LOS ANGELES "” A week after a pro-immigration rally was broken up by police using batons and rubber bullets, activists announced plans to march again next month to refocus attention on their pleas for a path to citizenship.
Rally organizers hope the planned June 24 march will exceed the crowd of about 25,000 that attended the May 1 demonstration. It ended with riot police using batons and rubber bullets to drive protesters and journalists out of MacArthur Park.
Police Chief William Bratton speaks at a meeting of the Los Angeles Police Commission at LAPD headquarters in downtown Los Angeles Tuesday, May 8, 2007 8, 2007. (AP Photo/Reed Saxon) "All of us here today are united in expressing in the clearest voice possible that we can't be intimidated into inaction," said Juan Jose Gutierrez of Latino Movement U.S.A. at a news conference Tuesday outside City Hall.
About a dozen demonstrators stood behind him holding signs calling for amnesty for the roughly 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
The new march is planned for the intersection of Hollywood and Vine, in the heart of Hollywood and far from downtown, where prior immigration rallies have taken place. Gutierrez said the location was chosen to get other Los Angeles neighborhoods involved in the reform movement.
"A community divided is a weak community," Gutierrez said.
Also Tuesday, Police Chief William Bratton announced a replacement for the deputy chief who was demoted to the rank of commander and assigned to work from his home following the march.
Sergio Diaz, a 30-year department veteran who is currently assistant commanding officer for the Special Operations Bureau, will replace Cayler "Lee" Carter Jr., who was the highest ranking police official at the scene of the clash.
The melee is the focus of four separate investigations.
The chief told the Police Commission on Tuesday that the elite Metro unit, whose officers cleared the park, was undergoing training this week on use of force. He said he planned to speak to all personnel about crowd dispersal, use of force and the treatment of reporters in the field.
Critics attending the commission meeting said they were outraged by the officers' actions and urged a civilian panel to conduct a thorough investigation.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: explora,
By Lorenza Munoz, Times Staff Writer 6:11 PM PDT, May 14, 2007
Considering that Hispanics make up the largest ethnic group in the United States and Hispanic buying power is on an upward march, you'd figure Spanish-language networks would be fighting advertisers off.
They aren't.
This week in New York, where the bulk of the commercial time for the upcoming television season will be sold at what's called the upfront market, Univision and Telemundo will need to make hard sells.
Advertising spending on Spanish-language media has been growing, rising more than 14 percent last year from 2005, according to Nielsen Co. But only 3.2 percent of total national television and print advertising is directed at Spanish markets in the Spanish language, TNS Media Intelligence has found.
What's more, recent research by the Association of Hispanic Advertising Agencies determined that of the country's top 250 advertisers, about 100 don't market in Spanish at all, and many of those that do aim less than 1 percent of their promotional budgets at Hispanics.
A large group of advertisers -- mainly in the banking, investment and technology industries -- question whether they need to reach out to Latinos "en espanol" or whether their messages are getting across just fine in English.
For Univision in particular, this is irritating. Recently purchased by a group of private investors, the network's debt is about $10 billion, and it badly needs to ramp up advertising revenue. The investors are counting on Chief Executive Joe Uva, an advertising industry veteran who until early this year led OMD Global Media, one of the world's largest advertising companies.
Although Univision is considered a player in the big leagues, able to compete for audiences with ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox, it doesn't command the same price for advertising time as the English-language networks do. Overall, on a national level, 30 seconds on Univision or Telemundo is 40 percent to 50 percent less expensive than 30 seconds on an English-language network.
Univision's plan is to convince advertisers in New York that Spanish-language viewers are more loyal than others, less likely to own Tivos and other digital video recorders -- making them less likely to zip past commercials -- and more willing to accept product integration in their favorite programs.
For its part, NBC Universal's Telemundo has teamed up with Clorox, IKEA and other brands to integrate their products into the story line or as part of the sets of Telemundo's "telenovelas." Unlike Univision, which buys its popular novelas from Mexican network Televisa, Telemundo is producing its own soap operas and is using them to entice advertisers.
Univision, which maintains that the majority of its viewers are bilingual, says its so-called "sweet spot" is the audience that all advertisers covet: adults ages 18 to 34. According to Nielsen Television Index, Univision drew more viewers in this age group than any other network 41 percent of the time during the sweeps period in February.
Telemundo, a distant second to Univision in market share, also says its largest viewership is bilingual, although its age group skews older.
On a weekday afternoon or evening, the typical Telemundo and Univision viewer would seem like the ideal customer for toy manufacturer Fisher-Price: young mothers or grandmothers.
But Fisher-Price dropped its Spanish-language television campaign in 2005 after concluding that it was reaching Hispanics with young children on English television and with grass-roots print advertising.
For Fisher-Price parent Mattel Inc., the lack of weekday children's programming on Spanish-language television is a problem. To hawk Hot Wheels or Barbie, Mattel goes to Nickelodeon or the Disney Channel, which are big with the elementary school-age crowd.
Spanish-language TV isn't valued as highly as English because there's less variety in the prime-time lineup. Original episodes of popular shows air once a week on an English-language network, but on Univision and Telemundo, prime time is dominated by the same telenovelas every night of the week.
By contrast, "When you only make 22 shows per year, every original episode is a jewel, and it is sold that way," said one former Spanish-language television executive who did not want his name used.
Among some advertisers, there's a suspicion that Spanish-language viewers don't have a lot of money to spend.
"The image in much of corporate America is that these are not upscale folks," said Harry Pachon, president of the Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, a think tank that studies issues affecting the Hispanic community. "In reality, hundreds of thousands of Hispanic families have joined the middle class -- over 3 million families in Texas and California alone."
Apple Inc. is among the companies that spend little, if any, on television ads in Spanish, even though iTunes, Apple's online music stores, has a large inventory of Latin music.
"They are not advertising to young Latinos using the music that they are into," said Carl Kravetz, an advertising executive who is on the board of the Association of Hispanic Advertising Agencies. "If you are not talking to people, how do you expect them to know about you?"
An Apple spokeswoman didn't return calls for comment.
Companies that do advertise in Spanish have found it effective, after careful study of unique cultural preferences.
Procter & Gamble discovered that Hispanics were more likely to prefer scented products compared with the general market. So Danielle Gonza***, senior vice president of Tapestry, one of the nation's largest advertising companies, created a mini-novela -- "El Secreto de Jazmin" -- to sell Secret body spray. The five 30-second episodes, which ran every day, featured a young woman who surmounts her problems by wearing lavender and floral scented body spray.
"Within weeks, we saw a lift (in sales among Latinas)," Gonza*** said.
When furniture manufacturer IKEA recognized that it wasn't capturing the large Hispanic demographic in cities such as Los Angeles, it started advertising in Spanish and noticed results: more Hispanics in stores. And this year, IKEA launched a series of "vignettes" on Telemundo that run after the soap opera "Dame Chocolate" ("Give me Chocolate").
It features two specially designed bedroom sets made especially for the soap opera. Wearing a silky flower print dress, Karla Monroig, a leggy, blond actress who stars as Samantha in the novela, smiles into the camera and promises in Spanish: "You too can have a room like Samantha, if you go to IKEA. I'm in love with the room they built for me!"
Maria Lovera, deputy marketing manager for IKEA, said that, "Translating commercials is not enough. You have understand and participate in the culture."
"The brands that are forward thinking will understand this opportunity," she said. "Hispanics are very, very loyal."
[B]Changing Faiths: Latinos and the Transformation of American Religion[/B
A joint survey by the Pew Hispanic Project and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life
Executive Summary Hispanics are transforming the nation's religious landscape, especially the Catholic Church, not only because of their growing numbers but also because they are practicing a distinctive form of Christianity.
Religious expressions associated with the pentecostal and charismatic movements are a key attribute of worship for Hispanics in all the major religious traditions "” far more so than among non-Latinos. Moreover, the growth of the Hispanic population is leading to the emergence of Latino-oriented churches across the country.
To explore the complex nature of religion among Latinos, the Pew Hispanic Center and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life collaborated on a series of public opinion surveys that totaled more than 4,600 interviews, constituting one of the largest data collection efforts conducted on this subject. The study examines religious beliefs and behaviors and their association with political thinking among Latinos of all faiths. It focuses special attention on Catholics, both those who retain their identification with the church and those who convert to evangelical churches.
About a third of all Catholics in the U.S. are now Latinos, and the study projects that the Latino share will continue climbing for decades. This demographic reality, combined with the distinctive characteristics of Latino Catholicism, ensures that Latinos will bring about important changes in the nation's largest religious institution.
Religious Affiliation of Latinos in the U.S. Most significantly given their numbers, more than half of Hispanic Catholics identify themselves as charismatics, compared with only an eighth of non-Hispanic Catholics. While remaining committed to the church and its traditional teachings, many of these Latino Catholics say they have witnessed or experienced occurrences typical of spirit-filled or renewalist movements, including divine healing and direct revelations from God. Even many Latino Catholics who do not identify themselves as renewalists appear deeply influenced by spirit-filled forms of Christianity.
Similarly, the renewalist movement is a powerful presence among Latino Protestants. More than half of Hispanics in this category identify with spirit-filled religion, compared with about a fifth of non-Hispanic Protestants.
The study also shows that many of those who are joining evangelical churches are Catholic converts. The desire for a more direct, personal experience of God emerges as by far the most potent motive for these conversions. Although these converts express some dissatisfaction with the lack of excitement in a typical Catholic Mass, negative views of Catholicism do not appear to be a major reason for their conversion.
The practice of religion is not only often renewalist in character, but for most Latinos across all the major religious traditions it is also distinctively ethnic. Two-thirds of Latino worshipers attend churches with Latino clergy, services in Spanish and heavily Latino congregations.
While most predominant among the foreign born and Spanish speakers, Hispanic-oriented worship is also prevalent among native-born and English-speaking Latinos. That strongly suggests that the phenomenon is not simply a product of immigration or language but that it involves a broader and more lasting form of ethnic identification.
These two defining characteristics "” the prevalence of spirit-filled religious expressions and of ethnicoriented worship "” combined with the rapid growth of the Hispanic population leave little doubt that a detailed understanding of religious faith among Latinos is essential to understanding the future of this population as well as the evolving nature of religion in the United States.
About the Projects Pew Hispanic Center The mission of the Pew Hispanic Center is to improve understanding of the diverse Hispanic population and to chronicle the growing impact of Latinos on the nation. The nonpartisan research organization was founded in 2001.
Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life delivers timely, impartial information on issues at the intersection of religion and public affairs. The Forum functions as both a clearinghouse and a town hall. As a clearinghouse, it conducts independent opinion research, demographic studies and other quantitative and qualitative research on important trends in religion and public life. Through its various roundtables and briefings, it also provides a neutral venue for discussion of these important issues.
Pew Research Center The Pew Hispanic Center and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life are projects of the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan "fact tank" that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It does not take positions on policy issues. The two projects and the Pew Research Center are based in Washington, D.C., and are sponsored by the Pew Charitable Trusts. Beyond the strictly religious realm, this study suggests that the roles Latinos play in U.S. politics and public affairs are deeply influenced by the distinctive characteristics of their religious faith. Most Latinos see religion as a moral compass to guide their own political thinking, and they expect the same of their political leaders. In addition, across all major religious traditions, most Latinos view the pulpit as an appropriate place to address social and political issues.
The study also sheds new light on the role religious affiliation plays on party identification among Hispanics. Latinos who are evangelicals are twice as likely as those who are Catholics to identify with the Republican Party. Latino Catholics, on the other hand, are much more likely than Latino evangelicals to identify with the Democratic Party. These differences rival, and may even exceed, those found in the general population.
