Author: Duke1676

“I’ve said from the beginning that we can’t reform immigration laws until we control immigration, and we can’t control immigration unless we control our borders and our ports.” – Lou Dobbs

We’ve heard that statement in various forms a millions times, repeated ad infinitum by various politicians and talking heads since Frank Luntz first advised anti-immigrant Republicans to stress that “”A country that can’t control its own borders can’t control its own destiny” to sell an anti-immigrant agenda to the American public.

But it has always gone without saying that the border that needed to be controlled has been the one to the south.  Rarely, if ever, has the northern border been mentioned in most border security screeds.

Congress has appropriated funds for vast amounts of added security on the southern border, and walls are being constructed as we speak to further limit access across the 1900 mile stretch.

Of course the need to stem the flow of “illegal immigration” is always given as the chief cause for such expenditures. But additionally, the need for general “border security” is often cited.

Anti-immigrant politicians and talking heads are always quick to conflate the flow of economic refugees with the flow of drugs and the threat of international terrorism to pepper their anti-immigrant rants with even higher levels of fear and trepidation.

Trancredo famously brought up the specter of terrorists crossing the southern border in this ad:

And the boyz at Fox Noise have turned up the fear meter on more than one occasion:

But a new report from the General Accounting Office sheds new light on exactly where the nation’s greatest border security threats exist ….and they aren’t along the much patrolled southern border…but our remote and unmonitored northern one.  

GAO investigators identified numerous border security vulnerabilities, both at ports of entry and at unmanned and unmonitored land border locations between the ports of entry. In testing ports of entry, undercover investigators carried counterfeit drivers’ licenses, birth certificates, employee identification cards, and other documents, presented themselves at ports of entry and sought admittance to the United States dozens of times. They arrived in rental cars, on foot, by boat, and by airplane. They attempted to enter in four states on the northern border (Washington, New York, Michigan, and Idaho), three states on the southern border (California, Arizona, and Texas), and two other states requiring international air travel (Florida and Virginia). In nearly every case, government inspectors accepted oral assertions and counterfeit identification provided by GAO investigators as proof of U.S. citizenship and allowed them to enter the country. In total, undercover investigators made 42 crossings with a 93 percent success rate

In its most recent work, GAO shifted its focus from ports of entry and primarily performed limited security assessments of unmanned and unmonitored areas between ports of entry. The names of the states GAO visited for this limited security assessment have been withheld at the request of CBP. In four states along the U.S.-Canada border, GAO found state roads that were very close to the border that CBP did not appear to monitor. In three states, the proximity of the road to the border allowed investigators to cross undetected, successfully simulating the cross-border movement of radioactive materials or other contraband into the United States from Canada. For example, in one apparently unmanned, unmonitored area on the northern border, the U.S. Border Patrol was alerted to GAO’s activities through the tip of an alert citizen. However, the responding U.S. Border Patrol agents were not able to locate the investigators and their simulated contraband. Also on the northern border, GAO investigators located several ports of entry in one state on the northern border that had posted daytime hours and were unmanned overnight. Investigators observed that surveillance equipment was in operation, but that the only preventive measure to stop an individual from crossing the border into the United States was a barrier across the road that could be driven around. GAO also identified potential security vulnerabilities on federally managed lands adjacent to the U.S.-Mexico border. GAO concluded that CBP faces significant challenges on the northern border, and that a determined cross-border violator would likely be able to bring radioactive materials or other contraband undetected into the United States by crossing the U.S.-Canada border at any of the assessed locations.

GAO – “BORDER SECURITY: Summary of Covert Tests and Security Assessments for the Senate Committee on Finance, 2003-2007”

But due to political considerations the allocation of security assets along the two borders has always been disproportional.  

Regarding land ports of entry, the United States shares over 5,000 miles of border with Canada to the north (including the state of Alaska), and 1,900 miles of border with Mexico to the south. Individuals attempting to legally enter the United States by land present themselves to a CBP officer at one of the 170 ports of entry located along these borders….

… The U.S. Border Patrol, a component of CBP, patrols and monitors areas between ports of entry. However, given limited resources and the wide expanse of the border, the U.S. Border Patrol is limited in its ability to monitor the border either through use of technology or with a consistent manned presence. Commensurate with its perception of the threat, CBP has distributed human resources differently on the northern border than it has on the southern border. According to CBP, as of May 2007, it had 972 U.S. Border Patrol agents assigned to the northern border and 11,986 agents assigned to the southern border. The number of agents actually providing border protection at any given time is far smaller than these figures suggest. As mentioned above, in the September 2007 hearing on border security before your Committee, a CBP official stated that roughly 250 U.S. Border Patrol agents were patrolling the U.S.-Canada border at any given time–about a quarter of all agents reportedly assigned to patrol the northern border during that period.

So with a greatly undermanned force along the 5000 mile Canadian border, security has been lax at best.

According to CBP, the ease and speed with which a cross-border violator can travel to the border, cross the border, and leave the location of the crossing are critical factors in determining whether an area of the border is vulnerable. We identified state roads close to the border that appeared to be unmanned and unmonitored, allowing us to simulate the cross-border movement of radioactive materials or other contraband from Canada into the United States. For example, on October 31, 2006, our investigators positioned themselves on opposite sides of the U.S.-Canada border in an unmanned location. Our investigators selected this location because roads on either side of the border would allow them to quickly and easily exchange simulated contraband. After receiving a signal by cell phone, the investigator in Canada left his vehicle and walked approximately 25 feet to the border carrying a red duffel bag. While investigators on the U.S. side took photographs and made a digital video recording, the individual with the duffel bag proceeded the remaining 50 feet, transferred the duffel bag to the investigators on the U.S. side, and returned to his vehicle on the Canadian side. The set up and exchange lasted approximately 10 minutes, during which time the investigators were in view of residents both on the Canadian and U.S. sides of the border. According to CBP records of this incident, an alert citizen notified the U.S. Border Patrol about the suspicious activities of our investigators. The U.S. Border Patrol subsequently attempted to search for a vehicle matching the description of the rental vehicle our investigators used. However, the U.S. Border Patrol was not able to locate the investigators with the duffel bag, even though they had parked nearby to observe traffic passing through the port of entry.

We also identified several ports of entry with posted daytime hours in one state on the northern border. During the daytime these ports of entry are staffed by CBP officers. During the night, CBP told us that it relies on surveillance systems to monitor, respond to, and attempt to interdict illegal border crossing activity. For example, on November 14, 2006, at about 11:00 p.m., our investigators arrived on the U.S. side of one port of entry that had closed for the night. Investigators observed that surveillance equipment was in operation but that the only visible preventive measure to stop an individual from entering the United States was a barrier across the road that could be driven around. CBP provided us with records that confirmed our observations about the barrier at this port of entry, indicating that on one occasion a cross-border violator drove around this type of barrier to illegally enter the United States. Although the violator was later caught by state law enforcement officers and arrested by the U.S. Border Patrol, we were concerned that these ports of entry were unmanned overnight.

Contrary to the situation on the northern border, the southern border was found to be highly fortified. And while the GAO inspectors were able to find some holes in security, some were due to conflicting jurisdictions on tribal and federally managed lands.

In contrast to our observations on the northern border, our investigators observed a large law enforcement and Army National Guard presence near a state road on the southern border, including unmanned aerial vehicles. On October 17, 2006, two of our investigators left a main U.S. route about a quarter mile from a U.S.-Mexico port of entry. Traveling on a dirt road that parallels the border, our investigators used a GPS system to get as close to the border as possible. Our investigators passed U.S. Border Patrol agents and U.S. Army National Guard units. In addition, our investigators spotted unmanned aerial vehicles and a helicopter flying parallel to the border. At the point where the dirt road ran closest to the U.S.-Mexico border, our investigators spotted additional U.S. Border Patrol vehicles parked in a covered position. About three-fourths of a mile from these vehicles, our investigators pulled off the road. One investigator exited the vehicle and proceeded on foot through several gulches and gullies toward the Mexican border. His intent was to find out whether he would be questioned by law enforcement agents about his activities. He returned to the vehicle after 15 minutes, at which time our investigators returned to the main road. Our investigators did not observe any public traffic on this road for the 1 hour that they were in the area, but none of the law enforcement units attempted to stop our investigators and find out what they were doing. According to CBP, because our investigators did not approach from the direction of Mexico, there would be no expectation for law enforcement units to question these activities.

