For Immediate Release
Unprecedented Coalition of Elected Officials, Advocates, Law Enforcement, Business Groups
Ask Appellate Court to Reverse Texas Ruling Blocking President’s Immigration Initiatives
April 7, 2015
Washington D.C. - The Texas federal district court order that blocked parts of President Obama’s executive action on immigration was based on unproven or incomplete presentations to the court and should be reversed, civil rights and immigration advocates argue in an amicus (“friend-of-the-court”) brief in the case of State of Texas v. United States. Texas and 25 other states have sued the federal government to stop the implementation of initiatives that will provide temporary relief from deportation, but advocates maintain the President’s actions are legally sound.
Multiple legal briefs defending the deferred action initiatives were filed with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals by a range of advocates, leaders, and elected officials. One of these briefs was filed on behalf of more than 150 civil rights, labor, and immigration advocacy groups, led by the American Immigration Council, National Immigration Law Center (NILC), and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).
Briefs were also submitted to the court by 15 states and the District of Columbia, 73 mayors, county officials from 27 states, 181 members of Congress, and 109 law professors, law enforcement, faith and business leaders. These briefs discuss the economic and community benefits that will result from expansion of the successful DACA program and the new DAPA initiative for parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.
“Collectively, the parties in these filings represent more than half of the foreign-born population in our country, which means they have a demonstrated track record of producing inclusive immigration policies,” noted Marielena Hincapié, NILC executive director, during a telephonic press briefing announcing the briefs. “We are confident that we will win because the law is on our side. But we also know that the wheels of justice often move slowly. In the meantime, our message to eligible immigrants and their families is to be patient, continue gathering the necessary documents to apply, save up for the application fee, and don’t lose faith," added Hincapié.
“We are undeterred and we will continue in this campaign [to realize the start of the DACA and DAPA programs]," added Denver Mayor Michael Hancock. An early signer of the amicus brief by local officials, the mayor said the filing before the appellate court by mayors and counties has twice as many signers as an earlier brief submitted to the Texas district court. Citing the economic and community benefits that would come from allowing immigrants to come out of the shadows, Mayor Hancock added, “This is about our communities. This is about working with those who have chosen to call our cities ‘home.’”
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-CA, said the legal filing by 181 members of Congress argues the Texas court overturned Congress’ decision to give the executive branch authority to set immigration enforcement priorities.
“What the court has done is not only an affront to what the executive has done [in setting priorities] and to the authority we have – well-grounded in law and in precedent – but also an affront to what Congress has done,” Lofgren said. “There are millions of people living in fear, who have made our economy and lived here for decades, whose lives have been turned upside down by an erroneous ruling.”
Some states claimed that the administrative relief will harm them, but the legal briefs argue the judgment was incorrect.
“That is incorrect. The states have to show irreparable harm to get a preliminary injunction; they have not,” Noah Purcell, solicitor general in the Washington State Attorney General’s Office told reporters. “The president’s directives are good for states; they are not harming states.”
The human aspect of the case also was highlighted during press call.
“Although I was disappointed by the news that a federal district judge blocked implementation of DACA expansion, I was not disillusioned,” said Jong-Min You, an immigrant from New York who would be eligible for relief under DACA expansion. “I know that eventually, I will be able to come forward and apply for relief from deportation and work authorization, and I’m not the only one. Other elder Dreamers, along with their parents and millions of others, are ready for the legal battle ahead and for the legal battle to end so that we can finally move forward.”
Rocio Saenz, SEIU international executive vice president, said advocates for expanded DACA and DAPA will never give up.
"The plaintiff states and Republicans who support this lawsuit can ignore the will of their own constituents and immigrants' contributions, but we will continue to defend the immigration action in the courts. We will continue to fight for immigration reform. We will continue to inform future applicants and make sure that when the time comes – and it will come – that every eligible person applies for the immigration action. We are and will continue to send a strong message to the naysayers, to Republicans who stand in the way of progress: We are not the enemy. But we are ready – ready to fight back, ready for the immigration action, and ready to vote,” Saenz said.
“Amici and the government are clearly on the right side of the law, and we are confident that a stay [of the Texas order] will be granted, hopefully by the Fifth Circuit, one day very soon,” said Melissa Crow, legal director of the American Immigration Council.
A recording of press call can be downloaded at http://nilc.org/document.html?id=1222.