Both the Pew Hispanic Center and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life are projects of the Pew Research Center, a Washington-based, nonpartisan research organization that seeks to provide timely information free of any advocacy on issues, attitudes and trends that are shaping America and the world. This study is the result of a yearlong collaboration involving more than a dozen researchers drawn from the staffs of both projects with expertise in a variety of subjects and research methodologies.
The centerpiece of the study is a telephone survey of a nationally representative sample of 4,016 Hispanic adults conducted between Aug. 10 and Oct. 4, 2006. The survey included an oversample of 2,000 non- Catholics, which permits an examination of the growth of evangelical and pentecostal Christianity among Latinos, including the process of conversion, in unprecedented detail. The sampling methodology also provided for robust numbers of respondents in all the major country-of-origin segments of the Hispanic population, allowing for detailed analysis of results by this important variable.
Both the extent of renewalism and of ethnic-oriented worship were further examined in recontact interviews with 650 Catholics drawn from the sample of the first survey. The research team also examined data from a large body of surveys previously conducted by both projects, particularly the latest of the Forum's extensive surveys of religious belief and behavior in the general population, which offer various comparisons between Hispanics and non-Hispanics on many points.
Report Summary Chapter 1: Religion and Demography More than two-thirds of Hispanics (68%) identify themselves as Roman Catholics. The next largest category, at 15%, is made up of born-again or evangelical Protestants. Nearly one-in-ten (8%) Latinos do not identify with any religion. Differences in religious identification among Latinos coincide with important differences in demographic characteristics. For example, Catholics are a more heavily immigrant population than evangelicals. Given current demographic trends, Latinos are projected to become an ever-increasing segment of the Catholic Church in the U.S.
Chapter 2: Religious Practices and Beliefs For the great majority of Latinos, regardless of their religious tradition, God is an active force in everyday life. Most Latinos pray every day, most have a religious object in their home and most attend a religious service at least once a month. By significant majorities, Latinos who identify with a religion believe that miracles are performed today just as they were in ancient times. Amid this overall religiosity, important differences emerge among Latinos of different religious traditions and between Latinos and their non-Hispanic counterparts.
Chapter 3: The Renewalist Movement and Hispanic Christianity Renewalist Christianity, which places special emphasis on God's ongoing, day-to-day intervention in human affairs through the person of the Holy Spirit, is having a major impact on Hispanic Christianity. Among Latino Protestants, renewalism is more than twice as prevalent as among their non-Latino counterparts. A majority (54%) of Hispanic Catholics describe themselves as charismatic Christians, making them more than four times as likely as non-Latino Catholics to identify with renewalist Christianity. The implications of this are particularly important for the Catholic Church, given that the rapidly growing Latino flock is practicing a distinctive form of Catholicism.
Chapter 4: Conversion and Views of the Catholic Church Nearly one-fifth (18%) of all Latinos say they have either converted from one religion to another or to no religion at all. Conversions are a key ingredient in the development of evangelicalism among Hispanics. Half of Hispanic evangelicals (51%) are converts, and more than four-fifths of them (43% of Hispanic evangelicals overall) are former Catholics.
By an overwhelming majority (82%), Hispanics cite the desire for a more direct, personal experience with God as the main reason for adopting a new faith. Among those who have become evangelicals, nine-in-ten (90%) say it was this spiritual search that drove their conversion. A majority of evangelical converts (61%) say the typical Catholic mass is not lively or exciting, although only about one-in-three (36%) cite that as a reason for their conversion.
Chapter 5: The Ethnic Church The houses of worship most frequented by Latinos have distinctly ethnic characteristics. A majority of those in the congregation are Hispanic; some Latinos serve as clergy; and liturgies are available in Spanish. The growth of the Hispanic population is leading to the emergence of Latino-oriented churches in all the major religious traditions across the country. While the prevalence of Hispanic-oriented worship is higher among the foreign born, with 77% saying they attend churches with those characteristics, the phenomenon is also widespread among the native born, with 48% saying they attend ethnic churches.
Chapter 6: Religion and Politics Two-thirds of Hispanics say that their religious beliefs are an important influence on their political thinking. More than half say churches and other houses of worship should address the social and political questions of the day. By nearly a two-to-one margin, Latinos say that there has been too little expression of religious faith by political leaders rather than too much. Churchgoing Hispanics report that their clergy often address political matters, although the extent of that practice varies considerably by issue and by religious tradition.
Chapter 7: Ideology and Policy Issues Religious affiliation and church attendance are strongly related to political ideology and views on a variety of social and public policy issues among Latinos. Even after controlling for language ability, nationality, generation and education, for instance, Latino evangelicals are still significantly more conservative than Catholics on social issues, foreign policy issues and even in their attitudes toward the plight of the poor. Catholics, in turn, are somewhat more conservative than seculars when it comes to *** marriage, government-guaranteed health care and increases in government services.
Frequency of church attendance tends to be correlated with more conservative views on social issues after controlling for a variety of demographic factors.
Chapter 8: Party Identification and Ideology Latino evangelicals are twice as likely as Latino Catholics to be Republicans. That is a far greater difference than exists among whites. Moreover, Hispanic conservatives who are Catholic favor the Democrats, while white conservatives consider themselves Republican regardless of religious tradition.
The Democratic Party holds a nearly three-to-one advantage among Latino Catholics who are eligible to vote (48% vs. 17% for Republicans). Because the Latino electorate is overwhelmingly Catholic (63%), Catholics represent the core of Democratic support among Latinos. Indeed, 70% of all Latino eligible voters who identify as Democrats are Catholics. Party identification among Latino evangelicals is more narrowly divided and appears to slightly favor the Republican Party. Among Hispanic eligible voters who are evangelicals, 37% say they consider themselves Republicans and 32% say they are Democrats.
Originally posted by explora: Justice expiring for Mexico's murder victims Statute of limitations begins to run out for earliest Ciudad Juarez killings
This mural in El Paso, Texas, was painted in dedication to the unsolved murders of hundreds of women in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.
Updated: 11:18 a.m. ET May 14, 2007
CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico - For 13 years, June 14 has brought tears, tortured memories and enduring pain to Griselda Salas.
It was on that date, in 1993, that her 16-year-old sister, Guadalupe Ivonne Salas, disappeared. Guadalupe Ivonne's body turned up less than a week later in a park in this dusty, windswept industrial city near the U.S.-Mexico border.
Guadalupe Ivonne, who was raped and strangled, was one of the first victims in Mexico's grisliest modern-day crime mystery -- the murders of more than 400 women in the past 14 years in Ciudad Juarez, many of the bodies dumped in the desert, horribly mutilated. The killings, mostly of poor young factory workers, have inspired two Hollywood motion pictures and enraged human rights groups, which have filled volumes with accusations of corruption, botched investigations and official negligence. Yet the mystery remains unsolved.
Now the earliest of those cases are quietly slipping off legal dockets because Mexico, unlike the United States and many European countries, has a statute of limitations for murder. At a time when U.S. prosecutors are resurrecting Civil Rights-era murder cases -- some more than 40 years old -- Mexico is closing murder cases forever after 14 years. With each passing day, it appears likely that a legal technicality may end a quest to unravel a string of slayings that shocked the world.
"It is totally and absolutely grotesque to think that murderers could be enjoying their freedom because of this law," said Jaime Garcia Chávez, a Chihuahua state legislator who is pressing to abolish Mexico's statute of limitations. "It is inexcusable."
'Worrying silence' Once filled with optimism, buoyed by support from the likes of actresses Jane Fonda and Sally Field, feminists and lawmakers here are demoralized. Esther Chávez Cano, founder of Juarez's first rape and domestic violence counseling center, laments "a worrying silence" about cases that once commanded banner headlines. Few here are optimistic, even though the looming deadlines for dozens of Juarez cases have set off a last-minute race to revive long-dormant investigations.
An Argentine forensics team commissioned to look into the murders, drawing on experience from investigations of Argentina's "dirty war" and the Salvadoran civil war, is expected to release a ****ing report later this year that will illustrate the almost impossible task faced by prosecutors. The Argentines have found body parts carelessly left for years on the floors of medical examiner's offices, heads with no matching bodies, bodies with no matching heads and a mishmash of unlabeled corpses tossed into mass graves at paupers' cemeteries.
"It's basically a huge mess," forensic archaeologist Mercedes Doretti, the team leader, said in an interview.
Garcia Chávez's effort to give investigators more time to untangle that mess by extending the statute of limitations, a gambit he considers a long shot, has already come too late for Jesica Elizalde, a slain journalist whose murder case expired March 14. The case of a factory worker, Luz Yvonne de la O Garcia, went off the books April 21, as did the murder of an unidentified woman on May 12. Dozens more will follow in the coming months and years.
'Found a dead girl' The next could be Guadalupe Ivonne Salas, though prosecutors say they may be closing in on a suspect -- a promise that her family is reluctant to believe after years of dashed hopes.
Salas, a petite 16-year-old, shared a single bed in a cinder-block shack with her infant daughter and her mother, Vicky Salas. The family, like thousands of others, was drawn to Ciudad Juarez by the maquiladoras -- assembly plants, most of them owned by U.S. companies -- that sprung up blocks from the border because of an abundance of cheap labor and that transformed the town into the fourth most populous city in Mexico.
Young women were especially prized by factory supervisors because they were considered more reliable and less rowdy than men. Almost overnight, women were making money while men were still struggling to find jobs, leading to resentment in the local macho culture that activists cite as a social undercurrent to the slayings.
Salas walked each day down a treeless dirt road, past piles of rotting garbage and shacks with sagging walls, to catch a bus that took her to a television parts manufacturer. She made about $35 a week, sometimes pulling night shifts and returning home to a neighborhood with no streetlights.
The day that she disappeared should have been joyous; she was getting ready to celebrate her daughter's first birthday. Griselda Salas remembers her sister saying that a friend was going to lend her money to buy presents and party supplies.
"She's probably gone off with some stud," Griselda Salas remembers being told by police when her sister did not return home. "You watch, she'll come back pregnant with a fat belly in a few months."
Vicky Salas was on a religious retreat at the time of her daughter's disappearance. When she returned several days later, members of her church were in tears.
"They've found a dead girl," she remembers her friends telling her. "They think it's Ivonne."
A car accident delayed Vicky Salas's trip to the morgue, which was closed when she arrived. An unsmiling police officer told her, "You'll have to come back tomorrow," and no amount of pleading by a panic-stricken mother could change his mind, she recalled.
I read this article in the Post today - unbelievably sad.
Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail. (Ralph Waldo Emerson)
Calderon changes Mexico's drug war strategy Drug cartels, unrelenting in their attacks, now target soldiers daily
Mexican soldiers stand over a detained man after a deadly gun battle with drug traffickers in Apatzingan, Mexico, on May 7.
Updated: 6:24 p.m. ET May 14, 2007 APATZINGAN, Mexico - Mexican drug cartels armed with powerful weapons and angered by a nationwide military crackdown are striking back, killing soldiers in bold, daily attacks that threaten the one force strong enough to take on the gangs.
The daily bloodshed includes an ambush that killed five soldiers this month, a severed head left with a defiant note outside a military barracks on Saturday and the slaying Monday of a top federal intelligence official who was shot in the face in his car outside his office in Mexico City.
Mexicans were particularly shocked last week by televised images of kindergartners fleeing their school during a grenade-and-gun battle between traffickers and soldiers that lasted for nearly two hours in this small town in President Felipe Calderon's home state of Michoacan.
The unrelenting bloodshed has forced a change in strategy for Calderon, who sent more than 24,000 federal police and soldiers out in December to reoccupy territory from Michoacan's poppy-dotted mountains to the tourist-packed port of Acapulco.