In another example, on January 23, 2007, our investigators arrived on federally managed lands adjacent to the U.S.-Mexico border. In this area, the Rio Grande River forms the southern border between the United States and Mexico. After driving off-road in a 4×4 vehicle to the banks of the Rio Grande, our investigators observed, in two locations, evidence that frequent border crossings took place. In one location, the investigators observed well-worn footpaths and tire tracks on the Mexican side of the river. … Our investigators were in this area for 1 hour and 30 minutes and observed no surveillance equipment, intrusion alarm systems, or law enforcement presence. Our investigators were not challenged regarding their activities. After performing our limited security assessment of these locations, investigators learned that a memorandum of understanding exists between DHS (of which CBP is a component), the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Agriculture regarding the protection of federal lands adjacent to U.S. borders. Although CBP is ultimately responsible for protecting these areas, officials told us that certain legal, environmental, and cultural considerations limit options for enforcement–for example, environmental restrictions and tribal sovereignty rights.

As evidenced by this report from the GAO, while the southern border is far from airtight, and for bureaucratic reasons some areas are not as highly scrutinized as others, the comparison between the actual probabilities of a terrorist or other national security threat penetrating the southern as opposed to the  northern border are as different as night and day.  

While vast expanses of the northern border go totally un-secured or are guarded only by day, or by traffic gates that can be driven around, the southern border contains walls, barriers, vast number of Border Patrol Agents, and National Guard, unmanned drones and high-tech surveillance equipment.  All in attempts to keep out and control the flow of people looking to work.  While to the north, those wishing to do real harm can walk right in.

But I guess those guys that FOX tells us about  from “Cairo, or somewhere else in the Mid-East” who go to Mexico to “get acculturated and learn Spanish of the kind spoken in Mexico” …to sneak over the border since “you can’t tell the difference” between an Arab and a Mexican if you “strip em down and dress em up”  …and since it’s so easy for “Arabs to acculturate in Mexico because up to 1942 Islam ran the Iberian peninsular”  …just aren’t aware of the fact that the Canadian border is like a sieve and they could just walk right through any time they wanted.  Or maybe they’re just too stupid to figure that out …being brown and all…..   Jeez.

Cross-posted at: The Sanctuary

On May 1st 2006, millions took to the streets in cities and communities throughout the nation to finally have their voices heard.

Out from the shadows came the forgotten, the marginalized, the nameless, faceless, mass of humanity who toil daily in thankless jobs with little reward or recognition.

Those who had labored invisibly for years as they quietly provided a nation with prosperity of which they could never partake, took to the streets to say “no more”.  We will no longer be marginalized … We will no longer be demonized … We will not be criminalize ….We Are America.

That day, as pundits and politicians tried to grasp the seismic shift taking place, attempting to read the tea leaves of public opinion and formulate positions that would serve them politically, two men had the courage to do not what was safe or politically expedient …but rather, what was right.  
One was an elder statesman, a lion in winter, who had long fought the great battles of his generation, battles for justice, and battles for equality.  ….The other was a young man, just starting his political journey. A young man with a vision of the future based on hopes and dreams for a new America… An America that finally lived up to the principles and precepts on which it was founded. Those two men were Sen. Ted Kennedy and Sen. Barack Obama….The only two sitting Senators to take to the streets in solidarity with those who had too long been invisible.

Three days later Obama had this to say about his participation in the events in Chicago, and his vision for a new America:

On Monday, I traveled from D.C. to Chicago to witness a monumental event. There were 400,000 people marching on behalf of comprehensive immigration reform in this country. There were rallies all across the country but Chicago was one of the largest. I had the opportunity to speak to the people who were gathering at Union Park before they marched over to Grant Park. Four-hundred thousand people, mostly of Mexican origin, but large numbers of people from other countries – Nigerians and Pakistanis and Indians and Filipinos – people who’ve come to this country for the same reason that immigrants have been drawn to this country for generations: the notion that they can pursue and better life for themselves but, most importantly, for their children, if they work hard and apply themselves.

…I think what we saw in those marches is the face of a new America. America is changing and we can’t be threatened by it. We have to understand that we are going to be better off united than divided.

…to those who are fearful of these immigrants, in some cases because they have come to represent a loss of control for the country and its borders, I would just say to them that we can’t have a country in which you have a servant class that is picking our lettuce or plucking our chickens or looking after our children or mowing our lawns but who never have the full rights and obligations of citizenship. That’s just not the kind of country that I want to have my children grow up in and my hope is that over the coming months we can come up with the kind of comprehensive, thoughtful legislation that I think the Senate bill reflects and we can have strong border security, we can have employers do the right thing by hiring those who are here legally in some fashion, but that we also provide all those families, children, elderly people and teenagers that I saw in that amazing march on Monday the opportunity to be full members of the American community.

Barack Obama on Immigration Marches, May 4, 2006

Cross Posted From The Sanctuary

Today, two important events demonstrated just how far to the right the Republican Presidential candidates are shifting on the immigration issue. The first was the endorsement of Iowa front runner, Mike Huckabee, by Minutemen founder, Jim Gilchrist -not so much for the fact that Gilchrist is once again is trying to thrust his agenda center stage – but rather Huckabee’s willingness to embrace it.
On stage at an event in Council Bluffs with Gilchrist ,Huckabee characterized the anti- immigrant vigilante as  “a person who just got fed up with what he saw as a breakdown of his own government….Since October of 2004 he’s been one of the leading voices in this country trying to bring sanity to an issue that’s spiraled..” adding:

“Frankly, Jim I’ve got to tell you there were times in the early days of the Minutemen I thought what are these guys doing, what are they about,” Huckabee said. “I confess I owe you an apology.” He said of Gilchrist, “nobody can question his commitment to his country.”

Washington Post

The second event was an announcement by the leading civil rights watchdog group, The Southern Poverty Law Center, that the parent organization of the Washington think tank that’s been credited with formulating Huckabee’s new tough nine-point plan on immigration has been officially placed on their list of Hate Groups in the US.

In a statement issued today, the SPLC asserted that due to its ties to know white supremacists and promotion of racist ideas, the nation’s leading anti-immigrant organization, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), would be placed on the Hate Group list. It joins other radical groups like the Neo-Nazi, National Alliance, and the KKK, who also share the same classification.  

The country’s leading anti-immigration organization — whose leaders have testified repeatedly before Congress and are frequently quoted in the media — has ties to known racists and a long track record of bigotry, according to a new report released today by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

The group, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR):

    * is the creation of a man who operates a racist publishing company and has compared immigrants to “bacteria;”
    * has employed members of white supremacist groups in key positions;
    * has promoted racist conspiracy theories; and
    * has accepted more than $1 million from the Pioneer Fund, a racist foundation devoted to eugenics and to proving a connection between race and IQ.

The SPLC today added FAIR to its list of hate groups operating in the United States.

“FAIR’s position on immigration is rooted more in its anti-Latino and anti-Catholic beliefs than in policy concerns,” said Mark Potok, the director of the SPLC’s project that monitors hate group activity. “Remarkably, it has still managed to infiltrate the mainstream and shape the immigration debate in this country.”

FAIR helped defeat federal immigration reform earlier this year and has played a key role in fueling the fierce, anti-immigrant backlash in the United States. It was founded in 1979 by John Tanton, a man who has compared immigrants to bacteria and warned that high birthrates will allow Latinos to take over America. Still a member of FAIR’s board, Tanton also operates The Social Contract Press, listed as a hate group for many years by the SPLC because of its anti-Latino and white supremacist writings.
SPLC

FAIR’s ties to Huckabee come through its public policy wing; The Center for Immigration Studies, who the former Arkansas Governor has widely credited for the formulation of his new “get tough” immigration policy. In fact he pretty much just lifted the whole thing from a proposal by CIS executive director Mark Krikorian.

The nine-point immigration plan released Friday by former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee came with a footnote:

“Note: This plan is partially modeled on a proposal by Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies.” That proposal by the conservative anti-illegal immigration activist was published in the National Review in May 2005.

Not only is Huckabee’s plan strikingly similar to the magazine piece – in some cases, it contains exact quotations copied over from the article

CNN

Its been well documented that FAIR, CIS and a network of other leading anti-immigrant groups are all in fact not only connected, but were all founded and under the leadership of one man; John Tanton, who for over 25 years has been the driving force behind the ant-immigrant movement. The groups share funding, leadership, and in some cases offices.

in 1985, FAIR would spin off yet another major Tanton organization — the Center for Immigration Studies, which presented itself as an impartial think tank and later even sought to distance itself from the organization that had birthed it.

Today, the Center regularly dispatches experts to testify on Capitol Hill, and last year it was awarded a six-figure research contract by the U.S. Census Bureau.

SPLC

SPLC on Federation for American Immigration Reform

The fact that Huckabee has chosen to align himself with CIS, Krikorian, and FAIR is not surprising. FAIR, through its networks of organizations, has become a leading political force in anti-immigrant politics. During the last debate over immigration reform legislation, FAIR affiliate, Numbers USA, was credited with a campaign that generated over a million faxes in opposition to the bill. Obviously with the adoption of Kirkorian’s immigration policies Huckabee is hoping to put the full weight of the Tanton network behind his campaign.

