OBAMA HAS SQUANDERED BILLIONS PROTECTING THE BORDERS OF
MUSLIM DICTATORS OVER THERE, WHILE SABOTAGING HOMELAND SECURITY TO EASE MORE
MEXICANS INTO OUR COUNTRY, JOBS AND VOTING BOOTHS.
THERE IS A REASON WHY THE MEX DRUG CARTELS ENDORSED OBAMA!
Secretary of Homeland Security
Janet Napolitano:
According a Gallup Poll, a full 62 per cent of the American people believe that stopping illegal immigration should be a top priority of the U.S. government. Unfortunately for the American people, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano is not numbered among that 62%. And she is the person who is supposed to be enforcing the law. Last year, Napolitano opened the floodgates of illegal immigration by having the Department of Homeland Security review all cases then before the immigration courts with an eye towards halting the deportation of many illegal immigrants allegedly with no criminal backgrounds. (JW uncovered records demonstrating this to be an utter lie. Many of the illegals let off the hook were convicted of violent crimes.)
Not satisfied with skirting the law in 2011, Napolitano decided to abandon it altogether in 2012. Accordingly, on June 15, 2012, she announced: "By this memorandum, I am setting forth how, in the exercise of our prosecutorial discretion, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should enforce the Nation's immigration laws against certain young people who were brought to this country as children and know only this country as home."
In short, this amounted to blanket "temporary" amnesty for illegals under the age of 30. With her single statement, she simply declared upwards of one million illegal aliens entirely legal. Just like that. No legislation. No debate. No votes. No court rulings. The Constitution of the United States notwithstanding. And, in so doing, she violated the Oath of Office she had taken when sworn in as secretary of Homeland Security on January 21, 2009: "I, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
According a Gallup Poll, a full 62 per cent of the American people believe that stopping illegal immigration should be a top priority of the U.S. government. Unfortunately for the American people, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano is not numbered among that 62%. And she is the person who is supposed to be enforcing the law. Last year, Napolitano opened the floodgates of illegal immigration by having the Department of Homeland Security review all cases then before the immigration courts with an eye towards halting the deportation of many illegal immigrants allegedly with no criminal backgrounds. (JW uncovered records demonstrating this to be an utter lie. Many of the illegals let off the hook were convicted of violent crimes.)
Not satisfied with skirting the law in 2011, Napolitano decided to abandon it altogether in 2012. Accordingly, on June 15, 2012, she announced: "By this memorandum, I am setting forth how, in the exercise of our prosecutorial discretion, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should enforce the Nation's immigration laws against certain young people who were brought to this country as children and know only this country as home."
In short, this amounted to blanket "temporary" amnesty for illegals under the age of 30. With her single statement, she simply declared upwards of one million illegal aliens entirely legal. Just like that. No legislation. No debate. No votes. No court rulings. The Constitution of the United States notwithstanding. And, in so doing, she violated the Oath of Office she had taken when sworn in as secretary of Homeland Security on January 21, 2009: "I, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Is Illegal Immigration Moral?
By Victor Davis Hanson
11/25/2010
We
know illegal immigration is no longer really unlawful, but is it moral?
Usually
Americans debate the fiscal costs of illegal immigration. Supporters of open
borders rightly remind us that illegal immigrants pay sales taxes. Often their
payroll-tax contributions are not later tapped by Social Security payouts.
Opponents
counter that illegal immigrants are more likely to end up on state assistance,
are less likely to report cash income, and cost the state more through the
duplicate issuing of services and documents in both English and Spanish. Such
to-and-fro talking points are endless.
So
is the debate over beneficiaries of illegal immigration. Are profit-minded
employers villains who want cheap labor in lieu of hiring more expensive
Americans? Or is the culprit a cynical Mexican government that counts on
billions of dollars in remittances from its expatriate poor that it otherwise
ignored?
*
HERE’S
HOW LA RAZA NAPOLITANO HELPS ILLEGALS STAY IN OUR BORDERS AND JOBS, WHILE THEY
BREED THEIR ANCHORS = 18 YEARS OF WELFARE:
Illegal immigrants in Colorado seize upon new visa waiver
By Nancy Lofholm The Denver Post The Denver Post
Posted:
|
DenverPost.com
|
Alejandro Esparza
texted his wife a smiley face Wednesday.