Now, to supplement the massive presence of soldiers and tanks in small towns, he's ordered the creation of an elite military special operations force capable of surgical strikes.
"We are not going to give in," Public Safety Secretary Genaro Garcia Luna said. "In the states where there is most violence, we will be right there to confront the phenomenon."
The drug trade is all-powerful in Mexico. Analysts estimate that cartels here make between $10 billion and $30 billion selling cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine to the U.S. market, rivaling Mexico's revenues from oil exports and tourism. The gangs also make billions through robbery, kidnapping and extortion of businesses and would-be migrants.
The Calderon administration insists the crackdown is working "” the government has already detained more than 1,000 gunmen and burned millions of dollars in marijuana plants. Traffickers are being extradited to the U.S. more rapidly than ever before, and police recently made the world's biggest seizure of drug cash, $207 million neatly stacked inside a Mexico City mansion.
U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency officials say it's too early to judge the crackdown's success. Seizures at the U.S. border indicate the flow of drugs north may actually be increasing "” 20 percent more cocaine and 28 percent more marijuana has been seized in the past six months, compared with the same period a year earlier.
Violence soaring Violence nationwide in Mexico seems to be increasing. The country's three leading newspapers estimate shootouts, decapitations and execution-style killings have claimed the lives of about 1,000 people this year, on track to soar past last year's count of 2,000. The government doesn't count drug-related killings, and a top federal police official, Public Safety Secretary Genaro Garcia Luna, has referred to the newspaper figures as the best numbers available.
This month's death toll for soldiers and sailors is the worst for the military in more than a decade "” violence that shows the gangs' desperation, officials say.
On Saturday, drug gangs left the head of a 37-year-old auto mechanic wrapped in a sheet outside an army base near the port city of Veracruz, along with a note that read: "We are going to continue, even if federal forces are here." The grisly message came shortly after the government said it was sending troops to the city to respond to a shooting attack.
Many Mexicans fear even the army is outgunned.
CONTINUED: 'We are scared to go out of houses'
"Calderon's war on drugs has been a big disappointment for us," said Pedro Ortega, a family doctor in Aguililla, a Michoacan farming town at the center of the drug trade. "The reality is that we are scared to go out of houses, scared about what could happen to our children."
Calderon's overall approval ratings remain high "” 68 percent according to a recent Ipsos-BIMSA poll. But 40 percent blame the military presence for the increasing violence, and 36 percent believe the traffickers are winning, according to the nationwide survey of 1,050 adults from April 26 to May 1, which had a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points.
Aguililla was one of the first towns to receive soldiers. Convoys of Humvees rolled down the streets, black helicopters clattered low over the houses and soldiers at checkpoints frisked motorists for guns. But residents say the military presence has been sporadic since then, and most of the time they are left without protection from the traffickers.
"There is no government here. We just pray to God to take care of us," said 60-year-old Soledad Lombera, sobbing at a cross of candles in her house, an alter she created days after her son Francisco Alvez was found shot and buried on a nearby ranch.
Outsiders ordered to leave Like many towns in the heart of drug country, Aguililla is strategically difficult to control, approachable by winding roads on which assailants ambushed and killed 11 state police last year. At night, the paved central plaza is taken over by gun-wielding thugs in sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks.
Outsiders are not welcome. A group of Mexican newspaper reporters who tried to cover the killings in Aguililla were blocked by a gang of men bearing automatic rifles who ordered them to leave, said the reporters, who asked that their names not be used for fear of reprisals.
Seven journalists have been killed in Mexico since October, making it the world's second-most dangerous place to report, after Iraq.
Aguililla's mayor, Miguel Avila, said the crackdown won't work unless Mexicans get better jobs as an alternative to growing and smuggling drugs.
"If you don't let people make money in one way, you have to offer them another," Avila said. "All the people in the United States buying these drugs give people a big incentive to produce them."
Labor officials say process allows firms to intimidate, but industry leaders call bill 'undemocratic.'
By E.J. Schultz - Bee Capitol Bureau Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, May 14, 2007 Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A4
With the farm labor movement in its infancy, legendary organizer Cesar Chavez won a major victory in 1975 with the passage of a state law that guaranteed secret ballot elections for farmworker unions.
Now the union Chavez helped found is fighting against secret ballots, claiming the process allows for company intimidation -- and ultimately, union losses.
A bill backed by the United Farm Workers union would allow for workers to sign cards instead of cast ballots in union elections. If a majority of workers sign up, the union would be certified almost immediately.
Senate Bill 180 was authored by Carole Migden, D-San Francisco.
"Farmworkers' lives are hard enough -- this will make the process easier for them to express themselves," said Richie Ross, a UFW lobbyist.
But industry leaders say the legislation is "undemocratic."
"It infringes on the very fundamental right of the farmworker to a secret ballot," said Barry Bedwell, president of the California Grape & Tree Fruit League. "I don't believe you correct a perceived injustice by creating a bigger injustice and taking away the employee's rights."
The right to secret ballots is cemented in the 1975 Agricultural Labor Relations Act. In the wake of the law, farm unions had great success securing union contracts. But organizers have been stung by losses in recent years.
Farm unions, including the UFW, won only a little more than half of all elections -- 73 of 132 -- between 1990 and October 2005, according to data from the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, which oversees elections.
Labor leaders, in part, blame the process. Farmworkers wishing to join a union must first submit a petition signed by a majority of employees. The ALRB must then hold a secret ballot election within seven days.
Unions claim that during the waiting period, businesses discourage yes votes by intimidating workers. The UFW says tactics include threatening to close down if the union wins, firing or blacklisting pro-union workers, or threatening to shutter company housing.
Such threats are considered unfair labor practices and are illegal under state law. The remedy is to set aside the election results.
SB 180 would allow for workers to choose an alternative method known as "card-check" organizing.
Employees wishing to join a union would be asked to sign cards. If more than 50 percent of workers sign up, organizers would submit a petition to the ALRB. The ALRB would then have 48 hours to verify the signatures and certify the union.
The bill also would levy new fines for unfair labor practices.
SB 180 passed the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee on a 3-2 vote, with Republicans opposed. It will be heard today by the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not taken a position. But his administration's Labor & Workforce Development Agency opposes the bill, saying in a letter that the proposed change "undermines" the right to a secret ballot election.
Bedwell said the card-check system is unfair because it limits the company's chance to state its case -- by reminding employees of their current benefits, for example.
"Both sides should be heard," he said.
Workers might agree to an election but vote against a union once in the voting booth, he said.
"At that point, they look at it and (say) I don't believe the union is going to do anything more than what is already done for me," he said.
But union officials say their message gets drowned out because organizers have limited access to workers in the days before an election.
"The current system is like an election in which one side gets television (advertising) ... and the other side doesn't get TV -- they only get to go door to door," Ross said.
Access wasn't as big an issue in the union's early days when organizers could reliably find workers laboring on the same fields day after day, he said. Now, with labor contractors involved, workers get shifted to a different location almost every day, so it's "tough to even find them," Ross said.
The UFW believes that card-check organizing would level the playing field because organizers would not have to worry about companies campaigning against the union in the days leading to an election.
Card-check organizing is not unprecedented. Some public sector employees are covered by the provision, including teachers and local government workers. In addition to farmworkers, labor leaders are fighting for a card-check system for tribal casino workers.
The Legislature's Democrats last year blocked ratification of several gaming compacts agreed to by the Schwarzenegger administration because the deals left out card-check provisions. The issue continues to stall approval of the deals this year.
About the writer: The Fresno Bee's E.J. Schultz can be reached at (916) 326-5541 or eschultz@fresnobee.com.
According to Mexico's Ley General de Población, Article 123, illegal aliens can be fined and sentenced to up to two years in prison.
"Se impondrá pena hasta de dos años de prisión y multa de trescientos y cinco mil pesos, al extranjero que se interne ilegalmente al pais. "
Enforcing the law is one thing, abuse of authority is another. And that's what frequently happens to Central Americans in Mexico. The illegal aliens are victims of both corrupt authorities and private criminals. Corrupt officials often shake them down for bribes. Some are robbed, raped or even murdered. Not much is done about it. Undocumented Central American migrants complain much more about how they are treated by Mexican officials than about authorities on the U.S. side of the border, where migrants may resent being caught but often praise the professionalism of the agents scouring the desert for their trail.
Jose Luis Soberanes has reported that Central American migrants in Mexico are subject to abuse at the hands of police and military personnel, and that immigrants are detained in municipal prisons. In some Mexican states, Central Americans "go to the municipal jails, where they stay for days and weeks. In some small rooms there are dozens of them and they do not separate the men and the women." In 2005, Mexico detained 240, 269 illegal aliens in its territory. Of that total, 42% were from Guatemala, 33% from Honduras, with most of the rest being from El Salvador. All three of those countries are poorer than Mexico (more on that later).
In the first six months of 2005 alone, more than 120,000 people from Central America have been deported to their countries of origin. This is a significantly higher rate than in 2002, when for the entire year, only 130,000 people were deported. Many women from Eastern Europe, Asia and Central and South America are also offered jobs at table dance establishments in large cities throughout the country causing the National Institute of Migration (INM) in Mexico to raid strip clubs and deport foreigners who work without the proper documentation. In 2004, the INM deported 188,000 people. Mexico maintains its own aggressive stance on immigration on its southern border ([37]) disrupting the illegal immigration pipeline yet condemns the United States for its efforts at building a fence along the US-Mexico border.
So why is it good if Mexico controls immigration and bad if the U.S. does? So, while demanding rights for Mexicans illegally in U.S. territory, Mexico defends its own territory by detaining illegal aliens from countries poorer than Mexico. Many Mexican officials abuse these illegal aliens. And yet, you don't see Central American illegal aliens marching through the streets of Mexico, demanding their "rights." You don't see the governments of Guatemala and Honduras meddling in Mexican internal politics. Why not? Because they all know that Mexico wouldn't tolerate it.
But up north, Uncle Sam tolerates illegal aliens in the streets demanding legalization and constant meddling in U.S. politics by Mexican officials. No wonder they don't respect us!
A bloody conflict between Hispanic and black gangs is spreading across Los Angeles. Hundreds are dying as whole districts face the threat of ethnic cleansing. Paul Harris reports from the epicentre of America's new urban warfare. Father Greg Boyle keeps a grim count of the young gang members he has buried. Number 151 was Jonathan Hurtado, 18 - fresh out of jail. Boyle's Los Angeles, where daily slaughter is a grim reality, is a world away from the glamorous Hollywood hills, Malibu beaches and Sunset Strip. Boyle's Los Angeles is where an estimated 120,000 gang members across five counties battle over turf, pride and drugs. It is a city of violence as a new race war escalates between new Hispanic gangs and older black groups, each trying to ethnically cleanse the other. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has referred to his city as 'the gang capital of America'.
Traditionally the outside view of LA gangs has been of black youths like the Bloods and the Crips and their countless subsets. It focused on the streets of Compton and South-Central and the culture of gangsta rap. But Hispanic gangs are in the ascendant, spreading across America. They have names such as Mara Salvatrucha, La Mirada Locos and Barrio Van Nuys, and now the 204th Street gang - who made it clear that they will kill innocent girls to force black families off their turf. Hate crimes against black people have surged. With a rapidly growing Hispanic population, LA's gang culture is shifting. It means that being black in the wrong neighbourhood can get you killed. Green's death brought the gang war between 'brown and black' to public awareness. 'All of the signs are there that a racial war is going to explode in this city,' says Khalid Shah, director of Stop the Violence, one of the groups organising the meeting. Memories of the 1992 Rodney King riots, which claimed 53 lives, remain fresh, but Shah believes that worse is ahead. 'It will be 10 times bigger than what happened after King. You are looking at an event which could not only paralyse an entire city but an entire state,' he warns.