This “new” Mike Huckabee is a far cry from the preacher-turned-politician who a few years ago called anti-immigrant legislation “Un-Christian”

Gov. Mike Huckabee Thursday denounced a bill by Sen. Jim Holt that would deny state benefits to illegal immigrants as un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life.

… Even if benefits to people who are in the U.S illegally could be stopped, “I don’t understand how a practicing Christian can turn his back on a child from this or any other state,” Huckabee said.

… The bill is modeled after a similar law in Arizona and supported by the newly formed group Protect Arkansas NOW. The group’s chairman is Joe McCutchen

… Huckabee said he took exception to characterization of immigrants in the bill and by its supporters as exploiters of social programs. “They pay sales taxes on their groceries,” Huckabee said. “They pay fuel taxes. If they’re using a fake Social Security number, they’re paying Social Security taxes and will never receive any benefit. It would be closer to the truth to say they’re subsidizing Joe McCutchen and Jim Holt more than the other way around.

Arkansas News Bureau, 1/28/05

But then again, the old Mike Huckabee could never have gotten through the Republican primary process …not in the current toxic climate where hate groups, racist vigilantes, and politicians willingly join forces to pander and promote hatred and fear.    

147 – just keep that number in the back of your mind for the time being – I’ll get back to it’s significance a little later on . … but for now, just file it away somewhere where we can find it when we need it.

For almost three years now, anti-immigrant forces have been ratcheting up  their message of opposition to  anything short of deportation and/or attrition for the approximately 12 mil unauthorized immigrants currently living and working in the US, coupled with increased militarization  and “security” along the southern border as the only way to solve their self-defined “immigration crisis.”  Armed with talking points crafted by Republican right-wing spinmeisters like Frank Luntz and zero-population-growth advocacy groups like the  Federation for American Immigration Reform and NumbersUSA, pundits, politicians and talking-heads have hit the airwaves with a constant barrage of misinformation and distortion.

By now we all know the drill.

They claim they don’t oppose immigration …just “illegal” immigration. There’s no need for sweeping comprehensive reforms …because we have perfectly good laws, it’s just that the government refuses to enforce them.  It’s not about the immigrants themselves … but rather respect for the “rule of law.” And those who wish to enter this country “legally” have a clear path to do, so it’s only those wishing to skirt the law and “take advantage of our generosity” that are creating all the problems and need to be harshly dealt with  … the mantras are repeated ad nauseam until ingrained into the collective American psyche.

But like all right-wing propaganda, this current fairy tale about immigration being the cause of all ills, and the need for a simple, quick fix, is based upon a foundation of lies and misdirection. It is only the newest in a long line of right-wing efforts to steer the American people in a direction that runs contrary to logic and their own best interests. From Colin Powell at the UN displaying cartoon pictures of mobile WMD labs, to Bush telling us why the “privatizing ” Social Security is good for working Americans, or Reagan explaining how giving huge tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans would cause wealth to “trickle down” to those lower on the economic ladder, the history of right-wing lies, deception, and failure goes back more than twenty-five years. And the current hysteria over invading hordes of disease-ridden, uneducated criminals, streaming over the southern border to steal our jobs and destroy our American way of life is no more based in reality than Mr Powell’s cartoons were.

But,  I have neither the time nor inclination to attempt to debunk every ridiculous talking point, and to do so would require volumes that the average reader  would soon tire of. But one talking point that can quickly and easily be put to rest is the one about the US having the most “generous Immigration policy in the world” providing a clear “legal” path for all “good immigrants” willing to take it. …this is simply a fallacy, a tall-tail like Washington and his cherry tree taught to impressionable children to instill pride and patriotism.

Essentially our current immigration is broken in two key aspects. The first being the laws themselves, the second being their enforcement and implementation.

A recent NYT article demonstrated the problems within the bureaucracy set up to administer immigration policy.

Immigration authorities are swamped in new bureaucratic backlogs resulting from an unanticipated flood last summer of applications for citizenship and for residence visas, officials said.

In July and August alone, the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency received 2.5 million applications, including petitions for naturalization as well as for the entire range of immigrant visas. That was more than double the total applications it received in the same two months in 2006, said a spokesman, Bill Wright.

In the 2007 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, the agency received 1.4 million petitions from legal immigrants to become United States citizens, about double the number of naturalization petitions in the 2006 fiscal year, Mr. Wright said.

…

Immigration officials said it could take more than a year to decide many of the recent applications.

The processing backlogs are different from the visa backlogs that have burdened the United States immigration system for years. Because of annual limits on all green cards, immigrants from some countries like Mexico and the Philippines often have to wait decades for visas to become available. Now the agency has fallen behind on the bureaucratic work of logging in applications and deciding whether to grant visas or allow immigrants to become United States citizens

NYT

But this inefficiency is not a new phenomenon and the problems go beyond the procedural to include infrastructure problems like computer systems unable to communicate with each other.

Aging, incompatible systems and outdated processes have contributed to a backlog of approximately 1 million people waiting for a decision from the department’s Citizenship and Immigration Services bureau. Computer problems at its Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau caused a snafu in which student visa holders were jailed overnight or barred from entering the United States.

-snip-

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service’s systems have come in for particular criticism from outside analysts and government auditors, who say these are simply not up to the task of serving the public, especially when coupled with a continuing reliance on paper forms. In some cases, for instance, information typed into one computer must be manually retyped into a second or third.

“All filings are paper-based, which means that everything you submit has to be keyed into the computer, which of course opens up the additional possibility of error, slows the process down and prevents some processes from being automated,” said Crystal Williams, deputy director for programs at the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

-snip-

One problem is that applications for different types of immigration status are saved in separate records. These aren’t interlinked, which means an application for a H1-B visa is not tied to the same person’s application for a green card–causing more paperwork and delays, until the two records can be matched by hand.

Link

But even if Congress were willing to expend the necessary funds to upgrade systems and supply the manpower needed to expedite the millions of applications already in the queue and awaiting processing, the major flaws in immigration policy would still exists.

Flaws codified into law that almost ensure that for the vast majority of would-be immigrants there is simply no legal path to take.

Here is where that number – 147 – comes into play, and why I asked that it be kept in the back of the mind.

I few weeks ago the annual Yearbook of immigration statistics from the Department of Homeland security came out listing every green card, work visa, tourist visa etc. issued for the past year. It’s about as dry and boring a report as one could managed to muddle through …but it supplies invaluable insight into what is really going on with the dysfunctional immigration system.

In 2006 the government issued a little over 1.2 million green cards to new immigrants to live in the US legally.  Additionally, 1.7 million more non-immigrant visas were issued to temporary workers and their family members to work in the US.  (1/2 million more than the number of green cards issued to new permanent residents –  a troubling statistic unto itself as it reflects the increasing tendency to move immigration for a permanent state whereby people join a new society, to a temporary state based on the importation of a disposable workforce).

So at face value it appears that there is amble opportunity for those wishing to enter the country permanently to do so legally. But  as Mark Twain said there are three kinds of lies  “lies, damn lies, and statistics” ..and in this case one must delve into the numbers to see what story they really tell.

Of the 1.2 million green cards issued last year, 581,106 of those went to wives, children and parents of current US citizens. And additional 222,225 went to various other family members of citizens and legal residents, for a total of 2/3 of all green cards going to someone who already had a US citizen or resident relative.

Additionally, out of the 1.2 million green cards issued, only 447,016 were “new arrivals”, the vast majority … 819,248 were already living in the US legally with a temporary status of one sort or another and simply readjusted their status last year to permanent status.  And while these two categories obviously overlap, simple analysis shows that the true number of new immigrants without US citizen relatives is in fact quite low.

The next largest category of immigrants after the  “family based” status were those who entered as “employment based immigrants”.  159,081 immigrants were awarded green cards last year to legally work in the US. ( 12.6% of all immigrants). The vast majority of them being immigrants with high skills, “specialty skills” “extraordinary skills” or “advanced degrees”.  

This is codified into the system.

The yearly cap on unskilled workers is placed at a 5000 maximum. This despite the fact that according to the Dept. of Labor, the US economy produces between 400,000 and 500,000 new low-skilled jobs a year and the vast majority of the nearly ½ mil unauthorized workers who enter the country each year find work in these unskilled sectors.

But as unrealistic as the 5000 cap appears, the situation is actually far worse.

Last year the total number of unskilled workers allowed into the US legally was roughly half the official cap: 2513. Out of nearly 3 million people allowed to enter the country either as temporary workers or stay as legal residents, only 2513 were unskilled workers.

But here comes that number I asked you to keep in the back of your mind  ….remember it …147?…

Of the 2513 unskilled workers allotted green cards last year, 2366 were already here living and working in the US. They simply “readjusted” their status to permanent residents (most likely from some temporary worker status) …that leaves 147

147 new un-skilled workers without US citizen or legal resident family already here were allowed to enter the US last year legally and receive green cards.