The occasion for
the momentous digital grin was a small change in a convoluted immigration
regulation. On paper, that change may seem like an insignificant reform, but
for American families of certain illegal immigrants such as Esparza, it
represents a new opportunity to obtain a green card without tearing loved ones
apart.
Under the old
rules, Esparza, who entered the United States illegally when he was 15 years
old, would have had to return to his home country of Mexico to apply for a
waiver from being barred re-entry to the United States. The waiver would be
based on the hardship his absence would create for his wife in Denver.
That process could
drag on for months or years — and it came with a great risk. If Esparza, now
27, was turned down for the waiver, he would be barred from returning to the
United States for three to 10 years because he had entered the country
illegally.
The
changed regulation, announced last week by Homeland Security Secretary Janet
Napolitano, makes it possible to apply for the waiver without leaving the
country. Immigrants still have to return to a home country to complete the
process and pick up a visa, but they can go with the waiver in hand and the
prospect that they will be away for weeks, not months or years.
"This is
really, really, really good news for us, said Esparza's wife, Magdalena
Mendoza.
It is so good the
family is now viewing the necessary trip back to Mexico as a vacation rather
than an anxiety-provoking separation. Mendoza and their three daughters will
accompany Esparza on the journey to complete what she calls "the
procedure."
When they return,
they will still have their home and jobs. Their girls can continue in their
schools.
All of that could
have been lost under the old regulations, which American Immigration Lawyers
Association president Laura Lichter calls "downright dangerous."
"This is a
really good interim solution to a problem that we shouldn't have anyway,"
Lichter said of the change to the waiver regulation.
There is no
estimate of how many illegal immigrants will be eligible for the new waivers,
which will open for applications March 4. Lichter, who practices immigration
law in Denver, said she has hundreds of clients who will be able to take
advantage of it.
To qualify, illegal
immigrants must have a citizen spouse or be under 21 and have citizen parents
in the United States. There must be proof that the citizen family members would
face extreme hardship due to the absence of the immigrant.
Many, including
Cesar Lopez of the Vail area, had been waiting for this change since it was
promised last spring as a step to keep families together in the absence of
comprehensive immigration reform.
Lopez has been
married to a citizen for five years and has two toddlers — one with a chronic
medical problem and another ready to enter kindergarten.
If he had to be
away in Mexico for an extended time, his wife, Rosa Martinez, said she didn't
know how she would have survived as the sole parent, breadwinner and part-time
college student.
"I was really
scared because it would be a horrible thing if he was gone," she said.
Moving the whole
family to Mexico was a feared option because of the crime and poverty rates
there and the fact that the elementary schools are behind U.S. schools,
Martinez said.
The relief some
families of illegal immigrants are feeling with the new rules is tempered by
what immigration lawyers and immigrant advocates are calling deficiencies in
the change.
Adult undocumented
children of U.S. citizens are not eligible for the hardship waivers even though
they might be important caregivers for parents. Brothers and sisters and other
immediate relatives are also not eligible.
"We are
disappointed that the rules change does not apply to spouses of legal permanent
residents and adult children of U.S. citizens, as they are often the
caregivers. We hope that, as the changes are implemented, the administration
will see the wisdom in expanding the hardship waivers to these critical family
members," said Eliseo Medina of Service Employees nternational Union.
Lichter was also
disappointed there is no provision in the new rules to help families that can't
pay the $585 filing fee.
She said she will
continue to warn her clients that the new rules do not come with any full
guarantee.
"There are
still risks. Nothing is ever 100 percent guaranteed," she said. "This
is just a way of removing one of the nonsensical roadblocks."
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2012/12/obamas-sabotage-of-homedland-security.html
DURING HIS FIRST
TERM, BARACK OBAMA COULD NOT SABOTAGE OUR BORDERS ENOUGH AS HE BUILT HIS LA
RAZA PARTY BASE of ILLEGALS, AND THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE IN OUR BORDERS.
OBAMA HAS SQUANDERED BILLIONS PROTECTING THE BORDERS OF
MUSLIM DICTATORS WHILE HE LEAVING OUR BORDERS WITH NARCOMEX OPEN AND
UNDEFENDED.
