shouldn’t stop those same individuals from becoming US citizens at some point.

“There’s a broad spectrum between deportation and easy, special pathway to citizenship,” Representative Goodlatte said Wednesday at a breakfast with reporters sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor, “to find a way to bring people out of the shadows and give them a legal status that will allow them to be better able to participate in our society."
Goodlatte, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which handles immigration issues, and other conservatives including Rep. Raúl Labrador (R) of Idaho are among those attempting the politically perilous task of piloting legislation on immigration reform. Their challenge is to chart a course that reform critics will not deride as "amnesty" for those who entered the US illegally and that emerging Latino and Asian voters will not rebuke as anti-immigrant.

In Goodlatte's view, the course to an immigration deal begins by determining how to give undocumented individuals legal status in the US. Then it adds reforms to America’s legal immigration system, including clearing many of the huge backlogs that exist for some groups of people seeking permanent legal status, a precursor to citizenship.

Only then would the formerly undocumented be able to apply for citizenship – citing family ties, employment-based sponsorship, or other means – but they would be in the application pool with all others hoping to secure a coveted US green card, the congressman said. He also noted that discussions are ongoing about how to amend restrictions that prevent unauthorized immigrants from adjusting their US status for up to a decade, a fix that would remove another impediment to citizenship for those currently in the country illegally.
“Those are good opportunities we could address,” Goodlatte said.

This circuitous citizenship route is what Goodlatte and other conservative lawmakers see as a potentially practical compromise to get immigration legislation through Congress.
“Everybody has a different definition of what a pathway to citizenship is,” he said. To me, rather than getting bogged down in semantics we should look at what actually would enable us to find common ground that would enable us to pass legislation.”
For liberals in Congress, however, the absence of a specific pathway to citizenship for the undocumented risks creating a permanent group of "second-class citizens" who shoulder many of the responsibilities of citizenship but have none of the political rights, as Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D) of Illinois, a key immigration negotiator, argues frequently.

As a practical matter, they say, putting as many as 10 million people into a system that currently admits 1 million per year will lead to years upon years of waiting.

“I don’t think there is a magic number” of years to wait for citizenship, said Angela Maria Kelley, an immigration specialist at the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, during a call with reporters on Friday.

Undocumented immigrants “can’t jump ahead of those in family or other backlogs, but [the time] can’t be so long that they’re being admitted to nursing homes at the same time they’re applying for citizenship,” Ms. Kelley said.

Liberal advocates also note that an immigration deal that lacks a pathway to citizenship could be politically explosive among the growing number of Asian and Latino voters.

“I find it stunning and cynical and short-sighted, and I think it will set [Republicans] back” politically, Kelley said. “If there are any Republicans in the House whose goal it is to rebrand themselves and be Republican Party 2.0 with the Latino community, this is taking them way back, back to the era of fax machines,” Kelley continued. “It would be highly insulting. I hope this is early chest-thumping.... I hope they would calm down.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 01, 2013, 12:01:59 am
Uh-Oh...There's this movie called "Olympus Has Fallen" coming out on 3-22-13 Sounds similar to their virals...

Jude 1:11 KJV

Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

There's another very-OWG themed movie coming out a couple of months from now - "Erased"(Yahoo put up the trailer recently). Biometrics, video cameras at street corners, the whole enchalada - plot centers around a man who's entire identity gets erased, and is on the run from the CIA - speaking of which when the mark of the beast prophecy comes to pass, I wonder if that will be the case here...everyone who takes it will have to go through a program to get their old memory in their brain swiped, and re-programmed and remote-controlled...scripture does say those who take the mark will burn in the lake of fire forever. It's as if NWO's programming arm Hollywood is really gearing up their predictive programming fast now.

Come to think of it, Hollywood has made a few of these futuristic movies centering around characters getting their old memory swiped the last 20 or so years.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 01, 2013, 02:50:48 pm

How the GOP Could Break an Unwritten Rule and Pass Immigration Reform

House Republican leaders eschewed a long-held principle when they held a vote on the Violence Against Women Act on Thursday. Only 87 out of 232 House Republicans backed that bill, but they still chose to bring it to a vote.
That decision made all the difference. The bill passed thanks to near-unanimous support from House Democrats and backing from some Republicans.
By allowing the bill to come to a vote, Republicans broke the "Hastert Rule" -- named after former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). The basic idea: don't let something come to a vote unless a majority of the party supports it.
If the unofficial Hastert rule is no longer a precedent for House Republicans, that could have a implications for other controversial, bigger pieces of legislation this year, such as immigration reform.
The rule has been a guiding convention for House Republicans for years. Hastert coined the phrase in a 2004 speech, in which he said that the House would only bring a bill to the floor if "a majority of the majority" (i.e., a majority of Republicans) backed it. Since then, Republicans have largely operated under that rule when they have controlled the House of Representatives, including under the current speakership of John Boehner (R-Ohio).
But Thursday's vote was not the first time this year that House GOP leaders allowed a vote on a bill that did not enjoy support from the majority of their conference. A deal to avert the fiscal cliff at the beginning of the year passed the House with only 85 Republican votes at the tail end of the last Congress. And only 49 Republicans voted for a relief package for victims of Superstorm Sandy, which passed into law.
That has led some to believe the rule could be tossed aside again on key issues, a bow to the reality of divided government.
"The idea that you're going to do everything just within your party might be a good idea [for the GOP], but it's not going to last very long," said Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a long-time observer of Congress.
Ornstein added that bills that can pass the Democrat-controlled Senate and receive President Barack Obama's signature "are probably going to require more Democrats than Republicans" to vote for them in the House.
Boehner's flock of House Republicans is uncompromising, often more so than their GOP colleagues in the Senate. For example, 35 percent of House Republicans voted for the fiscal cliff deal compared to 85 percent of Senate Republicans.
Thus Boehner may not be able to follow Hastert's mantra if he wants to ensure that the House does not become mired in gridlock and maintain his conference's credibility, argued John Feehery, a lobbyist and former communications director for Hastert. Feehery would know -- he penned the "majority of the majority" speech.
"I think John Boehner won't have much of a choice in these first several months of the 113th Congress. He has to get stuff done," Feehery wrote in a January op-ed column titled, "Rules Are Made to Be Broken."
"The Speaker doesn't have much room to maneuver," he added. "His conference is in no mood to compromise, nor in much of a mood to vote for anything that resembles responsible governance."
Boehner's office played coy as to how or if the majority-of-the-majority-principle would be applied to future votes.
"The current Speaker has never mentioned such a rule," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in an e-mail.
The weakened Hastert Rule could have an impact on a wide range of pressing fiscal issues, including a fix to replace the $85 billion in mandatory spending cuts this year known as "sequestration."
But it has also given Democrats hope that some of their legislative priorities, such as comprehensive immigration reform, could get through the GOP-controlled House. Obama has said that he wants a bill passed as soon as this summer and groups of lawmakers in both chambers have begun to draft legislation.
"It's clear that the Hastert Rule isn't as hard and fast as it has appeared to be over the past couple of years," Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), a member of a bipartisan working group in the House drafting immigration reform legislation, told ABC/Univision. "That does provide hope that if we were in a situation where the Senate passed an immigration reform bill and the president and American people were demanding a bill, that Speaker Boehner could find a way to move the legislation toward a sensible outcome if a majority of House Republicans do not support it."
Gutierrez said, however, that the aim is to come up with a bill that satisfies both a majority of Republicans and Democrats, undoubtedly a tough task.
"That would be a plan B, regardless," he added. "The best scenario is to have a bill where the Hastert Rule isn't a hindrance."
So far, Boehner has been able to bring bills to the floor without majority Republican support while not experiencing a major backlash from the rank-and-file. For example, he allowed a floor vote on a version of the Violence Against Women Act that was backed by House Republicans, but the version of the bill did not contain specific protections for undocumented immigrants, Native Americans, gays, and lesbians. That bill failed to pass and the House later approved another version with the protections included, even though the bill didn't have majority Republican support in the House.
But Ornstein said it's unclear how many more times Boehner and House leaders could accomplish that kind of maneuver before it foments a rebellion from Republicans who represent very conservative districts, which could undermine his role as Speaker of the House.
At the same time, Ornstein said, Boehner must recognize demands from top Republicans who believe the party must address controversial issues like immigration in an effort to help repair their standing with Hispanic voters. Some GOP strategists have said that will be necessary to remain competitive in national elections.
"There's no tougher job in the country than Boehner's at this point," Ornstein said.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 01, 2013, 03:01:21 pm
Senate Republicans sell immigration plan to House

McCain, Graham, Flake met with House hardliners to promote immigration plan

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Republican Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Jeff Flake met with key House conservatives this week to promote legislation to overhaul the nation's immigration laws and provide a pathway to citizenship for an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants, McCain's communications director said Friday.

McCain, R-Ariz.; Graham, R-S.C.; and Flake, R-Ariz., are members of a bipartisan group of eight senators working to craft a comprehensive immigration bill to enhance border security, streamline legal immigration, ensure employers don't hire illegal immigrants and provide eventual citizenship to illegal immigrants already here.

If it gets through the Senate, the legislation faces a potentially tough road with House Republicans skeptical of granting citizenship to illegal immigrants, and the meeting included at least one lawmaker known for taking a hard line on the issue.

"Sen. McCain was glad to have the opportunity to update key House members and get their advice and recommendations on this important effort. He looks forward to continuing these conversations as we move forward," said Brian Rogers, McCain's communications director.

Members present Thursday at the meeting organized by the House Republican Policy Committee included Rep. Steve King of Iowa and Rep. Raul Labrador of Idaho.

King is known for decrying amnesty for illegal immigrants while Labrador has said he supports finding a way to legalize the status of illegal immigrants already here, while rejecting the idea of giving them a special pathway to citizenship.

McCain, Graham, Flake and others argue that Republicans must tackle comprehensive immigration legislation partly to win back support from Latino voters crucial to national election outcomes, but that argument is a harder sell to House members who often represent overwhelmingly white districts.

Title: DHS released over 2,000 immigrants
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 01, 2013, 04:34:15 pm
AP Exclusive: DHS released over 2,000 immigrants

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Homeland Security Department released from its jails more than 2,000 illegal immigrants facing deportation in recent weeks due to looming budget cuts and planned to release 3,000 more during March, The Associated Press has learned.
The newly disclosed figures, cited in internal budget documents reviewed by the AP, are significantly higher than the "few hundred" illegal immigrants the Obama administration acknowledged this week had been released under the budget-savings process.
The government documents show that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement released roughly 1,000 illegal immigrants from its jails around the U.S. each week since at least Feb. 15. The agency's field offices have reported more than 2,000 immigrants released before intense criticism this week led to a temporary shutdown of the plan, according to the documents.
The states where immigrants were released include Arizona, California, Georgia and Texas.
The White House has said it was not consulted about the releases, and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has acknowledged they occurred in a manner she regrets. White House spokesman Jay Carney on Wednesday said the government had released "a few hundred" of the roughly 30,000 illegal immigrants held in federal detention pending deportation proceedings. Carney said the immigrants released were "low-risk, noncriminal detainees," and the decision was made by career ICE officials.
As of last week, the agency held an average daily population of 30,733 in its jails. The internal budget documents reviewed by the AP show the Obama administration had intended to reduce those figures to 25,748 by March 31.
The White House did not comment immediately Friday on the higher number of immigrants released.
ICE spokesman Brian Hale said Friday the numbers of immigration detainees fluctuate daily, but he reiterated only several hundred illegal immigrants had been released. "Beyond that normal movement, and as fiscal uncertainty remains over the continuing resolution and possible sequestration, ICE reviewed its detained population to ensure detention levels stay within ICE's current budget and placed several hundred individuals on methods of supervision less costly than detention," Hale said in a statement. "At this point, we don't anticipate additional releases, but that could change."
The immigrants who were released still eventually face deportation and are required to appear for upcoming court hearings. But they are no longer confined in immigration jails, where advocacy experts say they cost about $164 per day per person. Immigrants who are granted supervised release — with conditions that can include mandatory check-ins, home visits and GPS devices — cost the government from 30 cents to $14 a day, according to the National Immigration Forum, a group that advocates on behalf of immigrants.
The release of thousands from immigration jails is consistent with Napolitano's early warnings on Monday — hours before anyone knew publicly that any illegal immigrants had been released — that the pending, automatic budget cuts known as the sequester would limit the government's ability to maintain enough detention center beds for at least 34,000 immigrants.
"We're doing our very best to minimize the impacts of sequester, but there's only so much I can do," Napolitano said Monday. "You know, I'm supposed to have 34,000 detention beds for immigration. How do I pay for those?"
Late Thursday, after intense criticism over what the administration acknowledged was the release this week of several hundred immigrants, Napolitano told ABC News that she had been surprised to learn about the action.
"Detainee populations and how that is managed back and forth is really handled by career officials in the field," Napolitano told ABC. "Do I wish that this all hadn't been done all of a sudden and so that people weren't surprised by it? Of course."
The announcement that a few hundred illegal immigrants were being released was among the most significant and direct implications described so far by the automatic budget cuts. Republicans in Congress quickly criticized the decision and pressed the Homeland Security Department for details, including the number of illegal immigrants released and the nature of any criminal charges they were facing as part of the deportation process.
"Simply blaming budget reductions as a means to turn a blind eye toward the national security of the American people is a dangerous plan, and one that calls into question the department's preparations for sequestration," wrote two Republican lawmakers, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
The senior Homeland Security Department official in charge of arresting and deporting illegal immigrants announced his retirement to his staff on Tuesday, the same day the administration first openly confirmed the release of what it called several hundred immigrants. The executive associate director over ICE enforcement and removal operations, Gary Mead, told his staff he was leaving his job with mixed emotions. A career law enforcement officer, Mead will leave at the end of April.
After AP reported on Mead's retirement, ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said his decision was not related to criticism over the jail releases and said Mead had notified the agency's senior leaders "several weeks ago" that he intended to leave. She also called AP's reporting about Mead's departure "inaccurate and misleading." On Thursday, ICE corrected her statement to say that Mead has notified his bosses "more than a week ago," not several weeks ago.
The later government statement also criticized AP's reporting as "ill-informed, inaccurate information" and complained that AP had failed to contact the agency before publishing what it called a "misguided headline," although the AP had noted its unsuccessful efforts to contact Mead directly by telephone and email.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 02, 2013, 04:33:09 am
Again, more petty games by the feds.

What I would like to know is how do they save money from letting go somebody that's already in custody? If they know they are here illegally, then put them on a bus and send them out of the country. What's the problem? The problem is the federal government is playing games with immigration.

Consider that the fewer people they officially deport, the smaller the number will be, thus giving the impression that illegals entering the country has decreased seeing there are less people deported.

Immigration and how the federal government is handling it is in my opinion one of the biggest insults to the American public since the Civil War. We literally have a government that is letting foreigners into the country in violation of federal and state laws, intentionally. These people are outright doing it on purpose as an open disregard for US immigration law.

What the US has is a rogue government. God help us because the ONLY way for a population to deal with it's own government having gone rogue is to remove those government officials in violation of the law, by force if necessary, and then go back over the books and overturn all the bad legislation passed unconstitutionally. I don't see that happening.

Prophecy just doesn't suggest anything of the sort will happen. In fact, it says things will only get worse.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 04, 2013, 04:55:29 pm

Is Jeb Bush trying to scuttle immigration reform?

One of the GOP's most influential leaders appears to change his mind, now saying he's against a path to citizenship
In what appears to be a remarkable about-face, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush on Monday stepped back from his previous position on immigration reform, telling NBC's Today that he does not support a path to citizenship for immigrants who entered the country illegally. "I think there has to be some difference between people who come here legally and illegally," Bush said. "It is just a matter of common sense and a matter of the rule of law. If we're not going to apply the law fairly and consistently, we're going to have another wave of illegal immigrants coming into the country."
Bush is even more explicit in a forthcoming book called Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution that he co-authored with lawyer Clint Bolick. According to Elise Foley at The Huffington Post, who nabbed a copy of the book before its official publication date, Bush and Bolick write, "It is absolutely vital to the integrity of our immigration system that actions have consequences — in this case, that those who violated the law can remain but cannot obtain the cherished fruits of citizenship." They continue: "To do otherwise would signal once again that people who circumvent the system can still obtain the full benefits of American citizenship."
Technically, Bush says he does support a path to citizenship, but only if undocumented immigrants return to their home countries and apply through legal channels. That is miles away from his previous stance on the issue. As recently as January, Bush and Book wrote the following in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal (emphasis added):
A practicable system of work-based immigration for both high-skilled and low-skilled immigrants — a system that will include a path to citizenship — will help us meet workforce needs, prevent exportation of jobs to foreign countries and protect against the exploitation of workers…
America's immigration system should provide opportunities for people who share the country's core values to become citizens, thereby strengthening the nation as have countless immigrants have before them. [The Wall Street Journal]
In addition, Bush spent much of the 2012 presidential campaign criticizing Republicans — and by implication, standard-bearer Mitt Romney — for taking a hard-line stance on immigration. Bush's new position has angered at least one member of the Romney campaign, according to The Miami Herald:
"Where the hell was this Jeb Bush during the campaign?" said one advisor. "He spent all this time criticizing Romney and it turns out he has basically the same position. So he wants people to go back to their country and apply for citizenship? Well, that's self deportation. We got creamed for talking about that. And now Jeb is saying the same thing."
Asked to respond, Bush said by email: "i am not advocating self  deportation. read the book
." [The Miami Herald]
What is the former Florida governor hoping to accomplish? There was immediate speculation that Bush, who is considered a possible presidential contender in 2016, is seeking to place himself to the right of Sen. Marco Rubio, a fellow Floridian who is leading a bipartisan effort to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would likely include a pathway to citizenship for undocumented workers. When asked by NBC whether he was running for president, Bush left the door wide open. "I have a voice," he said. "I want to share my beliefs about how the conservative movement and the Republican Party can regain its footing, because we've lost our way." When pressed, he refused to rule out a run. "I won't," he said, "but I'm not going to declare today either."
Others say that Bush's shift reflects the stubborn fact that the GOP is not serious about comprehensive reform, despite Rubio's efforts and the appeals of party leaders (one of whom used to be Bush himself). "If I had to hazard a guess," writes Jamelle Bouie at The American Prospect, "this is another sign Republicans are moving away from comprehensive immigration reform, and towards something more piecemeal and less effective."
And where does that leave Rubio's proposal? According to Benjy Sarlin at Talking Points Memo:
"Wow," Marshall Fitz, director of immigration policy at the liberal Center For American Progress, told TPM in an email. "For a guy who has been a luminary on this issue for the GOP, his endorsement of such a regressive policy is deeply troubling."
The big question going forward, Fitz said, is "whether it cuts Rubio’s legs out from under him" by pressuring his right flank, or merely gives Rubio more power within the bipartisan gang negotiating a bill by demonstrating that conservative concerns about a bill are still a major hurdle that only he can address. [Talking Points Memo]

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 05, 2013, 10:09:43 pm

Immigration officials tight-lipped about detainee release. What is known?

Here are the basics about the detainee release – from the terminology that immigration officials use to a glimpse into the kinds of people who have been released.

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) said last week it was releasing a "few hundred" detainees to save money ahead of the automatic spending cuts in the “sequester.” A few days later, the Associated Press reported that the move involved closer to 2,000 detainees, who were set free from Atlanta to Livingston, Texas.
As criticism about the move – was it a sequester-related scare tactic by the White House? – rose from politicians like House Speaker John Boehner, ICE contended that it did not coordinate with the White House. The released detainees, it said, were "noncriminals and other low-risk offenders who do not have serious criminal histories."
But this week, Gov. Rick Perry (R) of Texas has been among those suggesting a more sinister development – that many of the released detainees are "criminal aliens," whose release onto the streets represents a massive and "unconscionable ... federally sponsored jailbreak."

 RECOMMENDED: Could you pass a US citizenship test?

To be sure, immigration record keeping and reporting are so poor in the United States that entire academic departments make their hay out of squeezing ICE for information and then analyzing the data for public consumption. When a nonpartisan immigration think tank released a report about ICE's work on the border recently, one person at the center suggested with a sigh that the report told a powerful tale that the agency had largely failed to tell itself.
Yet the lack of detailed information from ICE about its detainee policy has only added fuel to the questions and criticisms surrounding the detainee release.
Here it what is known so far about the release – from the terminology ICE uses for illegal immigrants to a glimpse into the kinds of people ICE has released.

Want your top political issues explained? Get customized DC Decoder updates.
The detainee controversy comes after other moves by the Obama administration. Since early in the Obama presidency, ICE has used greater discretion in deciding whom to target for deportation, focusing on those deemed higher risks to public safety. And last year, the administration set up a program that allows young illegal immigrants who were brought to the US as children to be eligible for work permits.
The new ICE move comes as Republicans weigh how far to go on agreeing to a "path to citizenship" as part of a looming immigration reform package. Both Democrats and Republicans, in fact, have used the detainee release for political posturing in the larger immigration debate.
Critics say the release shows that the Obama administration is not willing to enforce the existing laws that target undocumented immigrants – which for the critics could be an immigration-reform deal breaker. Others counterargue that the administration's actions actually show it's serious. Not only has the White House beefed up border security, they say, but President Obama has also deported more illegal immigrants per year than has any other president.
At least part of the detainee release has to do with the number of detention beds. A congressional funding mandate says that 34,000 detention beds need to be filled (with an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living in the US). But a day before ICE announced the detainee release, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano talked about reducing the number of detention beds.
Indeed, ICE officials have begun whittling down the number of beds without congressional approval. Facing the sequester, ICE officials plan to draw down to as few as 26,000 beds by March 31, the Associated Press said after its review of DHS records. The savings is about $150 per night, per bed.
Critics see in the bed reduction a willful ignorance of Congress. And such disregard is an ongoing point of contention and distrust between especially House Republicans and Mr. Obama. But according to the administration, the release was simply an acceleration of the discretionary decisions already being made by ICE – weighing detainees' flight risks and criminal past against available bed space.
Those released have been put into so-called alternatives-to-detention programs, which include phone check-ins and GPS anklets. They show up for court 96 percent of the time, data indicate. But overall, illegal immigrants notified by mail of deportation proceedings against them decide 59 percent of the time not to show up, according to the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), an anti-illegal immigration think tank in Washington.
Another issue that has come up in the detainee release is ICE’s terminology, which in the eyes of many is head-shakingly vague. ICE uses the term "criminal aliens" to describe persons found guilty of minor violations such as traffic offenses, as well as people convicted on more-serious charges such as assault – and it also describes those who have simply committed immigration violations.
More recently, however, ICE has tried to finesse the definition of what constitutes a criminal alien, saying it would spend most of its resources detaining and deporting "high-risk criminal aliens." This refers to those who had committed crimes more serious than misdemeanor traffic tickets.
Since 2010, the Obama administration has stepped up deportations for high-risk criminal aliens, a group that made up 27 percent of detainees in 2009 and 43 percent in 2010.
Questions about criminality in the detainee population have loomed large after the recent release, especially since law-and-order perceptions about illegal immigrants are a key part of immigration politics.
Politicians like Governor Perry have been dissatisfied with the amount of information ICE has given out about the detainees.
“Aside from allowing this federally sponsored jailbreak to occur, ICE has also failed to provide any information regarding the number of detainees released, their countries of origin, locations where these individuals have been released, and the reasons they were detained – despite repeated requests from my office," Perry wrote on Monday to John Morton, director of ICE. "The finger pointing at the highest levels of the Obama administration and unwillingness to take responsibility for this massive security threat is unacceptable.”
Media organizations have tracked down some of those involved in the detainee release, giving some insight into the kinds of people ICE saw fit to release.
Anthony Orlando Williams, a Jamaican national in his 50s now staying in Stone Mountain, Ga., was thrown into detention three years ago for violating probation after a 2005 conviction of simple assault, simple battery, and child abuse, all tied to a domestic dispute, according to The New York Times. "I'm good, man. I'm free," he told the paper.
Another man probably released as part of the sequester move was Miguel Hernandez, a 19-year-old illegal immigrant who had been picked up in rural Georgia. "I'm not a criminal," Mr. Hernandez told CNN, although he noted that he thought some of those who were released along with him may have been previously deported.
Time will tell if those freed comply with the terms of their release. If ICE is right, and the release becomes part of an argument against mass incarceration of “low risk” illegal immigrants, then the budget cuts may have presaged sound policy, some immigration-policy experts suggest.
"This really points out that despite the rhetoric about our targeting hardened criminals, there's actually not that many hardened criminal illegal immigrants to go around," says Allert Brown-Gort, an immigration expert at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. "There are lots and lots of people in the system that are clearly no danger to society, which is why [programs like the release and alternatives-to-detention] make sense."
Critics, meanwhile, maintain that the detainee release is a ruse that has little to do with budgets – and that ICE's lack of details bolsters the argument that politics is afoot.
"Obviously there's nothing in the sequester that says ICE has to release anybody: The idea is absurd," says Steven Camarota, research director at CIS. "They could hold or defer some payments, they could furlough some part of a bloated bureaucracy, but instead they chose to release illegals."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 06, 2013, 02:57:03 am
I tell ya, if i weren't a Christian and were into the world and being a citizen and all that carnal stuff, I'd be really p.o.'d at the way representatives are acting. The whole immigration issue is purely political, and politicians continue to play games with the public.

"Obviously there's nothing in the sequester that says ICE has to release anybody: The idea is absurd," says Steven Camarota, research director at CIS. "They could hold or defer some payments, they could furlough some part of a bloated bureaucracy, but instead they chose to release illegals."

Seriously, somebody should be fired for that stunt. And that kind of stuff is what I'm talking about. People in government running a muck, making a mockery of government based on party bias.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 06, 2013, 08:56:51 pm
Wash. state groups forge compact for immigration reform


Washington joined a handful of other states with a compact in support of immigration reform Tuesday, marking another effort by states to push Congress to overhaul U.S. immigration policies.

The compact, signed by a coalition of more than 40 agriculture, business and faith entities, calls for sensible policies that meet the needs of Washington residents and create a fair path to legal status for illegal immigrants.

The compact includes five principles for keeping families together, ensuring a strong economy and focusing local law enforcement efforts on criminal activities, rather than civil violations of federal code, such as immigration violations.

Similar compacts have been created in Arizona, Texas, Iowa, Colorado and Utah.

Much like those states, though, the Washington state compact offered scant details about what should be included in reform legislation.

The purpose of the compact is not to get into the details of immigration reform, but to promote the values that are essential in resolving the issue and give Congress a push, said former congressman Sid Morrison, a Republican who represented Washington's 4th District from 1980-1992.

The district includes the heavily agricultural Yakima Valley and the larger Columbia River Basin, where thousands of immigrants labor in farm fields, fruit warehouses and vegetable processing plants.

"Being a lifelong part of this valley, I know that they reflect the values of many of the folks who have come here, with good intent, lived the American dream, better themselves, feed their families, and yet were illegal."

Supporters of the compact include the Washington Association of Business, the Washington Growers League and the King County sheriff.

Resolving the issue is the federal government's responsibility, but the compact offers a set of principles that members of Congress should consider as they debate any legislation, said Mike Gempler, executive director of the Washington Growers League.

Making it harder for people to immigrate illegally _ and easier for people to immigrate legally _ will go a long way toward fixing the problem, he said.

But any solution, he said, must include provisions that protect the U.S. and Washington state economies, whether the issue is the general size of the workforce or the need for seasonal workers for agriculture.

"Any bill that is passed into law must consider what kind of workforce is needed for our economy for the future, and how we will achieve it," he said.

Marisol Guerrero, 36, traveled from Sunnyside to Yakima for the announcement with her two children, 7-year-old Ashley and 4-year-old Bryan.

"It's important for me to see reform, so that students can achieve their dreams," she said. "I'm a single mom and I'm the only one who is going to support my kids when they need me."

While in Congress, Morrison co-authored legislation to reform U.S. immigration policies 27 years ago. That bill passed the House, but failed in the Senate.

Morrison said he believes immigration issues could have been resolved then. He now serves on the boards of Central Washington University and Energy Northwest, the public-power consortium that operates the Northwest's only commercial nuclear reactor.

Washington state hires more college graduates than any other state, but graduates fewer of its own citizens, he said.

"We're kidding ourselves by not looking at the resource we have here in people," Morrison said.

Ridding these people of the "illegal cloud" enables them to be trained as documented workers, he said, adding, "These are some of the best workers in the world, no matter what they pursue."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 07, 2013, 02:34:32 am
Ridding these people of the "illegal cloud" enables them to be trained as documented workers, he said, adding, "These are some of the best workers in the world, no matter what they pursue."

Translation: We need slaves to do the dirty work.

And pay no attention that the worker, while "some of the best", are breaking the law right off the bat and they haven't even started their job yet and they are already criminals, and traitors to their home countries they left behind. Criminals don't run their mouths, and their handlers know it.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 07, 2013, 04:36:04 pm

Latinos Closing Digital Divide, Poll Shows

A new study out today shows Latinos are closing the digital divide -- and cell phones are the device of choice.
The report released today by the Pew Hispanic Research Center found that, in just three years, the gap between whites' and Latinos' use of Internet closed by half.
In 2009, only 64 percent of Hispanics used the Internet, compared to 72 percent of blacks and 80 percent of whites. In 2012 Hispanics matched blacks in usage at 78 percent, while whites slightly increased to 87 percent.
"These are trends we've been following for awhile," said Mark Lopez, associate director of the Pew Hispanic Center. "Some of the biggest gains that were made, particularly in Internet use, among Latinos were among foreign-born and among Spanish-dominant Latinos who had very low usage rates just a few years ago."
Most Latino Internet users depend on their mobile devices, rather than desktops and laptops, when accessing the Internet -- 76 percent, versus 60 percent of whites.
Hispanics and blacks outpaced whites in cell phone ownership at 86 percent, 90 percent and 78 percent, respectively.
It is a trend that could be, in part, because of Pew's findings that Latinos lag whites when it comes to desktop and laptop ownership (72 percent Hispanics vs. 83 percent whites) and nearly half (47 percent) of Latino adults live in cell-phone-only households. Comparatively, 38 percent of blacks and 30 percent of whites don't have a landline, a trend that has grown significantly since 2004 when only 6 percent of Hispanics, 4 percent of blacks and 4 percent of whites did not have one.
While Spanish-dominant and foreign-born Latinos have helped close the gap in Internet use, when it comes to social media, most (60 percent) who are tweeting and Facebooking are doing it in English, and at rates similar to other groups.
"It is interesting that, when it comes to social media, English is the dominant language," Lopez said.
He added that it probably has to do with the large, young generation present in the Latino community.
"Many Latinos are young and most likely to adopt those technologies first," he said, citing Pew's findings that those households with children under 18 are more likely to use newer technologies than those without children.
"[It] may be having spillover effects, but we don't know," Lopez said. "What's interesting about this is this a reflection of the relative use of [the] Latino community and also suggests that when it comes to a lot of newer technology Latinos are adopting them at similar rates to those of other groups. So as technology becomes more important, this may actually be an important phenomenon for Latinos moving forward."
Elianne Ramos, who is principal at Speak Hispanic Communications and had no part in the Pew research, said that the use of cell phones for Internet use could also be attributed to the lack of access for home Internet connectivity.
"One lifeline is the cell phone," she said. People may be "using it to access the Internet [because] it is their only connection to the online world."
In today's Hispanic culture, most are Internet consumers, Ramos said, adding that this study will be important to look toward the future as they become creators.
"What mobile's doing is it's changing the nature of the divide from being about access to being about quality," she said. "The hope is more people will start becoming content creators instead of consumers. ... Now, we are kind of playing catch up [and] starting to get access, but we still don't have the training."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 11, 2013, 12:58:04 am
Jeb Bush: I'm 'in sync' with Senate Republicans on immigration reform

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush on Sunday downplayed talk that his immigration plan undercuts Senate Republican efforts and said he’s more focused now on solving the country’s problems than positioning himself for a 2016 presidential run.
Bush, a Republican, said he talked with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., part of the Senate group working on an immigration reform proposal, who last week criticized Bush for seeming to not support a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, a key part of the bipartisan group’s plan.
Bush told ABC’s “This Week” that Graham was responding to concerns before Bush’s book on immigration was released.
“I told him that I support his efforts and I applaud what he’s doing,” Bush said. “And he concluded, after he heard what the thesis of the book is, that we’re in sync. We’re on the same path.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/10/jeb-bush-im-in-sync-with-senate-republicans-on-immigration-reform/#ixzz2NCxeOBeQ

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 11, 2013, 06:24:58 pm

Proposed Elements in Bipartisan Senate Pact Creates Second-Class Citizenship
A bipartisan group of senators has reached a tentative agreement to create a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, but that path is filled with stuff both parties usually reject as intolerable for American citizens. The senators hope to finish the bill and present it to the Senate Judiciary Committee by early April, the Los Angeles Times' Brian Bennett reports.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 12, 2013, 09:20:10 pm
Senate Immigration Group: National ID Too Costly

Senators working on a sweeping immigration bill will likely abandon the idea of a new high-tech ID card for workers because it's too expensive, a key negotiator said.

That means their emerging legislation, which they've promised will crack down on employers who hire illegal immigrants, likely will seek to expand a little-used system criticized as error-prone and vulnerable to fraud that employers can use to check the legal status of workers, mainly using Social Security numbers.

The system, called E-Verify, is now purely voluntary, and officials with labor and immigrants' rights groups say it would have to be greatly improved before being required nationally

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., members of the bipartisan Senate immigration negotiating group, had championed creation of a biometric ID card instead that would use personal markers such as fingerprints to make it easy for employers to check the status of prospective hires. But Graham said cost estimates came back higher than he expected.

"That seems to have been cost-prohibitive, so we're looking at other ways to achieve the same goal," Graham told reporters this week at the Capitol.

Graham said no final decision had been made on ditching the biometric ID card idea, which had also sparked civil liberties concerns, and he declined to say how much such a card would cost. A study by the University of California, Berkeley Law School's Warren Institute last year estimated start-up costs to the government for such a program would top $22 billion.

For Graham, Schumer and the other six senators trying to finalize an immigration bill by next month, a workable employer verification system is fundamental to legislation that also would secure the border, improve legal immigration and provide eventual citizenship to the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants already here. The immigration bill signed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986 is often criticized because it legalized nearly 3 million people while offering assurances that employers would have to verify the legal status of workers, but included no real mechanisms to ensure that happened.

Graham said that no amount of border enforcement would stop the flow of illegal immigrants without measures to keep employers from hiring them.

"If you don't control who gets a job, it doesn't matter how high the fence is," Graham said. "The best virtual fence is an employer verification system."

E-Verify was launched as a pilot program in 1997 and now is used by about 7 percent of employers. It's largely voluntary as a federal program but mandatory in some states. Draft immigration legislation by President Barack Obama, which he has said he'll offer if the Senate group doesn't come to agreement quickly enough, would make E-Verify mandatory nationally, and the Senate group is likely to take the same route.

E-Verify allows employers to electronically submit prospective workers' Social Security numbers or other information to be checked against government databases. Critics say it's error-prone because of mistakes in government records and that it has no reliable way to catch someone who is using a fraudulent Social Security number. Immigrants' rights groups also complain that workers can't easily contest disqualifications and that employers have been known to misuse the program by threatening to run workers through E-Verify if they try to organize a union.

The federal Citizenship and Immigration Services, which helps administer the program, says it's gotten progressively easier to use and more accurate.

"Improving the accuracy of the E-Verify system remains our primary goal," Soraya Correa, an associated director at the agency, told a House hearing last month.

But because of how hard it is for a worker to contest a disqualification, critics say any error rate is too high.

"The error rate is low but when applied to the entire American workforce, every workplace in the U.S., that's a problem," said Emily Tulli, an attorney at the National Immigration Law Center. "Only 7 percent of employers are currently utilizing it so if you think about taking that utilization from 7 percent to 93 percent more, it is problematic."

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposed E-Verify for years as cumbersome and unwieldy, but recently decided to support it as long as certain protections are in place for businesses. Randy Johnson, the Chamber's senior vice president for labor, immigration and employee benefits, said the program has improved, and for businesses, it's a reasonable price to pay as part of an overall immigration overhaul. Business supports an immigration overhaul in part because it would ensure a reliable workforce.

Businesses "see this E-Verify system as a necessary slice of the pie to move comprehensive immigration reform forward," Johnson said.

If they do expand E-Verify, senators are expected to endorse ways to make it more reliable and better at detecting ID fraud, such as by expanding the use of photo IDs in the system. For many lawmakers, especially Republicans skeptical of immigration legislation, an airtight employer verification system will be necessary for them to be able to support the bill.

But critics are skeptical that any changes would make the program acceptable.

"The system is still too error-prone," said Chris Calabrese, an attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union. "It will prevent lawfully present Americans from being able to work."

Title: Latino Voters Poll: Same-Sex Couples Should Be Included In Immigration Reform
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 12, 2013, 09:44:32 pm
Latino Voters Poll: Same-Sex Couples Should Be Included In Immigration Reform

WASHINGTON -- Nearly two-thirds of Latino voters support allowing same-sex couples equal immigration rights, according to a poll released Friday, contradicting the often-repeated line that those voters are more socially conservative than average.

The poll was conducted by polling firm Latino Decisions for the group Immigration Equality, which advocates for same-sex couples to be included in reform. Under current law, same-sex couples do not have the same immigration rights as heterosexual ones. An American can't petition for legal status for their same-sex partner because even legal marriages are not recognized at the federal level under the Defense of Marriage Act.

When asked whether same-sex partners should be allowed to petition for legal residency for a spouse, 64 percent of Latino voters said they would support such a policy, while 24 percent said they would oppose it. A strong majority -- 92 percent -- of those who support inclusion in immigration law said it was important that it be made part of reform.

Most Latinos who self-identified as Catholic or evangelical also supported provisions for same-sex couples. For Catholics, views were particularly pronounced when the survey asked about same-sex binational couples who were raising a U.S. citizen child. While 62 percent of Latino voters overall said it was "very important" that those children be able to keep both parents in the U.S., the ratio went up to 70 percent among Catholics.

Exit polling in November found that a majority of Latino voters -- 59 percent -- support state recognition of same-sex marriages, well above the 48 percent of voters overall who supported legalizing gay marriage in their state.

A HuffPost/YouGov poll released Jan. 31 found that 45 percent of Americans support granting the same immigration rights to same-sex couples, while 38 percent are opposed and 17 percent said they are not sure.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 13, 2013, 04:11:36 am
What the heck does same-sex couples and immigration have to do with each other? Nothing. ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 13, 2013, 08:07:33 pm
South Carolina becomes ground zero for immigration reform ad wars
One of the most active states in the ad wars over immigration reform is far from the border—and doesn't even have a large population of foreign workers.
South Carolina, however, is home to two key figures in the push to legalize the nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants and reform the immigration system: Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who is part of a Senate working group drafting a bill, and Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy, who heads the House's immigration subcommittee.
Graham, who could face a primary challenge when he runs for re-election in 2014, has in particular become a target of the ads. NumbersUSA, which opposes legalizing undocumented immigrants and favors lower rates of legal immigration, blanketed South Carolina TV stations with ads last month that accused Graham of supporting "amnesty" for illegal immigrants when unemployment rates for native-born workers is high.
In response, a newly formed super PAC called Republicans for Immigration Reform is defending Graham against those charges. The ads, which start this week, feature Charleston Chamber of Commerce President Bryan Derreberry praising Graham for fighting for "modern immigration laws" that will help the economy.
"Sen. Graham is right on target. ... We have to be able to update our immigration laws," Derreberry says.
Meanwhile, evangelical leaders who support immigration reform are launching their own radio advertisement buy in the state, flooding Christian stations with 450 spots about how Christians are called to welcome immigrants and offer them a path to citizenship. The Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land told reporters on Wednesday that the group of pastors and Christian leaders hopes to counter those who oppose immigration reform by encouraging congregants to call Gowdy, Graham and other politicians and demand immigration reform. The group has already organized hundreds of calls to lawmakers.
"We certainly appreciate Sen. Graham's leadership on this issue both in the last reform debate and this one," Land said. "We believe that that kind of courageous leadership should be supported


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 13, 2013, 09:53:29 pm
Look at the time stamp on this article - TEN HOURS ago...uhm...wasn't it Noon Central then, and the new Pope's name wasn't announced then? Yeah, all of this is pre-determined way ahead of time, then they throw in this dog and pony show.

3/13/13(10 hours ago)
New Pope Reflects Spanish-Speaking Catholics' Importance to the Church

The selection of Jorge Bergoglio of Argentina, a 76-year-old Jesuit who is an advocate for the poor, as the first pontiff from outside Europe should please many U.S. Catholics, almost 30 percent of whom are of Hispanic or Latino heritage.
Of seven news organizations surveyed about the selection process prior to the conclave, only two—the Associated Press and NBC—had listed the Jesuit cardinal from Buenos Aires as a possible pontiff.
A Reuters interactive that rated the possibilities did not even include the priest now called Francis I.

Early analysis of the selection of Bergoglio, born in Argentina to an Italian railroad worker and his wife, indicates he may be a compromise candidate who was runner-up to the cardinal who became Benedict in the last conclave, but Francis is certain to please many Spanish-speaking Catholics.
Argentina's last census placed its total population at 37 million, 70 percent of which are Catholic.
A Population Reference Bureau map, which shows its most recent numbers (from 2004) and projections through 2050, indicates that Latin America and the Caribbean as a collective region is 83 percent Catholic; South America has almost 455 million Catholics, or 42 percent of the world’s total number.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 14, 2013, 05:27:27 am
flooding Christian stations with 450 spots about how Christians are called to welcome immigrants and offer them a path to citizenship.

THAT is a stone-cold lie.

If anything, scripture tells the believer to stay away from Caesar's world, and believers definitely have no place in the secular political system.

If they are called for such a thing, it ain't God calling them!

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 14, 2013, 01:12:29 pm
Immigration Reform Could Cost Social Security Billions

Immigration reform is a hot button issue being debated across America, from the floor of the Capitol to main street U.S.A.
There are currently an estimated 11.5 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S., that's a 33% increase since 2000. And in fact, today 5.2% of the U.S. labor force consists of undocumented workers.
The “Gang of Eight,” a bipartisan group of eight senators, is currently working on a plan to reform immigration policy in the U.S. The group of lawmakers is expected to present its bill, which will provide a path to U.S. citizenship for all those living in this country illegally, on the floor of the Senate later in March.

The senators have a difficult task. They must consider how legalizing over 10 million immigrants might affect jobs, border security and tax revenue. Another issue they must consider is that if passed, immigration reform could also impact Social Security taxes and checks.
Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration estimates that 3.1 million illegal workers pay into Social Security each year. In 2010, undocumented workers and their employers paid $15 billion to Social Security with no intention of ever collecting benefits -- that year illegal workers only received $1 billion back.
How do working illegal immigrants pay in to and collect Social Security? Some are issued Social Security numbers with their temporary or student visas, others forge documents and were issued numbers by Social Security before they tightened their screening process in 2001, some steal numbers, and others simply make them up.
When workers pay Social Security under numbers that don’t match their names the administration sorts these into their “suspense” file. No one gets credit towards benefits for this money but the money does still go to the Social Security trust fund.

Over the course of many years, Goss estimates that a total of $150 billion in undocumented workers' money has flowed into the Social Security trust fund. That’s about 8% of the total $1.7 trillion Social Security has in reserve.

In 2010 Goss said if not for the millions of illegal workers paying into the system Social Security would have “entered persistent shortfall of tax revenue to cover payouts starting in 2009."

He tells The Daily Ticker today that things may have to change. “It might mean that we might have to have a higher tax rate or lower benefits,” he says.
While some argue legalizing millions of illegal immigrants will help keep Social Security solvent, Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies disagrees.
If they’re legalized then they can collect Social Security and guess what? People with low incomes get more out of Social Security, generally speaking, than they pay in," he argues. "So the Social Security argument is actually an argument for keeping illegal immigrants illegal because that way they won’t ever collect Social Security."
It’s true that undocumented workers typically earn lower wages. The average illegal immigrant run household makes about $17,000 less a year than its legal counterpart.


Edward Alden of the Council on Foreign Relations says that granting amnesty would actually lead to higher wages and allow immigrants to pay more towards Social Security.
"You have people who are often working in very low wage jobs because they’re uncertain about their status they’re scared," Aldin tells The Daily Ticker. "So these people generally, the analysis shows their wages will go up, they’re going to pay more into the Social Security system. The CBO has run these numbers, in the short-run there’s a big boost for the Social Security system."

In 2007 the Congressional Budget Office projected that granting amnesty to illegal immigrants would actually boost Social Security funds $57 billion by 2017. Steven Goss of the Social Security Administration also claims that amnesty would more than double the numbers of those paying into social security and depending on legislation might benefit the fund.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 14, 2013, 01:18:46 pm
Wa. House OKs college aid for illegal immigrants

Washington House passes measuring making young illegal immigrants eligible for college aid

SEATTLE (AP) -- The Washington House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a measure making young illegal immigrants eligible for state college financial aid. The measure's bipartisan 77-20 vote was highlighted by impassioned speeches by Republicans who broke ranks with their party to vote in favor of the bill. "People will seek this nation out from all over the world. They want a life of opportunity," said Republican Rep. Charles Ross of Naches. "These kids, I want them to someday go to Cornell, to be a state lawmaker or more." House lawmakers amended the bill on the floor to open college aid to all young illegal immigrants. The bill has undergone several changes since it was introduced earlier this year.

The bill's previous version made only young immigrants who had qualified for the Obama Administration's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program eligible for the State Needs Grant. That federal program provides young immigrants who arrived in the United States as children a legal way to live in the country on renewable two-year stays, if they meet certain age and non-criminal history criteria.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 14, 2013, 01:39:29 pm
They want a life of opportunity," said Republican Rep. Charles Ross of Naches.

No, what you slugs want is the tax dollars, and the Department of Education wants them all in massive student loan debt.

This whole deal is disgusting. >:(

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 14, 2013, 10:00:47 pm
Judges asked to close some immigration cases

Video of news clip: http://news.yahoo.com/video/judges-asked-close-immigration-cases-231706781.html

3 hrs ago, KTRK – Houston

A backlog of immigration cases across the U.S. has courts clogged and now the DOJ is telling judges to do something about it

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 15, 2013, 02:44:15 pm
It seems like this whole agenda is going the similar route the current gay marriage agenda is...

Pretty much everything is staged to make it look like it's "conservatives vs liberals", but at the same time some of the "conservative" forces are slowly getting on board AND pushing this agenda. Ultimately, they probably have their plan in the bag now, but nonetheless the more they drag out this Hegelian Dialectic, the more they can get the masses to get on board with it through their Problem-Reaction-Solution model.(ie-if Social Security ends up going bankrupt after the millions of illegals get citizenship, and are able to draw SS, then their "solution" would be to go to some kind of RFID tracker)

And just like with the other agendas, Churchianity is playing a big role in helping to push this agenda - not only is the "conservative" SBC is lobbying for it, but they're getting churches to PREACH SUPPORTING this on the pulpits! And not to mention too an SBC favorite, Rick Warren, is CFR(and he's one of the Emergents pushing Catholicism teachings in the SBC - guess no surprise as Mexico is largely Catholic).

So yeah, most of the news articles tend to lean "conservative vs liberal", but nonetheless read b/w the lines in them, and you'll see how they're dragging out this dog and pony show to slowly disensithize the masses to accepting it.

Prov_12:26  The righteous is more excellent than his neighbour: but the way of the wicked seduceth them.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 15, 2013, 03:04:04 pm
"I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose [that] in which I delighted not." Isaiah 66:4 (KJB)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 18, 2013, 06:15:46 pm
GOP roadmap calls for immigration reform

WASHINGTON (AP) — Over strong objections from some conservative leaders, the Republican National Committee formally endorsed immigration reform on Monday and outlined plans for a $10 million outreach to minority groups — gay voters among them — as part of a strategy to make the GOP more "welcoming and inclusive" for voters who overwhelmingly supported Democrats in 2012.
In a report released Monday, the RNC says that the way the party communicates its principles isn't resonating widely enough and that focus groups perceive the party as "narrow minded," ''out of touch" and "stuffy old men."
"The perception that we're the party of the rich unfortunately continues to grow," Reince Priebus, the RNC chair, said in a Monday morning speech.
To broaden its appeal, the party must reach out to minority voters and others, according to one recommendation in the report: "We must embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform. If we do not, our party's appeal will continue to shrink," it said.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 19, 2013, 12:01:35 am
Considering the Pauls are PPF's heros, looks like that forum will have a picnic over this... :P

Rand Paul Endorses Immigrant Path to Citizenship
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky is endorsing a pathway to citizenship for the nation's 11 million illegal immigrants, a significant move for a favorite of tea party Republicans who are sometimes hostile to such an approach.

In a speech to be delivered Tuesday morning to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the potential 2016 presidential candidate declares, "If you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you." A copy of the speech was obtained in advance by The Associated Press.

Paul's path to citizenship would come with conditions that could make it long and difficult for illegal immigrants. Chief among these, Congress would have to agree first that progress was being made on border security.

Nonetheless, Paul's endorsement of allowing illegal immigrants an eventual way to become citizens puts him in line with a growing number of Republicans who are embracing action on immigration as a way to broaden the GOP's appeal to Latinos. On Monday, a Republican National Committee report called on the GOP to support comprehensive reform, though without specifying whether it should include a pathway to citizenship, which is decried by some conservatives as amnesty.

Paul's move also comes as a bipartisan group of senators is nearing agreement on sweeping legislation to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, an effort that could get a boost from Paul's stance. In an interview, Paul said he could foresee backing the Senate group's emerging bill, although he plans to try to amend it on the floor with some of his own ideas.

Paul's speech is peppered with Spanish phrases from his youth in Texas, references to his immigrant grandparents and praise for Latino culture. He says his party must adopt a new face toward Hispanics and says conservatives must be part of it.

"Immigration reform will not occur until conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation," Paul says.

"Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport" the millions already here, he says.

For Paul, there are political overtones to his newly articulated stance, since he's viewed as a potential presidential candidate and Hispanics are an increasingly important part of the electorate. Latino voters overwhelmingly backed President Barack Obama last year, helping seal his re-election, and Paul said the GOP needs to reverse that trend or risk "permanent minority status."

In his speech, Paul lays out broad elements of a comprehensive immigration overhaul that has some overlap with the approach contemplated by the Senate's bipartisan Gang of Eight, which hopes to release its legislation next month. The Senate group aims to secure the border, improve legal immigration and boost workplace enforcement, as well as create a pathway to citizenship.

Like the Senate group, Paul would aim to secure the border before illegal immigrants could begin taking steps toward citizenship, and he emphasizes this as a necessary first step to get support from conservatives.

He doesn't specify how the border would be made more secure but says the Border Patrol and an inspector general would have to sign off. Congress would also have to agree annually for five years that border security was progressing in order for the other reforms Paul envisions to keep moving forward.

In year two of his plan, illegal immigrants would begin to be issued temporary work visas, and would have to wait in line behind those already in the system before moving forward toward citizenship. A bipartisan panel would determine the number of visas per year. High-tech visas would be expanded and a special visa for entrepreneurs would be issued.

Different from other approaches, Paul would not attempt to crack down on employers by expanding working verification systems, something he says is tantamount to "forcing businesses to become policemen."

"My plan will not grant amnesty or move anyone to the front of the line," Paul says. "But what we have now is de facto amnesty."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 19, 2013, 01:07:56 pm
Yes, this whole thing is an on-going political dog and pony show - but nonetheless, look at how all of this is slowly but surely merging together via their many years of Hegelian Dialectic talk. Alot like the whole gay marriage debate since the 80's - the pro-longed "war of words" between the "religious right" and gay-rights activists ended up coming to merge together in our present day when all was said and done. In all of these cases, it ended up taking many years.

Also, look at the word emerging - this is also a New Age buzzword. For example, you heard this word alot in the modern-day/Emergent church now.

1John 3:1  Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

Boehner hails emerging bipartisan House immigration plan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The top Republican in Congress voiced support on Tuesday for an emerging overhaul of immigration laws, which includes a controversial pathway toward U.S. citizenship.
Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner said "there are a lot of issues in here that have to be dealt with" but the tentative proposal by a bipartisan group of eight House members "is frankly a pretty responsible solution."
While hailing the overall plan, Boehner did not specifically address its centerpiece, a pathway toward citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants, which could include paying a fine and back taxes and learning English.
No undocumented immigrant could proceed along the pathway until there is agreement by a yet-to-be-decided authority that the U.S. border is secure.
"The speaker believes his role is to foster bipartisan efforts to address immigration reform and he will continue to voice support for these efforts," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said.
"He has not endorsed any one solution, but believes it is important for our members to continue to work and make progress on this issue," Steel said.
Many Republicans have been reluctant to back any pathway toward citizenship, fearing it could amount to or be seen as "amnesty," which is opposed by much of the party.
Bipartisan groups in the House and Senate are drafting plans for an overhaul of the immigration system, which would both include some sort of pathway toward U.S. citizenship.
The Republican National Committee on Monday urged its members to embrace comprehensive immigration reform, an issue long dominated by President Barack Obama's Democrats.
Democrats have been rewarded for their efforts by traditionally being backed by Hispanic voters, who played a major role in Obama's victory in last November's election.
Boehner recalled that the day after the election he made it clear that immigration reform is a "top priority."
Boehner said he and fellow House Republican leaders met last week with the four Republicans on the eight-member bipartisan immigration reform group.
"They are essentially in agreement over how to proceed, but this is just the beginning of the process," Boehner said.
"There is a lot of education that needs to be done because more than half of our members have never dealt with the issue of immigration reform," he said.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 19, 2013, 07:43:10 pm
Was just reading this article - if you read b/w the lines in this, it gives an in-depth perspective how the NWO minions are craftily playing the Hegelian Dialectic in all of this. While they are trying to avoid the "amnesty" word, at the same time they are giving ALL kinds of meanings to "pathway to citizenship". Technically, giving a pathway to citizenship is granting them citizenship soon, while not doing so means deporting them back to their countries, right?

However, pretty much alot of these big whigs like Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Barack Obama, etc are throwing out ALL kinds of meanings like "It's a pathway to citizenship, but it's going to take time", or "I don't endorse a pathway to citizenship, but illegals won't be deported back to their countries", etc. Pretty much all kinds of confusion where everyone misses the big picture and facts.

Ultimately - it seems like their main goal is to keep the unsecured borders more and more loosened(and not to mention too a good portion of illegals are too poor to take English classes and pay for other things to help earn their citizenships), to the point where their Problem-Reaction-Solution model could give way to RFID chip IDs, NAU, etc. Again, a political article, but a read b/w the lines one...

Rand Paul latest pol to be tripped up by ‘pathway to citizenship’ in immigration debate

For an expression so ubiquitous in today's immigration debate, no one seems to agree on what the term "pathway to citizenship" actually means.
That lack of clarity tripped up Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul on Tuesday. What was supposed to be a major speech on immigration reform for the likely 2016 Republican presidential hopeful was overshadowed by a messy debate about the "pathway" term.
To some of the most liberal proponents of immigration reform, a pathway to citizenship means putting illegal immigrants on their own fast-track to citizenship. On the other end of the spectrum, some conservatives see the pathway as telling illegal immigrants to return to their home country where they can apply for citizenship just like anyone else. In the center, where immigration reform legislation will most likely be crafted, a pathway to citizenship generally means that current illegal immigrants will have an opportunity to apply for permanent residency after living in the United States legally under a long-term visa for several years. Once they obtain permanent residency, they can apply for citizenship after five years.
On Tuesday, Paul delivered a speech to the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, where he outlined his vision for immigration reform that allows immigrants a chance to gain residency without returning to their home countries after a long waiting period. When The Associated Press previewed his remarks and said Paul would support a "pathway to citizenship," his office pushed back and said it was inaccurate.
But Paul's plan would in fact leave the door open for illegal immigrants to eventually apply for citizenship through the same channels as those waiting back home. "It's not a new pathway, it's an existing pathway," Paul said during a conference call with reporters Tuesday afternoon when asked to clarify his remarks

Sound like "a path to citizenship" to you? Technically, it is.
Paul explained that he disliked the "pathway" term because he found that it polarized the debate.
"I think one of the reasons it's confusing is that I think the whole debate on immigration is trapped in a couple of words: 'Path to citizenship' and 'amnesty,'" Paul said. "If we get trapped too much in these descriptive terms and make it really simple that you're either for or against, I think what we do is we're going to polarize the debate on not allow us to move forward with it."
"Can't we have reform and not calling them names that discourage the progress going forward?" he went on to say.
It was the same expression that tripped up former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush a few weeks ago when he released his new book on immigration.
Consider these three headlines, all written within the same 24-hour period: "Jeb Bush: No Path to Citizenship in Immigration Reform" from ABC News, "Jeb Bush Unclear on Citizenship Path" from Politico and "Jeb Bush No Longer Supports Path to Citizenship" from the Washington Post. Say what?
As Bush experienced, taking a stab at the question without defining what the questioner means can have serious consequences. By avoiding the term altogether, Paul tried to avoid the same fate, but still found himself caught up in a whirlwind of confusing messaging
Even Illinois Democratic Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a liberal working on the House version of an immigration bill who proudly says he "supports a pathway to citizenship," does not believe in creating a "new special path" either. He also concedes that under the best circumstances, it will probably take more than 15 years for a current illegal immigrant to be granted citizenship.
"If things run really, really well, I'm going to be like 75 years old before the first undocumented person gets to vote," Gutierrez, 59, told reporters Tuesday morning. "This is not something that's going to happen tomorrow or the next day."
"I thought Rand Paul was absolutely clear this morning in his speech," he added. "I see a party that wants to see something done on immigration. It's almost as though in Washington, D.C., we have a hard time accepting yes."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 21, 2013, 12:20:55 am
Most Americans back path to citizenship for illegal immigrants: poll

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The majority of Americans favor giving millions of illegal immigrants a way to earn citizenship, according to a survey released on Thursday, highlighting public support for efforts in Congress to reform immigration law.
In the Public Religion Research Institute poll, 63 percent of Americans said they supported a path to citizenship for undocumented foreigners if they meet certain requirements.
Seventy-one percent of Democrats and 53 percent of Republicans backed eventually allowing illegal immigrants to become Americans.
The path to citizenship idea is the centerpiece of both a bipartisan immigration plan in the Senate and President Barack Obama's immigration reform proposals.
This week, Republican Senator Rand Paul, a libertarian and favorite of the conservative Tea Party movement, called for legalization of the 11 million undocumented foreigners, the majority of who are from Latin America.
He stopped short of specifically urging a path to citizenship but his statement nonetheless represents a shift in thinking for many conservatives, many of whom used to advocate deportation.
"In many ways, we are seeing the leaders in Congress catching up to where rank and file Republicans are on this issue," said Robert Jones, the CEO of the Public Religion Research Institute.
"Republicans, a couple of years ago, were holding the line against a path to citizenship... Now, there have been more Republican (lawmakers) talking about a middle option," he said

Republicans have been forced to retool their message to non-white voters after Hispanics and other minority groups threw their support behind Obama in the November presidential election.
The poll found that fewer Americans thought that the best way to solve the country's immigration problems was to secure U.S. borders, and arrest and deport everyone living in the United States illegally. This year, 29 percent of those surveyed said that was the best policy, down from 36 percent in 2011.
The survey, conducted between March 6 and 10, was based on 4,465 Spanish and English telephone interviews with adults. The margin of error is plus or minus 1.7 percentage points.
The poll was conducted in partnership with the Brookings Institution think tank.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 21, 2013, 03:30:02 am
Seventy-one percent of Democrats and 53 percent of Republicans backed eventually allowing illegal immigrants to become Americans

I don't believe that poll either! Reason being, it "says" everything the government wants, or at least is claiming.

4465 respondents, but don't say how many Spanish and how many English. ::)


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 21, 2013, 10:46:44 am
I don't believe that poll either! Reason being, it "says" everything the government wants, or at least is claiming.

4465 respondents, but don't say how many Spanish and how many English. ::)


I agree with you - but it's gotten to a point where even Churchianity is pushing illegal immigration reform. Even a number of SBC churches here in Texas have pastors pushing this agenda on their pulpits.

Again, these "polls" are rigged, but at the same time at least in my neck of the woods, I'm getting a sense that people as a whole are softening up on this issue like it doesn't even exist.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 22, 2013, 12:15:45 pm
Next step for immigration reform: Give detained migrants legal counsel

As immigration reform takes shape in Congress, the US must ensure that any person detained in the context of immigration enforcement must be provided access to legal counsel. Victims of sex trafficking and genuine refugees are among those held without possibility of finding counsel.

Congress is off to an optimistic though rancorous start on comprehensive immigration reform. Advocates across the political spectrum recognize the need to address the arcane and often incomprehensible set of rules that govern legal and illegal immigration in the United States. We must also continue to honor our treasured commitment to refugee protection.

But a crucial issue that cries out for action is the need to ensure that any person detained in the context of immigration enforcement must have access to legal counsel. America cannot continue to propound the rule of law abroad while denying upward of 400,000 individuals (the number deported in 2012) the opportunity to be meaningfully informed of legal charges against them and of their options to steer through the legal maze.

Due to Supreme Court precedent from the 1880s that arose in the context of viral anti-Chinese sentiment, it has been accepted doctrine that an immigration removal proceeding is civil rather than criminal in nature. That means only limited access to counsel.

Congress has since determined that individuals in removal proceedings are allowed representation by counsel, but not at the expense of the government. That possibility creates the opening to rectify this injustice. Congress should change the law to provide access to counsel at government expense if necessary for those in detention.

Under the present scheme even detained children and the mentally disabled are not provided with counsel, except for the scarce non-profit resources and occasional attorney from an immigration project who may be able to step in. But a handful of such lawyers cannot provide counsel to hundreds of thousands of detained individuals. Victims of sex trafficking, genuine refugees, and torture survivors are among those held without possibility of ever finding legal counsel.

Those who are apprehended and detained during the course of removal hearings are often shipped thousands of miles away from families, doctors, and friends and warehoused in remote private facilities in the desert such as the Eloy and Florence detention centers in Arizona. A migrant ripped from her community in New York is likely to end up in Florida.

Government statistics show that only about 17 percent of people detained on charges of deportation ever have the benefit of counsel. The cost of such detention averages $40,000 annually for one individual. Most often the detained have no way of understanding the charges against them and whether there is any meaningful “relief” from deportation for which they may be eligible.

Without counsel they are certainly hindered in gathering documents, evidence, and witnesses who could appear in court and demonstrate to a judge how they qualify for asylum or legal residency and why they should be allowed to remain in the United States. Several stories in recent years tell of deportations of US citizens who didn’t have the wherewithal or understanding of the system in order to convince a judge that they were indeed US citizens. These stories attest to the gravity of the dilemma.

When I was an immigration judge in San Francisco from 1997 to 2004, I presided over the detention calendar. I saw scores of immigration detainees who had the potential to win their immigration hearing. But they threw up their hands and accepted deportation, after months-long and often arbitrary detention, because they had no prospects of ever finding counsel to assist them.

A professionally trained corps of public immigration defenders – authorized by Congress through immigration reform – could fill the need, usually at great savings to the government.

Rather than over broadly detaining upward of 400,000 migrants a year (the current administration has each year detained more migrants than ever before) at an annual price tag of $2 billion, migrants can largely be released under “alternative terms of detention” such as ankle bracelets and home monitoring at 20 percent of the cost, according to a 2012 study by the National Immigration Forum. That savings can be reallocated to pay for attorneys to represent detained migrants.

The Supreme Court held that the US is not required to provide counsel in civil deportation hearings at government expense. But now, more than 100 years later in a world of more enlightened and pragmatic thinking, Congress can surely act to make sure that the US immigration procedure conforms with American values and due process.

If an individual has no chance of fighting a charge of deportation, counsel can break the bad news to respondents so that they don’t waste months or even years of their lives, and heaps of taxpayer money, floundering around in a system that is difficult even for experienced attorneys to understand. If there is an avenue of relief, appointed counsel can greatly speed up the process to the benefit of all government agencies involved.

It is un-American to detain someone in a remote facility with no realistic means of consulting with family or legal counsel for months or years and then drop-kick them across the border. Multiply such an injustice by the hundreds of thousands and you have today’s state of affairs with US immigration detention. Future generations will look back with disbelief on such a callous, inhumane travesty of justice. We can fix it this year.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 25, 2013, 06:20:09 pm
Facebook's Zuckerberg to push immigration reform

Sources: Facebook's Zuckerberg forming new group to push immigration, education reform

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is forming a new issues advocacy group to promote immigration reform, education and other policies aimed at growing the economy.

Two people familiar with the discussions confirmed the effort, speaking on condition of anonymity because it has not yet been publicly announced.

Zuckerberg will be joining with other high-tech executives and has already signed up several high-profile consultants, including Joe Lockhart, former Clinton White House press secretary now at the Glover Park Group, and Rob Jesmer, formerly executive director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

High-tech companies have stepped-up their lobbying on immigration to get more visas for high-tech workers, but the people involved say Zuckerberg's interest is broader and includes citizenship for those here illegally.