147 out of 1,266,264.

147 …so tell me again how there is a legal path for all who are willing to work and wait patiently.

How long is one expected to wait… because if the ½ a million who enter each year through improper channels were to go home and wait patiently for their turn,  it would take over 3000 years before they would get that chance when only 147 are allowed in each a year.

But the rhetoric will most likely continue, despite all factual evidence to the contrary. Lou Dobbs will nightly inform his minion that only the shiftless and slovenly disregard the law. O’Rielly will bluster away how he “respects and supports” those who “do it the right way” and Rush will whine that reform isn’t fair to all those “waiting in line”…But disingenuous blowhards and misleading experts cannot change the truth, or hide the facts.  The current immigration laws, and the systems in place to enforce them, are woefully inadequate and all the wall building, workplace raids, deporting and incarcerating will not change that fact…and until they are addressed rationally and reasonably the “immigration crisis” will never end.  

The Democratic Party finally released what appears to be their official strategy/talking points intended to counter the Republican immigration wedge.

Now, I’m not a high paid consultant, or a professional Washington strategist with a long history of losing campaigns, but for the life of me I can’t seem to figure out what the Democratic leadership is trying to accomplish with this plan.

Up until now it appeared that the “Republican-lite” strategy developed by Rahm Emanuel and the DLC centrists looked like it would become the party line. But with this new strategy, recently released on the party’s website, I frankly haven’t a clue what the Dems ultimate plan is.

The strategy in essence revolves around a few key concepts:

• The Republicans are using the immigration issue for political gain
• The Republicans had plenty of time to fix immigration and didn’t
• The Republicans have been unable to secure the border
• The Republicans are using fear and bigotry to scapegoat immigrants
• The scapegoating isn’t working

Of course there’s one glaring omission in this strategy …. there isn’t any sort of a alternative plan proposed

Nowhere is there a word about what in fact the Democrats are going to do about immigration. Not even the usual vague call for “comprehensive reform that secures our border while providing a path to citizenship to undocumented immigrants.”  And you can just forget about specifics.  

But what’s even more troubling is the tone and tenor of the talking points    

Despite having majorities in Congress for twelve years and a President in the White House for the last seven years, Republicans ignored the issues of border security and immigration reform until it became politically convenient. To distract from their failure to address the issues and to distract from their failed economic policies, Republicans turned immigration into a wedge issue for electoral gain that has relied on scapegoating people and dividing Americans.

From border walls that were never funded to trying to criminalize immigrants, their families, and even clergy, the Republican legacy on border security and immigration reform amounts to failure and scapegoating….

• For Years, Administration’s Catch and Release Policy Left Gaping Hole In Nation’s Security, While Targeting Mexicans.
• Through First Five Years of Bush Administration, Apprehensions of Illegal Immigrants Dropped, Deportable Aliens Declined, and Audits of Employers Dropped.
• DHS Has Wasted Millions On Failed Border Security Programs.
• Bush Administration Underfunded Border Security Called For By 9/11 Act.
• Republican Congress Provided Only Half of Mandated Border Agents, Killed Democratic Attempts to Meet Full Mandate.
• 2001-2005: Republicans Killed 5 Separate Attempts to Increase Border Security Funding By Over $2 Billion.
• 2005: Republicans Voted Against 650 Border Patrol Agents.
• 2003: Republicans Voted Against $750 Million for Border Security.
• But the GOP Didn’t Even Fund the Fence, Only Offered “Down Payment” On Fence Construction; Billions More Needed To Build.

What exactly are the Dems trying to say here?  

Are they going to build a better wall?

Fund more Border Patrol Agents?

In essence, are they saying they will do the job the Republicans haven’t been willing or able to do?

It looks like they’re trying to send the message that when it comes to “border security” the Republicans have been as ineffective as they were with Katrina, Iraq, and the economy, and the Dems can do a better job.

And while this strategy might play with some discontented Republicans and swing independents, it raises serious questions about the Dems commitment to meaningful reform that doesn’t rely on simplistic solutions like wall building and armed guards every 50ft along the border.

If trying to “out-Republican the Republicans” on border security is the best the leadership can come up with, they need to go back to the drawing board and start reworking this idea. For one thing, the Republicans own the misguided “border security” concept, and those that agree with them will never be convinced that the Dems could ever be as “tough”…or cruel … as say Tom Tancredo or Duncan Hunter are trying to force the Republican Party to be.

So obviously this strategy must be aimed at a broader audience. Those swing voters, independents, and Democrats, who polls show would support legalization of the 12 million unauthorized immigrants, but still want “strong border enforcement”

And here is where this strategy has its greatest flaw.

Instead of using the Republican’s inability to “secure the borders” as an opening to introduce the broader, more sweeping changes, that would eventually decrease illegal entry and mass economic migration, they imply that they can simply do the same job … but better.  

Instead they should be saying that after all these years the Republicans cannot physically seal the borders, because trying to “physically” seal the borders is not the answer. No wall can be high enough, and no amount of money spent, large enough. There have to be other, more complex, and comprehensive ways of controlling immigration:

• Things like adjusting free trade agreements so they don’t foster poverty in sender nations.
• Things like working with foreign governments in sender nations to ensure that they not only respect human rights, but worker rights and economic justice.
• Things like examining and reforming our immigration codes to make them more practical, fair, and reflective of economic realities.
• Things like fixing our immigration bureaucracy so it can efficiently and humanely process the flow of immigrants in a timely and effective manner.

And these are but just a few of the things that should be talked about. There are many, many more.

If, in an ironic twist on Rovian tactics, the goal of the Democrat’s attack on the Republican’s inability to “secure the border” is to make a weakness out of their presumed strength of being tough on immigration, they need to fill that void with an alternative plan … And it should be plain and simple to present to the American people: “You can’t build a wall high enough – We’ve got smarter answers”

Additionally this strategy has one other troubling aspect; the notion that the “Scapegoating is not working”

For one, it’s just not accurate.

Anyone who has followed this issue over time knows that during the past two years the polling has been consistently shifting towards the right. And no wonder. Between Republican politicians beating the issue to death for a lack of anything else on the agenda, and the right-wing noise machine hammering away on it, the public increasingly moves further and further from the center. The MSM has only added to this shift by allowing Republicans a pass on important issues of the day, by letting them focus the debate on immigration.   The trend is obvious, and unless the Democrats start to effectively counter the immigration wedge, any predictions about it’s political power a year from now are speculative at best.

The second, and more troubling,  aspect for concern about underestimating the effectiveness of scapegoating immigrants is that it demonstrates a total disconnect with the concerns of the very Latino voters the Democrats are so sure are guaranteed to flock to the party.

In fact, the “scapegoating” page on the website links to an article about the political price the Republicans will pay for demonizing Latino immigrants.

But, at the same time, Democrats are trying to convince voters that just because the polling shows that immigration is currently not a “top tier” issue for the American people, or that the wedge didn’t work in the last two election cycles, somehow this demonstrates scapegoating’s ineffectiveness.

But this sends a message that runs contrary to Latino’s everyday experiences.

Latino voters know all too well the ramifications of current toxic political environment. They are appalled by the constant racial and ethnic attacks that pass for political discourse. Hate crimes against Latinos are at record levels and nearly daily there are stories of raids and roundups of “illegals” portrayed as subhuman criminals. And yes, Latinos see this as a product of a rabidly xenophobic and racist Republican party…. But Democratic downplaying of the impact of  scapegoating, simply because it might prove politically ineffective, marginalizes it’s true impact.

This, coupled with the implied emphasis on “border enforcement” and lack of a meaningful  alternative comprehensive plan in this strategy cannot be viewed as good news for Latino voters.

We can only hope that as we move forward with this election and this issue, the Democrats will gain some further insight, and the courage to start to take a true leadership roll, and not only neutralize this issue politically…but actually come up with some real and meaningful solutions.  

In the early morning hours of May 12th, about a dozen Iraqi insurgents ambushed a small Army outpost in the village of  Quarghouli in the Sunni Triangle. With a volley of rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire it wasn’t long before they overwhelmed the seven soldiers from the 10th Mountain Division.

By the time a relief force reached the site, four US servicemen and their Iraqi Army interpreter lay dead.  The fate of the other three soldiers was unknown, but there was evidence that they had been abducted.  Within hours, a group calling itself Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia announced that it was not only responsible for the ambush, but was holding the three missing Americans.

A massive search effort was initiated utilizing 4000 US soldiers, 2,000 Iraqi troops, helicopters, search dogs and FBI interrogators. In the following days the manhunt was massive, homes were searched , canals drained, hundreds interrogated, and many arrested …but still no sign of the missing soldiers. Two more servicemen lost their lives in the search effort, but to no avail

Eleven days later, the body of 20-year-old private first class, Joseph Anzack, of Torrance, California, was found about 30 miles down river floating face down in the Euphrates. He had been shot multiple times and there were signs of tortured.

The fate of the two other missing servicemen – Alex R. Jimenez, a 25-year-old specialist from Lawrence, Massachusetts, and Byron R. Fouty, of Waterford, Michigan, a 19-year-old private who had been in Iraq only a few weeks, – is still unknown.

It’s against this backdrop that we now learn that Jimenez’s wife, Yaderlin, whom he married in 2004, is facing deportation.

Yaderlin Hiraldo, is a native of the Dominican Republican who first met her husband during his childhood visits to the island, but according to her attorney, Matthew Kolken,  the 22 year old had entered the U.S. illegally prior to marrying him. It was when he requested a green card and legal residence status for her, that authorities were first alerted to her situation.

Despite Spec. Jimenez’s status as a US citizen and active duty serviceman, the fact the Yaderlin had entered illegally meant that she would now have to return home and wait ten years before reapplying.

“I can’t imagine a bigger injustice than that, to be deporting someone’s wife who is fighting and possibly dying for our country,” said  Kolken in an interview with a local TV.

An immigration judge has put a temporary stop to the proceedings since Spec. Jimenez was reported missing. The soldier’s wife is now living with family members in Pennsylvania.

U.S. forces continue to search for Spec.Jimenez, 25, and a comrade, Pvt. Brian Fouty, 19, of Waterford, Mich.

The soldiers’ identification cards were found in an al-Qaeda safe house north of Baghdad, along with video production equipment, computers and weapons, the U.S. military said Saturday. An al-Qaeda front group claimed in a video posted on the Internet earlier this month that the soldiers were killed and buried, and showed images of the ID’s. The video offered no proof of their fates.

Link

This sad case goes to highlight one of the biggest problems with the current discussions revolving around immigration reform. All too often we hear opponents of reform digging in their heels and talking tough about the “rule of law.”

 How often have we heard about their opposition being limited to “illegal” immigrants while claiming support for those who “do it the right way.”  They like to try to compartmentalize immigrants, and immigrant families into these two very black and white groups. The “good” immigrants” who wait their turn and the “bad immigrants” who enter improperly. But it’s not so cut and dry.

As anyone who truly knows anything about the current immigrant experience can attest, the lines are hazy at best.

Within families, there can be all gradations of legality from citizens, to LPR’s to the undocumented all living under the same roof. Husbands and wives with different status. Siblings, parents, aunts, uncles or cousins, all having differing legal status.  

In a system that can leave legal permanent residents waiting ten years to bring in children or spouses and naturalized citizens up to twenty to bring in a sibling or parent, it is no wonder that even the most “law abiding” immigrant has someone close to them that is at constant risk of arrest and deportation.

This situation appears to be lost on those opposed to immigration reform.

During last years marches and rallies that brought millions into the streets to protest for reform, those from the right insisted on calling the demonstrations “illegal allien marches”, or “illegal immigrant demonstrations.”  As if to imply that only those who are “law breakers” would be demanding reform.

But this could not be further from the truth. This issue effects the lives of many whom Lou Dobbs or Bill O’Rielly would deem “good immigrants” …..”good immigrants”  like Spec. Alex Jimenez.

In the mid-nineties US policy towards Mexico changed in two significant ways that eventually set the stage for the current “immigration crisis.” In January 1994, NAFTA went into effect and a new era of prosperity and progress was to begin in Mexico. At the same time, a new strategy was enacted along the southern border intended to stem the flow of unauthorized migrants. The policy of “prevention through deterrence” involved quintupling border-enforcement expenditures, building new fortified checkpoints, high-tech surveillance, and deploying thousands of additional Border Patrol Agents. Additionally, border barriers were built along portions of the California and Texas border to prevent migrants from entering through the most highly trafficked urban areas.

More than a decade later it’s become evident that the promises of these two policies, rather than bringing economic change to Mexico and decreasing unauthorized migration to the US, have led to conditions that more than doubled the flow of immigration….and brought added death to the border.
NAFTA, while bringing trade and investment to Mexico, has had unintended negative consequences on both sides of the border for working people and the poor. Whole segments of the US manufacturing sector have been relocated to Mexico resulting in job loss for US workers. At the same time, the lifting for trade restrictions in Mexico have allowed cheaper US commodities to enter the country, decimating Mexican agricultural markets and throwing millions of small farmers out of business. Additionally, the availability of even cheaper labor sources in places like China has forced manufacturing wages to go down.

As for the policy of “prevention through deterrence”, all it has really accomplished in the past thirteen years is a movement of the routes of migration from relatively safe urban areas like San Diego and El Paso to the hostile desert and mountainous regions where enforcement is difficult. This “funneling effect” of forcing migrants into least hospitable areas has had devastating effects for those on both sides of the border. A new study just released by the University Of Arizona examined the consequences of shifting migration patterns from California and Texas to Arizona and found it had increased migrants deaths by 20-fold.

The failures of NAFTA to bring prosperity to Mexico are well documented. It’s moved 19 million more Mexicans into poverty, forced more than a million small farmers off the land due to the lifting of restrictions on cheaper US subsidized agricultural products, lowered  real wages, and in the end forced “millions …to abandon their native homelands. Entire indigenous nations — the Zapotecs, the Mixtecs, the Tzotzil Maya — have moved by the tens of thousands, creating the largest migration of Native American peoples in North America since the Trail of Tears in the late 19th century.”

While trade policies have brought suffering to the poor of Mexico, border policies have brought death.

Migrant Deaths Increase

Since 1994, between 2000 and 3000 migrants have died trying to cross the inhospitable regions left unsecured after numerous security measures like “Operation Hold the Line”, “Operation Safeguard”, and “Operation Gatekeeper” were put in place – 1000 of those in Arizona.

A study just released by the Binational Migration Institute (BMI) of the University of Arizona’s Mexican American Studies and Research Center looks at the effects of the “funneling effect” by compiling data on those who perished trying to cross the Arizona desert in the Tucson Sector.

A national border enforcement strategy that funneled illegal immigrants through Southern Arizona from Texas and California led to a dramatic increase in illegal-entrant deaths in Southern Arizona, according to a University of Arizona study released Wednesday.

The study by the Binational Migration Institute — paid for by in part by the Pima County Board of Supervisors — is not the first to reach that conclusion. Last year, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that Arizona accounted for at least 78 percent of the increased Southwestern border deaths between 1990 and 2003.

But the UA study is the most detailed examination of known border deaths in Southern Arizona to date, said Melissa McCormick, a senior research specialist with the institute, which studies issues related to human rights and immigration as part of the university’s Mexican American Studies and Research Center.

Among the unusual aspects of this latest study is that it is based on a detailed examination of more than 900 autopsy reports from the Pima County Medical Examiner’s Office from 1990 to 2005. Previous studies had based their research on vital statistics from death certificates, which don’t account for all illegal-entrant deaths since unidentified deaths are assumed to be U.S. citizens, McCormick said.

Arizona Star

(BMI) has undertaken a unique and scientifically rigorous study of all unauthorized border-crosser (UBC) deaths examined by the Pima County Medical Examiner’s Office (PCMEO) from 1990-2005

…snip…

Because the PCMEO has handled approximately 90 percent of all UBC recovered bodies in the U.S. Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector, an analysis of such deaths serves as an accurate reflection of the major characteristics of all known unauthorized border-crosser deaths that have occurred in this sector since 1990.

…snip…

The BMI study was designed specifically to measure this “funnel effect” created by U.S. immigration-control policies. The BMI study found that there has been an exponential increase in the number of UBC recovered bodies handled by the PCMEO from 1990 to 2005.

BMI’s findings unambiguously confirm previous evidence that U.S. border-enforcement policies did create the funnel effect and that it is indeed the primary structural cause of death for thousands of unauthorized men, women, and children from Mexico, Central America, and South America who have tried to enter the United States. During the “pre-funnel effect” years (1990-1999), the PCMEO handled, on average, approximately 14 UBC recovered bodies per year. In stark contrast, during the funnel effect years (2000-2005), on average, 160 UBC recovered bodies were sent to the PCMEO each year. Over 80 percent of the unauthorized border-crosser bodies handled by the PCMEO have been under the age of 40, and there is a discernable, upward trend in the number of dead youth under the age of 18. There also has been a statistically significant decrease in the number of recovered bodies of unauthorized border-crossers from northern Mexico and a significant increase in the number of such decedents from central and southern Mexico.

American Immigration Law Institute

Yet, despite the obvious failures of these two policies, policymakers insist on using them as a model for future programs. NAFTA has been replicated in the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) passed by Congress in 2005 and similar trade agreements with Panama, Columbia and Peru, based on the NAFTA model are now pending in Congress.

As for relying on increased border security measures as a deterrent to unauthorized migration – it’s become the cornerstone of Republican immigration reform policy.

The Human Cost

Lost in all the discussion of “unauthorized border crossers” and the death in the desert are the stories of those who never completed their journeys only to become statistics in any of the myriad of studies and reports on the topic.

For instance there is the story of Antonio Torres Jimenez, a long-time Tucson resident, whose body was found in the desert in May of 2006:

Antonio Torres Jimenez perished while coming back into Tucson from Mexico. After the Border Patrol ended their search, Torres’ friends continued to look for him (24 people fanned out across the desert to find their friend). They found him in less than 24 hours

The reason Torres went back and forth across the border illegally?

“A couple of years after Torres earned permanent residency, his eldest daughter died in Mexico…. Torres returned to La Loma [Mexico] to be with his wife and remaining children. When he came back to his construction job in Tucson, he learned that he’d violated the terms of his green card because he stayed in Mexico too long. He lost his legal status…. With few jobs back home, Torres continued living and working in Tucson. Torres’ wife and children stayed behind and he would travel to see them” (LoMonaco 6/3/06).

Binational Migration Institute

Or the story of Lucrecia Dominguez Luna:

Fifteen-year-old Jesus Abran Buenrostro Dominguez memorized the silhouette of Baboquivari Peak as his mother lay dying on the desert floor.

If he could remember where they were, maybe he could get help. His mother, 35-year-old Lecrecia Luna Dominguez, died before he had the chance.

Now all he wants is the chance to find her body and bring her home.

Home is the small village of San Martin Sombrerete in Zacatecas. Jesus’ father works in Texas, and it was hoped the family could reunite. They crossed with Jesus’ 7-year-old sister Nora. When Luna Dominguez fell ill on the third day of the journey, the group of village friends they were traveling with continued on with Nora. Jesus stayed behind to be with his mother.

“She kept begging me to go on without her, but I couldn’t leave her,” Jesus said.

Tucson Citizen

When she lost consciousness, Jesus struck out alone to try to find emergency help. Three days later, Border Patrol agents found him lost, wandering and disoriented in the desert. Although Jesus was dehydrated, in shock, suffering from heat exhaustion and terrified about his mother’s status, the agents gave him a little water and then left him at the federal line in Nogales, a practice known as “expedited removal.” Once there, Jesus placed a frantic call to his grandfather for help.

ePluribus Media

Cesario Dominguez, Lucrecia’s father, spent weeks searching the Altar Valley for her remains. The humanitarian-aid group No More Deaths assisted him; Border Patrol officials helped for only one day. Miraculously, Cesario eventually came upon his daughter’s skeletal remains, recognizing her three rings. “What was left was that hand with those rings, there in the sand,” said her father.

Binational Migration Institute

These stories and thousands more just like them are the reality behind the statistics.  Lucrecia Dominguez Luna is but one of the women whose death accounts for the two-thirds increase in female migrant deaths in recent years. She is one of the 61% of all migrants who die of exposure; up from 39% from the period before the funnel policies went into effect. … But she was also someone’s wife, daughter, and mother. How did Lucrecia’s last moments pass?

Luis Urrea in his book Devil’s Highway describes what death from “exposure” really entails:

Your heart pumps harder and harder to get fluid and oxygen to your organs. Empty vessels within you collapse. Your sweat runs out….Your temperature redlines —you hit 105, 106, 108 degrees. Your body panics and dilated all blood capillaries near the surface, hoping to flood your skin with blood to cool it off. You blush. Your eyes turn red: blood vessels burst, and later, the tissue of the whites literally cooks until it goes pink, then a well-done crimson. Your skin gets terribly sensitive. It hurts, it burns. Your nerves flame. Your blood heats under your skin. Clothing feels like sandpaper. Some walkers at this point strip nude. Originally, BORSTAR rescuers thought this stripping was a delirious panic, an attempt to cool off at the last minute. But often, the clothing was eerily neat, carefully folded and left in nice little piles beside the corpses. They realized the walkers couldn’t stand their nerve endings being chafed by their clothes.

Once they’re naked, they’re surely hallucinating. They dig burrows in the soil, apparently thinking they’ll escape the sun. Once underground, of course, they bake like a pig at a luau. Some dive into sand, thinking it’s water, and they swim in it until they pass out. They choke to death, their throats filled with rocks and dirt. Cutters can only assume they think they’re drinking water. Your muscles, lacking water, feed on themselves. They break down and start to rot. Once rotting in you, they dump rafts of dying cells into your already sludgy bloodstream. Proteins are peeling off your dying muscles. Chunks of cooked meat are falling out of your organs, to clog your other organs. They system closes down in a series. Your kidneys, your bladder, your heart. They jam shut. Stop. Your brains sparks. Out. You’re gone. [3]

ePuribus Media

As policymakers in Washington mull over the newest proposals for increasing foreign markets for US products, discuss the merits of the global economy and the free movement of capital, or the need to build more walls and barriers along the southern border to prevent the flow of the economic migrants caused by these policies ….do they think of Antonio Torres Jimenez or Lucrecia Dominguez Luna dying terrible deaths in the desert?  Do they think of the thousands of others who have come before them or the thousands more to come in the future?

We will never know the stories behind each an every one of the 3000 migrant deaths that have occurred along the border. No one will tell us about their individual decisions to make the arduous journey, or the grief of family and friends when they didn’t survive. In fact, for many migrants, the details of their deaths will always remain nameless, faceless statistics.

But thanks to the work done by the University of Arizona we can at least attach names to roughly one thousand of those who never completed the journey to el Norte.

Perhaps they should be read aloud in the halls of Congress each time a new trade or immigration policy is debated ….maybe then policymakers might think about the human cost of their actions.

MORE INFORMATION

2006 Report on Migrant Deaths at theU.S.-Mexico Border: El Paso-New Mexico Border Region 2006, BNHR.org

BMI – “The ‘Funnel Effect’ & Recovering Bodies of Unauthorized Migrants Processed by the Pima County Office of the Medical Examiner, 1990-2005”

GAO – “Border-Crossing Deaths Have Doubled Since 1995; Border Patrol’s Efforts to Prevent Deaths Have Not Been Fully Evaluated”

HOW YOU CAN HELP

No More Deaths

Humane Borders

Border Action Network

2007 International Conference on the Migrant

From: Migra Matters – Progressive Immigration Reform

NRC Broadcasting has refused to run the newest campaign ad by Bill Winter, Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress in CD-6. The ad, that began running earlier this week, highlights Congressman Tom Tancredo’s personal and financial ties to a number of leaders and organizations in the “White Power” movement.  

Winter’s campaign manager, Berrick Abramson, was informed by the General Sales Manager at NRC that the ad was pulled on direct orders from NRC Broadcasting’s CEO, Tim Brown, a major Republican donor who has given over twelve thousand dollars to various Republican candidates in 2006 including Marilyn Musgrave, Doug Lamborn, Scott Tipton, Rick O’Donnell, Rick Santorum and Winter opponent Tom Tancredo.

The Winter for Congress campaign began airing the radio ad titled “Dateline: South Carolina” earlier this week addressing Tom Tancredo’s ties to a number of “right-wing hate groups” like the League of the South and Aryan Brotherhood.

On Tuesday, October 31, the campaign also issued a press release titled, “Winter Calls on Tancredo to Sever Racist Ties,” in which the campaign provided more detail about the direct ties between Mr. Tancredo and these hate groups. Additionally they posted full documentation on their web site backing up all the claims made in both the radio add and the press released.

On Wednesday, November 1, shortly before noon, the Winter for Congress campaign received an e-mail from a sales representative of NRC Broadcasting, whose stations include Jack FM and KCUV, claiming that the stations were getting “lots of complaints” about the “Dateline: South Carolina” radio spot and suggesting, “Can we pull it?” After advising the representative of NRC to refer any complaints to the campaign and providing them with both the statement issued by the campaign as well as significant documentation supporting the claims made in the spot, a representative of NRC wrote to the campaign stating, “wish it was that simple. Management has given me no other choice put (sic) to pull this spot.”

At the time of the last e-mail message from the NRC message, the Winter campaign had not received any complaints from other stations, despite the ad being in heavy rotation on nearly every station in the market. When campaign manager Berrick Abramson spoke with the General Sales Manager at NRC, the campaign was told that “the CEO heard the spot and wants it off the air,” according to Abramson.

When Abramson asked if there were any claims or assertions that anything in the ad was false, Abramson was told “No, the CEO just doesn’t like it,” and that “you have to admit, it’s pretty harsh on Tancredo.” After pointing out that there were no complaints from other networks, the General Manager conceded that the “complaint” had come from “down the hall” in Mr. Brown’s office. In spite of the acknowledgement that the ad contained no factual errors, the Winter campaign was advised that CEO Tim Brown “had made his decision” to have the ad pulled.