The Administration's Phantom
Immigration Enforcement Policy
According to DHS’s own reports, very
little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or otherwise) are secure, and
gaining control is not even a goal of the department.
By Ira Mehlman
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
Published on 12/07/2009
Townhall.com
The setting was not quite the
flight deck of the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln with a “Mission Accomplished” banner
as the backdrop, but it was the next best thing. Speaking at the Center for
American Progress (CAP) on Nov. 13, Homeland Security Secretary Janet
Napolitano declared victory over illegal immigration and announced that the
Obama administration is ready to move forward with a mass amnesty for the
millions of illegal aliens already living in the United States.
Arguing the Obama
administration’s case for amnesty, Napolitano laid out what she described as
the “three-legged stool” for immigration reform. As the administration views
it, immigration reform must include “a commitment to serious and effective
enforcement, improved legal flows for families and workers, and a firm but fair
way to deal with those who are already here.”
Acknowledging that a lack of
confidence in the government’s ability and commitment to effectively enforce
the immigration laws it passes proved to be the Waterloo of previous efforts to
gain amnesty for illegal aliens, Napolitano was quick to reassure the American
public that those concerns could be put to rest.
“For starters, the security
of the Southwest border has been transformed from where it was in 2007,” stated
the secretary. Not only is the border locked up tight, she continued, but the
situation is well in-hand in the interior of the country as well. “We’ve also
shown that the government is serious and strategic in its approach to
enforcement by making changes in how we enforce the law in the interior of the
country and at worksites…Furthermore, we’ve transformed worksite enforcement to
truly address the demand side of illegal immigration.”
If Rep. Joe Wilson had been
in attendance to hear Secretary Napolitano’s CAP speech he might well have had
a few choice comments to offer. But since he wasn’t, we will have to rely on
the Department of Homeland Security’s own data to assess the veracity of
Napolitano’s claims.
According to DHS’s own
reports, very little of our nation’s borders (Southwestern or otherwise) are
secure, and gaining control is not even a goal of the department. DHS claims to
have “effective control” over just 894 miles of border. That’s 894 out of 8,607
miles they are charged with protecting. As for the other 7,713 miles? DHS’s
stated border security goal for FY 2010 is the same 894 miles.
The administration’s
strategic approach to interior and worksite enforcement is just as chimerical
as its strategy at the border, unless one considers shuffling paper to be a
strategy. DHS data, released November 18, show that administrative arrests of
immigration law violators fell by 68 percent between 2008 and 2009. The
department also carried out 60 percent fewer arrests for criminal violations of
immigration laws, 58 percent fewer criminal indictments, and won 63 percent
fewer convictions.
While the official
unemployment rate has climbed from 7.6 percent when President Obama took office
in January to 10 percent today, the administration’s worksite enforcement
strategy has amounted to a bureaucratic game of musical chairs. The
administration has all but ended worksite enforcement actions and replaced them
with paperwork audits. When the audits determine that illegal aliens are on the
payroll, employers are given the opportunity to fire them with little or no
adverse consequence to the company, while no action is taken to remove the
illegal workers from the country. The illegal workers simply acquire a new set
of fraudulent documents and move on to the next employer seeking workers
willing to accept substandard wages.
In Janet Napolitano’s
alternative reality a mere 10 percent of our borders under “effective control”
and sharp declines in arrests and prosecutions of immigration lawbreakers may
be construed as confidence builders, but it is hard to imagine that the
American public is going to see it that way. If anything, the administration’s
record has left the public less confident that promises of future immigration enforcement
would be worth the government paper they’re printed on.
As Americans scrutinize the
administration’s plans to overhaul immigration policy, they are likely to find
little in the “three-legged stool” being offered that they like or trust. The
first leg – enforcement – the administration has all but sawed off. The second
– increased admissions of extended family members and workers – makes little
sense with some 25 million Americans either unemployed or relegated to
part-time work. And the third – amnesty for millions of illegal aliens – is
anathema to their sense of justice and fair play.
As Americans well know,
declaring “Mission Accomplished” and actually accomplishing a mission are two
completely different things. When it comes to enforcing immigration laws, the
only message the public is receiving from this administration is “Mission
Aborted.”