More then two million people are behind prison and jail bars in the United States. The U.S. has experienced a surge in its prison population, quadrupling since 1980. 70% of the incarcerated population are people of color. Latinos are the fastest growing group behind bars. A survey showed that among the nearly 300,000 prisoners released, 67.5% were rearrested within 3 years, and 51.8% were back in prison. Each year, the United States spends an estimated $60 billion on corrections. Compared with other countries, the United States has among the highest incarceration rates in the world. More people are behind bars in the United States than any other country. As of 2006, a record 7 million people were behind bars, on probation or on parole. Of the total 2.2 million were incarcerated. China ranks second with 1.5 million. The United States has 5 percent of the world's population and 25 percent of the world's incarcerated population. Inside prison everything is determined by race. Housing, exercise, eating, clothing and access to various jobs and programs depend on skin color. One prison in California had weightlifting equipment labeled "B" for black, "W" for white, and "L" for Latino to avoid fights over. Prison systems are rife with traditional race rivalries.
John Mullaly a former NYPD homicide detective, estimates that 70 percent of the drug dealers and other criminals in Manhattan's Washington Heights were illegal. In New York City, "every high school has its Mexican gang," and most 12- to 14-year-olds have already joined, claims Ernesto Vega, an illegal 18-year-old Mexican. Such pathologies only worsen when the first lesson that immigrants learn about U.S. law is that Americans don't bother to enforce it.
In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all outstanding warrants for homicide (which total 1,200 to 1,500) target illegal aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants (17,000) are for illegal aliens. A confidential California Department of Justice study reported in 1995 that 60 percent of the 20,000-strong 18th Street Gang in southern California is illegal; police officers say the proportion is actually much greater. The bloody gang collaborates with the Mexican Mafia, the dominant force in California prisons, on complex drug-distribution schemes, extortion, and drive-by assassinations, and commits an assault or robbery every day in L.A. County. The gang has grown dramatically over the last two decades by recruiting recently arrived youngsters, most of them illegal, from Central America and Mexico.
Prior to 1965, the US was taking around 178,000 legal immigrants annually. In 1965, Congress replaced the national origins system with a preference system designed to unite immigrant families and attract skilled immigrants to the United States. With these changes and some subsequent ones, the result was that most of our legal immigrants now come from Asia and Latin America, and not Europe. Chain migration designed to unite families has also brought in aged parents, children, uncles, etc., many of whom are not contributing to our society and in fact, require more social services. Even with quotas in certain immigration categories, we are now legalizing the status of over one million people annually and millions more are waiting in lines overseas for their turn to come in. Chain migration has also changed the "mix" of immigrants, making it less diverse.
Mexico accounts for 31 percent of all immigrants. Immigrants from Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean account for the majority of immigrants, with 54 percent of the foreign"‘born coming from these areas. Of those who arrived 2000 to 2005, 58 percent are from Latin America. This lack of diversity has hindered assimilation and could well result in the Balkanization of the country by language and culture.
We need a rational, sensible immigration policy for many reasons, some of them economic and some of them cultural, i.e., the ability to assimilate these massive numbers into our society . Since 1970, the population of the US has increased by 100 million; since 1990; by 53 million; and since 2000 by 20 million or the equivalent of our six largest cities. The Bureau of the Census projects that we will have 364 million by 2030 and over 400 million by 2050 with one-quarter of the population being Hispanic. The annual arrival of 1.5 million legal and illegal immigrants, coupled with 750,000 annual births to immigrant women, is the determinate factor "” or three-fourths "” of all U.S. population growth. These additional people will require infrastructure [roads, water, electricity, gasoline, etc.], and impact our schools, hospitals, social welfare systems, penal system, etc. Couple these increases with an aging US population faced with entitlement programs about to go belly-up in 10 years and you have some serious public policy issues that could threaten the future of this country.
One-third of immigrants lack health insurance "” two-and-one"‘half times the rate for natives. Immigrants and their U.S."‘born children account for almost three-fourths (nine million) of the increase in the uninsured population since 1989. Of adult immigrants, 31 percent have not completed high school, three-and-a-half times the rate for natives. Immigrants and their minor children account for almost one in four persons living in poverty. Between January 2000 and March 2005, 7.9 million new immigrants (legal and illegal) settled in the country, making it the highest five-year period of immigration in American history. The 35.2 million immigrants (legal and illegal) living in the country in March 2005 is the highest number ever recorded "” two and a half times the 13.5 million during the peak of the last great immigration wave in 1910.
According to the California Department of Water Resources, if more supplies aren't found by 2020, residents will face a shortfall nearly as great as the amount consumed today. Los Angeles is a coastal desert able to support at most 1 million people on its own water; the Los Angeles basin now is the core of a megalopolis that spans 220 miles from Santa Barbara to the Mexican border. The region's population is expected to reach 22 million by 2020. California population continues to grow by more than a half million a year and is expected to reach 48 million in 2030. But water shortages are likely to surface well before then. Water is already a scarce resource in Texas and the increased demand generated by population growth is exacerbating the problem. By 2010, over ten percent of the water needs in urban areas will not be met during times of water shortages. El Paso, San Antonio, and Albuquerque could run out of water in ten to 20 years.
Federal data suggest that as many as 10 percent of the approximately 1,000 Mexicans who emigrate to the United States daily probably are infected with Chagas, said Dr. Louis V. Kirchhoff, a Chagas specialist and a professor at the University of Iowa's medical school. It is curable in its early stages, but kills about a third of the people infected if it is not caught in time. The report found that people from outside the United States accounted for 53.3 percent of all new tuberculosis cases in this country in 2003. That was up from fewer than 30 percent in 1993. In 2003, nearly 26 percent of foreign-born TB patients in the United States were from Mexico. Another third of the foreign-born cases were among those from the Philippines, Vietnam, India and China, the CDC report said. In the past three years, according to a report from the New York Times in February, 2003, leprosy has infected over 7,000 people in the United States. It was brought in by illegal immigrants from India, Brazil, Mexico, and the Caribbean. Leprosy spreads by infected illegal aliens working in fast food, dish washing and hotels.
In 1900, Mexico had a population of only 13 million. Today, its population is 105 million and 18.2 million American citizens in the 2000 Census declared having Mexican ancestry. In Phoenix, Tucson and Denver, the white non-Hispanic population has recently fallen below 50 percent. Demographers say non-Hispanic white people soon will be a minority in 35 of the country's 50 largest cities. Since 1960, California´s population has more than doubled, reaching more then 37 million people. As recently as 1970, four of every five Californians were non-Hispanic whites. Only 34% of newborns in California were non-Hispanic white a few years ago. Net illegal immigration soared from about 130,000 per year in the 1970s to over 500,000 per year in the 1990s. Illegal immigration may be as high as 1,500,000 per year in 2006. If current birth and immigration rates were to remain unchanged for another 60 to 70 years, US population would double to some 600 million people. Among Mexican immigrants in the U.S., fertility averages 3.5 children per woman compared to 2.4 children in Mexico.
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS The Associated Press Tuesday, May 15, 2007; 9:24 PM
WASHINGTON -- Republicans and Democrats were nearing a deal Tuesday on a sweeping immigration overhaul that would give millions of illegal immigrants a chance at legal status but strictly limit future arrivals from staying in the U.S.
Senators and White House officials negotiating through the afternoon and into the evening said an elusive compromise was in sight. With details changing rapidly, it was unclear whether the talks would result in a breakthrough or a meltdown.
The Immigration Debate The Washington Post's coverage of the immigration issue, from the politics of revising the nation's immigration laws to the impact of illegal immigration on the U.S.-Mexico border and the Washington region.
"Eighty-twenty!" said an upbeat Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., one of the key players in the talks, giving strong odds of a deal he said could be announced as early as Wednesday.
In a hopeful sign for a potential deal, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., postponed until Monday a vote that had been scheduled for Wednesday on bringing up an immigration measure that passed the Senate last year.
That bill had the support of most Democrats but was opposed by a majority of Republicans, who had promised to block it. The vote _ designed to pressure negotiators into reaching a new deal _ was shaping up as a highly partisan start to the already intense debate over immigration.
Delaying it gave the weeks-long set of closed-door bipartisan talks _ slated to continue early Wednesday _ more time.
Negotiators led by conservative Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and liberal Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., were scrambling to piece together a compromise that could command broad support, melding the GOP's preference for get-tough enforcement measures and limits on future immigration with Democrats' desire for a more welcoming approach.
The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a probationary "Z visa" and _ after paying fees and fines of up to $5,000 and returning to their home countries _ ultimately try for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. The process couldn't begin until border security improvements and a high-tech worker identification program were completed.
A new temporary guest worker program would also have to wait until those so-called "triggers" had been activated. And all but the highest-skilled temporary workers would have to return home after work stints of two or three years, with barely any opportunity to apply for permanent legal status or ever become U.S. citizens.
Only 10,000 green cards annually would be available for guest workers, and they would be awarded on a so-called "points system" that favors higher-skilled and better-educated immigrants.
"We're trying to make sure that people who are temporary workers don't melt into society and put down roots. Temporary means temporary," Graham said.
Negotiators were still weighing the particulars of the guest worker program, including the length of the visas and whether to allow workers to renew them multiple times.
In perhaps its most contentious change, the proposed plan would radically shift the entire immigration system from one heavily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for those with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills. Family connections alone would no longer be enough to qualify for a green card, although senators were still haggling over how heavily points for family ties would be weighed.
U.S. citizens would see their ability to bring foreign-born parents to the U.S. limited. Temporary workers could not bring family members at all unless they accepted a shorter-term visa and could show they would not become primarily dependent on government benefits.
Behind the scenes, some Democrats and liberal groups are deeply divided over whether the proposal is worth supporting. Leading Republicans, too, warned that they were wary of being pushed too far in the interests of a compromise.
"We need to have immigration reform, but not just any immigration reform," said Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., the party whip. "We're not going to be forced into passing a bad bill."
Virtual Veto Power in Immigration Debate Virtual Veto Power in Immigration Debate
By Krissah Williams and Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writers Wednesday, May 16, 2007; Page A04
When Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) declared last week that unnamed "stakeholders" would decide whether Congress overhauls immigration law this year, Latino organizations in Washington understood exactly what he meant.
After laboring in obscurity for decades, groups such as the National Council of La Raza, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the National Immigration Forum are virtually being granted veto power over perhaps the biggest domestic issue coming before Congress this year. Organizations that represent what is now the nation's largest minority group are beginning to achieve power commensurate with their numbers.
The Immigration Debate The Washington Post's coverage of the immigration issue, from the politics of revising the nation's immigration laws to the impact of illegal immigration on the U.S.-Mexico border and the Washington region.
"There's a real sense that the Latino community is key to the solution in this debate, so now they are reaching out to us more than ever," said Eric Gutierrez, lead lobbyist for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF. "Neither party wants to make a misstep politically."
Such groups were practically in the room yesterday, maintaining contact as Democratic and Republican senators negotiated into the night, trying to hammer out a new immigration bill before the deadline today set by Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.). The contours began to emerge for a bill that would couple a tightening of border controls with a guest-worker program and new avenues for an estimated 12 million undocumented workers to work legally.
Negotiators agreed yesterday that illegal immigrants would be granted a new Z Visa, allowing legal residency for eight years. During that time, the head of an undocumented household would have to temporarily go back to the home country to apply for permanent U.S. legal status for his or her family. Holders of Z Visas would then have to pay a fine and back taxes, undergo a criminal background check, and begin to work toward citizenship.
But Republicans and Democrats were still trying to bridge a deep divide over two remaining issues: Whether 400,000 foreigners entering the country as temporary workers would have to leave the country after three years or be granted a chance to stay permanently, and how extended family ties should be weighed in granting visas to those seeking to enter the country.