On November 21, 2014, President Obama issued two Presidential Memoranda clarifying his previous broadcast of the executive actions on immigration, known as the "Immigration Accountability Executive Actions." These memos establish further directives for assimilating immigrants and refugees into the American society, as well as directives for updating and reorganization the visa procedures. The following is a summary of the family related components of the President's declaration, the other aspects of the memos will be discussed in Part II:
1. Enlarging the DACA membership. The present Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program will be modified as follows: The existing age cap (31 as of the date of the original DACA publication) has been removed and the eligibility cut-off date by which an applicant is required have been in the United States will be changed to January 1, 2010 as opposed to the original June 15, 2012 date. In other words, no age cap. DACA and work permission will be permitted for 3 years. The new three-year time period applies to pending DACA renewal applications.
USCIS anticipates beginning to accept DACA applications under the modified program within 90 days of November 20, 2014.
2. Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA). USCIS will create a new deferred action procedure, comparable to DACA, for individuals who (1) have a U.S. citizen or LPR son or daughter (of any age) as of November 20, 2014; (2) have been continuously present in the U.S. since before January 1, 2010; and (3) were physically present in the U.S. on November 20, 2014 and are present at the time of requesting DAPA. All applicants are required to pass background checks and must not be labeled as an enforcement priority under the new memorandum.
DAPA will be granted for a three-year period.
USCIS anticipates that it will begin to accept DAPA applications within 180 days
of November 20, 2014.
Enforcement Priorities (these individuals will not qualify for these executives orders, except under certain circumstances)
a. Priority 1: Threats to national security, border security, and public safety. This includes suspected terrorists, people captured at the border, intentional gang participants (as well as those who were convicted of a gang- related offense), and convicted felons (excludes state/local status-related offenses).
b. Priority 2: Misdemeanants and new immigration violators. This includes individuals convicted of a "significant misdemeanor" or three or more misdemeanors arising out of three separate schemes (excludes traffic and status-related violations); people who entered unlawfully after January 1, 2014; and people who have "significantly abused" the visa or visa waiver programs.
c. Priority 3: Other immigration violations. Those who have been issued a final order of removal on or after January 1, 2014.
3. Extension of the Provisional Waiver Program. The USCIS will enlarge the I-601A provisional waiver application process. Currently, only immediate relatives (spouses and children of U.S. citizens and parents of adult U.S. citizens) who can demonstrate extreme hardship to a U.S. citizen spouse or parent are entitled to apply for a provisional waiver. USCIS will "expand access to the provisional waiver program to all statutorily eligible classes of relatives for whom an immigrant visa is immediately available. This action would seemingly include any family-based preference category beneficiary with an approved I-130 and a current priority date who can establish "extreme hardship" to a citizen or LPR spouse or parent.
This I-601A Provisional waiver will be set up by regulation. No specific time frame is stipulated.
Currently establishing extreme hardship to the U.S. citizen spouse is difficult at best as there are no concrete guidelines. Therefore adjudicators receiving cases with similar fact patters, make different decision.
Under the memo USCIS must provide guidance on the definition of "extreme hardship" that will clarify the elements that are considered in determining whether the "extreme hardship" standard has been met. USCIS is also to consider criteria by which a presumption of extreme hardship may apply. If this actually takes place processing of these cases will be easier and less expensive to the immigrant and family.
Learn more about immigration law: apsanlaw.com
Source : AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 14112446. (Posted 11/24/14)
On November 20, 2014, President Obama broadcasted a series of executive actions for immigration relief.
There are three sections I will discuss in this article.
Expanding those eligible for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program to young people who came to this country before turning 16 years. Now more people will be eligible.
* Allows an individual born prior to June 15, 1981, to apply for DACA
* Requires continuous residence in the United States since January 1, 2010, not prior to June 15, 2007 as originally required
* Extends the deferred action period and employment authorization to three years from the current two years.
Allowing parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who have been present in the country since January 1, 2010, to request deferred action and employment authorization for three years, , provided they pass required background checks
Currently, only spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens are allowed to apply to obtain a provisional waiver. Expanding the use of provisional waivers of unlawful presence to include the spouses and sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents and the sons and daughters of U.S. citizens
When will USCIS begin accepting applications related to these executive initiatives?
USCIS expects to begin accepting applications for the expanded DACA program and the Parents program and the new I-601A waiver approximately 90 days after the President's November 20, 2014, announcement; and
What should you do while USCIS is not accepting applications.