*
Obama soft on illegals enforcement
Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped
precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday.
Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of
illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from
fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.
The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge
to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves
- but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the
Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top
Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil
is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take
jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
*
MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com, JUDICIAL WATCH.org & WIKI-leaks EXPOSES OBAMA’S AGENDA OF OPEN BORDERS, FUNDING OF LA RAZA SUPREMACY, AND HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES!
SHOCKING! MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com, JUDICIAL WATCH.org & WIKI-leaks EXPOSES OBAMA’S AGENDA OF OPEN BORDERS, FUNDING OF LA RAZA SUPREMACY, AND HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES!
*
WIKILEAKS EXPOSES OBAMA’S OPEN BORDERS AGENDA!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/wikileaks-exposed-obamas-la-raza-open.html
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/wikileaks-exposed-obamas-la-raza-open.html
The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by
70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully
belong to citizens and legal workers.
*
Obama
Quietly Erasing Borders (Article)
Article Link:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=240045
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=240045
FAIRUS.org
FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN
IMMIGRATION REFORM
FAIR CHARACTERIZES THE OBAMA,
AND LA RAZA DEMS PLAN FOR AMNESTY AS FOLLOWS:
That's why, throughout 2009
FAIR has been tracking every move the administration and Congress has made to
undermine our immigration laws, reward illegal aliens and burden taxpayers.
· Foot-dragging on
proven methods of immigration law enforcement including border structures and
E-Verify.
· Appointment of several illegal alien advocates
to important administration posts.
· Watering down of
the 287(g) program to limit local law in their own jurisdictions.
· Health care
reform that mandates a “public option” for newly-arrived legal immigrants as
well as illegal aliens.
OBAMA’S OPEN BORDERS AGENDA TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED WITH
HORDES MORE ILLEGALS LOOTING OUR COUNTRY
WHY THE JOBS GO TO ILLEGALS:
“What employers really
want in many cases by hiring immigrants is to hold down wage costs, experts
say.”
Importing Poverty: Immigration and Poverty in the United States: A Book of
Charts
The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers.
*
THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!
"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. "President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws."
VIVA LA RAZA! THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION IS NOW EXPANDING TO ALL OTHER 49 STATES!
*
Illegal labor pool and its impact on unemployment rates
http://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-govt/2012/12/20/illegal-labor-pool-and-its-impact-on-unemployment-rates
*
WHY THE JOBS GO TO ILLEGALS:
“What employers really
want in many cases by hiring immigrants is to hold down wage costs, experts
say.”
Senators
Tell DHS To Stop Ignoring Illegal Alien Sanctuaries
By Judicial
Watch Blog
Created
4 Nov 2011 - 12:22pm
While the Justice Department
focuses on taking action against state laws to combat illegal immigration, a
group of U.S. Senators is asking the Obama Administration to stop ignoring
local ordinances that undermine federal laws by offering undocumented aliens
sanctuary.
In battling local immigration
control measures nationwide, the DOJ has claimed that they conflict with
federal immigration law [1]and undermine the
government’s careful balance of immigration enforcement priorities and
objectives. The Obama Administration has made this argument recently in cases
against Arizona and Alabama.
But what is the
administration doing about local governments that refuse to cooperate with
federal immigration authorities and blatantly ignore the legal status of
arrested individuals? A group of Senate Judiciary Committee members posed the
question to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano this week.
They specifically mentioned
Cook County Illinois where local authorities openly flip the finger at the feds
by refusing to report illegal immigrants who come in contact with police, even
dangerous criminals. In fact, in 2007 Judicial Watch took legal action [2]
against the Chicago Police Department—which has a don’t-ask-don’t-tell
immigration policy—after learning of an illegal immigrant sanctuary resolution
that was being considered by Cook County’s Board of Commissioners at the time.
In a letter [3]
to Napolitano this week, the Judiciary Committee members—senators Chuck
Grassley (Iowa), John Cornyn (Texas), Tom Coburn (Oklahoma) and Jeff Sessions
(Alabama)—cite a recent meeting with a high-ranking Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) official who confirmed that Cook County creates a major
problem for enforcement efforts. In fact, the ICE associate director of removal
operations said Cook County’s egregious example of sanctuary city policies
presents “an accident waiting to happen.”