A deal on those tough issues could depend on the assent of Kennedy's "stakeholders," Democratic negotiators agreed. Democratic leaders, who are fighting for the loyalty of the fast-growing Latino electorate, have no desire to embrace legislation that could end up alienating the voters they are trying to woo.
The early word from the groups is not promising.
"Some of the proposals that are coming from the negotiations in the Senate and White House are measures that the immigrant community advocates are wholly against, particularly the elimination of some aspects of family reunification," said William Ramos, a spokesman for the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. The groups also oppose a policy that would force immigrants to return to their home countries for an extended period and to petition for reentry.
Latino organizations know well that they have muscle to flex. A bill passed by the House last year that would have made illegal immigration a felony drove millions of Latinos into the streets in cities across the country last spring.
When the current immigration law was written 21 years ago, the League of United Latin American Citizens, or LULAC, tacitly approved the legislation, even though it provided no direct path to citizenship for most temporary workers. But the Latino community was much smaller then, and illegal immigration was a regional issue, confined mostly to California, Texas and New York.
Today, U.S. citizens of Latino descent, having eclipsed African Americans as the nation's largest minority, are far more organized and politically active. "We're not going to let them screw it up," said Brent A. Wilkes, LULAC's national executive director.
LULAC, MALDEF, La Raza and the National Immigration Forum are part of a broad network of immigrant rights groups that hold nightly conference calls and strategy sessions on the legislation. The groups speak daily with top aides in Reid's and Kennedy's offices.
The White House, well aware that immigration may offer President Bush his last best chance at a major domestic achievement for his second term, has worked hard to keep the groups on board, even as Bush has shifted to the right with a new plan that is tougher than the proposals he embraced last year.
The White House held a meeting 2 1/2 weeks ago with Latino advocates, labor unions and civil rights organizations in which an adviser outlined an administration's policy based on increased border security and a temporary-worker program. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez have also met with some of the groups.
"At least they are paying attention to us," said MALDEF President John Trasviña.
The groups have also made it clear to Republicans who oppose generous immigration legislation that they are willing to press them hard this year. "Power is not handed over. To get your place at the table, you have to fight for it," Wilkes said.
Fix Immigration Now More dithering in Congress equals more chaos.
The Washington Post, Editorial Tuesday, May 15, 2007; Page A14
A MAKE-OR-BREAK point has arrived in this country's effort to enact meaningful immigration reform. After failing last year to devise a way out of the deadlock that has left 12 million illegal immigrants in legal limbo, and the likely future influx of several hundred thousand new workers annually in equally dire straits, Congress is faced with the political calendar's hard reality. If lawmakers fail to hash out a compromise now, the presidential cycle probably will dash any hope for progress until at least 2009. Americans overwhelmingly prefer a workable solution now, and lawmakers owe it to them.
The components of that fix do not lend themselves to the usual horse-trading on Capitol Hill; expediency could produce more laws that won't work, and an artless compromise may invite more law-breaking. But an array of stakeholders -- employers, unions, immigrants' rights groups and others -- agree on the outlines of an approach that would replace chaos with an orderly regime that coaxes illegal workers out of the shadows, satisfies the labor market's demands and fashions a realistic, enforceable legal framework while protecting the interests of newcomers. Here are the main ingredients of such a system:
For the 12 million immigrants already here illegally, a fair route to legal status and citizenship. Almost no one seriously advocates mass deportation of illegal immigrants, who comprise perhaps 5 percent of the labor force. For workers who satisfy clear and reasonable requirements -- a modest fine, a law-abiding record, steady employment, competent English, payment of back taxes -- there should be a pathway to eventual citizenship. Onerous, open-ended fines, as the Bush administration has proposed, or a requirement that immigrants leave the country and then reenter in order to "reboot" and supposedly legitimize their status here, will only dissuade many from compliance.
? A realistic system for future immigrants. Any workable law needs to reckon with the demand for 400,000 immigrant workers annually, most of them in relatively unskilled jobs. The current slogan that "temporary means temporary," in fashion among some conservative Republicans, is reality-blind: If the law creates a revolving door of future immigrants, it will frustrate the needs of employers while encouraging some so-called guest workers to overstay their visas and break the law. This country long has welcomed foreign workers and in time made Americans of them; there must also be a legislative mechanism for that to happen with those future immigrants who want and deserve to stay.
? A humane approach to immigrant categories. Proposals to scrap the long-standing system of preferences based on family or employer sponsors, and replace it with a merit-based regime, pose a false either-or choice. Much of the demand for immigrant labor is for farmhands, landscapers, drywallers and other low-wage workers, and denying them the chance to reunite here with their families is inhumane. A sensible strategy needs to recognize both a globalized economy's demand for employees with fluent English and advanced academic degrees and the continuing need for lower-end workers.
? The debates over these and other parts of an immigration bill tend to obscure the broad agreement on many points, including the need for tougher border enforcement; sanctions for firms that hire illegal immigrants; and a system for employers to verify that job applicants are here legally. Many of those points of agreement are reflected in a bipartisan House bill introduced in March.
But the House is waiting for the Senate; if a bipartisan deal can be struck there, the House will probably follow suit. A starting point for any debate should be that this country needs immigrants -- those already here and those yet to come. Immigration hawks who seem more intent on punishing illegal workers than incorporating them into America's social fabric won't solve the problem. And the longer Congress dithers, the more states and localities will attempt to deal with the matter on their own -- and the more anarchy will become the rule when it comes to immigration enforcement.
By ANABELLE GARAY The Associated Press Tuesday, May 15, 2007; 7:52 PM
DALLAS -- Latino activists and civil liberties advocates asked a federal judge Tuesday to block a voter-approved ordinance that prohibits landlords from renting apartments to most illegal immigrants in the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union, which have already sued the city, requested the temporary restraining order in U.S. District Court. A group of merchants also suing the city filed a separate request Tuesday to stop the ordinance's enforcement, activist Carlos Quintanilla said
The ordinance, scheduled to take effect next Tuesday, requires apartment managers to verify that renters are U.S. citizens or legal immigrants before leasing to them, with some exceptions. Violators face fines of up to $500.
"It is unfortunate that the residents of Farmers Branch have chosen to implement a law which is not only bad policy, but is likely also unconstitutional," said Lisa Graybill, legal director for the ACLU of Texas. "Now the issue will have to be resolved in federal court."
The city is preparing a response to the request, said Matthew Boyle, an attorney representing Farmers Branch. City Councilman Ben Robinson said he believes the groups are wasting their time.
City council members first approved the ban in November without discussion, then revised it in January to include exemptions for minors, seniors and some mixed-status families. On Saturday, residents voted to approve the ban with 68 percent of voters in favor, according to unofficial results.
Councilman Tim O'Hare, the ordinance's lead proponent, contends the city's economy and quality of life will improve if illegal immigrants are kept out. O'Hare declined to comment Tuesday.
Since 1970, Farmers Branch has changed from a small, predominantly white bedroom community with a declining population to a city of almost 28,000 people, about 37 percent of them Hispanic, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Farmers Branch already faces four lawsuits brought by civil rights groups, residents, property owners and businesses, who say the ordinance discriminates and puts landlords in the precarious position of acting as federal immigration officers. Their attorneys argue the ordinance attempts to regulate immigration, a duty that is exclusively the federal government's.
Nationwide, more than 90 local governments have proposed, passed or rejected laws prohibiting landlords from leasing to illegal immigrants, penalizing businesses that employ them or training police to enforce immigration laws.
By Lori Aratani Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, May 5, 2007; Page B03
An early morning fire at a day-labor center near Gaithersburg yesterday was arson, Montgomery County investigators said, causing little damage but raising concerns about anti-immigrant sentiment.
County fire investigators said that shortly before 6 a.m., someone used an ignitable liquid to start the fire at the double-wide trailer at the temporary worker center that opened last month on Crabbs Branch Way.
Department spokesman Pete Piringer said that by the time firefighters arrived, the blaze had been extinguished. He estimated damage at $2,000.
Investigators did not know whether the blaze was set by someone who opposed the worker center, which has generated controversy among residents and groups that oppose illegal immigration. But representatives from Casa of Maryland, which runs the center, said they were certain this was sabotage.
"We see this as a natural consequence to the ongoing debate over immigration,'' said Christy Swanson, program director for Casa of Maryland. "We also consider it a hate crime.''
Swanson said her group has received phone calls and e-mails from people who oppose the center but there were no specific threats that hinted at yesterday's fire.
Patrick Lacefield, spokesman for the county, said he spoke to County Executive Isiah Leggett (D), who called the incident "shameful and despicable."
"Some people disagree with the policy and they have a right to, but obviously this crosses the line,'' Lacefield said.
Representatives from two groups that oppose the center said they had nothing to do with the blaze. "There is no one with any affiliation to our group that would do anything like this,'' said Stephen Schreiman, state director of the Maryland Minutemen.
Brad Botwin, director of HelpSaveMaryland.com, reiterated his belief that the center be shut down and suggested the fire might have been started by one of the workers.
"We don't know who these workers are," he said. They could have done this."
By noon, the damage from the fire, which was discovered by a staff member, was largely erased. County workers moved quickly to repair a charred floorboard near the door of the trailer. But there were still signs that something was amiss. A darkened trail, evidence of the accelerant that investigators believed was used to fuel the fire, extended from the sidewalk to the steps of the trailer.
With the trailer closed, a dozen workers stood in the parking lot waiting for work.
The day-labor center opened with little protest April 16, despite several years of controversy over where it should be established.
Even though the county operates two other day-labor centers -- in Wheaton and Silver Spring -- its plans to open a Gaithersburg site drew protest from some community members and anti-immigration groups. The Montgomery County Council had allocated money in 2005 for the center to be opened in Gaithersburg, but city officials never found a suitable site.
Anyone with information about the blaze is asked to call fire officials at 240-777-2263.
President Bush Addresses the Nation on Immigration Reform The Oval Office
Video (Real) White House News Audio En Español
8:01 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. I've asked for a few minutes of your time to discuss a matter of national importance -- the reform of America's immigration system.
The issue of immigration stirs intense emotions, and in recent weeks, Americans have seen those emotions on display. On the streets of major cities, crowds have rallied in support of those in our country illegally. At our southern border, others have organized to stop illegal immigrants from coming in. Across the country, Americans are trying to reconcile these contrasting images. And in Washington, the debate over immigration reform has reached a time of decision. Tonight, I will make it clear where I stand, and where I want to lead our country on this vital issue.
We must begin by recognizing the problems with our immigration system. For decades, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders. As a result, many who want to work in our economy have been able to sneak across our border, and millions have stayed.
Once here, illegal immigrants live in the shadows of our society. Many use forged documents to get jobs, and that makes it difficult for employers to verify that the workers they hire are legal. Illegal immigration puts pressure on public schools and hospitals, it strains state and local budgets, and brings crime to our communities. These are real problems. Yet we must remember that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are decent people who work hard, support their families, practice their faith, and lead responsible lives. They are a part of American life, but they are beyond the reach and protection of American law.
We're a nation of laws, and we must enforce our laws. We're also a nation of immigrants, and we must uphold that tradition, which has strengthened our country in so many ways. These are not contradictory goals. America can be a lawful society and a welcoming society at the same time. We will fix the problems created by illegal immigration, and we will deliver a system that is secure, orderly, and fair. So I support comprehensive immigration reform that will accomplish five clear objectives.
First, the United States must secure its borders. This is a basic responsibility of a sovereign nation. It is also an urgent requirement of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border should be open to trade and lawful immigration, and shut to illegal immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists.