The move was first reported by the San Francisco Chronicle.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 28, 2013, 09:22:03 am
Senators tour border, say immigration bill near

Senators promise immigration overhaul bill by April after tour of US-Mexico border

NOGALES, Ariz. (AP) -- A bipartisan group of senators crafting a sweeping immigration bill vowed Wednesday that they would be ready to unveil it when Congress reconvenes in less than two weeks after getting a firsthand look at a crucial component of their legislation: security along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The four senators — Republicans John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona and Democrats Chuck Schumer of New York and Michael Bennet of Colorado — are members of the so-called Gang of Eight, which is close to finalizing a bill aimed at securing the border and putting 11 million illegal immigrants on a path to citizenship

The lawmakers' reassurance that their work would be complete by the week of April 8 came after a public feud erupted between the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO over a low-skilled worker provision in the bill — a spat that remained alive Friday as Congress began a two-week recess. But Flake noted Wednesday that negotiations over the worker program had resumed; an AFL-CIO negotiator also confirmed the talks were back on.

During the tour, the senators saw border agents apprehend a woman who had climbed an 18-foot-tall bollard fence.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 30, 2013, 09:38:33 pm
Business, Labor Get Deal on Worker Program

Big business and labor have struck a deal on a new low-skilled worker program, removing the biggest hurdle to completion of sweeping immigration legislation allowing 11 million illegal immigrants eventual U.S. citizenship, labor and Senate officials said Saturday.

The agreement was reached in a phone call late Friday night with AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, U.S. Chamber of Commerce head Tom Donohue, and Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who's been mediating the dispute.

The deal resolves disagreements over wages for the new workers and which industries would be included. Those disputes had led talks to break down a week ago, throwing into doubt whether Schumer and seven other senators crafting a comprehensive bipartisan immigration bill would be able to complete their work as planned.

The deal must still be signed off on by the other senators working with Schumer, including Republicans John McCain of Arizona and Marco Rubio of Florida, but that's expected to happen, according to a person with knowledge of the talks who spoke on condition of anonymity. With the agreement in place, the senators are expected to unveil their legislation the week of April 8. Their measure would secure the border, crack down on employers, improve legal immigration and create a 13-year pathway to citizenship for the millions of illegal immigrants already here.

It's a major second-term priority of President Barack Obama's and would usher in the most dramatic changes to the nation's faltering immigration system in more than two decades.

"The strength of the consensus across America for just reform has afforded us the momentum needed to forge an agreement in principle to develop a new type of employer visa system," Trumka said in a statement late Saturday. "We expect that this new program, which benefits not just business, but everyone, will promote long overdue reforms by raising the bar for existing programs."

Schumer said: "This issue has always been the dealbreaker on immigration reform, but not this time."

The AFL-CIO and the Chamber of Commerce, longtime antagonists over temporary worker programs, had been fighting over wages for tens of thousands of low-skilled workers who would be brought in under the new program to fill jobs in construction, hotels and resorts, nursing homes and restaurants, and other industries.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 30, 2013, 09:48:59 pm
I remember hearing a couple of years ago that universal health care has been one of the United Nations's big agenda(Obama wasn't the first time they pushed for it - remember Bill Clinton did the same but failed). Looks like Obamacare has a much deeper agenda a lot of people don't know about.

Affordable Care Act opens doors for the undocumented
By John M. Gonzales
03/30/2013 11:09:18 AM PDT

SIMI VALLEY -- Clinic director Fred Bauermeister has watched them pass through his doors for decades: chronically ill, uninsured men, women and children, who have delayed medical care because they are in the country illegally.

Now, though, a political deal may be in the works that, after many years, could bring health benefits to millions of undocumented people.

A bandwagon of endorsements last week by Congressional Republicans have aligned with vows by President Obama and Senate Democrats to establish comprehensive immigration reform. A road to citizenship for people who entered the country illegally seems more assured by the day, but what is less clear is how the health care landscape of California, and the nation, would also change.

Would California's estimated 2.5 million undocumented immigrants become eligible for health benefits? How would an already burdened health system absorb them?

"We're very interested -- and very concerned -- with how this is all going to work out," said Bauermeister, executive director of the Free Clinic of Simi Valley, a California provider that seeks to keep immigrants out of expensive modes of care like the emergency room.

Obama's commitment to move an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants nationally "out of the shadows" would not end there. Under current law, it would also slowly open the door for them to qualify for public programs, including health reform's massive coverage expansions.

Obama's plan would have immigrants wait at least eight years before they qualify for health benefits. A Congressional plan spearheaded by Republicans Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. John McCain pushes the wait to at least 10 years.

Some experts believe both scenarios would create an interim period in which even wider gaps developed between the haves and have-nots of health care.


If health reform works as intended, there will not only be a boost in the number of new people covered, but a steady improvement in their health. Meanwhile, undocumented immigrants sit on the sidelines for, give or take, at least a decade.

"We're going to create a two-tiered system of health, as well as perpetuate disparities in health," said Ignatious Bau, a San Francisco-based health policy consultant whose clients include insurance giant Kaiser Permanente.

"People who are in the system are going to get better quality and efficiency," said Bau, who was formerly director of culturally competent health systems at the nonprofit California Endowment. "But [undocumented] people who aren't in the system are going to go to the ER."

The haves, incidentally, will continue to be stuck with the health care bill for the immigrant have-nots, Bau said.

There is a push by several groups, including the California Endowment, to win immediate health reform benefits for undocumented immigrants.

But so far neither Obama, nor Congress, has shown any interest.

Rubio, a Florida Republican, has said that immediate health reform benefits for undocumented immigrants would force him to withdraw support for immigration reform.

"Senator Rubio's position has not changed," Rubio's spokesman, Alex Conant, said in an email last week. He pointed out that "the White House and Senate Democrats have agreed that undocumented immigrants should not receive Obamacare."

Some health providers believe that the gradual approach proposed by Washington is the only way to accommodate the undocumented population, particularly in immigrant-heavy states like California.

"From a pure numbers point of view, it would allow the system to ramp up to accept these folks," said Dr. Martin Serota, chief medical officer of AltaMed, a California clinic network that serves 150,000 families a year.

"It would allow us to build. There's bricks and mortar and hiring" to be done, he said.

Serota said the health system also needs time to train immigrants as caregivers, filling health reform's need for bilingual, bi-cultural, medical staff.

read more at link

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 02, 2013, 09:09:18 pm
Obama Signs Executive Order Nationalizing Elections Over Easter

Following rampant allegations of voter fraud in last November’s Presidential election, President Barack Obama defied his harshest critics this past week, by quietly signing an executive order establishing a Presidential administration dedicated to, among other things, registering non-English speaking citizens to vote.

Last Thursday, while the nation was busy preparing for their Easter holiday President Obama signed an Executive Order establishing the Presidential Commission on Election Administration, a wing of the federal government he has tasked with “election administration,”  a move critics say is an attempt to nationalize the country’s elections for partisan advantage.

The executive order, establishes a nine member board,  appointed by the President, that “shall be drawn from among distinguished individuals with knowledge about or experience in the administration of State or local elections…  and any other individuals with knowledge or experience determined by the President to be of value to the Commission.”

Among one of the missions of the board will be to “ensure that all eligible voters have the opportunity to cast their ballots without undue delay, and to improve the experience of voters facing other obstacles in casting their ballots, such as…  voters with limited English proficiency.”  A voting bloc that leans Democratic by a margin of 70% in most elections.

In a bold and unprecedented step, the executive order, which side steps any legislation or national debate, created a federal Commission that shall consider, ”the number, location, management, operation, and design of polling places; the training, recruitment, and number of poll workers;  the efficient management of voter rolls and poll books; voter education; and voting accessibility for individuals with disabilities, limited English proficiency, and other special needs.”

When confronted with the news, one Virginia local elections official called the move, “Frightening,”  adding, “Because of my position, I’m non-partisan, which is precisely why I find this to be so troubling.  The genius of American government is rooted in its separation of powers – not only between the branches of federal government, but also between the levels of government in general – state and Federal.  When we have a commission comprised only of individuals appointed by one man, from one party, from only one branch of the government, that will be setting rules and making suggestions as to how local elections should be managed it’s beyond alarming – it’s just plain wrong.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 03, 2013, 03:17:41 pm
(b) The Commission shall be advisory in nature and shall submit a final report to the President within 6 months of the date of the Commission's first public meeting.

Sec. 4. Administration. (a) The Commission shall hold public meetings and engage with Federal, State, and local officials, technical advisors, and nongovernmental organizations, as necessary to carry out its mission.

(b) In carrying out its mission, the Commission shall be informed by, and shall strive to avoid duplicating, the efforts of other governmental entities.

(c) The Commission shall have a staff, which shall provide support for the functions of the Commission.

Sec. 5. Termination. The Commission shall terminate 30 days after it presents its final report to the President.

So for six months, this "commission" will brainstorm and implement changes to the election process, no doubt gaming it to their advantage. That in itself is, in my mind, outright criminal.

One citizen will direct how elections are handled in the US, through a "commission" hand-picked by the president only? How is that not a dictator? There is no way executive orders were ever intended to be used this way. The test is by whether or not the House and Senate would pass such tyranny on it's own as a bill. An Eo was never suppose to be used as an "end around" of Congress, but like an emergency measure to get things done faster when the need arises, but is something that under normal operations would pass the House and Senate. It was never suppose to be used as a political tool to get stuff written into law that normally wouldn't pass on it's own. What Obama is doing is blatantly gaming the system to his own personal political advantage, because this is nothing that cannot be resolved through the normal channels as there is no emergency to act quickly (even though in reality the current political situation in the US is in an emergency situation).

"...it's just plain wrong" is a massive understatement! It stinks of treason.

More and more as this administration rolls on, we are seeing why the government has been beefing up supplies and ammo, and militarizing civilian police departments. They know full well their efforts will not be well received and has the potential for making a lot of people very angry at government.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 04, 2013, 11:32:25 pm
Push for Family Unity in Immigration Bill
ABC OTUS News – Wed, Apr 3, 2013

Religious and labor leaders are criticizing plans by senators writing an immigration bill to boost employment-based immigration and limit visas granted to people because of family ties.

On a conference call Wednesday, officials representing the Roman Catholic Church, the AFL-CIO and others said that family immigration is a cornerstone of the nation's immigration policy and that shouldn't change. AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka says immigration reform should work to unite families, not divide them.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and others involved in writing a comprehensive immigration bill say U.S. citizens should only be able to sponsor immediate family members to join them in the U.S. — not siblings and others as is now allowed. Instead they want more visas for people with job prospects or educational achievements.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 05, 2013, 11:31:18 am
Looks like they are really speeding this up now...

House group finalizing immigration bill

WASHINGTON (AP) — A group of Republicans and Democrats in the House is finalizing a sweeping immigration bill that offers work permits and the eventual prospect of citizenship to millions of people living illegally in the United States, aides say. That path to citizenship, however, is likely to take at least 15 years for many, longer than envisioned by Senate immigration negotiators or by President Barack Obama.

The secretive House effort, which also aims to further tighten the border against foreigners crossing illegally into the U.S. and crack down on employers who hire them, has been overshadowed by the bipartisan negotiations in the Senate, which is expected to act first on immigration legislation. But it's an important indication that a number of lawmakers, including Republicans, in the conservative-dominated House want to have a say in crafting a comprehensive overhaul of U.S. immigration law.

"We have legislative language that we'll be ready to go forward on, not concepts but actual language," Rep. John Carter, R-Texas, a leader of the group, said this week on "Capital Tonight," a program on cable news channel YNN in Central Texas.

Without revealing details, Carter said the bill should be ready to be released in the next week or two and would address worker visas and the status of the 11 million immigrants who either arrived in the U.S. illegally or overstayed their visas.

"We will have a very, very comprehensive bill that will do a great job in addressing these issues and others," he said.

The Senate bill also is expected to be released as early as next week.

According to two House aides with knowledge of the talks, the House bill will offer a couple of possible solutions for those here illegally. Those brought to the country as young children would be able to seek citizenship relatively quickly. People working in agriculture would also get a particular path toward legalization, a distinction also made in the Senate bill.

The millions of other people here illegally would be able — after paying fines and back taxes and getting a criminal background check — to get a basic work permit, which would be renewable. After 10 years, they could get a green card. Under current law, green card holders can petition for citizenship after five years — three if they're married to a U.S. citizen — and that would likely apply to green card holders under the House bill, too.

That's a longer path to citizenship for most than the process expected from the Senate bill, which envisions a 10-year path to a green card but then only a three year wait for citizenship. Legislation drafted by the White House, which Obama has said he'll offer if the congressional process stalls, also has a 13-year path to citizenship.

The House bill would offer another option, too, the aides said. Current law requires people here illegally to return to their home countries for as long as 10 years before they can try to enter the U.S. legally. The House bill would likely allow people who came forward and acknowledged being present illegally to return to their home countries and try to come back legally, but without being subject to the lengthy waits. This could be an option for those with prospects of getting visas under existing law, such as family or employment ties.

House members are reviewing an agreement between the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO on a new low-skilled worker visa that will be part of the Senate bill, to see if it might fit in their legislation, too.

One House aide said the House bill is similar to the Senate version in requiring that a series of border security requirements be met before allowing immigrants to begin moving toward legal permanent residence. A largely voluntary electronic system that employers can use to verify the legal status of their workers, called E-Verify, would be made mandatory.

The House bill would place a strong emphasis on the importance of upholding the law, an aspect pushed by Republicans in the group, and illegal immigrants could be required to go through a legal proceeding to highlight that they broke the law, aides said.

The aides spoke on condition of anonymity because there had been no public announcement.

Overall, the aim is to satisfy House Republicans who insist that immigrants here illegally not get a special path to citizenship ahead of anyone attempting the process legally — while also meeting the concerns of Democrats who want to ensure that citizenship ultimately is widely available.

"The good news is that the Democratic bottom line and the Republican bottom line have a lot of overlap," Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., another member of the group, wrote in an opinion piece in the Orange County (Calif.) Register recently. "There is a lot of room between not preventing citizenship and not giving newly legalized immigrants a special path to citizenship. I think we will be able to find the sweet spot where neither side will be overjoyed, but each side will be satisfied."

The House group, which has a core of four Republicans and four Democrats, has been meeting off and on for years but members have kept the talks quiet, much more so than their Senate counterparts. Even now as they near a public unveiling and have briefed House leaders in both parties, lawmakers involved will say little about their deliberations. Carter said that was because "we didn't want outside influences pulling on the committee group."

Other group members on the Democratic side include Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Xavier Becerra of California and John Yarmuth of Kentucky. On the Republican side, they're Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida, Sam Johnson of Texas and Raul Labrador of Idaho.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 05, 2013, 03:51:00 pm
...The secretive House effort, which also aims to further tighten the border against foreigners crossing illegally into the U.S. and crack down on employers who hire them,...

And just how do they propose to "further tighten" the border? And more importantly, how would they crack down on employers, considering that affects every employee in the US?

...A largely voluntary electronic system that employers can use to verify the legal status of their workers, called E-Verify, would be made mandatory...

Now that the "problem" of immigration has been pushed to the point of people "reacting" as desired, it's apparently now time for their "solution". Prophecy makes it clear where this is headed.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 09, 2013, 09:49:09 pm
Tentative deal on immigration farm workers

WASHINGTON (AP) — A tentative deal has been reached between agriculture workers and growers, a key senator said Tuesday, smoothing the way for a landmark immigration bill to be released within a week.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who's taken the lead on negotiating a resolution to the agriculture issue, didn't provide details, and said growers had yet to sign off on the agreement. The farm workers union has been at odds with the agriculture industry over worker wages and how many visas should be offered in a new program to bring agriculture workers to the U.S.

But Feinstein said she's hoping for resolution in the next day or two.

"There's a tentative agreement on a number of things, and we're waiting to see if it can get wrapped up," Feinstein said in a brief interview at the Capitol.

"I'm very hopeful. The train is leaving the station. We need a bill."

The development comes as a bipartisan group of senators hurries to finish legislation aimed at securing the border and putting 11 million immigrants here illegally on a path to citizenship, while also allowing tens of thousands of high- and low-skilled foreign workers into the U.S. on new visa programs. The agriculture dispute was the most prominent of a handful of unresolved issues. There's also still some debate over plans to boost visas for high-tech workers.

The group of four Republican and four Democratic senators has been hoping to release the landmark immigration bill this week, possibly as early as Thursday. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a leader of the group, said Tuesday that this week remains the goal. But it also looked possible it could slip into next week.

Senators in the immigration group met Tuesday with Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who agreed to hold a hearing April 17 on the legislation, Senate aides said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the deliberations were confidential.

That's something Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., has been calling for in response to pressure from conservatives who argue the bill is being pushed too fast without enough time for debate. Given Judiciary Committee procedures that allow Republicans to push for extra time to review legislation, the committee could begin to vote on and amend the bill the week of May 6, an aide said.

"The Judiciary Committee must have plenty of time to debate and improve the bipartisan group's proposal, so it's good that senators and the public will have weeks to study this proposal," Rubio spokesman Alex Conant said.

At least 50 percent and as much as 70 percent or 80 percent of the nation's approximately 2 million farm workers are here illegally, according to labor and industry estimates. Growers say they need a better way to hire labor legally, and advocates say workers can be exploited and need better protections and a way to earn permanent residence.

Senators plan to offer a speeded-up pathway to citizenship to farm workers already in the country illegally who've worked in the industry for at least two years. In addition they're seeking to create a new visa program to bring foreign agriculture workers to the U.S. But wages and visa caps have been sticking points, just as they were for a separate low-skilled worker program that was resolved recently with a deal between the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO.

After negotiations between the United Farm Workers and agriculture interests, including the Western Growers Association, stalled in recent weeks, the four senators working on the issue — Feinstein, Rubio, Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah — developed a framework that would ultimately call for the agriculture secretary to set visa levels and wages, according to officials involved in the talks.

But the uncertainty of that structure sparked concern on both sides, and talks between growers and agriculture reopened. There now have been numbers set for wages and where to cap visa levels that the United Farm Workers has agreed to, officials said, although details weren't immediately available Tuesday. But growers emphasized they had yet to sign off.

"We are working diligently on the final details on the important details of the wage and cap and are hopeful, but have not agreed to anything," said Kristi Boswell, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation.

Even in absence of a formal OK from the growers side, Feinstein suggested that the senators were satisfied and would be moving forward with what they've settled on.

"We hope we can get their acquiescence and support, otherwise we just need to proceed ahead," she said.

Meanwhile there were indications that the immigration debate, largely confined to behind-the-scenes negotiations so far, was moving into a more public phase.

Pro-immigrant groups planned rallies around the country and outside the Capitol for Wednesday.

And there was back-and-forth among GOP-leaning groups over the expected cost of a bill, with a conservative think tank, the American Action Forum, releasing a report Tuesday arguing that immigration reform would grow the economy and reduce the deficit, partly because of growth in the labor force. That stood in contrast to a report by the Heritage Foundation released during the last immigration debate in 2007, and expected to be revived again this year, that contended the legislation cost taxpayers $2.6 trillion.

The dispute was more evidence of a split in the GOP, with some favoring comprehensive immigration legislation, and others still strongly opposed.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 10, 2013, 04:00:09 am
But Feinstein said she's hoping for resolution in the next day or two.

What's the rush? They haven't done anything on immigration in forever, so why the rush? When the salesman pushes you to take a deal "today only", that kind of high pressure sales tactics is a red flag something is wrong with the deal. Count on it.

Even in absence of a formal OK from the growers side, Feinstein suggested that the senators were satisfied and would be moving forward with what they've settled on.

Hows that for attitude? No matter what the growers want, they will get what the politicians force on them. This kind of stuff really gets me fired up! The attitude, the outright total disregard for what the public wants among politicians is mind-numbing.

No question we are seeing proof of scripture that tells us of how the world calls evil good, because everything is turned upside down.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Boldhunter on April 11, 2013, 05:14:01 pm
Mark Zuckerburg Launches Immigration Reform


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 11, 2013, 11:07:31 pm
Mark Zuckerburg Launches Immigration Reform


Immigration reform: Can Mark Zuckerberg and friends deliver?

Mark Zuckerberg and a cast of Silicon Valley players are entering the fray over immigration reform. But the new group, FWD.US, says it's also interested in promoting education reform and scientific research.

Washington’s bipartisan Gang of Eight senators are in what many hope is the endgame in the debate over immigration reform. But just in case, on Wednesday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg brought in a slew of major players to bring it all home.

He and an impressive roster of Silicon Valley luminaries have teamed up with political strategists from across the spectrum to launch a political action group on the issue. Since by most accounts some kind of reform package is likely, the move has some asking, why now?

It’s all about the game, says David Mark, editor-in-chief of the online political site politix.

“This is basically to drive the game across the finish line,” he says, noting that if this pack of corporate heavy-hitters had jumped onto the field earlier, “it could have easily turned people off thinking that this was just a cynical move to get more cheap labor for business.”

Biding their time and weighing in after much of the political gamesmanship has already played out, he says, “allows them to both make their case and help clinch the final deal.”

However, according to the group’s founders, it has a broader horizon than just the current legislation. Dubbed FWD.US, the group plans to advocate for comprehensive immigration and education reform as well as support for scientific research well beyond 2013.

In a Washington Post Op-Ed piece Wednesday, co-founder Mr. Zuckerberg wrote that today’s “economy is based primarily on knowledge and ideas – resources that are renewable…. In a knowledge economy, the most important resources are talented people.”

Beyond helping to nudge the current debate, according to a statement released on Wednesday, the group’s goal is to “organize and engage the tech community in the issues where we can contribute to the national debate, on issues of vital importance to America’s ability to compete in the global knowledge economy.”

Says co-founder Joe Green, a former college roommate of Zuckerberg’s with long involvement in social activism and entrepreneurship, in the same release, “We view this as one of the key challenges to improving our country’s economic future – ensuring that we have as many people as possible in the workforce who have the skills to participate.”

What this means right now is leveraging the group’s collective knowledge of marketing and social media in support of a more immigrant-friendly environment, particularly when it comes to skilled labor.

But whether that marketing and social media expertise will be effective depends on how the group is perceived politically, both in Washington and by the general public.

In that sense, the politics of the Silicon Valley cohort – a coalition of industry heavyweights just came down on the side of same-sex marriage – could hobble the group’s effectiveness, suggests presidential scholar Charles Dunn, a professor of political science at Regent University in Virginia Beach, VA.

“Although Silicon Valley's involvement is a distinct plus for immigration reform, its involvement could backfire, because its political strength rests more on the liberal side of the issue,” he says via e-mail, adding, “Zuckerberg's support is not a minus, but it does not carry the strength that it could, because he is a lightning rod politically.”

The vast majority of Americans may not relate to Silicon Valley’s need for more skilled workers, says Dan Afrasiabi, author of the upcoming book “Restart Entrepreneurial Immigration.” But he notes that Silicon Valley can have an important impact by helping to move the focus of the national immigration debate from security issues to economic issues. “9/11 refocused the debate on security but Silicon Valley can help shift the focus back to the importance of keeping jobs here in the country,” Mr. Afrasiabi says.

Currently, the US government issues some 85,000 H-1B visas, which are reserved for highly skilled workers, each year. This year, when the application period opened on April 1, the US Citizenship and Immigration Service received more than 124,000 applications within five days and closed the process, finishing it off with a lottery to decide recipients.

“This is a horrific way to run an immigration system,” says Andrez Mejer, a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, who was in Washington Wednesday for a day of action on the issue of immigration reform.

The country does not have enough skilled workers to fill industry’s needs, he says, and it sorely needs a more sensible approach to keeping America competitive. “Silicon Valley can play an important role in getting that message out,” he says, “because small individuals or companies cannot get that message out, but a company like Apple or Microsoft can be heard.”

Mike Beckley, CTO of Appian, a high-tech firm with 225 employees in Reston, Va., says he spends more than three fourths of his time recruiting, noting that more than half the qualified applicants he turns up are foreign nationals.

“There are just not enough applicants to fill the jobs we have,” he says, but the solutions begin with early education – an important prong in the FWD.US platform. “It has to start with grade school,” he says, noting that in Vietnam, for instance, “there are fifth graders who already know how to write computer code.”

The education and research sides of the Silicon Valley group may be even more important than the skilled worker visa issue, says Reaz Jafri, head of the immigration practice at the international law firm Withers Bergman.

Besides lobbying for more high-tech visas, he says via e-mail, it is important to ask, “what is Silicon Valley doing to encourage a STEM-driven education system where young Americans look more and more to science, technology, engineering and mathematics?”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 11, 2013, 11:15:42 pm
The vast majority of Americans may not relate to Silicon Valley’s need for more skilled workers, says Dan Afrasiabi, author of the upcoming book “Restart Entrepreneurial Immigration.” But he notes that Silicon Valley can have an important impact by helping to move the focus of the national immigration debate from security issues to economic issues. “9/11 refocused the debate on security but Silicon Valley can help shift the focus back to the importance of keeping jobs here in the country,” Mr. Afrasiabi says.

Not that I ever endorsed the agendas of the so-called "religious right"/"moral majority" - but nonetheless it's been the plan all along by these minions(who've played their part in this Jesuitical, Hegelian Dialectic). For years in their social conservative issues debates, they would almost always bring up how "we need to take this country back meaning a healthy economy for all" without mentioning what Jesus Christ did on the cross...well guess what, in recent years while the social conservative issues debates have slowly but put on the shelf, the talk has been shifted to "It's the economy, stupid!" rhetoric, which this same Churchianity group have gotten themselves into(ie-heard a lot of this rhetoric when Romney ran for Prez last year).

Now we're seeing it with this issue to loosen illegal immigration, same rhetoric..."It's the economy!". AND, the whole gay marriage debate has went from "Gay marriage is wrong, plain and simple!" to "It's a states right, plain and simple!"(the latter rhetoric brings to mind almost immediately over years of smaller government the better rhetoric since Reagan).

1Tim 6:17  Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy;
1Ti 6:18  That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate;
1Ti 6:19  Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 12, 2013, 04:30:58 am
“it could have easily turned people off thinking that this was just a cynical move to get more cheap labor for business.”

But cheap labor for those with love for money is what drives this whole deal. It's all about the labor of immigrants that corporate America is fighting for. Immigrants think they are here for a better life, when in reality, they are allowed to be here, legal or not, for their manual labor for their taskmasters.

Consider you don't need laborers for a family farm that operates to feed a family or two. You need laborers if your running a commercial operation for the sake of profit. Huge difference in needs when comparing a 2 acre garden to a 1000 acre commercial operation.

This is about nothing but the love of money.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 16, 2013, 05:35:19 pm
Senators plan to unveil immigration bill this week

WASHINGTON (AP) — A bipartisan Senate immigration bill would put the 11 million immigrants in the country illegally on a 13-year path to U.S. citizenship that would cost $2,000 in fines plus additional fees, and would begin only once steps have been taken to secure the border, according to an outline of the measure released Monday.

The sweeping legislation also would remake the nation's inefficient legal immigration system, creating new immigration opportunities for tens of thousands of high- and low-skilled workers, as well as a new "merit visa" aimed at people with talents to bring to the U.S. as well as employment or family ties. Senators planned to formally introduce the bill on Tuesday, but after the tragedy at the Boston Marathon a planned press event was delayed until later in the week.

Employers would face tough new requirements to check the legal status of all workers. The bill would institute a fundamental shift in an immigration system long focused on family ties, placing more importance on prospective immigrants' skills and employment potential.

Billions of dollars would be poured into border security, and millions of people who've been waiting overseas for years, sometimes decades, in legal immigration backlogs would see their cases speeded up.


Title: Cato, Norquist, Rubio Use Boston Terror Attacks to Push Immigration Reform
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 21, 2013, 09:17:19 pm
EXCLUSIVE -- Secret Emails: Cato, Norquist, Rubio Use Boston Terror Attacks to Push Immigration Reform

Secret emails obtained exclusively by Breitbart News show the libertarian Cato Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) are colluding on immigration reform messaging in the wake of the Boston Marathon terror attack in order to push the “Gang of Eight” bill that was released this past week.

On Friday afternoon, political consultant Peggy Ellis of Ellis & Company, who is supporting the Gang of Eight immigration efforts, emailed “Talkers from Rubio” to the group of organizations supporting their efforts such as Cato and ATR.

The email was headlined: “Rubio talking points re: Boston terrorists vis a vis immigration reform.” The message contained three talking points from Sen. Rubio, the first of which argued that the immigration bill would prevent people like the Boston Marathon terrorists from getting into or staying in the country.

“These terrorists came here under the existing system, the one opponents of reform want to leave in place,” Sen. Rubio wrote in his first talking point.

The second Rubio talking point argued that the terrorists “didn’t cross the border” to get into America.

In his third talking point, Rubio argued that authorities only know who the terrorists are because they came here legally to begin with.

“The reason we know who they are is because they were here legally,” Rubio wrote. “If they were here illegally, living in the shadows, it would have made them much harder to investigate. The fact is that today there are 11 million people already in this country and we don’t know who they are, why they’re here, and what they’re doing. That is not only an economic problem, it’s a huge national security problem as well.”

Ellis’s email was in response to an email conversation she had with Cato’s Alex Nowrasteh and ATR’s Josh Culling, among others, earlier in the day about the potential effects of the Boston terror attacks on immigration reform.

Nowrasteh is the Cato analyst who has attacked the forthcoming Heritage Foundation analysis that argues that the Gang of Eight bill will add multiple trillions to the entitlement rolls. He wrote to the group on Friday afternoon: “The Boston thing could derail this big time so I’m spending most of today on that,” Nowrasteh wrote, referring to the Gang of Eight bill. “Sorry, gotta run and focus on that.”

The brothers who allegedly carried out the Boston terror attack, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, were granted asylum in the United States. This sparked Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to question the bill in the context of the Boston terror attacks during a Friday morning committee hearing. In response, and Gang of Eight member Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) attacked Grassley's position while using the Boston terror attack to push the bill himself.

As the week ended with police killing one Tsarnaev brother and arresting the other, the Gang of Eight grew more nervous--and that is when Rubio, Cato, and ATR drafted the aforementioned talking points together.

After facing intense criticism over the past week or so, Rubio has backed off and kept a low profile this weekend. But Schumer and fellow Gang of Eight member Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) ended up using what appear to be the exact talking points Rubio, ATR, and Cato drafted during his appearance on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday.

As Breitbart News' Joel Pollak reported, host Candy Crowley asked Graham if he would consider amendments that improved the bill’s security so that people like the Tsarnaev brothers do not slip through the cracks of the system again. Graham responded that legalizing America’s illegal immigrants would enable better monitoring of immigrants.

“Now is the time to bring all of the eleven million out of the shadows and find out who they are,” Graham said.

Graham blamed the FBI and argued that the Gang of Eight bill would “fix” poor interior immigration law enforcement.

Appearing on the same program, Schumer agreed. “Keeping the status quo is not a good argument, given what happened," Schumer said. "Our law toughens things up."

Even though they say their bill helps fix interior immigration law enforcement problems, law enforcement experts disagree. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents’ union president Chris Crane, an ICE agent himself, said, according to Fox News, that “this legislation again does nothing to resolve that.”

None of the groups involved in crafting the emails, or talking points, responded to a request for comment from Breitbart News.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 24, 2013, 07:11:40 pm
Mark Zuckerberg group launches TV blitz

The Mark Zuckerberg-backed organization pressing for immigration reform will launch its first wave of television ads Tuesday, in a move aimed at shoring up support for a large-scale immigration deal on the right, strategists for the group told POLITICO.

FWD.us, the organization formed to push Silicon Valley’s priorities in Washington, will advocate for a new immigration law through a subsidiary group created specifically to court conservatives. Americans for a Conservative Direction will spend seven figures to run ads in more than half a dozen states, according to strategists who sketched out the organization’s plans.

The sales pitch leans heavily on clips of Florida Sen. Marco Rubio to make its case to skeptical Republican-leaning voters. The ad campaign is the first wave of advocacy advertising from FWD.us, and an early test of the group’s ability to move the political debate.

The conservative-oriented FWD.us affiliate running the ads has assembled its own blue-chip board of advisers, including former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour; Sally Bradshaw, the former chief of staff to Jeb Bush; Dan Senor and Joel Kaplan, the former George W. Bush advisers; and Rob Jesmer, the former executive director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee who serves as the campaign manager for FWD.us.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 25, 2013, 11:28:03 pm
Apr 25, 8:09 PM EDT
Calif. bill would let non-citizens serve on juries

SACRAMENTO, California (AP) -- The California Assembly passed a bill on Thursday that would make the state the first in the nation to allow non-citizens who are in the country legally to serve on jury duty.

Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, D-Fremont, said his bill, AB1401, would help California widen the pool of prospective jurors and help integrate immigrants into the community.

It does not change other criteria for being eligible to serve on a jury, such as being at least 18, living in the county that is making the summons, and being proficient in English.

The bill passed 45-25 largely on a party-line vote in the Democratic-controlled Assembly and will move on to the Senate. One Democrat - Assemblyman Adam Gray, of Merced - voted no, while some other Democrats did not vote.

Democratic lawmakers who voted for the bill said there is no correlation between being a citizen and a juror, and they noted that there is no citizenship requirement to be an attorney or a judge. Republican lawmakers who opposed Wieckowski's bill called it misguided and premature.

Assemblywoman Diane Harkey, R-Dana Point, said there is no shortage of jurors.

"Jury selection is not the problem. The problem is trial court funding," Harkey said before the vote. "I hope we can focus on that. Let's not break something; it's not broken now. Let's not whittle away at what is reserved for U.S. citizens. There's a reason for it."

Wieckowski's office said the bill is the first of its kind in the nation and suggested that courts regularly struggle to find enough prospective jurors because jury duty is often seen as an inconvenience, if not a burden. His office did not cite any statistics but pointed to a 2003 legislative report that said numerous articles have noted high rates of non-participation.

A 2007 survey by the Center for Jury Studies said 20 percent of courts across the country reported a failure to respond or failure to appear rate of 15 percent or higher. The center is run by the National Center for State Courts, a Virginia-based nonprofit dedicated to improving court systems.

It's not clear, however, if that rate translates to a shortage of jurors in California.

Noting that women were once kept off juries, Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles, said the judicial system should be changed to allow a person to be judged by their peers.

"This isn't about affording someone who would come in as a juror something," Perez said. "But rather understanding that the importance of the jury selection process of affording justice to the person in that courtroom."

An estimated 10 million Californians are summoned for jury duty each year and about 4 million are eligible and available to serve, according to the Judicial Council, which administers the state's court system. About 3.2 million complete the service, meaning they waited in a courthouse assembly room or were placed on call.

In 2010-2011, the most recent year available, only about 165,000 people were sworn in as jurors.

The judicial branch has not taken a position on AB 1401.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 26, 2013, 03:02:17 am
An estimated 10 million Californians are summoned for jury duty each year

n 2010-2011, the most recent year available, only about 165,000 people were sworn in as jurors.

Are they serious? Obviously, there is no need for jurors. They got plenty, as each state has always had plenty of jurors.

What this is, is an attempt to get illegal immigrants into the mix to sway votes.

There is no way no how a non-citizen can be on a US jury. They have lost their minds!

Democratic lawmakers who voted for the bill said there is no correlation between being a citizen and a juror, and they noted that there is no citizenship requirement to be an attorney or a judge.

What planet are those people living on? The jury system is for the citizens of America, period, just like the legal system itself is for the citizenry.

A foreign national as a judge in a US court? Now I wonder where they are really going with that claim. Can you say international judges, say under the direction of the UN?

How are those people getting elected in California? I keep finding myself saying that California has lost it's mind, and then they top it, and something even more anti-American happens there.

This kind of stuff is scary anti-American stupidity.

The person, I won't call them a politician out of respect for politicians, who submitted such a bill, Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, D-Fremont should be immediately recalled and banned from US politics. He might even need to be banned from the US and have his citizenship stripped, along with every other person who voted for the bill. The nerve!  >:(

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 28, 2013, 10:50:06 pm
Survey finds strong Catholic support for immigration changes

Washington D.C., Apr 27, 2013 / 01:09 pm (CNA).- A survey commissioned by the U.S. bishops finds that almost 80 percent of Catholics support legal changes that allow immigrants to gain “earned citizenship” through meeting certain requirements.

“It is clear that Catholics understand the importance of this issue,” Archbishop José H. Gomez of Los Angeles, who chairs the U.S. bishops’ migration committee, said April 19 in response to the poll.

“As an immigrant church, Catholics from all walks of life understand the migration experience and accept the Gospel’s call to welcome the stranger.”

The survey, commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Office of Migration Policy and Public Affairs, found that 77 percent of U.S. Catholics support citizenship for immigrants who fulfill requirements like registration, paying a fine, paying taxes, and taking English classes.

Eighty-four percent of respondents agree that requiring immigrants to register with the government in order to remain in the country would improve national security.

Another 75 percent of respondents said immigration law enforcement should be focused on “humane values” that deport violent criminals but “finds ways to work with people who have come to find a better life.”

Most respondents said that border security and humane treatment of illegal immigrants are compatible and most agree that the Church has an obligation to help those in need, even if they are illegal residents. Additionally, most believe that immigrants are good for the economy, and most thought that enforcement-only policy focused on deportations is bad for family unity.

Sixty percent of Catholics who attend Mass weekly or more said that the immigration issue is very important to them.

The Catholic bishops have endorsed changes to immigration law, such as allowing an expansive “path to citizenship” for undocumented immigrants and expanding legal migration for low-skilled migrant workers.

Archbishop Gomez encouraged Catholics to ask their legislators to support “humane” immigration reform, saying this would “help our brothers and sisters come out of the shadows and become full members of our communities.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 29, 2013, 03:20:42 am
Eighty-four percent of respondents agree that requiring immigrants to register with the government in order to remain in the country would improve national security.

Requiring immigrants to register with the government? Hmm, this from the Catholic cult. You'd think they would discourage registering with the government for anything, seeing what bible prophecy says. But wait, that's right, they don't really read or believe the bible anyway. ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 29, 2013, 11:51:53 am
Alabama Rejected by U.S. Court On Immigrant-Harboring Law

The U.S. Supreme Court, steering clear of the debate over immigration policy, refused to revive an Alabama law that made it a crime to harbor people who are in the country illegally.

The high court today rejected Alabama’s appeal, leaving intact a ruling that said the state infringed on federal authority by enacting the provision as part of an effort to drive away undocumented immigrants. The rebuff is a victory for the Obama administration, which sued to challenge the law.

In throwing out the provision, an Atlanta-based federal appeals court pointed to a Supreme Court decision last year invalidating parts of Arizona’s immigration law.

The rejection comes as Congress debates proposals to create a path to citizenship for millions of people who entered the U.S. illegally or stayed after their visas had expired.

Justice Antonin Scalia dissented from today’s court action without giving an explanation. The case is Alabama v. United States, 12-884.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 29, 2013, 03:49:15 pm
The high court today rejected Alabama’s appeal, leaving intact a ruling that said the state infringed on federal authority by enacting the provision as part of an effort to drive away undocumented immigrants.

Wow, what a load of cow dung!  ::)

Notice how they change it up and use the word "undocumented", when referring to foreigners here without authorization?

"drive away"? Isn't that what property owners do when they have a trespasser on their property? They call the cops and have them removed, right?

So I guess these federal authorities have no problem with one of those "undocumented immigrants" setting up a tent on their front lawn then?

This kind of stuff is just more proof that the system is being intentionally manipulated according to a select group's agenda, in spite of US law.

The Supreme Court being compromised with judges ruling based on policy and not law, the whole US legal system becomes suspect.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 30, 2013, 10:40:34 am
Congressmen pledge immigration compromise

Congressmen from Texas, Illinois acknowledge political challenges to immigration compromise

SAN ANTONIO (AP) -- Invoking the spirit of the Alamo, a Republican congressman from Texas with a prominent role in the immigration debate vowed Monday to overcome the political challenges to reform.

"The president's set you up and you're going to stick your neck out," said Rep. John Carter, describing fears he has heard from members of his own party. "I'm kind of like Davy Crockett: They can go to hell and I'll go to Texas."

During a luncheon forum with Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Illinois, with whom Carter serves on an informal bipartisan group studying the issue, Carter pledged to bring a compromise bill to the House floor.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on April 30, 2013, 01:10:16 pm
Invoking the spirit of the Alamo, a Republican congressman from Texas...

Hey Sparky! They all died at the Alamo.  ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 06, 2013, 04:11:17 pm
The Gang of Ocho
E-Verify and high-skill immigration are what we should be looking at now
By Michael Barone

Many loud voices in the debate over immigration have been insisting that effective border enforcement must precede any steps to legalize the status of current illegal immigrants.

Some analysts, including my Washington Examiner colleague Byron York, have been reading the fine print in the 800-page draft prepared by the Senate Gang of Eight (or Gang of Ocho, if you prefer).

They argue that the legislation is quick to provide some form of legal status but only calls for commissions to be convened at some later time if the border proves not to have been secured. There’s something to these arguments.

The Gang of Eight, like the drafters of the 1986 immigration law and of the bills that failed to pass in 2006 and 2007, is offering a deal: legalization in return for effective enforcement. The 1986 law, it is widely agreed, did not deliver on enforcement, and this bill wouldn’t, either.
But that is yesterday’s issue. The border doesn’t matter so much as it used to

That’s because the U.S. is not likely to have another wave of immigration across our border with Mexico of anywhere near the magnitude of the one from 1982 to 2007.

During most of that time, Mexico’s birth rate was high, and its economy was hit by periodic crashes. In most of those years, the United States was generating large numbers of new jobs, especially in California and Texas. The wave of immigration from Mexico followed.

Today conditions are different. Mexico’s birth rate has fallen; its economy is growing, while ours struggles; and the dream of homeownership in the U.S. was shattered as foreclosures took a heavy toll on Hispanic immigrants.

We can do better on the border — though we should keep in mind that Texas leaders, including Governor Rick Perry, don’t want a fence along the Rio Grande. But those who fear that the reform bill would trigger another wave of illegals would be wise to direct their attention to other parts of the legislation.

One is E-Verify, the system to determine the legal status of job applicants by checking their Social Security numbers. This has been required for some employers in states such as Arizona, and a survey conducted for Immigration Works USA, a group that favors a comprehensive bill, reports that 23 percent of restaurant owners are using it today.

The Gang of Eight says that its bill would mandate the use of E-Verify. It’s a tool that was not available when the 1986 law was passed

Most Americans then, left and right, were skittish about creating anything like a national identity card. Americans today, after years of mass illegal immigration and terrorist attacks, seem less troubled by this.

An effective means of validating legal status — and why should this be harder than what Visa and MasterCard do every day? — could vastly reduce job opportunities for illegal immigrants. It could dramatically decrease the incentive to cross the border illegally or overstay a visa.

Those who fear future illegal immigration should be drilling down into the E-Verify sections. When would its use be required? And of whom? What are the standards it would have to meet, and who would decide?

It’s possible that a case can be made for strengthening the E-Verify provisions. Those who don’t want another wave of illegals should make that case if they can.

The other area of concern to those who decry mass low-skill immigration is the section covering high-skill immigration.

The Gang of Eight says it would increase the slots for high-skill immigrants. That would move us some distance toward countries such as Canada and Australia, which limit immigration to those with high skills.

Currently, we have a small number of H-1B visas allowing entry to those with high-tech skills. Surely, we need to increase that number.

But should we limit those immigrants, as we currently do, to one employer? Maybe high-skill immigrants could make more contributions to our society if they were able to operate freely in the marketplace.

Major immigration legislation gets passed only every generation or two — 1924, 1965, 1986. The provisions of the law end up shaping the future population of the nation, sometimes in unanticipated ways.

One of those unanticipated ways was the wave of illegal low-skill immigrants — mainly, but not entirely, from Mexico — that started in the early 1980s and was accelerated by the 1986 law.

Those who regret that would be wise to concentrate not on yesterday’s issues but on tomorrow’s issues, such as employer verification and encouraging high-skill immigration.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 08, 2013, 10:34:44 am
Fox News now running pro-amnesty Marco Rubio ad

American Action Network is pimping Marco Rubio and amnesty. They spent $300,000 television advertising campaign to “end de facto amnesty.” The ad will only run on Fox News. Of course, the amnesty bill supported by Rubio, McCain, Lindsey Graham and Democrat is de facto amnesty. Of course American Action Network doesn’t want you to believe that. They tout Marco Rubio in an ad called ‘disaster’ ad that’s been on (especially on Hannity) the last few days.


Watch out for American Action Network. They may try and appear to be conservative, but they are nothing more than a progressive action group. I don’t know if it’s just a coindence, but you do a search for American Action Network on Twitter, guess what comes up first? The Center for American Progress[/u]. I’ve only seen the ad a couple times, but judging by the Twitter search they are really bombing Florida with the ad.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 13, 2013, 10:41:49 pm
High-tech pushes for more in immigration bill

WASHINGTON (AP) — High-tech companies looking to bring more skilled workers to the U.S. pushed Monday for more concessions in an immigration bill pending in the Senate. Labor unions said the Silicon Valley had already gotten enough in the legislation and further changes risked chipping away at protections for U.S. workers.

The clash is set to play out in a Capitol Hill hearing room this week as the Senate Judiciary Committee resumes consideration of amendments to sweeping legislation remaking the nation's immigration system.

At issue are the highly sought-after H-1B visas that allow companies like Google and Microsoft to bring workers to the U.S. to fill job openings for engineers, computer software experts, and other positions where employers say there's a shortage of U.S. workers. The legislation increases the number of these visas that are available, but also adds in a number of restrictions designed to ensure U.S. workers get a first shot at jobs.

Those protections were championed by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a Judiciary Committee member who's also part of the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" senators who authored the immigration legislation.

But high-tech companies have their own champion on the Judiciary Committee: Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who's prepared a slew of amendments to help their cause.

Hatch is seen as a potential swing vote on the immigration bill so backers of the legislation, who are working assiduously to ensure their bill passes the Senate with as many votes as possible, would like to court his support
. But Durbin opposes Hatch's efforts and he and other Democrats are under pressure from organized labor not to go along.

"We deemed the current language in the bill to be the compromise. After all, high tech got an awful lot of what it wanted, including the visa limit going up nearly threefold," said Tom Snyder, immigration campaign manager for the AFL-CIO. "Now they want to compromise the compromise."

Robert Hoffman, senior vice president for government affairs at the Information Technology Industry Council, disagreed. He said that the changes sought by Hatch, whose state is increasingly becoming a major high-tech employer, mostly amount to mechanical fixes to ensure the high-tech provisions work to boost economic growth and job creation in the U.S.

"It's very important that the H-1B be workable and I think that's what we're trying to fix," Hoffman said. "Because the reality is the legislation as drafted in our view runs the risk of pushing work and investment that could come through temporary visas outside the United States."

The Information Technology Industry Council joined dozens of other business groups and state and local chambers of commerce and technology councils in sending a letter to Judiciary Committee members Monday outlining their concerns about the high-tech language in the bill.

The bill would raise the cap on H-1B visas from the current 65,000 annually to 110,000, with the potential to adjust upward to 180,000 depending on how many visa applications are received and what the unemployment rate is. High-tech companies said the unemployment rate shouldn't be a factor because it might not reflect actual demand for skilled workers. Hatch has an amendment to make that change.

High-tech companies also are concerned about a new provision requiring them to show they've tried to recruit U.S. workers before hiring anyone on an H-1B visa. Hatch would limit the requirement only to companies that are more heavily dependent on H-1B visas, so that it wouldn't apply to a number of U.S. tech companies.

Hatch also has an amendment to change a requirement in the bill seeking to ensure that U.S. workers are not displaced by the hiring of foreigners.

The Judiciary Committee meets Tuesday, but the consideration of the bulk of Hatch's amendments looked likely to be put off until Thursday to give senators time to see if they could reach a resolution.

Durbin and the three other Gang of Eight members on the Judiciary Committee — Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. — have resolved to vote together to defeat changes that would strike at core provisions of the bill and threaten the coalition backing it. But it was unclear Monday whether the lawmakers would be able to reach a compromise that could accommodate Hatch in a way Durbin could go along with. There was also no indication that Hatch would commit to supporting the bill even if his amendments on high-tech issues were accepted, because he's raised a number of other concerns as well.

Meanwhile the committee on Tuesday planned to turn to several amendments from Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who's supporting even greater restrictions on H-1B visas that those in the bill, but it seemed unlikely his efforts would prevail.

Beyond the H-1B provisions, the legislation makes changes favorable to the high-tech community that reflect the industry's increased lobbying muscle on Capitol Hill, as well as concerted involvement during the bill-writing process. The bill exempts certain immigrants, including those with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or math from U.S. schools, from annual limits on the permanent resident visas known as green cards. It also creates a new visa for foreign entrepreneurs coming to the U.S. to start companies.

In the latest sign of involvement by the high-tech and business communities, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's Partnership for a New American Economy, a group made up of business leaders and mayors, was to announce plans Tuesday for a "virtual march on Washington" to get people to use social media platforms to push Congress to support the immigration bill. The effort, set for next week, is to be co-chaired by Organizing for Action, a group headed by loyalists to President Barack Obama, and Republicans for Immigration Reform, led by former Bush administration Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez.

Overall, the legislation would aim to boost border security, require all employers to verify the legal status of their workers, allow tens of thousands of new high- and low-skilled workers into the U.S., and create an eventual path to citizenship for the approximately 11 million already here illegally. It is a top second-term priority for Obama.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 16, 2013, 08:39:05 pm

House group agrees on immigration reform

Washington (CNN) -  After months of intense negotiations, a bipartisan U.S. House group has reached an "agreement in principle" on immigration reform, according to Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida, one of the GOP members of the group.

A Democratic aide familiar with the discussions confirmed that all the members signed on and told CNN both Democrats and Republicans "will now run the whole package past their respective leadership and colleagues" and aim to formally introduce legislation at the beginning of June.

 Diaz-Balart declined to get into the details of the deal, but said, "there's going to be a lot of differences in a lot of areas," from a bipartisan measure working its way through the Senate.

"Filing a real bipartisan bill – a serious, enforceable commonsense bill is, I think, a huge step. But it's the first step of the process … a very important step," Diaz-Balart told reporters outside the House floor Thursday.

The four Republican members of the House group include Diaz-Balart, Rep. Raul Labrador of Idaho, and Rep. John Carter and Rep. Sam Johnson, both of Texas.

The four Democrats are Reps. Xavier Becerra and Zoe Lofgren, both of California, Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Illinois, and Rep. John Yarmuth of Kentucky.

Carter told reporters earlier on Thursday that the last sticking point involved whether the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States would get access to government health care benefits. It's unclear how the group resolved that issue.

Carter also said that because Republican and Democratic negotiators were unable to come to an agreement on a program overseeing guest workers, the group decided to leave that issue out of the bill. But both planned to offer their proposals separately, likely as amendments to the main legislation.

Both sides differed on how many worker visas should be allowed for construction companies and other industries relying on low skilled labor workers.

House Speaker John Boehner pledged that any immigration bill would move through the appropriate committees in the House before any vote by the full chamber.

A key test for the bipartisan deal will come when the House Judiciary Committee takes it up, because that panel includes a significant number of conservatives, who have pledged to block any measure that allows a path to citizenship for undocumented workers.

Boehner signaled he wanted the House to have its own version to negotiate a final immigration bill with the Democratic-led Senate.

"I continue to believe that the House needs to deal with this and the House needs to work its will," Boehner said on Thursday.

The Senate plan is now being considered by the Judiciary Committee.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 21, 2013, 03:31:26 pm
Senate panel nears completion of immigration bill

By Richard Cowan and Rachelle Younglai

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate negotiators on Tuesday reached a tentative deal to ease restrictions on U.S. technology firms hiring highly skilled workers from abroad, potentially a big win for industry as efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform this year accelerated.

Under the deal struck by Utah Republican Senator Orrin Hatch and New York Democratic Senator Charles Schumer, the Senate would back a looser formula for issuing H-1B visas that technology companies say they need to hire qualified employees.

That formula would replace the one specified in the sweeping bill the committee has been considering since May 9.

In an important boost for the measure, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said he will not stand in the way of the measure coming to the floor for a full debate.

"There is a possibility that we can be done today," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said Tuesday as he kicked off a fifth day of debate on the nearly 900-page bill.

The measure would create a pathway to legal status for millions of undocumented immigrants, create a new system for determining the future flow of workers long desired by agriculture as well as industry, and revamp the law governing immigration to the United States for the first time in a generation.

The panel was hurrying to finish debating and amending the bill for two reasons: Senators are hoping to begin a Memorial Day holiday recess this week, and backers of the legislation want it to be ready for debate by the full Senate in early June.

For weeks now, senators on the panel have been in negotiations with each other and with labor union groups and high-tech industry officials over limits imposed for hiring skilled workers from abroad.

Hatch of Utah has fought against some of the constraints that Democratic Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois had included on behalf of organized labor, which wants to protect American jobs.

Supporters of the immigration bill want Hatch's vote and were working to accommodate him. With Hatch's support - in the Judiciary Committee and on the Senate floor - the measure stands a much better chance of success, according to several congressional aides and immigration reform advocates.


The immigration bill currently requires all companies that hire H-1B employees, not just those that are defined as dependent on the high-skill visas, to advertise job openings on a government website and offer them first to any qualified Americans.

Schumer accepted one of Hatch's most contentious proposals, strongly opposed by the AFL-CIO labor organization, that requires only "H-1B dependent" companies to give Americans the first shot at jobs.

A dependent company is defined as one with more than 15 percent of its workforce on H-1B visas.

The Hatch-Schumer deal needs approval from the Judiciary Committee, and the entire immigration bill needs to pass the Senate and House of Representatives before President Barack Obama can sign it into law.

Throughout the Judiciary Committee's debate of the bill, Republicans and Democrats have been striving to show they have overcome the partisan bickering that has bogged down lawmakers for the past two years.

But there was still plenty of time for fights to break out.

Leahy has made clear he wants to amend the bill to give people the right to sponsor same-sex partners who are foreigners for permanent legal status.

Conservatives in Congress, including Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio, have warned that the Vermont lawmaker's amendment would kill the measure.

On Tuesday some gay rights groups feared that Democrats might shy away from the fight.

Rachel Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality, a gay rights group, feared Democrats "are giving in to bullying."

(Additional reporting by Caren Bohan and Sarah McBride.; Editing by Xavier Briand)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 21, 2013, 08:25:32 pm

McConnell won't block immigration bill from hitting Senate floor

   By Alexander Bolton  -    05/21/13 05:13 PM ET

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) on Tuesday said he would not try to block immigration reform from reaching the floor despite the opposition of some conservative leaders.
The green light from McConnell is a promising development for the 800-plus-page bill from the Gang of Eight that was unveiled at the beginning of the month.
While McConnell stopped short of pledging his support for the legislation, he praised the Gang of Eight’s work and said he is “hopeful” of passing a comprehensive immigration fix through the Senate.
“The status quo is not good, the current situation is not good,” McConnell said of the nation’s immigration system, which his colleagues frequently describe as broken.
“With regard to getting started on the bill, it’s my intention — if there is a motion to proceed required — to vote for the motion to proceed so we can get on the bill and see if it we’re able to pass a bill that actually moves the ball in the right direction,” he said.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/301047-mcconnell-hopefully-of-passing-senate-immigration-reform-bill#ixzz2TyqyW9j9

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 22, 2013, 11:35:01 am
Senate panel passes immigration reform bill: how Republicans helped shape it

The immigration reform bill, which passed the Senate Judiciary Committee by a 13-to-5 vote Tuesday night, received some tweaks aimed at attracting more GOP support during its next key vote on the Senate floor.


The Senate’s comprehensive immigration-reform legislation marches on.

A bill that would be the most sweeping rewrite of America’s immigration laws in two decades not only passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a 13-to-5 vote Tuesday night, but also sustained no dramatic alterations to the bipartisan framework fashioned by the bill’s authors, the “Gang of Eight.”

The bill did receive, however, a slew of tweaks and adjustments aimed at attracting more GOP support during its next key vote on the floor of the US Senate. Tuesday’s vote brought commentary from several key Republicans that augur well for the bill’s prospects.

“I appreciate the work of the Senate Judiciary Committee in taking the bill my colleagues and I introduced in April as a starting point for debate and making improvements to it over the past few weeks,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R) of Florida in a statement after the bill’s passage. “Through an extensive, open and transparent process, they have made real improvements to the bill.”

The four “Gang” members on the Judiciary committee – Charles Schumer (D) of New York, Richard Durbin (D) of Illinois, Jeff Flake (R) of Arizona, and Lindsey Graham (R) of South Carolina – were joined by the eight other Democrats on the panel and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) of Utah in voting affirmatively.

Senator Hatch’s support of the bill in committee came after he and Senator Schumer hashed out a deal on a handful of amendments that Hatch wanted regarding high-skilled workers, long of interest to the veteran Utahn. These measures would make it easier for technology companies and others to hire the talented but temporary workers that come through the H-1B program.

Hatch also secured a compromise amendment requiring a test of a biometric entry-exit system at America’s 10 largest airports in the next two years, followed by an expanded test at the 30 largest US airports four years later. A biometric system, which could capture a foreign traveler’s fingerprints or scan his or her iris, was a frequently cited desire of Republican members of the panel.

While Hatch’s final support of the bill will be contingent on another series of amendments he’ll offer on the Senate floor, the committee adopted other conservative changes to the bill that may accentuate its appeal to Republicans on the Senate floor. These changes include the stipulation that the Department of Homeland Security must turn back or apprehend 90 percent of would-be border crossers along the entire Southern border – not just in high-risk sectors as the bill originally required – before the nation’s millions of illegal immigrants can become citizens.

The changes were only a handful of the more than 200 amendments that the committee considered over five days and more than 30 hours of debate and votes. About a third of the 141 changes that were approved came from the panel’s conservative senators.

The process drew acclaim from even the most deep-seated opponents of the legislation, with several Republican senators thanking Judiciary chairman Patrick Leahy (D) of Vermont in their closing comments for organizing what the panel’s ranking Republican, Charles Grassley (R) of Iowa, called a “productive debate.”

However, senators agreed that not everything was up for amendment, for fear that the delicate balance struck by the Gang of Eight could be undone. That group’s two Republican members on the panel hung with Democrats to defeat a slew of amendments regarding amped-up border security and forced widespread implementation of a biometric entry-exit system.

In one of the committee’s most emotional moments, a handful of Democrats said they would vote with all the panel’s Republicans to defeat Senator Leahy’s amendment allowing same-sex couples to be recognized by the federal government for immigration purposes – because that measure would all but guarantee GOP opposition to the bill on the Senate floor. Leahy withdrew the amendment.

“You’ve got me on immigration,” Senator Graham said. “You don’t have me on marriage.”

Several key Republicans indicated they would not attempt to block the measure from entering debate.

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R) of Kentucky, who as his party’s leader in the Senate is often the frontman for holding back bills the GOP conference doesn’t like, told reporters he would vote to break an initial filibuster “so we can get on the bill and see ... if we're able to pass a bill that actually moves the ball in the right direction.”

“I think the Gang of Eight has made a substantial contribution to moving the issue forward,” Senator McConnell said Tuesday

Two of the bill’s critics in the Judiciary Committee, Sen. John Cornyn (R) of Texas and Senator Grassley, both said they would vote affirmatively to move to debate on the bill. Such support makes it all but guaranteed that the measure has a quick route to further amendments on the Senate floor when Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada takes the measure up after the Memorial Day recess.

The fact that senators on both sides see a pressing need to move legislation forward even if they don’t agree with all of it was embodied best by Grassley, who said he would have voted for the bill if it meant the difference between it dying in committee or being sent to the full Senate.

With a broken immigration system, Grassley said, it’s incumbent on Congress to give the issue the fullest hearing possible – passing bills in both chambers and then untangling the differences in a conference committee.

“I believe we have to move this bill along, and I believe that nobody has their mind made up exactly what this bill is going to look like when this bill comes out of conference,” he said in his closing statement Tuesday. “In the final analysis, I won’t know if I’m for this bill or not [until] it gets to that final product.”

He added, “If this system is broken, we all ought to take every opportunity we can ... to make sure it is fixed and fixed right.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 23, 2013, 12:44:24 pm
House approves drivers licenses for immigrants(CT)

Updated: Thursday, 23 May 2013, 12:27 PM EDT
Published : Thursday, 23 May 2013, 6:55 AM EDT

HARTFORD, Conn. (WTNH) -- They may not have entered the country legally, but they may be on their way to getting Connecticut state drivers licenses. The House approved that bill Thursday morning, but only after an all-night debate.

The debate began around 10 o'clock Wednesday night and was still going on at 5:30 Thursday morning.
"I'd love to be able to go home and start again tomorrow, but that's not necessarily in our control," said Rep. Brendan Sharkey, Speaker of the House. "We open up the debate, it goes until it's done."

The debate is over a bill that would allow undocumented immigrants to get state driver licenses. Republicans opposed the bill for a number of reasons.

"The bill had not gone through all the appropriate committees, it was dropped on our desk at 10 o'clock," said Rep. Larry Cafero, House Minority Leader.

Republican leaders say they're not opposed to the idea, they just want to study it more.

"You have to collect all the data, that was not allowed here," Rep. Cafero said. "There are so many unanswered questions. The proponents of the bill didn't even have the answers to the questions and yet we're making a sea change within our laws."

The DMV says it would require immigrants to provide either a passport or a birth certificate from their home country to get a license. Democrats say there are already around 50,000 immigrants driving on Connecticut roads without licenses, registrations, or insurance, and that costs Connecticut residents about $20 million in insurance premiums.

"They work here, they pay their taxes here, but if we don't allow them to actually get a drivers license, register their motor vehicle and insure them, we're making Connecticut less safe," said Rep. Sharkey.

After close to 8 hours of debate, the bill passed when Republicans finally ended their debate.

"We could have had a chance to really educate the public and have them really embrace the idea or not, but unfortunately that's not the way the democrats wanted to play the bill," said Rep. Cafero. "They played it purely political."

Next the bill goes to the Senate. If the Senate passes it and it goes to the Governor, Governor Malloy has already indicated he would sign it into law. That law would go into effect in January of 2015.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 23, 2013, 03:37:58 pm
Speaking of Obama's current "scandals" going on(ie-the IRS) - sometimes we really have to be discerning, in that the MSM/NWO people can really go overboard to make the public think Obama's on the verge of freefall/impeachment, but en yet right under everyone's noses they'll slip other draconian agendas. Ultimately, if we can use our brains and logic for at least 5 minutes...the same GOP people that are trying to expose Obama over this current "scandal" with the IRS, why are they getting on board with immigration reform? Wouldn't common sense say it would be the perfect time to expose ALL of the draconian agendas going on by Obama?

"Prove all things..."

Watch the other hand: Immigration reform advances under cover of scandals

While some of President Obama's most outspoken critics are working overtime to expose details of the various scandals plaguing his administration these days, it seems there are games afoot on Capitol Hill -- specifically, the little-noticed advancement of the "Gang of Eight" immigration reform proposal.

Bloomberg reports that the perfect storm of scandals has created a "honeymoon period" for pending immigration legislation.

As Glenn likes to say, watch the other hand...

The congressional probes into various government agencies diverted attention at a critical time, allowing the Senate Judiciary Committee a respite from the spotlight as it reached critical compromises on the measure and approved it on a bipartisan 13-5 vote on May 21. The bill would allow the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. without authorization a chance at citizenship.

"It's like magic -- you distract the audience while the real trick is being done -- and I think right now, while Americans focus on President Obama's unending difficulties, it's good news for the Gang of Eight working on immigration," said Republican strategist Alex Castellanos, referring to the four Republicans and four Democrats who crafted the bill.

The proposed legislation is under the radar now, but that will change when it comes up for a high-profile vote in the Senate next month.

Nevertheless, the lack of attention focused on the Judiciary Committee's markup may still have significant consequences:

Republican Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, a member of the group of eight that wrote the compromise bill as well as the Judiciary Committee that signed off on it, said the scandal fever that has broken out in Washington has “been good” for the legislation, lowering the emotional temperature that has surrounded past failed efforts to make immigration changes.

“To be able to go through this markup where nobody can claim that we’ve short-circuited the process — it’s been an open process, we’ve adopted some substantive amendments — to be able to do that without people calling press conferences outside and without groups calling members, it’s been a good process,” Flake said in an interview, referring to the Judiciary panel’s actions. “I’d have to say it probably helped.”

The final day of Judiciary’s markup of the bill was a case in point. While former IRS officials testified before the Senate Finance Committee, the panel convened in the building next door for its fifth day of deliberations. Senator Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, quietly reached agreement with Democrats on changes to a high-skilled visa program, clearing an impediment to his party’s support for the bill.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on May 24, 2013, 03:13:40 am
“To be able to go through this markup where nobody can claim that we’ve short-circuited the process — it’s been an open process, we’ve adopted some substantive amendments — to be able to do that without people calling press conferences outside and without groups calling members, it’s been a good process,” Flake said in an interview, referring to the Judiciary panel’s actions. “I’d have to say it probably helped.”

Yep, right there it is. A full admission by a politician that they are intentionally manipulating the situation and using misdirection for cover to pass bills that the public would no way vote for, and all done with the lead of just 8 people. And the voting public? Politicians "don't need no stinkin'" voters!

The public SHOULD be outraged, but they are too clueless to even know they should be mad.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 27, 2013, 02:11:27 pm
It seems like in recent years, especially after Katrina - whenever these natural disasters would happen, the aftermaths would get used to *unite* communities...and guess who is playing a large role in all of this? As you all know, I lived in New Orleans when Katrina happened - and yes, clergy in that city acted as community organizer roles(ie-Emergent/WOF heretic leaders like Rick Warren, Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyer, etc all stopped by - Warren even told a group of Baptist pastors that discouragement is the biggest sin in the bible, and that God would forsake us if we didn't put it aside to work together).

Twister heals Ala. town fractured over immigration

KILPATRICK, Ala. (AP) — For years before a tornado hit, few besides the immigrants who work at nearby poultry plants ventured down the pothole-rutted dirt roads of "Little Mexico."

The community, whose official name is Kilpatrick, comprises a large population of Latin American residents who previously mingled very little with the white, English-speaking natives.

Oddly enough, it was the twister, with its 125 mph destructive winds and home-wrecking fury, that began bringing the two groups together, even as it tore much of what they owned apart.

People began working together clearing away debris and wreckage after the storm without regard to language or culture, and folks suddenly were getting along better. Jacky Clayton, assistant police chief in Crossville, which includes part of Kilpatrick, doesn't know exactly what happened, but he said things seem less tense now.

"Maybe it's just a little more understanding of brotherly love," Clayton said.

Ivan Barrera, of Puebla, Mexico, the 31-year-old owner of a full-service Latin grocery store in the town, noted that for much of the seven years he has lived here, he has felt a certain "neutrality" between the immigrant and native communities. No blatant animosity, but no meaningful connection, either.

"I think things have gotten better since the storm," he said, speaking in Spanish.

The tearing down of cultural walls was a rather remarkable achievement in a state that two years ago passed the toughest anti-immigration law in the nation and is now bracing for the results of a protracted debate in Washington on immigration reform.

Located about 75 miles northeast of Birmingham in DeKalb County, Kilpatrick has drawn hundreds of immigrants from Mexico, Guatemala and other Latin American countries who moved to the rural area over the past decade to work in chicken-processing plants.

An estimated 2,000 immigrants live in Kilpatrick. An exact number is hard to nail down given the transience of some of the workers and the fact that many moved here without legal permission.

But their influence is unmistakable: The 600-student elementary school in nearby Crossville that many children from Kilpatrick attend is more than 60 percent Hispanic, unusual in a state where the population is only 4 percent Hispanic.

Driving through the area, it's not hard to see why so many people call it "Little Mexico" or, alternately, "Little Tijuana." Signs in Spanish advertise everything from $1 tacos at the El Taco Unico roadside stand to pastries, pinatas and Mexican spices at a Mexican bakery where Latin music plays quietly. On a main road a mile away, customers come and go from Barrera's grocery store.

On a recent sunny spring afternoon, families strolled down the road to a small neighborhood store while boys played soccer in yards next to bleating goats and clucking chickens. Most of the children spoke Spanish, with a little English sprinkled in.

Rosemarie Chavez is a bilingual native of Texas who moved into the area about 16 years ago when hardly anyone else was around and has most recently taken on the role of unofficial liaison between the immigrants and Alabama natives. She said the Hispanic population grew quickly once landowners began subdividing pastureland and selling acreage and mobile homes to the families who were moving in to take the poultry jobs.

The more the town grew, however, the more it became a target of the anti-immigration sentiment that had begun growing in the South and other parts of the country. For advocates of the tough anti-immigration law passed by Alabama's Republican-dominated Legislature in 2011, Kilpatrick was a prime example of unregulated immigration — many of the recently arrived workers had come to the United States without legal permission.

The new law allowed police to check immigration status during routine traffic stops and detain those who couldn't produce the right papers. The legislation also required schools to verify students' immigration status.

Police began to make Kilpatrick a focus of frequent traffic stops, and many residents were scared, said Chavez, who is also a community outreach worker for Quality of Life Health Care Services, which provides medical services throughout the area.

Many Hispanics left Alabama in the weeks after Gov. Robert Bentley signed the strict immigration law. They gradually returned, however, as courts gutted the measure's strictest provisions, officials relaxed enforcement, and the public's attention went elsewhere, Chavez said.

Still, their renewed physical presence did not translate into cultural assimilation. Kilpatrick's residents seldom veered far from the route that led to their jobs at the poultry plants and their native neighbors showed little interest in getting to know them.

That all began to change on March 18, the day two twisters plowed through DeKalb County, damaging 270 residences countywide. A total of 27 homes were destroyed, 19 of them in Kilpatrick, which was hit by an EF2 tornado, said Daryl Lester, deputy director of the DeKalb County Emergency Management Agency. Tornadoes are considered significant when they are rated EF2 or higher.

Students and volunteers from English-speaking churches accompanied the police, rescue squads and fire departments that descended on Kilpatrick within hours, helping to deliver food, right overturned vehicles, pick up fallen limbs and rescue photos and other precious keepsakes from the wreckage of the homes.

The immigrants were initially spooked by so many officials with badges, and some fled to the homes of friends and family instead of taking advantage of local agencies' offers of food and shelter, Chavez said.

But Chavez and others helped spread the word that authorities were there to assist tornado victims, not to arrest or deport anyone.

Both immigrants and natives learned valuable lessons that day and in the weeks afterward as they found themselves working side by side. The newcomers discovered that not everyone resented their presence in town. Alabamians with family roots reaching back for centuries discovered that the Hispanics down the road were a lot like them: family folks just trying to scrape by.

"We were helping a lot of the Hispanics and they were reaching out to help others," said Clayton, the police officer.

Barrera said that in the weeks since the twister, English-speaking firefighters and church groups have continued to help the Hispanic community by taking up collections. Just two weeks ago, a man who has sold land and mobile homes to residents in the Hispanic community dropped by Barrera's store to let him know that food and replacement furniture were available at a nearby church.

Miguel Gomez, 24, a native of Mexico's Michoacan state who has worked at the Guelaguetza Bakery in Kilpatrick for four years, said he felt a welcome change after the tornado, which did minor damage to the mobile home where he lives with his wife, child and mother.

"A lot of Americans came to offer us help, to offer shelter and food," Gomez said, speaking in Spanish. "It did surprise me a little to see it because not everyone tries to help the Mexicans."

Signs of the tornado are still evident: Blue tarps still cover damaged structures, and some of the mobile homes brought in to replace destroyed trailers appear ramshackle and rickety. Meanwhile, immigrants and natives are far from being the best of friends in Kilpatrick, where immigrant residents say they still see the occasional police car pulling over drivers whose legal status might be in doubt.

But few deny that important progress toward tolerance and unity has been made since the day the twisters landed.

"A great bridging has taken place," said Zach Richards, pastor at the local Union Grove Baptist Church. "It's beautiful to see

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on May 28, 2013, 04:26:14 am
Churches have helped for centuries, starting with the RCC. The Catholics in particular are well known for doing this stuff to circumvent immigration law by offering shelter to illegals. And of course government looks the other way, feigning a concern.

Latinos have invaded that part of the country. Across the state line in Georgia, just south of Chattanooga, they have literally taken over an area called Dalton, where carpets are made. Been there, seen it for myself as I use to live in Chattanooga where my family is from.

The more illegals, the more tax base, the more you have people here who support certain politicians who forward their illegal cause, and the more cheap farm labor you have. Ultimately, it's about the love of money.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on May 30, 2013, 03:04:06 pm
House approves drivers licenses for immigrants(CT)

Connecticut Senate Approves Licenses for Undocumented Immigrants
Gov. Dannel Malloy expected to sign bill
Thursday, May 30, 2013  |  Updated 10:45 AM EDT

After a heated debate that extended through the night, members of the Connecticut Senate approved legislation that would allow undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses, register their vehicles and get insurance.

The state Senate passed the bill by a vote of 19 to 16 on Thursday morning and it will move to Gov. Dannel Malloy, who is expected to sign it.

“This bill is first and foremost about public safety.  It’s about knowing who is driving on our roads, and doing everything we can to make sure those drivers are safe and that they’re operating registered, insured vehicles." Malloy said in a statement.

The state Senate passed the legislation a week after the state House of Representatives passed the bill to allow licenses regardless of citizenship or immigration status.

The House had also passed the bill in the early hours of the morning with a 74-55 vote.

Supporters said the legislation would create millions of dollars in state revenue and make the roads safer.

“Allowing undocumented drivers to get a license ensures that they are just as accountable to the laws of our roads as everyone else. This bill allows people to carry out their lives while encouraging them to be safe and properly ensured while on the road.” Senator Terry Gerratana (D-New Britain) said in a statement.

Opponents said more research should have been done on the bill.

State Rep. Themis Klarides last week called the process the bill came through the state Legislature "irresponsible" and "disappointing."

“Without a study or any effort to thoroughly vet this concept, we can only speculate the impact this bill will have on homeland security, public safety, insurance policy holders and insurance companies. Perhaps even more troubling is that we have no plan to allocate the financial and staff resources needed for the DMV to manage the colossal influx of demand that will cripple their day-to-day operations,” she said in a statement.

“Connecticut would be the only state on the east coast to allow such a program, making the state a magnet for illegal immigrants who bring with them a host of increased costs to state government,” State Rep. David Scribner said in a statement.

Mayor John DeStefano Jr., an outspoken advocate for immigration reform, took on the issue seven years ago by offering undocumented immigrants resident identification cards and released a statement in support of the legislation.

"Like the municipal ID, granting immigrants driver licenses regardless of immigration status is good policy.  Drivers’ licenses will reduce the number of uninsured motorists on the road and will establish training and testing standards to ensure driver safety.  Moreover, like the Elm City ID, drivers’ licenses can help connect immigrants with banking services to help reduce street crime, increase the reporting of crime and help to create a sense of community identity,” DeStefano said in a statement.

More than 10,000 cards have been issued since the program's inception and the ID cards have gone a long way in strengthening relationships between residents and the city’s police department, DeStefano said in March.

"“It should also be noted that, like many issues, action on the federal level would address this problem in an even more comprehensive and sensible way.  I continue to support those broader efforts at national reform, and urge Congress to follow the example being set by Connecticut and other states,” Malloy said in a statement.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 09, 2013, 05:17:52 pm
GOP's Ayotte says she'll support Senate immigration bill

GOP Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire will support the comprehensive immigration bill drafted by the bipartisan "Gang of Eight," she said Sunday, saying the legislation offers a "tough but fair" path to citizenship for the nation's estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants. 

"This is a thoughtful bipartisan solution to a tough problem," she said on CBS's Face the Nation. "And so that’s why I’m going to support it.”

An additional Republican vote is welcome news for proponents of the bill, which was drafted by a bipartisan group of eight senators and will be debated on the Senate floor starting this week.

The bill will need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

Ayotte joins the four Republican members of the Gang of Eight who are pushing for passage, although Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has suggested that he will only support the final legislation if more border security measures are written into the bill.

In an op-ed on her Senate website, Ayotte said she will back amendments to beef up border security.

"Consistent with my priorities, the legislation includes more border agents, more fencing, and better surveillance technology," she wrote. "And during the upcoming debate, I will support strengthening the legislation's border security measures even further."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 10, 2013, 11:03:08 am
OK, I know this news article is more political, but nonetheless I find it odd how they are making it WIDE open to everyone that BOTH political parties are working hand-in-hand in this, but the public still can't see this? And they still have this attitude that "If we can go out and fight against it, we can get this bill destroyed", but en yet they have this "stay the course" attitude where they have to either support their own political parties, but their "truth movement" party(in the case of Alex Jones et al) as well. And speaking of the "truth movement" runned by Jones, they're no different in their approach - even Rand Paul admitted he would support this bill.

Karl Rove-backed Crossroads GPS runs pro-immigration overhaul ad

Crossroads GPS, an advocacy group backed by Karl Rove, former senior adviser to George W. Bush, is launching a $100,000 ad campaign urging conservatives to support an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws.

The full-page print ad is signed by 53 business leaders and Republicans, including former Republican National Committee Chairman Edward Gillespie, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Rove. It's the first ad the group has run on immigration this year.

"Immigration reform presents an historic opportunity to strengthen our nation's security and prosperity for the future," the ad says in bold text near the top.

There's a caveat to Crossroads GPS' support, however. In a statement released on Monday, Crossroads GPS CEO Steven Law said the current bill requires an "extreme makeover" that increases border security provisions and protects American workers. But abandoning talks over the bill would give President Barack Obama more decision-making power over the future of immigration policy, Law said, echoing an argument that Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio makes frequently.

"If we lose this opportunity to pass meaningful immigration reform, we will give President Obama an opening to shift immigration policy further to the left by executive fiat," Law said in the statement.

"The Senate immigration bill needs an 'extreme makeover' before we can say it really protects our borders and our workers, but it's important that Congress move forward on it and not just throw up its hands," continued Law. "This isn't just about politics; it's about taking responsibility for solving a critical national problem."

The ad, pictured below, will run online and in The Wall Street Journal, Roll Call, The Hill and Politico.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 13, 2013, 03:09:42 pm
Video: http://live.wsj.com/video/seib-wessel-brownback-backs-immigration-reform-2013-06-12-151155739/70E25794-7C8A-4483-BBDD-61EFBF76318E.html#!70E25794-7C8A-4483-BBDD-61EFBF76318E
U.S. News
Seib & Wessel: Brownback Backs Immigration Reform

In an interview with WSJ's Jerry Seib, Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback says Kansas's immigration workforce provides a boost for the state's economy and gives his thoughts on whether Washington can get a deal done on reforming the immigration system.
Up Next
6/12/2013 3:57:39 PM2:35


FYI, GOP Kansas gov Sam Brownback has ties to the heretical New Apostle Reformation.

Rick Warren welcomes Obama, Brownback to Saddleback’s AIDS summit

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 14, 2013, 01:17:57 pm
Jeb Bush touts family-focused, 'fertile' immigrants as economic boon

Speaking to religious conservatives Friday, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush said that welcoming immigrants to the United States will be an economic boon because they are hard-working, family-oriented and “more fertile.”

"Immigrants create far more businesses than native-born Americans,” Bush said in remarks to the Faith and Freedom Coalition in Washington D.C. “Immigrants are more fertile, and they love families, and they have more intact families, and they bring a younger population. Immigrants create an engine of economic prosperity."

Bush, who is mulling a 2016 bid, also argued that there are too few young people paying into a system to support a larger number of older Americans because native-born fertility rates are going down.

While Bush’s arguably awkward phrasing earned Twitter jabs, data shows that immigrants do have a higher fertility RATE than women born in the United States.

According to 2011 data from the National Center for Health Statistics, the birth rate for foreign-born women is substantially higher than that of U.S. born women, at 87.8 births per 1,000 women aged 15-44. (It was 58.9 for women born in the United States.)

In fact, the Pew Research Center calculated that, in 2010, about 23 percent of all births in the country were to mothers born abroad, even though only about 13 percent of the total population was foreign-born.

But it’s also worth noting that the immigrant birth rate dropped sharply  -- down 13 percent -- between 2007 and 2010.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on June 14, 2013, 04:07:34 pm
"Immigrants create far more businesses than native-born Americans,” Bush said

And this guy is allegedly an American? Based on what? Number of new companies that got start up cash from the federal government just because they were foreigners? You mean THOSE immigrants? ::)

I don't think he wants to discuss how much federal money goes to new start ups by foreign nationals wanting to immigrate here.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 15, 2013, 12:23:50 pm
I heard on a radio show yesterday that this immigration bill is worse than Obamacare.

Odd how the same people who bent backwards and forwards exposing Obamacare are the same ones that are now supporting immigration reform(ie-Marco Rubio, SBC leader Richard Land, etc).

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 17, 2013, 06:51:49 pm
N.J. lawmakers advance bill granting in-state tuition for students in country illegally

TRENTON — As Congress debates an overhaul to the federal immigration system, New Jersey lawmakers again took up controversial legislation today that would allow students living in the country illegally to pay in-state tuition at the state’s public colleges.

The bill, dubbed the “Tuition Equality Act,” was approved by the state Assembly Budget Committee after a lengthy hearing in Trenton. The crowd in the chamber, which included immigrant students who have been pushing for the change for years, cheered as the committee moved the bill.

The legislation will now go to the full Assembly for a vote. Similar bills have died in Trenton in recent years. But supporters hope the movement in Washington, D.C., to pass immigration reform will help push New Jersey to make college more affordable for students who entered the country illegally.

Assemblyman Gordon Johnson (D-Bergen), one of the bill’s sponsors, said students brought into the U.S. illegally by their parents deserve the same chance to attend college as their American-born classmates.

“These students deserve any break any student should have in this state,” Johnson said. “It is not their fault their parents brought them here. They were raised here.”

Under the current system, students who entered the U.S. illegally can attend public K-12 schools and apply to New Jersey colleges. However, they are charged out-of-state college tuition if they can not produce documentation that they live in New Jersey legally.

That means students without legal immigration status often pay double the tuition of their classmates and are not eligible for federal and state financial aid programs. At Rutgers University, for example, in-state undergraduates paid $13,073 in annual tuition and fees last year while out-of-state students paid $26,393.

Students who have been granted deferred action, a temporary legal status, under a new program introduced by President Obama last year, also must pay out-of-state tuition in New Jersey.

Immigration reform advocates say the current system makes college unaffordable for most students living in the country illegally. Several students gave emotional testimony at the hearing detailing their struggles to pay tuition.

“Every semester I go with the uncertainty of whether I can continue my education or not,” said Renata Mauriz, who was brought to the U.S. illegally by her family eight years ago and currently attends County College of Morris.

Mauriz said there are about 40 undocumented students at her school now. She recently authored a study that found about 750 additional Morris County students could attend the county college if they were charged the same in-county tuition as legal residents.

If approved, the new legislation (A-4225) would allow students living in the U.S. illegally to pay in-state tuition if they attended a New Jersey high school for at least three years and earned a diploma. The students would also be required to file an affidavit saying they have filed or will file an application to legalize their immigration status.

Several lawmakers questioned whether the bill would encourage illegal immigration and take away spots at four-year colleges that could have gone to legal residents. They also questioned whether colleges would be able to enforce the provision requiring students to file for legal immigration status.

Assemblyman Jay Webber (R-Morris) said he found it unfair a U.S. citizen in Pennsylvania would be charged more to attend a New Jersey college than a student who entered the country illegally.

“That to me doesn’t seem right,” said Webber, who voted against the bill.

The Assembly Budget Committee also approved a second bill (A-3162), called the “Higher Education Citizenship Equality Act,” designed to make it easier for American-born students to pay in-state tuition and apply for financial aid even if their parents are living in the U.S. illegally.

Students under age 24 currently may be required to use their parents’ residence and tax information on financial aid forms. The new legislation would allow students to pay in-state tuition and apply for loans, grants and scholarships if they can prove they are U.S. citizens who have lived in New Jersey for at least 12 months.

“The fact that their parents are undocumented is not a cause for denial,” said Marlene Caride (D-Bergen), one of the sponsors of the bill.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 19, 2013, 01:27:14 pm
Business, labor groups urge Senate to pass immigration bill

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Seeking to boost momentum for a broad immigration bill, the country's top manufacturing association and one of the largest labor unions joined forces on Wednesday to push Congress to pass the legislation.

In a letter to the Senate, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Service Employees International Union endorsed the bill that would give legal status to some 11 million undocumented immigrants and establish new guest worker programs for both high- and low-skilled foreign workers.

"We are cognizant that partisanship and politics can create paralyzing gridlock, but the Senate has put forward a thoughtful and bipartisan bill - a feat many thought was nearly impossible in recent years," the letter said.

"The NAM and SEIU believe in the future of the American economy and agree that immigration reform is a key component to its success."

The letter indicated a willingness by the business and labor groups to try to work out disagreements that arise during the immigration debate. Business-labor disputes helped to derail the last immigration reform effort in 2007 and have been a sticking point in the current debate.

During the crafting of the Senate bill by the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" senators a rift arose between business and labor over the guest worker program for low-skilled workers, but the two sides ultimately reached a deal. When the Senate Judiciary Committee debated the bill last month, another dispute flared over the visa program for high-tech workers.

Discussions about a partnership between NAM and SEIU, which represents 2.1 million members, including healthcare workers, teachers and janitors, have been going on for months, said Joe Trauger, vice president of human resources policy at NAM.

The letter comes as the Democratic-controlled Senate is seeking to pass the immigration bill before the July 4 holiday weekend, which would send the issue to the House of Representatives.

The bill, which is backed by President Barack Obama, faces its steepest challenge in the Republican-dominated House. Obama has made immigration reform a top priority of his second term in the White House.

"The message that (the letter) sends is that we have groups that have not traditionally worked together on issues in the past that are making a commitment to work together on this important issue," Trauger said.

As the House debates the details of provisions such as the guest worker programs, the discussion is likely to open the door to renewed business-labor disagreements.

Sylvia Ruiz, director of SEIU's Immigrant Justice Campaign, said the partnership with NAM could provide a forum for working out future disputes.

NAM, which represents small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector in all 50 U.S. states, is also using its lobbying muscle this week in a series of meetings on Capitol Hill.

About 500 of its member companies are in town for the organization's annual summit and have scheduled hundreds of meetings with House and Senate lawmakers and their staffs, with immigration reform one of the top agenda items.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 21, 2013, 08:48:11 am
Some immigrants excluded from health care overhaul

PHOENIX (AP) — President Barack Obama has championed two sweeping policy changes that could transform how people live in the United States: affordable health care for all and a path to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants illegally in the country.

But many immigrants will have to wait more than a decade to qualify for health care benefits under the proposed immigration overhaul being debated by Congress, ensuring a huge swath of people will remain uninsured as the centerpiece of Obama's health care law launches next year.

Lawmakers pushing the immigration bill said adding more recipients to an already costly benefit would make it unaffordable.

Health care analysts and immigration proponents argue that denying coverage will saddle local governments with the burden of uninsured immigrants. They also fear a crisis down the road as immigrants become eligible for coverage, but are older, sicker and require more expensive care. Those placed on provisional status would become the nation's second-largest population of uninsured, or about 25 percent, according to a 2012 study by the Urban Institute.

"All health research shows that the older you get, the sicker you become, so these people will be sicker and will be more expensive on the system," said Matthew O'Brien, who runs a health clinic for immigrants in Philadelphia and researches health trends at Temple University.

The Affordable Care Act will make health insurance accessible for millions of uninsured people starting in January through taxpayer-subsidized private policies for middle-class families and expanded access to Medicaid, the program for low-income people funded by federal and state dollars. The proposed immigration overhaul explicitly states immigrants cannot receive Medicaid or buy coverage in new health care exchanges for more than a decade after they qualify for legal status, and only after certain financial and security requirements have been met.

Immigrants with provisional status may obtain insurance through employers once they have legal status to work, but many are unskilled and undereducated, and tend to work low-wage jobs at small businesses that don't have to provide the benefit under the health care law. Immigrants illegally in the country also can access community health centers, but the officials who run those clinics said they are overwhelmed by the demand.

"We can't help everybody," said Bethy Mathis, executive director of Wesley Community Center in Phoenix. The clinic serves 7,000 patients a year who seek everything from vaccinations and relief from minor medical problems to care for long-term health conditions such as diabetes.

Debate over whether immigrants illegally in the country should be eligible for federal benefits nearly sank Obama's health care reform before it was passed by Congress in 2010. For lawmakers pushing immigration reform, there was no question that immigrants would continue to be excluded.

"That's one of the privileges of citizenship," said Republican Sen. John McCain, one of the so-called Gang of Eight pushing the immigration bill, during a conference call with reporters. "That's just what it is. I don't know why we would want to provide Obamacare to someone who is not a citizen of this country."

The issue has received more attention in recent weeks. Some House Republicans have threatened to kill the immigration bill unless immigrants are required to pay for all their health care costs even after they receive green cards or become citizens. Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, meanwhile, said she wants the government to distribute at least $250 million to state and local governments because they are the ones who will feel the financial pain of immigrants being left out of the health care law.

Pregnant women, children, seniors and the disabled are eligible for emergency Medicaid services regardless of their immigration status.

The politics behind the bill offer little solace to immigrant families struggling with growing medical bills.

Isabel Castillo came to the U.S. illegally with her parents when she was a child. She's now 28 and has not gone for an annual physical exam since 2007. Every pain triggers debate over whether it's worth a medical visit or not.

"You are like, 'God, should I go, should I wait? The bill is going to be so high,'" Castillo said. "You just wait until you can't tolerate the pain anymore and then you go to the emergency room."

Immigrants who are U.S. citizens are also affected by the limits on health care access if they provide for family members here illegally.

High school student Jacqueline Garcia of Phoenix works two jobs to support her 13-year-old brother and 52-year-old grandmother, who has severe diabetes. The woman's mobility is limited, her vision and memory are fading and she sometimes suffers from seizures. The children were born in the United States and are being raised by the grandmother, who does not have lawful status and as a result does not qualify for Medicaid.

"Every time she gets sick, I have to take her to the doctor. It's really expensive," Garcia said. "What if my grandmother doesn't make it for the 10 years? I mean, I am always going to be struggling. That's too long."

Opponents said they understand the concerns of immigrants not getting health care, but it becomes an issue of the added expense.

"We aren't saying people shouldn't get health care. The question is who is going to pay for it?" said Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a national group that opposes the immigration overhaul. "They would all be on Medicaid or heavily subsidized in some other way."

Critics of the decision said immigrants are eager to pay for affordable health care insurance and already support federal benefits by paying sales and income taxes. They note that adults unable to overcome health emergencies are less likely to contribute to the workforce and society.

"The risk of them being uninsured if they are in the country illegally is the same risk of anyone else in the country not being insured," said Stephen Zuckerman, a health economist for the Urban Institute. "It's always more expensive to treat people at a more advanced stage of disease."

In North Carolina, Jessica Sanchez-Rodriguez said she has undergone a series of surgeries and medicines to treat her spina bifida, a developmental congenital disorder, and an ailment that leads to brain swelling. Her parents brought her illegally from Mexico when she was 11 months old. As a minor, she received subsidized medical care, but she was cut off when she turned 18 in February.

Her family is trying to raise money for a $55,000 surgery to connect a catheter to her bladder.

"It's terrible," said Sanchez-Rodriguez. "I have to go to school with these pains."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 21, 2013, 12:10:19 pm
"The Border Security Ruse"

For a brief moment, I thought the Wall Street Journal had published an editorial on immigration I agreed with. It's titled "The Border Security Ruse" and I thought it would be about the efforts to add increasingly stringent border enforcement provisions as a way of buying Republican votes for the amnesty, pointing out that they were only included for political purposes and would never actually be implemented. Alas, the Journal was complaining that the promotion of enforcement-first amendments was the eponymous ruse, a "trick" by the inhumane and anti-growth folks on the "restrictionist right" to prevent amnesty for no good reason.

But more attention on the border-security ruse — in my first meaning — is warranted. The latest attempt at providing political cover for pusillanimous Republican senators to vote for amnesty comes from Corker and Hoeven. Their proposal would leave the basic, flawed architecture of the bill in place, amnestying the illegal population up front and promising more enforcement in the future. The marquee element of this latest ruse is to roughly double the Border Patrol by adding 20,000 agents and finish the 700 miles of fencing already required under current law. It also includes a 90 percent apprehension rate for border infiltrators, but that provisions is a "goal" rather than a requirement and would thus not have to be met before the amnesty beneficiaries could upgrade to green cards (and eventual citizenship).

This is utterly phony. Even Senator Corker alluded to its phoniness when said this morning on MSNBC that "for people who are concerned about security, once they see what is in this bill, it's almost overkill." There is no way to successfully recruit and train 20,000 additional Border Patrol agents in a short period of time — at least not without cutting a lot of corners. The Border Patrol certainly needs to grow — it's considerably smaller than the NYPD. But doing it properly takes some time; it took about a decade to add the last 10,000 agents, so how long would it take to add 20,000 more? They just pulled this number out of their, uh, hats as a way to dazzle the yokels "who are concerned about security."

The Corker-Hoeven amendment is a sham, pure simple. Anyone who votes for it is announcing that he thinks the American people are gullible fools. I just hope they're not right in that assessment.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on June 21, 2013, 02:04:08 pm
The marquee element of this latest ruse is to roughly double the Border Patrol by adding 20,000 agents and finish the 700 miles of fencing already required under current law. It also includes a 90 percent apprehension rate for border infiltrators, but that provisions is a "goal" rather than a requirement

These idiots are so deluded! And stone-cold hypocrites to boot.

They talk about "90% apprehension rate", and out of the same wicked mouth tell Sheriff Arpio in Arizona he can't be checking immigration status of anybody, that he's violating their rights by profiling!

Rights? I own the White House as a natural born citizen. It belongs to "We the People", but watch what happens if I were to climb the fence and set up a tent on the White House lawn! I'd disappear under some federal prison, never to be seen again, for "trespassing", at least, because according to the government, I don't have the right to be there as a civilian not employed there.

Yet people who enter our country, by climbing the fence, without the right to do so, are welcomed and given benefits the US citizens don't get!

THAT makes me angry! ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 22, 2013, 12:02:44 am
Huckabee's another known globalist...

Huckabee sides with Corker-Hoeven border security deal

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee (R) suggested in an interview Friday that he supports the border security deal crafted by Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and shunned the idea that a path to citizenship would be contingent on fully securing the border.

Asked on Fox News whether he sides with those two senators and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) or opponents of the immigration bill like Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Huckabee chose the former.

“I’d say probably the Rubio, Corker, Hoeven [side],” Huckabee said.

Huckabee said that an immigration reform bill is “necessary” but also urged caution in passing it too quickly. While he praised the compromise efforts, he emphasized that Republicans have plenty to lose if they don’t get border security right.

He also said he doesn’t like the idea of so-called triggers that would allow illegal immigrants a path to citizenship once certain border security requirements are met.

“You don’t just wait and do nothing on the pathway process while you’re working on the fencing,” he said. “And let’s be clear: We’re never going to have 100 percent border security. There’s always somebody who’s going to find a way to break into the system.”

Huckabee’s fellow Fox News host, Bill O’Reilly, endorsed the immigration reform compromise Thursday night. Other conservative talkers, including Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter, have mobilized against the bill.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 22, 2013, 10:46:59 pm
Repackaged Amnesty Bill Allows Napolitano to Nix Border Fence

Another loophole inserted into the new version of the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill allows Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (or any of her successors) to nix the construction of a required border security fence if she does not find it to be an "appropriate" use of resources.

The new version of the bill was introduced via a so-called “border surge” amendment from Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and John Hoeven (R-ND), with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid repackaging the whole bill into the amendment.

On page 35, line 24 of the new bill, a provision was inserted that says Napolitano--who already believes the border is secure--can decide against building a fence if she chooses not to erect one:

Notwithstanding paragraph (1), nothing in this subsection shall require the Secretary to install fencing, or infrastructure that directly results from the installation of such fencing, in a particular location along the Southern border, if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain effective control over the Southern border at such location.

The “paragraph (1)” that new waiver refers to is the one that supposedly “requires” the construction of a fence along the border.

Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a strategy, to be known as the ‘Southern Border Fencing Strategy,’ to identify where 700 miles of fencing (including double-layer fencing), infrastructure, and technology, including at ports of entry, should be deployed along the Southern border,” that paragraph of the bill reads.

This could allow illegal aliens to be granted amnesty, or legalized “Registered Provisional Immigration (RPI)” status, once Secretary Napolitano submits a fencing (and border security) plan to Congress. However, this provision allows Napolitano to decide against building the fence after doing so, with no legal ramifications.

As Breitbart News has already detailed, a similar provision was inserted with regard to border security technology requirements.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 22, 2013, 10:53:35 pm
Major changes in 1,200-page immigration amendment; vote is Monday

The Hoeven-Corker border security amendment to the Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration reform bill is finally out, and it is huge. Released in several parts, it totals 1,190 pages, amounting to a rewrite of large portions of the original bill. While much of the text of those 1,190 pages duplicates portions of the original legislation, there are entirely new passages and significant changes throughout — enough to keep anyone who cares about what is in the bill busy for quite a while.

The problem is, they don’t have quite a while. The Senate will likely vote on the amendment on Monday. That’s not much time to read and digest such a momentous and far-reaching piece of legislation.

On Friday, Republican Sen. Bob Corker anticipated such concerns and sought to reassure the public by saying that everyone will have 75 hours to read the amendment before the vote. “I know we have had a lot of people on the floor who have criticized this legislation without reading it,” Corker said. “I know it has been called a magic amendment. I will just say to people who care about border security — and obviously numbers of people on our side of the aisle care deeply about that — read the bill. By filing cloture today [Friday] on this amendment, it is going to give everybody in this body and in the nation the opportunity to read this piece of legislation for 75 hours before the cloture vote occurs.”

If one started as Corker spoke and devoted 16 hours a day to nothing but studying the bill, one would have to cover about 24 pages an hour to finish the legislation. That’s certainly doable — if one has 16 hours a day for three days to do the job. But it’s also not easy, because reading the amendment requires comparing the new text to the original text of the bill to try to spot changes. Despite what Sen. Corker says, it’s not a lot of time.

Several Senate staffers are going over the amendment this weekend. Sen. Mike Lee, for example, has assigned staff 100-page sections of the legislation in a hurried attempt to know what’s in the entire bill. For my part, here is an early look at some of the bill’s major changes.

First, the bill does not alter the fundamental legalization-first structure of the original Gang of Eight bill. The nation’s estimated 11 million illegal immigrants will be granted legal status within months of the bill becoming law, before enhanced border security and interior enforcement measures are in place. But the bill does put in place new requirements that those measures be finished before millions of legalized immigrants can move on to permanent legal resident status — green cards — and ultimately to U.S. citizenship. Even so, there remain some of the exceptions and waivers that critics pointed out in the original bill.

On the enforcement side, the biggest change is the so-called “border surge.” The legislation gives the Secretary of Homeland Security eight years, until September 30, 2021, to “increase the number of trained full-time active duty U.S. Border Patrol agents deployed to the Southern border to 38,405.” How they chose the specific figure of 38,405 is unclear, but that’s what the bill says. The legislation also sets a date — September 30, 2017 — for the hiring of 3,500 new Customs officers.

Hoeven and Corker also require new border fencing, although not always double-layer fencing, as many border security experts have advocated. The bill does not specify a deadline date for completion, but it requires that the Secretary of Homeland Security be able to “certify that there is in place along the southern border no fewer than 700 miles of pedestrian fencing which will include replacement of all currently existing vehicle fencing on non-tribal lands on the southern border with pedestrian fencing where possible, and after this has been accomplished may include a second layer of pedestrian fencing in those locations along the southern border which the Secretary deems necessary or appropriate.” Where the fence goes up is entirely at the Secretary’s discretion.

As far as other security measures are concerned, the Hoeven-Corker amendment is far more detailed than the original bill. The idea was to take away the discretion of the Secretary — many Republicans have expressed skepticism that current Secretary Janet Napolitano and President Obama will actually do the work — and dictate new security measures within the bill itself. The new amendment does that. So, for example, it includes these requirements for the Yuma and Tucson sectors of the Arizona border:

(i) 50 integrated fixed towers.

(ii) 73 fixed camera systems (with relocation capability, which include Remove Video Surveillance Systems.

(iii) 28 mobile surveillance systems, which include mobile video surveillance systems, agent-portable surveillance systems, and mobile surveillance capability systems.

(iv) 685 unattended ground sensors, including seismic, imaging, and infrared.

(v) 22 handheld equipment devices, including handheld thermal imaging systems and night vision goggles

The amendment includes similarly specific requirements for each of the nine sectors of the U.S.-Mexico border. It also includes changes in provisions involving the E-Verify employment system and the exit-entry system to check for people who overstay visas that allow them to come into the U.S.

The amendment has a huge price tag. Whereas the original bill allocated $8.3 billion to what is called the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Trust Fund, the new bill provides $46.3 billion.

So the question is: Does the bill absolutely require that all of those measures must be in place and actually working before legalized immigrants can move to green card status? The answer is mixed. Yes, it requires the measures to be in place, although there is usually a waiver or exception nearby. But no, it does not require them to be working in some measurable way before immigrants are awarded green card status.

The new language in the Hoeven-Corker amendment says that, with the exception of agricultural workers and so-called Dreamers who are given fast-track status in the bill (that’s more than a million people right there), the Secretary of Homeland Security may not move immigrants from provisional legal status to permanent status until six months after certifying that what is called the Comprehensive Southern Border Strategy, with its various provisions for Border Patrol, Customs, fencing, surveillance technology, E-Verify, exit-entry and more, “is deployed and operational.” It further defines “operational” as meaning that all the security measures have been “procured, funded, [and are] in current use by the Department to achieve effective control, except in the event of routine maintenance, de minimis non-deployment, or natural disaster that would prevent the use of such assets.”

That is a major change from the original bill, which not only did not define the Border Strategy but required only that it be “substantially deployed and substantially operational” before immigrants were granted permanent status. That could have meant virtually anything.

So the new amendment is tougher on that front. But the fact is, Hoeven and Corker — and many Republican colleagues — intended it to be much tougher than that. As originally conceived, the amendment would have required proof that the new security measures are actually working, in a measurable way, before immigrants could move to green card status. “For all of the people that they identify coming across the border, you’ve got to capture or turn back 90 percent of those folks,” Hoeven told me in a June 17 interview. “And only then can you go from registered provisional immigrant to green card status.”

That 90 percent standard — a measurement of results, not just effort — was unacceptable to Democrats. Several reports in the last few days have said that President Obama told Senate Democrats that a 90 percent standard was a deal-killer. Of course, the Democrats already thought that themselves, as did the immigration activist groups that support them. Throughout the course of negotiations, from the Gang of Eight’s beginning until now, Democrats have resisted any provision that would require measurable border security before immigrants are granted green card status.

And Republicans have given in. The thinking behind the new amendment seems to be that it throws so much money at the problem that it is bound to increase border security significantly, even if not in a way that can be certified 90 percent effective. So Republicans accepted the Democrats’ offer of lots of new spending on security in place of the 90 percent standard.

Finally, the Hoever-Corker amendment includes a provision that has been in the bill from the start, which says that if litigation or some unspecified act of God delays implementation of the new security measures, immigrants will be given permanent status in ten years no matter what. Of course most observers expect the bill to spark lots of litigation — for example, there will be lawsuits claiming that immigrants should be eligible for federal benefits — and it’s entirely possible that litigation could tie up at least parts of the bill for years. So the catchall clause, still in the bill after the Hoeven-Corker amendment, guarantees that immigrants will win permanent status in the long run.

More later.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 23, 2013, 10:24:15 pm
New amendment adds jobs bill to Gang of Eight immigration plan

Opponents of the Gang of Eight immigration bill have spent the weekend looking for hard-to-find changes in a piece of legislation that was substantially re-written by the Hoeven-Corker amendment. But there’s one big change that’s right out in the open — impossible to miss, in fact.

The original Gang bill ended with a section designated Title IV, which was headlined REFORMS TO NON-IMMIGRANT VISA PROGRAMS. The Hoeven-Corker version of the bill added a Title V, with the headline JOBS FOR YOUTH. The measure would provide $1.5 billion in the next two years to provide jobs for Americans between the ages of 16 and 24. It was originally pushed by Democratic Sen. Bernard Sanders, who wanted to come to the aid of young workers who were “hard hit by the Wall Street-caused recession.” Now, Sanders says immigration reform will further damage youth job prospects.

In the few days of Senate debate over the Gang of Eight bill, Sanders delivered several floor speeches that were almost bitterly critical of the legislation’s economic effects. The bill will cost jobs and reduce the standard of living of millions of low-skilled Americans, Sanders argued. His was the most vocal and persistent criticism of the bill from the left.

So how to make him happy, or at least less unhappy, with the legislation? Allow him to put in a few features of his own. A press release from Sanders’ office put it this way: “Sanders had argued that helping unemployed American young people was the least Congress should do in a bill that allows college students from around the world to take jobs that young Americans would otherwise perform.”

According to Sanders, each state would receive a minimum of $7.5 million to run a summer jobs program for young people in 2014 and 2015. States with high youth unemployment would receive a lot more. Many of the bill’s provisions are based on President Obama’s American Jobs Act, which Congress never passed. Sanders claims it would be paid for by “imposing a temporary $10 fee on employers who hire guest workers and international workers who receive green cards.”

Sanders’ amendment is entirely consistent with positions he has taken over many years. The only odd thing is that his proposal would be included in an amendment offered by two Republicans, John Hoeven and Bob Corker. Do they endorse Sanders’ policy positions?

On the one hand, a critic could ask what business lawmakers have recycling provisions from the American Jobs Act as new additions to a sweeping new immigration reform bill. On the other hand, one could argue that the Sanders addition is an attempt to counter some of the economic damage the bill’s sponsors will not admit it will inflict. In any event, Sanders’ project is likely to be part of the massive bill that wins Senate approval by the end of the week.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 24, 2013, 05:24:31 pm
Jan Brewer: This Gang of Eight bill is a victory for Arizona

Stupidity or something worse? Border security doesn’t “come first” in the Gang of Eight bill, of course; it comes before green-card eligibility but after probationary legalization, which is why Rand Paul, for instance, can’t support it. Illegals are granted a legal claim to staying here before anything happens on the border. Which leaves three possibilities. One: Brewer’s confused about what the bill says. That seems … doubtful. She’s the governor of a border state; almost no one is more interested in finding out precisely what the bill says than she is. Two: Brewer’s deliberately misleading the public at the behest of national Republicans who need prominent so-called “border hawks” like her to reassure low-information (a.k.a. dumb) GOPers that the bill is awesome. That seems likelier, although I believe Brewer’s term-limited as governor and therefore doesn’t really need anything from the national leadership. She could go her own way if she wanted to. Which brings us to number three: She supports the bill on the merits because, like Marco Rubio, she’s not as much of a border hawk as she pretended to be when running for office three years ago. By the same token, how many conservatives who voted for her thought she’d be a fan of ObamaCare? We have, it seems, been misled. Again.

Which brings me to the larger point. I honestly can’t believe how many Republican pols backing the bill lied, and lied brazenly, about being stalwart border hawks as candidates in order to get elected. Rubio, Dean Heller, Kelly Ayotte, Jan Brewer — hell, even McCain ran, ridiculously, as some sort of immigration hard-ass to get back to the Senate in 2010. Before the party tears itself apart over immigration reform in the House, can we have a moment of unity at least over the fact that immigration moderates shouldn’t lie about their moderation as candidates? Right? Respect your constituents enough to give them a fully informed choice in the booth by stating your opinion about a momentous issue of policy honestly. As it is, we’re being asked to believe that somehow every one of these people, from Rubio on down, has had precisely the same epiphany about what needs to be done on immigration, and in each case it was only after being safely elected that they had it. That’s some coincidence. No one but no one on the GOP side ever sees the virtue of “legalization first” policies and “comprehensive” reform in the middle of the campaign; only afterward, when they’ve gained incumbency and the support of monied national Republican interests, do they somehow attain enlightenment. Virtually no one talks about the status quo being “de facto amnesty” until after they’ve made it to Washington; as candidates, you’re much more likely to hear them say that an “earned path to citizenship is basically code for amnesty,” as Marco Rubio once infamously did. If you take these very conveniently timed reversals at face value (which you shouldn’t), then at best it means the people now leading the GOP effort on reform simply didn’t think deeply or at any length about this subject as candidates. Candidate Rubio thought earned citizenship equalled amnesty, but that’s only because he cared so little about the nuts and bolts of the issue that he didn’t spend 10 minutes thinking hard on it until he got elected, whereupon he suddenly discovered that amnesty is actually what we have now. This is the guy we’re supposed to follow on this issue?

These people lie to you, shamelessly, to get elected, and then betray your interests while in office to stay elected. They have the sheerest contempt for your opinion. Keep that in mind when the champagne corks are popping on the Hill today after the big Senate vote.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 24, 2013, 06:12:50 pm
Border security amendment clears hurdle, bolstering chances for immigration bill

The sweeping effort to reform the nation’s immigration laws took another important step forward Monday when a Republican proposal to bolster security along the U.S.-Mexico border was poised to clear a key procedural hurdle in the U.S. Senate by a margin that bodes well for its eventual approval.

More than 60 senators had voted by Monday evening to proceed to debate on the measure, exceeding the threshold necessary to move forward. The vote was one of just a final few steps left before the Senate is expected to give final approval to the bipartisan measure later this week.

The “no” votes included Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) and a block of conservative lawmakers who have been opposed to the bipartisan immigration measure since debate began weeks ago.

The proposal that moved forward Monday was designed instead to garner the support of a collection of other Republicans, including Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Orrin G. Hatch (Utah) and Roger Wicker (Miss.), who were voting with Democrats to proceed.

Voting on the motion to proceed was kept open Monday evening because flights carrying several senators back to Washington were delayed by severe weather and issues with an airplane that veered off a runway at Reagan National Airport.

In voting no, several Republicans complained Monday that the amendment doesn’t go far enough to bolster border security and that Senate Democrats rushed consideration of the proposal while blocking votes on other GOP proposals.

“What is the rush? Why are we proceeding gangbusters?” said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), a vocal critic of the process. He charged that colleagues of both parties were seeking “a fig leaf” that would permit them to say they bolstered security along the border, “when in fact this bill does not.”

McConnell agreed, saying that there “is simply no reason we need to end this debate now in order to meet some artificial deadline determined by the majority leader’s summer schedule.”

It has long been the goal of Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” who wrote the bill to approve their 1,200-page proposal before the start of the July 4th congressional recess. Their hope is that the House will devote most of its attention to immigration in July and approve a bill before the month-long August recess, permitting negotiators to work on a compromise and allow Congress to return in the fall to approve a final deal.

But consideration of immigration in the House remains in doubt after lawmakers of both parties rejected a broad five-year farm bill that revived concerns about whether House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) can cobble together enough support among Republicans and Democrats to pass significant legislation.

Boehner has said that he only plans to hold a vote on an immigration measure that enjoys support from a majority of Republicans, but that he also hopes to proceed in a bipartisan fashion. But GOP aides have said that cooperation with Democrats may prove impossible after they withdrew support for the farm bill.

In a notable sign of conservative support, Arizona Republican Gov. Jan Brewer said she supports the border security plan that advanced Monday.

“I think that what we’re seeing taking place in the Senate is a victory for Arizona,” she told Fox News. “I’m glad that they finally decided to talk about the ‘border surge’ that we’ve called out for since 2010.”

Brewer later clarified via Twitter that her support applied only to the border security amendment and not the overall bill. She has emerged as a conservative champion in recent years for critiquing the Obama administration’s handling of border security.

At the White House, President Obama sought to rally business leaders in support of the measure by meeting with a group of corporate and small-business executives.

“It’s not a bill that represents everything that I would like to see; it represents a compromise,” Obama told reporters before the meeting.

“If we get this done — when we get this done — I think every business leader here feels confident that they’ll be in a stronger position to continue to innovate, to continue to invest, to continue to create jobs, and ensure that this continues to be the land of opportunity for generations to come,” he added.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2013, 11:26:36 am
DOMA Ruling Means ‘Gang of 8′ Amnesty Bill Now Extends to Illegal Alien Gay ‘Partners’
Jun 26th, 2013 @ 08:49 am › John Hill

If this bill has in it something that gives gay couples immigration rights and so forth, it kills the bill. I’m done…I’m off it.“

-Marco Rubio, Andrea Tantaros Show. 6/13/2013

That’s what ‘Gang of 8′ amnesty front-man Rubio said when the Senate was debating the amendment, sponsored by Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT) which would grant green cards to foreign partners of gay Americans. Leahy originally introduced the measure during the Senate Judiciary Committee markup of the bill, but he withdrew it under pressure from Republican lawmakers who said it would reduce the chance of the bill passing.

This was the full statement of Rubio regarding the amendment…

“If this bill has in it something that gives gay couples immigration rights and so forth, it kills the bill. I’m done…I’m off it, and I’ve said that repeatedly. I don’t think that’s going to happen and it shouldn’t happen. This is already a difficult enough issue as it is.”

Well things just got even more “difficult”, Senator.

This morning’s U.S. Supreme Court 5-4 ruling overturning the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in the Windsor v. United States decision, overturned the federal law that defines marriage as a heterosexual union, saying it violates the rights of married gay couples by denying them government benefits.

This ruling applies squarely to the Federal government, and now means that the Leahy Amendment text would be law of the ‘Gang of 8′ bill is passed in its current form

Worse, the ruling would no doubt be extended by a friendly Federal judge within days to allow any illegal aliens granted amnesty to bring in same-sex “spouses”, or those they claim to be same-sex “spouses” (remember this is a population well-versed in marriage fraud), to the U.S. legally. DREAM-status illegals would be able to do this immediately. Other illegals could begin to do this within 5 years – until a judge says that’s unfair too.

So we have one question for Senator Rubio: Now that the Leahy Amendment would be the law of the land under your amnesty bill…are you “done”? Or will this be yet another promise broken?

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on June 26, 2013, 01:43:23 pm
It's amazing to sit back and watch them squirm!  ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 26, 2013, 04:41:34 pm
UPDATE 1-U.S. Senate backs border amendment to immigration bill

(Reuters) - The U.S. Senate on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a $46 billion plan to increase federal law enforcement efforts at the U.S. border with Mexico, a move aimed at winning bipartisan passage this week of a comprehensive immigration bill.

The amendment approved by the Senate aims to double, to around 40,000, the number of U.S. agents patrolling the southwestern border, complete the construction of 700 miles (1,126 km) of border fence and enable the purchase of high-tech surveillance and other equipment to detect illegal border crossings.

The Senate backed the border security amendment by a vote of 69-29, with 15 of 46 Republicans joining all 52 Democrats and two independents.

None of the top four Senate Republican leaders voted for the amendment, however, in a sign of continuing divisions within the party over immigration legislation that provides a pathway to citizenship for 11 million undocumented residents.

"I don't know how any Republican could look a TV camera or a constituent in the eye and not say that this amendment strengthens ... the border and makes our border more secure," said Republican Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, who helped write the amendment.

Corker added that if a majority of Republicans voted against the bill, which it did, "Democrats are going to own the border security issue," which has long been argued by Republicans.

Republican Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa countered that he was skeptical that the 20,000 additional border security agents actually would be hired over the next 10 years.

He also said the amendment "makes bold promises that may throw more money at the border, but there's no accountability to get the job done."

Republican opposition to a comprehensive immigration bill like the Senate's runs deep in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where no guarantees have been given that legislation will be advanced to legalize and ultimately allow citizenship for the 11 million undocumented residents.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on June 27, 2013, 02:07:41 am
Corker added that if a majority of Republicans voted against the bill, which it did, "Democrats are going to own the border security issue," which has long been argued by Republicans.

Hey you clown, it's not a Republican or Democrat issue, it's an AMERICAN border issue!  ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 27, 2013, 05:59:32 pm
Immigration reform bill passes Senate, moves to skeptical House

The Senate passed a sweeping immigration reform bill on Thursday afternoon, after a recently hashed-out compromise on border security helped persuade a total of 14 Republicans to vote for the measure. The bill, which passed 68-32, could face a steep uphill climb in the Republican-controlled House.

The vote brings Congress a step closer to passing its first major immigration reform since the 1986 amnesty bill that legalized more than 3 million immigrants under President Ronald Reagan.

Moments before the vote, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said on the Senate floor that the "historic legislation recognizes that today's immigrants came for the right reason, the same reason as the generations before them ... the right to live in a land that's free."

Republican Chuck Grassley of Iowa spoke against the measure on the floor, arguing that it does not do enough to increase interior immigration enforcement. "The bill won't ensure that a future Congress isn't back here in 25 years dealing with the very same problems," Grassley said.

The "Gang of Eight," a bipartisan group of senators who drafted the bill, had hoped to get 70 out of 100 senators to vote to pass the bill and send a strong signal to the House that the legislation is bipartisan. The bill fell just two votes short of that goal. Republican Sens. Lamar Alexander, Kelly Ayotte, Jeffrey Chiesa, Susan Collins, Bob Corker, Jeff Flake, Lindsey Graham, Orrin Hatch, Dean Heller, John Hoeven, Mark Kirk, John McCain, Lisa Murkowski and Marco Rubio joined the entire Democratic caucus in voting for the measure.

The reform will implement a mandatory, national employment verification system; allow for more legal immigration of low- and high-skilled workers; beef up border security; and eventually give green cards to most of the nation's 11 million unauthorized immigrants who pass background checks and pay fines.

The bill has moved to the right in the Senate on border security, thanks to an amendment adopted last week that will double the number of Border Patrol officers and increase fencing on the southern border by hundreds of miles before any unauthorized immigrants are offered permanent legal status.

But House members working on their own version of immigration reform told The Hill this is not enough: They would prefer that no unauthorized immigrant be offered even temporary legal status until all the border security measures of the bill are fully implemented. Republican Chief Deputy Whip Peter Roskam told reporters Thursday the bill is a "pipe dream" that will never pass the House.

Union leaders representing both Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers say they oppose the bill, and groups that seek lower immigration levels have tried to rally members to call and write senators asking them to kill the bill. But so far, the critics of the bill have been outnumbered.

Rubio, of Florida, has worked as a conservative ambassador for the legislation. Rubio highlighted his immigrant parents' journey to the United States in a speech on the floor on Thursday. "Here, in America, generations of unfulfilled dreams will finally come to pass," he said.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 13, 2013, 09:42:23 am
Surprise, surprise! George W. Bush supports Obama's immigration reform bill!

George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Immigration, and Why Obama Kept His Terrorism Policies



On another hot political topic – immigration – Bush said he thinks a major reform bill “has a chance to pass.” In 2007, Bush sought to pass an immigration bill similar to what’s been proposed in Congress this year, seeking to provide citizenship opportunity for undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S.

” I think it’s very important to fix a broken system, to treat people with respect. And have confidence in our capacity to assimilate people,” Bush said on “This Week. “It’s a very difficult bill to pass because there’s a lot of moving parts… But it looks like they’re making some progress.”

Bush said immigration is important to pass “to fix a system that’s broken,” not to improve the Republican Party’s political standing among Latino voters.

“Good policy yields good politics, as far as I’m concerned,” Bush said.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on July 14, 2013, 02:27:03 am
Not to be blunt, but who cares what Bush supports? He's a has-been traitor. I'd just rather he crawl back under the rock he crawled out from under.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 18, 2013, 02:37:32 pm
Sometimes I hear debates over how and why California became this blue state, and probably the blue-est in the country. Well, look no further...(and yes, I know both "parties" are controlled)


California was a Republican stronghold in presidential elections from 1952 until 1992. During this period, the Republicans won California in every election except the election of 1964. In these years, the GOP regularly nominated Californians as presidential candidates: Richard Nixon in 1960 and 1972, and Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984. Since then however, the Democrats have carried the electoral rich state since 1992. The immigration of Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans and migration of northern liberals, who tend to vote Democratic, and the flight of white, middle and upper-middle class suburbanites out of the state shifted the balance in favor of the Democratic Party.

**To sum it up in a nutshell - Amnesty in 1986...

Title: Catholic colleges to Catholic members of Congress: Pass immigration reform
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 18, 2013, 04:15:10 pm
Catholic colleges to Catholic members of Congress: Pass immigration reform

The presidents of 93 Catholic colleges and universities are calling on Catholic members of the House of Representatives to pass immigration reform that would put most of the 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the country on a path to citizenship.

“Catholic teaching values the human dignity and worth of all immigrants, regardless of legal status,” the Catholic leaders say in a letter sent to all 163 Catholic member of Congress, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi and House Speaker John Boehner. “We remind you that no human being made in the image of God is illegal.”

The Senate passed a comprehensive bill last month but, so far, the Republican-controlled House has not touched it.

The presidents represent 290,000 students at Catholic colleges and universities. They noted that 10 percent of House and Senate members graduated from Jesuit colleges.

“One thing immigrants do for the American Catholic Church is they enrich the church,” said John Garvey, president of the Catholic University of America. “They’re keeping the Catholic Church fresh and the churches full. More and more they're the backbone of parish life.”

“It would be a failure if we miss the opportunity to make the nation more welcoming,” said Father John Jenkins, president of the University of Notre Dame.

Garvey joked that the only way to influence members of Congress to vote for the legislation would be “revoking their degrees.” He said that “apart from that we don't have a lot of authority over them” and acknowledged that presidents' advocacy might not sway representatives opposed to the bill. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has also backed reform legislation.

Religious leaders from some evangelical churches — including conservatives such as Liberty University Law School Dean Mat Staver — have joined their Catholic colleagues in advocating for reform. Evangelical and Catholic churches are increasingly filled with immigrants and their children, and Christian doctrine commands followers to “welcome the stranger,” these leaders argue. It remains to be seen if they can mobilize their followers — about half of Americans self identify as Catholic or evangelical — to pressure lawmakers to pass reform.

Some lawmakers have objected to the Christian argument for reform. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., has argued that the immigration reform boosters play “fast and loose” with Scripture, which frequently emphasizes the importance of following the law.

Garvey addressed these concerns on a conference call with reporters. He said that even though unauthorized immigrants have broken civil immigration laws, they do not deserve to be punished their whole lives.

“We don't pursue people for all of their lives for something they may have done to find a better life for their families,” Garvey said. “At some point we have to let those transgressions go in our search for working things out.”

Title: John McCain: I Don't Know How Many Passports We Let You Forge
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 19, 2013, 03:48:32 am
John McCain: I Don't Know How Many Passports We Let You Forge

(CNSNews.com) – Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), a member of the “Gang of Eight” that helped write and pass the immigration reform bill in that chamber, said he did not know how many passports a person could forge under the proposed law before being charged with a crime.

On Capitol Hill on Wednesday, CNSNews.com asked McCain, “Senator McCain, can I ask you a question about the Senate immigration bill? Under the bill, how many passports can someone forge before it becomes a crime?”

McCain said,  “You’re going to have to ask our folks that, I don't think that we stand for any forgeries."

CNSNews.com followed-up, “Can you tell me why that would be part of the bill in the first place?”

McCain answered, “ I cannot tell you that it is part of the bill."

In the legislation that passed in the Senate, Section 1541 "Trafficking in Passports," it explains in detail that a person can be charged for a crime if they forge "3 or more passports," meaning that they potentially would not be charged if they falsely made only one or two passports. The criminal charges and penalties do not kick in until after "3 or more passports" are falsely made, issued, or transferred, etcetera.

As the legislation states,  “any person who, during any period of 3 years or less, knowingly – (1) and without lawful authority produces, issues, or transfers 3 or more passports; (2) forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely makes 3 or more passports; (3) secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys, sells, or distributes 3 or more passports, knowing the passports to be forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, procured by fraud, or produced or issued without lawful authority; or (4) completes, mails, prepares, presents, signs, or submits 3 or more applications for a United States passport, knowing the applications to contain any materially false statement or representation, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20  years, or both.”

The immigration reform bill passed in the Senate on June 27 with a 68-32 vote. All 52 Democrats, 2 independents, and 14 Republican senators voted in favor of the legislation, including Sens. McCain, Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), Jeff Chisea (N.J.), Susan Collins (Me.), Bob Corker (Tenn.), Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Dean Heller (Nev.), John Hoeven (N.D.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Marco Rubio (Fla.).

- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/mccain-i-dont-know-how-many-passports-we-let-you-forge#sthash.R1X9kXgq.dpuf

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 22, 2013, 11:09:44 am
Well, it seems like the most outspoken critics of Obamacare - restaurants in America - are also the same ones that are LOBBYING FOR this immigration reform bill...

Senate Immigration Reform Supporters Push Lobbyists to Target House GOP
The groups attending included FWD.us, the Partnership for a New Economy, ITI, TechNet, CompTIA, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, Bible, Badges, and Business, Google, Microsoft, Intel, Facebook, Oracle, Cisco, Compete USA, Americans for Tax Reform, PhRMA, Texas Instruments, IBM, and the National Restaurant Association, according to people who were there.

National Restaurant Association Statement on House Vote to Repeal Health Care Law
(Washington, D.C.) The National Restaurant Association (NRA) released the following statement from President and CEO Dawn Sweeney upon passage of H.R. 6079, the “Repeal of Obamacare Act”:

“On behalf of our members, we are pleased the House of Representatives has taken this step, which is in line with our view that given the unique issues that face the industry from a workforce standpoint, the economic impact of the employer mandate and the fines associated with it will impose insurmountable costs and administrative burdens for many in the industry,” Sweeney said. “Our industry wants health care reform and we will continue to actively participate in the health care reform debate, but we believe Congress must seek comprehensive health care reform that focuses first on lowering health care coverage costs and not on reform that hampers the ability of employers to create jobs.”

Front page of web site shows NRA pushing for immigration reform bill

Hypocrites, thieves and robbers indeed!

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 23, 2013, 06:18:40 am
Dallas suburb cannot bar housing to illegal immigrants, court rules

By Terry Baynes

(Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Monday rejected a Dallas suburb's controversial law that would have prevented illegal immigrants from renting housing.

In a 9-6 ruling, the 5th U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld a lower-court decision to block the ordinance in Farmers Branch, Texas, finding that the law interfered with the federal government's authority over immigration policy.

The law would have required renters in the suburb to register with the city and obtain an occupancy license. The city's building inspector would verify an applicant's immigration status with the federal government, and landlords who rented to unregistered tenants would face criminal fines or face losing their rental licenses.

By creating new criminal offenses and allowing state courts to review a non-citizen's immigration status, the law conflicted with federal law, a majority of the judges concluded, citing a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Arizona's immigration laws.

Kris Kobach, a lawyer for Farmers Branch, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Farmers Branch ordinance is one of numerous state and local efforts to crack down on illegal immigration. Arizona in 2010 passed its harsh set of immigration laws, which the Obama administration challenged in court.

The Supreme Court in 2012 upheld the most controversial aspect of Arizona's immigration overhaul, a requirement that police officers check the immigration status of the people they stop. But the court also struck down other provisions of the law, including a requirement that immigrants carry immigration papers at all times.

The Texas case is Villas at Parkside Partners et al v. City of Farmers Branch Texas, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 10-10751.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on July 23, 2013, 12:58:50 pm
I saw that, and thought about posting it. The antics of the federal government has become so obvious, in a way it's troubling. I'm not really sure why they haven't made an Executive Order saying the borders are open, no passport needed, because they are totally ignoring the Constitution now. They barely give it lip service anymore.

Just, wow.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 30, 2013, 06:03:02 pm
House Immigration Bill Just as Bad

The Gang of Eight pro-amnesty Senators are trying to con the House of Representatives into passing parts of an anti-American amnesty bill so they can get a Chuck Schumer-dominated conference committee and bamboozle Representatives into going along with their sellout plans. The few pro-amnesty Republican Senators had Marco Rubio as the salesman for the unpopular amnesty bill, and the few pro-amnesty Republicans in the House have Paul Ryan to play the same un-Republican role.

The Gang of Eight patted itself on the back for successfully passing their bill in the Senate, but, funny thing, the bill was never forwarded to the House for action. The explanation for this irregular omission is fear that the House would "blue slip" the bill.

Article 1, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution gives the sole power to the House to originate all bills for raising revenue, known as the Origination Clause. If the Senate oversteps and includes a provision to raise some revenue (which it did in the Gang's amnesty bill), the House can reject the bill and send it back to the Senate for correction in what is known as a "blue slip" procedure.

The devious Ryan plan to circumvent this rule is for the House to pass five or six bills on various aspects of amnesty and then use that bunch of bills to call for a conference committee with the Senate. Ryan let the cat out of the bag when he told a constituent audience in Racine, Wis. on July 26 that his revised plan now calls for a House vote, not before the August recess as originally expected but in October.

There is no indication that the Ryan amnesty is any better for Americans than the Rubio amnesty. Amnesty is still a bad deal for all, whether it comes in one package or in six.

The former New York Lt. Gov., Dr. Betsy McCaughey, the only one known to have actually read the 1,200-page Senate bill, says that the bill's text is loaded with "slippery" words (such as "emergency," "comprehensive," "plan" and "reform") that create loopholes giving Barack Obama the opportunity to refuse to enforce any provisions he doesn't like, including border security that the public is demanding.

That's what Obama notoriously did to cancel provisions of other laws, notably Obamacare's date of enforcement and the effective Work Requirement in Welfare Reform. Obama also seems to think he can invent his own new laws never passed by Congress, such as the Dream Act and anti-coal regulations.

There are so many dangerous and costly provisions in Congress' amnesty plans that they are difficult even to itemize, but for starters take the foolishness that amnesty loosens the rules for asylum seekers. We should have learned some deadly lessons from the asylum seekers we have already welcomed who turned out to be terrorists, such as the first World Trade bombers in 1993 and the Boston Marathon bombers this year.