So the senators ask
Napolitano: “We would like to know what specific steps have been and will be
taken by your Department to compel Cook County to reverse its policy of
ignoring immigration detainers. In addition, we would request an overview of
meetings held between federal officials and Cook County, including any emails
or other documentation that exist, to understand how the federal government has
been or is attempting to rectify the situation.”
Napolitano is urged to take a
direct role in the matter by the lawmakers who remind the Homeland Security
Secretary that Cook County’s ordinance creates a “serious threat to the
public’s safety” that requires Napolitano’s “immediate and personal attention.”
It’s a matter of national security, the veteran senators assert.
Americans shouldn’t hold
their breath. The Obama Administration is too busy fighting local measures that
are viewed as “discriminatory” and “anti-immigrant” by the open borders
movement. In fact, the DOJ even created a secret group [4]
within the bloated civil rights division to monitor laws passed by states and
local municipalities to control illegal immigration.
Judicial Watch has been a
frontrunner in the nationwide battle to combat illegal immigration and earlier
this year filed a motion [5]
on behalf of the Arizona State Legislature in the Obama Administration’s
lawsuit challenging its tough law. JW has also sued police departments across
the country for practicing don’t-ask-don’t-tell immigration policies and has
led an effort to shut down taxpayer-funded day laborer centers. Read all about
JW's work involving illegal immigration here [6].
*
Obama Administration Refuses to Sue Sanctuary Cities
Obama Administration Refuses to Sue Sanctuary Cities
Less than a week after suing Arizona to block its immigration law, SB 1070, critics are pressing the Obama administration to go after “sanctuary cities” that deliberately look the other way when it comes to illegal immigration. The Department of Justice last week responded that it will not sue these cities, which prohibit local law enforcement from inquiring about an individual’s legal status or alerting immigration authorities when they encounter illegal immigrants, because it believes passive refusal to follow the law is not as egregious as Arizona’s passage of a law that “actively interferes” with federal law. Justice Department spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric Holder inexplicably argued, “There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law.” (The Washington Times, July 14, 2010).
Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX), who authored the 1996 federal law which requires states and localities to cooperate with federal authorities on immigration enforcement, criticized the Justice Department’s politically convenient stance on sanctuary cities. "For the Justice Department to suggest that they won't take action against those who passively violate the law …. is absurd," said Rep. Smith. "Will they ignore individuals who fail to pay taxes? Will they ignore banking laws that require disclosure of transactions over $10,000? Of course not." (The Washington Times, July 14, 2010).
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has also noted the irony of the Obama administration’s refusal to sue localities to strike down their sanctuary policies, which she said could also be considered a “patchwork” of immigration laws across the country. (Brewer Statement, July 6, 2010). Senator David Vitter (R-LA) similarly noted, “This administration’s idea of immigration enforcement is to go after the states and local officials actually trying to enforce the laws on the books. They are demonizing those that look to protect our border and end illegal immigration while giving a wink and nod of approval to sanctuary cities that don't enforce our laws.” (Vitter Press Release, July 15, 2010).
Less than a week after suing Arizona to block its immigration law, SB 1070, critics are pressing the Obama administration to go after “sanctuary cities” that deliberately look the other way when it comes to illegal immigration. The Department of Justice last week responded that it will not sue these cities, which prohibit local law enforcement from inquiring about an individual’s legal status or alerting immigration authorities when they encounter illegal immigrants, because it believes passive refusal to follow the law is not as egregious as Arizona’s passage of a law that “actively interferes” with federal law. Justice Department spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric Holder inexplicably argued, “There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law.” (The Washington Times, July 14, 2010).
Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX), who authored the 1996 federal law which requires states and localities to cooperate with federal authorities on immigration enforcement, criticized the Justice Department’s politically convenient stance on sanctuary cities. "For the Justice Department to suggest that they won't take action against those who passively violate the law …. is absurd," said Rep. Smith. "Will they ignore individuals who fail to pay taxes? Will they ignore banking laws that require disclosure of transactions over $10,000? Of course not." (The Washington Times, July 14, 2010).