Individuals who think they may be eligible for one or more of the new initiatives may prepare now by assembling documentation that establishes the basic elements such as their:
2. Relationship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident; and
3. Continuous residence in the United States over the last five years or more.
For more information go to Apsanlaw.com and Drmoises.com
TONIGHT PRESIDENT OBAMA WILL EXPLAIN HIS NEW IMMIGRATION POLICY
The TV program VOCE e A Lei, on SIC International Portuguese TV and Vejatv.com will feature a special show this evening at to discuss President Obama’s New Program.
Dr. Moises Apsan and Luis Pires will host the program.
Find out :
· If you or your family will be included;
· What will the process look like;
· How long should it take;
· Will you receive a work permit? Permission to travel?
· What happens if you have received an order for deportation?
Learn the answers to these questions and more.
THIS WILL BE A LIVE CALL IN SHOW.
You can see is on SIC International Cable stations and also on vejatv.com though the internet.
Don’t forget to attend. This will be a historic event.
New York -- Tomorrow, November 19, 2014 at 8 p.m. EST, at a televised speech positioning the plan. President Barack Obama will reveal the much-expected immigration plan, Thus, altering the rules for deportations that could touch millions of undocumented immigrants and simultaneously beginning an unpredictable clash with Republicans.
Obama's executive orders are expected to eliminate the danger of deportation for as many as 5 million of the estimated 11 million people residing illegally in the United States. This executive action is a noteworthy step for a president notorious for having deported thousands of illegal migrants.
According to sources, the Obama administration is contemplating increasing the group of undocumented immigrants who would qualify for deferred deportations by using principles such as permanency in the United States and family ties. Parents in the country illegally but who have children who are U.S. citizens are almost certain to qualify, the sources said. More in question is whether undocumented parents of so-called Dreamers -- many of whom have been shielded from deportations under a 2012 administration policy -- would qualify as well.
In a video on the White House Facebook page, Obama said "What I'm going to be laying out is the things I can do with my lawful authority as president to make the system work better even as I continue to work with Congress and encourage them to get a bipartisan, comprehensive bill that can solve the entire problem...Everybody agrees that our immigration system is broken. Unfortunately, Washington has allowed the problem to fester for far too long," ..."And so what I'm going to be laying out is the things that I can do with my lawful authority as President to make the system work better, even as I continue to work with Congress to encourage them to get a bipartisan, comprehensive bill that can solve the entire problem."
At a dialogue on immigration Wednesday at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said Obama would act "in the coming days."
Johnson defended the idea of Obama acting unilaterally, saying he believes the president has "a fairly wide latitude within existing executive authority to fix the system."
"It can't be that we're not allowed to lift a finger to fix the broken immigration system until Congress acts," Johnson said. "Well, we've been waiting for Congress to act. It can't be that we're not allowed to take action in a number of respects to reform the system. And we will. And we've identified a number of ways that we will."
In fact, Congress has indicated which aliens may be removed from the United States and the procedures for doing so. Aliens might be removed if they were inadmissible at the time of entry, convicted of certain crimes, or meet other criteria set by federal law. Removal is a civil, not criminal, matter. The principal feature of the removal system is a broad discretion exercised by immigration officials. Federal officials, as an initial matter, must decide whether it makes sense to pursue removal at all. If removal proceedings commence, aliens may pursue asylum and other discretionary relief allowing them to continue in the country or at least to leave without formal removal.
It looks like President Obama is singing an old Paul McCartney tune:
|"I've had enough
I can't put up with any more
No no no no no no no
I've had enough
I can't put up with any more
No no no no no no no"
And maybe he finally means it. During a recent news conference President Obama emphatically said that "Before the end of the year, we're going to take whatever lawful actions that I can take that I believe will improve the functioning of our immigration system, ... What I'm not going to do is just wait."
According to today's CNN's headline "Obama to announce 10-point immigration plan via exec action as early as next week" and Fox news announced that a source close to the White House told them that President Obama plans to reveal as early as next Friday, a plan which would shield 5 Million Immigrants from deportation by applying executive action .
A centerpiece of the order permits many parents of children who are American citizens or legal residents to obtain legal work credentials and would take away the constant fear about being discovered, alienated from their families and deported.