I was a governor of a state that has a 1,200-mile border with Mexico. So I know how difficult it is to enforce the border, and how important it is. Since I became President, we've increased funding for border security by 66 percent, and expanded the Border Patrol from about 9,000 to 12,000 agents. The men and women of our Border Patrol are doing a fine job in difficult circumstances, and over the past five years, they have apprehended and sent home about six million people entering America illegally.
Despite this progress, we do not yet have full control of the border, and I am determined to change that. Tonight I'm calling on Congress to provide funding for dramatic improvements in manpower and technology at the border. By the end of 2008, we'll increase the number of Border Patrol officers by an additional 6,000. When these new agents are deployed, we'll have more than doubled the size of the Border Patrol during my presidency.
At the same time, we're launching the most technologically advanced border security initiative in American history. We will construct high-tech fences in urban corridors, and build new patrol roads and barriers in rural areas. We'll employ motion sensors, infrared cameras, and unmanned aerial vehicles to prevent illegal crossings. America has the best technology in the world, and we will ensure that the Border Patrol has the technology they need to do their job and secure our border.
Training thousands of new Border Patrol agents and bringing the most advanced technology to the border will take time. Yet the need to secure our border is urgent. So I'm announcing several immediate steps to strengthen border enforcement during this period of transition:
One way to help during this transition is to use the National Guard. So, in coordination with governors, up to 6,000 Guard members will be deployed to our southern border. The Border Patrol will remain in the lead. The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training. Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities -- that duty will be done by the Border Patrol. This initial commitment of Guard members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online. It is important for Americans to know that we have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, to respond to natural disasters, and to help secure our border.
The United States is not going to militarize the southern border. Mexico is our neighbor, and our friend. We will continue to work cooperatively to improve security on both sides of the border, to confront common problems like drug trafficking and crime, and to reduce illegal immigration.
Another way to help during this period of transition is through state and local law enforcement in our border communities. So we'll increase federal funding for state and local authorities assisting the Border Patrol on targeted enforcement missions. We will give state and local authorities the specialized training they need to help federal officers apprehend and detain illegal immigrants. State and local law enforcement officials are an important part of our border security and they need to be a part of our strategy to secure our borders.
The steps I've outlined will improve our ability to catch people entering our country illegally. At the same time, we must ensure that every illegal immigrant we catch crossing our southern border is returned home. More than 85 percent of the illegal immigrants we catch crossing the southern border are Mexicans, and most are sent back home within 24 hours. But when we catch illegal immigrants from other country [sic] it is not as easy to send them home. For many years, the government did not have enough space in our detention facilities to hold them while the legal process unfolded. So most were released back into our society and asked to return for a court date. When the date arrived, the vast majority did not show up. This practice, called "catch and release," is unacceptable, and we will end it.
We're taking several important steps to meet this goal. We've expanded the number of beds in our detention facilities, and we will continue to add more. We've expedited the legal process to cut the average deportation time. And we're making it clear to foreign governments that they must accept back their citizens who violate our immigration laws. As a result of these actions, we've ended "catch and release" for illegal immigrants from some countries. And I will ask Congress for additional funding and legal authority, so we can end "catch and release" at the southern border once and for all. When people know that they'll be caught and sent home if they enter our country illegally, they will be less likely to try to sneak in.
Second, to secure our border, we must create a temporary worker program. The reality is that there are many people on the other side of our border who will do anything to come to America to work and build a better life. They walk across miles of desert in the summer heat, or hide in the back of 18-wheelers to reach our country. This creates enormous pressure on our border that walls and patrols alone will not stop. To secure the border effectively, we must reduce the numbers of people trying to sneak across.
Therefore, I support a temporary worker program that would create a legal path for foreign workers to enter our country in an orderly way, for a limited period of time. This program would match willing foreign workers with willing American employers for jobs Americans are not doing. Every worker who applies for the program would be required to pass criminal background checks. And temporary workers must return to their home country at the conclusion of their stay.
A temporary worker program would meet the needs of our economy, and it would give honest immigrants a way to provide for their families while respecting the law. A temporary worker program would reduce the appeal of human smugglers, and make it less likely that people would risk their lives to cross the border. It would ease the financial burden on state and local governments, by replacing illegal workers with lawful taxpayers. And above all, a temporary worker program would add to our security by making certain we know who is in our country and why they are here.
Third, we need to hold employers to account for the workers they hire. It is against the law to hire someone who is in this country illegally. Yet businesses often cannot verify the legal status of their employees because of the widespread problem of document fraud. Therefore, comprehensive immigration reform must include a better system for verifying documents and work eligibility. A key part of that system should be a new identification card for every legal foreign worker. This card should use biometric technology, such as digital fingerprints, to make it tamper-proof. A tamper-proof card would help us enforce the law, and leave employers with no excuse for violating it. And by making it harder for illegal immigrants to find work in our country, we would discourage people from crossing the border illegally in the first place.
Fourth, we must face the reality that millions of illegal immigrants are here already. They should not be given an automatic path to citizenship. This is amnesty, and I oppose it. Amnesty would be unfair to those who are here lawfully, and it would invite further waves of illegal immigration.
Some in this country argue that the solution is to deport every illegal immigrant, and that any proposal short of this amounts to amnesty. I disagree. It is neither wise, nor realistic to round up millions of people, many with deep roots in the United States, and send them across the border. There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation. That middle ground recognizes there are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently, and someone who has worked here for many years, and has a home, a family, and an otherwise clean record.
I believe that illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law, to pay their taxes, to learn English, and to work in a job for a number of years. People who meet these conditions should be able to apply for citizenship, but approval would not be automatic, and they will have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and followed the law. What I've just described is not amnesty, it is a way for those who have broken the law to pay their debt to society, and demonstrate the character that makes a good citizen.
Fifth, we must honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples. The success of our country depends upon helping newcomers assimilate into our society, and embrace our common identity as Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language. English is also the key to unlocking the opportunity of America. English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening a grocery, from cleaning offices to running offices, from a life of low-paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own. When immigrants assimilate and advance in our society, they realize their dreams, they renew our spirit, and they add to the unity of America.
Tonight, I want to speak directly to members of the House and the Senate: An immigration reform bill needs to be comprehensive, because all elements of this problem must be addressed together, or none of them will be solved at all. The House has passed an immigration bill. The Senate should act by the end of this month so we can work out the differences between the two bills, and Congress can pass a comprehensive bill for me to sign into law.
America needs to conduct this debate on immigration in a reasoned and respectful tone. Feelings run deep on this issue, and as we work it out, all of us need to keep some things in mind. We cannot build a unified country by inciting people to anger, or playing on anyone's fears, or exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain. We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no matter what their citizenship papers say.
I know many of you listening tonight have a parent or a grandparent who came here from another country with dreams of a better life. You know what freedom meant to them, and you know that America is a more hopeful country because of their hard work and sacrifice. As President, I've had the opportunity to meet people of many backgrounds, and hear what America means to them. On a visit to Bethesda Naval Hospital, Laura and I met a wounded Marine named Guadalupe Denogean. Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean came to the United States from Mexico when he was a boy. He spent his summers picking crops with his family, and then he volunteered for the United States Marine Corps as soon as he was able. During the liberation of Iraq, Master Gunnery Sergeant Denogean was seriously injured. And when asked if he had any requests, he made two: a promotion for the corporal who helped rescue him, and the chance to become an American citizen. And when this brave Marine raised his right hand, and swore an oath to become a citizen of the country he had defended for more than 26 years, I was honored to stand at his side.
We will always be proud to welcome people like Guadalupe Denogean as fellow Americans. Our new immigrants are just what they've always been -- people willing to risk everything for the dream of freedom. And America remains what she has always been: the great hope on the horizon, an open door to the future, a blessed and promised land. We honor the heritage of all who come here, no matter where they come from, because we trust in our country's genius for making us all Americans -- one nation under God.
White House News En Español President Bush Addresses the Nation on Immigration Reform In Focus: Immigration
Tonight, President Bush Discussed His Vision For Comprehensive Immigration Reform. The five clear objectives of comprehensive immigration reform are securing our borders, creating a temporary worker program, making it easier for employers to verify employment eligibility and continuing to hold them to account for the legal status of workers they hire, dealing with the millions of illegal immigrants who are already here, and honoring the great American tradition of the melting pot.
The President Believes America Can Be A Lawful Society And A Welcoming Society At The Same Time. We will fix the problem of illegal immigration, and we will deliver a system that is secure, orderly, and fair.
1. The United States Must Secure Its Borders
Securing Our Borders Is The Basic Responsibility Of A Sovereign Nation And An Urgent Requirement Of Our National Security. President Bush's proposals to better secure our borders include increasing the number of Border Patrol agents, using enhanced border security technology, ending the practice of "catch and release" along the southern border, eliminating bureaucratic obstacles to returning illegal immigrants to their home countries, and working with our Nation's Governors to send National Guard members to the border for temporary assignment to assist the Border Patrol during the transition as new Border Patrol agents are added and new technologies come online.
Since President Bush Took Office, We Have Increased Funding For Border Security By 66 Percent And Expanded The Border Patrol From About 9,000 To 12,000 Agents. Over the past five years, we have apprehended and sent home more than 6 million people entering America illegally.
The President's Secure Border Initiative (SBI) Is The Most Technologically Advanced Border Enforcement Initiative In American History. This year, we will begin a comprehensive program to construct high-tech fences in urban corridors and build new patrol roads and barriers in rural areas. We will employ motion sensors, infrared cameras, and unmanned aerial vehicles to detect and prevent illegal crossings. We will better integrate our homeland security forces to dramatically improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our border security efforts.
President Bush Is Asking Congress For $327 Million To Help End The Policy Of "Catch And Release." More than 85 percent of the illegal immigrants apprehended at the southern border are from Mexico, and most are returned within 24 hours. For many years, government detention facilities did not have enough beds for many non-Mexican illegal immigrants caught at the border. As a result, most were released back into society. They were each assigned a court date, but the vast majority did not show up.
The President's FY06 Budget Funds 20,800 Beds For Detention Facilities. The President is asking Congress to provide money to increase the number of beds in detention facilities by 4,000 beds and to increase efficiency in the detention and removal system. The President's FY07 budget proposes increasing the number of beds in detention facilities to 27,500 by the end of FY07. The Administration has expanded the use of "expedited removal," which allows us to send non-Mexican illegal immigrants home more quickly. We are also continuing to make it clear to foreign governments that they must accept back their citizens who violate our immigration laws.
The President Is Eliminating Bureaucratic Obstacles So That We Can Return More Non-Mexican Illegal Aliens In Shorter Periods Of Time Than Ever Before. We have expedited the legal process to cut the average deportation time. We have ended "catch and release" for illegal immigrants from Brazil, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua caught crossing our southern border. The Administration will work with Congress to close loopholes making it difficult to process illegal immigrants from certain countries and will continue pressing foreign governments who are reluctant to take back their citizens who violate our immigration laws.
The President Is Working With Congress To Eliminate Rules Requiring The Federal Government To Release Illegal Immigrants If Their Home Countries Do Not Take Them Back In A Set Period Of Time. These rules have forced the government to release even violent criminals. The President is also working with Congress to address the cycle of endless litigation that clogs immigration courts, rewards illegal behavior, and delays justice for immigrants with legitimate claims.
The Administration Is Working To Expand "Operation Streamline." Through "Operation Streamline," the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice (DOJ), and numerous local law enforcement organizations are working to expedite prosecution of aliens for illegal entry in conjunction with removal proceedings. We Are Working Closely With State And Local Law Enforcement To Stop Illegal Immigration.
The Law Enforcement Support Center (LESC) Is Enabling DHS To Share Critical Law Enforcement Information - Such As Immigration Status And Identity Information - With State And Local Law Enforcement Officials. Responses to requests for information sent to the LESC are usually answered within an hour. In FY 2004, the LESC provided immigration-related information requested by Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials on over 668,000 occasions. The LESC regularly responds to over 60,000 queries per month. The LESC also provides training to officers in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New York, and Texas.
DHS Is Continuing Its Program, In Conjunction With State And Local Law Enforcement Agencies, To Identify Illegal Aliens Who Are Incarcerated In Non-Federal Jails. Under this program, when a criminal alien is booked into a State, county, or local jail, an electronic query is automatically sent to DHS to verify the alien's immigration status. Certain jails in Arizona, California, Florida, and Texas are using this program. The United States And Mexico Are Engaging In Renewed Discussions On Collaborative Border Security And Safety Initiatives. The United States and Mexico have a shared interest in addressing violence against law enforcement personnel and innocent people and increased lawlessness that is occurring in some border areas.
U.S.-Mexico Action Plan To Combat Border Violence: On March 3, 2006, in accordance with the Security and Prosperity Partnership, Mexico and the United States signed an Action Plan to combat border violence and improve public safety. This agreement strengthens procedures to enhance cooperation on both sides of the border to respond to scenarios ranging from accidental crossings to incidents of violence, or other situations that present risks to those who live, work, or travel at our common border. Both governments endorsed a multi-step plan for bi-national coordination during emergency situations and committed to ensure immediate communication and information sharing during any such situations that may have cross-border implications. The Action Plan also sets forth the groundwork for ensuring coordinated investigations and detentions of persons believed to be involved in violent activity along the border.
We Are Working With The Mexican Government On Interior Repatriation - Returning Illegal Immigrants To The Towns They Came From In Mexico. Over the past two years, nearly 35,000 illegal immigrants were returned to Mexico through interior repatriation to decrease their likelihood of trying to cross again. President Bush Is Calling On Congress To Provide Funding For Improvements In Manpower And Technology And Better Collaboration With State And Local Law Enforcement Officials.
We Will Increase The Number Of Border Patrol Agents By 6,000 By The End Of 2008 - Doubling The Size Of The Border Patrol During The President's Time In Office. So far, President Bush has increased the number of Border Patrol agents from about 9,000 to about 12,000. More agents mean more area will be covered and more illegal cross-border traffic will be interdicted. Crime will decrease around the border as criminal enterprises are dismantled and human and narcotic smuggling corridors are disrupted. We Will Continue Expanding The Federal Government's Partnership With Border Counties And Targeted States. Targeted training and grant programs like the 287(g) program and Operation Stonegarden allow State and local law enforcement to assist the Border Patrol in helping the Federal government quickly expand border security efforts on a temporary basis.
Operation Stonegarden Provides Grants For Overtime And Travel Expenses, Enabling Local, State And Tribal Law Enforcement Agencies To Increase Manpower Required For Area-Specific Operations. These agencies work in direct coordination with the U.S. Border Patrol. During these joint operations, there is an increased area of coverage, which increases apprehension of illegal cross-border traffic and deters local crime.
Section 287(g) Of The Immigration And Nationality Act Authorizes DHS To Train State And Local Law Enforcement Officials In Immigration Enforcement So They Can Identify And Process Incarcerated Aliens. DHS is working with State and local law enforcement across the Nation to ensure illegal aliens are removed from the United States. 287(g) programs have already been established in Alabama, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina, and California. DHS will work with its State and local partners to expand these programs to increase targeted enforcement and will be requesting $50 million dollars for this effort along the southern border.
These Additional Resources Will Enhance Partnerships Between ICE And State and Local Law Enforcement As Newly Trained and Certified Officers Join DHS Task Forces, Including Border Enforcement And Security Task Forces, Document And Benefit Fraud Task Forces, And Human Trafficking Task Forces. The expanded participation will increase the apprehension, prosecution, and removal of criminal aliens and alien smuggling rings at the southern border and throughout the country.
ICE Is Projecting To Train Approximately 250 To 500 State And Local Law Enforcement Officers Under The 287(g) Delegation Authority Program. Focused primarily on the southern border states, expansion of the 287(g) delegation of authority in a managed and focused approach will significantly enhance ICE's capabilities. To Help During This Period Of Transition And In Coordination With Governors, Up To 6,000 National Guard Members Will Be Sent To Our Southern Border. The Department of Homeland Security will remain in the lead. National Guard units will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads, and providing training. National Guard units deployed to our border will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities - that duty will be done by the Border Patrol.
This Initial Commitment Of Guard Members Would Last For One Year. After that, the number of National Guard members will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents are added and new technologies come online. At any one time, these 6,000 Guard members account for less than 2 percent of the total National Guard force of more than 440,000. Guard members will be deployed in two- to three-week rotations to meet this 6,000 person level. We have enough National Guard members to deploy to our border, while continuing to respond to natural disasters and fight and win the War on Terror.
The National Guard's Primary Role Will Be Support For DHS - As Is Currently Provided On A More Limited Basis. National Guard units will not be involved in the apprehension or detention of illegal immigrants, perform detention operations, take or maintain custody of illegal aliens, or directly perform any law enforcement activities. Apprehensions and detention operations will be conducted by the Border Patrol.
The President Is Committed To Working With Our Nation's Governors. Military personnel will be employed consistent with applicable Federal, state, and local law. The National Guard units from the Southwest Border (SWB) States will be under the command and control of their respective State Governors and Adjutants General. National Guard units from other States will deploy to the SWB States, and through an agreement between Governors of providing States and receiving States, will be under the command and control of the Governors and Adjutants General of the receiving States. The National Guard Bureau will serve as the coordinating authority to deploy National Guard units from across the country to perform the border security mission in support of DHS. The SWB States will establish a National Guard Joint Task Force in each State to serve as the command and control element for the border security mission. These Joint Task Forces will provide the necessary logistical and administrative support for mobilized forces. These Joint Task Forces will establish coordinating relationships with the each other and DHS to ensure unity of effort and information sharing.
The United States Is Not Going To Militarize The Southern Border. Mexico is our neighbor and friend. We will continue to work cooperatively to improve security on both sides of the border, confront common problems like drug trafficking and crime, and reduce illegal immigration.
National Guard Support Will Enable Us To Move More Than 500 Border Patrol Agents From Jobs In The Back Office To The Front Lines. This will free well-trained border patrol agents now performing clerical, transportation, and logistics jobs and return them to helping detect and apprehend illegal aliens. These veteran agents will not have to undergo additional training to be effective in their areas of operation. The United States, Canada And Mexico Have A Common Border Security Workplan Under The Security Pillar Of The Security And Prosperity Partnership (SPP) Of North America. When the three leaders met in Cancun, Mexico, in March 2006, they committed to working together on a "North American Smart, Secure Borders Plan," which includes close coordination on screening of goods and people, collaboration and prioritization of border infrastructure and technology investment, and concerted law enforcement cooperation to respond to criminal or terrorist threats.
The United States And Canada Cooperate Extensively On A Range Of Border Security And Counterterror Initiatives. Since 2001, Canada has demonstrated its commitment to increased internal security by investing billions of dollars on security enhancements to increase coordination among agencies, enhance border, airport, and maritime security, improve screening of immigrants and refugee claimants, and improve critical infrastructure protection. Together, the United States and Canada have established 15 Integrated Border Enforcement Teams combining U.S. and Canadian law enforcement agencies in a unified effort along the border. 2. To Secure Our Border, We Must Create A Temporary Worker Program
President Bush Supports A Temporary Worker Program That Would Create A Legal Path For Foreign Workers To Enter Our Country In An Orderly Way, For A Limited Period Of Time. This program would match willing foreign workers with willing American employers for jobs Americans are not doing. Every worker who applies for the program would be required to pass criminal background checks, and temporary workers must return to their home country at the conclusion of their authorized stay.
A Temporary Worker Program Would Meet The Needs Of Our Economy, Ease The Financial Burden On State And Local Governments, And - Most Importantly - Add To Our Security. A temporary worker program would give honest immigrants a way to provide for their families while respecting the law, replace illegal workers with lawful taxpayers, and enable us to make certain we know who is in our country and why they are here. 3. We Need To Hold Employers To Account For The Workers They Hire
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Must Include The Creation Of A New Identification Card For Every Legal Foreign Worker So Businesses Can Verify The Legal Status Of Their Employees. This card should use biometric technology to make it tamper-proof. A tamper-proof card would help us enforce the law - and leave employers with no excuse for violating it. We will also work with Congress to expand "basic pilot" - an electronic employment verification system - and mandate that all employers use this system to quickly and accurately confirm work eligibility for all prospective employees. By making it harder for illegal immigrants to find work in our country, we would discourage people from crossing the border illegally in the first place.
4. We Must Deal With The Millions Of Illegal Immigrants Who Are Already Here
Illegal Immigrants Should Not Be Given Amnesty. President Bush opposes amnesty and believes illegal immigrants should not be given an automatic path to citizenship because it would be unfair to those who are here lawfully and would invite further waves of illegal immigration. The President supports increasing the annual number of green cards that can lead to citizenship, but for the sake of justice and security, the President is firmly opposed to amnesty.
President Bush Believes That Deporting Every Illegal Immigrant Is Neither Wise Nor Realistic. There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant and a program of mass deportation.
President Bush Believes Illegal Immigrants Who Have Roots in America And Who Want To Stay Should Have To Pay A Meaningful Penalty For Breaking The Law, Pay Their Taxes, Learn English, And Work In A Job For A Number Of Years. The President also believes that there are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently - and someone who has worked here for many years, and has a home, a family, and an otherwise clean record. Those who meet our conditions should be able to apply for citizenship - but approval will not be automatic, and they will have to wait in line behind those who played by the rules and followed the law.
5. We Must Honor The Great American Tradition Of The Melting Pot
The Success Of Our Country Depends Upon Helping Newcomers Assimilate Into Our Society And Embracing Our Common Identity As Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language.
English Is The Key To Unlocking The Opportunity Of America. English allows newcomers to go from picking crops to opening a grocery, from cleaning offices to running offices, from a life of low-paying jobs to a diploma, a career, and a home of their own. When immigrants assimilate and advance in our society, they realize their dreams, they renew our spirit, and they add to the unity of America. The House And Senate Must Pass A Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill
All Elements Of This Problem Must Be Addressed Together - Or None Of Them Will Be Solved At All. The House has passed an immigration bill. The Senate should act by the end of this month - so that the House and Senate can work out their differences and send the President a comprehensive bill to sign.
America Needs To Conduct This Debate In A Reasoned And Respectful Tone. Feelings run deep on the matter of immigration - and as we work out this issue, all of us need to keep some things in mind. We cannot build a unified country by inciting people to anger, or playing on anyone's fears, or exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain. We must always remember that real lives will be affected by our debates and decisions, and that every human being has dignity and value no matter what their citizenship papers say.
May 15, 2007 Immigration vote delayed until Monday
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has pushed back the immigration debate - again.
In an effort to give the bipartisan negotiators more time, Reid said tonight that he will hold off on the debate until late Monday. At that point, Reid will raise last year's Senate-approved bill - or the bipartisan deal, if one is reached.
"I have spoken to people who are doing the negotiations on immigration," Reid said on the Senate floor. "They tell me they're 80 percent of the way there. Well, that's fine. The other 20 percent is hard."
Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the Democrats' chief negotiator, "asked Reid for it to be postponed," Kennedy spokeswoman Laura Capps said. "The bipartisan negotiations are showing progress and this gives them a chance."
But this shouldn't necessarily be taken as a sign that a deal is imminent. Senators haggled all day over some of the thorniest issues. Chief among them was whether guest workers can seek permanent residence. Democrats want that option open to a percentage of guest workers. Republicans insist that temporary means temporary. (See our story, Immigration talks threaten ties.)
This is the second time that Reid postponed the debate, despite his insistence that the process must move forward. When Republicans pressed for more time, Reid held firm, saying they knew for two months that debate would begin in mid-May. "Anyone who thinks two months is not enough time to get ready should get another occupation," Reid told reporters last week.
Explaining his decision tonight, Reid said: "I don't think we will lose a step. It will allow the people who have been working on this matter for a number of weeks to have a few more days to do that. It would be different if we had nothing else to do here."
The Senate will take up the Iraq supplemental bill, the budget and a water resources bill until then.
Municipalities, tired of waiting on Congress, get proactive on reforms
12:12 AM CDT on Wednesday, May 16, 2007 By DAVID McLEMORE and DIANNE SOLÃS / The Dallas Morning News dmclemore@dallasnews.com and dsolis@dallasnews.com
From Farmers Branch to Hazleton, Pa., more than 100 municipalities across the country are taking it upon themselves to tackle illegal immigration.
In Pennsylvania, 32 municipalities have considered or enacted resolutions – such as making English the official language, cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants and punishing landlords who rent to them. In California, 13 cities have passed or considered local laws to crack down on illegal immigrants and push for comprehensive immigration legislation. The list goes on.
And state legislatures in all 50 states, dissatisfied with congressional inaction, are considering more than twice the number of immigration-related laws as in previous years – with most imposing tougher restrictions on illegal immigrants.
The message to Congress, some say: If you can't do it, we will.
On Tuesday, the Senate was struggling to meet Majority Leader Harry Reid's ultimatum to end months of delay and begin policy discussions today for immigration legislation – or face a vote on a bill passed last year that no one now likes. But late Tuesday, Mr. Reid, D-Nev., postponed a vote until Monday.
The actions at the local level are the result of frustrations with congressional inability to forge bipartisan overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, say groups on both sides of the debate.
"What we find in the local initiatives is that people use the only mechanisms they have to get the situation resolved," said Cecilia Muñoz, senior vice president of research, advocacy and legislation at the National Council of La Raza, a Latino rights organization. "We believe that was the cause of the Farmers Branch vote. It was a vote out of frustration. Unfortunately, it will cause a lot of harm."
Also Online Map: Dealing with illegal immigration (.pdf)
Links: More information on bills in state legislatures
Parties near deal on immigration overhaul
Court maneuvers start over FB law The overwhelming passage of the Farmers Branch ordinance Saturday marked the first public vote on a local ordinance to get tough on illegal immigration, though opponents have filed for an injunction to stop the measure from going into effect Tuesday.
The Dallas suburb's ordinance would fine landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and require apartment managers to collect documents on the legal status of tenants. Dozens of cities across the country have seen similar tough measures approved by municipal government in the last year.
In cracking down, however, many activists are running smack into the complexity of the nation's immigration laws, said Stephen Yale-Loehr, a Cornell University law professor. Mr. Yale-Loehr testified in March as an expert witness in a trial involving the town of Hazleton.
"People think it is easy to determine, and it is not," the law professor said. A person can have legal status one day and lose it the next, he noted. And mixed-status families present other difficulties in enforcing an ordinance without raising discrimination claims for those in a family who are U.S. citizens, he noted.
Legal challenge The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit against an April 2006 initiative in San Bernardino, Calif., that would deny city permits and contracts to businesses that hire illegal immigrants, ban such immigrants from renting or leasing city property, and require official city business to be conducted in English.
And the ACLU of Oklahoma is considering a legal challenge to a bill that Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry signed into law last week. The new law would prevent illegal immigrants from getting jobs and public assistance and require law enforcement agents to police illegal immigrants arrested for particular crimes.
Several measures in the Texas Legislature have died in committee.
And last year, a federal judge issued a restraining order barring enforcement of several measures enacted by the town of Hazleton, Pa., that would require businesses to investigate the legal status of employees and tenants.
"If you're a landlord, how are you supposed to know who has legal papers and who doesn't?" Ms. Muñoz said. "You're more likely then to make a determination about tenants based on ethnicity. And that tends to make all Latinos suspect."
Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that favors reduced immigration, said the increase in action at the local level is simply a reflection of the public being fed up with illegal immigration.
"Votes such as at Farmers Branch are very clear messages that the community wants illegal immigrants to go away," Mr. Camarota said. "Local communities are left holding the bag for the consequences of illegal immigration. The longer the federal government doesn't act, the more the cities pay in education, health care and social costs."
Meanwhile, Congress is in gridlock on the issue because it can't craft legislation that appeals to both immigration special-interest groups and the public at large, Mr. Camarota said.
"Politically, the usual answer is just kick the can down the street and blame it on the other guy," Mr. Camarota said. "If that's the Senate's response this week, we'll see more activity at the local level like that at Farmers Branch. Period."
State legislators in all 50 states are dealing with more than twice the number of immigration-related bills than they were this time last year, according to a new report by the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Some 1,169 pieces of legislation and resolutions designed to address immigration or immigrant-related issues have been introduced this year – compared with 570 in 2006. And at least 57 measures have been enacted in 18 states, including Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas and Kentucky, the report said.
"There's no question that immigration reform is one of the nation's most pressing issues, and it should come as no surprise that state legislators are responding accordingly," said Texas state Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio, president of the conference of state legislatures. "However, what is extremely disappointing is Congress' inability to craft a comprehensive immigration reform solution.
"Washington's inability to reach consensus has forced states to roll up their sleeves and get the job done," she added.
In addition, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund said that through February, about 130 local governments from Avon Park, Fla., to Sandwich, Mass., have attempted or passed ordinances or resolutions dealing with immigration-related matters. About a fifth of those efforts were in favor of comprehensive immigration reform.
While many small towns are cracking down on illegal immigrants, some large cities have taken a more neutral stance in support of comprehensive legislation.
The public desires for immigration reform are a strange balance of toughness on illegal entry and recognition of the positive contributions of those immigrants who have lived and worked in the country for years.
In a poll released April 26, about 64 percent said they support immigration reform legislation that provides increased border security and tougher enforcement, while including a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
The poll was conducted by The Tarrance Group for the National Immigration Forum from April 15-19 and April 22 of 800 registered likely voters in 2008. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
"Voters are clearly laying this issue at the feet of Congress," said Frank Sharry, executive director of the national Immigration Forum, which commissioned the poll. "Doing nothing is not an option."
Ms. Muñoz agrees.
"There will be hell to pay if the Senate doesn't act and if some form of reform doesn't happen," Ms. Muñoz said.
Spinning their wheels The discussions in the Senate have largely stalled along partisan lines on a number of contentious issues, particularly on how the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States would be treated.
Republican senators favor rules tougher than last year's Senate bill for those here illegally to achieve legal status – longer waits, bigger fines and a return to the country of origin.
Negotiators for the White House proposed an equally controversial measure that stresses job skills and education over family ties in the qualifications for future legal immigration.
Discussions have stumbled over opening the borders to more tech workers and whether agricultural workers will be able to enter only through a guest worker program that would end their stay after three years.
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said hurried action by the Democratic leadership would not help provide useful, workable immigration reform.
"It would be terribly disappointing and unfortunate if the Democrat majority leader were to set aside this work and simply move to last year's bill that was rejected by a majority of Congress and the American people," he said.
"Securing our borders and repairing our broken immigration system is too important to get bogged down in partisan politics or political gamesmanship," Mr. Cornyn said. "I hope the Democrat leader will do the right thing and allow these negotiations to continue instead of attempting to ram through a flawed bill without the appropriate amount of bipartisan input and consideration."
Groups join fight Increasingly, however, grassroots organizations have formed to fight guest worker programs and legalization plans.
The Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee recently launched Operation City Walls to spread the anti-illegal immigrant movement to cities across the country to help create local support to derail amnesty and legalization plans, PAC president William Gheen said.
The group works with more than 100 cities and towns that have passed or are considering ordinances similar to that passed by Farmers Branch.
What's remarkable about Farmers Branch, Mr. Gheen said, is that two-thirds of the voters supported the measure, though they were significantly outspent by the opposition in the campaign.
"Ninety percent of the time the side that spends the most wins," Mr. Gheen said. "Farmers Branch not only reversed that, they devastated that statistic, which means anybody on an existing city or town council, or anyone considering running for city or town council, needs to take up this issue."
Staff writer Stephanie Sandoval contributed to this report.
Groups seek restraining order; others consider suit over at-large seats
11:31 PM CDT on Tuesday, May 15, 2007 By STEPHANIE SANDOVAL / The Dallas Morning News ssandoval@dallasnews.com
Attorneys in a lawsuit against Farmers Branch asked a federal court Tuesday to issue an injunction halting the city from implementing a law that bans apartments from renting to illegal immigrants.
Two civil rights activists who have called the law and city officials supporting it "racist" said they also are considering filing legal action. They want to force the city to move from at-large City Council districts to single-member districts after the defeat Saturday of the only Hispanic council candidate.
Vote has quick impact Tuesday's legal moves are the beginning of what some say will be a long court fight over the ordinance, scheduled to go into effect next week after a landmark vote by residents.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas filed a request for a temporary restraining order Tuesday morning.
They represent Farmers Branch apartment complexes and apartment tenants in one of two lawsuits pending against the city.
"It's unfortunate that the residents of Farmers Branch have chosen to implement a law which is not only bad policy, but is likely also unconstitutional," said Lisa Graybill, legal director of the ACLU of Texas. "Now the issue will have to be resolved in federal court."
City to fight it: City attorney Matthew Boyle said he expects the court to set a hearing by the end of the week before acting on the requests.
"We will certainly be fighting it," Mr. Boyle said. "We remain cautiously optimistic about our chances of prevailing in having the restraining order applications denied."
Attorneys for a group of Farmers Branch businesses that are also part of the federal lawsuit against the city filed a separate request for injunctive relief Tuesday afternoon. Dallas activist Carlos Quintanilla said the request would strengthen the one from the ACLU and MALDEF.
The Bickel & Brewer Storefront, attorneys for plaintiffs in the other suit, said they plan to file a similar request this week.
The move comes as Farmers Branch prepares to implement the law Tuesday.
While cities around the country, including Hazleton, Pa., and Valley Park, Mo., have enacted similar apartment laws, Farmers Branch is the first Texas city to do so. And it was the first city in the nation to put the issue to a public vote.
More than two-thirds of voters approved the measure, with turnout hitting record numbers for a city election.
Mr. Quintanilla said he is contemplating legal action against the city as well, to force a move to single-member districts.
"We've already contacted the Justice Department, asking them to intervene," he said. "If the Justice Department decides not to intervene, we will go directly to federal court."
Candidate's defeat: Dallas activist Domingo Garcia said Tuesday that he was also considering taking legal action to force the city to move to single-member districts.
Both expressed frustration over the defeat of City Council candidate Jose Galvez, the first Hispanic to run in Farmers Branch.
"We believe if you have single-member districts, you will have representatives that come from throughout the city, as opposed to one or two neighborhoods, and will have a more diverse council that will reflect all the residents of Farmers Branch, instead of a small group," Mr. Garcia said.
City Council member Tim O'Hare, the driving force behind the apartment ordinance, said the city of 28,500 is too small for single-member districts to make sense.
He also said assertions that the Hispanic community's voice wasn't heard are false. Many of them, he said, simply supported other candidates on both sides of the issue.
"The Hispanic community was completely and totally divided on who it came to support in this election," Mr. O'Hare said. "This is another attempt to interfere with the democratic process. The voters spoke. They spoke loudly. They have given the council a mandate to move forward and address this issue, and that's what we intend to do."
Add to del.icio.us