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has also noted the irony of the Obama administration’s refusal to sue localities to strike down their sanctuary policies, which she said could also be considered a “patchwork” of immigration laws across the country. (Brewer Statement, July 6, 2010). Senator David Vitter (R-LA) similarly noted, “This administration’s idea of immigration enforcement is to go after the states and local officials actually trying to enforce the laws on the books. They are demonizing those that look to protect our border and end illegal immigration while giving a wink and nod of approval to sanctuary cities that don't enforce our laws.” (Vitter Press Release, July 15, 2010).
*
8 New American Gateways For
Immigrants
By Neema P. Roshania, Kiplinger.com
Jun 29th, 2010
The economic recovery may be slow and uncertain. Immigration
remains a hot button political issue. But there's one positive trend that will
keep benefiting smaller cities in the years ahead: Their growing appeal to
immigrant poppulations.
Though New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago and other large U.S. cities remain hubs for immigrants,
newcomers from abroad are increasingly settling in smaller communities across
the U.S., lured by a lower cost of living, more job opportunities, and a
support structure of fellow immigrants. In return, these communities get a
rejuvenated work force and a consumer base.
Here are eight rapidly emerging gateway communities for
immigrants. All are likely to remain popular with foreign newcomers, despite
stepped-up enforcement of federal immigration laws. Some may surprise you.
Benton/Washington Counties, Ark.
Home to large employers such as Wal-Mart in Bentonville and Tyson Foods in nearby Springdale, these northwest Arkansas counties have seen enormous
growth in their immigrant populations over the past decade.
Foreign born residents now make up more than 20% of Springdale's population. The area's chicken farms, construction
industry, corporate headquarters, and low cost of housing remain a strong
magnet.
With Hispanics accounting for most of the increase, the
region is seeing more ethnic bakeries, restaurants, media outlets, and other
businesses. The once nearly homogeneous local school districts have added
English as a second language to their curricula in addition to special programs
to help involve parents in their children's education.
Portland and Salem, Ore. (Marion/Multnomah counties)
The growth of the area's technology industry draws highly skilled immigrant workers
to northwest Oregon, where they're joining earlier arrivals -- refugees from
Southeast Asia, Africa, eastern Europe and Russia.
Fairfax County, Va.
In this large suburban county bordering Washington, D.C., immigrants make up almost 30% of the population. The
recession hasn't been felt here as much as it has in other parts of the country
and construction, and service jobs are still plentiful. Fairfax County is across the Potomac River from the nation's
capital, which, along with other large cities, has long been a draw for
immigrants.
There's also a strong immigrant presence among service
workers, especially in health care, restaurants, and cleaning services. Nearly
40% of the region's immigrant population arrived within the past decade. Many
own their own businesses. And they are encouraging more family members and
friends from the old country to join them.
Shelbyville, Tenn. (Bedford County)
Though the foreign born population in Shelbyville hovers around the national average, the small city and its
environs have become a mecca for refugees from Egypt, Myanmar (formerly known
as Burma), and Somalia. There are jobs in Shelbyville's food processing plants and other factories.
Cape Coral, Fla. (Lee County)
Southwest Florida's Gulf Coast has strong agriculture and service sectors. In
2000, Cape Coral's foreign born population was 8.7%, relatively low compared
with national average of 11.1%. In the past decade it has increased by about
250% -- putting it above the national average.
Boise, Id. (Ada County)
Attracted to the area by job opportunities in agriculture
and an affordable cost of living, Boise's immigrant population has climbed by more than 50% over the
past decade.
Gwinnett County, Ga.
The foreign born population in Gwinnett County has more than doubled since 2000, and now represents about
25% of the county's total population. Drawn to the area by an abundance of jobs
in the service sector and the low cost of housing, the immigrants are mostly
Hispanic. They are carving out a livelihood in a region where blacks have
traditionally been the most visible minority. Gwinnett also has one of the
highest rates of illegal immigration in the U.S. -- authorities estimate that
half of all foreign born residents of the county are unauthorized.
Raleigh-Durham-Cary, N.C. (Wake/Durham/Chatham Cos.)
North Carolina's 394% immigrant growth rate in the 1990s was the fastest
among Southern states, and the trend has continued in the 21st century. The Raleigh-Durham area has been hub to much of this growth.