It appears that the Obama plan could have an effect on as many as 3.3 million people who have lived in the United States illegally for at least five years. However, the White House is also thinking about a stricter policy that limits the benefits to people who have lived in the country for at least 10 years, or about 2.5 million people.
Moreover, extending protections to more undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children, and to their parents, could affect an additional one million or more if they are included in the final plan that the president announces.
This section would expand the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which, Obama created in June 2012. The program was a lifesaver for illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, entered before June 2007 and were under 31 as of June 2012. The modification would enlarge the dates to include anyone who entered before they were 16, and the cut-off would change from June 2007 to Jan. 1, 2010. This is projected to make nearly 300,000 illegal immigrants eligible.
Mr. Obama's executive action actions will also enlarge opportunities for immigrants who have high-tech skills, move extra security resources to the nation's southern border, overhaul a controversial immigration enforcement program called Secure Communities, and provide clear guidance to the agencies that enforce immigration laws. Clarifying who should be a low priority for deportation, such as those with strong family ties and no serious criminal history.
A new enforcement memorandum will make clear that deportations should still proceed for convicted criminals, foreigners who pose national security risks and also, recent border crossers.
Perhaps this forceful action by the President will push the recalcitrant republicans to work on a true comprehensive immigration reform law. One that will resolve the ongoing problem for the millions of other undocumented immigrants that do not have close ties to a U.S. citizen, but have contributed favorably to our country for many years.
If Ronald Reagan were alive today, he probably would have cringed when he realized that his own party, the Republican Party, has been blocking the way for a comprehensive immigration reform. A law that our country is in desperate need, not only to resolve the issue of 15 million undocumented immigrants, but also to help kick start the return of an economically robust economy.
In fact Reagan would probably abhor the way many conservative republicans have been handling the immigration reform debate and would be worried about the eventual demise of the Republican Party, caused by the stranglehold of anti-immigrant conservatives. Regan, similar to Obama, fundamentally saw America as a land open to immigrants that believe in the “American Dream.” In November 1979 when announcing his candidacy for the presidency Reagan proposed a treaty allowing for full freedom of movement for all workers throughout North America. Even as far back as 1952 when the US immigration policy was still controlled by the very restrictive Immigration Act of 1924, Reagan gave a speech embracing nearly unlimited immigration:
“I . . . have thought of America as a place in the divine scheme of things that was set aside as a promised land . . . [A]nd the price of admission was very simple . . . Any place in the world and any person from these places; any person with the courage, with the desire to tear up their roots, to strive for freedom, to attempt and dare to live in a strange and foreign place, to travel halfway across the world was welcome here . . . I believe that God in shedding his grace on this country has always in this divine scheme of things kept an eye on our land and guided it as a promised land for these people.
Every U.S. president since 1956 has permitted temporary immigrants immigration assistance. This begins with President Eisenhower in 1956 paroling 923 foreign-born orphans into the custody of U.S. military families looking to adopt them. During 1959-to 72, Presidents Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon used executive powers to parole into the U.S. a majority of 621,403 Cuban asylum seekers fleeing from Castro’s Cuba. In 1976, President Gerald Ford granted extended voluntary departure to defend from deportation an unknown number of Lebanese who escaped Lebanon for the U.S. President Jimmy Carter paroled 123,000 Cubans and Haitians into the U.S. during the Mariel boatliff in 1980 and most importantly President Ronald Reagan deferred deportation for children in more than 100,000 families if the parents of the families were gaining legal status under the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, IRCA, and granted AMNESTY to over three million immigrants . In 1990, President George H. Bush used executive powers to postpone deportations of up to 1.5 million spouses and children of people legalized under IRCA and in 1992, Presidents George H. Bush and Bill Clinton approved stays of deportation to about 190,000 El Salvadorans whose temporary protected status that permitted them to live and work in the U.S. had expired. And finally in 2012 President Barack Obama applied executive power to defer deportations for up to 1.8 million young immigrants in the U.S. illegally., who entered before they were 16 years of age and less than 31 years old,.
In his January 2011 Obama, in his State of the Union address in 2011, reminded the nation that success in the 21st century can only be accomplished though education, innovation, ,and rejuvenating America's infrastructure. Obama integrated immigration reform as a fundamental element in the "reinventing" of America. He announced that he was "prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows."
Reagan's and Obama’s dream of peaceful, hardworking immigrants is diametrically opposed to anti-immigration views advocated glibly by the Tea Party, Mitt Romney, Martin Levin, Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly, Pat Buchanan, Past Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, and many others who claim the mantle of Ronald Reagan.
Reagan's work in immigration reform was unreserved. At a 1982 ceremony at Ellis Island he spoke emotively of immigrants who "possessed a determination that with hard work and freedom, they would live a better life and their children even more so." In 1986 he signed the immigration reform law that legalized almost 3 million illegal immigrants in exchange for sanctions against employers that knowingly hire illegal workers and for better border protection.
In fact under President Reagan's term, more immigrants became part of the United States legally than under any previous U.S. president since Teddy Roosevelt. Reagan saw illegal immigrants not as criminals but as human beings working honestly for a better life for them and their family. In a 1977 radio show he pointed out that apples were rotting on New England trees because no Americans were willing to pick them. "It makes one wonder about the illegal alien fuss. Are great numbers of our unemployed really victims of the illegal alien invasion or are those illegal tourists actually doing work our own people won't do?" Reagan said. "One thing is certain in this hungry world; no regulation or law should be allowed if it results in crops rotting in the fields for lack of harvesters."
Reagan’s consistently affirmative attitude towards immigrants and immigration was a fundamental aspect of his positive image of America. Republicans that disagree with Reagan's position on immigration would have to, in order to be consistent, discard much of Reagan’s approach to social and economic and social policy. Today's anti- immigration conservatives can continue their fight for immigration restrictions but they should not do so under the guise of Reagan republicanism.
Reagan understood the economics of immigration in the U.S. Congress in preparing to engage in the upcoming immigration reform debate should take in earnest a study from the Cato Institute that concludes that there would be an estimate of a trillion dollar benefit to our country if the most expansive immigration policies are pursued. Economists Peter Dixon and Maureen Rimmer (Peter Dixon is the Sir John Monash Distinguished Professor and Maureen Rimmer is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre of Policy Studies at Monash University in Australia. The U.S. Departments of Commerce, Agriculture, Homeland Security, and the U.S. International Trade Commission have applied the USAGE model of the U.S. economy. In doing so, they discovered that increased enforcement and reduced low-skilled immigration have a significant negative influence on the income of U.S. households by reducing U.S. household welfare by about 0.5 percent, or $80 billion. In distinction, legalization of low-skilled immigrant workers would produce significant income gains for American households and workers. Under an optimal visa tax the positive impact for U.S. households of legalization would be 1.27 percent of GDP or $180 billion.
In Reagan’s farewell message to the nation he said “I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here.”
We've all heard the story of the Boy who "Cried Wolf," but have you heard the story of the President who cried Wolf so any time that his words lose all meaning.
Here's how the story goes.
On September 5, 2014, at the end of a two-day NATO summit, President Obama, without offering details or a timetable, failed to make a much anticipated commitment about whether he would use his executive power for immigration reform, in the coming weeks as he had earlier pledged. Instead he said "My expectation is that fairly soon, I'll be considering what the next steps are,"
In making this statement, he repeated his quotable words by saying that without congressional action to overhaul the immigration system, he would take steps to increase border security, to upgrade the processing of border crossers, to encourage legal immigration and to give immigrants who have been illegally in the United States for some time a path to become legal residents, pay taxes, pay a fine and learn English.
"I want to be very clear: My intention is, in the absence of...action by Congress, I'm going to do what I can do within the legal constraints of my office, because it's the right thing to do for the country,"
Haven't we heard this before?
For the last several weeks, in Washington and the nation's immigrant communities, there's been a buzz, that President Obama would circumvent Congress and use his executive power to spare millions of illegal immigrants from deportation by offering them temporary legal status.
There have been dozens of stories in the last few weeks suggesting that some sort of executive relief for the undocumented was just around the corner.
An August 9 editorial in The New York Times, titled "Mr. Obama, Your Move," implied that some type of executive action was practically a fait accompli. The article went on to say, "The most obvious thing is to lift the threat of deportation from immigrants who should be the lowest priority for removal: those with citizen children, jobs, clean records and strong community ties. Some reports put the size of that group at four million to five million."
But what's happening today is nothing new. Even before 2008, the same rhetoric has been traveling the same circle.