The new amnesty bill reduces the application to be an asylum seeker from the current one-year deadline to as many years as the immigrant wants and, incredibly, allows the U.S. Attorney General to pay the asylum seekers' legal fees. We should absolutely bar all entry from countries that routinely engage in terrorism.

Another highly dangerous and costly provision that should be decisively rejected is the politically motivated plan to outsource duties to community organizers and activists who will be paid by our taxpayers to help immigrants transition to American life and apply for government benefits. That's like pouring tax dollars into the Democratic voting machine to do phone banking and outreach to load new entrants permanently into the Democratic Party.

The amnesty bill even assigns some of these so-called non-profit, left-wing community groups the task of rewriting provisions for U.S. citizenship. This indicates how far the left-wing's "religion" of diversity is taking us: That duty certainly should be performed by Americans, not foreigners.

Here's a good question for a new Congressional hearing. Will the Internal Revenue Service do a thorough audit of these groups' tax-exempt status and demand answers to intrusive questions, as the IRS did with the Tea Parties?

Here's another good question to which we would like an answer in an open congressional hearing. How many young illegal aliens who cross our southern border illegally are valedictorians compared with those who are carrying illegal drugs? The left went into spasms of rage when Rep. Steve King suggested there might be more of the latter, so let's have an investigation to find out if King was correct.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 03, 2013, 09:39:51 am
From politics to the pulpit, faith groups see 'the hand of God' in immigration reform

When lawmakers return to their home districts this August, they’re likely to hear strident opinions about immigration reform from local business owners, farmers, political activists, talk radio devotees and regular citizens engaged in the democratic process.

But many Christian leaders are hoping that they also hear the voice of the Almighty as well.

“It is very difficult to argue theologically that Jesus would be opposed to immigration reform,” says Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, the leader of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. “Beyond the issue of the public policy, the heart of God is for those that are suffering and for the oppressed and the marginalized.”

Rodriguez’s group – encompassing more than 40,000 evangelical congregations nationwide – is just one of many faith-based organizations hoping to influence the immigration debate this fall by invoking scripture and the compassion of God, from the pulpit and at political events. 

Pro-reform Christian organizations trace their support for the overhaul from Biblical passages and parables; the most often-quoted is Matthew 25:35, which reads “ For I was hungry, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in.” Leviticus 19 is another common refrain: “The stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”

**Uhm, Leviticus 19, this very passage, was to ISRAEL!

But there are also very practical reasons for these organizations to engage in the pro-reform effort. Immigrants are increasingly a part of the fabric of American faith communities, advocates say – even those in congressional districts that are still overwhelmingly white. And when undocumented individuals face poverty, health problems and deportations, they’re turning to churches for help.

**This shows the rotten fruit right there of these church buildings - they're serving as community organizations more than anything else.

“Most evangelicals who are concerned about immigration aren’t concerned about immigration as an abstract issue,” says Dr. Russell Moore, the new head of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. “They’re concerned about people in their pews who are facing a broken system. They’re concerned about families that are threatened with being split apart.”

The faith-based push is far from new, but it’s reaching peak volume as the effort to pass immigration reform that includes a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants is bogged down in the GOP-led House going into the August recess.

Some, like the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, are specifically targeting Republican members of Congress who are on the fence by appealing to members of their congregation to attend town hall meetings and visit district offices. Others are more focused on building support for the reform effort through prayer and community events.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is urging local dioceses to organize pilgrimages, devote masses and deliver sermons on the subject; it has also suggested Sept. 8 as a day of action for Catholics to pray for – and speak up about – immigration. 

The “Bibles, Badges and Business” campaign, made up of diverse faith groups as well as law enforcement and business groups, is planning about 50 events nationwide, including roundtables, speeches and town hall visits. The Evangelical Immigration Table, a coalition made of up many of the same evangelical organizations, aims to target about 80 congressional districts with in-person visits, phone calls and op-eds, according to Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners, a national Christian organization focused on social and racial justice.

“When a pastor with 5,000 members calls his member of Congress, he answers the phone,” Wallis said.

The alliances between different religious groups – not always on the same page on other issues like sexual morality, war and the economy – also allow the pro-reform coalition to offer a consistent message to people of faith from born-again Christians and Mormons, who have supported Republicans overwhelmingly in past presidential elections, to Catholics and mainline Protestants, who are more evenly split between the two parties.

“The faith groups can reach to both sides of the spectrum,” said Kevin Appleby, the director of migration policy and public affairs at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “We have an ability to reach into offices where others may not be able to and make the argument that this is the right thing to do.”

Appleby acknowledges that the politics of immigration reform aren’t easy for some lawmakers, who may be hearing overwhelmingly from constituents who oppose the reform effort when they go home to heavily conservative districts.

Not all who hear the message are going to be convinced that creating a path to citizenship is the Christian thing to do. (Critics of the citizenship policy, after all, also cite the Bible, pointing to Romans 13: “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.”)

“But,” Appleby adds, “it certainly doesn’t hurt for members to know that their church or their faith organization would support them on this, and thank them for it.” 

Moore, from the Southern Baptist Convention, says that – although his organization doesn’t specifically organize political activity – the most effective way to influence lawmakers on the fence about the reform effort is simply to tell the stories of how the broken immigration system affects people in their own churches.

“As our congregations become more ethnically diverse – and they are, rapidly – our people are seeing the human element here,” he said. “Those stories are finding their way out of local congregations and toward elected officials.”

A May 2013 study by the Pew Research Center’s Religion and Public Life Project estimated that, over the last two decades, the United States has admitted about 12.7 million legal immigrants who identify as Christians.  About 60 percent of new legal immigrants last year were Christian.

And among undocumented immigrants, the percentage of Christians Catholics is even more striking. More than eight in ten undocumented immigrants are Christian Catholics, the study found, translating to an estimated 9.2 million individuals living in the United States today.

“The future of the churches, all of them – Catholic, Southern Baptist, evangelical, mainlinethe future of our churches are immigrants,” Wallis says. “They are our future.”

Rodriguez agrees, citing projections that show the majority of evangelicals in the United States may be Latino by the year 2030.

“The optics that guide the community in addressing immigration reform are not just morally driven – which is the most important – but are also about self-preservation,” Rodriguez says. 

“The very future of American evangelicalism lies in the hands of the immigration reform debate. So it’s a matter of survival.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 03, 2013, 11:00:56 am
Companies help immigrants obtain US citizenship

Employers help immigrants achieve dream of becoming US citizens, earn loyalty from workers


SANTA ANA, Calif. (AP) -- For immigrants working toward the American Dream, some employers are now helping them reach their dream of becoming Americans.

Health clinics, hotels and a clothing factory are pairing up with immigrant advocates to offer on-site citizenship assistance as one of the perks of the job in greater Los Angeles, Miami, Washington and Silicon Valley as they aim to make naturalization more convenient for the 8.5 million legal immigrants eligible to become U.S. citizens.

The effort is billed as a win-win for both employee and employers: Workers avoid legal fees and having to shuttle to and from law offices to complete applications; companies create a deeper bond with immigrant workers and there's little cost as nonprofits pick up the tab.

"You create some sense of loyalty," said Leonie Timothee, human resources manager at InterContinental Miami, a luxury hotel that has helped six employees apply to naturalize since last year. "It is going to be a part of you for the rest of your life, and to know your place of employment helped you, assisted you in becoming a citizen — I think that's a great deal."

In most cases, immigrants can apply to become an American citizen after having a green card for five years and passing English and civics tests. But they often take longer to do so because they can't afford the application fees, fear their English isn't good enough or simply don't know enough about the process, studies have shown.

While high-tech companies frequently sponsor foreign workers for visas or green cards, most companies haven't gotten involved in the naturalization process. Their involvement usually ends at getting work papers unless the employee needs to travel extensively overseas or obtain national security clearance only available to a citizen, said Angelo Paparelli, an immigration attorney who specializes in employment-based issues.

Since last year, 19 companies have signed up to participate in the effort by the Washington-based National Immigration Forum to help more people become citizens. The focus of the so-called Bethlehem Project is on low-wage workers, who often face additional hurdles to naturalization such as long hours and extensive commutes and who may lack the cash to hire an immigration lawyer to help them complete the paperwork.

Uruguayan native Yolanda Oruc said she could have become an American citizen three years ago but didn't have the money for attorney's fees. When the 52-year-old who restocks hotel room mini bars learned that her employer had brought in immigration experts to help her fill out the papers for free, she jumped at the chance and naturalized in July.

"I didn't have a way to become a citizen because I didn't have the money," said Oruc, who works at The Betsy Hotel in Miami's South Beach.

For starters, companies host a free information session run by a nonprofit to let employees know about the process of becoming a citizen. The agencies then hold one-on-one meetings to help fill out the necessary paperwork.

Some employers go further and front the government's $680 naturalization application fee and deduct the funds from pay checks, said Jennie Murray, manager of the Bethlehem Project.

The effort is funded in part by the New Americans Campaign, which is a broader push to encourage citizenship through workshops, training sessions and the development of a mobile app to help immigrants determine if they're eligible to become Americans.

Overall, about $500,000 has been donated to jumpstart the project named for Bethlehem Steel, which in 1915 offered its immigrant workers free English-language instruction.

Some businesses are also offering their own citizenship-related perks. Trump International Beach Resort in Sunny Isles, Fla., is paying for English classes to help its employees pass the citizenship test, said Linda Geyer, the hotel's general manager. The hotel is also offering interest-free loans and letting workers cash out vacation time to cover the cost of citizenship application fees.

Evan Bacalao, senior director of civic engagement at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, said he'd like to expand the program to help naturalize workers in big factories and warehouses in Southern California's Inland Empire. The region consists of suburbs spread over miles where immigrants often can't make the half-hour or hour-long trip to an advocate's office for help.

While unions historically played a role in helping workers naturalize, businesses didn't often get involved. But companies may be looking for ways to hang onto low-wage workers as immigration to the U.S. has waned and the economy starts improving, said Louis DeSipio, a professor of political science and Chicano/Latino studies at University of California, Irvine.

He said larger companies with a sizable immigrant workforce are more likely to join such an effort.

"In tough economic times, keeping your workers isn't so valuable," he said. "Now as we're moving back into a tighter job market it makes sense for employers to find ways to hold on particularly to low-wage employees."

Beyond breeding loyalty and gratitude, companies such as the Southern California-based health care provider AltaMed see providing such assistance as part of their mission.

For years, AltaMed has focused on treating Latinos and underserved communities in cities such as Santa Ana, where about half of residents are immigrants. As a community service, the network also holds regular voter registration drives in the hopes of churning out more voters who support health care programs for the poor.

So adding citizenship assistance seemed like a natural fit, said Bob Turner, AltaMed's vice president of human resources.

"The voters need to influence the politicians," Turner said. "We believe that an informed electorate, and a voting electorate — it's the way to be able to influence social change."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 03, 2013, 04:48:48 pm
Corporate Welfare for IBM, Accenture at Heart of Senate Amnesty Bill

The Senate’s immigration bill contains a tech industry handout for some companies like IBM and Accenture. It would virtually eliminate competitors in the market for highly-skilled immigrant labor.

Multiple sources close to the immigration debate have told Breitbart News that the provision is a key reason the corporate titans helped build support for passage of the immigration bill in the Senate. They fought hard to pass the law in the Senate and have been strategizing to get final passage in the House.

At issue is an overlooked change to the H1B visa system, used primarily by technology companies seeking foreign scientific talent. Companies like Cognizant Solutions, based in New Jersey and Tata Consultancy, based in India, bring foreign engineers into the country on H1B visas and then contract out their services to small and medium sized businesses that need help with specific projects.

Companies like these act almost like third-party human resources departments for businesses not big enough to recruit H1B talent from overseas in specific Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields. As such, these companies are big competitors to IBM and Accenture, who also provide technology services, but with a different business model. Because some of these companies operating in the US are headquartered in India, the business press refers to them as "Indian IT Industry."

The Senate passed amnesty bill, however, would change the law to prohibit an H1B visa being issued to an employee of a company that contracts out technology services to other businesses. Companies like Congnizant and Tata would have their entire business model prohibited by federal law. IBM and Accenture, who ironically do a significant amount of their services work overseas, would gain valuable business as a result.   

On page 917 of the final version of the bill, a section amends current law with regard to H1B visas,

OUTPLACEMENT.—Section 212(n)(1)(F) (8 U.S.C. 1182(n)(1)(F)) is amended to read as follows: ‘‘(F)(i) An H–1B-dependent employer may not place, outsource, lease, or otherwise contract for the services or placement of an H–1B nonimmigrant employee.

‘‘(ii) An employer that is not an H–1B-dependent employer and not described in paragraph (3)(A)(i) may not place, outsource, lease, or otherwise contract for the services or placement of an H–1B nonimmigrant employee unless the employer pays a fee of $500 per outplaced worker.

‘‘(iii) A fee collected under clause (ii) shall be deposited in the Comprehensive Immigration            Reform Trust Fund established under section 6 of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act.

‘‘(iv) An H–1B dependent employer shall be exempt from the prohibition on outplacement under clause (i) if the employer is a nonprofit institution of higher education, a nonprofit research organization, or primarily a health care business and is petitioning for a physician, a nurse, or a physical therapist or a substantially equivalent health care occupation. Such employer shall be subject to the fee set forth in clause (ii).’’

MoneyLife reported in May that international investment bank and financial advisory firm Nomura said it would “place the Indian IT business model at competitive disadvantage compared with MNCs and depress margins irrevocably.”

In the current system those foreign workers are brought to America on H1B visas and work for the "Indian IT" firm inside the United States. On a job-by-job basis, they are contracted out to separate companies, or “outsourced” or “outplaced,” in the lingo of this type of immigration law, where they perform the service for that company inside the United States until their H1B visa runs out. At that point they either get a new visa or return home to India.

The Senate bill rips the current system apart to favor companies that use foreign labor to perform those same services for U.S. companies. For instance, IBM has a large workforce inside India that does most of these same services without bringing high-skilled immigrants to the United States to do those jobs here. So does Accenture, which has a headquarters in Ireland and a small U.S. presence.

Instead, this bill would just direct foreign talent on H1B visas to companies that are shipping tech jobs overseas, while effectively wiping out the “outsourcing” companies that are competition to IBM, Accenture and others. IBM, according to a 2012 ComputerWorld article, has more employees in India than it does in the United States.

That would not have much effect on many companies that are customers of that “outsourcing” service of "Indian IT" firms who would be hurt by this bill.

For instance, in that late June Wall Street Journal/LiveMint article, one anonymous executive said if the Senate bill became law he would just ship those duties out of America to somewhere in Europe.

“Unlike a few years ago, when outsourcing vendors were still learning about our business, they are now capable of delivering most of the projects from offshore,” that executive said. “For a global firm like ours, there are many choices; we could make our European office lead onsite related work if the new Bill makes it difficult for us.”

A July 23 study from J.P. Morgan’s Asia Pacific Equity Research arm concludes the same. “The immigration bill (passed by the Senate) puts IBM & Accenture (and perhaps other US firms) at disproportionate advantage vis-à-vis the Indian IT industry,” J.P. Morgan’s analysts wrote. “But these firms’ track-record of job creation in the US over a reasonable time-frame does not seem to square up with one of the bill’s noble intents.”

A tech industry lobbyist told Breitbart News that IBM’s chief lobbyist Chris Padilla orchestrated this provision, and argued that the entire bill and immigration debate is built around this H1B language. Because it is such a boon for IBM, the lobbyist said, Padilla pushed the whole bill across the finish line in the Senate. The lobbyist who spoke with Breitbart News on condition of anonymity said Accenture, another tech company that would benefit from the legislation, helped IBM’s Padilla.

“This is a total jobs package for IBM and Accenture,” the lobbyist said in a phone interview.

“They used Compete America [a lobbying association for big business], smartly, but my hat’s off,” the tech lobbyist added. “It’s really Chris Padilla. He’s one of the best lobbyists in this town and he effectively executed this strategy.”

That lobbyist said, as immigration reform became a hot topic after the last election, Senior US IBM executives reached out to Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on the H1B language. According to Legistorm, Schumer had previously helped IBM by getting the company a $10 million earmark in 2010.

The lobbyist said that the rest of the bill was written around the H1B deal between IBM and Schema. Knowing that Schumer alone could not get legislation passed into law due to conservative and Republican resistance, the lobbyist said Padilla then used IBM’s connections around the country to bring in Sens. **** Durbin (D-IL) and John McCain (R-AZ).

“IBM, being as smart as they are, are headquartered in New York,” the lobbyist said. “They have offices in Chicago. But they have a large presence in Phoenix. So they have McCain too. They [IBM and Accenture] were pushing for off-site [language in the bill] and H1B numbers. To them, it’s a numbers game.”

“IBM and Accenture get Schumer and Durbin to do this,” the lobbyist added. “It was put in by Schumer at the behest of IBM, who met with IBM top executives.”

So, with McCain on board, he could bring Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and freshman Jeff Flake (R-AZ) onto the team.

The last piece left on the GOP side was Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), and that was easy because he has higher political ambitions.

The other Democrats, Sens. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Michael Bennet (D-CO) were likewise easy to convince to join the team.

Menendez, a Hispanic lawmaker who supports amnesty, had been fighting off scandal after scandal--so Menendez could use political cover from the other Senate heavyweights involved in this fight. Bennet is from Colorado, and serves as the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC)--and he sees this legislation as a way to protect the Democrats’ majority in the U.S. Senate heading into a year where the electoral map gives the GOP a solid chance at winning back the majority.

After the perfect storm was created, and the Gang of Eight had formed, the lobbyist said Padilla influenced the Chamber of Commerce, US India Business Council, and Internet Technology Industry Council. IBM is one of the biggest members of each of those groups as is Compete America.

After the legislation passed the Senate Judiciary Committee, Padilla praised it on IBM’s corporate public relations website.

“We are pleased with the bipartisan support for the package, and we particularly wish to thank Senators Schumer, Hatch and Durbin for defining a common-sense high-skilled framework that enabled final passage of the bill out of Committee,” Padilla said in a May 22 statement. “We look forward to supporting the bill on the floor and hope for bipartisan passage of this important legislation."

As more evidence of IBM’s and Accenture’s critical involvement in getting the legislation passed, the lobbyist lays out those who win if the bill ever becomes law. “You got to look at the big winners of this bill,” the lobbyist said. “There are four huge winners. IBM, number one. Accenture, number two. Hewlett-Packard, number three. And the AFL-CIO, number four.”

“The Reason IBM, Accenture, and HP win is simple, already laid in the H1B language and offsite language,” he added. “The estimates of revenue are in the billions for them which they need to help their declining earnings.”

A business lobbyist told Breitbart News that the reason why the AFL-CIO is a winner with this bill is because it caps construction worker visas at 15,000. “There are 1.5 million temporary construction workers in the U.S.,” the business lobbyist said. “And there are only 15,000 visas for them? How the hell are you going to build houses? It’s a joke. You need 15,000 people to build houses in Phoenix alone"

Ultimately, that means, the business lobbyist said, “you can’t have temporary construction workers.”

Equally important in this debate, the lobbyists said, is who loses. “Here are the losers,” the tech lobbyist said. “If you are a small to midcap US company on the NASDAQ, you are harmed both in stymieing innovation and expanding local growth because of the heavy fees, huge Department of Labor bureaucracy and onerous restrictions, so why expand operations in the US?”

When asked questions about this matter, IBM’s Padilla refused to answer any specifics and did not challenge the assertions of the tech lobbyist who spoke with Breitbart News.

Instead, another IBM official responded on his behalf and told Breitbart News that “Mr. Padilla has no comment on your questions, and just has a general statement to share with you.” That spokesman then provided the following statement, one that is almost identical to the public ones Padilla issued throughout this fight:

IBM applauds the U.S. Senate's passage of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act, which further strengthens our economic competitiveness and includes significant provisions that help high-skilled workers. We believe this represents an important milestone in the process to create an immigration system for the 21st Century economy. We are grateful to all those in the Senate who supported this bi-partisan legislation and now look forward to working with the House to advance much-needed reform of the immigration system.

Accenture’s senior director of corporate communications James McAvoy told Breitbart News that the company did not lobby for certain provisions because they would drive other companies out of business; rather, he said Accenture lobbied on behalf of certain provisions because they would help Accenture.

Your sources’ allegations are not true.  Accenture has not advocated for any changes to U.S. immigration law with the intention of penalizing another company.  Accenture’s focus has been only on aspects of the legislation that directly impact our ability to have continued access to and use of high skilled visas."

When asked in a follow-up question whether Accenture supported the specific provisions Breitbart News has laid out here, McAvoy would not answer. Instead, he replied: "We supported the Bill, but we do not discuss pending legislation, and certainly not specific provisions of pending legislation. Again, we did not advocated for any changes to Bill with the intention of penalizing another company. We will leave it at that."

Offices of Sens. Schumer, McCain, and Durbin did not respond to Breitbart News’ requests for comment on their involvement in this matter.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on August 04, 2013, 05:15:56 am
Mexico and Canada declared part of US homeland by Senate maps

Sen. Dianne Feinstein referred to the US, Canada and Mexico as “the Homeland” at an NSA Senate briefing on Wednesday, presenting a map that united the three nations as one.

 At a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting held to acquire details on the National Security Agency’s mass surveillance programs, Sen. Feinstein (D-Calif.) made a geographic mistake in which she united three large countries into one. The error went by without comment during the briefing, but generated a significant response upon closer examination of the map.

During the briefing, Feinstein, who serves as chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, was defending the NSA’s data-collection programs when she pulled out a world map that identified North America as the “Homeland”. The newly-declassified diagram showed terror activity that the NSA had allegedly disrupted throughout the world.

Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) (C) speaks as ranking member Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) (L) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) listen during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee July 31, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC (AFP Photo / Alex Wong)

 But while Europe, Africa and Asia were correctly identified by their continent’s name, countries of North America were all encompassed as a new mega-nation.
“Now, the NSA has produced and declassified a chart, which I’d like to make available to all members. It has the 54 total (terror) events,” Feinstein said. “And it shows the events disrupted… 13 in the Homeland, 25 in Europe, five in Africa and 11 in Asia.”
Although it might be easy to brush off the map as nothing more than a mistake made by a staffer, a writer at The Atlantic suggested that it might indicate a potential NSA attempt at tallying thwarted attacks in North America to make anti-terrorism efforts in the US look more successful.
“Normally, this would be written off as a design goof, as one of the NSA’s (newly adept) graphics guys using a little more light blue than he ought,” writes the Atlantic’s Philip Bump. “This being the NSA, we’re not inclined to offer that benefit of the doubt. Is this a way of blending in Canadian and Mexican terror activity disruptions (which, we’ll remind you, is different from actual plots interrupted) to give a larger sense of the NSA’s success at halting terrorism within our borders?”
Whatever the reason for the NSA’s creation of “the Homeland”, the spy agency has already been condemned for failing to respect the sovereignty of other nations through its extensive data-collection efforts.
Some people have taken to Twitter to sarcastically welcome Canada and Mexico to the United States.
“Earths newest continent. Welcome to the Homeland, Mexico and Canada!” wrote Twitter user Kat Capps.
“Are Canadians losing their sovereignty?” tweeted user Kevin King.

“We did it! Canada is now part of the American ‘homeland,’” tweeted Canada.com, a site for “spirited discussions on what’s important to Canadians.”
“Now, the NSA has produced and declassified a chart, which I’d like to make available to all members. It has the 54 total (terror) events,” Feinstein said. “And it shows the events disrupted… 13 in the Homeland, 25 in Europe, five in Africa and 11 in Asia.”

pics + vid: http://rt.com/usa/mexico-canada-us-homeland-961/

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on August 04, 2013, 06:08:13 am
Although it might be easy to brush off the map as nothing more than a mistake made by a staffer, a writer at The Atlantic suggested that it might indicate a potential NSA attempt at tallying thwarted attacks in North America to make anti-terrorism efforts in the US look more successful.
“Normally, this would be written off as a design goof, as one of the NSA’s (newly adept) graphics guys using a little more light blue than he ought,” writes the Atlantic’s Philip Bump. “This being the NSA, we’re not inclined to offer that benefit of the doubt. Is this a way of blending in Canadian and Mexican terror activity disruptions (which, we’ll remind you, is different from actual plots interrupted) to give a larger sense of the NSA’s success at halting terrorism within our borders?”
Whatever the reason for the NSA’s creation of “the Homeland”, the spy agency has already been condemned for failing to respect the sovereignty of other nations through its extensive data-collection efforts.

Yeah, whatever!  ::)

Notice the author failed mention the real problem with that map? The real problem is a matter of borders and the "North American Union", and how this plays into the globalists efforts to brainwash people with these little seeds of suggestion.

Not some stunt with numbers by the NSA to pad their terror fighting efforts. That's a misdirection, and this author is playing his part. But then it's from "Russia Today".

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 09, 2013, 05:10:42 pm
FYI, Walker is the same guy who rose to popularity b/c of his war against unions in his state.

Scott Walker fires state official for comparing unauthorized immigrants to 'Satan'

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker dismissed a state official this week for saying unauthorized immigrants reminded him of Satan in a Facebook rant that involved other politicians.

Steven Krieser, a top official at the state’s Department of Transportation, wrote in a now-deleted Facebook post (saved here by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) that “a stream of wretched criminals continues to flow unabated to the north” and that illegal immigration is crushing the social safety net system of some Southern states.

“You may see Jesus when you look at them,” Krieser said. “I see Satan.”

Walker fired Krieser within two hours of being informed of the post,  according to the Journal Sentinel, saying his views were unacceptable.

"Effective immediately, he has been removed from his position at the Department of Transportation," Walker spokesman Tom Evenson said in a statement provided to Yahoo News. "These comments are repugnant, completely unacceptable, and have no place in Governor Walker’s Administration. Governor Walker condemns his views, and they do not represent the governor or his administration in any way."

Krieser told the paper he had used a poor choice of words and would not put up the post if he could do it again. A spokeswoman for the Wisconsin chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said the group had no comment on whether it believes the firing infringes on Krieser's free speech rights.

The debate began when Democratic state Rep. Gordon Hintz posted a photo of a sticker sold at a local gas station that called for an “illegal immigrant hunting permit.” The sticker says “no bag limit — tagging not required,” suggesting that people shoot and kill people who cross the border without permission. Hintz criticized the photo. (Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor; overstaying a visa is a civil offense.)

Former Republican state lawmaker Joe Handrick then weighed in, writing on the post that Jesus would be seen as a dark-skinned foreigner if he came to America today and that people should be angry at the broken immigration system, not immigrants themselves. That’s when Krieser wrote that even though the sticker is “probably over the top,” he believes anger at unauthorized immigrants is warranted because “the illegals themselves have bred the animus that many American citizens feel toward them.”

In July, Walker, a rumored Republican presidential candidate in 2016,  said he believes Congress should provide a pathway to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants in the country. The Senate passed comprehensive immigration reform last month, but the Republican-led House has yet to take up the bill.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 22, 2013, 11:30:00 am
Voices opposing immigration law muted this August

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — It was the kickoff of a "Stop Amnesty Tour" organized by the Tea Party Patriots and other groups. But the crowd was so sparse that immigrant advocates were soon gleefully circulating photos of the featured speaker, Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa, standing alone on an empty stage.

The rally at a public park in Richmond, Va., earlier this month, along with the subsequent cancellation or postponement of several similar events, points to an emerging reality during Congress' five-week summer recess: Opposition to overhauling immigration laws appears notably muted, almost tame. Meanwhile, advocates who support comprehensive overhaul legislation are claiming they've changed at least a handful of minds among House Republicans.

During Congress' last attempt to remake the immigration system, in 2007, public backlash helped kill the bill as angry calls overwhelmed the Senate switchboard. This summer, other issues, notably President Barack Obama's health care law, seem to be topping the list of voters' concerns.

Constituents opposed to citizenship for immigrants in this country illegally are loudly voicing their views at Republican House members' town hall meetings this month. But advocates of immigration legislation that offers a path to citizenship are having some success getting their supporters to show up, too, even in heavily Republican districts.

"In a sort of immediate sense, Obamacare is what the party has decided they want to make a big deal of in these town halls, so that's frankly siphoning off a lot of outrage because the people ticked off about Obamacare are the same people ticked off about amnesty," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes higher immigration levels.

Plus, the pro-immigration reform side is better organized and funded this time around and many establishment Republicans are on board. "All of that put together means you're not going to see the same level of frantic activity," Krikorian said.

What's less clear is how much it will matter once lawmakers return to Washington in September.

Immigration overhaul legislation, a top second-term priority for Obama, is in limbo after the Democratic-led Senate in June passed a far-reaching bill that includes tens of billions of dollars for border security, new visa programs to bring more high- and low-skilled workers to the country, requirements for employers to check all workers' legal status, and a 13-year path to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants already in the country illegally.

GOP House leaders have rejected that approach, vowing instead to proceed with bills addressing individual immigration issues, beginning with border security. And although by advocates' count more than 20 House Republicans have now declared their support for some kind of citizenship path, the majority of House Republicans remain opposed, creating a potentially unbridgeable divide between the House and the Senate. Congress also faces looming deadlines on the debt ceiling and spending bills to keep the government running. It all adds up to a tough environment for getting an immigration bill to Obama's desk.

Nonetheless, pro-immigrant advocates are claiming success in their August recess efforts to pressure House Republicans to act on immigration in the fall. An unusual and deep-pocketed alliance of Catholics and evangelicals, labor unions, business groups and others have been targeting dozens of GOP members viewed as open to hearing them out, and say they'll have momentum on their side when Congress reconvenes.

"The big story I think of the August recess is that we haven't seen what some had predicted, this major anti-immigrant movement where members of Congress would be heckled into inaction," Galen Carey, vice president of government relations at the National Association of Evangelicals, said on a media call this week to announce a $400,000, 14-state radio ad campaign in support of immigration reform. "We've seen very much that that has been a muted voice, but actually the pro-immigrant voice has been rather prominent at many of the town halls that we have observed."

Although there have been no giant public rallies to draw national attention, pro-immigrant advocates have kept up a drumbeat of activity nationwide. They sent some 1,500 supporters into House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy's Bakersfield, Calif., district last week; delivered a 10,000-signature petition to Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas; and launched a statewide tour through Wisconsin, among other activities.

They're pointing to comments in the past few weeks from a handful of House Republicans, including Reps. Daniel Webster of Florida, Aaron Schock of Illinois and Dave Reichert of Washington, indicating qualified support for eventual citizenship for immigrants here illegally. So far, though, such comments have not become too widespread, and it's uncertain they'll add up to a real impetus for action in the fall.

But immigrant activists who'd been concerned that this summer could be a repeat of the last immigration fight — or of 2009, when irate voters trashed Obama's health care bill at unruly town hall meetings across the country — are starting to breathe easy.

The Stop Amnesty Tour event Aug. 12 in Richmond was to have been followed by events in other states, several of which subsequently disappeared from the Tea Party Patriots' website, according to an archived version circulated by the pro-immigrant group America's Voice. Organizers said most were going forward or rescheduled and disputed the claim by America's Voice that events were being canceled due to lack of interest.

"I think that when I heard about what happened at the Richmond event, we just look at what can we do to improve going forward, and one thing would be to give people more than 72 hours' notice," said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots. The group is working on the events with others, including NumbersUSA, which advocates lower immigration levels.

The Black American Leadership Alliance, which opposes allowing more immigrants into the country to compete for jobs, canceled a series of rallies, according to cached copies of Facebook postings collected by America's Voice. But Leah Durant, the group's founder, said those events were being held by local groups and the Black American Leadership Alliance was just trying to help support them.

"When I look at the focus of what's going on, I wouldn't say that there's no enthusiasm," Durant said. "I hear from people every day who say they are very concerned about this."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on August 24, 2013, 06:55:36 am
Obama Administration Makes Secret Deal With Mexico To Help Illegal Immigrants In The Workplace

Instead of making sure that U.S. employers are not hiring illegal immigrants, the Obama administration has actually signed a secret deal with Mexico to protect “the rights” of illegal immigrants in the workplace.  According to this “memorandum of understanding”, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission will spend U.S. taxpayer dollars to educate illegal immigrants about their civil rights, workplace safety, and minimum wage laws.  This is yet another example of how the Obama administration is openly flouting the law and doing all that it can to promote even more illegal immigration.  We are rapidly becoming a lawless nation that has absolutely no regard for the rule of law, and it all starts with the horrendous example that is being set at the very top.

(Read More.....) http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/obama-administration-makes-secret-deal-with-mexico-to-help-illegal-immigrants-in-the-workplace

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 25, 2013, 05:26:23 pm
CONFIRMED: John Boehner holding secret meetings with Chuck Schumer to slip Amnesty for Illegals past the GOP base

Awesome: Your Republican "leaders" are conspiring with one of the most malevolent and nefarious Statists ever to set foot in the Capitol Building to create a permanent Democrat majority. We know this because of an inadvertent slip by that very same Statist -- a lifetime politician who has never held a real job in his life -- and a man who can't seem to resist a reporter's microphone.

The most dangerous place in Washington: standing between Chuck Schumer and a camera.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) made his clearest indication yet that he would be fine with a piecemeal approach to immigration reform preferred by the Republican-led House.

Schumer, the leader of the Gang of Eight whose comprehensive immigration reform legislation passed the Senate in June, said even if the House passes separate bills, those measures could eventually be bundled in a House-Senate conference committee...

Schumer let slip that he is "having discussions" with House Republicans to get this deal done.

In other words, John Boehner and/or his committee chairs are secretly conspiring with Schumer and other Senate leftists to pass a series of "Security First" immigration bills to fool Americans into believing they're serious about border security.

Spoiler: they're not.

So Boehner and Schumer are hoping to get the package of bills into a conference committee, after which the full-blown Democrat Amnesty bill will emerge.

• It will be rushed to the floor of the House and Senate.

• It will consist of more than 1,000 pages of carve-outs, legal exceptions, payoffs to separatist groups like La Raza, bribes, wealth redistribution and corporate reach-arounds.

• Your elected representatives and the American people will have virtually no time to read the bill or understand it; they will be instructed to vote for it, or else.

“We would much prefer a big comprehensive bill, but any way that the House can get there is OK by us,” Schumer told CNN Wednesday. “I actually am optimistic that we will get this done.”

 ...Schumer also noted on CNN that a few of the House bills — such as one on agriculture workers and another on high-skilled immigrants — are “very similar” to components in the Gang of Eight bill.

Suffice it to say that Boehner and his apparatchiks, Paul Ryan among them, are conspiring against their base, their children, the American citizenry, and fiscal prudence.

 Why am I certain Ryan is complicit with Schumer?

 As a very visible spokesman for the corporatists' Amnesty campaign, I believe the odds that Ryan is scheming along with Schumer are slightly higher than the likelihood Lindsay Lohan will fall off the wagon.

 By putting their own petty interests and personal power over principle, Boehner and Ryan appear ready to have the Republican Party commit political suicide.

Title: Catholic Church Plans Massive Push for Amnesty
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 25, 2013, 11:50:13 pm
Catholic Church Plans Massive Push for Amnesty

If you attend Mass on September 8th, it is likely the priest's homily will be less about spiritual matters and more about the political imperative of passing an amnesty law for the nation's 11 million illegal immigrants. Last week, the Catholic Church announced a massive, coordinated effort to press Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform, including a pathway to citizenship. Catholics make up the largest single religious group in Congress.

“We want to try to pull out all the stops,” Kevin Appleby, the director of migration policy at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, told the New York Times. Appleby said the immigration issue was at a now-or-never moment. “They have to hear the message that we want this done, and if you’re not successful during the summer, you’re not going to win by the end of the year.”

The Church is planning advertising, phone calls and marches targeting 60 Catholic House Republicans. Over 130 members of the House are Catholic, including Speaker John Boehner.

The Church's effort in support of amnesty seems broader and more coordinated than its actions against an ObamaCare mandate requiring coverage of contraception. In recent years, the Church has been more vocal in its criticism of abortion, but even that seems muted in comparison with current plans on immigration reform.

Bishops and priests in the major dioceses in the country will coordinate their messages and homilies throughout September. More than a dozen have committed to holding special Masses or other events on September 8th, the day before Congress returns from recess.

Hispanics now make up the the largest single demographic group in the Catholic Church. This was a contributing factor in the election of Pope Francis, the first Pontiff from the Americas. In a way, the Church's efforts to pass amnesty legislation is tending to its base congregation.

Catholic Democrat Rep. Dan Lipinski expressed skepticism about the Church's efforts. “There are some issues that the church speaks authoritatively on, such as abortion, in protecting life,” Lipinski told the Times. “And then there are prudential judgments that are made, informed by Catholic theology, but it’s not something that Catholics are required to follow.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on August 26, 2013, 02:34:31 am
The most dangerous place in Washington: standing between Chuck Schumer and a camera.

Talk about misdirection!  ::)

No, the most dangerous place is for Schumer and the rest of those hypocrites in Washington to stand between the people and what they actually want.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on August 26, 2013, 04:17:10 am
hey look, see if you can spot the Catholic infiltrators

Evangelical pastors step up pro-immigration campaign

A national coalition of evangelical churches announced Tuesday that it is expanding a radio campaign aimed at persuading Republicans in Congress to support a broad overhaul of immigration laws.

The Evangelical Immigration Table launched a new round of ads in 56 congressional districts across 14 states, an effort that comes as Congress heads into the second half of its five-week summer recess. The ads, featuring local pastors, will be broadcast primarily on Christian radio stations over the next two weeks at a cost of $400,000, organizers said. They will air in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin.

The campaign builds on work the coalition has done over the past six months, during which members have held dozens of meetings with congressional offices. The coalition also had aired a previous round of immigration ads in five states during Congress’s spring recess.

“The combination of this ad buy and our continued prayer for reform gatherings send one clear message: Evangelicals support action by the House of Representatives on immigration,” said Barrett Duke, vice president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

Duke insisted the campaign has had an effect on the debate over immigration reform, even as House Republicans have continued to oppose a Senate-approved plan that features a broad path to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally. The message from evangelicals, Duke said, is to provide political support to Republican lawmakers who might consider an immigration bill that includes citizenship provisions for many of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants.

“I don’t know whether it’s a question of changing minds as much as it is giving more information to the congressmen, helping them to hear from a broader range of constituents than what was at one point a very loud, very small minority” opposed to citizenship, Duke said. Some GOP members have “become more nuanced in their expressions and statements” when talking about immigration reform.

Pastors involved in the campaign said that immigration is an important issue in their churches, with a growing number of members who are here illegally or have relatives who fear being deported.

“I have to deal with the collateral damage of our broken immigration system,” pastor Felix Cabrera, of the Quail Springs Baptist Church in Oklahoma City, said on a conference call with reporters Tuesday. “Many are unjustly detained and deported. Many are separated from their families, leaving behind U.S.-born children without parents.”


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on August 26, 2013, 04:18:01 am
Radio Ads Continue 'Largest Ever' Immigration Reform Effort by Evangelicals
(UPDATED) Local pastors in 14 states recruited for $400,000 campaign by Evangelical Immigration Table.

 Update (Aug. 21): Local pastors will tape radio ads in 56 congressional districts in 14 states, part of the Evangelical Immigration Table's latest and biggest push for comprehensive immigration reform.

According to the Washington Post:

    The ads, featuring local pastors, will be broadcast primarily on Christian radio stations over the next two weeks at a cost of $400,000, organizers said.

    They will air in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin.

CT noted the EIT's continued efforts (and President Obama's response) in advance of a sweeping reform bill passing the Senate in June, as well as the leading role played in the EIT by World Relief's Jenny Yang.

more: http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/january/new-video-launches-largest-ever-immigration-reform-effort.html

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on August 26, 2013, 04:53:12 am
The ads, featuring local pastors, will be broadcast primarily on Christian radio stations

Looks like the "Clergy Response Team" have received their first major marching orders!

In case one hasn't heard...

FEMA's Clergy Response Team
http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987 (http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987)

...For the clergy team, one of the biggest tools that they will have in helping calm the public down or to obey the law is the bible itself, specifically Romans 13.  Dr. Tuberville elaborated, "because the government's established by the Lord, you know.  And, that's what we believe in the Christian faith.  That's what's stated in the scripture."...

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on August 26, 2013, 06:33:17 am
Looks like the "Clergy Response Team" have received their first major marching orders!

In case one hasn't heard...

FEMA's Clergy Response Team
http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987 (http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987)

that is how it looks isnt it

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 26, 2013, 12:42:03 pm
FWIW, Congress likely already has "finalized" their immigration bill a long time ago(and all of this is just a puppet show, Hegelian Dialectic we're seeing), but ultimately "uniting" Churchianity on this will be yet another step closer to that OWR.

Pt being that as you can see, as time has gone on, churches in America(and around the world) are standing DOWN more and more when it comes to biblical truth. Looks like we could be seeing the final nail in that coffin now.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 28, 2013, 11:42:03 am
Muchas gracias! Notre Dame will now accept, heavily subsidize illegal immigrants

The University of Notre has announced that it will now admit illegal immigrants and give them generous amounts of money from school coffers to ease the burden of the school’s annual cost for tuition, room and board of over $57,000.

Officials at the famous Catholic school in Indiana say the new illegal-immigrant friendly policy will “strengthen” the student body, reports The Washington Times.

Notre Dame had never officially prohibited admission to illegal immigrants before instituting the new measure. Under the previous rules, however, the school regarded illegal immigrants as international students and insisted that they have visas.

Much like national championships for Notre Dame’s storied football team, that requirement is now a relic of a bygone era.

Illegal immigrants who might have trouble paying the steep price tag at Notre Dame because they aren’t eligible for the same federal financial aid available to citizens and nationals needn’t worry.

The school has indicated that it “is committed to meeting the full demonstrated financial need for all admitted students.” This language signals that the administration is prepared to provide admitted illegal immigrants packages of institutional grants — free money — and institutional loans to cover costs that students’ families cannot pay.

For students residing in the United States legally, federal financial aid would typically defray a large percentage of those costs.

“We will strengthen our incoming class and give deserving young people the chance for a Notre Dame education,” said Don Bishop, associate vice president for undergraduate enrollment, in a statement obtained by The Times.

Notre Dame is affiliated with the Congregation of Holy Cross, an international Roman Catholic organization headquartered in Rome, Italy.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/24/muchas-gracias-notre-dame-will-now-accept-heavily-subsidize-illegal-immigrants/#ixzz2dG5BDvru

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2013, 11:46:32 am
Catholic church calls for immigration reform
By Jessica De Nova/KTVL.com

MEDFORD, Ore.-Some Medford Catholic parishioners may hear talk of Comprehensive Immigration Reform from the pulpit.
One Sacred Heart Parish Pastor said U.S. Bishops and the local Diocese have asked priests to tell congregations to consider their Catholic values when talking to legislators about the country's immigration laws.

"As a pastor I also see some of the challenges that people face particularly when families are split apart because of immigration [...] I know that our current system is broken and it needs to be fixed," said Father Kenneth Sampson.

Roman Catholic Bishops across the nation have called for immigration reforms that include a path to citizenship for immigrants living in the country illegally.

Boston Archdiocese Cardinal, Sean O'Malley, said reform should be, "rooted in the principle of family unification," and appealed for support from American Catholics.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2013, 11:51:00 am
Dallas church offers prayers for immigration reform

DALLAS — In the parking lot outside St. Patrick Catholic Church in Northeast Dallas, the Rev. Josef Vollmer-König greets his parishoners with hugs and good wishes.

"Have a good day; God bless you!" he said with a grin.

Rev. Vollmer-König is proud of his church's diversity. In fact, he challenges a visitor to name a country and says it is likely that one of his members will represent the location.

Senait Kalleb, from East Africa is proof of that.

"Its a very welcoming church", Kalleb said. "We have a lot of diversity here."

But she's not the only foreigner. So too is Vollmer-König, who is from Germany. His American citizenship is one reason why he held a special mass to support immigration reform on Sunday.

"We want everybody to live in protection and peace," the pastor said.

On Sunday morning, before a packed church, Vollmer-König gave a short homily and then participated in prayers seeking economic justice and political reform.

He said his decision to participate was motivated by teachings in the Bible, and the fact that many Catholics are immigrants.

"At least 50 percent of my community comes from another country and making us what we are," Vollmer-König said.

Terri Momuldoon assists with the St. Patrick refugee outreach and believes change must start in the pulpit.

"I can't imagine a better place than it should be than dealt with here in the church," she said. "This is compassion! All the Bible is about immigrants."

Newly minted U.S. citizen Francois Nyongera is using prayer to help win his path to citizenship.

"Prayer works," he said. "I'm witness of those prayers. I'm a living witness!"

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2013, 11:54:18 am
Church celebrates new title while pushing for immigration reform

WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) --Saint Mary Catholic Church became the third basilica in the state early August and celebrated together Sunday afternoon.

”For our city it’s a great honor as well as the state,” Father Bob Kus said.

Hundreds came together for a Mass of Thanksgiving at the Basilica Shrine of Saint Mary.

"You get a spiritual uplift whenever you come into something like this and its really wonderful," parishioner Angelo Gibilaro said.

In 2007 the church asked the Bishop to petition the Vatican for consideration of receiving the title of basilica.

The request was based on the historical importance in the diocese, its unique architectural design, and its devotion to the community.

"Throughout its history it has been known for its care to the poor and needy, for welcoming the immigrant, for welcoming the stranger and for teaching the faith,” Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Raleigh Michael Burbidge said.

The congregation was founded over 100 years ago by primarily Irish immigrants.

Father Kus said between 15 and 20 percent of the Basilica’s current parishioners have come from other countries.

"We hope that one day there's a wonderful path to allow the families to stay together and to be citizens.” Father Kus said.

This issue is also extremely important to Bishop Burbidge.

He said he and bishops around the country are working with the president’s administration on comprehensive immigration reform.

"Let's be mindful of what our forefathers always wanted, and that's life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and all persons treated with respect and dignity,” Bishop Burbidge said.

A message one church-goer said embodies the every atmosphere at Saint Mary’s.

"It is like we are all one family, because to God we are all one family," Courtney Mason.

Father Kus said the Basilica is now working on its symbol, also known as a Code of Arms.

He said the design includes a ship at sea to pay tribute to the immigrants who founded the church and the community can expect its release within the next few months.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2013, 12:00:16 pm
SF Closer to Becoming First County to Outlaw Illegal Immigrant Detentions

San Francisco County is set to become the first in the nation to make it illegal for law enforcement officials to detain illegal immigrants "solely on the basis of immigration status."

On Thursday, the ordinance made it out of committee and was recommended to the full Board of Supervisors which will reportedly vote on the measure on September 17.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the ordinance was "authored by Supervisor John Avalos and [is] supported by a supermajority of his colleagues." Currently, the San Francisco Sheriff Department's policy "states that only people suspected of serious or violent felonies, or those with a serious or violent felony in their past, will be held for immigration authorities."

Supporters of the ordinance, as it is written, reportedly have a "veto-proof majority," even though law enforcement authorities want the ordinance amended "to see convicted violent felons, sex offenders and those with prior weapons possession convictions exempted from the law."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2013, 12:08:35 pm
For the first time in a decade, immigration flow to South Texas greater than Arizona

A costly game of cat and mouse unfolds nightly along the banks of the Rio Grande in South Texas. The number of immigrants crossing illegally there has doubled in the last four years, making it the busiest section along the Southwest border.

As night fell outside Mission, Texas in late August the Rio Grande looked deceivingly peaceful under the glimmer of a full moon.

Suddenly through a pair of night vision goggles, a Border Patrol agent spotted movement. He picked up his radio.

“Ey, can you tell what’s on the raft,” he said.

On the river ahead of him a mother and her two infant boys floated across on a raft. She scampered onto U.S. soil, but her taste of success was brief. She was apprehended and ended up in the back seat of a Border Patrol suburban.

The woman had traveled from Guatemala. She told the Border Patrol she was on her way to reunite with her husband in the United States. Her fate will now be a detention center and likely deportation.

This year, Border Patrol has detained nearly 200,000 people from Del Rio to Brownsville. While apprehensions across the southern border are at record lows, South Texas is the one spot where the numbers are rising again.

“We could apprehend anywhere between 100 and 200 a shift,” said Mark Foster, a Border Patrol supervisor. “On the weekend its very hard to get all the incursions dealt with, with the manpower that we have.”

In response to the increased traffic the Border Patrol is shifting more manpower and resources, like night vision technology and mobile towers, to South Texas. By the end of this year the Rio Grande Valley Sector expects to have 600 more agents.

Even with a record amount of manpower and infrastructure along the entire southern border, the Rio Grande Valley has the fewest number of agents per mile compared to other places. It also has the least amount of fencing. In some places the only deterrent is a few ground sensors.

The terrain adds to the challenge of patrolling this section of the border. The Rio Grande swerves and curls downstream like a string of yarn. Access is limited by gravel pits, cliffs and delicate wildlife refuges. There are also private residences and farmland, where locals can make a pretty profit cooperating with smugglers.

Daniel Perez is a newly minted Border Patrol agent who moved from Arizona to South Texas to start his job a year ago.

“It’s a big change down here,” Perez said. “You got the river and then they come into this jungle gym of a brush that we’ve got here and hiding spaces everywhere.”

Historically, heavier enforcement has pushed immigrants to take greater and greater risks to get to the United States. Twenty years ago, new Border Patrol tactics shifted migrant traffic out of urban centers like El Paso and San Diego to the deadly Arizona desert. Now, for the first time in a decade, the flow coming across South Texas is greater than in Arizona.

Once the migrants make it across the Rio Grande the game of hide and seek becomes increasingly dangerous.

Seventy miles north of the border in Brooks County, Texas, Eddie Canales loaded long metal poles onto the back of his pickup truck. He also loaded a tarp-like blue flag.

“Blue means water,” he said.

Canales works with a network of human rights groups. The blue flag is for a water station he was planning to put up in a nearby ranch frequently traversed by immigrants. Three years ago, Brooks County recovered the bodies of 20 dead immigrants. Last year the number of dead shot up to 129.

Most of those bodies turn up on private ranches, like the one managed by Lavoyger Durham.

“We save lives out here every week,” he said. “You know people have given up … and they’re crawling to my house and knocking on my door saying, ‘Please give me water and please give me food.’”

Durham looks after 13,000 acres on El Tule Ranch west of the county seat of Falfurrias. It’s rough country: oppressive heat, thorny thickets, insects and snakes.

The immigrants come through his land to avoid the Border Patrol checkpoint on U.S. Highway 281 south of town. In the past two decades Durham has found his share of bodies. A telltale sign, he said, is a circle of buzzards.

“Actually you’re pretty lucky when you find a dead one,” he said. “Because the coyotes and the vultures and the javelinas eat them up. And then they scatter all the bones.”

The majority of those coming across now are from Central American countries like Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. Violence in that region has made their lives impossible, they say, so they flee.

Chief Deputy Benny Martinez said last year the county spent nearly $200,000 burying the unidentified remains of border crossers in the local cemetery. There are also smugglers who operate within the county, he said. Recently, sheriff deputies stopped a U-Haul trailer stuffed with 70 migrants.

“They are on U.S. soil so it becomes our issue,” Martinez said. “This is where we need to step up and start doing something more proactive to where we can avoid these deaths out here.”

This year the body count is already at 70. At this pace Martinez believes Brooks County could end up with more dead than last year.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2013, 01:46:39 pm
It looks like Catholic Churches across America are calling for immigration reform.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on September 09, 2013, 04:10:39 pm
That's a political charade. It carries zero weight. The RCC has been helping illegals into the US for decades. They've been doing it all around the world and getting away with it because of their political influence. All you have to do is look at all the local "charity" organizations that "provide" services for "immigrant" populations. It's out of control here in Arizona.

If you are an immigrant in Arizona, especially with kids, you got all the help you could handle here from the state and it's buddy "social" organizations. But if your a natural born white citizen with no kids, you get NOTHING. THAT is a fact here, and I'm proof of it.

I need to scan and post up the reply I got from the state of Arizona over my recent surgery, where it says I don't qualify under any of their approved groups. Within a week I was denied. The fastest response I've had from those creatures. Add to that "Obamacare", and you got one big scam going on. Republican states like Arizona are really getting screwed because all the state wants to do is fight with the Democrats.

And with the recent release of a sample of the new insurance costs under Obamacare, they are actually trying to claim the costs are lower than expected!

God knows I hate this world!

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 04, 2013, 12:52:21 am
Illegal immigrants can get driver's licenses under new California law

(Reuters) - Illegal immigrants living in California will be eligible to apply for driver's licenses under a law signed on Thursday by Democratic Governor Jerry Brown, in the latest action to expand privileges for such immigrants in the most populous U.S. state.

The legislation marks a major victory for Latino and other immigration rights activists, who have fought for decades for such a law. The state says it is expected to spur 1.4 million people to apply for licenses over three years.

The law, passed with substantial Republican support, marks a significant departure from past policy in California, which will join at least nine other states that allow undocumented immigrants to drive legally when the law takes effect in 2015.

"Millions of immigrant families have been looking forward to this day," said Democratic Assemblyman Luis Alejo, who sponsored the bill. "It will allow them to go to work, go to school, take their kids to a doctor's appointment without fear that they are going to have their car taken away from them, or worse, be put into immigration proceedings."

The law is part of a broader effort to expand immigrant rights in strongly Democratic California, where 2.6 million people - most of them Latino - lack legal status, according to a recent study by the University of Southern California.

About 38 percent of California's population of 38 million is of Hispanic descent, state figures show, representing a potentially enormous number of voters with an interest in immigrant issues.

The move by California stands in stark contrast to policy in states like neighboring Arizona, long at odds with Washington over immigration reform. Earlier this month, Arizona widened its ban on licenses for illegal immigrants, including those granted temporary relief from deportation.

California, where two decades ago voters sought to bar illegal immigrants from public services including education, now allows college students brought to the United States as children to pay in-state tuition at California public universities to help defray the costs of higher education.

Bills awaiting the governor's signature would allow non-citizens to serve on juries, let undocumented immigrants practice law, and make it illegal for employers to retaliate against workers by threatening to report them to immigration authorities.


The law has particular meaning for immigrants such as 37-year-old Sugey Hernandez, who has already begun studying for her driving test, even though licenses aren't expected to be available to undocumented immigrants for over a year.

She currently drives without a license to buy food and other necessities for her family. But she said the experience is terrifying, because she is always afraid of being pulled over.

"Sometimes we are just so afraid of the police," said Hernandez, who is originally from Mexico but lives in the Los Angeles suburb of Maywood. "I don't go out on holidays because the police are going to be outside. ... You feel like you are in a prison sometimes."

The new law, which passed on votes of 28-8 in the Senate and 55-19 in the Assembly, sent a defiant message to Congress about its failure so far to pass comprehensive immigration reform despite considerable momentum on the issue earlier this year.

"When Congress fails to act, it forces states like California, with (the) largest immigrant population in country, to enact laws to improve the lives of immigrants," Alejo said.

Brown had initially threatened to veto the driver license bill but changed his stance after advocates promised it would not conflict with federal law.

"No longer are undocumented people in the shadows," Brown said at a signing ceremony in Los Angeles. "They are alive and well and respected in the state of California."


The bill won support from nearly half of the California legislature's Republicans, who broke ranks with their national leaders to support a number of protections for illegal immigrants at the state level and urged Congress to act.

On Thursday, a Republican Assembly leader who had not been part of that group criticized the bill as part of a "piecemeal" rather than comprehensive approach to immigration reform. But he also urged Congress to act.

"As Americans, we need to find compassionate, caring solutions to this immigration challenge," said San Diego County Assemblyman Brian Jones. "The first challenge is to secure our borders. The second challenge is to find a way for people to have legal status."

A conservative Republican assemblywoman, Diane Harkey of Orange County, said earlier that the measure could lead to racial profiling, because the licenses would be different from those issued to legal residents.

To conform with federal law, the licenses must show that the bearers have not presented a birth certificate or Social Security card.

The state Department of Motor Vehicles said Thursday it would begin to develop regulations required by the new law, which will go into effect January 1, 2015, unless the state determines it can begin issuing the licenses sooner.

Alejo said he would prefer the California licenses be discreet, with small wording on the back indicating the license was not meant for identification purposes. The law bars discriminating against people with the special licenses.

(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein; Editing by Cynthia Johnston, Steve Orlofsky and Ken Wills)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on October 04, 2013, 05:29:21 am
"Millions of immigrant families have been looking forward to this day," said Democratic Assemblyman Luis Alejo, who sponsored the bill. "It will allow them to go to work, go to school, take their kids to a doctor's appointment without fear that they are going to have their car taken away from them, or worse, be put into immigration proceedings."

Statements like that show just how insane all this is!

"Without fear"? Seriously? They are ILLEGALS. What part of not legal do these people not understand? Can somebody tell these idiots in Spanish what illegal means?  ::)

Alejo said he would prefer the California licenses be discreet, with small wording on the back indicating the license was not meant for identification purposes.

Well, of course he does! He knows that illegals are using this stuff to APPEAR to be legal, and an id with "ILLEGAL" stamped across it does them no good.

California is seriously compromised by foreign interests. Of course it doesn't matter so long as the federal government does nothing to stop them from violating the law.

Disregard for the law for Latino illegals? What's next, disregard for the law by, oh I don't know, say homosexuals?

At times like this, I tend to think we have past the tipping point. This ship is going down!

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 12, 2013, 05:31:47 pm
So this may have been the whole agenda behind this "shutdown"...Problem. Reaction. Solution.

Obama: End Shutdown So We Can Pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform

In his weekly radio address on Saturday, President Barack Obama said the government shutdown needed to end so Congress could work on comprehensive immigration reform.

Obama rejected a House Republican proposal that would have re-opened the government and raised the debt-ceiling for six-weeks in return for an agreement on a "framework" on negotiations on more long-term budgetary issues. He said "this Republican shutdown" had to end "because there is so much else we should be focusing our energies on right now" and cited immigration as one of the things the government had to "fix."

"We’ve got to create more jobs, and kids to educate, and an immigration system to fix," Obama said.

Obama has recently said that comprehensive immigration reform was his "number-one priority." On Monday, his administration allowed thousands of pro-amnesty protesters to use the National Mall, which was supposed to be closed due to the shutdown, for their rally. The Obama administration has barricaded other open-air spaces like the World War II Memorial.

The Senate has already passed an immigration reform bill, championed by Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Republicans have indicated that they would put immigration reform on the agenda as soon as issues dealing with the shutdown and the debt ceiling are resolved.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said even piecemeal bills that passed the House would go to conference with the Senate, where many believe the pathway to citizenship provision would be inserted into a final bill. That is why Pelosi said Democrats were willing to do "whatever it takes" to get to conference.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on October 18, 2013, 07:24:03 am
Looks like Obama is trying to go a couple of steps farther down the line..

 Obama Secretly Signing Away U.S. Sovereignty

Despite the government shutdown, the Obama administration has continued secret negotiations to complete what is known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP.

The expansive plan is a proposed free-trade agreement between the U.S., Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

The agreement would create new guidelines for everything from food safety to fracking, financial markets, medical prices, copyright rules and Internet freedom.

The TPP negotiations have been criticized by politicians and advocacy groups alike for their secrecy. The few aspects of the partnership leaked to the public indicate an expansive agenda with highly limited congressional oversight.

A New York Times opinion piece previously called the deal the "most significant international commercial agreement since the creation of the World Trade Organization in 1995."

Last week, the White House website released a joint statement with the other proposed TPP signatories affirming "our countries are on track to complete the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations."

"Ministers and negotiators have made significant progress in recent months on all the legal texts and annexes on access to our respective goods, services, investment, financial services, government procurement, and temporary entry markets," the White House said.

The statement did not divulge details of the partnership other than to suggest a final TPP agreement "must reflect our common vision to establish a comprehensive, next-generation model for addressing both new and traditional trade and investment issues, supporting the creation and retention of jobs and promoting economic development in our countries."
TPP Secrecy

In February, the Open the Government organization sent a letter to Obama blasting the lack of transparency surrounding the TPP talks, stating the negotiations have been "conducted in unprecedented secrecy."

"Despite the fact the deal may significantly affect the way we live our lives by limiting our public protections, there has been no public access to even the most fundamental draft agreement texts and other documents," read the letter.

The missive was signed by advocacy groups such as OpenTheGovernment.org, Project On Government Oversight, ARTICLE 19 and the Global Campaign for Freedom of Expression and Information.

The groups warned issues being secretly negotiated include "patent and copyright, land use, food and product standards, natural resources, professional licensing, government procurement, financial practices, healthcare, energy, telecommunications, and other service sector regulations."
Lack of Oversight

Normally free-trade agreements must be authorized by a majority of the House and Senate, usually in lengthy proceedings.

However, the White House is seeking what is known as "trade promotion authority" which would fast track approval of the TPP by requiring Congress to vote on the likely lengthy trade agreement within 90 days and without any amendments.

The authority also allows Obama to sign the agreement before Congress even has a chance to vote on it, with lawmakers getting only a quick post-facto vote.

A number of lawmakers have been speaking out about the secret TPP talks.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., recently proposed legislation requiring the White House to disclose all TPP documents to members of Congress.

"The majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations, while representatives of U.S. corporations—like Halliburton, Chevron, PHRMA, Comcast, and the Motion Picture Association of America—are being consulted and made privy to details of the agreement," said Wyden.

However, Obama has so far refused to give Congress a copy of the draft agreement.
Regulates food, Internet, medicine, commerce

The TPP is "more than just a trade deal," wrote Lori Wallach and Ben Beachy of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch in a New York Times op-ed last June.

"Only 5 of its 29 chapters cover traditional trade matters, like tariffs or quotas. The others impose parameters on non-trade policies. Existing and future American laws must be altered to conform with these terms, or trade sanctions can be imposed against American exports."

Wallach and Beachy spotlighted several leaks in the proposed TPP text, including one that would regulate the price of medicine.

"Pharmaceutical companies, which are among those enjoying access to negotiators as 'advisers,' have long lobbied against government efforts to keep the cost of medicines down. Under the agreement, these companies could challenge such measures by claiming that they undermined their new rights granted by the deal."

Amnesty International USA warned draft TPP provisions related to patents for pharmaceuticals "risk stifling the development and production of generic medicines, by strengthening and deepening monopoly protections."

Another leak revealed the TPP would grant more incentives to relocate domestic manufacturing offshore, Wallach and Beachy related.

Jim Hightower, a progressive activist, wrote the TPP incorporates elements similar to the Stop Online Piracy Act.

Hightower wrote the deal would "transform Internet service providers into a private, Big Brother police force, empowered to monitor our 'user activity,' arbitrarily take down our content and cut off our access to the Internet."

Indeed, Internet freedom advocacy groups have been protesting the TPP, taking specific issue with leaked proposals that would enact strict intellectual property restraints that would effectively change U.S. copyright law.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation argued the TPP would "restrict the ability of Congress to engage in domestic law reform to meet the evolving IP needs of American citizens and the innovative technology sector."

In a petition signed by over 30 Internet freedom organizations, the group warned the TPP would "rewrite global rules on intellectual property enforcement."

Read more: http://www.bibleprophecyblog.com/2013/10/obama-secretly-signing-away-us.html#ixzz2i4l14wBO

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on October 18, 2013, 01:15:02 pm
It's sort of like watching a car wreck. As it approaches the other car, your thinking for a split second, "TURN!" and the accident won't happen and all will be well. For a split second, but then just as fast, we realize in that flash of time that, no, it's not going to turn because the driver is texting, it's going to slam right into that other car, like right now! And in slow motion, as we watch, they collide, leaving us a feeling of being helpless to stop such a thing from happening.

Watching all of this go down in the world, leads me to believe we are at that time of where we have already realized they are going to crash, and now we are just waiting for impact.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 18, 2013, 09:06:35 pm
Virginia's Catholic Bishops Say Illegal Immigrants Are Not 'Lawbreakers'

Having been cued by President Obama that his attention will now turn to immigration reform, some Catholic bishops are revving up their campaign to demand that Congress grant amnesty to at least 11 million illegal immigrants.

In an op-ed in the Richmond Times-Dispatch entitled “Who Is My Neighbor?” Virginia’s bishops criticized Americans who claim illegal immigrants are “lawbreakers.”

Bishops Francis DiLorenzo of Richmond and Paul Loverde of Arlington wrote, “Many regard the undocumented immigrants among us as lawbreakers, when instead we are all challenged to embrace them as fellow children of God, deserving of the same dignity that we ourselves enjoy.”

Unlike the model that welcomed our parents, grandparents or great-grandparents to these shores in the last century or before, current policy does not adequately or realistically address the need for visas. Living in this comparatively prosperous, peaceful nation, many Americans seem unaware of the desperate situations that lead people to enter or remain in the country illegally. Around the globe, people yearn for better lives, a chance to escape poverty, jobs to feed their families, reunion with their kin or life in a country free of war.

Arguing that “immigration reform will strengthen Virginia socially and economically,” the bishops claim that, regardless, a “path to citizenship” should be accomplished simply “because it is the right thing to do.”

As Breitbart News reported earlier in the month, Justice for Immigrants, the group that has run the campaign for amnesty for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), is associated with some member groups whose actions have not been aligned with Catholic doctrine in the areas of abortion and marriage.

In September, Justice for Immigrants ran a program entitled “Pilgrimages for Immigration Reform” in Virginia, during which at least in one Catholic parish--Blessed Sacrament in Harrisonburg--the priest held up postcards at the pulpit and urged parishioners to complete them and send them to their congressional representative, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, demanding that immigration reform be passed.

The organizer of the “pilgrimage” at Blessed Sacrament Church, Roxana Bendezu, was reported as admitting that, in her community in Virginia, “there are a lot of people who are unfortunately undocumented.”

Bendezu said “a pathway to citizenship” for illegal immigrants is the most pressing issue for the country, “even before securing the nation’s borders.”

Bendezu referred to attaining legal citizenship as only “a piece of paper.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 23, 2013, 11:10:43 pm
Exclusive--Issa Confirms: Drafting Bill to Grant Legal Status to Some Illegal Aliens

A spokesman for House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) confirmed to Breitbart News on Wednesday that the chairman is currently drafting legislation that would grant legal status to at least some of America’s 11 million illegal immigrants.

“Congressman Issa is currently working on a proposal that would offer temporary status for some qualifying aliens already present,” Frederick Hill, Issa’s spokesman, wrote in an email.

On Tuesday morning, The Hill reported that Issa was working on such a bill. “Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has also started work on a bill that would deal with the immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, and has been briefing stakeholders on it for feedback, according to three people familiar with the matter,” The Hill’s Jennifer Martinez wrote. “It’s unclear when Issa will put the bill forward, sources say, but his aim is to jump-start a discussion in the House about the divisive issue.”

Issa is a lightning rod for conservatives and has led investigations into issues like Operation Fast and Furious, the terrorist attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, and the IRS’s targeting of Tea Party organizations. Such moves have won him favor with the GOP base, but immigration could be a deal-breaker for Issa depending on the specifics of the proposal.

Even those like Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) were unsuccessful in selling a policy that grants legal status to any illegal immigrants before the border is secured and the nation’s interior immigration laws are enforced. Rubio, once wildly popular among the Republican base, has plummeted in opinion polls after he pushed for immigration reform.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 25, 2013, 06:53:27 pm
Conservative Coalition Presses House Republicans to Act on Immigration

WASHINGTON — With immigration re-emerging as the topic of focus in Washington, an unusual coalition of business executives, Republican Party activists and evangelical leaders will descend on Capitol Hill early next week to pressure House Republicans to pass their own legislation.

“Doing nothing is not the answer,” said Glenn McCall, a retired banker and a Republican National Committee leader from South Carolina, who will be in Washington as part of the lobbying event. “We have done that, and you can see where we are.”

The debate threatens to create another schism in the Republican Party and to further alienate a major source of campaign contributions; several corporate executives interviewed this week said they were considering withholding donations from lawmakers who get in the way.

The push to bring immigration legislation to the House floor comes only weeks after House conservatives alienated many longtime supporters — including much of corporate America — by trying to block financing for President Obama’s health care law, a move widely blamed for the government shutdown.

House Republican leaders, including Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio and Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the majority leader, among others, support taking up their own immigration legislation this year, given that the Senate has already passed a comprehensive bill.

But privately, some House Republican officials are saying that they do not expect any major legislation to move through the House this year, or perhaps not even until 2015, in advance of the next presidential election.

There is intense division within the party over the proposals. In fact, a core group of hard-line conservatives said in interviews this week that they would not be intimidated by pressure from corporate America or other outside parties, even though in this case that includes farmers, evangelical leaders and some prominent conservatives.

“I care about the sovereignty of the United States of America and what it stands for, and not an open-door policy,” said Representative Ted Yoho, Republican of Florida, who is one of several conservatives opposing all of the bills the House is currently considering.

Even some who support a measure to increase border security say they would not vote for such a bill, fearing that it could become a vehicle to grant citizenship to an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.

“We have seen the character of this president, and the way that he does business,” said Representative Steve King, Republican of Iowa, explaining why he will oppose any measure.

Mr. Obama, speaking from the White House on Thursday, said Democrats and Republicans in the House must unite to pass an immigration package.

“Everybody wins here if we work together to get this done,” the president said.

The next two months are seen as a critical window to move ahead on the legislation, before Congress gets caught up again in budget debates and distracted by re-election efforts in 2014.

For months now, including this week, Capitol Hill has been the focus of immigration advocates, who have gone door to door trying to meet with lawmakers to urge them to take up the legislation. Next week’s event will be different, organizers said, because it will involve about 600 mostly conservative leaders in business, agriculture and religion from 80 Congressional districts in 40 states — all of them held by Republicans.

The crowd on Tuesday will include Republicans like Danny Tarkanian of Nevada, who twice has run for a seat in Congress, and his wife, Amy Tarkanian, a former Nevada Republican Party chairwoman, as well as Terry Jones, a dairy farmer from Idaho who considers himself a member of the Tea Party movement, and Robert Ross, a Republican who owns a chain of restaurants in Oklahoma.

“The Republican Party has gotten hurt significantly over the past six years, with this demographic,” Mr. Tarkanian said, referring in part to Hispanic-Americans. “Getting this resolved would definitely help.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 26, 2013, 07:44:37 pm

A Republican congressman from a heavily Hispanic district is breaking ranks from his party to join Democrats in an eleventh-hour push for a broad immigration overhaul before the end of the year.

Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Calif.) plans to sign on as the lone GOP member with 185 Democrats to co-sponsor a plan that would give millions of unauthorized immigrants the chance to attain citizenship.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 30, 2013, 04:45:18 pm
Immigration Reform 'Really Close,' Says Southern Baptist Leader

WASHINGTON – A leader in the largest Protestant denomination in the United States has stated at a conservative event Tuesday that drew over 600 leaders to lobby for immigration reform that their effort is "really close" to coming to fruition.

Dr. Barrett Duke, vice president for Public Policy and Research at the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, told The Christian Post at the event titled "Americans for Reform: Immigration Reform for our Economy, Faith and Security", which was held at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Hall of Flags room, that reform was near.  "They passed five bills out of committee already. They still need floor votes on those. Leadership, House leadership, has already said they want to get this done; they're working on a couple more bills in the House," said Duke.

"So they've done most of the really heavy lifting on this already. It wouldn't take much more than simply scheduling a floor vote."

Duke, who was part of a panel at the event, also said that the SBC had come to increasingly support immigration reform.

"We have had a denominational conversation where we have consulted the Scriptures, we've looked at our own congregations and we've recognized that we know a lot of these folks that we're talking about," said Duke.

"The result is that through our own personal spiritual reflection and our relationship building, we've developed a more balanced understanding of the need for immigration reform. So it's just a process that has grown over the years."

"Americans for Reform" was organized by the groups Partnership for a New American Economy; Bibles, Badges, Business; and Fwd.us. Sponsors included the American Farm Bureau Federation, TechNet, Wal-Mart, and the Western Growers Association.

Bruce Josten, executive vice president for Government Affairs at the U.S. Chamber, said in a statement that immigration reform is a "top priority" for the businesses the Chamber represents.

"Immigration reform remains a top priority for the business community, and the Chamber and our partners will continue to do everything we can to make the case for reform this year," said Josten.

"Acting on immigration during the 113th Congress would be an enormous achievement for our country and our economy, and would show the public and the world that the United States can still get things done."

Duke was part of a panel that gathered Tuesday morning before an audience large enough that event organizers had an overflow room next to the Hall of Flags which featured the speakers on a screen.

In addition to Duke, the first panel of the morning had Alberto R. Cardenas, chair of the American Conservative Union; Frank Keating, president and CEO of the American Bankers Association; Sheriff Margaret Mims of Fresno County, Calif.; and Tom Nassif, president and CEO of the Western Growers Association.

When asked by the moderator what led him to support immigration reform, Nassif stated that it had to do with the needs for labor in American agriculture.

"We know that people generally don't raise their children to be farmworkers. We know that not even farmworkers raise their children to be farmworkers," said Nassif.

"We're here to share that message and to show the legislators on the federal level how much it will do for this economy."

For its part, Duke told CP that SBC leadership is "calling on the congregations to read scripture, to understand what the Bible says about" immigration and treatment of immigrants.

"It is not pressuring our congregations one way or another, it's simply calling on them to search their own hearts, their own conscience," said Duke.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 30, 2013, 05:15:07 pm
Look at the groups and people endorsing this illegal immigration bill!

Liberty Council(!)
National Association of Evangelicals
Bill and Lynne Hybles
Max Lucado
Southern Baptist Convention
Focus on the Family
Salvation Army
Assemblies of God

Paul Louis Metzger: “Reforming Our Understanding of Romans 13 on Immigration Reform” ::)


G92 is a culture-shaping movement seeking to equip the next generation of Christian leaders for an effective, biblical response to immigration. G92 began at Cedarville University in October of 2011.  It takes its name from the ninety-two references to the ger—the immigrant, in Hebrew—in the Old Testament.  Students, faculty, and administrators at Cedarville joined together with individuals from about twenty other colleges and universities to hear biblical teaching, to raise awareness about the realities of immigration, and to equip Christian college students across the country to learn from, minister to, and advocate with immigrant communities.

G92 has now grown into a student movement that seeks to understand and respond to the challenges and opportunities of immigration in ways consistent with biblical values of justice, compassion, and hospitality.  The G92 movement includes regular conferences, student groups on various campuses, and g92.org which includes resources for campus groups, conference information and registration, videos, and a regularly updated blog.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on October 31, 2013, 04:39:29 am
Old fashioned socialism is all that is.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on October 31, 2013, 10:46:44 am
Old fashioned socialism is all that is.

You know it is the last straw when the modern-day church system is getting involved supporting it. Not that we should be surprised, but Liberty Council is on board - yeah, the same Falwell institution that was "defending" family values for years and years.

Enemies come from within...

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 04, 2013, 07:44:37 pm
This is mind-boggling - these same restaurants who exposed Obamacare through and through are supporting this very immigration bill? ???

Lobbyists for Restaurant Chains Grease Wheels for Immigration Bill

Fast food chains and other big restaurant lobbyists are turning their attention to efforts to try to grant amnesty to the 11 million illegal aliens in the country, Breitbart News has learned.

In a public statement released post-government shutdown on Oct. 23, the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC) wrote that it thinks Congress should focus on immigration reform efforts before the end of the year.

“Now that Congress can refocus after the showdown over the budget and debt ceiling, we are hearing calls from both sides of the aisle to go back to immigration reform,” EWIC wrote. “The Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (EWIC) is looking forward to continuing to work with the House of Representatives as it deliberates the important issue of immigration reform.”

Among other groups, the EWIC represents the National Council of Chain Restaurants (NCCR). According to the group’s website, its board includes a who’s who of fast food restaurant executives. For instance, NCCR’s chairman is Chip Kunde of Darden Restaurants--which owns brands like the Olive Garden, Red Lobster, Longhorn Steakhouse, Seasons 52, the Capital Grille, Bahama Breeze, Eddie V’s, and Yard House. Other members include:
•Vice Chairman: Mary Schell of Wendy’s
•Treasurer: Cicely Simpson of Dunkin’ Donuts
•Secretary Lynn Liddle of Domino’s Pizza
•Past Chairman: Mike Starnes of Denny’s
•Board members: Donald Balfour of Waffle House, Steve Hilton of McDonald’s, Craig Prusher of Church’s Chicken, James Richardson of White Castle, Patrick Sheehy from Cracker Barrel, Mark Simpson of Texas Roadhouse, Dan Colegrove of DineEquity, Inc., which owns IHOP and Applebee’s, and Joe Taylor of Brinker International, Inc., which owns Chili’s and Maggiano’s brands
•Chairman Emeritus: Steve Brigandi of Jack in the Box

The EWIC argued that despite unprecedentedly high unemployment rates, the industries it represents somehow need more workers. According to the September report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in America stands a 7.2 percent and has not dropped below 7 percent since President Barack Obama took office.

“There is currently no effective process by which lesser skilled essential workers can immigrate legally other than a guest worker in a seasonal or temporary period position,” EWIC wrote in its statement. “Our American-born workforce will increase only 1% over the next 10 years. The restaurant industry alone projects a need for 15% more workers. There are simply not enough American-born workers to fill the jobs we expect to be created by a vibrant economy in the coming years.”

EWIC argued that American workers cannot always cut it in the fields this group of lobbyists represents, writing that its clients need “a new essential temporary worker program to identify qualified immigrant workers when domestic labor is unavailable.” The industry association called for a “workable and fair” E-Verify system, without giving specifications; “legal immigration reforms for employment-based immigrants to deal with unrealistic quotas and processes”; and “a mechanism for unauthorized immigrants to earn legal status under strict conditions and after complying with strict criteria.”

The group listed five different immigration bills currently weaving their way through the House of Representatives, each of which presumably would be used by House GOP leadership in efforts to combine the Senate’s “Gang of Eight” immigration bill in a conference committee if one of them or any group of them passed the House. “Although we recognize that these bills may be modified when they get to the floor, it is still significant to have so many bills in process,” EWIC wrote.

“We are particularly encouraged to hear that a new lesser-skilled temporary worker program is being drafted by Members that will allow the economy to get the workers needed from abroad when domestic labor is unavailable," the statement continued. "We understand that this new temporary worker program will include visa numbers that reflect the economic needs of U.S. job creators and will be open to all industries. We encourage all House Members to support this policy initiative.”

House Budget Committee chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has publicly stated he wants a conference committee with the Senate bill. "A lot of people are saying, just pass the Senate bill," Ryan said in July. "That's not what the House is going to do. I think we can make it better.”

Other industry groups the EWIC represents include:
•American Health Care Association
•American Hotel & Lodging Association

•American Immigration Lawyers Association
•American Meat Institute
•American Nursery & Landscape Association American Staffing Association
•Associated Builders and Contractors

•Associated General Contractors of America
•Federation of Employers & Workers of America
•Greenberg Traurig, LLP
•ImmigrationWorks USA
•Independent Electrical Contractors International Franchise Association
•National Apartment Association
•National Association of Home Builders
•National Association of Manufacturers National Club Association
•National Multi Housing Council
•National Retail Federation
•National Roofing Contractors Association Professional Landcare Network
•Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
•Small Business Workforce Alliance

EWIC is hardly the only group representing fast food restaurants pushing for amnesty. The National Restaurant Association (NRA) has participated in the campaign to lobby the House of Representatives as well. In July, after the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill passed that chamber, Gang of Eight members Chuck Schumer (D-NY), John McCain (R-AZ), Dick Durbin (D-IL) Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Michael Bennet (D-CO) met with NRA lobbyists to discuss pressuring the House to push for amnesty.

“With the fate of immigration reform in the hands of the House of Representatives, the National Restaurant Association took part in a meeting with senators who authored the Senate’s immigration reform bill to discuss strategies for moving immigration reform legislation forward,” the group noted on its website at the time. It also noted that tech lobbyists from Google and Facebook also attended the briefing.

“The overall message of the meeting was that the business community, including restaurant operators, needs to be vigilant in urging representatives to act on a comprehensive reform package,” the NRA added. “During the Senate debate, restaurateurs across the country contacted their senators to encourage them to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Restaurateurs in several states took part in media events to call attention to the importance of immigration reform to the U.S. economy."

"The NRA will continue its discussions with key members of Congress in an effort to secure its three priorities in immigration reform: a clear path to citizenship for undocumented workers, national use of the E-Verify employment verification system, and increased border security that does not impede legal travel and tourism,” the group stated.

The Hill has named the NRA’s Scott DeFife as one of the “top lobbyists” in Washington, D.C., an honor the outfit brags about on its website. The NRA’s president and CEO Dawn Sweeney noted in a statement that DeFife earned the lobbyist award for pushing on issues like healthcare and immigration. In addition to lobbying for amnesty, DeFife helped get big businesses an Obamacare delay by getting the Obama administration to push off the employer mandate while ordinary Americans continue to suffer from the law’s individual mandate.

“The NRA, under DeFife’s leadership, has played a significant role in encouraging the Obama Administration to delay the Affordable Care Act’s employer-mandate penalties and some reporting requirements until 2015,” the NRA wrote on its website. “It also has been vocal about immigration reform, making it a top priority for the restaurant industry and playing a key role in moving reform forward. Creating a clear path to legalization for undocumented workers, national use of the E-Verify employment verification system, and increased border security that does not impede legal travel and tourism are among the objectives DeFife and the Association are currently working on with members of Congress as well as the White House.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on November 05, 2013, 01:58:19 am
There are simply not enough American-born workers to fill the jobs we expect to be created by a vibrant economy in the coming years.

 :D Seriously? Vibrant? What a hoot.

It's no surprise that the service industry is screaming for "immigration reform". Masters have needed servants for ages to do the work that most won't do. Some call it slave labour. It's not technically slave labour, but close.

The reality is that Americans just don't want to get their hands dirty picking fruit and veggies, yet they want all those things in their grocery store fresh and cheap. So who do they get to pick the fields, and flip burgers for minimum wage? People from other countries with far worse wages than the US.

Employers also know that immigrants, especially illegal ones, won't complain like US workers will about the workplace and management.

Bottom line, the merchants need their slaves, and they will get them, one way or another, all in the name of the love of money.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 07, 2013, 11:34:02 pm
Top Catholic bishop presses House on immigration

WASHINGTON (AP) — The president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is pressuring the House to act on immigration legislation before the end of the year, calling the issue "a matter of great moral urgency" that cannot wait.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the archbishop of New York, said in a letter to Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, on Thursday that he was troubled by reports that immigration reform is delayed in the House since lawmakers have a responsibility to resolve the issue. Writing on behalf of the 450-plus U.S. cardinals and bishops, Dolan said they respectfully request that the House address the immigration issue as soon as possible.

The Senate passed a bill in June that would provide a path to citizenship for the estimated 11 million immigrants living here illegally and tighten border security, but the measure has stalled in the House where Boehner and GOP leaders have argued for a piecemeal approach.

"As a moral matter ... our nation cannot continue to receive the benefits of the work and contributions of undocumented immigrants without extending to them the protection of the law," Dolan wrote. "Keeping these human beings as a permanent underclass of workers who are unable to assert their rights or enjoy the fruits of their labor is a stain on the soul of the nation."

Dolan reiterated the bishops' stand that immigration legislation includes a path to citizenship, reaffirms family reunification, deals with future flows of migrant workers and restores basic due process protections to immigrants.

He wrote Boehner, a Catholic, that immigration is "a challenge that has confounded our nation for years, with little action from our federally elected officials. It is a matter of great moral urgency that cannot wait any longer for action."

The House has just a few legislative days left in the year, and prospects for any legislation are murky.

Responding to Dolan's letter, Michael Steel, a spokesman for Boehner, said the speaker "has been very clear that he supports common-sense, step-by-step reforms to fix our broken immigration system."

Most House Republicans reject a comprehensive approach as well as the Senate bill, with many questioning the offer of citizenship to people who broke U.S. immigration laws to be in this country. The House Judiciary Committee has moved forward with individual, single-issue immigration bills.

Although House Republican leaders say they want to resolve the issue, which has become a political drag for the GOP, many rank-and-file House Republicans have shown little inclination to deal with it. The bitter standoff with President Barack Obama on the budget and near default further angered House Republicans, who have resisted any move that might give Obama an immigration overhaul, the top item on his second-term domestic agenda.

Numerous House Republicans also are wary of passing any immigration legislation that would set up a conference with the Senate, fearing that they would lose out in final negotiations.

The Senate bill, strongly backed by the White House, includes billions for border security, a reworked legal immigration system to allow tens of thousands of high- and low-skilled workers into the country and a 13-year path to citizenship for those living here illegally.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 21, 2013, 02:47:03 pm
John Boehner: Immigration work not dead

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) reaffirmed his commitment to enacting immigration reform, a week after the chances of an overhaul appeared dead following his comments that he would not support negotiating with the Senate on its comprehensive bill.

“Is immigration reform dead?” Boehner said to reporters. “Absolutely not.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/john-boehner-immigration-100207.html#ixzz2lEFCczFK

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 22, 2013, 10:22:31 am
Pelosi Now Open to Boehner's Piecemeal Immigration Reform
Why is Boehner praising Obama on immigration?

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on November 22, 2013, 11:53:12 am
Why is Boehner praising Obama on immigration?

Because he is a closet devil liberal thats why and Catholic

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on November 28, 2013, 07:46:59 pm
On illegal immigration, more cities are rolling out a welcome mat

Tucson, a longtime foe of Arizona's 'papers, please' law, is modifying how it enforces SB 1070 to join a national trend that suggests the pendulum is swinging on illegal immigration.

The passage by conservative state lawmakers of Arizona’s controversial immigration law SB 1070 in 2010 inspired copy-cat measures in several other states that made them similarly hostile to illegal immigrants.

But city leaders in this desert town, in an example of a growing national trend more hospitable to immigrants, are pushing back against Arizona's "papers, please" law in renewed repudiation of the measure and in a nod to immigrant integration.

Tucson, in liberal-leaning Pima County, is a longtime foe of the tough immigration law designed to push out of state those in the country illegally.

But now the city council is going a step further, voting this month to change how police implement the immigrations status inquiries during law enforcement stops, a provision upheld by the US Supreme Court when it struck down most of the rest of SB 1070 in June 2012. For instance, minors may not be questioned away from an attorney or guardian, and people who report a crime can do so without fear of having their immigration status checked.

Tucson made the policy changes about a year after it declared itself an "immigrant welcoming city" and in response to more recent complaints over police treatment of immigrants in the area. The city wants to work within the confines of the state's law, but at the same time ensure that "we're not doing the work of border patrol," says Regina Romero, a Tucson City Council member.

In rolling out an official welcome mat to immigrants, Tucson finds itself in good company. Cities, towns and counties – including formerly inhospitable places toward immigrants – increasingly embrace newcomers through community initiatives, policies, and ordinances.

Chicago, through its Office of New Americans, is implementing its plan to incorporate the city's half-million foreign-born residents and their children as a crucial part of economic growth; Dayton, Ohio, put in place programs to lure immigrant workers to breathe new life into neighborhoods of empty houses; and Chattanooga, Tenn., is helping connect its small but rapidly-growing immigrant population with local agencies for seamless community integration.

"The pendulum's swinging the other way now," says Frank Bean, chancellor’s professor of sociology and director of the Center for Research on Immigration, Population and Public Policy at the University of California, Irvine.

It is a trend that mirrors that of states passing laws benefiting illegal immigrants in growing rejection of a years-long history of unfriendliness. From January to June this year, 43 states and the District of Columbia enacted such laws or resolutions related to immigration, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Much of the measures seek to make life easier for immigrants or simply praise their contributions. In granting in-state tuition and driver’s licenses to people here illegally, several states were reacting to President Obama’s deferred action for childhood arrivals program. Under it, eligible young people in the country illegally are allowed to stay and work without being deported.

In early October, California passed a series of far-reaching pro-immigrant measures, including one that curbs the ability of federal authorities to deport illegal immigrants. The move came 19 years after state voters passed Proposition 187, a highly controversial ballot measure aimed at limiting services for illegal immigrants that was ruled unconstitutional.

Immigration experts say the change reflects increasing recognition that immigrants, both legal and illegal, are vital to the nation's economic well-being and overall growing acceptance of immigrants. And, given the on-again, off-again federal efforts to overhaul an immigration system that badly needs fixing, experts say, municipalities are choosing to address a need in their own communities.

Professor Bean says the country's shrinking US-born workforce is a big reason why municipalities are welcoming immigrants. As more baby boomers retire, the reduction in low-skilled workers becomes more obvious and "towns are noticing that they need these (foreign-born) workers," he adds.

Some view the sweeping tendency of local governments to set the tone for how immigrants are perceived as a positive sign.

"We're seeing that in a lot of communities there is a new understanding that immigrants really contribute so much to the economy," says Susan Downs-Karkos, director of strategic partnership for the Atlanta-based nonprofit Welcoming America.

The four-year-old national organization, which promotes an inclusive environment for immigrants, grew out of frustration with Tennessee's efforts to crack down on illegal immigration. The feeling among immigrant-rights advocates was that not enough was being done to build support for immigrants amid rapid demographic changes.

Many residents felt threatened by the growing presence of immigrants in their midst, Ms. Downs-Karkos adds. "They didn't understand who their new neighbors were, they didn't understand how much they would actually have in common with them, that there were cultural and language barriers that got in the way of getting to know each other at a very human level."

Since its creation in 2009, the group has worked to increase understanding between the native born and newcomers in communities both with and without a history of immigration. This past summer it began recruiting cities and towns to take part in a national initiative that aims to build welcoming communities. So far, 22 municipalities have signed on. One of them, St. Louis, Miss., in September put up posters on Metro buses featuring the word "hello" in 17 different languages as part of efforts to create a welcoming environment.

To some, the trend to embrace people living in the country illegally seems dangerously defiant of federal immigration laws.

While the Department of Justice sued Arizona to keep the state from enforcing its tough immigration law, the federal government has "done nothing to hold these local communities and states accountable for policies that impede immigration enforcement," says Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

In late October the Washington, D.C.-based organization, which pushes for reduced levels of immigration, released its own study on the proliferation of ordinances, resolutions and other pro-immigrant activity in more than 100 communities. Although some of the actions date back several years, most were adopted under the Obama administration.

The group calls such communities "sanctuary cities," and the label casts a wide net. Gainesville, Fla., landed on the list for filing, in 2012, an amicus brief that urged the Supreme Court to strike down provisions of the Arizona law. Police departments such as the one in Columbus, Ohio, are considered havens for illegal immigrants because they won't detain people for immigration authorities  "unless a warrant exists or a criminal violation was observed." And several municipalities, including Helena, Mont., made the list for passing resolutions that prohibit using city resources to enforce immigration laws.

"What is happening is that because there is a vacuum in Washington, you are having all of these local policies that reflect the interest of the communities that they represent," Mr. Mehlman says.

Local governments may be reluctant to pursue enforcement measures for fear that the Department of Justice "is going to come down on them like a ton of bricks," he adds.

Jonathan Blazer, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who tracks immigration-related measures, says at least some of the local actions are reactions to Obama's Secure Communities, a controversial deportation program that relies on fingerprints to nab criminals without legal status. Critics contend the practice also gets law-abiding immigrants deported, and support for the program has eroded in various cities.

"There's been a lot of activity at the local level to establish local policies prohibiting individuals from being detained longer than they otherwise would need to be held by the locality for the pure convenience of immigration coming and picking them up at their own time and pace," Mr. Blazer adds.

He calls the period from about 2004 to 2011 a "dark period in immigration," when enforcement by attrition and self-deportation were looked upon as the answers to addressing illegal immigration.

"It's something that didn't really work, and people are hungering for solutions at the federal level," Blazer says. "But increasingly, the localities are saying, 'we're not going to wait.' ”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 05, 2013, 12:57:10 pm
John Boehner Very Quietly Made A Major Move On Immigration Reform Today

House Speaker John Boehner announced on Tuesday the hire of Rebecca Tallent, a top immigration policy aide who will advise the Speaker on the topic.

Tallent joins Boehner's office from the Bipartisan Policy Center, where she was the director of immigration policy. Her hire — which was announced at the bottom of a press release along with other new staff additions — signals that there's still life for an immigration reform bill to become law sometime over the next year.

And it came two weeks after Boehner declared in a press conference that despite press pronouncements, immigration reform was "absolutely not dead."

Pro-immigration reform advocates that have been critical of Boehner hailed the move, while groups that have decried Senate-passed legislation as "amnesty" pushed back furiously.

"The Speaker remains hopeful that we can enact step-by-step, common-sense immigration reforms — the kind of reforms the American people understand and support," Michael Steel, a Boehner spokesman, said in an email.

"Becky Tallent, a well-known expert in this field of public policy, is a great addition to our team and that effort."

Prior to joining the BPC, Tallent was the point person on Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) staff, often leading his various pushes for immigration. From the 108th to 110th Congresses, Tallent helped draft four major immigration-related bills while working for both McCain and Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) . She was also a policy adviser on McCain's 2008 presidential campaign.

Her move back to the Hill drew differing reactions from both sides of the immigration debate.  Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the  Center for Immigration Studies, said on Twitter that Boehner is "ready for amnesty."

Boehner also got praise from unlikely sources — like Marshall Fitz, the director of immigration policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

"Hiring Becky is an important signal that the Speaker is serious about achieving a legislative result," Fitz told Business Insider in an email.

"He could have hired someone junior to simply manage the issue portfolio; that would have signaled that he was going in to a defensive crouch on the issue, just trying to run out the clock. But instead he hired someone senior with deep experience on the issue and a proven track record of effectively working across the aisle. In other words, he hired someone who knows how to get to yes."

Boehner and other members of House GOP leadership have long signaled that they believe something needs to be done to reform the nation's immigration system. But contra the comprehensive bipartisan Senate bill, they prefer to do so through a piecemeal method. Recently, President Barack Obama said he was open to that idea.

"If they want to chop that thing up into five pieces, as long as all five pieces get done, I don't care what it looks like," Obama said during an interview at The Wall Street Journal CEO Council.

Not everyone is convinced that Tallent's hiring means that a solution on immigration reform is imminent, however.

A spokeswoman for the  Fair Immigration Reform Movement, a group that supports the Senate-passed bill, told Business Insider that the group has brought more than 40 children to Washington this week to lobby for immigration reform. 

"The Speaker can call a vote at any time and immigration reform would pass," said Kica Matos, a spokeswoman for FIRM.

"The entire year has passed and he has completely failed all relevant tests of leadership on this issue. We want an end to family separations and the only move we want to see from the Speaker is a vote on a pathway to citizenship that would achieve an end to such suffering.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 06, 2013, 12:59:23 pm

Evangelicals: Pray for Boehner on immigration reform

Posted by
CNN's Dan Merica   

Washington (CNN) - A group of evangelicals in favor of passing immigration reform have a message for House Speaker John Boehner: "We're praying for you."

In new ads, Evangelical Immigration Table–group that has been behind immigration reform on Capitol Hill–asks people to pray for Boehner and House Republican leadership on immigration reform and urge those leaders to listen to their prayers.

The group says the ad will air on WTOP, a radio station in Washington, D.C., as well as 30 Christian radio stations in Texas and North Carolina. A Spanish-speaking iteration of the spot will also air in Southern California.

"Our immigration system is broken and it is hurting everyone," says Dub Karriker, senior pastor at the Christian Assembly Church in Durham, N.C. "Families are separated, employers can't find the workers they need, and the undocumented who want to get right with the law are told to get in a line that doesn't exist."

The ad continues: "More than ever, Speaker Boehner needs our prayers. Congress can pass a true conservative solution that will actually fix our immigration system...Please join me in praying for Speaker Boehner and House leadership that God will help them find an immigration solution that reflect biblical values."

The ads all feature local pastors from the areas where they are running.

In print, the ad appeared in the Express newspaper in Washington, D.C on Thursday.

CNN emailed a spokesman for Boehner's office about the ad but did not receive a response by the time this article was published.

On a Thursday call with reporters, Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals and a leading member of Evangelical Immigration Table, said North Carolina, Texas and California were selected because "they are significant places in terms of the Congress."

The group, which formed earlier this year, has brought together leaders from the sometimes fractured world of evangelical Christian politics with the express goal of passing immigration reform. Groups involved include the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, the National Association of Evangelicals, Sojourners and Focus on the Family.

This is not the first ad campaign the group has launched. On top of events across the country, according to the group's figures, Evangelical Immigration Table has spent over $1 million on paid media efforts.

Their work, however, has not led to legislative success.

Although President Barack Obama made immigration reform one of his second term priorities and the Senate in June passed immigration reform–with some Republican support–the House of Representatives has done very little to move on the issue.

Last month, Boehner insisted that while immigration reform was "absolutely not" dead, he had "no intention" of negotiating with the Democratic-led Senate over its comprehensive immigration proposal.

Many Republicans in Congress who oppose the Senate plan–which includes an eventual pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States–have said they want to deal with immigration reform through a number of smaller bills, not one larger piece of legislation. Some House Democrats have said they won't agree to that approach.

Since the law failed to move in the House, groups urging the passage of immigration reform have made Boehner the focus of their frustration on the bill's lack of momentum. Evangelical Immigration Table brought evangelicals to Washington to urge passage of the law earlier this year and for most of 2013, Boehner's Capitol Hill office has been the site of immigration protests.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on December 06, 2013, 03:10:11 pm
The ad continues: "More than ever, Speaker Boehner needs our prayers. Congress can pass a true conservative solution that will actually fix our immigration system...Please join me in praying for Speaker Boehner and House leadership that God will help them find an immigration solution that reflect biblical values."

"The LORD is far from the wicked: but he heareth the prayer of the righteous." Proverbs 15:29 (KJB)

"Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts." James 4:3 (KJB)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 13, 2013, 09:25:20 pm
How the budget deal could pave the way for immigration reform

The two-year bipartisan budget deal passed by the House Thursday night potentially will do more than just dispel the atmosphere of chronic crisis in Washington, which has driven Congress' approval rating to record lows. The Capitol stage is now set for an even bigger bipartisan achievement: Immigration reform.

The immigration issue was set to come to a head last fall, after immigration advocates ran circles around the Tea Party during the August recess to whip up support for the bipartisan Senate bill. While Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) was resistant to the Senate’s comprehensive approach, he could not completely snub public pressure and promised the House would take action.

But instead of immigration, the fall season gave us the Syrian crisis, the government shutdown, and the HealthCare.gov botch, all of which demanded media attention that deprived immigration activists of the ability to maximize grassroots pressure. Momentum appeared to stall. The Hill even ran a two-part series in mid-November called "How Immigration Died."

But a funny thing happened two weeks after that obituary: President Obama publicly accepted Boehner's position that the House pass a series of piecemeal immigration bills instead of a single comprehensive bill like the Senate’s. Obama removed a political roadblock, putting the burden on Boehner to either follow through on his own pledge or shoulder all the political consequences for failure.

Boehner may not be eager to force his party to vote on an issue that divides its members, but neither does he want Republicans to take the blame for inaction and lose an entire generation of Latino voters.

A few days later, Boehner surprised Washington by hiring a new immigration policy aide from the Bipartisan Policy Center who supports what Democrats insist on but what many Republicans resist: A pathway to citizenship for the currently undocumented.

This week’s deal is another signal that congressional leaders are ready to close the curtains on the budget kabuki and bring immigration back to center stage. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), who negotiated the budget deal, already has made clear his support for reform that includes a pathway to citizenship, and has an interest in lowering the political temperature through this agreement. In turn, his negotiating partner Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) made sure to point out that the reduced tensions should help get immigration done.

Also of note, Boehner raised eyebrows this week by lashing out at conservative groups that opposed the budget deal before it was announced. After declaring they have "lost all credibility," Boehner was asked at a press conference if he wanted them to "stand down." He coldly responded, "I don't care what they do."

The public display of anger by the normally poker-faced speaker suggests he is less inclined to bow to those on his right flank after they drove the GOP into the shutdown ditch, which should free Boehner up to compromise on immigration. In fact, prominent conservative pundit Erick Erickson fretted on Twitter, "Is Boehner picking this fight with conservatives to lay battle lines for the immigration fight?"

Congress doesn’t have a lot of time left. The deeper we get into the 2014 campaign season, the more the two parties will be focused on drawing blood, not cutting deals.

But they certainly have until the spring, when filing deadlines for primary challengers begin to expire, reducing far-right, anti-immigrant pressure on incumbent Republicans inclined to deal.

Skepticism and cynicism have clouded the immigration reform effort for months. But where there’s a will, there’s a way. And the actions of Boehner and Ryan this month suggest there is a will.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on December 20, 2013, 05:20:27 pm
Chris Christie signs bill granting in-state tuition to N.J. immigrants

TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie today signed landmark legislation granting thousands of students who grew up in New Jersey but are in the country illegally the benefit of in-state tuition rates at all public colleges and universities.

Christie's signature marks the end of a public tug-of-war over the measure, deemed the "Dream Act", which was pared down in its final days in order for Democrats to gain the governor's approval. Both sides hailed the compromise as a historic achievement.

A spokesman for Christie, Colin Reed, said in a statement "the governor signed the legislation privately earlier today, and there will be a public ceremony to follow in the weeks ahead." He said a date and time for the ceremony has not yet been set.

The new law allows unauthorized immigrants who graduated high school in New Jersey after attending that school for at least three years to be eligible for the lower in-state rates at state college and universities, including in-county rates at community colleges.

The Legislature on Thursday sent Christie a version of the bill that would also have made immigrant students eligible for state financial aid programs, including tuition aid grants. Christie then conditionally vetoed the bill to remove that provision and sent it back to the Senate and Assembly, which both promptly agreed to the change.

With signing the bill, Christie fired back at some Democrats — notably Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) — as well as the media for criticism he received after he indicated support for the bill but then suggested he may not sign it.

While courting Hispanic votes during his re-election campaign, Christie said he supported the concept of in-state tuition for students who grew up here. But he did not elaborate on what he meant until the bill began advancing through the Legislature.

It was then Christie said he had problems with parts of the bill, including the financial aid section. Sweeney and others accused Christie of looking for a way to rescind support because he was worried about conservative voters in his potential 2016 presidential bid.

Only a few of the 18 states that offer in-state tuition to unauthorized immigrants also make them eligible for in-state financial aid, but they include Texas and California — the two most populous.

After pledging to sign the compromise version Thursday, Christie said at a news conference at the Statehouse that he was owed an apology by those who portrayed his concerns about the bill as backtracking on his support for tuition equality.

Democrats pledged to continue to pursue the financial aid portion stricken from the bill, even if it means waiting until Christie leaves office.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 02, 2014, 07:31:35 pm
Boehner Takes Aim: Is Immigration Reform Imminent?

Immigration reform has been part of House Speaker John Boehner’s (R-Ohio) rhetoric for a while, but he may now be getting serious. In June, Boehner said that “Securing our borders, enforcing our laws and making the process of becoming a legal immigrant fairer will in fact help America remain a magnet for the brightest minds and the hardest workers in the world.”

At the time, his call for immigration reform was blocked, with an agricultural policy bill shot down in the House of Representatives. In late October, a group of Republicans came to Washington to lobby against their own party representatives. They were executives and donors who threatened to cease contributions in the next election if Republicans didn’t stop jamming things up in Congress where immigration is concerned.

This, paired with Boehner’s recent anger at Tea Party members in the GOP, helps signal the gravity of Boehner’s intent when he spoke on plans to change immigration legislation. According to New York Times sources, Boehner spoke in favor of a “step by step” change to the laws governing immigration.

Per the publication, Boehner has hired Rebecca Tallent, the former adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on immigration. Though Boehner’s aides have told The New York Times that her role is to help him get his plans carried out, not change his opinions to hers, the move still suggests Boehner hopes to make a deal on immigration change this year.

“The American people are skeptical of big, comprehensive bills, and frankly, they should be. The only way to make sure immigration reform works this time is to address these complicated issues one step at a time. I think doing so will give the American people confidence that we’re dealing with these issues in a thoughtful way and a deliberative way,” said Boehner, according to The New York Times.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on January 03, 2014, 06:48:07 am
Uprising as Obama plans to skirt Congress on 'New World Order'

Protest planned against ambitious free-trade agreement

Can ordinary citizens protesting on the Internet block the Obama administration’s plan to ram through Congress one of the most ambitious globalist, “free-trade agreements” ever negotiated?
Very quietly, opposition is building on the Internet to oppose legislation that may be introduced as soon as Jan. 8. The measure would grant President Obama what is known as “fast track authority” to ram through Congress the Trans-Pacific Partnership with limited debate and no opportunity to propose amendments. The international trade agreement, negotiated largely in secret by the Obama administration, is regarded by globalist free traders as a cornerstone of the emerging “New World Order.”
A Facebook page has been created to call for a “Anti-TPP Twitter Storm” on New Year’s Day beginning at 7 p.m. Eastern Time.
“Anti-TPP Twitter Storm Wednesday 1/1/14 @ 4 p.m. PST/7 p.m. EST, the whole world will tweet and post an ANTI-TPP hashtag (to be announced) with posts about why people should stop the Trans Pacific Partnership,” the Facebook page reads.
“The goal of this ‘hashtag storm’ is to get this hashtag trending on both Twitter and Facebook, so we can inform the public about the dangers of the Trans Pacific Partnership and agitate people to ACT to stop the TPP. Join us and help expose the corporate coup known as the Trans Pacific Partnership.”
Obama’s ‘two –ocean’ free-trade agenda
As WND previously reported, Obama, in his State of the Union address Feb. 12, announced a two-ocean globalist free-trade agenda:
“To boost American exports, support American jobs, and level the playing field in the growing markets of Asia, we intend to complete negotiations on a Trans-Pacific Partnership,” he said. “And tonight, I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union – because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.”
For the first time, a decision by the U.S. Trade Representative within the Executive Office of the President was made public to expand the ongoing negotiations for a free-trade zone with Pacific Rim countries to include a a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with European Union countries.
Now there is no doubt the Obama administration has decided in the second term to double-up on a globalist agenda to develop massive new free-trade agreements across both the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans, adding a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TAP, to what is being developed as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP.
Fast-track authority

WND has reported Obama administration plans in development for the past two years are ready be implemented as Democrats in Congress plan to pass the massive Trans-Pacific Partnership free-trade agreement with a simple majority vote that would skirt the two-thirds vote in the Senate that the U.S. Constitution requires to ratify a treaty.
The strategy centers on what is known as “fast track authority,” a provision under the Trade Promotion Authority that requires Congress to review a free-trade agreement, or FTA, under limited debate, in an accelerated time frame that is subject to a yes-or-no vote by Congress without any provision for Congress to modify the agreement by submitting amendments. Fast-track authority is also intended to reassure foreign partners that the FTA negotiated by the executive branch will not be altered by Congress during the legislative process.
A report released Jan. 24 by the Congressional Research Service, “The Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations and Issues for Congress,” makes clear the Obama administration does not have fast-track authority to negotiate the TPP, even though the office of the U.S. Trade Representative is acting as if it were in place:

The present negotiations are not being conducted under the auspices of formal trade promotion authority (TPA) – the latest TPA expired on July 1, 2007 – although the Administration informally is following the procedures of the former TPA. If TPP implementing legislation is brought to Congress, TPA may need to be considered if the legislation is not to be subject to potentially debilitating amendments or rejection. Finally, Congress may seek to weigh in on the addition of new members to the negotiations, before or after the negotiations conclude.
The CRS report states that the TPP is being negotiated as a regional free-trade agreement that U.S. negotiators describe as a “comprehensive and high-standard” FTA that they hope “will liberalize trade in nearly all goods and services and include commitments beyond those currently established in the World Trade Organization (WTO.)”
That the Obama administration is treating the TPP like a TPA and not a formal treaty obligation strongly suggests the Obama majority will seek passage of the TPP by a simple majority vote in Congress.
Still, the impact of the TPP will be equivalent to a formal treaty obligation in that agreements made within the TPP will be designed to supersede U.S. law with the regional authorities as specified within the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.
So, the last hurdle the Obama administration faces in making the TPP law is to get Congress to vote fast-track authority as the terms under which the TPP will be introduced to Congress.
As a consequence, one of the few remaining strategies left to opponents of the TPP is to urge Congress to vote against giving the Obama administration fast-track authority when the issue comes up for debate, possibly as early as next week.
Advancing the NWO agenda
The globalists advising the Obama administration appear to have learned from the adverse public reaction to the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP, during the administration of President George W. Bush. Obama has avoided the leader summit meetings that exposed to a critical alternative news media the international “working group” coordination needed to create international free-trade agreements.
Globalists have learned from the adverse reaction that such internationalist adventures as the Trans-Texas Highway, known as the NAFTA Super-Highway, will only succeed if such initiatives are pursued covertly with a determination to ridicule anyone who dares contemplate its larger purpose of increasing global sovereignty.
The Obama administration has shut down the Security and Prosperity Partnership website, SPP.gov. The last joint statement issued by the newly formed North American Leaders Summit, operating as the rebranded SPP, was issued April 2, 2012, at the conclusion of the last tri-lateral head-of-state meeting held between the U.S., Mexico and Canada in Washington, D.C.
Now, with the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Obama administration appears to have leap-frogged SPP ambitions to create a North American Union by including Mexico and Canada in the TPP configuration.
The 10 nations involved in the TPP include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.
A graph presented in the CRS report on the first page shows the reach of the agreement across the Pacific, including Peru and Chile in South America; Australia and New Zealand; Malaysia and Vietnam in Southeast Asia; Singapore; and Japan.

As seen in the North American detail below, trade from Canada extends down into roughly Oklahoma in the United States, and trade from Mexico extends north roughly to Colorado.

At the same time, trade from Mexico is seen both as extending up into the United States, reaching across the Pacific Ocean to the Asian and Pacific Rim nations involved in the FTA.
International tribunal dispute resolution
A leaked copy of the TPP draft makes clear in Chapter 15, “Dispute Settlement,” that the Obama administration intends to surrender U.S. sovereignty to adjudicate disputes arising under the TPP to the processes of an international tribunal.
Disputes involving interpretation and application of the TPP agreement, according to Article 15.7, will be adjudicated by an “arbitral tribunal” composed of three TPP members whose purpose under Article 15.8 will be “to make an objective assessment of the dispute before it, including an examination of the facts of the case and the applicability of and conformity with this Agreement, and make such other findings and rulings necessary for the resolution of the dispute referred to it as it thinks fits.”
The TPP draft agreement does not specify that these arbitral tribunals must render decisions in compliance with U.S. law or that the decisions of the arbitral tribunals are invalid should they violate or otherwise contravene U.S. law.
Investment disputes under the TPP appear to be relegated for resolution to the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes, an international authority created by 158 nations that are signatories to the ICSID Convention created under the auspices of the World Bank.
The TPP draft agreement specifies that foreign firms from Trans-Pacific signatory countries that seek to do business in the U.S. can apply to the arbitral tribunals to obtain relief under the trade pact from complying with onerous U.S. laws and regulations, including environmental regulations and financial disclosure rules.
Because the TPP agreement places arbitral tribunals created under TPP above U.S. law, the Obama administration appears to be intent on creating a judicial authority higher than the U.S. Supreme Court. The tribunal could overrule decisions U.S. federal courts make to apply U.S. laws and regulations to foreign corporations doing business within the U.S.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 08, 2014, 10:05:49 pm
Chamber to 'pull out all the stops' to pass immigration reform in 2014

Washington (CNN) - The president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce vowed Wednesday that 2014 will be the year his organization pulls "out all of the stops" to pass immigration reform, pledging that the Chamber will turn the 2014 midterm elections "into a motivation for change."

"We're determined to make 2014 the year that immigration reform is finally enacted," Donohue said at his 2014 State of American Business address. "The Chamber will pull out all the stops – through grassroots lobbying, communications, politics and partnerships with unions, faith organization, law enforcement and other – to get it done."

Donohue refuted the idea that immigration reform would not pass in 2014, a midterm election year when very little, if anything, gets done on Capitol Hill.

"We hope to turn that assumption on its ear," he said. "It's based on a simple theory: If you can't make them see the light, then at least make them feel some heat."

Immigration reform, despite passing the Senate in June and being named one of President Barack Obama's top priorities for his second term, has seen very little movement in the House of Representatives.

Late last year, House Speaker Boehner insisted that while immigration reform was "absolutely not" dead, he had "no intention" of negotiating with the Democratic-led Senate over its comprehensive immigration proposal.

Many Republicans in Congress who oppose the Senate plan – which includes an eventual pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States – have said they want to deal with immigration reform through a number of smaller bills, not one larger piece of legislation. Boehner has said he backs that approach.

Some Republicans vigorously oppose the efforts by such groups as the Chamber pushing the immigration reform bill passed by the Senate. They argue it would double the number of guest workers and legalize 11 million illegal immigrants adding more to the nation’s work force. Some Republicans also believe this type of reform will drive down wages and lead to more unemployment.

“The President says people are worried ‘the system is rigged’ and yet it is the President who has teamed up with a small cadre of CEOs to double the flow of immigrant workers when these exact same companies are laying off American workers in drove,” Sen. Jeff Sessions Republican on the Judiciary Committee has previously said.

Donohue's remarks highlight how the Chamber of Commerce plans to be an aggressive player in the 2014 midterm elections and how immigration reform is set to be at the center of those plans.

A source with knowledge of the Chamber's election plans told CNN that the group is set to spend "at least $50 million" in the 2014 midterms. The group has already spent money in four midterms races, according to the source: defending House Republican Mike Simpson of Idaho, supporting Shelly Moore Capito in West Virginia's Senate race, backing Evan Jenkins, a Democrat-turned-Republican challenging Democrat Nick Rahall in West Virginia, and supporting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in Kentucky, who is facing a tea party challenger.

The source said the group will "spend early to help set the terms of the debate." In his speech, Donohue said the group will be active in at least half a dozen races and "will support candidates who want to work within the legislative process to solve the nation's problems."

The Chamber, which has long been reliably Republican, played a major role in a 2013 special election in Alabama, helping Republican Bradley Byrne, a former state senator, defeat businessman Dean Young, a tea party backed candidate.

After the speech, at a press conference with reporters, Donohue said "thank God" that Bryne won in Alabama.

Donohue said that the Chamber was primarily against candidates who plan to come to Washington and "burn down the town," not specifically against tea party backed lawmakers.

One reason the Chamber has seemed to step up its election plans is because of the 16 day government shutdown that gripped Washington in 2013 and highlighted the dysfunction on Capitol Hill. The Chamber was vocally against the shutdown and in his Wednesday speech, Donohue said the group would look to "expand a pro-business majority in the House" in 2014, a nod to the fact the Chamber worried about their influence on House Republicans after the shutdown.

As to whether the Chamber will challenge lawmakers that they feel had gone against business interests, Donohue was non-committal, but with a laugh, he said it "sounds like a good idea."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 08, 2014, 10:09:01 pm
House GOP writing 'principles' for immigration reform

WASHINGTON — House speaker John A. Boehner told rank-and-file Republicans that his leadership team was drafting “principles” for overhauling immigration laws that will be presented in coming weeks.

Boehner made the remarks Wednesday during the first private meeting of House Republicans in the new year. House Republicans have struggled to respond to the Senate's immigration bill that passed in June, which would create a path to citizenship for 11 million immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally. Boehner refused to bring the Senate bill up for a vote in the House last year and instead said the House should consider a series of narrower measures.

"We are working on a standards or principles document," Boehner said, according to a person in the room granted anonymity to discuss the private session. The document is being drafted by Boehner, his leadership team, including House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), as well as other members interested in the issue.

House Republican leaders believe that the GOP needs to support an immigration overhaul to woo Latino voters in advance of the 2016 presidential election.

For several months, Boehner has said he wants to take a “step-by-step” approach to changing immigration laws. This would mean passing a raft of separate bills that would boost the number of visas for high-tech workers, fast-track legalization for farm workers in the country illegally and allow immigrants who came to the country illegally as children to apply for citizenship, among other provisions.

The small team of GOP members and staff has been working to draft a statement of basic principles on immigration policy for several weeks. The effort is being coordinated by Rebecca Tallent, former immigration advisor to Arizona Sen. John McCain and a veteran of the previous effort to pass immigration reform during the second term of President George W. Bush. Boehner hired Tallent in December.

The goal is to present the document — which could serve as an outline for future legislative action — before the House GOP retreat at a resort on the Eastern Shore of Maryland on Jan. 29, the person said.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on January 09, 2014, 01:09:07 pm
Very quietly, opposition is building on the Internet to oppose legislation that may be introduced as soon as Jan. 8. The measure would grant President Obama what is known as “fast track authority” to ram through Congress the Trans-Pacific Partnership with limited debate and no opportunity to propose amendments. The international trade agreement, negotiated largely in secret by the Obama administration, is regarded by globalist free traders as a cornerstone of the emerging “New World Order.”

White House 


US lawmakers propose bill to give the White House power to fast-track international trade agreements - @Reuters

end of bulletin


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 15, 2014, 09:49:48 pm
Proposed high-speed rail would link Texas and Mexico

SAN ANTONIO — A proposed high speed rail between San Antonio and Monterrey is in the works.

One lawmaker says it would revolutionize trade and travel between the U.S. and Mexico and pump more tourism dollars into the local economy.

On Thursday, Representative Henry Cuellar will meet with the Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx along with state and Mexican officials to discuss the proposed rail system.

Instead of paying for a round-trip airline ticket to Monterrey from San Antonio —  which can cost at least $400 — Cuellar said a commuter could hop on a high-speed train and travel between the two cities in less than two hours.

He said it would also let the commuter skip lengthy customs lines at the airport and crowded border patrol check points.

Imagine a high-speed light rail like the ones in Europe that would let tourists and business people hop from San Antonio to Laredo and to Mexico.

"Moving people from these two large cities in a fast way and in a safe way," said Cuellar. He's hoping that the high-speed rail will come to fruition in the next six to eight years.

"This is if everything falls into place," he added.

Cuellar said it would bring more visitors from Monterrey to San Antonio and that means more money being spent in the local economy, especially during peak shopping times for Mexican nationals like during Easter Holy Week.' Cuellar said the economic benefits are endless for both nations.

Businesses from Monterrey are already popping up on the north side... so much so that locals have termed it "Sonterrey."

"You can see on the northwest side a lot of people who have opened up businesses from Monterrey.

Cuellar said Monterrey already has the right of way to begin construction.

But opponents wonder: Who will foot the bill?

"I think one of our challenges is where will we come up with the money," said Cuellar.

While there's no price tag on the project yet or a dollar amount on how much travelers would pay to ride, Cuellar said they are eyeing Europe for examples and relying on the private sector to be involved

Cuellar said some companies are already highly interested.

Opponents also worry about their safety. Murders and kidnappings have motivated immigrants from Monterrey and Mexico City to escape crime by relocating to Texas.

"You don't have to worry about driving in a car," added Cuellar. "The security will be there."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on January 16, 2014, 02:36:38 am
He said it would also let the commuter skip lengthy customs lines at the airport and crowded border patrol check points.

Uh, so if they are saying this train is the way to go, don't they think it will draw people that will stand in line there too? How do they propose to not have the same issues? So, do they think that if you ride a train, you don't have to worry about Customs? Socialists!  ::)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 24, 2014, 11:06:14 am
Michigan seeks visas to lure immigrants to Detroit

DETROIT (AP) — Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder asked the federal government Thursday to set aside thousands of work visas for bankrupt Detroit, a bid to revive the decaying city by attracting talented immigrants who are willing to move there and stay for five years.

The Republican governor has routinely touted immigration as a powerful potential force for growing Detroit's economy, saying immigrant entrepreneurs start many small businesses and file patents at twice the rate of U.S.-born citizens.

"Let's send a message to the entire world: Detroit, Michigan, is open to the world," Snyder said at a news conference.

The proposal involves EB-2 visas, which are offered every year to legal immigrants who have advanced degrees or show exceptional ability in certain fields.

But the governor's ambitious plan faces significant hurdles: The visas are not currently allocated by region or state. And the number he is seeking — 50,000 over five years — would be a quarter of the total EB-2 visas offered.

The program would require no federal financial bailout, the governor said, only the easing of immigration rules and visa limits to help fill jobs in automotive engineering, information technology, health care and life sciences.

"It's really taking up the offer of the federal government to say they want to help more," Snyder said. "Isn't this a great way that doesn't involve large-scale financial contributions from the federal government to do something dramatic in Detroit?"

He said the Obama administration has "been receptive to us bringing significant ideas to them, and this would be near the top of the list."

Snyder, a first-term governor who made millions as a computer industry executive and venture capitalist, said it's not clear whether the White House could act administratively or if such a change would require legislative action.

He said he's talking about the proposal with Michigan's congressional delegation and plans private meetings Friday with administration officials while in Washington for a panel discussion about the economic benefits of an immigration overhaul.

The governor's proposal seemed to take officials by surprise at the State Department, which works with the Homeland Security Department to decide on visa requests.

In Washington, State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf told reporters Thursday that she was aware of the governor's comments but had no immediate response.

Snyder's office has said immigrants created nearly one-third of the high-tech businesses in Michigan in the last decade, and he cited a study that found for every job that goes to an immigrant, 2.5 are created for U.S.-born citizens.

Being more welcoming to immigrants would also make the city more attractive to employers.

"The point isn't just to say, 'Let's have a lot of jobs created in Detroit for immigrants,'" he said. "Let's step this up. Let's do something that could really be a jumpstart to the continuing comeback of Michigan and Detroit."

The city, the largest in American history to file for bankruptcy, has been hollowed out by a long population decline, from 1.8 million people in its heyday of the 1950s, to about 713,000 today at the time of the 2010 census. During that time, Detroit steadily lost many of its manufacturing jobs, and huge numbers of workers fled to the suburbs.

The governor is trying to find flexibility in a waiver that allows foreign workers with a master's degree or higher — or who demonstrate exceptional skills in science, business or art — to come to the U.S. if it's in the "national interest."

Snyder wants to broaden the definition of national interest to apply it to Detroit, likening the concept to one already in place where foreign-born physicians can get a green card after working in an underserved area for five years.

One critic of Snyder's proposal said it appears to dismiss immigrants who have not achieved high levels of education. Even if it does not take a specific job away from native-born job-seekers, it makes immigrants "more marketable than educated current residents," said the Rev. Horace Sheffield III, executive director of the Detroit Association of Black Organizations.

"What does that do to displace people who are born here and who don't have the education and are already competing for scarce jobs?" Sheffield said. "The other problem is the governor only picked educated immigrants. That only pits immigrants against immigrants."

About 1 in 5 Detroit residents are without a high school diploma, according to Detroit Future City, a 2012 report that examined how the city can remake itself.

Another 35 percent have diplomas, but no other kind of training. And for every 100 residents, there are only 27 jobs, the study found

Under Snyder's plan, Detroit would be allocated 5,000 visas in the first year, 10,000 each of the next three years and 15,000 in the fifth year. Snyder is especially keen on keeping foreign students in Michigan, many of whom come to the state to earn advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or math, then leave.

In his annual State of the State address last week, he announced a plan to join two other states in putting immigration services under a special office, as well as a separate initiative to make Michigan the second state to run a regional visa program to attract immigrant investors for development projects.

Frank Venegas is chief executive and chairman of the Ideal Group, a family-owned manufacturing and construction company where the governor made Thursday's announcement.

Venegas, the grandson of Mexican immigrants, said Snyder's proposals would benefit the struggling city and the company he started in 1979, which has grown to incorporate several subsidiaries and annual revenue of more than $200 million.

"We're the greatest country in the world. Why can't we attract some of the greatest people in the world from different countries?"

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on January 24, 2014, 12:27:59 pm
The program would require no federal financial bailout, the governor said, only the easing of immigration rules and visa limits to help fill jobs in automotive engineering, information technology, health care and life sciences.

So this clown's solution is to bring in foreign workers, while the US has millions that are out of work? They are willing to give incentives to foreigners to fill slave jobs with low pay for this country, and not willing to come up with incentives to encourage the hiring of current US citizens that are unemployed and would gladly change careers or move for a decent job.

I have no doubt there are many people in Detroit that just don't qualify for certain jobs, and many others are so disillusioned with society, they aren't looking for work, but instead have chosen life on the streets outside the law. Those people aren't even part of the equation until they step up and make an effort to change their situation. That doesn't mean there are not people willing to learn new skills or move to Detroit if the deal is right. But the decent paying jobs have to be there for it to be worth it to move there. People won't come to Detroit to work at McDonalds for even $15.00/hour. Sure, 20 years ago, that was an okay wage, and if two in the house made that, it wasn't too bad financially if you didn't live above your means, but you still weren't "middle class". Now? A "living wage" in today's society? It's well over $15/hr. net pay in all the larger population centers.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 25, 2014, 04:04:50 pm
Evangelicals Wooed by Businesses on Immigration Revamp

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is wooing religious groups to overcome opposition of conservative lawmakers to immigration-law revisions as Congress is poised to consider the issue.

“The left has never been the problem on this,” Randel Johnson, the chamber’s senior vice president for labor and immigration issues, said yesterday at an event in Washington. “The right is the problem.”

The chamber, the largest U.S. business-lobbying group, and President Barack Obama’s administration are seeking to rewrite immigration laws, which they say limits access to workers. House Republicans say they will take up the issue this year after declining to consider a Senate-passed bill last year.

Johnson said Tea Party-backed candidates and Republicans aren’t the chief obstacles to change.

“This issue doesn’t divide by the so-called Tea Party or non-Tea Party members,” he said, adding that the chamber has had more than 150 meetings with lawmakers and their staffs on Capitol Hill to discuss the issue.

Evangelical groups’ support can help win over conservatives, Johnson said. In November, the Southern Baptist Convention and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops joined the chamber in urging Congress to act on the issue.

The event co-sponsored by the chamber featured former Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Michigan Governor Rick Snyder -- both Republicans -- and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, founder and majority owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is wooing religious groups to overcome opposition of conservative lawmakers to immigration-law revisions as Congress is poised to consider the issue.

“The left has never been the problem on this,” Randel Johnson, the chamber’s senior vice president for labor and immigration issues, said yesterday at an event in Washington. “The right is the problem.”

The chamber, the largest U.S. business-lobbying group, and President Barack Obama’s administration are seeking to rewrite immigration laws, which they say limits access to workers. House Republicans say they will take up the issue this year after declining to consider a Senate-passed bill last year.

Johnson said Tea Party-backed candidates and Republicans aren’t the chief obstacles to change.

“This issue doesn’t divide by the so-called Tea Party or non-Tea Party members,” he said, adding that the chamber has had more than 150 meetings with lawmakers and their staffs on Capitol Hill to discuss the issue.

Evangelical groups’ support can help win over conservatives, Johnson said. In November, the Southern Baptist Convention and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops joined the chamber in urging Congress to act on the issue.

The event co-sponsored by the chamber featured former Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Michigan Governor Rick Snyder -- both Republicans -- and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, founder and majority owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP.

Economic Growth

“The reality is without immigration our workforce down the road doesn’t grow,” Gutierrez said. “And if our workforce doesn’t grow, our economy doesn’t grow.”  

Obama may speak on the immigration issue in his Jan. 28 State of the Union speech, and Congress plans to take up the issue in the coming weeks.

House Republicans have said they plan to move piecemeal legislation on immigration this year. They are are drafting a statement of principles that would guide their effort, and an agreement could come next week at their annual retreat.

Republicans have tied support for immigration changes with tougher border security. Some elements have already advanced in committee and probably would be included in any deal. The issue yet to be resolved is how to deal with 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S.

Cantor, Ryan

While Republican House leaders -- including Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan -- have backed some path to gaining legal status, even if citizenship is never an option. Opponents say even that would count as amnesty, which would draw fire from conservatives.

**Yep - it's a lot like saying you're "a little" pregnant.

The Senate in June passed 68-32 the most significant revision of U.S. immigration law in a generation. The bill’s backers had hoped the vote would pressure the Republican-controlled House to act.

The Senate measure would create a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants now in the U.S., while directing $46.3 billion to shore up the border with Mexico. The border provisions -- the costliest plan ever -- were added on the Senate floor to win Republican support.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on January 26, 2014, 02:48:00 am
This back and forth in US politics is getting really old! Arguing over topics simply for the sake of their respective political parties is a joke and an insult.

If there were a place on this planet I could go to separate myself from the world's government's, I'd be gone in a nanosecond. Unfortunately, there is no place, as all the land mass on the planet is claimed by somebody, and under the rule of some government. You can't simply say you no longer want to be a citizen of a country, as there is nowhere to go.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on January 31, 2014, 09:57:53 am
Immigration officials warn of amnesty ‘overload’

The officers who would be charged with approving millions of applications from illegal immigrants for legal status warned Congress this week that they can’t handle the workload, and said the change would guarantee criminals and others would be approved to remain in the country.

In a letter to House Republicans, who are planning to announce principles Thursday that would include legal status for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants already in the U.S., the labor union that represents U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers and adjudicators predicted it would be a disaster.

“There is no quality here, only quantity,” said Kenneth Palinkas, president of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council. “USCIS is not equipped to handle this workload, and due to political interference in its mission, is not empowered to deny admission to all those who should be denied due to ineligibility. We have become a visa clearinghouse for the world, rather than the first line of defense for a secure immigration system.”

Mr. Palinkas went on to say that any proposal that pushes millions of applications through would “overload the system.”

The letter was addressed specifically to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Robert W. Goodlatte, a Virginia Republican whose panel has jurisdiction over most of the key questions surrounding immigration policy.

While the law enforcement side of the immigration issue has gotten the most attention, analysts have warned that a major test for any legalization program would be whether the government bureaucracy could process the millions of applications.

Key questions include what documents would be accepted to prove someone meets the criteria for legal status and whether adjudicators would interview every applicant, which would take longer but would be more likely to weed out criminals or fraudulent applications.

Obama administration officials have said they would be ready if and when Congress orders them to begin processing.

They point to President Obama’s non-deportation policy for young adults, imposed last year, which granted tentative legal status to at least 400,000 illegal immigrants in its first year, as a test-run for a broader legalization.

The new union warning letter, however, indicates that the rank-and-file officers who make the judgments have less confidence that the system will be ready.

House Republicans are gathered at a retreat in Maryland on Thursday to talk about how to proceed on immigration. Party leaders want to pass bills that would grant some form of legal status to most illegal immigrants, and would grant a specific path to citizenship to young illegal immigrants.

The Senate passed a more generous bill last year that would grant a full specific pathway to citizenship to most illegal immigrants.

Mr. Palinkas asked for House Republicans to consult with his union before drawing up any final plans. He and the leaders of the unions representing the Border Patrol and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and officers have made similar requests to both the House and Senate.

Mr. Palinkas also took specific aim at House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, who has pushed for a path to citizenship for young illegal immigrants, known as “Dreamers.” Mr. Palinkas took issue with Mr. Cantor saying that granting them citizenship was in line with the founding principles of the U.S.

“If this were true, that would mean that all future Dreamers have a right to amnesty, as every immigration law is bypassed and permanently void. I hope, as the top member of the Judiciary panel, you would reject this language without hesitation,” Mr. Palinkas said in his letter to Mr. Goodlatte.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 11, 2014, 09:11:22 pm
Gay Rights Can Unlock Immigration Reform

As Bloomberg View wrote last week, American views on immigration have been changing very, very quickly.

In 1986, the last time Congress passed comprehensive immigration legislation, easing the way to citizenship for several million undocumented immigrants, the public was in no mood to host newcomers. A Gallup poll that year showed 49 percent of Americans supported a decrease in immigration, while only 7 percent supported an increase. Another 35 percent endorsed the "current level" of immigration.

The change in views has been astonishingly rapid. Since dipping to 8 percent in the fearful wake of Sept. 11, support for increased immigration has risen remarkably, hitting 23 percent in the most recent Gallup poll in July 2013. In the same poll, support for decreased immigration, which was 50 percent in the wake of the economic meltdown in 2009, hit a record low of 35 percent. An April 2013 polling report by Public Opinion Strategies, a top Republican polling firm, stated: "It is clear that Americans' attitudes have shifted to be much more positive over time when it comes to the perceived impact of immigration." In November 2006, the firm found 64 percent of Americans saying immigration "hurts more than helps," while only 36 percent said it "helps more than hurts." By March 2013, the views were upside down -- 48 percent said it "helps more," while 40 percent said it "hurts more."

What's going on?

I asked a few pollsters and immigration experts, via e-mail, whether a surge in cosmopolitanism -- for lack of a better word -- might be driving greater acceptance of immigrants. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 80 percent of Americans lived in an urban area in 2010, and 40 million residents are foreign-born. It's been a while since we were defined by "American Gothic." As economist Bryan Caplan points out, support for immigration reform is weakest in places where immigrants are fewest. In other words, exposure to immigrants -- and perhaps to diverse populations generally -- appears to be closely related to support for immigration.

"For me, it's pretty stunning that we had the Great Recession without a backlash against immigrants," Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg said. Of course, Arizona, Alabama and Georgia all passed anti-immigrant legislation even as border crossings from Mexico declined. But given how recent the economic crisis was, and how mediocre the economy has been since, support for immigrants is surprisingly strong. Greenberg points out that more than one-third of New York City residents are foreign-born; roughly 40 percent of Californians are. The U.S., he said, has "passed some tipping point on scale, density and familiarity" with immigrants. "Also, note that the undocumented used to concentrate around the border states, but with stronger border enforcement, they are much less likely to return to Mexico and have dispersed to metro areas around the country."

"The average American lives somewhere where the immigrant population is large or growing, they have personal connections, and the average American knows that immigrants are not stealing jobs or siphoning social services, they are working hard and contributing to America," wrote Matt Barreto, a pollster for Latino Decisions. "The DREAM movement really gave a public face to this cause, showing hard-working, assimilated young American immigrants who want a chance to continue their educations and be able to contribute more fully to their home country."

Asked about the current historical anomaly of strong public support for immigrants, Marshall Fitz, an expert at the liberal Center for American Progress, wrote: "Americans are much more comfortable with diversity than ever before, that is also an historical anomaly. But I think the reason is the sweeping nature of the demographic shifts. They have diminished (somewhat) the fear of the 'other.' Relatedly, millennials are growing up in a far more diverse society than we did and they don't even have to react to a demographic shift -- it's what they know. And the influence of millennials on cultural norms is significant."

One of the changing norms, as Peter Beinart explains, is belief in American exceptionalism. Only 27 percent of 18- to 29-year-old Americans agree that "the U.S. stands above all other countries." Among Americans age 65 and over, 50 percent agree.

"Think of it as somewhat similar to support for same-sex marriage," Barreto wrote of growing support for immigration. "Among younger folks, let's say under 35, things like gay rights and immigrant rights are not controversial, because they have grown up knowing more people who are gay or who are immigrants. So as the immigrant population increases and becomes more visible -- AND -- the overall U.S. population ages, the people who are 18 and over voicing their opinions in surveys are becoming more tolerant of diversity issues as a whole."

Welcome to cosmopolitan, internationalist, increasingly gay- and immigrant-friendly 2014. Unless, of course, you happen to live and work on Capitol Hill.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on February 12, 2014, 02:21:21 am
"The average American lives somewhere where the immigrant population is large or growing, they have personal connections, and the average American knows that immigrants are not stealing jobs or siphoning social services, they are working hard and contributing to America," wrote Matt Barreto, a pollster for Latino Decisions.

Yeah, we know all about "pollsters"! Pick a poll to get whatever results you want.

But this guy obviously is pushing a lie, because I live in one of those areas, and his claims simply aren't true.

- They do in fact steal jobs from legitimate citizens, as evidenced by the immigration raids done all the time here in Phoenix

- Social services are SWAMPED with immigrants here! Just go to any state welfare office and tell me who you see. You'd think you were in Mexico, seriously!

- Hard working? Another lie. They take what work they want at the time and can get away with without being arrested.

- There's no contributing to America, except for it's downfall. They are taking and taking from America's social services and medical facilities, and give NOTHING back. Don't believe it? Go to any Arizona emergency room and see who's waiting there. And also, take a look at all the illegal immigrant criminals that are arrested each year here, and notice what race they are. The vast majority are illegals from Mexico, if they don't get away and slither back across the border.

The real truth is that the socialist Hispanic lobby in the US is stone-cold racists that could care less about the US (can you say "La Raza"?). They want the southwest for themselves, their precious "Aztlan".

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on February 24, 2014, 08:33:56 pm
US Chamber of Commerce Pres: Pass Amnesty Now Before It Gets Tougher

Saying the political landscape will not be more conducive to amnesty legislation in two or four years, U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue wrote on Monday that immigration reform must happen now.

Donohue has previously said that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce would "pull out all the stops" to get immigration reform this year. The group reportedly plans to spend $50 million to blunt the influence of the Tea Party, largely because it opposes amnesty, and millions more to push for immigration reform legislation that the Congressional Budget Office has said would lower the wages of American workers.

Donohue wrote that "a system in which more than 11 million undocumented immigrants are living and working in our communities in de facto amnesty is indefensible" and claimed that "immigrants do not typically compete with Americans for jobs" and "serve as a complement to U.S.-born workers and can help fill labor shortages across the skill spectrum and in key sectors."

He claims that "support for reform has never been stronger" even though Gallup found that only three percent of Americans view it as a top issue. He also said amnesty proponents "include lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, as well as labor, business, law enforcement, ethnic organizations, religious groups, and the high-tech industry" without mentioning that many of these groups are front-groups supported by left-wing donors like George Soros.

"There will never be a perfect time for reform. The political landscape isn’t going to be any more conducive to reform in two years or four years," he wrote. "The case for immigration reform is clear. The need is undeniable. The time is now."

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) has repeatedly emphasized that big-business interests want immigration reform legislation to get cheaper labor at the expense of the those in America's working class that are struggling in Obama's economy.

“House leaders should support—not ignore—the immigration officers pleading for help,” Sessions has said. “They should stand with—not against—unemployed American workers. And they should expose—not join—the president’s campaign to pass an immigration plan that will hollow out our shrinking middle class.”

Amnesty proponents have a sense of urgency after momentum for the House GOP leadership's "immigration principles" stalled after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) blasted it as amnesty. Democrats who want amnesty like Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have said that this year is the last chance for amnesty legislation to pass.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on February 25, 2014, 01:07:11 am
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) has repeatedly emphasized that big-business interests want immigration reform legislation to get cheaper labor at the expense of the those in America's working class that are struggling in Obama's economy.

That is the bottom line! That is the fuel behind all of this.

Added on top of that is politicians that are getting behind "immigration reform" as a means for votes, just like they are doing for the gay lobby. It's all motivated by a specific group's agenda.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 03, 2014, 12:51:00 pm
U.S. Supreme Court declines immigration cases

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected attempts by towns in Texas and Pennsylvania to revive local laws that cracked down on illegal immigration.

The court decided against hearing appeals filed by the towns of Farmers Branch, Texas, and Hazleton, Pennsylvania, which were seeking to overturn appeals court rulings that said the ordinances were trumped by federal immigration law. In doing so, the court left intact the appeals court rulings and avoided wading into the divisive issue of immigration at a time in which reform efforts have stalled in the U.S. Congress.

Prompted by concerns that the federal government was not adequately enforcing immigration laws, officials in both towns enacted ordinances that, among other things, required tenants to provide identification that could later be verified with immigration authorities and penalized landlords from renting to illegal immigrants. The Hazleton ordinance also penalized employers for knowingly employing unlawful immigrants. Groups of tenants, landlords, employers and workers challenged the laws in court. They won in both cases, prompting the towns to seek Supreme Court review.

Advocates for immigrants say that five out of six federal courts of appeals that have dealt with similar housing-related ordinances have held that they conflict with the federal government's role as the primary enforcer of immigration law.

The outlier was the St. Louis, Missouri-based 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in June 2013 upheld an ordinance passed in the town of Fremont, Nebraska. That ordinance was different, lawyers opposing the laws say, because it did not penalize immigrants themselves, unlike the two ordinances at issue in the cases before the Supreme Court. Under both ordinances, tenants can be arrested and fined for occupying a residence without the necessary license.

The last time the court decided a major immigration case was in 2012 when it partially upheld Arizona's immigration law. The previous year, the court upheld another Arizona law that penalizes businesses for hiring illegal immigrants. In April 2013, the court signaled a reluctance to get further involved in immigration when it declined to hear an appeal from Alabama seeking to revive a section of the state's immigration law that criminalized the harboring of illegal immigrants.

The cases are City of Hazleton v. Lozano, 13-531 and City of Farmers Branch, 13-516.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 12, 2014, 04:22:35 pm
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer won't seek third term

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Kilika on March 13, 2014, 03:49:56 am
According to state law, she's done. Can't go another term, and quite frankly, Arizona doesn't need another 4 years from that...uh...person.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on March 24, 2014, 11:42:37 pm
Latinos being left behind in health care overhaul

WASHINGTON (AP) — The nation's largest minority group risks being left behind by President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.

Hispanics account for about one-third of the nation's uninsured, but they seem to be staying on the sidelines as the White House races to meet a goal of 6 million sign-ups by March 31.

Latinos are "not at the table," says Jane Delgado, president of the National Alliance for Hispanic Health, a nonpartisan advocacy network. "We are not going to be able to enroll at the levels we should be enrolling at."

That's a loss both for Latinos who are trying to put down middle-class roots and for the Obama administration, experts say.

Hispanics who remain uninsured could face fines, not to mention exposing their families to high medical bills from accidents or unforeseen illness. And the government won't get the full advantage of a group that's largely young and healthy, helping keep premiums low in the new insurance markets.

"The enrollment rate for Hispanic-Americans seems to be very low, and I would be really concerned about that," says Brookings Institution health policy expert Mark McClellan. "It is a large population that has a lot to gain ... but they don't seem to be taking advantage." McClellan oversaw the rollout of Medicare's prescription drug benefit for President George W. Bush.

The Obama administration says it has no statistics on the race and ethnicity of those signing up in the insurance exchanges, markets that offer subsidized private coverage in every state. Consumers provide those details voluntarily, so federal officials say any tally would be incomplete and possibly misleading.

But concern is showing through, and it's coming from the highest levels.

"You don't punish me by not signing up for health care," Obama told Hispanic audiences during a recent televised town hall. "You're punishing yourself or your family."

Like a candidate hunting for votes in the closing days of a campaign, Obama was back on Hispanic airwaves Monday as Univision Radio broadcast his latest pitch.

"The problem is if you get in an accident, if you get sick, or somebody in your family gets sick, you could end up being bankrupt," the president said.

Only last September, three of five Latinos supported the national overhaul, according to the Pew Research Center. Approval dropped sharply during October, as technical problems paralyzed the health care rollout and the Spanish-language version of the HealthCare.gov website. Hispanics are now evenly divided in their views.

A big Gallup survey recently showed tepid sign-up progress. While the share of African-Americans who are uninsured dropped by 2.6 percentage points this year, the decline among Hispanics was just 0.8 percentage point.

In California, where Latinos account for 46 percent of those eligible for subsidized coverage through the exchange, they represented 22 percent of those who had enrolled by the end February and had also volunteered their race or ethnicity. The state is scrambling to improve its numbers in this week's home stretch.

Experts cite overlapping factors behind disappointing Latino sign-ups:

— A shortage of in-person helpers to guide consumers. "In our community, trust and confidence is so important — you want to make sure it's OK before you share all this personal information," Delgado said. There's been a lack of "culturally sensitive" outreach to Latinos, added Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas.

— Fear that applying for health care will bring unwelcome scrutiny from immigration authorities. The health insurance exchanges are only for citizens and legal U.S. residents, but many Hispanic families have mixed immigration status. Some members may be native born, while others might be here illegally. Obama has tried to dispel concerns, repeatedly saying that information on applications will not be shared with immigration authorities.

—The decision by many Republican-led states not to expand Medicaid, as they could under the law. With states like Texas and Florida refusing to expand Medicaid, many low-income Latinos will remain uninsured. However, Medicaid expansion is separate from coverage on the exchanges, which is available in every state. Latinos don't seem motivated to sign up for that, either.

— Technical difficulties that delayed the federal government's Spanish-language enrollment site. CuidadoDeSalud.gov has also had to cope with clunky translations.

Delgado's group is asking the administration to extend the March 31 deadline for Latinos who got tangled up in website problems. Officials say that's not likely. However, they haven't ruled out a little extra time for anyone who started an application but wasn't able to finish by the deadline.

A recent enrollment outreach event in Houston drew Mary Nunez, who works with her self-employed husband in the florist business. They have been uninsured since she lost her job last year. In that time, she's only been to a doctor once — to get a refill on blood-pressure medication.

"Praise the Lord, we haven't gotten sick," said Nunez, adding that she knows luck eventually will run out.

She made an appointment for in-person assistance to review her options on the Texas exchange. But since the couple's income fluctuates from month to month, she was uncertain how much they could afford. A deadline is looming, she noted, and "Hispanics always leave it for the last minute."


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 06, 2014, 08:33:55 pm
Jeb Bush says illegal immigration often 'an act of love'

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Jeb Bush, a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2016, said on Sunday that illegal immigrants who come to the United States to provide for their families are not committing a felony but an "act of love."

In comments at odds with the views of many in his party, Bush, the son of the 41st president and brother of the 43rd, said of the divisive immigration issue: "I think we need to kind of get beyond the harsh political rhetoric to a better place.

"I'm going to say this and it will be on tape and so be it," Bush said in an interview with Fox News host Shannon Bream in an event at the Texas presidential library of his father, George H.W. Bush.

"The way I look at this is someone who comes to our country because they couldn't come legally ... and they crossed the border because they had no other means to work, to be able to provide for their family, yes, they broke the law, but it's not a felony.

"It's an act of love, it's an act of commitment to your family.

Bush, 61, added: "I honestly think that that is a different kind of crime. There should be a price paid, but it shouldn't rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families."

Bush repeated at the event that he would decide on a presidential bid by the end of the year.

A comprehensive immigration reform bill passed the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate in June 2013 but has stalled in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

Republican lawmakers have cited deep divisions in the party over the issue, including granting legal status to 11 million undocumented immigrants.

A Republican Party review after the last presidential election had urged the party to embrace immigration reform to attract more Hispanic support. Democratic President Barack Obama, who was re-elected in 2012, won 71 percent of the Hispanic vote to Republican challenger Mitt Romney's 27 percent.

Recent polls have suggested that if he were to run, Bush, a former Florida governor, would be weighed down by Americans' lingering attitudes toward his brother, George W. Bush, who left office in January 2009 as one of the least popular presidents in U.S. history.

In a Washington Post/ABC News poll last month, nearly half the voters surveyed said they "definitely would not" vote for Jeb Bush in 2016 - a level of disapproval matched only by Romney. Even Bush's mother, former first lady Barbara Bush, has been lukewarm about the notion of another son running for president.

Asked by Bream about the critical considerations that would go into his decision on whether to run for the presidency, Bush said one was whether he could do it with a "hopeful, optimistic message" that avoids drawing him into a political "mudfight."

The other consideration, he said, "is it OK for my family?

Is it something that isn't a huge sacrifice for our family."

He added: "It turns out that not running has generated more interest than if I said I was running."

(Reporting by Peter Cooney; Editing by Jim Loney and Eric Walsh)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 21, 2014, 12:25:41 pm
Arizona Rejected by High Court on Immigrant-Harboring Law
By Greg Stohr  Apr 21, 2014 6:39 AM PT   39 Comments    Email  Print   

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to revive an Arizona law that made it a crime to harbor or transport people who are in the country illegally, as the justices steered clear of a new clash over immigration rules.

Rejecting Arizona’s appeal, the nation’s highest court today let stand an appellate ruling that said the law was unconstitutionally vague and ran afoul of U.S. immigration law.

The Arizona law was part of a 2010 effort by the state to reduce the influx of undocumented immigrants. The Supreme Court invalidated much of the crackdown in 2012, saying states must defer to the federal government on immigration policy.

The high court over the past year has rejected several bids by states and local governments for more power to curb illegal immigration. The justices turned away a similar appeal from Alabama last year.

The Arizona harboring rules were challenged by people and groups that said they might face prosecution for providing transportation and shelter to undocumented immigrants. Arizona argued that the challengers lacked the legal right to sue, contending that they needed to show a greater likelihood that they would face prosecution.

The state also argued that its harboring measure complies with federal statutes and the Constitution.

The case is Arizona v. Valle Del Sol, 13-806.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 23, 2014, 10:10:39 am
Boehner and House Republicans Aim to Pass Immigration Bill by Summer

Speaker of the House John Boehner, speaking to a group of donors at a Republican Party fundraiser last month, pledged that the House would pass several immigration bills this summer. Several attendees at the fundraiser told the Wall Street Journal’s Laura Meckler that Boehner said he was “hellbent on getting this done this year.”

One of Boehner’s House colleagues, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said during a recent trip to Silicon Valley that legislative action this year was “entirely possible,” with the House likely voting this summer on five to seven immigration bills. Carl Guardino, chief executive of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which hosted Goodlatte’s visit, related the congressman’s statement to the Journal.

On April 18, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) issued a statement expressing his apprehension about a possible House immigration vote. After noting that President Obama and congressional Democrats have “put their collective weight behind an immigration bill that delivers a sweeping amnesty for open borders groups and a huge guest worker surge for corporations,” Sessions observed that — according to the Wall Street Journal report — “House GOP leaders are considering a plan to move an apparently similar immigration plan this summer.”

Sessions warned that the move that the House Republican leadership seems intent on taking would be bad on several counts. The first of these is political: Since public trust in President Obama is at a record low, holding a vote on the type of immigrations bills likely to be introduced would amount to a reversal of the position the GOP took before the primary season. Such an about face would “represent a colossal breach of the public trust,” maintained the senator, because American workers count on Republicans to protect their jobs from guest workers and illegal immigrants.

Instead of helping the Obama administration pass legislation that would be detrimental to Americans, said Sessions, “Republicans must expose the harm the Administration has done — not join it in delivering a hammer blow to the middle class.”

In his news release, Sessions invited the voters to compare the White House-favored bill already passed by the Senate with its House counterpart, H.R. 15, and included a link to remarks the senator made on January 30 as an aid in making this comparison (click here).

In his January statement, issued after House GOP Leaders released a set of immigration principles/talking points, Sessions said that “the leadership talking points look like an attempted repackaging of the tired Gang-of-Eight-style formula that has been proposed, rejected, and re-proposed for years.”

H.R. 15, the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act,” has some glaring major flaws. A review of the bill by the Federation for American Immigration Reform notes:

Democrats describe the legislation as the Senate Gang of Eight’s bill with alternative “border security” provisions. As put by [Nancy] Pelosi herself, H.R. 15 contains the “best of the Senate bill,” without the Corker-Hoeven “border surge” amendment, and with the McCaul-Jackson Lee border bill (H.R. 1417) in its place. Which “border security” provisions the bill contains, however, is completely irrelevant given that: (1) neither actually takes any real steps to secure our nation’s borders, and (2) the bill still contains S. 744’s core amnesty-first, enforcement-later (probably never) approach.

Sessions also made a strong statement about the Gang of Eight’s bill after it was passed last June by a 68 to 32 vote:

This proposal would economically devastate low-income American citizens and current legal immigrants. It will pull down their wages and reduce their job prospects. Including those legalized, this bill would result in at least 30 million new foreign workers over a 10-year period — more than the entire population of the state of Texas.

In contrast, President Obama praised the vote, stating: “Today, with a strong bipartisan vote, the United States Senate delivered for the American people, bringing us a critical step closer to fixing our broken immigration system once and for all.”

Among the senators who opposed the Gang of Eight bill were Sessions (naturally), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), and Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Among those voting for it were Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and both Arizona Republicans, John McCain and Jeff Flake. Rubio, McCain, and Flake were among the Gang of Eight who hammered out the bill. The other members were Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

In criticizing House Republican plans to schedule a vote on a bill based on the Senate bill, Sessions echoes similar sentiments expressed by Cruz in January, when he blasted his Republican colleagues in the House for crafting an immigration plan that he denounced as “amnesty.” “I think it would be a mistake if House Republicans were to support amnesty for those here illegally,” he said when asked about a proposal to be included in the House Republicans’ immigration principles statement.

“In my view we need to secure the borders, we need to stop illegal immigration,” Cruz said during a Bloomberg News breakfast. “And we need to improve and streamline legal immigration.”

As for whether the House will follow through on a group of immigration bills this summer, some analysts have pointed to the recent phone conversation between House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and President Obama on April 16 to discuss immigration legislation as an indication that the House and the president are at odds and unlikely to cooperate. Earlier in the day, the president had criticized the GOP’s inaction, asserting, “The majority of Americans are ahead of House Republicans on this crucial issue.”

Following his conversation with Obama, Cantor made the following statement:

Today, President Obama called me to discuss his desire for comprehensive immigration reform. The President called me hours after he issued a partisan statement which attacked me and my fellow House Republicans and which indicated no sincere desire to work together. After five years, President Obama still has not learned how to effectively work with Congress to get things done. You do not attack the very people you hope to engage in a serious dialogue. I told the President the same thing I told him the last time we spoke. House Republicans do not support Senate Democrats’ immigration bill and amnesty efforts, and it will not be considered in the House. I also reiterated to the President there are other issues where we can find common ground, build trust and get America working again. I hope the President can stop his partisan messaging, and begin to seriously work with Congress to address the issues facing working middle class Americans who are struggling to make ends meet in this economy.

While Cantor’s statement may have served as good cheerleading for the Republican team, his description of the Gang of Eight-crafted Senate bill as the “Senate Democrats’ immigration bill and amnesty efforts” is, in itself, partisan grandstanding. Perhaps Cantor has forgotten that the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013 (S. 744) was a bipartisan creation formed by a committee that included John McCain, the GOP’s 2008 presidential standard bearer.

As one indication of the type of legislation that the GOP-controlled House will consider this summer, the Wall Street Journal reported that Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) is drafting legislation that “would give qualifying undocumented immigrants legal status and the chance to apply for citizenship through existing channels.”

House leaders have advised Diaz-Balart to have the legislation ready to go for possible debate in June or July, the Journal was told by an unnamed aide.

Despite the Journal’s use of the euphemisms “undocumented immigrants” for illegal aliens and “legal status” for amnesty, that is exactly what such legislation would accomplish.

Considering that the strongest opposition to immigration legislation that includes amnesty has come from the Senate, where Republicans are the minority, it appears that securing a majority position in Congress for the GOP does not necessarily serve to present much of an opposition to the Obama administration’s efforts to open our borders to a flood of illegal immigrants.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 24, 2014, 11:54:10 am
McCain: Illegal immigrants are 'not going home'

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Wednesday that immigrants living in the United States illegally are not going home, and that the U.S. has no practical way of forcing them to leave.

"They're not going home. And so why don't we give them a path to citizenship," McCain asked at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy Jr. forum.

"There are not enough buses to deport them," he added. "It's de facto amnesty."

The senator, who has pushed for immigration reform, said once Congress passes legislation he believes it will be named after the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.).

Kennedy and McCain had worked on a comprehensive bill in 2005 that eventually made it into a 2007 measure that failed to make it to a Senate vote.

McCain was a member of the "Gang of Eight," a group of senators that helped push an immigration reform bill through the Senate last year. House GOP leaders have refused to take up that version.

The senator emphasized the bill does not provide automatic amnesty.

"It's really tough," he said, adding it would take years for people's status to change. "If you keep these people in the shadows, it is a stain on America’s honor."

McCain also repeated his previous prediction that "the Republican Party will never win another nationwide election unless we enact comprehensive immigration reform."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on April 24, 2014, 09:49:27 pm
Atlanta-area evangelical leaders call for immigration overhaul

Atlanta-area evangelical leaders on Thursday called on Congress to pass legislation that would create a pathway to citizenship for immigrants living illegally in the U.S.

They are part of the Evangelical Table, a coalition of faith leaders who support revamping the nation’s immigration system “consistent with biblical values.” The coalition’s statement of principles also calls for respecting the rule of law and securing the nation’s borders.

Several Georgia members of the coalition held a news conference about their cause Thursday at First Baptist Church of Tucker. Some are planning to travel Tuesday to Washington to meet with congressmen.

“We find that over and over again,” said David Park, pastor of Open Table Community, an Evangelical Free Church of America location in Chamblee, “God instructs his people to love and welcome immigrants, to ensure they are treated justly, and to protect the unity of the family, the institution that God has established as the cornerstone of society.”

Evangelicals are divided on the topic. Another group — Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration — has issued an open letter calling on Congress to scrap the Senate’s bipartisan immigration legislation and start over, saying it is “flawed to the point of being unworkable.” Now stalled in the Republican-led House, the Senate bill would create a route to citizenship for millions of immigrants without legal status.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 18, 2014, 02:06:58 pm
Rick Perry: 'We Don't Have the Resources' to Secure Texas Border

HOUSTON, Texas—Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) appeared on Fox News’ Fox and Friends show and said Texas lacks the resources and manpower to secure the 1,200 mile Texas border with Mexico. The comment sent shock waves through a Texas grassroots discussion thread on Facebook this morning of activists who are seeking a special session call from the Governor to deal with the issue of border security.

In the video, Governor Perry tells the hosts of Fox and Friends, "We don't have the resources, nor the manpower to be able to do that (secure the border) for the 1,200 miles. If we did, we would." The comment came after about three minutes of his explaining the historical perspective of how we got to this point and pointing his finger of blame at the Obama Administration for not securing the southern border of the United States.

Other Texas elected officials, speaking on condition of anonymity have told Breitbart Texas that Texas does, in fact, have the resources to conduct not only a surge operation, but a prolonged border control operation that would secure the Texas border with Mexico. As for the surge operation, most, including Governor Perry, seem to be pointing the finger for the delay at Texas House Speaker Joe Straus.

Host Brian Kilmeade opened the segment asking Perry if he was shocked by the numbers of people crossing the border into Texas. “The numbers are shocking when you think about a thousand a day being apprehended along the border,” Perry said.

Perry explained these children are traveling across Mexico to get to the United States in “incredibly dangerous conditions.” “Your heart goes out to these kids, obviously,” Perry explained, “but the issue is, we should never be seeing this happening. Diplomatically, I think there is a huge breakdown between the United States and those countries (Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador) in being able to say, ‘wait a minute, what are you doing?’”

Perry discussed the ongoing efforts of Texans to secure its own border with Mexico. “We’ve been sounding that alarm and putting substantial Texas dollars into it,” Perry stated. “We have a request in for even more dollars going towards border security from the Texas standpoint. But it’s 1,200 miles and the idea that the State of Texas should be doing this, I get it, my citizens require me to keep them safe.” Perry goes on to explain the vast resources that Texas has expended along the border.

“This President,” Perry said in a pivot to the federal government, “… is totally and absolutely either inept or, [pausing] is making some decisions that are not in the best interest of American citizens, particularly from a public safety standpoint.”

Perry was asked why Obama has not done something to “stop this right now.” “I don’t know,” Perry responded. “We flagged this issue in 2012 and have yet to even have a response, as far as I know, not from the President, but not even from his administration. These unaccompanied alien children, and that is a huge issue, but also we have record high numbers of ‘other than Mexicans’ (OTM) being apprehended at the border.”

“These are people coming from states like Syria,” Perry explained, “that have substantial connections back to terrorist regimes and terrorist operations. We’re seeing record highs, historic high numbers of these individuals being apprehended.”

“I think, whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican,” he stated, “You need to be addressing this Mr. President. We know how to do this. We have surged into certain sectors of the border and shut down the illegal activities that are going on there.”

Many grassroots activists in Texas are calling on Perry to take a stronger lead on this issue and call a special session of the legislature to provide financial resources to Texas law enforcement to completely and immediately secure the border. An online petition drive was created over the weekend and now has over 3,000 signatures. The petition is titled “Request for Immediate Texas Border Control.”

One of the grassroots activists in the discussion thread, Holly Morse, a self described Tea Party Activist from Dallas, said, “He [Perry] seems to be just pointing the finger at Obama and just wanting to leave it up to him. We can't do that at this point. Surely Perry gets that. But what he doesn't get is that we are going to have to step up in Texas.”

Breitbart Texas contacted Governor Perry’s office for a comment about the petition and a potential special session. Press Secretary, Lucy Nashed responded, “I know you and I have discussed that the unaccompanied minor issue is one we've known about for years, the root cause of which is the unsecured border. That's why Texas has put hundreds of millions of dollars into personnel and resources to fill in where the federal government has failed.”

“Gov. Perry has also signed on to a letter with Lt. Gov. Dewhurst,” Nashed continued, “directing DPS to conduct a border surge operation in the coming months. This letter is awaiting approval from Speaker Straus.”

Responding to the call for a special session Nashed said, “As he does with calls for special session on any issue, the governor will take this into consideration.” Breitbart Texas contacted the Governor’s Office again asking for more clarification on the special session issue. A response has not yet been received for those questions.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 19, 2014, 01:39:48 pm
Rupert Murdoch Pushes for Immigration Reform in WSJ Op-Ed

Rupert Murdoch, the head of NewsCorp (the corporate owner of Fox News), penned an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal today in which he strongly advocates for immigration reform, an issue believed to have cost Eric Cantor his reelection at the hands of the tea party. And, in fact, Murdoch opens his op-ed by saying, “When I learned that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor had lost his Republican primary, my heart sank.”

He worries that Cantor’s loss would send Congress the wrong signal that immigration reform should be brushed aside, and declares, “One of the most immediate ways to revitalize our economy is by passing immigration reform.”

Murdoch makes the case that “immigrants enrich our culture and add to our economic prosperity,” and in addition, they are actually hard-working individuals.

    I don’t believe that people come to America to sit on their hands. The vast majority of America’s immigrants are hardworking, family-minded individuals with strong values. They are drawn here from many different places by a common belief that this is still the land of opportunity for those willing to work hard.

    We need to give those individuals who are already here—after they have passed checks to ensure they are not dangerous criminals—a path to citizenship so they can pay their full taxes, be counted, and become more productive members of our community.

Murdoch even takes a shot at “extreme” conservatives dead-set against immigration reform and argues that Congress must act on this issue because if they don’t, President Obama might do it by executive action, and no one wants to see the political avalanche of outrage that would ensue from that.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 19, 2014, 01:51:10 pm
Texas leaders OK millions for new border surge

AUSTIN — Texas’ top three lawmakers agreed Wednesday to spend tens of millions dollars to fund a surge operation along the border to deal with the influx of Central American children pouring into Texas.

Gov. Rick Perry, Lt. Gov David Dewhurst and House Speaker Joe Straus authorized a deal for emergency funding of $1.3 million per week for DPS surge operations that will run through at the least the end of the year.

Some 60,000 unaccompanied children and teens are expected to cross into the Texas border this year — up from about 6,560 in 2011. The stream of unaccompanied children has already caused a crisis, overwhelming Border Patrol facilities and sparking debate in Washington over what’s causing the calamity and how to handle it.

“Texas can’t afford to wait for Washington to act on this crisis and we will not sit idly by while the safety and security of our citizens are threatened,” Perry said in a statement. “Until the federal government recognizes the danger it’s putting our citizens in by its inaction to secure the border, Texas law enforcement must do everything they can to keep our citizens and communities safe.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 21, 2014, 04:46:56 pm
US to open immigrant family detention centers

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration is actively looking for additional space to house families caught crossing the border with Mexico illegally, primarily for mothers with young children, officials said.

Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas made the statement Friday amid a surge of migrants seeking to enter the United States from Central America.

Mayorkas did not say how many people the new family detention centers would house or where they will be located. The government currently operates only one such facility, in Berks County, Pennsylvania, with space for fewer than 100 people.

Mayorkas said about 39,000 adults with children have been apprehended at the border since the start of the budget year in October. The administration has released an unspecified number of them into the U.S. in recent months with instructions to report later to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices. Mayorkas, the No. 2 official at the agency and former head of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, told reporters he didn't know how many people have been released or subsequently appeared as ordered.

Mayorkas said the administration will also send more immigration judges, ICE attorneys and other immigration officials to the region to help process migrants caught crossing the border illegally and, when possible, quickly return them to their home countries.

Immigrants crossing the border illegally have overwhelmed U.S. immigration agencies. More than 174,000 people, mostly from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, have been arrested in Texas' Rio Grande Valley this year.

Other announcements the administration made about illegal immigration from Central America Friday include:

—The administration will give the governments of Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala $9.6 million to help local authorities reintegrate returned immigrants.

—The U.S. Agency for International Development will launch a $40 million program to help improve citizen security in Guatemala. USAID will also start a $25 million crime and violence prevention program in El Salvador.

—More than $18 million will be used to support community policing and law enforcement efforts to combat gangs in Honduras under the Central American Regional Security Initiative, or CARSI. The U.S. government will also provide $161.5 million for CARSI programs focused on security and government challenges in the region.

The spike in border crossers — southern Texas is now the busiest border crossing in the country — prompted the Homeland Security Department earlier this year to start sending families to other parts of Texas and Arizona for processing before releasing them at local bus stops.

Family detention has long been a contentious issue for Homeland Security. In 2009 the department was forced to shutter a large family detention center in Texas after legal challenges about the conditions of the facility. And in 2012, ICE abandoned plans to accept bids for a new family detention center in Texas amid complaints from advocates about the possibility of housing immigrant families in jails.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security said Friday that the first new family detention center would be a 700-bed facility on the grounds of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Artesia, New Mexico. U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce told the Roswell Daily Record that the new detention facility planned for New Mexico would only be for immigrant families, not unaccompanied minors, and could be a temporary stop before deportation.

Also on Friday, the leader of the House of Representatives, Speaker John Boehner, urged President Barack Obama to send troops to the southern border to help deal with the surge of children and other migrants. More than 52,000 children traveling alone have been caught crossing the border illegally since October.

Former President George W. Bush deployed thousands of troops to the border during his second term to augment the Border Patrol as it bolstered its ranks. Since then, the agency has nearly doubled to more than 20,000 agents and the number of migrants caught crossing the border illegally has declined overall.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 23, 2014, 02:01:05 pm
Judge strikes down Montana immigrant law

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — A Montana judge struck down most of a 2012 voter-approved law requiring government officials to conduct immigration checks on anybody seeking services provided by the state — from unemployment benefits to crime-victim assistance.

The law, which aims to deny government jobs and assistance to people in the U.S. illegally, required Montana agencies to check legal status when a person applied for any state service. If the person was not in the country legally, the agency must turn over the name to federal immigration officials.

The ruling is the latest test of a law approved during a wave of immigration crackdowns nationwide. Last week, a federal judge in Utah upheld part of a 2011 law in that state that allows authorities to check the citizenship of those stopped for traffic infractions — within certain limits — but struck down other provisions, such as warrantless arrests on suspicion of immigration status.

In Montana, nearly 80 percent of voters approved the state's law in a 2012 referendum, but it has not been enforced since an immigration-rights group filed a legal challenge.

District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock of Helena said in his Friday order that it conflicts with federal immigration laws by attempting to regulate immigration, which is exclusively a federal power.

The law, known as Legislative Referendum 121, makes up its own definition of "illegal alien" that is not defined in federal law, Sherlock said. That means state officials would be making their own determination of immigration status, which should only be done by authorized federal agents, he said.

"This is the crux of the problem with the enactment," Sherlock wrote in the order.

Sherlock allowed one provision of the law to stand, saying it doesn't conflict with federal law. It requires state officials to report to immigration officials the name of a person who is not in the U.S. legally.

Attorney Shahid Haque-Hausrath, who challenged the law on behalf of the Montana Immigrant Justice Alliance, said the reporting provision shouldn't matter as long as the rest of the law is struck down.

"That shouldn't be of any significance because agencies won't be screening or asking any questions," Haque-Hausrath said Monday. "That was the heart of LR 121."

State attorneys just received the ruling Monday and no decision has been made on whether to appeal, Montana Department of Justice spokesman John Barnes said.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 24, 2014, 12:12:57 pm
Doctor Says Illegal Immigration’s Causing ‘Public Health Crisis’
Fox News contributor Dr. Marc Siegel said a public health crisis is emerging because illegal immigrants are carrying diseases across the border, and the Centers for Disease Control ought to get involved.

“We need the CDC involved — right now it’s Homeland Security,” Siegel said Monday on “Fox and Friends.”

Unlike legal immigrants, illegal immigrants obviously are not being screened for diseases, Siegel explained, and that’s a public health problem. “We’re not talking enough about the medical side of [illegal immigration],” he said.

The recent influx of illegal immigrants is reigniting worries over diseases, such as tuberculosis, scabies, dengue fever, measles and even leprosy.

Siegel said 10 to 25 percent of illegal immigrants coming to the U.S. have scabies, which is a highly contagious skin condition with intense itching and a rash because of a mite. Tuberculosis is reemerging in a dangerous drug resistant strain, he added, and dangue fever, which causes fatigue and muscle aches, is emerging in Texas.

“Now, I don’t want to scare anyone there out there more than I already have,” Siegel continued. “Leprosy — extremely rare. And for dangue fever, you need mosquitoes … but they’re starting to breed now in south Texas. This is a major problem in Texas and Arizona now.”

Because of the disease risks, Dr. Siegel recommends that parents ensure their children are getting the proper vaccinations before the school year starts. He is also urging doctors to look for the signs of these diseases in their patients.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/23/doctor-says-illegal-immigrations-causing-public-health-crisis-video/#ixzz35UVpNBrq

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on June 28, 2014, 03:24:55 pm
Pelosi on the Border: We Have to Use This 'Crisis' as an 'Opportunity'

Saturday at a press conference from the Rio Grande Valley, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) discussed her tour of a border holding facility and addressed the humanitarian crisis of thousands unaccompanied minors flooding across the U.S.-Mexico border, which she called a "humanitarian opportunity."

Pelosi explained, "We are all Americans -- north and south in this hemisphere," and urged America to see this as not a crisis but an opportunity "to be helpful." She also said she wished she could simply "take home" the thousands of children temporarily housed in the overburden facilities.

According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, in the past fiscal year more than 47,000 unaccompanied children have crossed the border into the United States through Mexico with the majority coming from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 28, 2014, 05:21:01 pm
Pelosi on the Border: We Have to Use This 'Crisis' as an 'Opportunity'

Saturday at a press conference from the Rio Grande Valley, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) discussed her tour of a border holding facility and addressed the humanitarian crisis of thousands unaccompanied minors flooding across the U.S.-Mexico border, which she called a "humanitarian opportunity."

Pelosi explained, "We are all Americans -- north and south in this hemisphere," and urged America to see this as not a crisis but an opportunity "to be helpful." She also said she wished she could simply "take home" the thousands of children temporarily housed in the overburden facilities.

According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, in the past fiscal year more than 47,000 unaccompanied children have crossed the border into the United States through Mexico with the majority coming from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador.


And to boot - these recent GOP vs Tea Party election fiascos are doing just that...being a DISTRACTION away from agendas like this.(ie-MSM has been pretty quiet over this)

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 28, 2014, 10:07:44 pm
Dick Durbin: Obama to 'borrow' Constitutional power to rule on immigration

If House Republicans do not act on immigration in the way Barack Obama wants soon, then the president will simply "borrow" Congress' legislative powers and unilaterally rule on the issue, bypassing Congress once again, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said Thursday.

"I don't know how much more time he thinks he needs, but I hope that Speaker Boehner will speak up today," Durbin said. "And if he does not, the president will borrow the power that is needed to solve the problems of immigration."

Democrats have issued an ultimatum to Republicans in the House, telling them that if they do not do Obama's bidding on immigration by the end of July, the president will simply adopt the mantle of dictator and rule on his own.

"We're at the end of the line," Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., told reporters. "We're not bluffing by setting a legislative deadline for them to act."

On Wednesday, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., repeated his call for unilateral action when he declared immigration dead in the House and demanded Obama issue an executive order to curb deportations.

“Having been given ample time and space to craft legislation, you failed, the president now has no other choice but to act within existing law to ensure that our deportation policies are humane, that due-process rights are protected, that detention conditions are as they should be, and most importantly — that the people we are deporting are detriments to our communities, not assets to our families, economy, and society,” he said.

But the Constitution does not allow for Obama to simply "borrow" congressional power as Durbin suggests or write laws when he believes Congress is not acting as he wishes.

"The President does not 'borrow power.' He grabs it. He overreaches. He acts lawlessly. But, no, he can't borrow power like a library book," Cruz aide Amanda Carpenter tweeted.

"The White House saying it is going to 'borrow' power from Congress should send shivers down every American's spine," another person tweeted.

The Hill said Durbin's threat came a day after House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, announced legislation allowing the House to sue Obama for overstepping his Constitutional authority.

"When there is a failure on the part of the president to faithfully execute the law, the House has the authority to challenge this failure," Boehner said Wednesday.

But is a lawsuit enough to stop Obama from wielding his pen and his phone or ruling like the movie character "Judge Dredd?"

For years, various Republicans have threatened impeachment -- the Constitutional cure Judge Andrew Napolitano said is the only way Congress can stop Obama's executive actions. But nothing has been done and grassroots conservatives are becoming weary of talk with no action.

On Friday, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., tried to ease the minds of constituents concerned about Obama's executive overreach with an email saying the Constitution's system of checks and balances will ultimately keep the president under control, as it did when the Supreme Court unanimously ruled Obama's recess appointments to the NRLB unconstitutional.

"I want you to know that I am listening," she said. "I am working with my colleagues in Congress to hold the Administration accountable to you – and I am more confident than ever that our system of checks and balances will prevail."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 29, 2014, 09:32:13 pm
Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins announces plan for county to house up to 2,000 children from Texas border

Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins said Saturday that the county would house and care for hundreds of unaccompanied children in the country illegally from Central American and Mexico.

Jenkins told delegates at the Texas Democratic Convention that the federal government would pick up the cost for the effort, which would be centered in Dallas and another city inside the county.

The unaccompanied minors could start arriving here at the end of July, Jenkins said.

“My hope is that when Dallas County steps up, the state and others will step up as well,” Jenkins said in a news conference after his convention speech.

Jenkins said Dallas and the unnamed city would each house up to 1,000 children. He did not say which facilities would be used for the kids, except that they could be in the form of unoccupied schools, hospitals or large buildings.

Though the plan does not have to be approved by the commissioners court, Jenkins said there would be community meetings. He added that Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings was on board.

The county, according to Jenkins, would have a contract to house the children for 120 days. Depending on the state of the crisis, the children could be in Dallas County much longer.

Jenkins said he was hopeful that churches and other community organizations would get involved in the process.

“It’s a great opportunity for our community to show compassion,” he said.

Dallas County Sheriff Lupe Valdez supported Jenkins’ efforts.

“There are human beings, little children, that we need to take care of,” she said.

Jenkins said he reached out to federal officials after his eight-year-old daughter express concerned about the children flooded across the border. She even offered Jenkins Highland Park home as a potential site, saying it would be fun to play with other little girls.

“We cannot turn our backs on the children that are already here,” Jenkins said.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on June 30, 2014, 06:05:40 pm
Obama seeks power to return immigrant children

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is asking Congress for increased powers to send unaccompanied children from Central America back home from the U.S. border they tried to cross illegally, setting up a confrontation with immigration activists.

In a letter to congressional leaders Monday, Obama also is asking for increased penalties for persons who smuggle immigrants who are vulnerable, such as children. The request is part of a broader administration response to what the White House has called a "humanitarian crisis" on the border.

Obama is asking Congress for emergency money that would, among other things, help conduct "an aggressive deterrence strategy focused on the removal and repatriation of recent border crossers."

Obama's letter to House Speaker John Boehner, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell says the administration is confronting the influx with a coordinated response on both sides of the border.

"This includes fulfilling our legal and moral obligation to make sure we appropriately care for unaccompanied children who are apprehended, while taking aggressive steps to surge resources to our Southwest border to deter both adults and children from this dangerous journey, increase capacity for enforcement and removal proceedings, and quickly return unlawful migrants to their home countries," Obama wrote.

The Border Patrol in South Texas has been overwhelmed for several months by an influx of unaccompanied children and parents traveling with young children from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. Unlike Mexican immigrants arrested after entering the U.S. illegally, those from Central America cannot be as easily returned to their countries. Obama is seeking authority to act more quickly

The Border Patrol has apprehended more than 52,000 child immigrants traveling on their own since October.

Immigrant advocacy groups, already frustrated by Obama's lack of executive action to ease record levels of deportations, immediately pounced on the administration's decision.

"President Obama is asking Congress to change the law to enable the government to inflict expedited removal on unaccompanied children. That is simply unconscionable," said Leslie A. Holman, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "No matter what you call it, rapid deportations without any meaningful hearing for children who are rightly afraid of the violence and turmoil from which they fled is wrong, and contradicts the fundamental values of this nation."

Under current law, children arriving at the border from Central America have a right to an immigration hearing before a judge, but under Obama's proposed changes, which must be approved by Congress, that would no longer be automatic and instead the kids would have to make their case to a Border Patrol agent, advocates said.

Marielena Hincapie, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, said the influx of children across the border "really requires a humanitarian response, not an increase in deportations."

Obama's attempt to speed up deportations of the Central American immigrants comes as immigration advocates have been pressing the administration to take steps to slow deportations in the face of congressional inaction on comprehensive immigration legislation. Advocates expressed frustration that after a year where immigration legislation offering the promise of citizenship went nowhere in the GOP-led House, the administration is seeking votes on an immigration crackdown instead.

The response from some Republicans was not favorable either. Rep. Bob Goodlatte, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, accused Obama of seeking a "blank check" with no real solutions. "President Obama created this disaster at our southern border and now he is asking American taxpayers to foot the bill," said Goodlatte.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 05, 2014, 11:10:53 am
Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

The vast majority of 50,000 unaccompanied youths and children who have illegally crossed the Texas border during the last few months have been successfully delivered by federal agencies to their relatives living in the United States, according to a New York Times article.

A second New York Times article reports revealed that officials have caught an additional 240,000 Central American migrants since April, and are transporting many of them to their destinations throughout the United States.

The deluge of 290,000 illegals — so far — are exploiting legal loopholes that allow them to get temporary permits to stay in the United States.

Experts say that President Barack Obama’s administration has failed to close the loopholes and is unlikely to deport more than a small percentage of the illegals, despite the high unemployment rates among American Latino, African-American and white youths, and the strapped budgets of many cities and towns.

The president’s policy has caused protests by frightened citizens in towns such as Murrieta. But Obama’s allies — such as La Raza, an ethnic lobby for Latinos — are eager to escalate the conflict and to paint the protestors as racists. Those protests may escalate before the November elections.

The Central American parents of the 50,000 youths and children are using a 2008 law to ensure their children are transported to them for free by a relay of border patrol and Department of Health and Human Services officials. The youths are delivered to the border patrol by smugglers, dubbed coyotes, in exchange for several thousand dollars.

Half of the 50,000 Central American youths were delivered by taxpayer-funded employees directly to their parents now living in the United States, and another third were delivered to people who said they were close relatives, said the July 3 article.

That new data was included in the 19th paragraph of a 20-paragraph June 3 article.

Top immigration officials choose to not heck if the relatives or parents who pick up the children are in the country legally.

Both New York Times articles described the border-crossing illegal aliens as “immigrants.” In fact, “immigrants” is the term for people who legally migrate into the United States.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 07, 2014, 06:03:52 pm
Report: Obama Intent on Granting Temporary Amnesty to Millions More

President Barack Obama is reportedly set on using executive actions to give temporary amnesty to nearly 7 million more illegal immigrants in America this year, including the parents of illegal immigrant children.

According to National Journal, in a meeting with pro-amnesty activists last week, "Obama made it clear he would press his executive powers to the limit" and "gave quiet credence to recommendations from La Raza and other immigration groups that between 5 million to 6 million adult illegal immigrants could be spared deportation under a similar form of deferred adjudication he ordered for the so-called Dreamers in June 2012."

At least 670,000 illegal immigrants received temporary amnesty and work permits under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Obama has reportedly "now ordered the Homeland Security and Justice departments to find executive authorities that could enlarge that non-prosecutorial umbrella by a factor of 10."

Senior officials told National Journal that "Obama wants to see what he can do with executive power to provide temporary legal status to undocumented adults" and "will shift Immigration Control and Enforcement resources from the interior to the border to reduce deportations of those already here and to beef up defenses along the border." That means illegal immigrants who are already in the country who are not violent criminals are likely not to be deported, which may give migrants from Central America more incentive just to get across the border.

National Journal reported that Obama also said that "presidents must send the message that you can't just show up on the border, plead for asylum or refugee status, and hope to get it," but the White House may be doing exactly that by vowing to not rescind DACA. Those who received DACA can renew their status for another two years in September without an age cap. Those who were not 16 in 2012 but are now can apply for the first time, which means more illegal immigrants will get temporary amnesty this summer even if Obama doesn't enact any executive actions.

The flood of illegal immigrants from Central America has drastically increased after Obama enacted DACA by executive fiat.

As the Christian Science Monitor noted, "during the decade preceding fiscal year 2012, the federal government agency tasked with caring for unaccompanied minors who cross the border illegally dealt with an average of 7,000 to 8,000 cases a year." In fiscal year 2011, there were 6,560, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

The year after Obama enacted DACA, "the number jumped to 13,625," and "at least 50,000 have entered illegally since October of last year. Officials estimate at least 150,000-160,000 more will try next year."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 08, 2014, 11:06:57 am
Brewer's immigrant driver's license policy blocked

PHOENIX (AP) — Reyna Montoya is one of nearly 19,000 young immigrants in Arizona who have been allowed to stay in the U.S. under the Obama administration's deferred action policy, but the benefits of the program in the state have been limited.

As Montoya applies for teaching jobs, she considers herself competitively disadvantaged because Arizona hasn't allowed her to get a driver's license as the federal policy allows.

She was among those cheering a decision by a federal appeals court that on Monday ruled the state cannot deny driver's licenses to immigrants in the program. The three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals suggested the policy was intended to express hostility toward the young immigrants, in part because of the deferred action policy.

"We are celebrating now, but we are going to have to continue to organize," Montoya said, noting that it's not the only example of difficulties she and others face.

Montoya said her counterparts in Arizona often struggle to pay for college, because the state requires those receiving deferred action assistance to pay out-of-state tuition, which is more expensive.

The program was created by the Obama administration in 2012 to help immigrants younger than 30 who came to the U.S. illegally as children. Applicants must have been in the country for at least five continuous years, enrolled in or have graduated from a high school or GED program or have served in the military. Aside from allowing driver's licenses, the program also permits young immigrants to pursue a two-year renewable work permit.

States have imposed various restrictions on benefits such immigrants are able to obtain, and Arizona's denial of licenses was one of the most visible challenges to the Obama administration's deferred deportation policy. A separate court battle is playing out in Arizona over a community college system that wants to grant in-state tuition to the immigrants — an effort the state attorney general has challenged.

Arizona was one of two states that refused to issue licenses to the immigrants, sparking the latest court fight over the issue.

Republican Gov. Jan Brewer called the ruling misguided and said she was considering appeal.

The appeals court ruling follows other high-profile battles between Arizona and the federal government over immigration, including court decisions that struck down much of a 2010 enforcement law but upheld its most hotly debated section, which requires police to check immigration status under certain circumstances.

"We hope that this ruling signals the end of what has been an unfortunate anti-immigrant period in Arizona," said Karen Tumlin, one of the attorneys representing the immigrants.

The decision should remove any barriers young immigrants face in getting a driver's license in Arizona, Tumlin said.

The ruling comes during a national focus on the topic as tens of thousands of immigrants from Central America — many unaccompanied children — have illegally entered the country in recent months, straining the capacity of detention centers along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Brewer issued an executive order in August 2012 directing state agencies to deny driver's licenses and other public benefits to young immigrants who get work authorization under the deferred action program.

Brewer pointed out that the judges who ruled against her were appointed by Democratic presidents. The governor blames Obama's policy for the recent influx of immigrants entering the country illegally and notes that the program isn't federal law. "Lawless decrees by the president demonstrate animus to Congress, states and the Constitution," Brewer said.

The appeals panel ordered a lower court judge to issue a preliminary injunction blocking Brewer's executive order while the case is litigated. It's unknown how long it will take for the case to conclude.

Brewer's attorneys said the decision to deny driver's licenses grew out of liability concerns and the desire to reduce the risk of the licenses being used to improperly access public benefits.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 11, 2014, 06:52:43 pm
Billionaire trio unite for US immigration reform

Washington (AFP) - Three of the world's richest men -- Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Sheldon Adelson -- put aside their political differences to unite in scathing condemnation of US lawmakers' failure to implement immigration reform.

In an opinion column in Friday's New York Times, the trio, who have a net worth of about $160 billion between them, said that a Congress paralyzed by partisanship is failing US citizens by refusing to make the compromises necessary to overhaul a system that Democrats, Republicans and President Barack Obama all say is broken.

"Americans deserve better than this," the men wrote, adding that despite their political differences they would be able to draft a bill acceptable to each of them.

They took particular aim at the Republican-led House of Representatives, which has stonewalled several attempts to craft legislation.

The House bill's differences, the trio argued, could be hammered out with members of the Senate, whose landmark immigration bill passed with bipartisan support one year ago but has languished on Capitol Hill.

"Whatever the precise provisions of a law, it's time for the House to draft and pass a bill that reflects both our country's humanity and its self-interest," the billionaires said.

"A Congress that does nothing about these problems is extending an irrational policy by default."

The three men may be on the same page with regard to immigration reform, but it is their political differences that makes the column stand out.

Gates, founder and former boss at Microsoft, and Berkshire Hathaway founder and world-renowned investor Buffett have both supported Obama, while Las Vegas Sands Corporation chief executive Adelson is the casino magnate who in 2012 spent nearly $100 million in an effort to defeat Obama's re-election.

Last year's Senate bill created a "pathway to citizenship" for many of the 11 million undocumented people in the US, a sticking point for conservative House Republicans who view the provision as amnesty for illegal immigrants.

House Speaker John Boehner has publicly proclaimed his support for immigration reform but has also said efforts to draft a comprehensive bill in 2014 were essentially dead.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 11, 2014, 06:55:28 pm

Video: Child immigration crisis reaches Chicago-area shelters
WLS – Chicago 3:08 mins

The immigration crisis on the U.S.-Mexican border is now playing out in Chicago as hundreds of undocumented children are now in this area.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 12, 2014, 03:00:11 pm
Border Patrol Agent Hospitalized with Pneumonia Caught from an Illegal Immigrant, Expected to Have Lifelong Complications

A Border Patrol agent from the Laredo, Texas, Sector has been hospitalized for seven days with bacterial pneumonia, which the agent contracted while processing illegal immigrants, officials from National Border Patrol Council 2455 tell National Review Online. 

Agent Jarrad Seely, vice president of NBPC 2455, says the agent is expected to have chronic asthmatic symptoms for life, according to information relayed by the agent. The illness has so swollen the agent’s throat that it’s difficult for the agent to speak, Seely says.

“It’s a very traumatic experience for [the agent] and [the agent’s] family,” he says. “[The agent’s] got small children.” He says that it’s too soon to tell if the agent will be able to make a full recovery and return to work, and says the agent was healthy prior to processing the immigrants.

“Our agents have been getting sick more often than before with flus and congestion and a whole bunch of respiratory illnesses,” says Hector Garza, the secretary and treasurer of NBPC 2455. “The processing room was severely overcrowded and that just made [it] the perfect breeding ground for these diseases.” Garza says he and other Border Patrol officials have had to communicate indirectly with the agent, via the family, because of the agent’s inability to speak.

Seely says the Laredo Sector has recently had illegal immigrants arrive with active cases of tuberculosis, scabies, lice and chicken pox.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 17, 2014, 11:59:59 am
Border Patrol Agent: Diseases Coming in We Haven’t Seen in Decades

Another Border Patrol Agent is speaking out on the influx of diseases being brought into the United States by illegal aliens crossing the border. Vice President of the Border Patrol Union Chris Cabrea told Fox News host Martha MacCallum, "We're having a lot of diseases coming in and some we haven't seen in decades."

Cabrea said that it's been hard to see many of the kids coming in after the journey they've been on and then on top of that to witness the diseases they are bringing with them. In fact, he reiterated what Ron Zermeno said regarding Border Patrol Agents coming down with many of these diseases themselves, including Scabies. Cabrea said that recently one Border Patrol Agent contracted bacterial pnuemonia, while others were getting head lice.

"Once that happens, then I think the floodgates will stop," said Cabrea.

When MacCallum asked why Cabrea thought there was a great influx now of foreigners, he said, "I think what we're looking at is 'word of mouth' advertising. People believe that there is a defacto amnesty that if they get here, they'll be allowed to stay, and they're exploiting a loophole in the system, and frankly, they are doing it quite well."

Indeed they are, but it's more than that. There are the goodies that the Federal government has been pushing, in conjunction with the Mexcian government, at tax payer expense. We have seen how the food stamp program has been advanced to the Hispanic community in Mexico and the US.

While there are many hard working immigrants and Hispanic Americans, there are also many who come to take advantage of the system. It isn't relegated to Hispanics though, a variety of ethnicities are partaking in social welfare. However, it is documented that the federal government has openly advertised the welfare program to those in Central America, and even Congressmen are acknowledging that Barack Obama is using this to overwhelm the system. Obviously, he's doing it with the Cloward and Piven strategy for an predicted end result.

Cabrea said that the agents are frustrated with Obama. "We would like to see him come down here and take a first hand look for himself as to what's going on, the people in the cells. It's heartbreaking to see some of the things we see down here on a daily basis."

When MacCullum asked Cabrea why he didn't think Obama would come, he said he had no idea. Obviously, Obama says he doesn't want a "photo-op," which everyone knows is a lie, but the reality is that he isn't concerned with the situation at all. In fact, the less he does about it, the more the Cloward and Piven strategy works… and, of course, there is that little thing about $3.7 billion in taxpayer money, which won't be used to do anything about either security or disease.

In contrast, Cabrea said, "Governor Perry is doing a excellent job….He seems to have a clear grasp of what's going on. He seems to get it and he seems to have some good ideas as to how to fix this issue."

"The border patrol is trying to play catch up… and we're having a lot of diseases coming in and some we haven't seen in decades and we are worried they'll spread rapidly throughout the United States, especially if they are being released and have the disease."

Indeed, that is an issue, especially when many of these people are being allowed on commercial airliners and traveling across the US to different points, such as Boston, Murrieta and New Mexico, but make no mistake about it, this has all been planned and orchestrated.

When these diseases become epidemics in the US, don't be surprised when the creature the US funds, the United Nations, steps in and brings the World Health Organization in along with UN "peace keepers," in order to subdue the American people. Keep in mind my fellow Americans, this was planned.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 17, 2014, 12:04:46 pm

CDC Confirms Activation of “Emergency Operation Center” in Response to Immigrant Influx
After months, federal health agency responsible for “disease control and prevention” breaks silence..


The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is responding to the public health crisis spurred by the recent surge of illegal immigrants by activating an emergency facility designed to monitor and coordinate “emergency response activities to public health threats,” the agency admitted to Infowars Tuesday.

In a taped phone call, a CDC information hotline representative confirmed that, unbeknownst to the American public, the agency has activated their intelligence arm, the Emergency Operation Center, to deal with various diseases accompanying the surge of illegal aliens currently staging a virtually uncontested U.S. invasion.

“In response to this influx of unaccompanied alien children, CDC’s Emergency Operation Center (EOC) has been activated,” the CDC rep stated, likely reading from a script. “Through this activation the EOC will work closely with the Division of Global Migration and Quarantine. CDC staff will consult on health issues and the UAC’s countries of origin, consult on shelter, water, sanitation and hygiene and provide staff for public health support.”
Ads by Keep NowAd Options

A description of the EOC from the CDC:

    In 2003, CDC established a dedicated, state-of-the-art Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to serve as CDC’s command center for monitoring and coordinating CDC’s emergency response activities to public health threats in the United States and abroad. Staffed around-the-clock, the EOC serves as CDC’s central point of contact for reporting public health threats and supports the Secretary’s Operations Center of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

“The CDC Emergency Operations Center is activated during events such as hurricanes or disease outbreaks,” a 2009 CDC video about the EOC states. “When activated, CDC staff work with contacts at the state, local, and international levels 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.”

The EOC has responded to dozens of emergencies since 2001, from Hurricane Katrina to H1N1 flu outbreaks to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the World Trade Center attacks.

Until now, the federal government has remained largely silent on increased public health concerns linked to the immigrant influx. As we reported Saturday, the CDC ignored border agents’ pleas for help containing the spread of disease.

Numerous border agents have contracted disease from exposure to afflicted minors, and reports suggest the influx, now hailing from several parts of the world (not just Central America), may potentially bring with it deadly diseases such as dengue and the incurable ebola virus. There are also increased worries immigrants hailing from Honduras could be infected with HIV, the AIDS-causing virus.

Writing for WND.com, Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet questions the government’s shroud of silence in the face of an emerging public health crisis. Labeling the porous southern border “a gateway for disease entry,” Vliet has compiled a running list of questions regarding the CDC’s secrecy:

    Why is the CDC, the U.S. agency responsible for identification, tracking and overseeing issues around infectious disease outbreaks, so strangely silent?

    Why are there reports of a temporary decontamination center set up in El Paso, Texas, similar to those in use in West Africa? What is it for? What diseases have been found that would require such a facility?

    Why is the CDC not on top of – and warning – the public of these increasingly serious situations?

    Why are more doctors in the southern border states not already on alert to handle sudden increase in TB, adult chicken pox, measles, H1N1 influenza, dengue, Ebola, plus other unknown but lethal diseases?

As Dr. Vliet highlights, the lack of answers to these questions should concern otherwise healthy Americans. “These diseases are highly contagious, especially in crowded and poor sanitary conditions in the detention and processing centers where thousands of illegals are housed until sent to other areas of America, without full screening for such diseases,” says Vliet.

“Many of the diseases of concern, such as Ebola hemorrhagic fever, have NO effective treatments,” adds Dr. Vliet, noting infectious disease is the leading cause of death worldwide.

The government agency’s superficial response to our inquiry, and their practice of keeping things hidden from the public unfortunately do little to quell anxieties over increased health concerns.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 21, 2014, 10:40:47 am
Ronald Reagan and the Republican hypocrisy over illegal immigration

Republicans and conservatives around the country are cheering a great wall to be built at the border while crossing their fingers over a pipe dream of an Obama impeachment. Despite their fantasy, their own past might leave them with their jaws dropping.

November 6, 1986. That date might not seem to special to many people but it was the day that then President Ronald Reagan put pen to paper and signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Also known as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, for Democrat Rep. Romano L. Mazzoli and Republican Sen. Alan K. Simpson who chaired their respected subcommittees, Reagan signed the bill into law with the hopes that the immigration issue would be taken care once and for all.

Among some of the bills provisions, it granted legal status to nearly 3 million illegal immigrants who entered the country before January 1, 1982 as long as they followed a plan to pay back taxes and fines. It also came down on employers who knowingly hired undocumented workers, while also attempting to secure the border. A noble effort, the results weren't as promising as fraudulent applications soured the bill's intentions, opening the door for more employees to hire a growing number of illegal immigrants entering the country.

Immigration reform has been a hot topic as Washington continues to make it the elephant in the room when it comes to today's current process. Everyone seems to know that it's an issue that must be tackled, but both sides of the political aisle get worried about the fallout. While Democrats argue over how far to take the immigration issue, Republicans question if they as a party can even afford to get it done. The overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants come from south of the border and the Republican party sees no light at the end of the tunnel if they stick with the status quo.

As the Hispanic population continues to grow, so does the voting base. According to the Pew Research Center, 11.2 million Latinos voted in the 2012 election, just over 48 percent of those who were eligible.

"Latino population has fueled quick growth in the number of Latinos eligible to vote (U.S. citizen adults). Between 2008 and 2012, the number of Latino eligible voters grew from 19.5 million to 23.3 million—an increase of 19%. By contrast, the number of Latino voters increased by 15% over 2008."

Republicans find their party at a political crossroads. They still cater towards an aging southern white population that doesn't typically support immigration reform, but they also know that if they want to have a chance in national elections moving forward, they can't appear to hard on immigration. Ronald Reagan gave it shot in 1986, but if he was doing that today, conservatives would be screaming "impeachment" with every movement of the signature of his pen. High profile Republicans, such as former VP candidate Sarah Palin, have called for President Obama's impeachment, but if they look back at their favorite leader's history, they might tone their rhetoric down or risk being called out over their own hypocrisy.

Title: Rick Perry Orders 1000 National Guard Troops To Secure Border
Post by: Christian40 on July 22, 2014, 04:39:32 am
"Monday, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) announced he is deploying 1,000 Texas National Guard to the U.S. border with Mexico, saying he can not idly sit by while “our citizens are under siege.”

Pointing out the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors only make up roughly 20 percent of those being apprehended illegally crossing the border, Perry said he can no longer wait for the president to act as gang members and drug cartels flood into Texas, causing crime to skyrocket.

Perry has repeatedly called on President Obama to visit the border, calling his refusal Obama’s “Katrina,” moment.

Perry pointed out Texas tax payers can not bear the expense of processing and housing the surge of illegal immigration caused by President Obama’s 2012 executive action “Dream Act” which has given people in Central America the idea children will be allowed to stay once in the U.S."


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 23, 2014, 04:27:45 pm
Immigration Reform Is Actually Happening – Just Not On Capitol Hill

California Gov. Jerry Brown signs a bill adding California to the growing list of states allowing immigrants living in the country illegally to obtain driver licenses. (AP Photo/City of Los Angeles)

Though comprehensive immigration reform has sputtered and stalled in Congress, many Democrats and activists have turned their attention away from the federal government and started focusing their efforts on the local level. This push has resulted in a  number of pieces of local immigration reform legislation that have passed largely under the radar of the national debate. However, these laws have had dramatic effects and supporters argue they may inspire a wave of similar policies across the country.

Just this month New York City passed new legislation granting government ID cards to undocumented immigrants, joining cities like Oakland, New Haven, Trenton, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. Since last year, a number of localities — including California, Maryland, Connecticut, Illinois, New Mexico, Nevada, and Oregon — have passed legislation granting drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants, according to the National Immigration Law Center. And a small slew of states have passed their own versions of the DREAM Act, giving undocumented students in-state tuition assistance.

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, a Democrat looking at a run for president, told Business Insider that, when it comes to immigration reform, "progress has become a metropolitan phenomenon."

"I think hopefully what will happen is the more states that pursue policies that are consistent with the longer arc of our American immigrant experience," O'Malley explained at a New York City pub last week. "The more of us that follow those policies, the easier it will become for our federal government to catch up."

According to the  most recent numbers  compiled by the National Conference of State Legislators, immigration-related legislation is accelerating at the local level. A total of 184 state immigration laws were enacted and 253 resolutions adopted in 2013 — a 64% increase over 2012, the report said. (This number includes both pro-immigration and anti-immigration measures.) Ann Morse, the NCSL program director who helped compile the report, said the upcoming 2014 numbers are on track to show similar trends.

For his part, O'Malley predicted immigration reform could follow a similar path to same-sex marriage, which has rapidly become legal in state after state.

"I think that the genius of our system is that there is some flexibility and some room for states to follow some different approaches. And if they turn out to be better approaches then we learn from each other, right?" he asked. "Eventually, the result is in terms of extending fuller rights to greater numbers."

O'Malley recently found himself in the center of the national immigration debate after he engaged in a high-profile back-and-forth with the White House over the influx of unaccompanied children who have crossed the Mexican border and been placed in crowded detention centers. In response, O'Malley criticized the detention centers while also accusing President Barack Obama's administration of sending the children it planned to deport back to "certain death" in violent Central American countries. The White House fired back at O'Malley, who was one of Obama's most dedicated surrogates during the 2012 presidential election, by reportedly leaking conversations between the governor and administration aides that were designed to make him look hypocritical on the issue.

Even with members of both parties describing the situation with the flood of children on the border as a humanitarian crisis, the White House's solution to the problem —  $3.7 billion in emergency border spending — is currently stuck in the quagmire of congressional politics.

Federal comprehensive immigration reform legislation is in an even more intractable position. Though an immigration reform bill passed the Democratic-controlled Senate, anything that can be labeled "amnesty" meets steep opposition in the Republican-controlled House. A final nail in the coffin for the possibility of compromise on the issue came last month when  Eric Cantor, the soon-to-be-former House Republican majority leader, lost a primary in a shocking upset fueled by his willingness to consider a path to citizenship for undocumented children. Faced with this gridlock, Obama is exploring what actions he can take unilaterally without congressional approval.

Local leaders, including New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, have directly cited federal inaction on immigration reform as motivation for them to seek their own solutions.

"In the absence of federal leadership on a host of issues, cities around the country are taking on the challenge of finding ways to create progressive change that helps all our residents, and then sharing ideas with each other, inspiring each other to action," de Blasio said as he signed a municipal ID card bill in July.

It's not only the amount of local immigration legislation that has changed. According to Kica Matos, director of the Immigrant Rights and Racial Justice at the Center for Community Change, t he nature of the laws being passed has shifted from policies aimed at blocking illegal immigration to legislation designed to expand access to government services for undocumented immigrants. 

"What’s interesting is if you look at the trajectory of 2006 and 2007, the trend was more towards introducing anti-immigrant bills. What we’ve really seen is a shift in the types of legislation that’s being introduced in particular states and much more acceptance ... of bills that are pro-immigration," Matos told Business Insider.

This stands in contrast, she said, to laws like the one Arizona famously passed in 2010 — which both supporters and critics identified as the strictest immigration crackdown in generations. That law, which was mostly struck down by a subsequent Supreme Court ruling, made failure to carry immigration documents a crime and expanded police power to go after anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant.

Echoing many politicians and advocates for undocumented immigrants, Matos said one reason for the shift towards state- and city-level immigration reform is that officials have realized Congress is unlikely act on the issue anytime soon.

"The state legislatures and particularly the big cities are recognizing that when Congress is unwilling to move forward with legislation, ... municipalities and the states really have to wrestle with the challenges that come with the undocumented population," she argued.

Of course, not everyone is happy with these measures. When New York City began to move forward with its municipal ID card bill in February, State Senator Greg Ball, a Republican leading his chamber's homeland security committee, warned of dire consequences.

“Now a decade plus after 9-11, New York's extremist mayor is laying out a hair brained scheme that can simply be dubbed the 'de Blasio Terrorist Empowerment Act.' My concern is not about the illegal alien dish washer looking to get to work, this extreme mayor's proposal, joined by efforts in the New York State Senate to provide New York State driver's licenses to illegals, will simply provide a mask to those seeking to harm the United States," Ball said at the time. "This mayor's proposal is a homeland security nightmare."

But Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, who championed the bill in addition to other immigration-related measures, told Business Insider her legislative body was "very careful and deliberative" in how it crafted the municipal ID card law.

"We feel very comfortable about this. We feel very proud about what we’ve done,"  she said, also touting her efforts to expand legal services access in immigration courts and limit cooperation with federal deportation authorities in certain cases.

Mark-Viverito further predicted other localities will follow New York's lead.

"We know that New York City is the city this country and everywhere in the world has their eyes on," she said. "Definitely it’s a strong signal and a strong message to ... encourage others to implement it and take it a step further."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 23, 2014, 07:45:42 pm
House, Senate advance competing border proposals

WASHINGTON (AP) — At an impasse on immigration, House Republicans and Senate Democrats advanced competing proposals Wednesday for dealing with tens of thousands of young migrants showing up at the southern border. Each side quickly ruled the other's approach unacceptable, leaving any solution unclear with Congress' annual August recess looming.

Unless Democrats capitulate, "We're going to be at an impasse and we will have earned even greater disdain from the American people than we already have," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said.

But Republicans were having difficulty agreeing even among themselves.

At a morning meeting of House Republicans, Speaker John Boehner urged action to address the border crisis, reminding GOP lawmakers that the Border Patrol and other agencies would be running out of money in coming months because of the heavy influx of unaccompanied minors and families at the border.

A working group appointed by Boehner rolled out proposals including sending in the National Guard and changing a 2008 trafficking victims law to allow Central American kids to be turned around quickly at the border and sent back home. Lawmakers announced plans to chop President Barack Obama's $3.7 billion emergency spending request for the border crisis down to $1.5 billion.

But as they left the meeting in the basement of the Capitol, some of the more conservative members of the GOP caucus made clear they were unconvinced.

"If Republicans move forward on this, we're now jumping right in the middle of President Obama's nightmare and making it ours," said Rep. John Fleming, R-La. Fleming said he worried that any House-passed bill "will be turned on its head" by the Senate "and actually make the problem even worse."

Fleming said Boehner told Republicans he was undecided about bringing the plan to the floor because he didn't know whether there were enough votes to pass it.

In his comments to reporters after the meeting, Boehner was noncommittal.

"This discussion with our members is going to continue, but we've not made any decisions," he said. "I'd like to act. We've got a humanitarian crisis on the border that has to be dealt with."

The path forward was not much clearer in the Senate, where Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., introduced legislation paring Obama's spending request back to $2.7 billion for more immigration judges, detention facilities and other resources.

"We cannot turn our backs on these children," Mikulski said on the Senate floor.

But Mikulski said she was omitting from her legislation any changes to the 2008 trafficking victims law, which Republicans say has contributed to the crisis by allowing Central American youths to stay in this country indefinitely while awaiting far-off court dates.

"We don't want a backdoor version of bad immigration reform," Mikulski said. "This bill is only a money bill. It does not include immigration legislation."

Republicans continued to demand changes to the 2008 law as the price for approving any money for the crisis, and Republican senators made clear they would not lend their votes without those provisions. "A fundamental of any agreement is the repeal of the 2008 law," McCain said.

Without GOP support it wasn't clear the Senate would be able to advance Mikulski's bill, and it wasn't evident whether a compromise could emerge.

White House officials and some Democrats were initially open to changing the 2008 law, but there has been a backlash from immigration advocates who say kids would be sent back to their deaths at the hands of vicious gangs in parts of Central America. Now most Democrats say they are strongly opposed.

"I'm willing to compromise on things, but it depends on what," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said. "If they really want to take these kids and ship them back in five days without giving them the right to at least have a decent right to claim asylum, no, I'm not going to change on that."

Boehner's working group, chaired by Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, would allow Central American youths to be treated the same as those from Mexico, who can be turned around quickly at the border unless they can convince Border Patrol agents that they merit more extensive screening. Other proposals include speeding up court hearings and boosting border security.

"Without trying to fix the problem I don't know how we actually are in a position to give the president any more money," Boehner said. "What the president's asking for is a blank check."

Democrats and immigration advocates criticized Granger's proposals as overly harsh, but conservatives on and off Capitol Hill said they didn't go far enough.

Later in the day Boehner sent a letter to Obama asking him to declare his support for changing the 2008 law, pointing to mixed signals from the White House on the issue.

More than 57,000 minors have arrived since October, mostly from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, and tens of thousands of families have arrived too. Polls suggest the public is paying attention and demanding a solution, but lawmakers leave Washington at the end of next week for a five-week recess.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 27, 2014, 02:07:26 pm
George Will Says U.S. Should ‘Welcome’ Illegal Children, Mocks Supporters Of Deportation

Conservative columnist George Will surprised “Fox New Sunday’s” Chris Wallace when he claimed the United States should “welcome” the flood of illegal immigrant children along our southern border — adding that concerns about America’s ability to absorb Central America’s problems are “preposterous.”

Will spoke on a panel along with Fox News contributors Kirsten Powers, Juan Williams and Brit Hume about the ongoing border crisis. Powers had just finished slamming the Republican Party for not wanting to work on any kind of comprehensive immigration issue beyond deporting the tens of thousands of Central American children coming into the country illegally.

“How do you respond to Kirsten and her talking about Republicans who don’t want to deal with immigration except deporting children,” Wallace asked, “and is there a right way to deal with this problem?”

“Well, I think Kirsten’s largely right,” Will responded. “I think we ought to say to these children, ‘Welcome to America. You’re going to go to school and get a job and become Americans. We have 3,141 counties in this country. That’d be 20 per county.”

“The idea that we can’t assimilate these 8-year-old criminals with their teddy bears is preposterous,” the conservative columnist went on, mocking those concerned about putting further strain on the United States’ limited resources.

Wallace warned Will over a potential backlash from his comments. “You’ve gotta know — I mean, I can just sort of feel them clicking off — that we’re gonna get tons of email of people saying ‘this guy doesn’t understand the border, why should we be dealing with Central America’s problem, we can’t important the problem, they’ve gotta deal with it there, and our border’s got to mean something,’” the Fox News host explained.

“We can handle this problem, is what I’m saying,” the columnist replied. “We’ve handled what Emma Lazarus called ‘the wretched refuse of your teeming shores’ a long time ago, and a lot more people than this.”

Lazarus was, of course, writing about immigrants who came to the country legally through Ellis Island, New York.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 28, 2014, 06:41:35 pm
Feds quietly dump hundreds of illegal immigrants in Tennessee

Imagine you’re about to sit down for supper when suddenly 760 folks show up on your front porch wanting fried catfish and hushpuppies. You’d be fit to be tied as they say in Tennessee.

And Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam is fit to be tied.

The Obama administration recently released 760 illegal immigrant children to sponsors in the Volunteer State without any warning, the governor charged.

There was not so much as a text message or tweet.

“It is unacceptable that we became aware via a posting on the HHS website that 760 unaccompanied children have been released by the Office of Refugee Resettlement to sponsors in Tennessee  without my administration’s knowledge,” the governor wrote in a strongly-worded letter to President Obama.


Haslam, a Republican, said he still has not been contacted by the Obama administration – and has no idea where the illegals were resettled.

“I still have not been contacted and have no information about these individuals or their sponsors other than what was posted on the HHS website,” he wrote.

The Office of Refugee Resettlement says sponsors are typically a parent or relative who can care for the illegal immigrant child while their immigration case is processed. All sponsors are required to undergo background checks.

It’s also unclear why the ORR is handling the children – since they are illegal immigrants and not refugees.

It’s been the Obama administration’s standard operating procedure to release the illegals into states without notifying local or state government officials.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters that the illegal immigrant children have a right to privacy. He said privacy rights of the illegals are more important than the public’s right to know what’s happening.

Haslam warned the sheer number of illegals could “have a significant impact on state and local governments.”

Specifically, he feared whether the massive numbers will complicate the start of the new school year.

“An influence of unaccompanied immigrant children to the state, with little information being made available to the public or to state leaders, creates confusion and could be very problematic,” the governor wrote.

Dan Howell, a Republican state house candidate, said the administration’s actions are outrageous and commended Haslam’s letter.

“I believe in legal immigration but I support Gov. Haslam's response to the president's decision which is an outrage,” Howell told me. “It's unfortunate the president's actions are putting a strain on Tennessee's resources but what's more unfortunate is the hardship his actions are imposing on these children and the fact the president is ignoring the law and refusing to seal the border.”

Meanwhile, Haslam is demanding the Obama administration answer eight questions about the illegals dumped in his state.

Among the most pressing questions, he wants to know if the children were given medical screenings, how their sponsors were screened, the official immigration status of the illegals and their sponsors, the localities the children were placed, and how long they plan to be residents of the Volunteer State.

Gov. Haslam has a right to be concerned.

If Obama is truly acting in the best interests of the nation – why is he cloaking this nefarious scheme in a shroud of secrecy?

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 28, 2014, 06:54:56 pm
With The Law Ignored, Border Surge Turns Into A Tsunami

Amnesty: With word out about U.S. coddling of Central American illegal immigrants, Haitians and people from much farther abroad are flooding our shores to get their slice. This is what comes when politics trumps law.

Some of the strongest voices speaking in favor of amnesty for the latest flood of illegal immigrants from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, such as columnist George Will, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and the Catholic bishops, have used the hardship and mercy argument to scrap the law and permit the illegals to stay.

"The idea that we can't assimilate these 8-year-old 'criminals' with their teddy bears is preposterous," Will told Fox News on Sunday.

Pelosi likened illegals to "baby Jesus" and said she wanted to take some home (sounding as if she thought they were pets) while the Catholic bishops said America should accept them regardless of cost.

Mercy, in other words, is the argument, as if there's something unique about Central America, a group of countries that are all democracies with citizens who are empowered to vote to change their economic conditions if they want to.

The insistence on special treatment for Central Americans over those who follow the law and wait in line to immigrate is a preoccupation of many of our elites. These are the very same people, as the late New York Timesman Scotty Reston put it, who will do anything for Latin America except read about it.

The hard reality is, if the law is suddenly rendered null based on the treacly photos of cherubic toddlers and their moms, it's not going to be just Central Americans at our door.

As CBS News reports, we're now seeing a surge in illegal immigrants from Haiti, with the number soaring in the past two years from 12 in 2011 to 1,760 in fiscal 2013.

The Colombian navy has been plucking illegals out of coastal waters from as far away as Bangladesh and Afghanistan. They're making their way to Central America and its vast human smuggling networks.

Just last weekend, the National Border Patrol Council said a large group of nationals from Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka were caught in the Rio Grande Valley, coming to get what Central Americans were getting.

These migrant waves parallel the migrant waves from Africa flooding the shores of Italy, Greece and Spain and are above all a commentary on the global development of powerful smuggling networks and mafias empowered by technology. They're able to do today what couldn't be done just 10 years ago.

Ineffective border policing, combined with massive incentives — such as Europe's welfare programs, or President Obama's end-runs around the law to nullify current immigration law, such as his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, an executive order that effectively enacts the Dream Act rejected by Congress — create powerful incentives to emigrate.

The 2013 Family Interest Directive enables illegals to use their children to shield them from deportation. So does a 2008 directive signed by George W. Bush that gives non-Mexican illegals a long legal process and appeals before any can be deported.

All of these are incentives to break U.S. law.

When the law is rendered meaningless and heart-rending, teddy-bear toddler pictures justify ignoring it, it doesn't take long for word to get out.

That's why nullifying American law for Central Americans is a sure incentive to get illegals from other countries knocking at our door.

Already the Haitians are doing it, while the Middle Easterners and South Asians are just getting started.

The only thing that will stop a massive wave of illegals from around the world hitting our shores is for U.S. law to regain its primacy.

How far do things have to go before anyone in the Obama administration recognizes this?


America isn't mentioned in bible prophecy, FWIW.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 28, 2014, 07:03:52 pm
Obama mulls large-scale move on immigration

WASHINGTON (AP) — Even as they grapple with an immigration crisis at the border, White House officials are making plans to act before November's mid-term elections to grant work permits to potentially millions of immigrants who are in this country illegally, allowing them to stay in the United States without threat of deportation, according to advocates and lawmakers in touch with the administration.

Such a large-scale move on immigration could scramble election-year politics and lead some conservative Republicans to push for impeachment proceedings against President Barack Obama, a prospect White House officials have openly discussed.

Yet there's little sign that the urgent humanitarian situation in South Texas, where unaccompanied minors have been showing up by the tens of thousands from Central America, has impeded Obama from making plans to address some portion of the 11.5 million immigrants now in this country illegally. Obama announced late last month that congressional efforts to remake the nation's dysfunctional immigration system were dead and he would proceed on his own authority to fix the system where he could.

Since then he's asked Congress for $3.7 billion to deal with the crisis of unaccompanied youths, a request that's gone unmet even as the House and the Senate scramble to see if they can vote on some solution to the crisis this week before adjourning for their annual August recess.

Meanwhile, White House officials led by Domestic Policy Council Director Cecilia Munoz and White House Counsel Neil Eggleston, along with Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, have been working to chart a plan on executive actions Obama could take, hosting frequent meetings with interest groups and listening to recommendations from immigration advocates, law enforcement officials, religious leaders, Hispanic lawmakers and others.

Advocates and lawmakers who were in separate meetings Friday said that administration officials are weighing a range of options including reforms to the deportation system and ways to grant relief from deportation to targeted populations in the country, likely by expanding Obama's two-year-old directive that granted work permits to certain immigrants brought here illegally as youths. That program, called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, has been extended to more than 500,000 immigrants so far.

Advocates would like to see deferred action made available to anyone who would have been eligible for eventual citizenship under a comprehensive immigration bill the Senate passed last year, which would be around 9 million people. But Obama told them in a meeting a month ago to "right-size" expectations, even as he pledged to be aggressive in steps he does take.

That's led advocates to focus on other populations Obama might address, including parents or legal guardians of U.S. citizen children (around 3.8 million people as of 2009, according to an analysis by Pew Research's Hispanic Trends Project) and parents or legal guardians of DACA recipients (perhaps 500,000 to 1 million people, according to the Fair Immigration Reform Movement).

"Our parents deserve to live without the fear of deportation," Maria Praeli, a 21-year-old from New Haven who came to the United States from Peru 16 years ago, said at a protest outside the White House on Monday. "It is time for the president to go big and to go bold."

Another focus could be the potentially hundreds of thousands of people who might be eligible for green cards today if current law didn't require them to leave the country for 10 years before applying for one.

At the same time, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says it is actively working to determine whether there are steps Obama could take by executive action that could help the business community.

For Obama, the political repercussions of broad executive action on immigration could be unpredictable, and extreme.

Republicans are warning he could provoke a constitutional crisis.

"It would be an affront to the people of this country which they will never forgive, it would be a permanent stain on your presidency," Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said on the Senate floor Monday, while urging language to block such executive action be made part of any legislation to address the border crisis.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced plans to use an oversight hearing on the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency Tuesday to raise questions about Obama's plans, which he warned could "worsen the border crisis and encourage many more to come."

On the other side, some Democrats have debated the best timing for Obama to take executive action, raising questions as to whether acting before the midterms could hurt vulnerable Senate Democrats in close races while boosting turnout among the GOP base.

But liberal advocates noted that Obama's move on deferred action two years ago gave him a boost heading into his re-election and could help this year with Latino voters discouraged over the failure of immigration reform legislation and record-high deportations on Obama's watch. Republicans would be in a position of deciding whether to come out in favor of deporting sympathetic groups, such as parents, and many liberals say impeachment talk would only shore up Democratic base voters.

"Most Democrats will be thrilled" if Obama acts boldly on immigration, said Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice, a leading advocacy group. "And Republicans will keep lurching to the right and cementing their reputation as the anti-immigrant party."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 31, 2014, 10:18:07 am
The Immigration Problem We’re Not Talking About

One of the biggest factors driving the surge of unaccompanied children making the dangerous journey from Central America to the United States’ Southern border has been the incorrect impression that, once they arrive, they will be allowed to stay. Unfortunately, by vastly understaffing the country’s immigration courts, the U.S. government has made that myth appear to be reality.

Imagine this. What if the first wave of children in this migration of tens of thousands had been deported back to Honduras, El Salvador, or Guatemala a few months after they left home in the first place? It seems likely that word would have got around that, contrary to rumor, the United States was not providing blanket amnesty to children.

In fact, according to the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, the vast majority of unaccompanied children crossing the border are designated for deportation once they come before a judge. The problem is that wait time for a hearing in immigration court is measured not in weeks or months, but in years.

According to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), there was a backlog of 375,503 cases in the immigration court system as of the end of June. That’s more than twice the number of pending cases in 2008. It also translates into an average wait time, according to TRAC, of 587 days for an initial hearing, with wait times in some jurisdictions averaging much longer.

In Omaha, for instance, the average case takes 839 days to get in front of a judge. In Los Angeles, it’s 820, and in Phoenix it’s 808. And these are just averages. Immigration activists report some children waiting three to five years for a hearing. Worse yet, in some cases, the initial hearing is only part of the process; some drag on for years even after they first come before a judge.

Part of the reason is that the federal immigration court system is gravely understaffed when considering the magnitude of the task in front of it. There are currently about 243 immigration judges, or one to every 1,545 pending cases.

This means that families in Central America who send their children north can report to friends and neighbors that those kids are in the United States and aren’t coming back anytime soon, creating an incentive for other parents to send their children on the perilous trip.

The worst part about this is that it was a completely predictable and avoidable problem.

There is a growing call among those most concerned about the influx of illegal immigrants to amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which many blame for the current crisis on the Southern border. Originally passed in 2000, and meant to protect the victims of human trafficking from being returned to dangerous circumstances, the law barred the immediate deportation of children who enter the US illegally, and who are not from Mexico or Canada. The immigration caseload, flat or declining in the years immediately before 2000, has been on a nearly uninterrupted rise ever since.

But all the law guarantees is a hearing – not amnesty. And the passage of a law promising a hearing to a large segment of illegal immigrants who would not otherwise be entitled to one ensured an increased workload for the immigration court system – a promise the U.S. government largely ignored.

“It’s sort of ironic the one part of the immigration system that is underfunded is the one that provides due process to immigrants,” said Daniel Costa, Director of Immigration Law and Policy Research for the Economic Policy Institute in Washington. In recent years, he said, funding for immigration enforcement operations increased 300 percent – that’s the part of the system charged with apprehending illegal immigrants and bringing them before a judge. Over the same time frame, said Costa, the funding for the courts rose only 70 percent.

“If there wasn’t an immigration court crisis, there wouldn’t really be a border crisis,” said Costa. “The crisis is that we can’t provide everybody with a hearing. If they were being processed in an orderly fashion – if their cases were being processed in 60, 90, or 100 days, I don’t know if people would be making so much noise about it.”

President Obama’s $4 billion proposal to address the crisis on the border would allow for the hiring of a few dozen judges. A more expansive proposal being pushed by Sen. Barbara Mikulski would provide for substantially more. Given the backlog, though, there’s no likelihood, in the near term, of changing the impression many potential illegal immigrants have that, simply by crossing the border, they will get to stay in the U.S. indefinitely.

Reducing the backlog is going to take years – even with additional funding, said Costa. “Even if you to double or triple the immigration judges you aren’t going to do it overnight.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 31, 2014, 03:32:35 pm
House leaders abandon border bill

WASHINGTON (AP) — Short on votes, House Republicans abruptly abandoned a bill Thursday to address the immigration crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border after last-minute maneuvering failed to lock down conservative support. An hour later, they called an urgent meeting to plot their next moves.

The surprise developments, coming on Congress' final day of action ahead of a five-week summer recess, were an embarrassing setback for Speaker John Boehner and his leadership team as a small group of tea party lawmakers once again upset their plans.

Even if Boehner succeeded in reviving the border bill, there was no chance it could be reconciled with a very different version awaiting action in the Senate in time to send to President Barack Obama before Congress heads on its summer recess Friday.

The developments were also a disappointment for the majority of House Republicans who were eager to produce a legislative solution to the situation on the border, where tens of thousands of unaccompanied children have been showing up from chaotic Central American nations and crossing illegally into the United States. Many Republican lawmakers were reluctant to return to their districts to face voters without having acted.

"It can't wait, it's a humanitarian crisis," Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers, R-Ky., said before the vote on the $659 million measure was canceled, as he pleaded with fellow Republicans to support the legislation to send resources to the border and send the arriving youths back home faster.

"This bill is an urgently needed bill," Rogers said.

But it was unclear if such sentiments could prevail and pull the GOP conference back together.

"There are still members who are convinced that they're going to be endangered back in their districts if we don't, quote, do something, unquote," said conservative Rep. John Fleming, R-La., who said he opposes any extra border spending.

"I completely disagree with them on that. I think by doing something, all we're doing is taking Obama's nightmare for ourselves. He created it," Fleming said.

Significant concessions by leadership failed to secure support from a small band of tea party lawmakers reluctant to give money to Obama without taking steps to rein in his executive authority on immigration. Those lawmakers were goaded on by firebrand Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who summoned them for pizza Wednesday evening to strategize against the bill.

As conservative opposition mounted, GOP leaders agreed late Wednesday to schedule a separate vote on legislation to block Obama from extending deportation relief to more immigrants here illegally, beyond the 500,000 that have already benefited from a program he created.

That seemed to win over some lawmakers by Thursday morning, but as the day progressed conservative lawmakers and outside groups declared the measure insufficient.

Then, just before the vote on the border bill was to begin, there was an unexplained pause in action on the House floor, and suddenly the reading clerk called up an unrelated highway bill instead.

Minutes later, the border bill disappeared from the House schedule for the day, and Boehner and other House leaders issued a statement saying: "This situation shows the intense concern within our conference — and among the American people — about the need to ensure the security of our borders and the president's refusal to faithfully execute our laws. ... We will continue to work on solutions to the border crisis and other challenges facing our country."

Democrats openly mocked the apparent influence of Cruz over the House GOP, referring to him as Speaker Cruz. Some House Republicans chafed over his involvement.

"I think we've seen this game before," said Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who is close to House GOP leaders. "Any time the groups come out and start to score about these issues, then senators get involved and they start having meetings and then they all sit together and sing 'Kumbaya' and stop any progress."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 31, 2014, 06:04:02 pm
House Delays Recess Until Border Bill Is Passed

House Republicans, poised to head out for their August break, are staying in Washington to try to pass a plan addressing child migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, and some blame Republican Senator Ted Cruz.

Cruz, a Tea Party-backed lawmaker from Texas, is urging House Republicans to oppose leaders’ $659 million border plan. Enough of them balked to force leaders to cancel today’s scheduled vote on the bill for lack of support.

“We’ll have the votes tomorrow,” Representative Spencer Bachus of Alabama told reporters.

House leaders plan to confer with holdouts tonight to work on revisions to the measure, and Republicans will meet privately in the morning. Representative John Fleming of Louisiana said that to get his vote, “they would have to massively change what’s in the bill.”

Even if the House manages to pass a measure, Congress almost certainly will leave Washington for the August break without enacting a plan to address the border crisis. The Senate yesterday advanced a $2.7 billion plan, still less than the $3.7 billion President Barack Obama requested.

Republicans and Democrats also disagree about Republicans’ bid to change a law to speed the deportation of children at the border.

House Republican leaders had repeatedly adjusted the border proposal in an effort to gain support from lawmakers aligned with the small-government Tea Party movement.

“We’ve got a caucus of widely disparate views, and it never really gelled for 218 on our side,” the number of votes needed to pass a bill in the House, said Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers, a Kentucky Republican.

Cruz Meeting

Cruz this week was urging party members in the House to oppose the bill, H.R. 5230. Late yesterday he met with about a dozen House Republicans over pizza and Dr. Pepper to discuss strategy about the proposal.

“Ted Cruz and a handful of Republicans have hijacked the party,” said Representative Peter King, a New York Republican.

“Speaker Cruz is deciding the agenda,” said Representative Joe Garcia, a Florida Democrat.

Cruz been an influential voice among House Republicans, urging them to oppose Obamacare at every turn. His encouragement to withhold support for government spending unless the president’s health-care law was defunded led to the partial government shutdown in October.

Senator Sessions

Senator Jeff Sessions, an Alabama Republican, also sought to persuade House Republicans to oppose their leaders’ bill, Bachus said. In a statement on his website, Sessions said Congress needs to pass a stronger bill to prevent Obama from taking executive action to provide “amnesty” to undocumented immigrants.

The blowup over the border bill occurred as House Speaker John Boehner’s new leadership team is taking control following the defeat of outgoing Majority Leader Eric Cantor by a Tea Party-backed candidate in a Virginia primary vote.

“We are going to stay until we get it done,” Representative Darrell Issa of California told reporters after the meeting. “There were a number of people who had indicated no but they would now vote yes.”

House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland said, though, that members of his party were already leaving Washington.

Texas Republican Kay Granger said she was “very disappointed” the bill her border working group helped write was pulled from the floor. The reason was “no votes,” she told reporters.

Senate Bill

With the House in disarray, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters that Senate Democrats would press forward with an effort to pass their $2.7 billion spending bill later today.

“Obviously we’ll try and pass ours,” said Reid, a Nevada Democrat, adding that he wasn’t surprised Boehner couldn’t lock down the votes for the House bill. “It’s not the first time.”

Today’s move in the House was similar to another failed attempt by Boehner to corral votes from his members. In December 2012 he canceled a vote on his proposal to extend expiring tax breaks for people making up to $1 million annually. That ultimately led to a fiscal compromise including a tax increase for individuals making more than $400,000 a year.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, in an interview, criticized Republicans for stripping down their bill repeatedly to appeal to holdout Tea Party members.

‘Bad Enough’

“It wasn’t even bad enough for them,” said Pelosi of California.

The border vote would be a tough one for some Tea Party Republicans because it combines more spending with the politically difficult issue of immigration. In the past few years, Boehner has had to rely on Democratic support to help pass some measures, including a debt-limit increase and a farm bill.

Boehner told reporters July 29 that leaders had “a little more work to do” to gain support for the border bill.

Late yesterday, Republican leaders agreed to allow a vote on a measure -- sought by Cruz and other party members -- to block Obama from expanding a 2012 executive order giving certain undocumented children relief from immigration proceedings.

That agreement “cuts both ways” by picking up certain Republicans and losing others, said Representative Doug Lamborn, a Colorado Republican.

About 57,000 unaccompanied children were apprehended at the border from Oct. 1, 2013, through June 15, double the total from the same time a year earlier. Most of the children are from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

Securing Border

Representative Kerry Bentivolio, a Michigan Republican, said regarding the leaders’ plan, “I don’t really think it secures the border.”

“I’m not really interested in supporting it because I don’t think it does anything,” Bentivolio said.

The Obama administration seized on the House leadership’s failure to get a vote and used it to justify the president’s plan to use executive actions on the border issue.

“By pulling their own bill, the House GOP once again proves why the president must act on his own to solve problems,” senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer posted on Twitter.

Pfeiffer told reporters last week that the humanitarian crisis on the border combined with a deadlock in Congress give Obama “broad permission to take what executive action we can to try to deal with the broken immigration system.”

Democratic officials and immigration advocates have said Obama is considering using his executive authority to let millions of undocumented immigrants obtain work permits that would allow them to stay in the U.S. legally. Obama probably will act before the November midterm congressional elections.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on July 31, 2014, 06:09:35 pm

OUTRAGE: Illegal Aliens to be Housed in Renovated ‘Suites’ with Flat-Screen TVs, New Soccer Field, Health Club
By Top Right News on July 31, 2014 in 2016, Border Security, Crime, Obama, Politics, Texas

Thousands of veterans are suffering in outdated facilities, many dying from neglect, or even just waiting for an appointment. Millions of Americans remain out of work or are homeless, children are hungry or go without basic supplies in dilapidated schools.

But the Federal government seems unwilling or unable to fix these problems. But there seems to be no limit to the blank check Obama will write for his most-favored amongst us: illegal invaders.

And now he has spent millions to renovate facilities in Texas to house illegals in the style he thinks they deserve (and God knows where else, since they keep most everything secret) .

Case in point: a planned facility 3 hours north of the Rio Grande Valley that will over 500 “women and children” from Central America who crossed the Rio Grande over the past few months. As KRGV reports:

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Friday will open a refurbished detention center three hours north of the Rio Grande Valley.

    The Karnes City center will house women and children who entered the country illegally through the Valley.

    The 532-bed facility underwent a massive renovation to house women and children. The center housed only adult immigrants in the past.

    Immigrants will be at the facility for an average of 23 days.

    The feds said the immigrants will be referred to as “residents” and the rooms as “suites.” The suites are furnished with flat-screen television sets and landline telephones. The center has a soccer field covered with artificial turf, ping pong tables and a weight room.

    A charter school nearby will provide schooling and access to a library for the immigrant children.

Work hard, fellow Americans: illegal aliens are counting on your tax dollars.

Notice how the Feds told the reporter that they “must” provide these luxuries to keep up “Federal standards”. Where are such “standards” for our wounded veterans?

Title: Rick Warren, Andy Stanley to Headline Major Hispanic Evangelical Leadership Conf
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 01, 2014, 12:19:57 pm
As we all know, Rick Warren is a Council on Foreign Relations member - the same shadow government group pushing for the North American Union!
Rick Warren, Andy Stanley to Headline Major Hispanic Evangelical Leadership Conference

Renowned Hispanic evangelical church leaders from Latin America and throughout the United States will trek to Los Angeles to partake in LiderVision Conference, considered to be the largest Spanish-speaking convergence movement, during a two-day event beginning August 1.

"Pastors and ministry leaders today need ministerial renovation. We need to broaden our knowledge and skills and in turn we need to work together," reads a statement on LiderVision's website. "That is why LiderVision is not only an annual event but an event of connections."

The event is organized by Editorial Vida and Grupo Nelson, publishing entities under Harper Collins Christian Publishing, and will be headlined by Rick Warren, Marcos Witt, Samuel Rodriguez, Andy Stanley, Luis Palau, Phillip Yancey and more.

Participants will have the opportunity to attend round table discussions to engage in conversation and questions about practical topics within ministry today. Each discussion will be moderated by experts in the topic of interest and will offer different perspectives on subjects about church growth, culture, leadership, youth ministry, worship, technology within the church and Bible study.

In a previous interview with The Christian Post, David Coyotl, a member of the marketing team at Editorial Vida, said the event is intended to be dynamic with a collaborative environment.

"The purpose is for these experts to disperse their knowledge to those with similar interests and experiences which will facilitate open dynamic interaction among them," said Coyotl.

Coyotl also said that bringing together renowned leaders has been an ongoing work in progress as they have worked to establish relationships with various movers and shakers within the Christian community over the last 15 years.

"We're trying to consolidate a community based on leaders who encounter similar experiences but are separated by different Latin American countries," he added. "Our efforts go beyond our event … it's more than just that."

LiderVision holds conferences in Washington, D.C., Houston and Los Angeles each year. In addition, the organization will host a conference in Mexico City in 2015 and will launch a new television program in August.

Title: Feds Fly Unaccompanied Minors to Alaska
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 01, 2014, 03:02:05 pm
Feds Fly Unaccompanied Minors to Alaska

HOUSTON, Texas--As unaccompanied minors continue to illegally cross the Texas-Mexico border, President Obama's Health and Human Services (HHS) has been quietly releasing them onto U.S. soil. A total of 30,340 unaccompanied minors have already been released from federal custody and placed into foster homes, according to HHS' Office of Refugee and Resettlement (ORR). While many migrants have been released in border states like Texas and California, others have been set free in Alaska.

Federal data shows that as of July 7, five unaccompanied minors were released in Alaska.

The trip from McAllen, Texas--where the current border crisis is occurring--to Anchorage, Alaska is a nine and a half hour flight. This is almost double the time it would take to fly the migrants back to their home countries in Central America; a flight from McAllen to El Salvador takes just over five hours, according to Google Maps.

The federal government's reasons for transporting unaccompanied minors all the way to Alaska are unclear. Some of the minors have also been flown to Hawaii, according to Fox News' Todd Starnes.

Millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars have been spent flying illegal immigrants to locations around the nation. Breitbart Texas recently revealed that a Department of Homeland Security budget for Fiscal Year 2015 includes more than $87 million for the transportation of illegal immigrants, who are most often flown via charter plane from Southern Texas to shelters located in various U.S. cities.

Subsequent to a short stay in federal housing facilities, most of the minors are released from custody. They promise to show up at an immigration court hearing at a future date, but many never do. Foster families, or "sponsors," for children migrants are often located through nonprofit organizations at various locations in the U.S. Breitbart Texas has reported closely on the process of becoming a foster parent of a foreign youth--in some cases, sponsors can receive up to $7,400 per month for housing up to six illegal immigrants at a time. The payments are dispersed by the federal government.

"ORR cares for the children in shelters around the country until they can be released to a sponsor, typically a parent or relative, who can care for the child while their immigration case is processed," an HHS webpage says. "Ensuring that a potential sponsor can safely and appropriately care for the child is a top priority.  A background check is conducted on all potential sponsors, and steps are taken to verify a potential sponsor’s identity and relationship to the child.  In some cases where concerns are raised, a home study is done. Before children are released to a sponsor, they receive vaccinations and medical screenings. We do not release any children who have a contagious condition."

Breitbart Texas made multiple attempts via phone and email to reach HHS and inquire about the shipment of illegal immigrants to Alaska. No phone calls or emails were returned.

Title: Undocumented Immigrant Minors With Legal Counsel Show Up for Immigration Court,
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 03, 2014, 04:01:42 pm
Undocumented Immigrant Minors With Legal Counsel Show Up for Immigration Court, Likely to Stay in US, Says Report

The immigration crisis at the southern U.S. border has seen an influx of undocumented immigrant minors enter the country in alarming figures.

According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 57,525 undocumented immigrant children under the age of 18 and traveling without a parent or guardian were apprehended between Oct. 1, 2013, and June 30, 2014. For 2015, the White House said up to 150,000 undocumented children will enter the U.S. With many undocumented immigrant children being apprehended to detention centers, they have the opportunity to make their case to stay in the U.S. at an immigration court hearing. According to new reports, however, the children appearing at the immigration courts bring new problems.

Republican Arizona Senators Jeff Flake and John McCain claimed 90 percent of unaccompanied immigration children skip their immigration hearings. Sen. Flake told The Arizona Republic that his 90 percent source was House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. The senators' allegation has received criticism, such as from the Department of Justice's Executive Office of Immigration Review. The office's director, Juan Osuna, said 46 percent of all overall minors failed to appear at court hearings, but he didn't share the rate for unaccompanied children.

"The fact that no one -- from the executive branch to the chairman of the congressional oversight committee -- is able to tell us how many of the kids currently being apprehended will show up for court just underscores the need for better tracking and reporting, which is what Sen. Flake and Sen. McCain are trying to do with their bill," Flake spokeswoman Bronwyn Lance Chester said to The Arizona Republic.

As noted by President Barack Obama, the wait times for a hearing at an immigration court can be long. Pew Research revealed the current U.S. immigration process could take months, even years, for an undocumented immigrant to be processed through the country's system, regardless of the outcome.

As Latin Post reported, the Department of Justice noted that the U.S. immigration courts have a backlog of 375,373 cases, approximately 50,000 more cases than in 2012. According to National Association of Immigration Judges President Dana Leigh Marks, she has scheduled immigration cases as far as 2018. Judge Marks is one of the 243 judges making decisions for the more than 59 immigration courts in the U.S.

The Transnational Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University revealed 47.5 percent of undocumented minors with legal counsel are present for their immigration court hearings and granted the right to stay in the U.S. The study revealed nine out of 10 children without an attorney are deported.

"Examining cases filed during the last 21 months (FY 2013 through June 30, 2014) for which outcomes have been reached, a greater proportion of the children have been allowed to remain in this country, and a smaller percentage were ordered deported, relative to earlier cohorts of children," the study stated. "This was true both for those who were represented as well as those who were not."

The study also reported, "Even without the assistance of an attorney, over a quarter of recently arrived children have been allowed by an Immigration Judge to remain, as compared with only 10 percent for the decade as a whole."

For 2014, Congress allocated $312 million for immigration courts, which is an increase from $289 million in 2013.

Title: Are We Being Lied To ? – Detainment Center At Artesia New Mexico Claims Lockdown
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 03, 2014, 04:15:55 pm
Are We Being Lied To ? – Detainment Center At Artesia New Mexico Claims Lockdown Due To Chicken Pox… But Something Is Not Adding Up

A few days ago we shared the Washington Times story about a facility in New Mexico being closed due to a Chicken Pox outbreak.  However, a little more research into the Artesia, New Mexico, Detainment Center and you can find out a week prior a little-known CDC/DHS inspection found there were 89 (eighty-nine) cases of Tuberculosis identified in the exact same facility.

Is the Chicken Pox story a cover for the more troublesome Tuberculosis outbreak ? Is the New Mexico quarantine really because of Chicken Pox ?

If so, why didn’t they quarantine the facility as they began x-ray screening for the 89 active skin-test TB cases ?

I think with research we have a pretty good idea of what the *actual* reality is.  But first, the Chicken Pox story as it appeared in the media:

NEW MEXICO - The federal government’s new facility to house illegal immigrant families surging across the border has been put on lockdown because of chicken pox, with no immigrants allowed to be transferred in or out, a congressman said this week.

Hundreds of illegal immigrants being kept at the campus of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Artesia, New Mexico, are being treated for and vaccinated against chicken pox after an outbreak, said Rep. Steve Pearce, the Republican congressman whose district includes Artesia.

“As the FLETC facility reaches maximum capacity, I am increasingly concerned for the health and safety of the women and children at FLETC and for the local community. The virus, that has caused two residents to be put in isolation, has halted all departures,” Mr. Pearce said.

He said he’s asked the Homeland Security Department, which runs the facility, to be available to handle calls from the community.

The chicken pox outbreak is the latest hiccup for federal officials struggling to gain a handle on the surge of illegal immigrants from Central America this year.

While most of the attention has been on the children traveling without their parents, the border has been flooded by an almost equal number of families from Central America — usually women bringing their children with them. While unaccompanied children were being turned over to social workers, the families were eligible for quick deportations — except the government had fewer than 100 beds to hold the thousands of people being apprehended. (read more)

However, the week prior, the first underreported story of positive skin TB tests in the same facility reflected this reality:  (*note – Pay attention to the dates)

TUESDAY JULY 22nd – ARTESIA >> A total of 89 undocumented immigrants detained at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center have tested positive on the tuberculosis, or TB, skin test, but no individual has actually contracted the disease according to J.R. Doporto, a Carlsbad City Councilor.

A positive TB skin or blood test only signifies that the person has been infected with the bacteria that causes tuberculosis, according to a fact sheet published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The test does not show whether the person has actually contracted the tuberculosis disease.

If a person tests positive in the TB skin test, he or she is then given a chest x-ray which proves whether the subject has contracted the disease.

Doporto, Artesia Mayor Phil Burch, and other various city and county officials from Southeastern New Mexico met with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials on Tuesday (7/22) for an update on the status of the undocumented immigrants being detained at FLETC while they await either deportation or an asylum hearing in front of an immigration judge. (read more)

On Tuesday July 22nd they were in the process of x-raying the positive skin test detainees to identify “ACTIVE TUBERCULOSIS”.

According to the media report some detainees ‘skin-tested positive’ on Tuesday July 22nd, and therefore couldn’t get their x-rays until Wednesday July 23rd or Thursday the 24th.  There are 603 illegal alien detainees in this facility. Notably ICE refused to give the reporter commentary.   However, the final paragraph of the article is this:

[...]  No detainee to-date has been found to have any contagious disease or virus since Central Americans who were caught illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border were first brought to Artesia on June 27. (link)

And yet SIX DAYS after this article, and four days after the TB X-Rays began, the entire facility was shut down due to an outbreak of “chicken pox” ?

Doesn’t make sense.

If, according to the reporter and city council member, no detainee through 7/22/14 “has been found to have any contagious disease“, then why did the entire facility get quarantined five days after they began screening (x-rays) for “active TB” ?

Think about it.

…And another factor coincidence.  The same day as the media reports the facility was quarantined, President Obama signs an executive order allowing for the detainment and quarantine of those showing signs of acute respiratory disease, ex: Tuberculosis.

On Thursday, Barack Obama signed an executive order that allows for the apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals with certain severe acute respiratory diseases, not including influenza. The executive order modifies one signed in 2003 by George Bush that allowed for the detention and quarantine of those with SARS.

“Severe acute respiratory syndromes, which are diseases that are associated with fever and signs and symptoms of pneumonia or other respiratory illness, are capable of being transmitted from person to person, and that either are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic, or, upon infection, are highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity if not properly controlled,” the executive order reads. “This subsection does not apply to influenza.” (link)

Our hunch, our reasonable hunch based on empirical evidence, is the quarantine was a direct result of positive x-ray scans for ACTIVE TB.

Further evidenced because the CDC, DHS and ICE have been studying TB contagion rates in illegal aliens for several years.    And not coincidentally guess which countries have the highest rates of TB virus:

It’s important to remember the U.S. Border Patrol does NOT screen for diseases.  The BP merely process the apprehended illegal alien and transfer into a temporary detainment facility – like the FLETC facility in Artesia, New Mexico – where DHS (Dept. of Homeland Security) take over and begin screening the arrivals.

Additionally, and again not coincidentally, yesterday the following article outlined Inspector General audits of DHS facilities.   The audit reflected an alarming reality:

Unaccompanied illegal immigrant children with communicable diseases have given or exposed federal agents to lice, scabies, tuberculosis and chicken pox, according to a report issued Thursday by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General.

In two cases, the children of a border patrol agent got chicken pox contracted from their parents’ exposure to unaccompanied children with chicken pox, according to the report on conditions of detention centers and border facilities.

The report, the first in a series, is based on 87 unannounced visits to 63 detention centers being used to house unaccompanied alien children (UAC) in Texas, Arizona and California during July 1-16.  (continue reading)

An outbreak of “Chicken Pox” sounds a lot better to the public than an outbreak of “Tuberculosis”, no?   The former sounds, well, almost ‘childlike’.

I seriously doubt the exact same facility holding 603 detainees, just coincidentally with 89 positive TB skin tests, is quarantined because of chicken pox -with zero prior occurrence’s- just five days after x-rays began on 89 positive TB skin test patients; on the same day President Obama signs an executive order allowing DHS to detain and isolate TB carriers.

Occam’s Razor !

Just sayin’….

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 04, 2014, 09:20:24 am
Colorado issuing driver's licenses to immigrants

DENVER (AP) — Colorado has started issuing driver's licenses and identification cards to immigrants regardless of their legal status, marking a dramatic change in a state that less than a decade ago passed strict immigration enforcement laws.

There was a festive mood at one Denver office issuing the documents Friday morning, as state Department of Revenue Director Barbara Brohl congratulated applicants once they had their cards approved.

"I never imagined that I would one day have a driver's license in my hands," Mexican immigrant Rosalva Mireles, 37, said in Spanish as she held a paper copy of her new license. The permanent card will be mailed.

She's one of thousands of immigrants hoping the identification cards will add a degree of legitimacy to their residency in Colorado. About 9,500 people are signed up for appointments through the next 90 days to get the documents, with more getting scheduled every day. Both people in the country illegally and those who have temporary legal status will qualify.


Title: Leaked CBP Report Shows Entire World Exploiting Open US Border
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 04, 2014, 03:50:44 pm
Leaked CBP Report Shows Entire World Exploiting Open US Border

LUBBOCK, Texas — A leaked intelligence analysis from the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reveals the exact numbers of illegal immigrants entering and attempting to enter the U.S. from more than 75 different countries. The report was obtained by a trusted source within the CBP agency who leaked the document and spoke with Breitbart Texas on the condition of anonymity. The report is labeled as "Unclassified//For Official Use Only" and indicates that the data should be handled as "Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU)."

The numbers provided are in graphics and are broken down into “OFO” and “OBP.” The Customs and Border Protection agency is divided into the Office of Field Operations (OFO) and the Office of Border Patrol (OBP). The OFO numbers reflect anyone either turning themselves in at official U.S. points of entry, or anyone caught while being smuggled at the points of entry. The OBP numbers reflect anyone being caught or turning themselves in to Border Patrol agents between the points of entry, or anyone caught at interior checkpoints by Border Patrol agents. The “OFO Inadmissible” designation to any individual from a nation other than Mexico or Canada means that U.S. authorities took the individuals into custody. Whether they were deported or given a Notice to Appear is unknown. It is important to note these numbers do not include data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The unavailable ICE data are in addition to these numbers.

The report reveals the apprehension numbers ranging from 2010 through July 2014. It shows that most of the human smuggling from Syria and Albania into the U.S. comes through Central America. The report also indicates the routes individuals from North Africa and the Middle East take into the European Union, either to illegally migrate there or as a possible stop in their journey to the United States. The data are broken down further into the specific U.S. border sectors where the apprehensions and contact occurred.

Among the significant revelations are that individuals from nations currently suffering from the world’s largest Ebola outbreak have been caught attempting to sneak across the porous U.S. border into the interior of the United States. At least 71 individuals from the three nations affected by the current Ebola outbreak have either turned themselves in or been caught attempting to illegally enter the U.S. by U.S. authorities between January 2014 and July 2014.

As of July 20, 2014, 1,443 individuals from China were caught sneaking across the porous U.S. border this year alone, with another 1,803 individuals either turning themselves in to U.S. authorities at official ports of entry, or being caught attempting to illegally enter at the ports of entry. This comes amid a massive crackdown by Chinese authorities of Islamic terrorists in the Communist nation.

Twenty-eight individuals from Pakistan were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. this year alone, with another 211 individuals either turning themselves in or being caught at official ports of entry.

Thirteen Egyptians were caught trying to sneak into the U.S. this year alone, with another 168 either turning themselves in or being caught at official ports of entry.

Four individuals from Yemen were caught attempting to sneak into the U.S. by Border Patrol agents in 2014 alone, with another 34 individuals either turning themselves in or being caught attempting to sneak through official ports of entry. Yemen is not the only nation with individuals who pose terror risks to the U.S. that the report indicates travel from. The failed nation of Somalia, known as a hotbed of Islamic terror activity, was also referenced in the report. Four individuals from Somalia were caught trying to sneak into the U.S. by Border Patrol agents in 2014. Another 290 either turned themselves in or were caught attempting to sneak in at official ports of entry. This reporter previously covered the issue of illegal immigration into the U.S. from Somalia and other nations in the Horn of Africa.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 06, 2014, 08:53:53 am
Rand Paul: Rick Perry's Embrace of TX DREAM Act Lured Illegals Like Obama's Amnesty

On Tuesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said Texas Gov. Rick Perry's enthusiastic embrace of in-state tuition for illegal immigrants is a magnet that lures more illegal immigrants to America – just like President Barack Obama's temporary amnesty program for DREAMers.

“President Obama won’t send them home, and Gov. Perry has done the same thing by giving them in-state tuition," Paul told the Wall Street Journal during a significant Iowa trip. "That’s a beacon without any kind of border security."

Paul and Perry are potential 2016 presidential rivals, and they both will be meeting with potential supporters and activists as they crisscross throughout Iowa this month. They have feuded on foreign policy in recent months in the pages of beltway publications like Politico and the Washington Post.

Paul's comments come as the border crisis has propelled Perry to the top tier of potential GOP presidential hopefuls – along with Paul – in some polls. During the 2012 GOP presidential primary, Perry fell precipitously because of the illegal immigration issue.

In addition to concerns about his crony capitalism, conservatives did not trust Perry on illegal immigration before the campaign. He only confirmed and exacerbated those fears during a Florida primary debate in September of 2011 when Perry said opponents of in-state tuition for illegal immigrants did not have "a heart."

Perry never recovered from those remarks.

Title: Obama Is Preparing To Make One Of The Boldest Moves Of His Presidency — And It C
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 06, 2014, 07:06:55 pm
Obama Is Preparing To Make One Of The Boldest Moves Of His Presidency — And It Could Stretch The Scope Of Executive Power

By the end of the summer, President Barack Obama will make what some activists and legal experts say could be the "boldest move" of his presidency as he prepares to move without Congress on immigration reform.

The coming executive actions to change immigration policy could become the defining moment in a second term marred by congressional gridlock. A mid  fierce debate over the crisis along the U.S.-Mexico border they also could set up a potential political firestorm just weeks before the crucial midterm elections. Perhaps most importantly, Obama's coming executive actions could also test the limits of presidential power.

"Depending on how far they go, yes," David Martin, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law who specializes in immigration law, told Business Insider.  "It could be a significant challenge to the scope of presidential power."

The White House has provided few hints on what Obama will do on immigration as a review by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security on his options is still ongoing. The Washington Post has reported, based on readouts of meetings among White House officials, congressional Democrats, and activist groups, that Obama could effectively expand the Deferred Actions for Childhood Arrivals program. DACA, as it is known, has shielded hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children from deportation .

According to the Washington Post report, the Obama administration is considering providing " temporary relief for law-abiding undocumented immigrants who are closely related to U.S. citizens or those who have lived in the country a certain number of years." The number of people who could fit under those descriptions might be as high as five million.

"We're asking the president to really go as broad as he can go," Cristina Jimenez, the cofounder and managing director of the group United We Dream, told Business Insider, adding: "He has a chance to make one of the boldest moves he possibly could. It depends on how he wants to be remembered."

United We Dream was one of a few groups that gave up rather early on the idea Congress would pass any sort of legislative reform to the nation's immigration policy. The group stopped lobbying Congress on the issue long before House Speaker John Boehner informed Obama in late June that the House would not take up any immigration-related legislation this year.

Jimenez said United We Dream then  made Obama its "primary target," because he has the authority to enforce the law
. As most proponents of immigration reform see it, Obama's options for executive actions fit into two categories, as laid out earlier this year by the left-leaning Center for American Progress:

    "Enforcement reforms" — in which, for example, the administration would choose to place a lower priority on undocumented immigrants who do not have a criminal history or who have extensive community ties.
    "Affirmative relief" — involves identifying the low-priority individuals and creating a program for them to earn relief from deportation, such as in the case of the DACA program.

During a news conference last week, Obama painted a sharp contrast between himself and congressional Republicans who voted to effectively end the DACA program the same day, saying he would have to "act alone" to solve the border crisis.

"The broader point is that if, in fact, House Republicans are concerned about me acting independently of Congress — despite the fact that I’ve taken fewer executive actions than my Republican predecessor or my Democratic predecessor before that, or the Republican predecessor before that — then the easiest way to solve it is passing legislation. Get things done," Obama said.

Some legal experts, as well as supporters of any potential executive action, think the administration is on solid legal ground to take the steps described in reports — despite the White House's repeated claims earlier this year that its hands were tied.

Others, like Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the conservative-leaning Center for Immigration Studies, disagree. Krikorian argued that though much smaller versions of the DACA program have been pursued by presidents in the past, they were usually in emergency situations in which the president did not have time to wait for Congress.

Krikorian said an expansion of the DACA program to as many as five million people could constitute a fundamental change in executive power — from a constitutional system with checks and balances to one that could run on "decree."

"He  doesn't give a rat's *** about the Constitution," Krikorian said of Obama.

Krikorian said Obama's executive actions could be a slippery slope for future presidents. One example he gave: A Republican President Chris Christie, for instance, could want to reform the corporate tax code. Facing opposition from Congress, he would decide that his administration would simply not prosecute corporations that don't pay more than 25% in taxes.

However, Ben Winograd, an attorney at the  Immigrant and Refugee Appellate Center, rejected Krikorian's analogy. Winograd told Business Insider the federal government always has the discretion to enforce the law as it wishes or sees capable — and does so already, to an extent, in deciding which types of violators of tax laws it wants to go after.

"If the complaint is that, 'Well, so and so isn't following the law as we'd like him to,' then the only remedy for that is political," Winograd said. "You can vote them out at the ballot box, or you can try to bring articles of impeachment. But to say you are violating the law by not enforcing the law to an extent we'd like — I mean, it's a non sequitur. It doesn't make sense."

The key element the administration must follow is adhering to the resources allocated by Congress. The Impoundment Control Act  requires the executive branch to spend the  money appropriated by Congress toward the purpose designated by Congress.

Congress has appropriated enough funds to deport about 400,000 people a year. The administration deported nearly 370,000 undocumented immigrants last year, according to statistics released by the Department of Homeland Security.

Martin, the Virginia law professor, told Business Insider the administration could theoretically adhere to those guidelines for at least a few years while expanding deferred action. But absent legislative action from Congress, it might be hard to continue on a long-term basis.

"The situation requires f aithful execution of appropriation laws," Martin said. " If they drop far below that, then there'd be real legal issues."

Title: Weighing in on border crisis, SBC president says Jesus was an immigrant
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 07, 2014, 03:42:17 pm
Weighing in on border crisis, SBC president says Jesus was an immigrant
Just back from touring two Texas facilities for unaccompanied migrant children, SBC President Ronnie Floyd urged Baptists to act with compassion toward the undocumented.

The president of the Southern Baptist Convention says Jesus would be sympathetic to the plight of undocumented children flocking to the southern U.S. border, because as a child he also lived as an immigrant.

Ronnie Floyd, senior pastor of Cross Church in Northwest Arkansas, preached a sermon Aug. 3 on what the Bible says about immigration. In the message, picked up on the SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission website, Floyd reminded listeners that according to the second chapter of Matthew, the baby Jesus’ parents took him and fled during the night to Egypt after an angel told Joseph in a dream that Herod was trying to kill him.

Floyd — just back from a visit with faith leaders including SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission President Russell Moore to sites along the U.S. border housing immigrant children — repeated a quote that Moore wrote in a blog three years ago.

“Our Lord Jesus himself was a so-called ‘illegal immigrant,’” Moore, at the time a professor and administrator at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary wrote in a blog titled “Immigration and the Gospel” dated June 17, 2011. “Fleeing, like many of those in our country right now, a brutal political situation, our Lord’s parents sojourned with him in Egypt.”

“Therefore, without any question at all, Jesus Christ is sympathetic with immigrants,” Floyd added. “The immigrant is loved by Jesus Christ. I mean every person on the face of this earth is loved by Jesus Christ. And that’s why Christ died for all of the world.”

Floyd said following Christ should affect every area of life, including one’s views about immigration.

“How we treat other people — all people, all ages of people and all generations of people, regardless of the color of their skin or the language they speak — it tells us a great deal about our personal walk and relationship with Jesus Christ,” he said.

Floyd said Christians “must extend compassionate action to all people, pointing them to the hope that is found only in the Lord Jesus Christ and his saving grace,” and “as we treat the least of these, we had better remember, we are treating Jesus Christ.”

Floyd said that means ministering to the needs of the immigrant when opportunities arise. He said Cross Church has been involved in immigrant transition ministry for about a year, teaching English as a second language with hopes of adding citizenship classes and resources to put immigrants in touch with legal aid.

**I've noticed SBC churches, in particular these First Baptists, have offered free English as a Second Language classes in recent years. Now I see why.

A moral issue, as well as politlcal

Floyd said regardless of one’s personal views on immigration policy, the immigration crisis taking place at the border is not just a political issue, but also a moral issue.

“I want to remind you again, these are real people, made in the image of God, and people for whom Christ died,” he said.

Floyd urged Christians to “diligently pray” for national leaders confronting the immigration issue.

“We need to humbly call upon the leaders of our country to fix the immigration system in our nation,” he said. “Since we have elected them to lead us, we need to pray for them to come together and agree upon what needs to be done in reforming our immigration system.”

“As we pray for them, we need to remember that these issues are very complex and they don’t have easy answers,” Floyd said. “Yet I believe that we have a God who is able to bring people together and towards a common goal of demonstrating a commitment to both compassion and justice.”

Floyd cited a 2011 SBC resolution calling for, “with the borders secured, a just and compassionate path to legal status, with appropriate restitutionary measures, for those undocumented immigrants already living in our country,” while adding that “this resolution is not to be construed as support for amnesty for any undocumented immigrant.”

Avoiding amnesty

“You hear periodically the term ‘amnesty,’” Floyd said. “By no means would we believe in absolute amnesty, meaning that we believe everyone who is illegal now becomes legal automatically.”

Floyd said the presence of an estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants already in the country and the surge of children and young people creating the current humanitarian crisis at the border prove that the nation’s borders are not secure.

“This is a major national security threat to our nation and to our future,” Floyd said. “This is why we must pray for the leaders of our nation, and our leaders need to come together and take care of this issue.”

Floyd said the Christian’s final responsibility for the immigrant is “we need to reach all people, including immigrants, for Jesus Christ.”

**So one minute he says(pretty much) that those who came here illegally need to be sent back, then the next minute he says to "reach out to them"? Talk about double minded...

“As God is bringing the world to the United States, we have a tremendous opportunity for reaching people for Christ,” Floyd said. “God has brought them here to find him. Therefore we must share him.”

“Our church must be aggressive in reaching all people with the gospel of Jesus Christ, not only those who look like us and talk like us, but those who are different from us in many ways,” he said.

One way of doing that, he said, is through ministries of adoption and foster care.

Title: Re: Weighing in on border crisis, SBC president says Jesus was an immigrant
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 07, 2014, 03:49:43 pm
Ronnie Floyd, senior pastor of Cross Church in Northwest Arkansas, preached a sermon Aug. 3 on what the Bible says about immigration. In the message, picked up on the SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission website, Floyd reminded listeners that according to the second chapter of Matthew, the baby Jesus’ parents took him and fled during the night to Egypt after an angel told Joseph in a dream that Herod was trying to kill him.

Floyd — just back from a visit with faith leaders including SBC Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission President Russell Moore to sites along the U.S. border housing immigrant children — repeated a quote that Moore wrote in a blog three years ago.

“Our Lord Jesus himself was a so-called ‘illegal immigrant,’” Moore, at the time a professor and administrator at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary wrote in a blog titled “Immigration and the Gospel” dated June 17, 2011. “Fleeing, like many of those in our country right now, a brutal political situation, our Lord’s parents sojourned with him in Egypt.”

OK, let's look at the CONTEXT of this passage they're talking about...

Matthew 2:12  And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.
Mat 2:13  And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.

1) It was GOD that told them to flee from Herod and to depart to Egypt.

2) Joseph, Mary, and Jesus ONLY stayed there TEMPORARILY(until the Lord told them to come out).

Mat 2:19  But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,
Mat 2:20  Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life.
Mat 2:21  And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.
Mat 2:22  But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:
Mat 2:23  And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

So are these SBC reprobates saying these (unsaved)illegal immigrants were told in a vision by God to sneak across the Mexican border and stay here permanently?

Title: CBF(SBC grp) appeals for funds as it responds to immigrants crossing U.S. border
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 07, 2014, 04:07:45 pm
CBF appeals for funds as it responds to immigrants crossing U.S. border

The group has helped feed more than 3,000 people in partnership with others in the Rio Grande Valley.


The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship has created a fund called “CBF CARES (Children and Refugee Emergency Support)” to assist the surge in Central American immigrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, many of whom are now detained in federal facilities.

The fund will help with immediate needs but also will provide resources as unaccompanied children and refugee families are transported from border areas to other cities.

CBF Disaster Response is coordinating efforts with field personnel along the Texas border, CBF of Texas and partners including Texas Baptist Disaster Recovery.

Diann Whisnand, a CBF worker on the Texas border, has facilitated the CBF’s donation of pallets of bottled water to the Rio Grande Valley Food Bank in Pharr, Texas. She has also talked with refugees, aid volunteers and agencies in McAllen, Texas. The CBF has helped feed more than 3,000 people in partnership with the Salvation Army and Catholic Charities.

Whisnand says the McAllen community is focused on helping refugee families, typically young mothers with children. Unaccompanied refugee children, she said, “are transported directly under the guardianship of the federal government to centers managed by contracted child service agencies.”

Tommy Deal, the CBF’s U.S. Disaster Response coordinator, said the organization will continue to seek ways to serve in this long-term crisis.

“As these children and families are moved out of the border cities and states where they entered the U.S. to other cities for housing, other needs will arise across the country,” he said. “Opportunities for individual and church support for the day-to-day needs of the refugees, as well as opportunities to advocate on their behalf will surface.”

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 07, 2014, 06:14:43 pm
Texas Border Rancher Says Illegal Immigrant Surge ‘Overwhelming’

While the discussion of the latest wave of illegal immigrants has focused mostly on women and unaccompanied children, Texas sheriffs and ranchers say they are seeing another side of the surge.

Illegal immigrants — often ushered across the Rio Grande river by coyotes — are busting through ranchers’ fences in one county at levels not seen in years, indicating that more than just children and women are coming into the U.S. illegally.

According to ABC Houston, in the first six months of the year in Hidalgo County, 30 miles north of the Rio Grande, ranchers in just one precinct have placed 47 calls about traffickers obliterating their fences.

“I promise you the number of incidents of ranch crossings is double or triple that,” Hidalgo County precinct Sgt. Aaron Moreno told the news station.

In the same precinct, 64 “bailouts” have been reported, according to ABC Houston. Bailouts occur when illegal immigrant passengers scatter from the vehicles transporting them after they crash or officers pull them over.

Hidalgo County rancher Fred Cappadona has observed a similar uptick in illegal traffic.

“The numbers are overwhelming,” he told ABC Houston, adding that, compared to last year, movement is “three times more aggressive this year.”

The recent spike of illegal immigrants — which the Obama administration has called “unprecedented” — has mostly been reported as a wave of unaccompanied children. The administration predicts that 90,000 will be apprehended this year — three times last year’s totals.

While the administration and lawmakers have called this a “humanitarian crisis,” ranchers like Cappadona and law enforcement officials working near the border have provided first-hand evidence that more than innocent children are coming into the U.S.

“They’re not being stopped at the river,” Cappadona told ABC Houston. “That’s the main problem. It’s government’s responsibility, not ours but we’re having to pay the expenses.”

“If the border patrol controlled them at the river, we wouldn’t have to call them here,” the rancher continued, adding “I am a taxpayer and I’m not getting my money’s worth.”

Cappadona’s and Sgt. Moreno’s observations were shared by at least some of the Texas sheriffs who gathered last month at their annual convention.

“The damage is constant,” Brooks County chief deputy Benny Martinez told reporters at the event.

“When you have to focus on the rush of undocumented immigrants coming through your county, what does that do to your staffing? Of course it kinda takes some of our staffing from being out on patrol,” Karnes County sheriff Dwayne Villaneuva warned. (RELATED: Texas Sheriffs Speak Out On Illegal Immigration)

Dealing with unaccompanied children and women with children leaves gaps in the border and allows more dangerous elements to enter the country, some lawmakers and U.S. border agents have claimed.

Texas attorney general and gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott expressed that concern in a June letter to President Obama requesting more border help.

“With the Border Patrol’s focus shifted to this crisis, we have grave concerns that dangerous cartel activity, including narcotics smuggling and human trafficking, will go unchecked because Border Patrol resources are stretched too thin,” he wrote.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 09, 2014, 06:20:32 pm
The Federal Government Won't Seal Our Southern Border, So It's Up To Us

Right this very minute, next to the town of Killeen, Texas sits Fort Hood. There are two full army divisions there: The 2nd Armored Division and the 1st Cavalry Division (my old unit). Given the circumstances, why haven't these two divisions been assigned to and deployed to our southern border?

The other day, an off duty border agent was murdered right in front of his wife and children by two illegal alien criminals, both of whom were deported several times before, but always found themselves back in the US. Because of Barack Hussein Obama's direct policies, a father, husband and son was brutally ripped away from his family and it didn't have to happen. Obama, in my opinion, is directly responsible and that young man's blood is on his hands!

Don't think that I'm letting Congress (both Houses) off the hook either, because I'm not!

It is painfully obvious, even to the most dimwitted, die-hard liberal that our country is under assault on our southern border. Contrary to what the liberal media is telling you, they are not all women and babies coming through. There is direct proof that there are Jihadist terrorists, drug dealers, violent psychopathic criminals and MS-13 gang members coming through also. This fact alone should alarm and terrify any sane person. These animals do not want to be American citizens. Their only thoughts are to ****, murder and rob you and me. The Muslims that are mixed in with them are here for only one thing: To destroy the United States of America.

This is one reason why the 2nd Amendment was put in the Constitution; the protection of our nation! It is an obligation of every American citizen to bear arms and protect his country. The federal government, from the President, to the Senate and the House of Representatives has utterly failed in their sworn duty to you and me. They left Washington without first securing the border. So when you go to town-hall meetings in the next five weeks, ask your elected official why they failed us. And don't accept any answer that starts with "It was all because of Harry Reid and the Democrats…" That is not an acceptable answer. You don't leave to go on vacation without locking-up the store before you go. No responsible adult can justify doing something so blatantly supid! That token bit of dramatic theater last week at the last minute was a shameful farce! They had no business leaving Washington until the border was secure. And yes, there is plenty of the blame game to go around!

Logically, it is now up to us, to do what our politicians have failed to do.

In my last article, I stated that every single politician who comes home during their break should be arrested for dereliction of duty and violation of their oath of office. That wasn't rhetoric or angst, but the plain and simple truth! And it goes all the way up to and including the President!

This is not a joke, our lives, our property and the lives of all our loved ones are in mortal danger! Every single politician in our nations capital have let us down and have put us in grave danger and exposed us to not just violence but the possibility of contracting diseases as well that were eradicated decades ago.

If you live on a border state....any border state, you have a duty as a citizen of that state to protect and defend it.

People who think this is all just the Democrats fault, don't have a clue as to how the political system in this representative government works and are living in a fools paradise and give ALL Americans and Tea Party members, a "black eye" with their lack of involvement and apathy!

If your state doesn't have a militia, then you should think about starting one, because if you're waiting for the National Guard to come and rescue you, you might be waiting a long time, and by then it will be too late.

This link will help you find a militia in your state.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 09, 2014, 06:29:24 pm
Treason: Border Patrol Agent Reveals that ADMITTED MURDERERS are Being Released into America

Treason: Border Patrol Agent Reveals that ADMITTED MURDERERS are Being Released into America

And more importantly, what will it take for Americans to finally do something about it?

Has everyone forgotten that these people work for us?

Would you consider releasing an admitted murderer, notice I said admitted and not suspected, into the United States an act of treason? Would that qualify?

While Obama and his complicit & traitorous legislators enjoy their vacations, this is exactly what has been happening. These traitors come in both colors, red and blue. However, I am not disillusioned enough to believe that there really are two distinct political parties in America. Both sides share the guilt and equally share a common agenda.

I don't want to hear another word about gun control. I don't want to hear another word about these poor helpless children who are entering the country to claim their free soccer balls from bleeding heart turncoats like Glenn Beck and Ted Cruz.

I am sick of hearing the lies. I am sick of the media twisting the stories and yanking at our heart strings. My heart strings currently belong to my own children. They are here legally and my government is putting my kids in danger.

Our government is now intentionally putting American people in harms way and using loopholes to do it. Never mind that these are illegal immigrants. That is immaterial. We are hearing that we can not break the laws that prohibit their deportation.

What the hell is that about? They are illegal, but we can't get rid of them?

This entire system is upside down.

And guess what people?

Your elected servants simply do not give a crap.

While Americans worry about Ebola and dozens of other legitimate problems, they are golfing, praying to their owl gods and doing whatever the hell else it is that the elite do.

Do you remember Chris Cabrera? He is the Vice President of the Border Patrol Union who previously revealed, "We're having a lot of diseases coming in and some we haven't seen in decades."

As if that wasn't enough to make us all mad…

His latest revelations are enough to make someone want to go write a letter or hold up a sign and beg the government to stop. Gee, that always works doesn't it? Check out this video and tell me it doesn't make you angrier than you have been in a long, long time.

Cabrera says "morale is at an all-time low right now," but the reasons for that morale being low better make everyone who reads this angry and we have to decide soon, like yesterday, that we have had enough. We can't just pour a glass of wine and turn on "Dancing With the Stars" while this goes away. That won't work.

Not only are our border patrol agents not being "allowed" to do their jobs, they are actually complicit in letting some very dangerous people into this country. That is unacceptable. Chris is acting like their hands are tied and that the decisions ultimately rest with ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), but these Border Patrol agents took an oath and you are an American Chris Cabrera. Start acting like it.

Our morale is pretty low as well.

You don't have to deport anyone. If they are not fond of dodging bullets, they will gladly deport themselves. Defend the American homeland. That is what you are there for.

Unconstitutional orders must be ignored. America is being invaded.

"We've had a couple that admitted to murder in their home countries."


Really Chris?

I appreciate the whistle blowing aspect of this, but wake up people. This is beyond crazy. Can we really hear statements like that and just go about our daily business?

I am really angry and you should be too.

Forget about the humanitarian effort for a minute and tell me… What has happened to the "humanity" of a nation that can accept bringing this trash into our country while intentionally putting our citizens in danger?

All these young gang members have to say is that they have a parent here and nothing at home and they are released. They can have gang tats from head to toe. They can admit M-13 gang affiliation and it doesn't matter. They can admit to murder. Does anyone else see a problem here?

Cavuto at one point says/asks, "So you have to follow the law, and if the law says to release them, there is nothing you can do about it?" That was not the proper line of questioning Neil. What about something like, "So what about your responsibility to the American people?"

Neil Cavuto you are a spineless moron and because of that you fit in pretty well at FOX News. You are not alone there. These people are illegal aliens. What part of "illegal" do you not understand?

America needs some leadership with intestinal fortitude to show up quickly. Our politicians and even the right-wing media are totally killing us. They have sold us out.

Someone please tell me when 1776 gets here. I am done defending any of these clowns. They have been put on notice.

Allowing admitted murders into my country crosses every single red line I could imagine. There is no more hiding it. There is no more kidding ourselves that elections will fix this.

How are you going to feel if one of these thugs kills your child or grandchild?

While we are busy trying to babysit the world, we have forgotten about the safety of our own children.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 12, 2014, 09:24:29 pm
300,000 People Could Lose Their Obamacare If They Don't Prove Their Residency

More than 300,000 Obamacare enrollees have yet to provide information on their legal residency or citizenship, according to the government. Those individuals have until September 5 to send complete information to the government before losing coverage on September 30.

According the data provided by the government, in May 970,000 people had citizenship data errors in their Obamacare applications. As of August, 450,000 of those cases have been resolved, 210,000 are in progress and 60,000 new documents arrive every day. The 310,000 remaining applicants will receive two more phone calls and one more email.

In June the Associated Press reported that 2 million enrollees were missing information on immigration, citizenship and income that could jeopardize their subsidies and insurance plans. At the time the Department of Health and Human Services expected that most the of inconsistencies would be cleared up by the end of the summer.

Critics of the health care law have noted that the government doesn't have a system in place to verify information it receives from consumers. Last month the Government Accountability Office was able to gain subsidized health insurance for 11 out of 18 fake accounts. The government has argued that a data inconsistency doesn't mean there's a problem with the application. As The New York Times noted earlier this summer, consumers often run into problems uploading files to Healthcare.gov, or are asked to send in files they've already sent.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 13, 2014, 06:46:19 pm
Illegal Immigrant Children In The Classroom, Schools Brace For 50,000 New Students

Illegal immigrant children are entitled to a free public education under federal law. Schools across the country are preparing for an influx of new students in the coming weeks. Up to 50,000 illegal immigrant children are expected to enroll in American schools this fall, USA Today is reporting.

Although illegal alien children have become an increased percentage of the public school student population in many states over the past several decades, the sheer number of unaccompanied children who have crossed the Texas border this year alone has administrators concerned.

This is a whole new wave of immigrant students that are coming without any guardians whatsoever. One of the challenges here is the large number of unaccompanied minors,” National School Board Association general counsel Francisco Negron said. We don’t know the educational background of the students, if they’ve been to school, the language issue and operational issues that could raise costs, Negron added.

School support assistant director for Dalton Public Schools in Georgia, Caroline Woodason said, “We haven’t started school yet, so we are all just holding our breath to see what’s going to come on the first day of school.” In 2013 Montgomery County Publci Schools in Maryland enrolled 107 illegal immigrant children, an currently have no idea how many more new students with little or no English speaking skills will be coming their way this year. Last month more than 2,200 unaccompanied minors arrived in the state. As previously reported by The Inquisitr, illegal immigrants have now been transported to all 50 states from Border Patrol detention centers.

The added expense of educating the illegal immigrant children has been a source of angst for many taxpayers. Parents and teachers concerned about over-crowded classrooms and a slow-down of the learning process due to the language barrier alone is becoming another often-voiced complaint. School nurses, educators, and parents alike are also worried about communicable disease such as lice, scabies, and chicken pox, spreading more rapidly. As previously noted by The Inquisitr, Border Patrol agents at Texas border detention facilities have stated that such conditions and ailments have presented frequently among the unaccompanied children being released into communities across the country.

The United States Department of Education has created a team to field “inquiries received from the field” and to identify additional resources for school districts feeling overwhelmed by the influx of new students.

States can set aside additional money for school districts who have a “significant increase” in illegal immigrant children walking through the building doors. But, a state must actually have additional funds to set aside for such endeavors and be willing to face political backlash from taxpayers over the expense.

What do you think about the concerns over illegal immigrant children attending public schools this fall?

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on August 22, 2014, 03:04:36 am
Obama weighs broader move on legal immigration

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is considering key changes in the nation's immigration system requested by tech, industry and powerful interest groups, in a move that could blunt Republicans' election-year criticism of the president's go-it-alone approach to immigration.

Administration officials and advocates said the steps would go beyond the expected relief from deportations for some immigrants in the U.S. illegally that Obama signaled he'd adopt after immigration efforts in Congress collapsed. Following a bevy of recent White House meetings, top officials have compiled specific recommendations from business groups and other advocates whose support could undercut GOP claims that Obama is exceeding his authority to help people who have already violated immigration laws.

"The president has not made a decision regarding next steps, but he believes it's important to understand and consider the full range of perspectives on potential solutions," said White House spokesman Shawn Turner.

One of the more popular requests among business and family groups is a change in the way green cards are counted that would essentially free up some 800,000 additional visas the first year, advocates say.

The result would be threefold: It would lessen the visa bottleneck for business seeking global talent; shorten the green card line for those being sponsored by relatives, a wait that can stretch nearly 25 years; and potentially reduce the incentive for illegal immigration by creating more legal avenues for those wanting to come, as well as those already here.

Obama's aides have held more than 20 meetings in recent months with business groups and other interest groups to discuss possibilities, ahead of an announcement about next steps the president is expected to make in September. Coordinating these "listening sessions," as the White House calls them, is its Office of Public Engagement, led by top Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett.

Obama's options without new laws from Congress are limited and would only partially address obstacles business groups say are preventing them from hiring more workers. Even so, administration officials say these groups are urging the White House to help streamline a complex and unpredictable system.

Republicans are working to use immigration and the surge of unaccompanied minors at the border against Democrats in the midterm elections by arguing that Obama and his party are undermining the rule of law.

"Politically we think it flips the switch because it's not just talking about a benefit to those who broke the law," said former Rep. Bruce Morrison, D-Conn., who authored the 1990 immigration law and is now lobbying on behalf of groups representing tech industry professionals, business management and U.S. citizens married to foreigners.

Matt Mackowiak, a Texas-based Republican strategist, said the moves on legal immigration might prompt businesses to praise the president, even if it's not enough to persuade the business community to side with Democrats in the upcoming elections.

"From the White House's perspective, this is an easy way for them to score some points," Mackowiak said. "They'll say: 'We're arguing about substance, Republicans are arguing about process.'"

Obama in June announced that in the face of congressional inaction, he would act on his own to address as much of the nation's immigration mess as he could. Since then, advocates for the roughly 11 million people living in the country illegally have lobbied for deportation relief particularly for the parents of U.S.-born children and the parents of youth who authorized to remain in the country under a program Obama announced in 2012.

But in recent weeks, other groups have stepped up public pressure in favor of presidential action that would change how the legal immigration system operates, too.

Those who support changing the green card count say each year half of the 140,000 employment-based green cards issued go to spouses and children, unnecessarily reducing the numbers available to workers.

Other requests have included removing the requirement that some spouses of U.S. citizens return to their native country for at least three years before they can apply for U.S. residency, as well as extending work permits to the spouses of all temporary H1-B skilled workers.

The potential for broader executive action ignited flames this week from Republicans in Congress already vehemently opposed to legislation that would increase immigration quotas.

U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., slammed the White House this week for meeting with big business to bring in more workers while "tens of millions of Americans are on welfare, unemployment and public assistance."

Not all industries are pushing for broad action, though. Agriculture leaders, who acknowledge as much as 70 percent of their workforce is "unauthorized" have remained on the sidelines — a reminder of the limits of any Obama's executive authority.

Kristi Boswell, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau, said her organization has met this summer with White House to encourage administrative changes that would reduce immigration raids targeting farms and processing plants and cut the red tape on hiring guest workers.

"Absolutely, ag workers have an ability to benefit at least temporarily from executive action," she said but added that reforming guest worker provisions and other aspects of the immigration system couldn't be done by the president alone.

For that, she said, Congress will still have to act.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 02, 2014, 07:41:31 pm
Obama Plans to Give Amnesty to Five Million Illegals!

Representative Luis Gutierrez was on MSNBC with host Jose Diaz-Balart to discuss the possibility (and probability) that President Obama would use executive action to give amnesty to 5 million illegal immigrants next week.

"If it is 5 million, Jose, then that would be five times as many as when the president freed the dreamers from deportation, when he instituted [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals] in June of 2012. When he said we’re not going to deport anymore immigrants that arrived here as children and you saw how was it, Jose, that our community was ill prepared.”

“The structures were not in place to help those people. So I've been going around meeting with major news organizations, newspaper editorial boards, columnists and others here in Chicago for the last three weeks telling them we have get prepared as a city. And prepare a model for the nation because when 5 million people are allowed the opportunity to come out from under the shadows and into the light of day and get legalized, it's going to take a lot of work and a lot of capacity of our community but I’m really looking forward to that challenge.”

Are you ready for five million new Americans... President Obama and the Democrats sure are.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Mark on September 04, 2014, 10:32:43 am
Mexican President Peña Nieto Declares United States 'the Other Mexico'

Forget so-called "Mexifornia." How about the United States of Mexico?

On Monday, Mexico President Enrique Peña Nieto called on other states to "evolve" like California so the United States can be more like his home country.

Appearing with Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and California Governor Jerry Brown in Los Angeles, Peña Nieto called for amnesty legislation and more open borders while blasting governors who have taken a tough stance on illegal immigration.

"This is the other Mexico," Peña Nieto reportedly "said of the United States, which is property to an estimated 11 million Mexican immigrants," according to the Los Angeles Times.

After President Barack Obama enacted his temporary amnesty program for illegal immigrants in 2012, the number of illegal immigrant juveniles--nearly 90% of whom are teenagers--who have been apprehended has drastically spiked. Since October of last year, close to 63,000 illegal immigrants have been detained, nearly all having been lured by the hope of getting "permisos" or amnesty. Most of those illegal immigrants are Central Americans who have traveled through Mexico, often without much resistance, to the United States. Yet, Obama may soon double down on his executive amnesty, as the White House has indicated that he may grant temporary amnesty and work permits to possibly five million more illegal immigrants.

In California, Brown has already given illegal immigrants driver's licenses, made California a sanctuary state, and signed the California DREAM Act. Peña Nieto thanked Brown for his generosity toward illegal immigrants and called on other governors to follow suit, chastising those who are against open borders as unethical.

"There are still states that have not evolved so much as California, that still skimp on recognition and, even worse, the rights of immigrants," Peña Nieto said, according to the Associated Press. "Those who still believe and bet for the exclusion and discrimination or the rejection of diversity ... I only have one thing to say: the future, and a very near future, will demonstrate your ethical mistake. Time will show we're right."

Governors across the country from Texas to Maine have expressed concerns that communities do not have the resources to absorb so many illegal immigrants. Others have expressed concerns about communicable diseases and crime that illegal immigrants can bring across the border.

Though Peña Nieto did not offer to help those governments absorb illegal immigrants in their communities and schools, he did reportedly promise scholarships for DREAMers and, "during the ceremony, a group of students from Mexico was awarded scholarships to attend California universities including UCLA, Cal State Northridge and Cal State Long Beach."

According to Pew Research, a "record 33.7 million Hispanics of Mexican origin resided in the United States in 2012," and that estimate included "11.4 million immigrants born in Mexico and 22.3 million born in the U.S. who self-identified as Hispanics of Mexican origin." Mexicans accounted for "nearly two-thirds (64%) of the U.S. Hispanic population in 2012" and made up roughly 28% percent of all foreign-born residents in the United States.


Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 05, 2014, 06:31:03 pm
The Obama Administration Policies That Jihadists Are Using To Legally Immigrate To America


Did you know that one of the Americans that was recently killed fighting for ISIS once cleaned planes at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport?  His name was Abdirahmaan Muhumed, and he was a Somali refugee.  Since 1975, more than 3 million refugees have been resettled in cities in the United States, and thanks to the Obama administration an increasing percentage of those refugees are Muslim.  As you will read about below, Obama has even made it possible for refugees that have given only "limited material support" to terrorists to come to America. The Obama administration says that it is still trying to keep full-blown terrorists from entering the country, but it has become exceedingly clear that administration officials aren't exactly into that whole "border security" thing.  And once refugees arrive in the United States, they are fully eligible for food stamps, Medicaid, housing assistance and a whole host of other welfare programs.  So if you are a jihadist and you want to move to the United States legally, all you have to do is claim to be a "refugee" and you might just find that the red carpet gets rolled out for you.

According to a survey conducted by Pew Research, "the estimated share of legal Muslim immigrants entering the U.S. each year has roughly doubled, from about 5 percent of legal immigrants in 1992 to about 10 percent in 2012."  And this rise in Islamic immigration has been accelerated by a series of moves by Barack Obama.

For example, earlier this year the Wall Street Journal reported on a decision by the Obama administration to bring thousands of additional Syrian refugees into the country by the end of this year…

    U.S. plans to resettle thousands of Syrians displaced by their country's civil war could hinge on those refugees receiving exemptions from laws aimed at preventing terrorists from entering the country.

    A U.S. official stated publicly for the first time this week that some of the 30,000 especially vulnerable Syrians the United Nations hopes to resettle by the end of 2014 will be referred to the U.S. for resettlement.

Will "refugees" with ties to ISIS or other jihadist organizations be weeded out?

Hopefully at least some of them will be.  But at this point the Obama administration has set the bar pretty low.  In fact, the Obama administration has decided that it is even okay for those that have provided "limited material support" to terrorists to be allowed into the country…

    The Obama administration has issued new exemptions to a law that bars certain asylum-seekers and refugees who provided "limited material support" to terrorists who are believed to pose no threat from the U.S.

    The Department of Homeland Security and the State Department published the new exemptions Wednesday in the Federal Register to narrow a ban in the Immigration and Nationality Act excluding refugees and asylum seekers who had provided limited material support, no matter how minor, to terrorists.

    "These exemptions cover five kinds of limited material support that have adversely and unfairly affected refugees and asylum seekers with no tangible connection to terrorism: material support that was insignificant in amount or provided incidentally in the course of everyday social, commercial, family or humanitarian interactions, or under significant pressure," a DHS official explained to The Daily Caller.

When they arrive in the United States, many Muslim refugees are resettled in cities in the heartland of America.  For instance, the city of Minneapolis, Minnesota has had such an influx of Somali refugees that it has become known as "Little Mogadishu"…

    Minneapolis, Minnesota, sits at the heart of the controversial program. Known as "Little Mogadishu" to some critics, the city has, since 1983, welcomed thousands of Somali refugees, most of whom are practicing Muslims and attend a local mosque or Islamic center.

    While the Minneapolis-St. Paul area plays host to the largest Somali refugee population, it's not the only American city that is taking in refugees from the war-torn African nation. Columbus, Ohio, and San Diego, California, have also served as refugee resettlement hot spots.

Of course most of the refugees are law-abiding people that are not causing problems.

But there are an alarming number of exceptions.

It is not just a coincidence that the two Americans that were fighting for ISIS that were recently killed were both from Minnesota…

    The trend was underscored again last week when it was reported that two Americans, both from Minneapolis, had linked up with the ISIS terrorist organization in Syria and were killed on the battlefield in that country's civil war. One was a Somali refugee and the other reportedly was an African-American with ties to the Somali community in Minnesota.

    And many more have been tried and convicted of providing money or material support to overseas Muslim terrorist organizations. Among them was one Somali woman from Minnesota who refused to rise when called upon by the judge, citing a verse in the Quran.

    "I'll not stand for anyone except for Allah," Amina Farah Ali told the federal judge.

And guess what?

If they had not been killed on the battlefield, they would have been welcomed back into the United States with open arms.

Just check out what Congresswoman Michele Bachmann learned when she asked the FBI about this…

    Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R) was stunned when she questioned the FBI about what would happen to American citizens who have gone overseas to fight with the Islamic State, and then try to return to the United States.

    "Two from my state were the first Americans who were fighting for ISIS," she began on The Glenn Beck Program Tuesday. "I had gone earlier this year and asked the FBI, 'Are there any Minnesotans that are over fighting with ISIS?' It was classified information at the time, I couldn't reveal it. Now everyone knows."

    "At that time, these two hadn't been killed yet," Bachmann continued. "So what I asked is, 'OK, once they're done fighting with ISIS, what's going to happen if they try to return?' And they said, 'Well, they'll come into the country.'"


Fighting for ISIS won't even keep people out the country?

Are we insane?

And while jihadists are staying inside our country, they are eligible for a free ride that the rest of us are paying for.

The following information comes from Refugee Resettlement Watch…

    Refugee access to welfare on the same basis as a U.S. citizen has made the program a global magnet.

    The federal programs available to them include:

    ∙ Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) formerly known as AFDC
    ∙ Medicaid
    ∙ Food Stamps
    ∙ Public Housing
    ∙ Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
    ∙ Social Security Disability Insurance
    ∙ Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD) (direct services only)
    ∙ Child Care and Development Fund
    ∙ Independent Living Program
    ∙ Job Opportunities for Low Income Individuals (JOLI)
    ∙ Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
    ∙ Postsecondary Education Loans and Grants
    ∙ Refugee Assistance Programs
    ∙ Title IV Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Payments (if parents are qualified immigrants – refugees, asylees, etc)
    ∙ Title XX Social Services Block Grant Funds

Of course most refugees are more than happy to take advantage of all of these "services."  Here is more from Refugee Resettlement Watch…

    Public Assistance Utilization Among refugees who arrived during the 5 years previous to the survey 57.7% are on government medical assistance such as Medicaid, about 25% have no health insurance at all, 70.2% are receiving food stamps, 31.6% are in public housing (an additional percentage is on a public housing waiting list), and 38.3 % are getting cash assistance such as TANF or SSI.

    The figure of 57.7% dependent upon government medical assistance is actually an undercount since it excludes children under 16.

Yes, our southern border is wide open for any jihadists that want to come into our country illegally.

But if you are a jihadist that wants to immigrate to America, there is a much easier way.

Just tell the Obama administration that you are a "refugee," and you might just find that you are soon living in one of our major cities at U.S. taxpayer expense.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 07, 2014, 09:43:58 pm
Peter Muller: Obama reforms should allow tech companies to hire key talent

In the coming weeks, President Barack Obama will announce executive actions designed to improve America's immigration system. While he is expected to focus primarily on people living and working in the United States without documentation, the president also should seize the opportunity to improve the legal immigration system that governs how highly skilled, foreign-born workers are employed in this country.

By doing so, Obama can deliver on one of the top priorities of technology companies -- reform to an outdated visa program that restricts their ability to hire key talent.

For years, Silicon Valley companies have struggled to find the highly skilled workers they need to fill important technical positions -- and as the economy strengthens, that challenge becomes greater. A look at job postings for Intel, Google and Facebook shows those companies have hundreds of openings for engineers in California.

The U.S. higher education system produces talented graduates who are sought by companies in the technology and life sciences industries, but because many of those graduates are foreign born they cannot work here without visas.

The visa system for highly skilled workers is broken.

The number of temporary visas, known as H-1Bs, has failed to keep up with increasing demand. This year, half of those who applied for a visa were turned away.

More troubling, our system fails to provide enough permanent employment-based visas, known as green cards, necessary to allow workers with sought-after skills to live and work in the United States permanently.

Currently, foreign-born workers who graduate from U.S. universities, who fill key jobs in companies across the country and meet every requirement for permanent residency, must wait years before receiving a green card.

In the meantime, they work on a temporary employment visa that limits their job opportunities and causes them to question why they struggle for acceptance in the United States while opportunity awaits them around the world.

The Senate passed a bill last year to reform U.S. immigration policies, including those for highly skilled workers; despite support from a wide array of advocates representing undocumented residents, the agriculture and construction industries, religious organizations and high-tech companies, the House of Representatives never voted on it.

In July, Obama declared that the window of opportunity for congressional action had passed and said he would use his executive authority to fix as much as possible.

The Department of Homeland Security already has taken one step in this direction. In May, the department published a proposed rule that would provide work authorization to the spouses of many H-1B workers. This sensible reform would enhance the lives and careers of H-1B employees and their families.

The president can also "recapture" green cards that went unused in previous years and issue them to people who are stuck in the long waiting line. He can create a more seamless process for foreign-born graduates of U.S. universities to obtain permanent resident status without first requiring the interim step of a temporary work visa. And he can look at ways to enhance the legal status of people who have qualified for a green card but will not receive one for years.

The long-term solutions to the fundamental shortcomings of the high-skilled immigration system will require Congress to increase the number of visas available each year.

In the meantime, Obama should use the tools available to him to improve the system as much as possible. We should not encourage talented workers to build businesses and grow economies elsewhere in the world.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 09, 2014, 10:56:40 pm
Texas Is Mad Mexico Won't Share the Rio Grande's Water

According to The Washington Post, Mexico owes the U.S. 380,000 acre-feet of water, equivalent to the amount consumed by 1.5 million Texans over the course of a year.

Since 1945, The United States and Mexico have abided by a water utilization treaty, which was put in place to settle disputes between the neighboring countries over the allocation of water supplies between the Colorado River and the Rio Grande. Together the two rivers make up two thirds of a 1,954 mile long U.S.-Mexico border.

Recently, Mexico has been struggling to uphold its end of the 70-year-old deal, which is especially problematic considering Texas is in the middle of a drought.

What's worse, the race for water in the region doesn't show any signs of stopping. The American Meteorological Society predicts that the likelihood of a decade-long drought impacting the southwestern United States this century is at over 90 percent.

Governor Rick Perry (R) wrote to President Barack Obama in 2013, asking him and Secretary of State John Kerry to use diplomatic pressure to force Mexico to provide the water. According to the Congressional Research Service, Obama subsequently raised the issue with President Enrique Peña Nieto during a trip to Mexico later that year. Nieto stressed his commitment to solving the water problem as soon as possible.

During the shortage, Texas has brought lawsuits against other neighbors as well. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Oklahoma when a Texas District sued the state for trying to block the purchase of water reserves from the Red River. The Lone Star State is hoping for better luck in its current suit against New Mexico.

Meanwhile, Ignacio Peña Treviño, a Mexican representative from the International Boundary and Water Commission told The Washington Post that Mexico was struggling to provide the water because of the country's own sustained drought.

"We have had a prolonged drought since 1994 until now. It has been difficult for Mexico to give this water,” he said  “There isn’t rain like there was in the past.”

This article was originally published at http://www.thewire.com/national/2014/09/texas-is-mad-mexico-wont-share-the-rio-grandes-water/379793/

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 10, 2014, 02:07:02 pm
Obama’s illegals bring disease to America’s children

America’s children are paying the price of Obama’s largesse. We were warned

    An agent stationed at the McAllen, Texas, Border Patrol station told a radio host Sunday that diseases carried by illegal aliens crossing the Rio Grande are “slipping through the cracks” and will soon begin affecting the entire nation, possibly even “coming to your town.”

Border Patrol Agent Chris Cabrera said that diseased illegals were being dumped at various areas around the country. Pay close attention to where:

    “It’s not always the ideal medical care,” Cabrera confessed, “and a lot of it is slipping through the cracks. I read now one of the publications this morning that [reported] they had a bunch of people go in there in at a detention facility [that] had to be shut down due to chicken pox. It’s kind of alarming, seeing as we toured that facility less than a month ago and they assured us that they had everything in order, that something like this wouldn’t happen. And sure enough, it fell through the cracks.

    “We’re not set up for this, and we’re inviting more problems,” he said. “The thing is, these [illegal immigrants] aren’t staying down here in the border region. This problem isn’t contained in the border areas. [They] are coming in here, they’re going north, and it’s going to affect the entire country. It’s going to affect the New Yorks, the Washington, D.C.s, the Chicago, the Dallas, even the Kansas, the Iowa, that’s where they’re headed, and that’s where it’s headed.”

    Klein asked Cabrera to clarify that he was talking about was medical issues spreading to places like Chicago, New York City and Kansas.

Remember that Cabrera said Kansas was a dumping site for illegals? Obama policies bear fruit there now:

    KANSAS CITY, Mo. — An unusual respiratory virus is striking children in the metro in big numbers. Children’s Mercy Hospital is hospitalizing 20 to 30 kids a day with the virus. The hospital is as full now as it is at the height of flu season.

    This is not the same virus we told you about several weeks ago that can cause meningitis. This one can cause severe breathing trouble. Children’s Mercy has seen more than 300 cases in recent days in kids of all ages.

    Preston Sheldon’s mom says he seemed fine when she took him to pre-school Tuesday. But minutes later, the Grain Valley mom got the call. Her three-year-old son was having trouble breathing.

    “You could see his ribs, and his stomach was pushing out really hard… I thought it was an asthma attack,” said Pam Sheldon.

    But it was a virus that is inundating Children’s Mercy with patients.

And when you hear the word “unusual” from doctors, it means it has recently been introduced:

    “To be at winter census is quite unusual in August obviously. To see a virus we’ve not seen before is unusual, too,” said Dr. Mary Anne Jackson, an infectious disease specialist.

    It is enterovirus 68. The doctor says it’s well-known around the world, but cases have not been seen in Kansas City before.

Barack Obama dumped illegals in Lynn MA.

    Lynn is a municipality on the brink. Key department officials say a recent influx of illegal immigrant children and families in the city is stressing almost every service from trash collection to healthcare.

    “We have been aware of the unaccompanied children issue for quite a while, and we were able to absorb a lot of these children early on,” said Lynn Mayor Judith Flanagan Kennedy. “But now it’s gotten to the point where the school system is overwhelmed, our health department is overwhelmed, the city’s budget is being sustainably altered in order of accommodate all of these admissions in the school department.”

Well, hello Tuberculosis

    LYNN, Mass. (AP) — More than 30 Lynn Community Health Center employees and 800 patients are being tested to determine if they were exposed to tuberculosis after center doctors confirmed a case.

    Center Director Lori Berry says after confirming the single positive test for tuberculosis in a male health care worker around Labor Day, center medical workers contacted and tested employees as well as patients ‘‘having sufficient exposure to warrant testing.’’

Now a respiratory illness is spreading to children like wildfire across the country.

    A respiratory illness that has already sickened more than a thousand children in 10 states is likely to become a nationwide problem, doctors say.

    The disease hasn’t been officially identified but officials suspect a rare respiratory virus called human enterovirus 68. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the virus is related to the rhinovirus, which causes the common cold.

    According to Mark Pallansch, director of the Division of Viral Diseases at the CDC, similar cases to the ones in Colorado have been cropping up across the U.S. At least 10 states — Missouri, Kansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Iowa, Colorado, Ohio, Oklahoma, North Carolina, and Georgia — have reported suspected outbreaks of human enterovirus 68 and requested CDC support.

It’s struck Ohio hard:

    Medical officials admitted a record number of children to a local hospital over the weekend because of what they believe to be a rare respiratory virus spreading throughout the country.

    Although there’s been no confirmed cases of the enterovirus at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, officials admitted 540 patients Friday, said Dr. Derek Wheeler, associate chief of staff at the hospital.

    The previous record was around 515, Wheeler said.

    Some reports out of Missouri and Colorado suggest the virus, with symptoms similar to the common cold, brought sicker patients to hospitals, Wheeler said.

    “We’re just seeing the (increased) volumes, we haven’t seen (patients) sicker than usual yet,” he said.

    Hospitals from other states have placed restrictions on visitations, but Wheeler said there are no plans to do that in Cincinnati.

Ohio, you say?

Ohio agencies rally help for young immigrants

Ohio charity wants to house immigrant children

Feds: Ohio sponsors already have 360 ‘unaccompanied children’

In Colorado:

    Immigration cases involving unaccompanied minors are clogging one of the Denver area’s two immigration courts, records obtained by CBS4 indicate.

    There are nearly 8,000 immigration cases backlogged in the immigration court in downtown Denver. Nationwide, there are 400,000 cases in a backlog.

    “It’s creating another extreme crisis within the immigration court system throughout the United States to deal with all these additional cases,” David Kolko, the chairman of the Colorado chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said.

And now?

    The CDC has confirmed samples from children in Colorado have tested positive for Enterovirus 68.

    The illness causes symptoms similar to the common cold, only those symptoms progress quickly and become much more severe.

    Colorado is one of 10 states that asked the CDC to look into it. No deaths have been reported yet, but with thousands of cases being diagnosed in just days, doctors are racing to contain it.

    Confirmation tonight from the CDC is putting health officials on higher alert.

    “Most of the isolates that we have sent them are the enterovirus, giving them increased wheezing and asthma problems,” said Dr. Christine Nyquist, Children’s Hospital Colorado.

    Enterovirus typically causes symptoms similar to a cold, but this year’s strain is so severe, some believe it could turn into an epidemic.

    “It’s a phenomenal number of cases that you didn’t even hear about before,” said Dr. John Torres, KRDO medical expert. “If you listen to different hospitals and press conferences. Its hundreds of cases that three days ago you didn’t even hear about.”

900 cases so far.

Enteroviruses are a family of viruses that include polio and Hepatitis A. Five children in California have been identified as having “polio-like syndrome.” Two of them tested positive for Enterovirus 68.

This disease is painful for children and it is becoming a significant health care cost. These kids should not be sick and if not for Obama’s narcissism none would be ill. None would be ill had Obama not created the illegal alien DREAM Act magnet. There have been no reported deaths so far but if one American child dies Obama will have a great of explaining to do.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 13, 2014, 12:07:28 am
Domestic violence ruling may help thousands of immigrants get asylum

Heidy fled her native Honduras for the United States on the advice of police. There was nothing they could do, they told her, to protect her from her abusive husband, a drug trafficker who spat on her, raped her — the first time when she was 17 — and threatened her at gunpoint.

"He was going to kill me at any moment," she told a U.S. immigration judge this week. Heidy, whose surname is being withheld because she is a **** victim, is the first test case since the highest immigration court in the United States issued a ruling last week recognizing domestic violence as a basis for granting asylum.

In that case, a 41-year-old Guatemalan mother of three who was repeatedly beaten and raped by her husband was given asylum in the U.S.

Immigration attorneys have seized on the decision, hoping it will help other Central American women. Thousands of such women and their children have been apprehended in recent months after illegally crossing the Southwest border.

At an immigration detention facility here, at least half of the estimated 300 women interviewed by pro bono attorneys claim they are victims of domestic violence, said Blaine Bookey, who was co-counsel on Heidy's case and is associate director at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies at UC Hastings College of Law.

Critics say the ruling may allow any woman who suffers from domestic violence to seek shelter in the U.S. Bob Dane, spokesman for Federation for American Immigration Reform, called the ruling "another example of the systematic whittling away of the original intent and definition of asylum."

The Board of Immigration Appeals decision also may complicate plans by immigration authorities who have vowed to speed up the processing and deportation of thousands of single women with children who have illegally entered the U.S.

Before last week's ruling, immigration judges regularly denied asylum to victims of domestic violence because U.S. law did not consider them part of a "social group," a key requirement for asylum.

Asylum applicants must establish a well-founded fear of persecution because of "race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion," according to Citizenship and Immigration Services guidelines.

Asylum seekers also have to prove that their home government is complicit in their persecution or unwilling or unable to stop it. The board found the requirement was met in the Guatemala case, observing that the country has a "culture of machismo and family violence" and that police often fail to intervene in domestic violence cases.

He was going to kill me at any moment. - Heidy, a Honduran whose last name is withheld because she is a **** victim, telling a U.S. immigration judge about her abusive husband

Heidy's hearing on Thursday showed the challenges officials face in handling a flood of cases this year. The 23-year-old and her attorney were in a makeshift courtroom set up at an immigration facility in Artesia. They were linked via teleconference to an immigration judge and interpreter 1,800 miles away in Arlington, Va.

Heidy testified about her life in Honduras, trying to compose herself as she told Judge Roxanne C. Hladylowycz about the abuse she endured for six years.

"He would push me. He would grab me from my neck. From my jaw," she said, gesturing with her hands over her neck to demonstrate.

Her face flushed and she bit her lips, trying to hold back tears. "He told me I was an Indian that was worth nothing," she said. "I told him I was a woman who was worth a lot." Sometimes the microphone would cut out unexpectedly, forcing her to repeat uncomfortable testimony again and again.

She was walking to high school when her future husband first spotted her. She resisted his advances, Heidy testified, because she had heard he was part of a powerful drug-trafficking family. But he was relentless. After six months of stalking her, he forced into a car one afternoon and raped her.

When he told her that he would take her far away from her family, Heidy proposed they get married so she could stay in town. She soon gave birth to her son — the product of that first ****, she said. Physical and mental abuse started soon after they wed and moved to a house near his family, she said.

A typical day started with her cooking breakfast for his entire family and doing chores around the house. She wasn't allowed to attend college or leave the home without him.

"I was like a slave for him," she said.

Even when he landed in prison for his role in a murder, his friends and family kept a close eye on her, and he constantly called on a cellphone smuggled to him.

"He and his entire family are very dangerous people, and the whole world is scared of them in my town. Even police are scared of him," Heidy said.

Afraid of what would happen to her if she didn't comply with his demands, she visited him in prison. The guards were paid off to allow him his own room where he would **** her, she said.

Once, she tried filing for divorce, but no government officials would take the case. Eventually, she managed to move to her parents' home, but her husband, who had been released from prison, wouldn't leave her alone. He pointed a gun at her, threatening to take away their 5-year-old son and 1-year-old daughter if she went with another man.

The last straw came when he arrived at her parents' home firing a gun in the air. On June 2, Heidy's brother took her and her two children to a city three hours away. There, she asked authorities for help. They said her best option was to leave Honduras.

Under cross-examination, a government attorney asked Heidy what would happen if she were deported.

"It would be sure death for me," she replied.

Hladylowycz had already reviewed Heidy's asylum packet, which included multiple testimony — including an affidavit by her brother, who helped her escape, and an assessment of conditions for women in Honduras.

Heidy's situation, the judge said, was a "textbook case" for asylum relief for her and her children.

Heidy put her hands to her face and began to shake. Her principal attorney, Christina Brown, handed her a tissue.

"In one year you can apply to become a permanent resident of the United States," the judge said. "Good luck to you."

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 15, 2014, 06:58:09 pm
Exclusive: Feds Find Anti-Israel and Pro-Palestine 9/11 Message to America on Border Fence

NOGALES, Arizona -- On September 11, 2014, individuals or a group in Mexico hung a message to America over the U.S.-Mexico border wall condemning American support for Israel and declaring support for Palestine. U.S. federal agents discovered the banner draped over the primary border fence in Arizona’s Yuma Sector in a restricted area that could only have been reached from Mexico. The message also contained an image described by authorities as an anarchist symbol. The incident was kept secret from the American public by federal authorities. Breitbart Texas exclusively obtained the leaked incident report from federal agents on the condition their identities remain private.

The leaked incident report reveals that U.S. Border Patrol agents discovered the banner in the early hours of September 12, 2014, indicating that the banner had been draped over the border wall late in the night on September 11th.

One federal agent involved in leaking the incident report to Breitbart Texas expressed concern over the symbolic timing of the message and said, “Everyone has been discussing whether cartels would work with ISIS or other terror groups, but this indicates that political groups in Mexico’s border region may be more of a concern in terms of working with terrorists to make a political statement in America.”

Breitbart Texas recently published a leaked intelligence report from the Texas Department of Public Safety that was distributed to federal agencies and indicated that ISIS members or supporters were known to be discussing the potential use of the porous U.S.-Mexico border as a means of secretly entering the United States. In the immediate aftermath of that report, experts and pundits erupted into disagreements about whether ISIS would take advantage of the open U.S.-Mexico border instead of utilizing air travel and whether Mexican cartels would actually risk shutting down valuable illicit trade routes by working with Middle Eastern terrorists. The potential for radical and extremist Mexican-based anti-Israel or anti-U.S. political groups to either work with ISIS or engage in extremism was not part of the public discourse.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 16, 2014, 01:26:44 pm
Safety concerns increasing at the Texas-Mexico border

Brownsville, TX - Officials report that increased numbers of militia members are showing up along the Texas-Mexico border.

The border patrol says the growing number of militia members is an increasing concern for them. A new website called 'Patriots Information Hotline' says there are about 16 militias along the border in Texas and they are encouraging more to come.

Militias have flocked to the Rio Grande Valley to help secure the border and many plan to participate in the September 20th protest to shutdown ports of entry, but agents say militias complicate law enforcement efforts.

Right now, the National Guard, hundreds of state troopers and 3,600 border patrol agents are all patrolling the border in the valley and they say adding groups that are not connected could be dangerous.

In August, an agent was pursuing a group of immigrants in the Brownsville area when he came across a man holding a rifle. The agent fired shots at the man who was later identified as a militia member. That man was not injured, but agents said this situation could have ended a lot worse.

Agents also go through weeks of training to understand immigration laws and say that people who are not trained on those standards could violate someone's civil rights and open themselves up for a civil lawsuit.

That very reason is why the border patrol stand by their message of leaving border security to them.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 18, 2014, 03:58:44 pm
Boehner Touts Immigration Reform: 'The Sooner We Do It The Better'

America’s immigration system is a “mess” and reforming it would help the economy, House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday.

Speaking at the American Enterprise Institute about “resetting America’s economic foundation” Boehner addressed immigration reform when asked by a member of the audience.

“Yeah, I think immigration reform would help our economy, but you’ve got to secure the borders first — we’ve got a mess and I think everybody knows we’ve got a mess. Our legal system is broken, our borders aren’t secure. And then we’ve got the problem of those that are here without documents,” Boehner said.

“It needs to be fixed,” he continued. “We’re a nation of immigrants. The sooner we do it the better off the country would be.”

House Republicans did not move forward on immigration reform this year due what Boehner and many other Republicans said was a lack of confidence that President Obama would apply the law as passed.

“I told the president what I have been telling him for months: the American people and their elected officials don't trust him to enforce the law as written.  Until that changes, it is going to be difficult to make progress on this issue,” Boehner said in a statement this summer responding to Obama’s assertion that the Speaker told him the House would not move on immigration reform this year.

Earlier this month Boehner raised the possibility of moving on immigration reform next year, as long as Obama followed the law.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 24, 2014, 10:25:23 pm
Massive 'Residential Center' to Open in Texas for Illegal Immigrants

HOUSTON, Texas -- A large new immigrant housing center will be opened in South Texas. The South Texas Family Residential Center will ultimately hold 2,400 individuals, primarily families, who were apprehended while crossing the Texas- Mexico border. During their stay at the center foreigners will be provided with taxpayer-funded "medical care, play rooms, social workers, educational services, and access to legal counsel," Breitbart Texas has learned.

The facility will open in November in Dilley, Texas, which is located about 70 miles southwest of San Antonio. This is the fourth facility of its kind to be built in Texas, according to Fox News. 

The new center is opening amid claims that the border crisis has slowed down; it could signal that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is expecting the number of crossers to pick up again.

An ICE spokeswoman refused to give Breitbart Texas answers to specific questions and instead provided a statement that said the agency"plans to open and operate a new residential center in Dilley, Texas to house adults with children in response to the influx of adults traveling with children apprehended along the southwest border. "

The massive facility, which will lie on a 50-acre property, will be "ready for full capacity within 210 days," the agency's statement continued.

Such centers are used to house immigrants while they wait to be "processed" by ICE. Once processed, the migrants are placed in the custody of President Obama's Health and Human Services (HHS).

At this time, many young immigrants are placed with families or in foster homes throughout the United States. The HHS website states that the federal government is required to "feed, shelter, and provide medical care for unaccompanied children until it is able to release them to safe settings with sponsors (usually family members), while they await immigration proceedings. These sponsors live in many states."

They are expected to attend an immigration court hearing in the future, but most never show up and ultimately get lost in the woodwork or forgotten about.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 26, 2014, 01:11:59 am
Illegal Immigrants get free education, housing and healthcare for crossing border; Americans get $5,000 fine


(NaturalNews) Scores of polls taken over the past few years have regularly shown that the majority of Americans do not want amnesty for illegal aliens, do not want the federal government to continue conveying taxpayer-supported benefits onto them and do not support legal measures that legitimize them in any way. The Obama Administration and too many in Congress, however, are not paying attention to the will of the people.

And now, there comes one additional insult: The Department of Homeland Security is fining Americans for accidentally crossing borders, but our government gives free education and other benefits to those who break our laws and sneak into our country illegally.

As reported by InfoWars.com and other alternative media, DHS has fined an American and a Canadian $5,000 apiece for cross the U.S./Canadian border, though fines are never given to the tens of thousands of illegals who are detained by U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) and other agencies on a daily basis.

According to a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol press release, the two men -- a 40-year-old American and 44-year-old Canadian -- had been walking down a dirt road with mountain bikes near the border when they were approached by a USBP agent.

"Questioning by the agent revealed that the two suspects illegally entered the U.S. from Canada," a USBP press release stated. "Subsequently, both males were arrested for violation of U.S. law and transported to the Rangeley Station for further processing."

"Following database verifications, Border Patrol agents turned over both subjects to CBP officers at the Coburn Gore port of entry for assessment of fines and penalties," said the release.

The government assessed for both men "a $5,000 civil penalty under 19 USC 1459 for Failure to Report" to border patrol officials. As InfoWars.com stated sardonically, it isn't very likely the two men crossed into the U.S. in quest of President Obama's de facto amnesty for illegal aliens.

Americans and Canadians pay, but illegal crossers don't

"Since this is an administrative fine, the individuals do not have to go through a judicial process and will have approximately 30 days to pay the fine," the press release added.

Are their political implications involved in the administration's decision to fine Americans and Canadians but not illegal aliens? Of course there are; immigrants -- once they are able -- are eight times more likely to vote for Democrats than Republicans, which makes it all the more confusing why too many Republicans would support amnesty in the first place.

Nevertheless, those who break into the country are not fined; most, under the current administration, are increasingly being allowed to stay in the country, especially minors. And all are given taxpayer benefits like free food, shelter, medical care and primary education.

Obama Administration officials say that the illegal border crossers are given "notices to appear" before immigration judges -- before they are taken to destinations throughout the U.S., again at taxpayer expense -- but courts are heavily backlogged. Court dates are being scheduled for four years from now.

"They know they are going to be processed and released and they are free to go wherever they want to go in the United States and the likelihood of them ever showing up for their court date is slim to none," Stu Harris of National Border Patrol Council Local 1929 told Infowars.

Aimed his gun at the scout's head

The site added:

This selective enforcement of immigration laws, in which an American is fined for crossing the border while thousands of illegal aliens are encouraged to do so, exemplifies how the Obama administration is directing federal agencies to target peaceful Americans but not illegal immigrants the White House is exploiting for political gain.

For instance, in July federal agents detained a Boy Scout Troop, of all people, for taking pictures near a border checkpoint. In that case, one agent aimed his weapon at a scout's head.

"He hears a snap of a holster, turns around, and here's this agent, both hands on a loaded pistol, pointing at the young man's head," Troop 111 leader Jim Fox told KCCI.

Meanwhile, American citizens will continue to suffer these indignities until those in power get the message that voters are tired of being ignored.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 26, 2014, 01:27:20 am
Illegal Immigrants Enrolled In Obamacare By The Thousands, Senator Claims

Illegal immigrants by the thousands have reportedly been able to enroll in Obamacare. The individuals who entered the United States illegally have also been able to enjoy taxpayer-funded subsidies to help cover the cost of their health insurance premium, according to Louisiana Senator David Vitter and a report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

A recent CMS report revealed that 115,000 individuals enrolled in Obamacare had not provided proof of citizenship by the September deadline, and will therefore be dropped from the program by September 30. But, those individuals with “immigration data-matching issues” will be allowed to keep their Obamacare coverage for six months.

The Obama administration is bending over backwards to give Obamacare to illegal immigrants but won’t protect hardworking American citizens who are losing their healthcare coverage,” Senator David Vitter told The Washington Times.

“The Obama administration has been granting deadline extensions, making excuses, and turning a blind eye to falsified documents by illegal immigrants. Enough is enough, and they need to provide answers to why they think illegal immigrants should be eligible for Obamacare,” the Louisiana Senator added.

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) stated that Obamacare eligibility rules “sacrifice document standards, authentication assurance, and identification integrity” for the sole purpose of maximizing enrollment in the federal healthcare program as quickly as possible.

“Rapidly expanding health coverage to some 40 million people, coupled with relaxed ID and verification standards, only increases the likelihood of fraud and improper enrollment of ineligible people, including aliens. Furthermore, the combination of relaxed verification and documentation standards could enable certain identity fraud schemes to be developed,” a statement from the Center for Immigration Studies reads.

CMS Deputy Administrator Andy Slavitt had this to say in regards to the latest controversy whirling around the Obamacare program, “If people are willing to pay their premiums, and they are eligible for coverage, they will continue to get coverage.”

The federal government extended the mandatory deadline for enrollment for those members who did not comply with the residency documentation policy, but not for natural-born citizens struggling to pay their monthly premium or medical bills not covered until an extremely high-deductable kicks in. Approximately five million Americans lost their insurance coverage due to the Obamacare mandate.

Prior to Obamacare, independent contractors and small business owners could shop around for the best coverage and the best deal online. Although such searching is still permitted, it is nearly impossible to find a policy with less than a $1,000-per-month price tag. Many Obamacare family policies are also $1,000-per-month or higher, but taxpayer-funded subsidies decrease the out-of-pocket expense for some policyholders to around $300 or less each month.

Before Obamacare, my family had portable and affordable Anthem insurance. The monthly premium was $358-per-month with a $2,500 deductable. The policy evaporated, and a vaguely similar replacement was extremely expensive. Forced to enroll in Obamacare or risk a fine, we chose a “Bronze” family plan with a $1,0115-per-month premium and a $12,500 annual deductable. Has your health insurance and related medical expenses improved or declined since Obamacare became law?

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 26, 2014, 05:15:22 pm
Report: 70 Percent of Illegal Immigrant Families Released into U.S. Failed to Report to Feds

About 70 percent of the tens of thousands illegal immigrant family units detained crossing the U.S./Mexico border and released into the United States have failed to fulfill their obligation to report back to immigration officials, according to a new report.

The Associated Press reports it has obtained audio of a confidential Immigration and Customs Enforcement meeting with immigration advocates working on detention policies that occurred on Wednesday.

On the recording, according to the AP, an ICE official revealed that about 70 percent of the illegal immigrant families detained and then released into the United States did not show up for their required appointments 15 days later with federal immigration officials.

“Since only a few hundred families have already been returned to their home countries and limited U.S. detention facilities can house only about 1,200 family members, the 70 percent figure suggests the government released roughly 41,000 members of immigrant families who subsequently failed to appear at federal immigration offices,” the AP’s Alicia Caldwell reported Thursday.

Caldwell further reported that the unnamed official added that 860 people in family units detained at the border had been ordered for removal but only 14 of them had reported to federal officials.

Since October more than 66,000 family units have been detained illegally entering the United States — the vast majority of those detained have been from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala. Most of them have been released into the United States.

The influx of illegal immigrant family units occurred in conjunction with the increase in illegal immigration by unaccompanied minors, both of which have strained government resources and captured headlines. Since October more than 66,000 unaccompanied illegal immigrant minors have been detained and the vast majority have been released into the U.S.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 26, 2014, 11:16:18 pm
DHS secret revealed: Tens of thousands of illegals released during the border crisis didn’t show up for their immigration hearings
posted at 6:01 pm on September 25, 2014 by Allahpundit

Of course they didn’t. Who thought they would? This is precisely what amnesty shills have in mind when they demand “due process” for illegals. You’re detained, you’re given a date to meet with immigration agents or appear before an immigration judge to decide whether you’ll be deported, and then you’re sent on your merry way into the United States — never to be seen by the state again. The point of “due process” is to give illegals an easy way to avoid the process. DHS understands this.

So rest easy. Our immigration system is working exactly the way it’s supposed to.

    An official with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement revealed that about 70 percent of immigrant families the Obama administration had released into the U.S. never showed up weeks later for follow up appointments.

    The ICE official made the disclosure in a confidential meeting at its Washington headquarters with immigration advocates participating in a federal working group on detention and enforcement policies. The Associated Press obtained an audio recording of Wednesday’s meeting and separately interviewed participants.

    On the recording obtained by the AP, the government did not specify the total number of families released into the U.S. since October. Since only a few hundred families have already been returned to their home countries and limited U.S. detention facilities can house only about 1,200 family members, the 70 percent figure suggests the government released roughly 41,000 members of immigrant families who subsequently failed to appear at federal immigration offices.

The same ICE official admitted in the meeting that, of at least 860 people caught entering the U.S. since May and subsequently slapped with an order of final deportation, 14 showed up to be deported. Let me stress, in case the boldface above didn’t catch your attention, you’re not supposed to know any of this. It’s potentially a giant headache for Obama as he tries to muster the courage to issue his executive amnesty later this year, after the voting suckers of America have cast their ballots and can’t punish his party for another two years. That’s why, as the AP notes, officials in the White House and DHS repeatedly dodged questions about the number of immigration scofflaws (at least seven separate times) in June when AP reporters demanded to know if they had any data. Apparently, only pro-illegal friends of the Most Transparent Administration Ever can be trusted with this information. In fact, I assume the reason it was shared with them is because DHS knew how happy it would make them to know that the system’s performing as terribly as they’ve hoped. That’s a nice consolation prize for amnesty shills after O broke their hearts by delaying his order for a few more months.

Give me a reason why the appropriate House committee shouldn’t return to D.C. next month and hold a hearing on why these numbers weren’t publicly released but rather reserved for the White House’s amnesty allies. Don’t tell me “they’re busy campaigning.” That’s stupid three times over: Some things are obviously more important than campaigning; the number of Republicans called back as part of the committee would be small to begin with; and given the fact that amnesty’s become more important to midterm voters as Obama inches closer to an illegal executive order, a hearing on just how broken the process is would be fine politics. Let’s go.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union
Post by: Psalm 51:17 on September 30, 2014, 12:15:49 am
Schools scramble to help teens who crossed border

FRANKFORD, Del. (AP) — American schools are scrambling to provide services to the large number of children and teenagers who crossed the border alone in recent months.

Unaccompanied minors who made up the summer spike at the border have moved to communities of all sizes, in nearly every state, Federal data indicates, to live with a relative and await immigration decisions. The Supreme Court has ruled that schools have an obligation to educate all students regardless of their immigration status, so schools have become a safe haven for many of the tens of thousands of these young people mostly from central America living in limbo.

Delaware's rural Sussex County has long attracted immigrants, partly because of work in chicken factories, and soybean and corn fields. The district's population is more than one-quarter Hispanic, and for years has offered an early learning program for non-English speakers.

Still, officials were caught off guard by about 70 new students mostly from Guatemala — part of the wave crossing the border — enrolling last year, mostly at Sussex Central High School. The Indian River School District over the summer break quickly put together special classes for those needing extra English help.

On a recent school day, a group of these mostly Spanish-speaking teenage boys with styled spiky hair and high-top sneakers enthusiastically pecked away on hand-held tablets at the G.W. Carver Education Center, pausing to alert the teacher when stumped.

"If you don't know what you're supposed to write on the line, look at my examples, OK?" Lori Ott, their English language teacher, told one.

The students are eager but face barriers. Some can barely read or write in their native language.

The district's goal is to get them assimilated — and eventually into a regular high school. There, they can earn a diploma, even if that means participating in adult education programs and going to school until they are 21.

"They just crave it, and they will come and ask questions," Ott said. "How do you say this? And, how do you say that? They just participate and you can't say enough about them."

Donald Hattier, a school board member, said advance warning would have helped with planning. The federal government, he said, "just dropped this on us." He wonders what's next.

"The kids are still coming across the border. This problem has not been solved," Hattier said.

Educators in Delaware and elsewhere say many of these students, who fled poverty and violence, have years-long gaps in schooling. For teenagers, learning in English can prove more difficult than for younger students. They also may be living with relatives or others they didn't know, and the workings of an American school can be confusing.

Others experienced trauma, either in their home country or while crossing the border, and may need mental health help.

"It's a new culture and they already feel that they are alone. ... Some of them don't have their parents here," said English language instructor Alina Miron at Broadmoor High School in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The school has about a dozen of these students enrolled

In districts like hers, the influx means hiring new English language instructors.

Two foundations donated money to the Oakland Unified School District in California to help fund a person to connect about 150 unaccompanied students with legal and social services; many didn't have legal representation at immigration hearings.

"We feel that we have moral obligation to serve these students as long as they are in the United States," said Troy Flint, a district spokesman. "Until their fate is decided, we're responsible for ensuring they get an education and we embrace that opportunity."

In Louisiana, the Broadmoor principal, Shalonda Simoneaux, said attending high school and learning English is a motivating factor for teenagers who want "want to blend in."

"Whatever is being said, whatever is going on, they are really learning more from listening from other teenagers, even more so than from the teachers because it's high school," Simoneaux said.

For cash-strapped districts, providing for these students' needs can be arduous, particularly if they arrive after student headcounts are taken to determine school funding.

In Miami, the school board voted to seek federal help after 300 foreign-born students, many from Honduras and traveling alone, enrolled toward the end of the last school year.

Margie McHugh, director of the nonprofit Migration Policy Institute's National Center on Immigrant Integration, says it's critical that children allowed to stay are integrated into American life and educated.

Indian River School District officials say that's their plan.

"We do have a very open heart and an open mind and any student who comes in our system, we're going to give the most appropriate services that we can," said the Delaware district's superintendent, Susan Bunting.

Title: Re: Steps toward a North American Union