Winter campaign manager Berrick Abramson, noted “Mr. Brown is entitled to his political views, but when he crosses the line by censoring what messages go out over the public airwaves, he has crossed the line from expressing his opinion and is now suppressing free speech.”

“It’s difficult enough to understand the apathy surrounding Mr. Tancredo’s indisputable ties to a network of hate groups,” remarked Abramson, “but it’s even more difficult to fathom that somebody allegedly serving as trustee of the public airwaves, would abuse that position in order to prevent the public from knowing about Mr. Tancredo’s disgraceful record.”

[Update 11-02-2006,1:40PM EST:] It looks like Tim Brown is trying to now backpedal on the ad cancellation. From today’s Rocky Mountain News

The executive, Tim Brown, chief operating officer for NRC Broadcasting, said he does not consider the ad titled “Dateline: South Carolina” offensive, and it continues to run on the air.

But Berrick Abramson, Winter’s campaign manager, said he was called by a station representative early Wednesday and told the ads had to be pulled.

An e-mail message forwarded to the Rocky Mountain News by Abramson seems to confirm that.

“Management has given me no choice but to pull this spot. As I said, we will be happy to run your other spots, but we cannot run the South Carolina spot,” the e-mail, apparently from NRC’s Neil Conway, said.

From: Migra Matters – progressive Immigration Reform

Thirty-six hours ago Tan Nguyen was a little know Republican congressional candidate from Orange County CA with no chance of winning and no prospect of ever garnering national attention. That was before it came to light that he was most likely behind a failed effort to intimidate Hispanic voters  in hopes of deterring them from showing up at the polls. With that one move, he now becomes the newest poster boy in an election season ripe with disclosures of Republican racism and malfeasance.

The revelations of George Allen’s bigotry and hidden past of racist activity shed new light on the undercurrent of racism that has run through Republican politics for years. Yet, Nguyen represents a new, and perhaps more toxic, kind of Republican; those drawn into politics by the volatile issue of immigration.  With its ability divide people along the lines of race and ethnicity, the immigration “issue” has drawn a new breed of activists and politicians.  These new “movement racists,” with ties to organized hate groups, are bent on dragging both their party and the nation down a path of intolerance and bigotry not seen before.
Earlier this week, in a mailing printed on the letterhead of the controversial Huntington Beach anti-immigration group, California Coalition for Immigration Reform, 14,000 Hispanic residents in centrarange County were warned that going to the polls could result in their possible deportation.

You are advised that if your residence in this country is illegal or you are an immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time, and you will be deported for voting without having a right to do so.

At the same time, you are advised that the government of the United States is installing a new computer system to verify the names of all new registered voters that vote in the October and November elections. Anti-immigration organizations can ask for information from this new computer system.

Link English

Original in Spanish

CCIR, founder, Barbara Coe who has referred to Mexican immigrants as “savages” and “illegal barbarians who are cutting off heads and appendages of blind, white, disabled gringos” denied orchestrating the letter and said she had no knowledge of it’s alleged author “Sergio Ramirez,”

Upon further investigation, the letter, which contains grammatical errors that led investigators to believe it was not written by a native Spanish speaker, was found to have originated the offices of Tan Nguyen.

The bulk mail permit used to send out the letter was sent by a Huntington Beach-based company named Mailing Pros. Nguyen’s campaign used the company for five different mailers this year, with several highlighting immigration issues, according to campaign finance disclosures.

Christopher West, who owns the company, said he was interviewed for two hours by investigators from the State Attorney General’s office. He would not publicly disclose who hired him, although he gave the information to investigators. West said he had no idea any laws were being broken when the mailer was sent.

“I’m the one that processed it and I don’t read Spanish, until the investigator read it to me, I didn’t know the content,” West said.

West said his company sends out many mailers in at least a dozen languages that he does not speak.

“The thing that steams me out about this is I know damn well I didn’t do anything wrong,” he said. “You’re dependent on the integrity of the candidates.”

According to campaign finance disclosures, Nguyen’s campaign also has contracted with the Burbank-based Political Data Inc. for data sorts from the Registrar of Voters database. Records show the company purchased an Orange County voter database in September, which could show addresses of every foreign-born voter in the county, the target group of the mailer. Company officials couldn’t be reached for comment.

Orange County Register

In a written statement, Nguyen denied personal responsibility for the letter claiming, “Evidently, an employee took it upon herself to allow our database to be used to send out the letter. It was disseminated without my authorization or approval. The employee has been discharged.”

But Orange County GOP Chairman Scott Baugh disputes Nguyen’s claim and has called for his withdrawal from the race. “I’ve learned that Mr. Nguyen was involved in expediting that mailer,” Baugh said. “I’ve had conversations with the attorney general and folks involved with the mail house. He called the mail house himself and told them to expedite the mailing.”

This should come as no surprise given the people Nguyen has chosen to associate with.  

His senior adviser, former Orange County Republican Party Chair, Tom Fuentes, has a long history of anti-immigrant advocacy and orchestrating dirty tricks designed to suppress the Latino vote. In addition to being a moving force behind California’s failed proposition 187 (along with Barbara Coe), in 1988 he caused a major controversy when he ordered the stationing of Republican poll guards to stand outside polling places in Latino neighborhoods during a local Assembly race.

1988 – In California, the Orange County Republican Party hired uniformed security guards to be posted at polling places in heavily Latino precincts. The guards displayed bilingual signs warning non-citizens not to vote, and such signs were also posted in Latino neighborhoods days before the election. The guards, wearing blue uniforms and badges, were removed from the polling places after the chief deputy secretary of state said their presence was “unlawful intimidation of voters.”

The GOP officials involved in the plan, working on the campaign of GOP state assembly candidate Curt Pringle, claimed they acted on rumors that there was illegal registration of voters. However, according to the Orange County Register, they admitted they had no evidence of such activity and were concerned because of a sudden surge in voter registration in some Latino neighborhoods. Many local Latino Republican officials were outraged. GOP Santa Ana councilman John Acosta said: “This has to be the most blatant method of intimidating that I have ever seen. … It’s un-American and I would say it borders on Nazism.”

As the controversy grew, the county registrar of voters said that he had warned Republican officials four weeks before the election not to challenge voters at the polls.

In 1989, the Orange County GOP paid $400,000 to settle a lawsuit stemming from the program. The plaintiffs donated $150,000 of the settlement to nonpartisan Latino voter registration efforts in the area. They also released some evidence gathered during the trial, including a map given to a sign-making company by the GOP campaign that indicated intended sign placement. Signs reading “Thank You Curt Pringle” were to go in predominantly white areas and bilingual signs saying “Non Citizens Can’t Vote” were to be placed in largely Latino areas.

PFAW

Even with Fuentes involvement, this could all perhaps be chalked up to an extreme case of “dirty politics as usual” if it were not for the fact that like many other “border security” Republicans, Nguyen’s ties to his party are tenuous at best and his strongest allies and supporters come not from the mainstream Republican Party, but rather the extremist, anti-immigrant right.

Groups like Coe’s CCIR, the Minutemen and Save Our State.

Save Our State, the Ventura California based anti-immigration group founded by Joe Turner has been called a “Trojan Horse” for Neo-Nazis and white supremacists by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Anti-immigration activist Joe Turner may be one of the best things to happen to the Southern California white power community in years — a man whose group is seen as a “Trojan horse” allowing radical infiltration of mainstream politics….

In rally after rally this year, Turner and other SOS officials have failed to turn away racist Skinheads and likeminded white supremacists who have joined their protests.

Swastikas and sieg heils aren’t usually welcome on the streets of Southern California, but Turner’s followers, including SOS spokesman Don Silva, have been photographed standing alongside Skinheads clad in high black boots with red laces. Most recently, swastika pennants and Confederate battle flags were hoisted alongside Turner’s own picket signs during a July 30 protest outside a day laborer center in Laguna Beach. One group in the crowd sieg-heiled repeatedly….

And then there are Turner’s own statements in his forum. “I am sick and tired of all the white bashing that goes on through the use of political correctness as an indoctrinating tool,” he wrote on July 16.

“I am sick and tired of multiculturalism, meaning, let’s celebrate every culture as long as it isn’t a European/white culture.” During the same exchange, Turner also wrote that “just because one believes in white separatism that does not make them a racist.”

SPLC ” Immigration protesters joined by neo-Nazis in California”

Despite SOS’s ties to both white supremacists and neo-Nazi groups, Nguyen chose to court the radical group.

In July of this year Nguyen’s campaign manager, Ryan S.Flynn  sent a letter to SOS introducing his candidate and asked the group for their support. It was posted up on the SOS internet forum, where it received a warm reception

Greetings!

I’m writing to introduce Tan Nguyen and ask for your help. Tan is a candidate for Congress of California’s 47th district. Tan, a LEGAL immigrant from Vietnam, believes in upholding our immigration laws and opposes anything which encourages illegal immigration.

We need your help in defeating the incumbent, Loretta Sanchez, a seasoned politician who is for Amnesty. Those who donate $20 or more to the campaign will receive one of our campaign signs, shown below. Please help Tan’s efforts by forwarding this email to your friends & family.

Checks can be made payable to Tan Nguyen for Congress. Thank you for your support.

Ryan S. Flynn

Campaign Manager/Fundraising Chair

Tan Nguyen for Congress

12955 Main Street

Garden Grove, CA 92840

(714) 530-1612

www.tanforcongress.com

A month earlier on that same forum a member called “minutemanIII” stated that he/she was “helping out Tan Nguyen in Orange County run for Congress in the 47th district.” and requested information about an anti-immigration rally SOS was planning.

Nguyen also courted the CCIR

Although Barbara Coe denies any knowledge of Nguyen’s  letter, she, like her friends at SOS,  is well aware of the man, having had him speak to her group a year ago… long before he was his parties candidate for the 47th Congresional District. The press release for the October 2005 event called Nguyen  a  “man who believes in America as a “nation of law”, has made a commitment to uphold and defend our Constitutional rights and freedoms, has courageously publicly praised the Minuteman Project and publicly opposed any illegal alien “guest-worker” program or amnesty…”

Nguyen is not the fist “Border Security” Republican to court organized racists.

Godfather of the “Border Security” Republicans, Tom Tancredo, has had long standing ties with both the Minutemen and their more radical allies. Back in September, while feeling out a run for the White House, he stood on a stage draped in confederate flags, in South Carolina, with the members of the League of the South, and sang “Dixie” after delivering a speech to the hate group about the need to stop illegal immigration.

In Arizona’s 8th congressional district Minuteman, Randy Graf, is running for congress on the Republican ticket having been endorsed by none other than  former Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan, David Duke.

Also in Arizona, State Legislator, Russell Pearce, that states leading Border Security Republican  and author of numerous pieces of anti-immigrant legislation including Proposition 200, sent out a piece of campaign literature to his constituents that contained an  article from the white supremacist group the National Alliance.

Titled “Who Rules America? The Alien Grip on Our News and Entertainment Media Must Be Broken,” the article criticized the media for promoting multiculturalism and racial equality, for portraying “any racially conscious White Person” as a bigot and for presenting the Jewish Holocaust as fact.

The media presents a “single view of the world – a world in which every voice proclaims the equality of the races, the inerrant nature of the Jewish ‘Holocaust’ tale, the wickedness of attempting to halt the flood of non-White aliens pouring across our borders, the danger of permitting citizens to keep and bear arms, the moral equivalence of all sexual orientations, and the desirability of a ‘pluralistic,’ cosmopolitan society rather than a homogeneous, White one,” the article says.

link

Nguyen and the other “movement racists” within the Republican Party who have allied themselves with the likes of Barbara Coe, Joe Turner and Jim Gilchrist represent an insidious and frightening new trend in politics.

Never before have such extreme fringes of society been sought out as political allies and patrons. Yet under the leadership of Tom Tancredo and Pat Buchanan, these new “movement racists” are willing to consort with the anyone who is willing to take up their cause … even those who only do so as a stepping stone to gain legitimacy and acceptance of their extreme and dangerous beliefs.

Using the Trojan Horse of “border security” and the “immigration crisis” as their means to enter the body politic, these “movement racists” and their radical allies can only take this nation further down a path of division and hate.

The New York Times reports that: “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger called the letter racist and urged Bill Lockyer, the California attorney general, to prosecute those responsible with a hate crime. A collection of other civil rights groups also called on Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to investigate the letter as a violation of federal voting laws.” Let’s hope they follow through with their prosecution. The time to stop this movement is now…. before it’s too late

From:Migra matters – Progressive Immigration Reform

The last time most Americans saw Raj Bhakta, he was being unceremoniously fired by Donald Trump on the TV show, “The Apprentice2.” Now, he’s running for Congress as a Republican and riding elephants through the Rio Grande to prove…well, quite frankly….that he’s still an idiot.
The bowtie festooned Raj, who had shrewdly usurped the ever popular Tucker Carlson look, made his mark on Trump’s show not only for making terrible business decisions, but for possessing the uncanny ability to give the entire female viewing audience the creeps with displays of lame flirtation with every woman he came in contact with. His claim to fame; having just heard the infamous words, “you’re fired,” the ever cocky Raj proceeded to leave “The Donalds” office and immediately hit on Trumps receptionist, Robin. On the way out to the always embarrassing cab ride sequence, he pressed for her for a phone number and she shot him down. It was just one last special moment from the man who claimed, “I’ve always been famous in my own mind.”

That was two years ago. Today Raj is a Republican candidate for Congress from eastern Pennsylvania’s 13th District. The Philly native, like other Keystone Republicans, is running on a platform that concentrates on the most pressing issue to Pennsylvania residents: Securing Pennsylvania’s border with Mexico.

Raj has built his entire dark horse campaign around border security and stemming the flow of undocumented immigration over the Mexico/Pennsylvania border, much like fellow Pennsylvanian, Rick “Sanatorium” Santorum.

Finding out that Pennsylvania didn’t actually have a border with Mexico, the ever clever Raj decided that if the border wouldn’t come to Raj – Raj would have to go to the border. So off to Texas, Bhakta went.

Once in Brownsville, he had a bright idea right out of a reality show.

To prove the porous nature of the border (and film a clever campaign commercial) he would hire a group of elephants and a six piece mariachi band to march across the Rio Grande with “Raj the Elephant Tamer”, riding the lead pachyderm in the procession. Leading a pack of pachyderms hired from a local circus, two African and one Asian, Raj splashed around the river for about an hour.

According to Bhakta’s account, “the band played on, the elephants splashed away, and nobody showed up.”  “If I can get an elephant led by a mariachi band into this country, I think Osama bin Laden could get across with all the weapons of mass destruction he could get into this country.”

But, just like on TV, not everything was exactly as it seemed.

For one thing, the owner of the elephants, James Plunkett, of the Shrine Circus, was totally unaware of Raj’s little publicity stunt.

Circus producer James Plunkett of rural Van Zandt County near Dallas said he thought he was renting out three elephants for a private party at a ranch east of Brownsville near Boca Chica beach and the mouth of the Rio Grande. He didn’t know until … Wednesday that the guy riding one elephant was not a birthday boy, or that the camera crew was not shooting a family video.

“These animals are treasures,” he said. “To put them in jeopardy or use them that way — that’s not something we would be party to.”
Dallas Fort Worth Star-Telegram

Additionally, after being detained by the Dept. of Agriculture, who were called in by Border Patrol agents once they got wind of Raj’s little circus,  the elephants needed to be sprayed down for ticks acquired in their little parade through the Texas brush.

Ironically, as explained by Bud Kennedy of the Dallas/Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Bhakta proved nothing with his little escapade.

But any Texan knows that we can go down and fish or wade freely from parks and private ranches along the Rio Grande, with or without an elephant.

We want most of the river kept that way, although a few crossings could use better Border Patrol roads or a mile or two of fence.

A few miles from the border, though, somebody always stops you and asks who you are, your citizenship status and other pertinent questions.

Such as, “Where did you get the elephant?”

That’s what happened the moment Plunkett and his trailer hit the Border Patrol checkpoint, five miles from the ranch. If Bhakta wanted to prove how easy it is to sneak an elephant into the country, he wound up proving that the Border Patrol is on the job.

“It was amazing to me how many officers showed up when we hit the checkpoint,” Plunkett said. “They had two guys, then four guys, then 50 guys in a matter of minutes. They gave us a thorough workover. I came away very impressed with the Border Patrol.”

That was good news to Roy Cervantes, spokesman for the patrol’s Valley headquarters in Edinburg. Officers there catch about 300 border crossers a day, half not from Mexico.

“It’s apparent to me that [Bhakta] has no idea what we do down here on the southern border,” Cervantes said. “We have always allowed ranchers to use the river for livestock and recreation. We don’t normally go out and stop someone like that. We use sensors and cameras to watch the crossings where smugglers bring in human cargo or drugs. … Officers stopped the truck at a checkpoint within minutes. Our enforcement worked.”

Link

But like the myriad of other Republican congressional candidates from states far from the border, or from areas with little or no immigrant populations, he will continue to mislead the American people about the “immigration crisis” and the threats to our security.  Raj will return to Philly with video of himself leading Hannibal’s army across our “broken border” to demonstrate just how important it is to keep our country safe from the “invading hoard from the south.”

Thankfully, like many of his Republican cohorts, Raj will get to hear this November the same words he heard two years ago from The Donald: “YOU”RE  FIRED”

From: Migra Matter – Progressive Immigration Reform