Let's just list a few of Obama's "wolf cries"
1. On Saturday, President Obama announced that he would postpone action on his repeated promises to overhaul federal immigration policies through executive authority until after the midterm elections in November.
2. Just recently in June 2014, President Obama promised to take executive action on immigration reform by the end of the summer. And the president said he will not act after the November elections.
3. On October 16, 2013, notwithstanding nationwide demonstrations in early October that led to the arrest of eight House Democrats (Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), immigration activist Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-IL), and Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY). The other House members who were arrested when they blocked a street near the Capitol are Reps. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Joe Crowley (D-NY), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Al Green (D-TX), and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). President Barack Obama reaffirmed his commitment to comprehensive immigration reform, assuring all that he would pressure Congress to bring up the issue the morning after a deal to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling is passed.
4. On July 8, 2010, during an appearance on "John King USA," Univision anchor Jorge Ramos accused Obama and congressional Republicans for failing to take action to repair the nation's broken immigration system.
5. Guest host Jessica Yellin showed a video clip of Ramos asking candidate Obama in 2008 if he would commit to reforming the immigration system. Obama responded, "I cannot guarantee that it's going to be in the first 100 days. But what I can guarantee is that we will have in the first year an immigration bill that I strongly support and that I'm promoting and that I want to move that forward as quickly as possible."
That first year came and went and still, no immigration bill in sight.
6. In April 2012 interview on Univision, a Spanish language television network. Appearing on Univision's "Al Punto" show, Obama stated, "I can promise that I will try to do it [comprehensive immigration reform] in my first year of my second term." "La Promesa de Obama," his promise to achieve immigration reform during his first year as president, has proved empty.
7. On October 24, 2012 President Obama said emphatically that he is "confident" that, if reelected, he will oversee the route to immigration reform next year, in part because Republicans will have an interest in reaching out to a growing Latino voting bloc they have "alienated" in recent years.
8. Remembering the 2008 campaign cycle, President Obama promised to overhaul immigration in his first year in office. Though he called for comprehensive reform in June of 2009, the effort got little push from the White House and since then it has gone nowhere.
9. Despite nationwide rallies in early October 2013 that led to the arrest of eight House Democrats, immigration reform has been relegated to Congress's back burner during the shutdown and debt ceiling crises, President Barack Obama (D) reaffirmed his commitment to immigration reform, promising that he would pressure Congress to bring up the issue the morning after a deal to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling is passed.
Now after five years as president, who for the most part was carried into office on the backs of immigrant voters, Obama Wolf Cries again? And seriously, who still believes him?
September 5, 2014 - It’s been a year since the Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill with bipartisan backing. The bill would resolve most of the open immigration issues plaguing this country. However, in light of the fact that the Tea Party Republicans have been holding prisoner the House of Representatives by a controlling a faction of the Republican Party for the last few years, the Senate bill has languished this whole time. Tea Party Republicans have pushed the House with a specific end goal, to engage the most supremacist and intolerant areas of their voting base.
Notwithstanding the way that the lion's share of Americans, and an extensive group of Republicans, feel that undocumented immigrants ought to be given a pathway to citizenship, the Tea Party has declined to move. Despite the fact that numerous powerful pioneers in the business, money related and agrarian fields have turned out and backed exhaustive migration change, to a great degree traditionalist wing of the House couldn't care less. Even, after the Congressional Budget Office has assessed that the Senate's bill will cut government planned shortages by $158 billion within one decade.. Notwithstanding, these formidable facts 'Tea Party traditionalists' won't permit this bill to see the House floor.
Other than the evident racial issues at play behind the Tea Party's complaints to anything that helps non-white foreigners get to be nationals, the other significant reason they are battling this without holding back is they expect that Democrats will win the gold ring for immigration change and for a considerable length of time to come, keep it. The truth of the matter is, the greater part of Hispanics and Asians in this nation vote in favor of the Democratic Party. The far-right is concerned that giving a great many undocumented immigrants a chance to venture out of the shadows and into the light will fundamentally mean the GOP will never have the capacity to win the White House. Particularly when you consider that today's GOP basically just engages old white individuals who scorn government and tan individuals with equivalent enthusiasm.
In this way, instead of progress their approaches and approach, and endeavor to be more comprehensive in their vision, Republicans, and particularly the Tea Party (however it is getting to be increasingly hard to separate between the two), have chosen to simply continue pushing against the tide of progress and grasp the contempt and bias that has turned into their trademark. I figure the inclination is that they simply need to speak to their constantly contracting base and verify that they can some way or another appear to vote in more prominent numbers than the much bigger area of the nation that rejects their vision. It is clearly a Quixotic arrangement, and is bound to fall flat, however in the without further ado, it may permit them to win decisions and clutch larger parts in gerrymandered voting locale.
Be that as it may, it creates the impression that the tide may be changing now in certain House races. In a key race in Colorado, Democratic competitor Andrew Romanoff has been pounding his adversary, officeholder Republican Rep. Mike Coffman, on his record and talk concerning movement issues. The AP ran a story on Friday itemizing how the GOP's absence of activity on migration might exceptionally well cost them this House seat, and in addition fate Senatorial competitor Cory Gardner in his offer to unseat Democratic officeholder Mark Udall. On his crusade site, Romanoff has a rundown of Coffman's activities and articulations with respect to migration change since taking office. As of now, this decision is seen as a throw up. Be that as it may, if Coffman loses, a key element will be his stance on migration.
In the mean time, in Nevada, Democratic competitor Erin Bilbray has likewise tried for the throat regarding highlighting her rival's perspectives and voting record on migration change. Rep. Joe Heck (R-NV) has called far-reaching migration change a "political contrivance" and has declined to go against the radical wing of the House GOP.
And there’s the rub for today's Republican Party. In their mechanical effort to charm the most moderate part of the American populace, and grasp the monstrous bigotry that rose to the surface amid and after Obama's decision, they've basically told the individuals who are not white, hetero, Christian guys, "We have no utilization for you." ((By permitting the Tea Party to essentially set the stage for the Republican Party these recent years, the GOP has betrayed its own particular long haul dissolvability)). With the party's activities these recent weeks, Republicans have fixed their destiny. Advancing, they will be simply a local political gathering. No longer a prominent political party.
September 4, 2014 - Over many years, it has been firmly established that the U.S. government tax collections would get a multi-billion-dollar bump if President Obama followed through on his promised executive order calling for temporary legal status to millions of undocumented residents. That is, if Obama does not take the same posture that he did with Syria, setting a “red line” for Assad not to use his chemical weapons hoard, and then calling off airstrikes.
In a report on Thursday the Center for American Progress said
1. Estimated $21.2 billion in additional payroll taxes would be collected over five years under one situation available to Obama, who has verbally made immigration reform a n alleged priority of his second term.
2. The increase in revenue is based on a setting where 4.7 million undocumented immigrants receive temporary legal status, permitting them to obtain work permits.
3. "Many workers and employers will be able to emerge from the underground economy and pay payroll taxes for the first time," the report said.
Obama, who had stalwart support from the Latino community in his 2012 re-election, had pressed Congress to pass a bill that would provide a pathway to citizenship for some of the 11.7 million undocumented inhabitants in the United States.
That struggle made advancement in the Democratic-led Senate, which passed a comprehensive immigration overhaul last year, but it got stuck in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, which refused pass the proposed legislation.
The Obama administration has since been analyzing administrative actions it can take on its own.
Of the 8 million illegal immigrants already working in a assortment of industries, about 3 million workers and their employers paid payroll taxes in 2010, the Center for American Progress report said. Granting work permits would mean the other 5 million workers "will go on the books."
The report predicts the wages of previously undocumented workers would grow by about 8.5 percent. Giving them full entry to the U.S. labor market would facilitate them in finding jobs to match their skills and maximize their earnings, it said.
THIS REPORT IS NOTHING NEW
A report issued by the Texas advocacy group, Greater Houston Partnership (GHP), a years ago, verified that legalization of undocumented workers would result in those workers paying more taxes and earning higher wages. The report used data collected by industry, in the Houston area from the Pew Hispanic Center to estimate the number of unauthorized immigrants.
The results where that if all undocumented workers in the Houston region were legalized and they and their employers paid Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, and federal income taxes, the additional tax revenues would exceed $1.4 billion. The report also demonstrates that with even with less than 100% legalization, there are still substantial potential revenues. If only 25% of the undocumented community is legalized, an additional $356.1 million in tax revenues would be generated.
Two-thirds of illegal immigrants currently pay Social Security, Medicare and personal income taxes
Consider this: a surprising two-thirds of illegal immigrants currently pay Social Security, Medicare and personal income taxes. According to the Congressional Budget Office and the Social Security Administration, undocumented immigrants pay many different types of taxes, including sales, property, and social security taxes individual income,
The influx in payment of taxes began in earnest in 1996, when the IRS created nine-digit individual taxpayer identification numbers (ITINs), It was designed to enable the IRS to track the tax returns of those who are ineligible for a Social Security number. It is believed that most taxpayers who use ITINs are illegal immigrants although a small portion of legal residents also has them.
Officially, the Social Security Administration estimates that about seventy five percent (75%) of illegal workers contribute to the overall solvency of Social Security and Medicare by paying taxes.
About $75 billion in wages from people who filed W2 forms with incorrect or mismatched data, about $9 billion in taxes was paid.
In 2005 the agency estimates that on about $75 billion in wages from people who filed W2 forms with incorrect or mismatched data, about $9 billion in taxes was paid.
This amount would include illegal immigrants using fake names and Social Security numbers. Although the influence on Social Security is considerable because most of the money received is never claimed by the illegal immigrant who pays into the system. Instead of the money returning to the rightful owner, it is used to cover the deficit in retirement checks payable to legal workers.
A study conducted by the Social Security Administration from census and Immigration and Customs Enforcement data in 2007 enabled them to project the effects of higher and lower immigration patterns. They concluded that with high immigration the SSA's combined trust fund would be exhausted in 2043 and if the immigration numbers were half the amount, the fund would run out four years earlier.
At a Congressional hearing in 2006 then IRS Commission Mark Everson told Congress "many illegal aliens, utilizing ITINs, have been reporting tax liability to the tune of almost $50 billion from 1996 to 2003."
Even with hard numbers and facts verified by our own government anti-immigrant proponents continue to mislead the public. Illegal immigrants contribute $428 billion dollars to the nation’s $13.6 trillion gross domestic product in 2006.
True, the contributions of illegal immigrants remain contentious. There are those that argue that illegal aliens make no contribution because they are parasites to governmental programs; they do not pay anywhere near the amount they take to make up for it. Another group argues that they pay more than they should because they will not be eligible for the Social Security they are paying for until their immigration status is resolved, if ever. Dr. William F. Ford a professor at Middle Tennessee State University and an expert on immigration and taxes assesses that (illegal immigrants contribute $428 billion dollars to the nation’s $13.6 trillion gross domestic product in 2006.) “If anything we need more immigrants coming into the country, not less, especially with the baby boomers retiring,” said Ford in an Associated Press article
The constantly increasing number of taxpayers parallels the national immigration reform debate.
Francine J. Lipman, a Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law, in the S Harvard Latino Law Review wrote an article "Taxing Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal and Without Representation,” In it she wrote: "[U]ndocumenteds actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services...
[E]ach year undocumented immigrants add billions of dollars in sales, excise, property, income and payroll taxes, including Social Security, Medicare and unemployment taxes, to federal, state and local coffers. Hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants go out of their way to file annual federal and state income tax returns.
Yet undocumented immigrants are barred from almost all government benefits...Generally, the only benefits federally required for undocumented immigrants are emergency medical care, subject to financial and category eligibility, and elementary and secondary public education. Many undocumented immigrants will not even access these few critical government services because of their ever-present fear of government officials and deportation.
Undocumented immigrants living in the United States are subject to the same income tax laws as documented immigrants and U.S. citizens. However, because of their status most unauthorized workers pay a higher effective tax rate than similarly situated documented or U.S. citizens. Yet, these workers and their families use fewer government services than similarly situated documented immigrants or U.S. citizens...As a result, undocumented immigrants provide a fiscal windfall and may be the most fiscally beneficial of all immigrants."
In general, though, illegal immigrants get fewer tax breaks. They cannot claim the Earned Income Tax Credit, which can be $4,700 for a family of four earning less than $12,000.
It is not just federal taxes that illegal immigrants pay, All illegal immigrants pay state sales taxes, contributing to the upkeep of public facilities such as roads, police and fire departments, and many pay property taxes that contribute toward the schooling of their children. The non-partisan National Research Council found that they contribute on average $80,000 more to federal treasury than they consume.
One can only imagine, the far-reaching positive effect to our country’s economy the passage of an immigration reform law would have. The 11 million illegal immigrants would become a fully contributing part of American society and the economy would blossom; just what the founders of our constitution envisioned in the first place.