The draw? Affordable housing and jobs at Research Triangle Park -- one of the country's
largest technology development centers -- as well as in the construction and
service sectors. The recession and stricter enforcement of immigration laws in
the Tar Heel State are slowing immigration growth -- at least for now. But many
experts think migration could pick up again as the economy recovers.
Sources: Census Bureau, University of Southern California,
Moody's Economy.com
Showing page 1 of 1
The
truth about the DREAM Act
Published
March 20, 2012
|
FoxNews.com
The
DREAM Act has become a rallying cry for President Obama, members of his
administration, and liberal Democrats everywhere. President Obama has vowed to
“keep fighting for the DREAM Act,” which would grant amnesty to millions of
illegal immigrants.
It’s
true when listeners or those polled don’t know the facts that the DREAM Act has
some appeal. After all, we are all naturally sympathetic when children are
involved.
But
the descriptions of the DREAM Act voiced by President Obama and his cohorts are
not accurate. And the consequences are never told.
DREAM
Act supporters claim that only children would benefit from such a bill, but the
facts tell another story. Under most DREAM Act proposals, amnesty would be
given to individuals up to the age of 30—not exactly children. And some other
proposals don’t even have an age limit.
These
supporters also maintain that illegal immigrants can’t go college without the
DREAM Act. But the truth is that illegal immigrants can already go to college
in most states.
And
ultimately, most versions of the DREAM Act actually don’t even force illegal
immigrants to comply with all the requirements in the bill, such as going to
college or joining the military. The administration can waive requirements
because of “hardship”at its complete discretion.
DREAM Act proposals are
also a magnet for fraud. Many illegal immigrants will fraudulently claim they
came here as children or that they are under 30. And the federal government has
no way to check whether their claims are true or not.
Such massive fraud occurred after the 1986 amnesty for illegal
immigrants who claimed they were agricultural workers. Studies found two-thirds
of all applications for the 1986 amnesty were fraudulent.
(ANYONE THAT THINKS THERE ARE ONLY 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN OUR
BORDERS SHOULD COME VISIT CA! LOOK AROUND AND TRY TO FIND A NON-HISPANIC
ENGLISH SPEAKING LEGAL! CA IS NOW 40% ILLEGAL. NEVADA IS NOW 33% ILLEGAL.
COLORADO IS NOW 20% ILLEGAL. AND LA RAZA IS NOW MOVING INTO THE AMERICAN SOUTH)
And
this amnesty did nothing to stop illegal immigration. In 1986, there were about
three million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. Today, there are an
estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. and about seven million of
them work here, unfairly taking jobs from unemployed Americans.
While DREAM Act
supporters claim that it would only benefit children, they skip over the fact
that it actually rewards the very illegal immigrant parents who knowingly
violated our laws. Once their children become U.S. citizens, they can petition
for their illegal immigrant parents and adult siblings to be legalized, who
will then bring in others in an endless chain.
This
kind of chain migration only encourages more illegal immigration, as parents
will bring their children to the U.S. in hopes of receiving citizenship.
President Obama tried to
get the DREAM Act passed during a lame duck session about a year ago but it
faced bipartisan opposition in Congress. This hasn’t stopped the administration
from passing its agenda. The Obama administration does everything it can to let
illegal immigrants stay here, which compounds the problem.
Political
appointees at the Department of Homeland
Security recently issued new deportation guidelines that amount to
backdoor amnesty and strike another blow at millions of unemployed U.S.
workers.
Under
the administration’s new deportation policy, DHS officials review all incoming
and most pending cases before an immigration court to determine if the illegal
immigrant can remain in the U.S. Since the administration has made clear that
many illegal immigrants are not considered priorities for removal, including
potential DREAM Act beneficiaries, this could open the door to allow millions
of illegal immigrants to live and work in the U.S. without a vote of Congress.
The Obama administration
has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants
to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal
workers. And the list goes on and on – this administration has a pattern
of ignoring the laws and intent of Congress.
The United States is based on the rule of law but the Obama
administration already has dirty hands by abusing administrative authority to
grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. The DREAM Act doesn’t stop illegal
immigration—it only encourages more of it by rewarding lawbreakers.
Rep.
Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee