AT IMMIGRATION SESSION, MUCH ADO FOR NAUGHT

By Sandhya Somashekhar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 9, 2007; Page LZ01

Where was everyone?

Extra sheriff's deputies were on hand Tuesday for the Loudoun County supervisors' much-anticipated meeting on illegal immigration.

That was partly because thousands of protesters had swarmed Prince William County's government building two days earlier over the same issue.
And hundreds had showed up at a similar supervisors' meeting in Prince William a month ago.


James Burton (I-Blue Ridge) spoke about the complexity of the immigration issue at a meeting Tuesday. (Courtesy Of Jim-g. Burton)

But all that security turned out to be unnecessary. Very few people attended the Loudoun session, and only about 10 spoke during the public comment period about the Board of Supervisors' plans to crack down on illegal immigrants. There wasn't a protest sign in sight.

Why the disparity? Well, for one thing, Prince William was the first to grab headlines this summer by promising to cut county services to illegal immigrants and step up deportations. Loudoun followed with a similar resolution a week later.

The main reason, though, is probably the lack of a vocal Loudoun political group rallying the troops against the measure.

In Prince William, there's Mexicans Without Borders, a group that helped draw crowds to last Sunday's protest in Manassas. Early on, some activists thought that La Voz of Loudoun - a Hispanic advocacy group that warned that strict new county rules could lead to racial profiling -- might play a similar organizing role in Loudoun.

It has not. As a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, La Voz is not allowed to engage in "substantial" lobbying. As it is, some critics have accused the group of taking too political a role and have called for its county funding to be revoked. Leaders of La Voz, however, have said that they are trying only to educate the community.

On Tuesday, La Voz Executive Director Laura Valle sat in the audience but did not speak.

"We accomplished what we had hoped to accomplish, which is education," Valle said. "We didn't ever plan on speaking."

She did say, however, that there was "a pitiful turnout on both sides" at Tuesday's meeting.

Maybe, but supporters of a crackdown definitely won the turnout contest. Most of the speakers who addressed the board were members of Help Save Loudoun, a vocal opponent of illegal immigrants.

A Lone, Dissenting Voice

Many Loudoun supervisors made fiery statements when the board adopted its resolution on illegal immigration in July. By comparison, the supervisors' debate Tuesday was subdued, culminating in a decision to put off further discussion until Sept. 19.

But one dramatic moment came when Supervisor James Burton (I-Blue Ridge) delivered an impassioned commentary about the complexity and sensitivity of the illegal immigration issue, which he said was anything but clear-cut.

Many of his colleagues have blamed illegal immigrants for problems such as escalating crime and high taxes. But in a prepared statement, Burton said data he received from the county Sheriff's Office show that less than 1 percent of criminal prosecutions in Loudoun involve illegal immigrants.

James Burton (I-Blue Ridge) spoke about the complexity of the immigration issue at a meeting Tuesday. (Courtesy Of Jim-g. Burton)

Then he said: "It appears to me that the immigrants, documented or undocumented, are an integral and vital part of our local economy, filling jobs that no one else wants -- jobs that are absolutely necessary for our economy to flourish."

The comments drew criticism from some of his colleagues, especially Jim Clem (R-Leesburg), who told Burton: "I'd be totally embarrassed to read that thing. I hope to **** you didn't write it."

Burton is hardly alone in taking such a stance. The U.S. and Loudoun chambers of commerce, as well as labor groups, have said that efforts to punish employers who hire illegal immigrants could harm the economy. Even U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff warned this summer of "serious" economic consequences if illegal immigrants are purged from the workforce.

But with illegal immigration shaping up as a key issue in this fall's Loudoun elections, Burton said he knew he was taking a risk by making such a statement.

"I thought about all that," he said Wednesday. "But I can't let that kind of thing dictate what I do as a supervisor. It's the easiest thing in the world to go along with the crowd. But if you don't believe the crowd is headed in the right direction, I think there is an obligation to at least speak your piece. And that's what I did."

Not So Independent?

A group of residents has founded the Loudoun County Independent Committee, which they promise will be a "center of reason" in a county torn by polarized politics. They plan to endorse a slate of candidates with diverse political views in the Nov. 6 Board of Supervisors election.

But some have doubts about whether the group is truly "independent." Charles McKinney, Mark Miller and Jacobus Vandenberg, the three men named in the Aug. 30 announcement about the launch of the committee, attended the Loudoun County Republican convention in June -- and signed statements pledging their allegiance to the GOP.

"Sounds like a bunch of disgruntled old boys who did not like what they got at the convention," said board Chairman Scott K. York on Thursday. He's an independent but has no plans to join the group.

Also fueling that skepticism is that McKinney, a veteran campaigner, is working on behalf of Jack Ryan, who is running for the Broad Run seat on the Board of Supervisors. Ryan lost the Republican nomination to incumbent Lori L. Waters in June, then became an independent to stay in the race.

And consider this: Of the three independent candidates reached last week for comment, only Ryan has decided to join the new organization.

McKinney denies that his affiliation with Ryan -- he is also a friend of Ryan's dad, John W. Ryan Sr. -- had anything to do with the group. Although McKinney once served as the Loudoun GOP's chairman, he thinks the group is controlled too much by the "far right."

The new group "has been in the works for three years," McKinney said Thursday. "We have been thinking of putting this together long before Jack decided to run."

Indeed, the fissures in the Loudoun GOP run deep, and there have been rumblings on and off for years from factions wanting to split. The committee's founders emphasize, however, that they are independent thinkers from a broad spectrum of perspectives and are not beholden to the Republican -- or any other -- platform.

CASES WITHOUT BORDERS
DIABETES STRAINS LIVES AND BUDGETS


HOME THERAPY Teresa Sánchez of Mexico City, who lives on $400 a month and supports three children, recently bought a blood sugar meter after having had diabetes for 10 years.

By ELIZA BARCLAY
Published: June 12, 2007

MEXICO CITY, June 11 "” Ten years after she learned she had Type 2 diabetes, Teresa Sánchez bought her first blood sugar meter, a small, hand-held device that cost $100, a quarter of her monthly pension.

Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York Times
Her son Raúl Martínez Sánchez giving her an insulin injection.

Before she got the meter, Ms. Sánchez, 52, had to go to a low-cost laboratory or a doctor's office to have her blood sugar tested. Sometimes months passed without a test, and then she would discover that the level had crept to 400 or 500 milligrams per deciliter, two to four times normal.


Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York Times
Her son Raúl Martínez Sánchez giving her an insulin injection.

Those years of hyperglycemia, or high blood glucose levels, have led to extensive complications: nerve damage in her legs and feet, feeble vision and glaucoma, and incontinence from the strain on her kidneys and bladder. She also complains of frequent nausea and weakness.

For diabetics in the developing world, the most basic tools necessary to keep their illness in check represent a major expense. Yet doing without them can be far more expensive in the long run, and harmful to their health.

Many diabetics in Mexico and other developing countries are finding themselves unable to work, jeopardizing their families' livelihood. Ms. Sánchez once supplemented her pension by selling clothes to her neighbors, but her painful feet now restrict her mobility.

"I am worried about the future," she said. "I am raising three children and everything has changed in my life because of this disease."

Even now, controlling her blood sugar might have remained beyond her reach if not for the intervention of a doctor she met after being hospitalized in December with a bladder infection.

The doctor, Marco Reynoso, is a rare visionary in Mexico's vast and often inept public health system. An internal medicine specialist, Dr. Reynoso, 49, has intervened in the lives of the scores of working-class diabetics who pass through the Mexican government's Darío Fernández Fierro General Hospital.

For 23 years, Dr. Reynoso has counseled diabetics like Ms. Sánchez, imploring them to invest in blood sugar meters and keep meticulous daily charts of their levels. He also runs educational courses and fairs for diabetics at the hospital, though he receives no resources or extra pay for his efforts and sometimes has to hold his classes in the hallways.

"We need to re-educate people and reform their habits, particularly their food and exercise plans," he said. "It's easy to control diabetes, and not that expensive, yet the disease so often becomes problematic."

Diabetes is Mexico's leading cause of death, with 138 deaths per 100,000 adults aged 20 to 84 in 2000, compared with 82 per 100,000 in the United States, according to data from the National Institute of Geographic and Statistical Information. And the prevalence rate here is among the world's highest "” 10.7 percent among adults aged 20 to 69.

The Mexican Diabetes Federation estimates that 6.5 million to 10 million Mexicans have diabetes, and that 2 million of those cases have not been diagnosed. Only 10 percent of diabetics have blood sugar meters and are in good control of their disease, the federation said.

According to a 2003 study by the World Health Organization, the total combined annual direct and indirect costs associated with diabetes in Latin America and the Caribbean in 2000 were estimated at $65.2 billion. In Mexico, direct and indirect costs were $15.1 billion.

Diabetes is also impoverishing families at the household level. According to the International Diabetes Federation, families in Latin America pay 40 percent to 60 percent of the cost of diabetes care from their own pockets. In Mexico, where medical care is financed by an amalgam of public and private sources, half the population is uninsured.

"When diabetics in their 40s and 50s have complications like foot problems or congestive heart failure, they're going to be less productive and their families may go bankrupt taking care of them," said Jonathan Brown, a health economist and a senior investigator at the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research. "Instead of the money going toward raising the kids, it goes toward taking care of the parents."

Ms. Sánchez, whose husband died several years ago, has three children. Though she has government-paid health insurance, thanks to her former job as a janitor for a state university, she must pay out of pocket for her monitor and some of her medicine, all of which come to about $200 a month.

While her insurance should cover her insulin, it was out of stock at the hospital pharmacy one recent week, so she had to go to a private drugstore and buy it with her own money. And her insurance does not cover the lancets she uses to ***** her finger to draw blood, the blood test strips, the syringes to inject insulin, the rubbing alcohol or the cotton swabs. "It's very hard economically," she said.


Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York Times
She says she "would have taken better care of myself and eaten less had I known what would happen to me."

(Related Times Topics: DiabetesOne remedy, experts say, is self-management education, which teaches diabetics how to regulate their blood sugar levels, avoid complications and keep costs down.)

Ms. Sánchez said that in her 10 years with the disease, she rarely received practical advice on what to eat and how to monitor her blood sugar levels.

"I was told to take my pills and not eat so much bread and tortillas, that was all," she said. "They never told me my levels were far too high, and never explained the risks of complications. I would have taken better care of myself and eaten less had I known what would happen to me."

Dr. Reynoso's educational approach is tailored for people with resources stretched thin: he understands they cannot join a gym, so he gives them tips on how to exercise at work. And he advises them on how to find affordable ingredients to prepare low-fat, sugar-free meals.

Mexico's state-run health institutions are developing educational programs for diabetics.

"Mexico is making an effort to improve quality of care and educational programs for diabetics," said Alberto Barceló, regional adviser for the Pan-American Health Organization's noncommunicable diseases unit. "There is a lot of effort from the government to prioritize the disease, especially compared with other countries in Latin America."

But Enrique Manero, executive director of the Mexican Diabetes Federation, says that fewer than 10 percent of Mexican diabetics are receiving self-management education.

"Many people don't know the resources exist, but others don't attend the workshops because of indolence or indifference," Mr. Manero said. "They hear about the complications but don't think they will happen to them."

Ms. Sánchez says she will attend Dr. Reynoso's diabetes course once her feet improve. And once she can maintain her blood sugar levels over the long term, her costs should go down.

"For now I can't buy my children shoes or books because the medications are so expensive," Ms. Sánchez said. "But I want to get better and I want to work again."

IMMIGRATION MYOPIA IN VIRGINIA

The Washington Post
September 9, 2007

For Virginia's Democrats to cede the issue of illegal immigration to Republicans in this fall's legislative contests would be as socially irresponsible as it would be politically myopic ["Democratic Gains Are Predicted in Va. Assembly," front page, Sept. 2]. Communities as diverse as Culpeper and Herndon, and Loudoun and Prince William counties, are seeking to curb the influx of illegal aliens (calling them "undocumented workers" is akin to referring to bank robbers as "unofficial withdrawal specialists").

Although they are denigrated as "xenophobes," "racists" and "nativists" by special pleaders, local leaders are responding to concerns about school crowding, emergency-room access, neighborhoods blighted by old vehicles, trash-strewn yards, houses bulging with occupants, ubiquitous signs in Spanish and the proliferation of gangs. Several other factors should awaken Democrats, especially those from Northern Virginia, who blithely intone the mantra that "we are a nation of immigrants":

? Periodic wars and depressions interrupted the waves of new arrivals in the 19th and 20th centuries, giving them a chance to assimilate and, above all, learn English. No such "timeouts" have occurred since the 1965 immigration law, which fostered the continuous influx of millions of Hispanics, many of whom live in linguistic enclaves perpetuated by the English-as-a-second-language lobby.

? Democrats claim to embrace the principle of justice. Although the United States legally admits almost 1 million prospective citizens each year, illegal aliens have broken the line, thrusting themselves ahead of men and women who have filled out myriad forms and followed the rules and expected to receive fair play in return.

? The Democrats should align themselves with the working people whom the Bush administration has disdained. It's not a Fairfax County lawyer or a Richmond businessperson whose wages and job opportunities are threatened by the mushrooming number of unlawful aliens. Instead, it's housekeepers, construction workers, hospitality industry employees and child-care providers, who feel abandoned when the party of Truman, Kennedy and Roosevelt elevates the interests of lawbreakers over the well-being of these forgotten blue- and pink-collar citizens.

? Finally, in scorning rigorous law enforcement, Democrats are compromising opportunities for African Americans, who have been our party's most faithful backers in the Old Dominion. The Congressional Black Caucus, which rakes in donations from corporate giants that exploit illegal aliens, has urged African Americans to join forces with Hispanics and other minorities in a "rainbow coalition" that supposedly will uplift the nation's downtrodden. In fact, such vapid sloganeering means that "African Americans have been left devoid of a strong black voice in Congress on a topic [illegal immigration] that affects them deeply, given their high unemployment rates and historic struggle to get quality housing, health care, education and other goods and services," writes Vanderbilt University professor Carol Swain, who happens to be black. Virginia's Democrats risk displaying equal callousness toward this constituency.


-- George W. Grayson

Williamsburg

The writer, who teaches at the College of William and Mary, served 27 years as a Democratic member of the Virginia House of Delegates.

IMMIGRATION FOES WARN PLOT AFOOT TO RETAKE SOUTHWEST; COMPLETELY BOGUS!


MARK HUMPHREY / Associated Press
Nashville, Tenn., City Council candidate Jim Boyd displays some of his campaign pamphlets Aug. 1 in Nashville. Boyd is basing his campaign on a single theme "” "stop the illegal immigrant invasion" "” and a theory that Hispanics want to reconquer the Southwest and secede from the United States.

By TRAVIS LOLLER and PETER PRENGAMAN
Associated Press
9/8/2007

LOS ANGELES -- On the far fringes of the pro-immigration movement, some Hispanic activists openly yearn for the day when immigrants rise up and retake the American Southwest, more than 150 years after the U.S. annexed it.

"If somebody steals your car, how much of it do you want back? Just the tires? The seats?" asks Olin Tezcatlipoca of the Los Angeles-based Mexica Movement.

Mainstream immigration advocacy groups -- as well as academics and experts on nearly all sides of the illegal immigration issue -- dismiss these "reconquista" notions.

But such talk appears to be galvanizing foes of immigration. Anti-immigrant activists and some conservatives have seized on such rhetoric to claim that a conspiracy is afoot among illegal immigrants to reconquer the Southwest.

Jim Boyd, for example, ran a losing campaign for City Council in Nashville, Tenn., on the single idea of stopping an "invasion" of Mexicans who he said want to seize much of the Southwest and secede from the United States.

"They're American citizens of convenience, until they can start a new country. Then they'll shuck their citizenship as easily as you or I take off a jacket," he said.

Boyd got only 2 percent of the vote last month. That translates to more than 8,000 people.

Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow with the conservative Manhattan Institute think tank, called the reconquista conspiracy theory "a fantasy, a boogeyman."

Similarly, Mark Potok, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Project, which tracks and monitors hate groups, said the reconquista idea is "completely bogus" but has "made its way into the mouths of national politicians and onto the screens of cable television news."

Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin and CNN host Lou Dobbs, both critics of illegal immigration, may not believe in the existence of an actual plot to retake the American Southwest, but both have talked about the reconquista theory as an example of the extreme rhetoric of some Hispanic organizations and pro-immigrant groups.

Charlie Norwood, a congressman from Georgia who died earlier this year, appeared to accept the conspiracy at face value, accusing the National Council of La Raza, a mainstream Washington advocacy group, of acting as a front organization for the "radical racist group" MEChA, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan.

In an article last year for the conservative newspaper Human Events, he complained of a grant La Raza made to MEChA, which he said was seeking "to carve a racist nation out of the American West."

"It doesn't end with secession," Norwood wrote. "The final plan includes the ethnic cleansing of Americans of European, African and Asian descent out of 'Aztlan."'

Aztec folklore puts Aztlan in northern Mexico, possibly along its western coast. Other accounts place it ****her north in what is now Arizona, Colorado or New Mexico.

Mexico's huge territorial losses were a result of defeat in the Mexican-American War. The 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ceded what are now California, Utah and Nevada, and parts of present-day Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and Wyoming, to the United States.

Anti-immigration critics often cite a MEChA manifesto, written in 1969 and filled with nationalist rhetoric, as proof the organization has a hidden agenda.

"Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans," the manifesto reads. "With our heart in our hands and our hands in the soil, we declare the independence of our mestizo nation. We are a bronze people with a bronze culture."

Marcos Zamora, chairman of MEChA's California State University, Northridge, branch, said those documents should be understood in historical context: "People were really radical back then." The organization's main mission now is to promote higher education for underprivileged youth, he said.

Many prominent Hispanics, like Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, were once members of MEChA, and that only convinces some anti-immigration critics that the radicals are taking over.

Cecilia Munoz, senior vice president for La Raza, said the accusations of a radical separatist agenda are "a little like accusing the NAACP of being the Black Panthers."

FEDERAL BUILDING PROTEST AGAINST ARREST OF ELVIRA ARELLANO

by Mexica Movement Monday, Aug. 20, 2007 at 11:52 PM
mexicamovement@sbcglobal.net (323) 981-0352
la.indymovement.org




Over 100 people protest outside Federal Building in support of Elvira Arellano.

Activists re-energized by arrest of migrant mother. Protest march scheduled for Sat. August 25th

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES -Over 100 supporters of Elvira Arellano rallied and protested outside the Federal Building on Monday night.

The community protested the arrest and deportation of Elvira on Sunday. A sense of outrage permeated the event.

The demonstrators were multi-ethnic and the event revealed how Elvira has become the symbol for a movement against an unjust system that tears families apart.

SCHEDULED FOR SATURDAY, AUGUST 25th:

* Saturday major mobilization from Olympic and Broadway. Mothers and children to wear white.
* Elvira's caravan will continue across the country.
* Sept 12 general national boycott.

Demands are:
1. Justice for Elvira
2. Families united: no raids, detention, or deportation
3. Respect for sanctuary
4. Legalization for all

www.mexica-movement.org

IMMIGRANT CHILDREN MAY BE DEPORTED

By ELIZABETH WHITE
Associated Press Writer
September 7, 2007

SAN ANGELO, Texas "” A Mexican family living illegally in Texas may be split up by immigration officials, apparently because of a routine delay in paperwork that, if completed, could allow the entire family to stay together in the U.S.

The story of Rocio Godinez's family provides a glimpse into the anguish of thousands of immigrants in similar straits. But their case is also different because the mother who first came to authorities' attention is not facing deportation. Her children are.

Godinez, 32, and her four oldest children came to the U.S. in the late 1990s and overstayed their tourist visas. The children, who are now 10 to 18 years old, could be sent back to Mexico as early as next week to a home they don't remember, to live with relatives who can't afford to take them in.

Godinez's family lives in San Angelo, as do her parents, who are legal U.S. residents. Her fifth child, Brisa, was born a U.S. citizen in 1999.

In 2001, Godinez's father petitioned for her to stay in the United States with her children. But because of a limited number of visas, the State Department has not yet reviewed the Godinez case, said Gregory Ball, chief counsel for Immigration and Customs Enforcement in San Antonio.

The family lived freely in the U.S. until Godinez was stopped in 2005 for speeding in San Angelo. Police referred her to the Border Patrol, and Godinez told them about her children. Then the deportation proceedings began.

"It's very difficult," Godinez said in Spanish from the living room of the family's run-down home. "I don't have a choice. I can't go back "” I can't stay."

Supporters of strict immigration enforcement said Godinez brought the problems on herself.

Advocates for illegal immigrants "always want to make it everybody else's responsibility for the consequences of one or more family members' decision to break the law," said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

Godinez, a single mother, doesn't know what she will do if authorities deport the four children "” Jorge, 18; Rocio Iveth, 16; Manuel, 12; and Uriel, 10. Her eldest child has a wife and child who are both U.S. citizens.

The children's lawyer, Jonathan D. Ryan, said he doesn't know why Godinez is being spared deportation. "That's the strangeness of this case," Ryan said. "Why not nobody or why not everybody?"

Ball, of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, said he did not have any information on Godinez, but he confirmed the four children are in removal proceedings. ICE officials declined to discuss the case further.

Niels Frenzen, a University of Southern California law professor, said ICE may be going easy on Rocio Godinez so she can eventually immigrate legally using the 2001 petition. Then she could be rejoined by her children. Another possibility is a paperwork error.

"There's always this tendency in any bureaucracy to sort of justify it and act like it's doing this with some intent and logical purpose," said Frenzen, who is not involved in the family's case.

If they return to Mexico, the children would live in the community of Ciudad Acuna, just across the border from Del Rio. But they have few memories of Mexico and don't know the aunt and uncle with whom they would probably live.

Godinez said her siblings have their own kids, including a sister who has just one bedroom for three children. "They don't have enough food for themselves," she said.

___

On the Net:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement: http://www.ice.gov/

http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/stories/2007/09/10/lawfirm0910.html

'IT'S NOT OPEN SEASON ON IMMIGRANTS':
LAW FIRM ROLLS TO NEW HEIGHTS

WILL THE IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN WORK?

The feds are renewing threats of jail for those who hire illegals. But while the latest rules stir fear, there's little hope for enforcement or reform.

By David Robinson and Renuka Rayasam
CNNMoney.com
September 10 2007: 5:44 AM EDT

(FSB Magazine) Washington, D.C. -- Bliss Nicholson flies to Mexico every year, not to soak up the sun in Cancún but to recruit legal migrant workers for his landscaping business in Middleton, Wis. With the local unemployment rate under 4%, few legal residents in his area care to work long hours in the hot sun planting trees or laying irrigation pipes for $10 an hour. Unlike many in his industry, Nicholson chooses not to hire illegal immigrants. So the annual road trip is his only recourse.

The federal government wants more employers to follow Nicholson's example. Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff recently announced that the Social Security system would be used to warn companies that hire undocumented aliens of possible penalties.

But the new policy, in effect Sept. 15, will do little to discourage illegal hiring or help honest employers find legal workers. If anything, Chertoff's bureaucratic bluster shows how badly our existing immigration regime needs an overhaul.

Every year U.S. companies file more than 250 million W-2 forms with the Social Security Administration (SSA), which uses them to track lifetime earnings so that it can calculate how much each worker is owed at retirement. Occasionally the name and the Social Security number on the form don't match. If the agency has trouble with more than ten forms filed by the same employer, it sends the company a "no match" letter inviting it to clear up the discrepancies - a step mainly designed to help employers catch clerical errors.

Of course, W-2 discrepancies also arise when illegal workers provide fake Social Security numbers to their employers. Under the new rules, all "no match" letters now include a leaflet from the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Any employer who ignores the letters, the new ICE notice warns, could face a felony charge of illegal hiring practices, punishable by as much as six months in prison and a fine of $3,000 for each illegal worker. To avoid penalties, employers must confirm the status of their workers and fire any who prove to be illegal.

Nursery and Landscape Association. But Nicholson, 59, won't join his competitors in hiring illegals. His Bruce Co. (bruceco.com) employs about 600 workers (including 65 from Mexico) and generates $45 million in annual revenues. Each year Nicholson spends more than $25,000 to satisfy immigration authorities that he can't find legal U.S. residents to fill all his job openings. He places want ads, submits interview records, and fills out reams of paperwork. Only then can he receive an allotment of H-2B work visas from the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service.

Once Nicholson gets approval, he flies to Mexico City and waits in line at the U.S. Embassy for most of the day before being allowed to recruit workers. "There are people begging for work outside my doorstep," he says. "But if you resort to illegals, you set yourself up to be raided."

Yet the new warning letters will do little to discourage landscapers who cut cost corners by hiring illegal aliens. Not very many employers cross the SSA's threshold of ten faulty W-2 forms, because 74% of small businesses with payrolls employ fewer than ten workers. And privacy laws prevent the SSA from telling immigration authorities where its "no match" letters have been sent - leaving ICE in the dark, unless the firm in question is already under investigation.

The bottom line: Honest owners such as Nicholson must still compete on an uneven playing field with dishonest owners who break the law with impunity. Without comprehensive reform of our broken immigration system, government "crackdowns" will have little effect on owners or on the illegal immigrants many of them employ. Nicholson has one suggestion. "What we need," he says, "is an efficient and practical protocol for hiring guest workers each year."

CRACKDOWN ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION RAISES QUESTIONS

By Jennie Rodriguez
Record Staff Writer
September 09, 2007 6:00 AM

STOCKTON - For most migrating to the United States, there's one driving reason: the pursuit of better living conditions - employment opportunities, education and the escape from political corruption.

But what if your migration isn't legal? What if in the new country you call home, getting stopped by police might result in deportation to the country you left? What if today - every day - you wake up hoping that when you get to work, you still have a job?

It's a constant worry of "will today be the day?" said Lupe Madera, a 42-year-old mother of three. The family has been in the United States seven years.

In the United States, there are more than 12 million undocumented immigrants, working the fields, construction, hospitality, landscaping and so on. One such Stockton family is the Maderas. (The Mexican native family spoke on the condition their real names and identities be concealed.)

On a recent Wednesday evening, they gathered around the dining room table, scooping with pieces of tortillas small bunches of egg, cheese and corn from their plates. It was dinner time, after a 12-hour workday for Lupe Madera and her oldest daughter, Erica.

"We came for the same reason everyone comes to the U.S.," Lupe Madera said as her family had supper. She sat on the couch, grasping her hands and laying them on her lap.

Madera, her husband, Salvador, and their 22-year-old daughter Erica work in Stockton with fake Social Security numbers, like millions others. They hope to stay in the shadows, unnoticed.

But Mother and daughter were fired from jobs with a staffing agency Sept. 1, shortly after the U.S. Homeland Security Department announced 140,000 warning letters would be mailed to employers that commissioned workers with mismatched Social Security numbers, such as those used by the Maderas. The warnings are part of a crackdown on illegal immigration.

But even as the letters are halted temporarily until Oct. 1, a number of employees with the discrepancies in the Stockton area already are being let go, according to local immigration advocates.

Lupe and Erica Madera said their former employer knew the women were providing false documentation.

But after Sept. 1, "the company said it didn't want illegals anymore," Madera said.

Five people live in the family's one-bedroom apartment, including the couple's 12-year-old daughter Araseli and a family friend. With minimum-wage incomes they combine, the family is able to pay rent and bills and send money to a 15-year-old daughter who was left in Mexico.

A San Francisco judge Aug. 31 issued the order temporarily suspending the letter mailing based on a lawsuit filed by the National Immigration Law Center, AFL-CIO and ACLU. The lawsuit claimed Homeland Security would be using error-prone Social Security records illegally for immigration enforcement. Also, the lawsuit claimed legal workers would be discriminated against in hiring scenarios should the letters be sent.

In the meantime, Lupe and Erica Madera have joined another staffing agency to continue contributing to their household. They'll coast along, switching from job to job, until either the dust settles on the letters issue, Lupe Madera said, or until there is no means of survival for them in the United States. If all else fails, they'll return to Mexico.

"We have to think about everything well, because they're about to throw us out," Lupe Madera said.

"That day they will kill our hope," she said. The Maderas don't qualify for any social programs. "We have to pay our own rent, doctor visits. ... We don't go to the doctor. ... Who could help us?" Salvador Madera said.

In the meantime, Araseli will continue her public schooling in Stockton.

"She says she wants to go to Delta (College)," her mother said.

Erica Madera hopes the letters halt will buy her more time to realize her goal.

"I want to be a photographer," she said, running her finger across her bandaged left arm that was injured at work. She takes evening English classes after 12-hour workdays.

Advocates including El Concilio and the immigrant project Proyecto Voz fear the Homeland Security letters will unearth discrimination among both legal and illegal Latino workers. Both organizations have been experiencing an increase of visits from workers who have lost their jobs.

National immigration experts say eliminating undocumented immigrants from the work force will place a significant dent on the U.S. economy.

"The effects are already being felt in our community," Luis Magaña of Proyecto Voz said.

The crackdown's effects are still unclear in the agriculture industry, said Bruce Blodgett, executive director of the San Joaquin Farm Bureau.

"Time will tell whenever they start contacting employers," Blodgett said. "Many of those numbers can easily be rectified.

"It might be the fact that they omitted a middle initial," he added.

The Farm Bureau is mostly concerned with the timing of the letters, as the harvest season is still in progress.

"If Congress would have done its job, this wouldn't be a discussion point. That's the biggest source of frustration between farm growers," Blodgett said, referring to Congress' failure to pass proposed immigration legislation earlier this year that included a guest-worker program.

Contact reporter Jennie Rodriguez at (209) 943-8564 or jrodriguez@recordnet.com

CONGRESS, DON'T BLAME EMPLOYERS FOR IMMIGRATION POLICY FAILURES

The immigration reform mess just keeps getting messier. Will Congress ever assume its responsibility to clean it up?

The latest wrinkle is a delay in a crackdown on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants -- a misdirected effort that still skirts the compelling need for comprehensive changes in immigration laws.

Such needed reform hinges on three components: 1) secure the southern border, 2) put a workable guest-worker program in place for immigrant laborers and 3) enforce employer sanctions.

After giving cosmetic treatment to the first and failing miserably on the second, the government was set to invoke the third and make employers the scapegoats for failed government immigration policies.

The Social Security Administration was poised to mail out letters last week to employers, notifying them of strict new requirements to follow through on "no-match" letters sent by the agency. Those letters warn employers of discrepancies in the information the government has on their workers.

This year the letters were to be accompanied by notices from the Department of Homeland Security outlining strict new requirements for employers to resolve those discrepancies within 90 days or face fines or criminal prosecution, if they're deemed to have knowingly hired illegal immigrants.

That's all on hold now, thanks to a ruling by a federal judge in San Francisco on a lawsuit filed by the AFL-CIO. The suit claims the new rules threaten to violate workers' rights and unfairly burden employers. The judge ordered a temporary restraining order, pending a hearing Oct. 1.

That effectively lets employers dealing in agricultural harvests off the hook this season. Even had the letters gone out, they would have had the 90 days to deal with issues raised in the letters. Now, especially with the delay, harvests will have long since been over.

The National Farm Bureau has warned growers that they could be liable if they hire the same worker with a problem Social Security number for next year's harvest.

Needed immigration reform, of course, doesn't apply to just harvests in the fields and orchards. The "no match" crackdown could have affected food processing, construction, service industries, or any other businesses that rely heavily on low-cost labor.

Doesn't it make more sense to help businesses find a legal way to avoid the current situation?

If the federal government is so willing to adversely affect businesses in and out of agriculture, then it behooves Congress to come up with a real solution. That would be a meaningful guest-worker program that negates the need to rely on the labor of illegal immigrants.

Employers shouldn't be the first line of defense against illegal immigration just because Congress isn't doing its job. Secure the border, enact a guest-worker program and then go to employer sanctions.

Continued failure to address those changes in total is an ongoing national embarrassment.


* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins and Bill Lee.

LAW WOULD PUNISH CITIES THAT SHIELD ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

WASHINGTON - A Tampa Bay area congresswoman wants to deny some federal funding to localities that have what she describes as "sanctuary" policies for illegal immigrants.

Under a bill that Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite will introduce this week, states and localities with policies that ban cooperation with federal officials in apprehending or removing undocumented immigrants from the country would lose federal funding that helps them pay for jailing noncitizens who commit crimes.

The Brooksville Republican says she continues to explore the idea of revoking other federal payments. She wrote Thursday to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff asking what added authority, if any, he needs to compel localities to better cooperate with federal authorities in enforcing immigration laws.

"Sanctuary cities are an insult to law-abiding citizens," Brown-Waite said during a hearing Wednesday in which she pressed Chertoff about cutting federal aid to these cities.

This Order Is On Books
New Haven, Conn., is such a city. It has a a general order to "ignore" federal immigration and customs warrants, unless they are criminal in nature, for undocumented immigrants.

Told of Brown-Waite's bill, officials in New Haven said they know what's best for their constituents, even if it costs their city or state some federal aid.

"The mayor has always believed that the policies in New Haven are what's best for New Haven, and not necessarily anywhere else," said Jessica Mayorga, a spokeswoman for New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr.

Brown-Waite dismissed that notion. "I would say that they are probably grossly out of touch with their constituents."

Brown-Waite's bill comes as a Rasmussen Reports national poll of 800 voters last month found that 58 percent of voters nationwide favor cutting off federal funding for what are known as "sanctuary cities" that provide protections to illegal immigrants. Twenty-nine percent of those surveyed were against the idea.

GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor whom Brown-Waite supports for the White House, proposed such a plan last month.

6 Months To Comply
Under Brown-Waite's bill - which also would seek to make illegal immigration a felony - a state or municipality could be targeted if it has in place "a statute, policy or practice" that prevents law enforcement from cooperating with federal officials regarding illegal immigrants apprehended "in the course of routine duties."

Funding revocation would kick in if those policies continue six months after Brown-Waite's bill became law.

A draft of her legislation notes that $1 billion would be authorized by Congress annually for an existing Department of Justice program to reimburse states and localities for a portion of their costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants on state or local criminal charges and convictions.

That money would transfer to "compliant states" under Brown-Waite's bill.

The one qualification: Local law enforcement agencies do not have to report the identity of a victim of a crime or a witness to a crime for the purpose of immigration enforcement or removal.

Brown-Waite's approach is similar to an amendment to a spending bill passed by the House this year. The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican running for president, would block Homeland Security funding in 2008 to localities that prevent cooperation between local police and federal immigration authorities.

But Brown-Waite acknowledges that determining which localities have set policies of noncooperation with federal officials is not easy, especially if the policies aren't in writing.

"Obviously there is no way of tracking it down if a particular police chief of sheriff just gives a verbal order," she said.

New Haven's policy is a written order.

It states that in "any contact with individuals in which warrant checks are performed," an Immigration and Customs Enforcement warrant that does not involve criminal charges "should be ignored."

It also states that "the individual will not be detained or taken into custody absent any criminal charges and ICE will not be notified in any manner of the person in question, under any circumstances."

No Stated Policies In Florida
Tampa does not have such a policy, said Kirby Rainsberger, the police department's legal adviser.

"Absolutely not - official or unofficial," Rainsberger said.

He said when police determine that someone in custody is an undocumented immigrant, the policy is to "hold onto the folks we come across" and notify federal immigration and customs officials.

Thirty-one cities and counties nationwide were listed in an August 2006 Congressional Research Service report as having sanctuary policies.

No Florida municipalities were named. Brown-Waite said a list that she has also names no Florida cities.

But cities such as Los Angeles, San Diego, Detroit, Minneapolis, Baltimore, New York, San Francisco, Austin, Texas, and Cambridge, Mass., were identified in the Congressional Research Service report.

That report explains that most of those cities had adopted a "don't ask-don't tell" policy in which they don't require city or county employees, including police, to report to federal officials immigrants who might be illegal.

At a U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security hearing last week, Chertoff seemed noncommittal under questioning by panel member Brown-Waite on the idea of threatening "sanctuary cities" by withholding funding.

"People use the term 'sanctuary city' in different ways," Chertoff responded. "So I am never quite sure what they mean."

Some cities, Chertoff said, don't tell the federal government about felons who are illegal immigrants in their custody.

"I think that's actually very foolish," he said.

But "I'm not aware of any city - although I may be wrong - that actually interferes with our ability to enforce the law," Chertoff said.

Brown-Waite said she wasn't satisfied with Chertoff's answers at the hearing, including his comment, "I don't know that I have the authority to cut off all Homeland Security funds if I disagree with the city's policy on immigration."

She wrote a follow-up letter asking him to let her know what options, if any, his department has to take action against sanctuary cities.

If there are no legal options available, she wrote that she wants Chertoff to provide recommendations for what added authority he needs "to enforce the law and require such cities to uphold established immigration laws and regulations."

Reporter Billy House can be reached at 202 662-7673 or bhouse@tampatrib.com.

DEMOCRAT SOUND BITES TRANSLATED INTO AMERICAN SATIRE



NewsBlaze.com
By John Lillpop
Op-Ed Contributor

Because the format of the latest debate among Democrats was based on racial profiling and pandering to illegal aliens, hundreds of millions of decent American citizens were unable to understand the sound bits and propaganda that flowed from the 10 least qualified presidential candidates in U.S. history.

For the benefit of those who do not, cannot, and never will speak Spanish, fret not. All you really missed is proof positive that this crop of liberal misfits is made up of double talking traitors who can lie in two languages!

As a service to real Americans who speak real American, the debate transcripts have been analyzed. A sampling of the most frequent sound bites from the Democrats follows:


* George Bush's 'surge' has failed. The Iraq war has been lost.

* There are no 'illegal' human beings, except for Republicans named Bush and Cheney.

* Elvira Arellano should be escorted back into the U.S., given full citizenship rights, and elected to the U.S. Senate to replace John Warner and or Chuck Hagel.

* Deportations must cease, except for Hispanic Republicans who should be shipped out regardless of immigration status.

* Comprehensive immigration reform is needed to bring millions of undocumented Americans out of the shadows where they will be free to join the Democrat party and vote Democrat for life.

* General Petraeus, You Betrayed Us!

* George Bush lied, People Died!


There you go--the eight most common declarations from the liberal nut cases who would, given the chance, cut $450 billion out of the defense and homeland security budgets and use the money to pay for public services for illegal aliens.

That is Loco, in any language!

John Lillpop is a recovering liberal.


Copyright © 2007, NewsBlaze, Daily News

ACTIVIST'S ROAD RUNS THROUGH YAKIMA

By JOSEPH TREVIÑO and ELOÍSA RUANO GONZÁ***
YAKIMA HERALD-REPUBLIC
September 10, 2007


Nam Y. Huh/Associated Press file
A December photo shows Elvira Arellano and her 8-year-old son, Saul, at a news conference at the Adalberto United Methodist Church in Chicago, where she sought sanctuary to avoid deportation and separation from Saul.

WAPATO -- Elvira Arellano, the immigrants rights activist who was deported to Mexico after spending a year claiming sanctuary in a Chicago church, has become an international cause celebre among many undocumented immigrants.

Some Mexican-Americans in town were buzzing about her notoriety last week, particularly since Arellano, a native of Michoacán, once lived here as a nanny and worked at the local laundromat. Few people, though, know or even remember her.

She was like many other women here, raising a child and trying to keep a low profile.

Last month, Arellano drew national and international headlines when immigration agents arrested her during an immigration reform rally in Los Angeles. The 32-year-old single mother had been ordered deported back to Mexico about a year earlier but took refuge in a church -- making her the first immigrant to claim sanctuary since the 1980s.

The photo image of her talking at a news conference on Olvera Street, with her son, Saul, hiding behind her, was circulated around the world. She was led away in handcuffs.

Some supporters liken Arellano to a modern-day Rosa Parks who has put a human face on the nation's immigration debate. But detractors criticize her as a scofflaw who deserves anything but support, much less a visa.

"Arellano isn't a victim of anything but her own decisions," wrote one columnist, Manny Lopez, in Detroit. "My guess is Arellano wouldn't get much sympathy from ... the countless other Hispanics whose families have followed the law and assimilated into America legally. She gets none from me."

Family members, meanwhile, are reticent about latching on to her fame. This is, after all, a small farm community where many immigrants live.

Arellano's cousin, Maria, doesn't want her co-workers at a local school to know about her connection to the immigrants rights activist. She agreed to be interviewed so long as her last name is not published.

She said she worries that some people in the community would misinterpret her work with non-English-speaking children as a political statement.

"I'm proud of what she's doing. I believe she has done -- and will do -- a lot for 12 million (undocumented immigrants)," said Maria, who has documents to be here legally. "She had it in her to be active and a fighter."

And even Arellano, who says she remembers her life here fondly, is protective of her family.

In an Aug. 21 interview with El Sol de Yakima, a weekly newspaper owned by the Yakima Herald-Republic, Arellano gave no specifics about where she worked or lived in the Valley.

"It was a bit difficult for me to adapt to a new life in the U.S.," she said by phone from Tijuana. "But as a single mother, I had a lot of help from a family, and the time I spent with them was very, very nice."

Before Chicago, Arellano lived for three years in Maria's home in Wapato, along with Maria's husband and their children.

Arellano moved here in 1997 at the age of 22 after first crossing the border through the California desert town of Calexico with the aid of "coyotes," human smugglers. She was caught and arrested on her first try, but because of her slim build, squeezed through revolving metal gates the second time.

With family here, Arellano knew she would have a place to stay and work. She lived a simple life as a nondescript young woman.

During the week, she would care for her cousin's children as a nanny, while also sweeping the floors and cleaning out machines at the family's laundromat. On weekends, she would dress up and go to Mexican dances at the SunDome.

The laundromat became her social hub, a place where she could meet and easily make friends.

There, where Mexican music blares from speakers and customers can buy candy and international phone-calling cards or just socialize while doing the laundry, the younger Arellano would take good care of the clients, Maria said. Besides chatting with customers, she would try to help immigrants who were new in town.

"She was very attentive," Maria said of her cousin. "She was always trying to help people."

It was when she began dating -- and then became pregnant -- by Saul's father, a hops field worker named Benjamin, that Arellano's life changed dramatically, relatives say.

Arellano said he was angry and reprimanded her for not taking measures to prevent the pregnancy. He suggested she get an abortion.

Heartbroken, Arellano refused to see Benjamin again.

On Dec. 18, 1998, she gave birth to Saul at Providence Top*****h Hospital. His birth certificate does not name the father.

Arellano took care of the baby on her own, often taking him to the laundromat where she worked. She never went back to Yakima dancing clubs to listen to Banda music.

"God knows why he does things. It never occurred to her to ask for welfare," Maria said. "She said, 'this is my son, this is my responsibility and I'm going to do it.' "

In early 2000, Arellano left for Chicago with two of her cousins, Maria said. They heard there were better-paying jobs there. She said she also wanted to get ****her away from Saul's father.

She worked in several menial jobs before she got a job cleaning airplanes at O'Hare International Airport. There, according to court records, she was arrested in 2002 for using a fake Social Security number.

While defying the deportation order, Arellano became a member of the PRD (Partido de la Revolucíon Democrática), a left-leaning political party in Mexico, which has an active chapter in Chicago. She also became an outspoken advocate for immigrants.

She returned to the Valley once, in 2003. A group in Sunnyside that knew of her political activism asked her to speak.

Several friends here have kept in touch with her, Maria said. They continue to drop by the laundromat to ask how she's doing.

Since her deportation to Mexico, Arellano has been interviewed on national television there and met with Mexico's President Felipe Calderon. She asked him to give her a diplomatic visa so she can return to the U.S. as an ambassador for peace and justice.

The now-8-year-old Saul was reunited with his mother in Mexico on Aug. 31 and, according to the Associated Press, plans to stay there indefinitely.

In the interview with El Sol de Yakima, Arellano said she plans to continue to fight for the rights of undocumented mothers who have U.S.-born children. And she urged others here in the Yakima Valley to do the same, by getting involved with local organizations and churches.

"You never imagine that this is going to happen to you," Arellano said. "I only thank God that experience has helped me face things with responsibility. What is important is that I got involved."


* Joseph Treviño is editor of El Sol de Yakima, a Spanish-language newspaper owned by the Yakima Herald-Republic. He can be reached at 249-6184 or jtrevino@elsoldeyakima.com.


* Eloísa Ruano Gonzá*** can be reached at 577-7749 or egonza***@yakimaherald.com.

We should've sent Columbus packing when we had the chance.

dailysouthtown.com
Sun-Times News Group
Speak Out
September 10, 2007

SAME PROBLEMS 500 YEARS LATER

Being part Native American, I have to laugh at how scared everyone was over one little illegal immigrant (Elvira Arellano). If you think about it, Native Americans were Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Border Patrol and the Department of Homeland Security fighting illegal immigration 500 years before the mess we have today.

We should've sent Columbus packing when we had the chance.

Chicago

NEWSOM SUPPORTS ID CARDS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS



KCBS NEWS
ALL NEWS 740 AM
September 10, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO (KCBS) -- San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is speaking out in favor of a plan to issue city identification cards to undocumented immigrants.

Supporters of the measure say the cards would give illegal aliens access to city services, including the new universal health care program. Critics claim the proposal undermines the nation's immigrant laws.

"We're doing quite fine as one of dozens and dozens of sanctuary cities that's already marching to our own drum and not the drum coming out of Washington D.C. and right-wing radio. This city takes care of all its residents, regardless of their of immigration status," said Newsom. "We've been perversely doing it for people who want to golf at Harding Park and want to get a discount, so they get residence cards. We do it through the Treasurer's Office. It seems to me we shouldn't limit it just to golf."

The I.D. card proposal could go before the San Francisco Board of Supervisors later this month.

NO BABU, WE DON'T OWE MEXICANS AMNESTY



The Conservative Voice
New and Commentary:
By Allan Wall
Sept. 10, 2007

Mr. Babu Ranganathan's article "Why We Owe Amnesty to Mexicans" was recently published on "The Conservative Voice". This article contains a number of common but false arguments used to support amnesty and mass immigration. I invite Mr. Ranganathan to consider why, in fact we do not owe amnesty to Mexicans and it probably wouldn't help them anyway.

Babu begins his article with this statement: "I am Christian, Conservative, and Republican. Having said that, let me say that we are committing a great injustice in how we are dealing with Mexican immigration and the status of illegal Mexican workers in the United States."

Babu, I too am "Christian, Conservative, and Republican" and I also reside (legally) in Mexico. I encourage you to study this issue more closely and not let yourself be swayed by emotional but phony arguments.

To begin with, what "great injustice" are we committing towards illegal alien Mexicans? Babu, these are people who have no right to be in the country. We have every right - as does every nation - to control our own immigration policy. Mexico certainly does. I have to have a work permit to work legally here in Mexico. Are you complaining about that?

Then Babu goes into a big spiel about the Mexican War of 1846-1848. I have written about this elsewhere. I invite the reader to read my article about the history of that war, which gives a little more balanced picture than Babu's paragraph. Find it, and other articles, on my website, which is linked below.

However, even if Babu were completely correct in his interpretation of the history involved, to say that "We can partly correct the great injustice and wrong which we committed against Mexico by giving legal status to Mexican workers in the U.S." is ridiculous. Mexico is not poorer than the U.S. because we took the Southwest from them. It's poorer for a variety of social and historical causes, absolutely none of which will be solved by giving amnesty to lawbreakers.

Then Babu repeats a familiar argument, that Mexicans do jobs most Americans "refuse to do". No Babu, but the difference in Mexican and American wage levels means that Americans can't work for the wages Mexican illegal aliens earn, because they aren't high enough wages for American workers. That means that illegal immigration hurts low-income American workers. Does Babu care about them?

Then Babu writes that "No one is being hurt and everyone wins". Many Americans are hurt by illegal immigration, not only economically, but they are daily attacked and murdered by illegal aliens who shouldn't even be in this country, because our government refuses to deport them.

Babu repeats the famous Mexican moral values argument. That argument asserts that Mexicans have better moral values than Americans. Babu, I live in Mexico. Let me tell you, every social problem in the United States, you can find here too.

And since you mention abortion, did you know that Hispanic women in the United States have a higher abortion rate than white women? I bet you didn't, but that's what CDC statistics reveal. In other words, immigration is increasing the abortion level ! Sad, but true.

Babu says that Mexicans will assimilate just like the Irish and Italians. But there are many differences between the era in which the Irish and Italians came, a hundred years ago, and now. Back then, the U.S. believed in assimilation, not multiculturalism like today. Today the U.S. encourages immigrants not to learn English! Also, back then, the massive welfare state of today did not exist, and about a third of the immigrants went home.

Also, Babu completely ignores the fact that the Mexican government is utilizing illegal immigration to get as many Mexicans as possible out of Mexico. Why? Because it takes pressure off the Mexican government.

Does mass immigration, and the prospect of an amnesty really help Mexico? No, Babu, encouraging the emigration of Mexicans hurts Mexico. It breaks up families, it encourages Mexicans who already have work to emigrate, and it removes incentives from the Mexican government to reform Mexico's economy. So really, mass immigration is bad for both countries, and an amnesty will just encourage more of it.

No, Babu, we do NOT owe amnesty to Mexicans. It would be a horrible mistake, it would encourage more illegal immigration, and it would be bad for both countries.

Allan Wall (allan39@prodigy.net.mx">allan39@prodigy.net.mx) is an American citizen who resides in Mexico. His website http://www.allanwall.net contains various articles on immigration and how it is viewed from south of the border.

2 PLEAD GUILTY IN MARRIAGE SCAM THAT PROVIDED ILLEGAL GREEN CARDS

The Associated Press
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 09.08.2007

NEW YORK "” A former federal immigration employee and his sister pleaded guilty Friday to conspiring to charge people up to $16,000 to obtain green cards through sham marriages.

In separate proceedings, Philip Browne, 41, a former district adjudication officer with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and his tearful sister, Beverly Mozer-Browne, 50, entered their pleas to one conspiracy charge each under a deal in Manhattan's U.S. District Court.

Each agreed to spend about three years in prison and pay a combined $1.5 million in fines.

They admitted their roles in a scheme that prosecutors said resulted in the issuance of hundreds of green cards for customers of Mozer-Browne's Queens business between 2001 and 2006.

Federal authorities said Mozer-Browne was the ringleader, bringing in more than $1 million by accepting between $8,000 and $16,000 from people who wanted to get green cards.

Mozer-Browne and her workers prepared documents containing phony facts so the customers could obtain marriage licenses and other documents. American citizens were paid to participate in phony marriages with the customers, prosecutors said.

The fraudulent business was discovered after an immigrant who was solicited as a customer wrote to the FBI. The federal government is now helping the informant, who testified at a recent trial, to get a green card.

The prosecution has resulted in one jury conviction and 26 guilty pleas. One woman still awaits trial.

During his plea, Browne said he became involved in the scheme when his sister asked him to approve permanent residency applications submitted by her customers.

He said he did so without requiring the applicant to sit with him for an interview, a part of the process meant to ensure the applications are not fraudulent.

VISAS FOR VICTIMS

A 'U' Visa will finally grant temporary legal status to illegal immigrants who are the victims of crime.

latimes.com
Sept. 10, 2007

Since the collapse of comprehensive immigration reform this summer, legislators, including erstwhile reformers such as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), have felt little compunction about pursuing enforcement-only measures while ignoring the 12 million illegal immigrants in this country.

Now, the federal government is finally working on the other half of the reform equation. This fall, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will begin granting temporary legal status to illegal immigrants who have been victims of a crime and who cooperate with law enforcement.

The idea for this "U" visa -- soon to be available for up to 10,000 petitioners per fiscal year plus eligible family members -- is an old one. Part of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, which was passed nearly unanimously by Congress in 2000, it seeks to protect illegal immigrants from crime, recognizing their particular vulnerability and their reluctance to cooperate with investigations for fear of deportation.

In nearly seven years, not a single U visa has been granted; the agency claims post-9/11 bureaucratic reshuffling caused the delay. It did, however, offer "interim relief" to crime victims, granting work and travel authorization but no official legal status to about 5,800 out of 7,000 applicants.

The new visa will be retroactively available to those victims, along with any illegal immigrants who procure certification from a law enforcement agency that they've suffered crimes such as rape, domestic violence or extortion committed on U.S. ground. As long as the petitioner cooperates with law enforcement, the visa would protect him or her from deportation and grant employment authorization for four years. Three years after receiving a U visa (or three years after receiving interim relief), the immigrant would be eligible to apply for legal permanent residence, though the rules for adjusting status have yet to be clarified.

The new visas are an important humanitarian concession to immigrants who essentially have been twice victimized: first by erratic enforcement of immigration laws and the failure of Congress to pass a uniform fix, and second by criminals who prey on them knowing they're less likely to turn to police. With each government effort to pursue enforcement -- from federal raids and proposed congressional measures against so-called sanctuary cities to dozens of immigration laws passed by states and cities -- illegal immigrants will increasingly avoid reporting crime even in cities such as L.A., where, by long-standing order, law enforcement does not inquire about immigration status.

And though the U visa could be abused, the broader benefit is evident. As presidential contender Rudolph W. Giuliani said in last week's Republican debate (while his colleagues strove to outdo each others' enforcement-only grandstanding): "If you are an illegal immigrant in New York City, and a crime is committed against you, I want you to report that, because . . . the next time a crime is committed, it could be against a citizen or a legal immigrant."

Haha! got tuna?

Assemblyman wants police to ask about citizenship

CRACKDOWN: Bauer says law would keep Anchorage from becoming "a gateway for illegals."

By KYLE HOPKINS
khopkins@adn.com

Published: September 10, 2007
Last Modified: September 10, 2007 at 09:57 AM

Sir, can I please see your license, registration and proof that you're an American?

Assemblyman Paul Bauer says he wants to strike Anchorage from a list of "sanctuary cities."

Assemblyman Paul Bauer is proposing a new city law that could have police asking certain drivers if they are U.S. citizens during routine traffic stops. It's part of a proposal that would force local police to team up with federal immigration authorities to crack down on illegal immigrants.

"It's a preventative measure," Bauer said Friday. "Let's not be a gateway for illegals."

The proposal is on the agenda for the Assembly's Tuesday meeting. It's based on a boilerplate ordinance written by a group in Washington, D.C., that believes the federal government isn't doing enough to target illegal or undocumented immigrants and it's up to cities and states to pick up the slack.

Last week, as Bauer's proposal became public, downtown Assemblyman Allan Tesche said the plan would only stir up paranoia and hatred of immigrants.

"Why doesn't Mr. Bauer help us all and pin yellow stars on these immigrants?" he asked in a sarcastic reference to the marking of Jews in Nazi Germany.

Bauer says he wants to strike Anchorage from a list of "sanctuary cities" circulating in conservative circles. Definitions vary, but so-called sanctuary cities are generally seen as communities that protect or tolerate illegal immigrants.

Mayor Mark Begich doesn't support the proposed law, which his spokeswoman, Julie Hasquet, said is pointless.

"We don't need this," she said. "We are already cooperating fully with the federal immigration officials and we are not a sanctuary city."

Either way, Bauer's proposal embroils the Anchorage Assembly in a national argument over immigration law that touches on terrorism, the Patriot Act, civil rights and, in this case, talk show host Bill O'Reilly.

LET THE FEDS DO IT

In July 2003, the Anchorage Assembly joined the state and other Alaska cities in protesting the U.S.A. Patriot Act with a two-page resolution.

Proposed by Tesche, the resolution said the city wouldn't help the federal government by, say, collecting information on people's religious beliefs, tracking their library records or racially profiling those who live here. It also said that unless necessary to protect public safety, the city would not "Use municipal resources or institutions for the enforcement of federal immigration matters, which are the responsibility of the federal government."

Tesche said at the time that the Patriot Act could demand that local police help or launch immigration investigations that they don't have the time or training for.

Bauer says this put Anchorage on a list of "sanctuary cities" for illegal immigrants -- a list often culled from a footnote in a 2006 report on immigration law by the Congressional Research Service, the research arm of the U.S. Congress.

Conservative talk show host Bill O'Reilly publicized the list, putting Anchorage in the cross hairs of people who say federal and local governments should do more to catch illegal immigrants.

City Hall says the label is wrong, and Hasquet and the mayor have both e-mailed O'Reilly in protest, Hasquet said: "I went to their site today and it said 'e-mail Bill.' So I did."

Some cities, such as Chicago, ban police from asking people if they are legal U.S. citizens, according to The Associated Press. Anchorage has no such rule, Hasquet said.

Anchorage Police Department Capt. Bill Miller said the 2003 resolution -- which is not a law -- did not change the way police work with immigration authorities.

"We enforce any law that we have the opportunity to enforce," he said.

TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT

Bauer said his proposal is based on a draft law written by the Immigration Reform Law Institute.

Staff attorney Sharma Hammond says the group has helped draft immigration policies for the states of Oklahoma, Colorado and Georgia. She said the idea is for local authorities to team up with Homeland Security to get training so they can catch illegal immigrants.

It is unclear how the proposed law would work, but here's how Bauer pictures it: An Anchorage police officer with special immigration training might stop someone for a broken taillight. The officer could then ask the driver for proof he or she is a U.S. citizen, which could include checking a driver's license as well as checking national databases.

If the officer determines the driver is an illegal immigrant, he or she could be handed over to federal immigration authorities.

Bauer said he's not clear on the details of the process, which he said would have to be worked out by the federal government and local police. As written, the proposal appears to say that police would routinely ask everyone they detain if they are a U.S. citizen, but Bauer said that's not his intent and could be fixed with a rewrite of the proposal.

Lt. Paul Honeman said the Police Department generally stays out of debates over Assembly proposals but also doesn't have any plans to make its officers into quasi-immigration agents.

"We don't have the resources," he said. "We believe we have other issues to deal with."

Bauer said the problem is that the city is on record saying it won't use its resources to enforce immigration laws and he wants to get people at least talking about illegal immigration in Alaska.

Even if the proposal proceeds as scheduled, any public hearing would still be weeks away.