Mediaboss Marketing

GENESEE COUNTY, MI -- Republicans have gained strength in their battle to unseat Dan Kildee from Congress thanks to redistricting but must decide next month who will be their standard-bearer against him in the general election in November.

Kildee, who has no opponent in the Aug. 2 Democratic primary, will face the winner of the three-candidate GOP field -- Paul Junge, Candice Miller and Matthew Seely.

Kildee and his three Republican challengers are running in the 8th congressional district, which was drawn as a result of redistricting thats been done on the local, state and federal levels following the results of the 2020 U.S. Census.

The new district includes much of Kildees current district, but adds parts of Midland County, including the city of Midland, which leans Republican.

Junge is a former criminal prosecutor who has worked in a family business, maintaining military family housing. He has served in the Department of Homeland Security and is a former investigative counsel for the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee.

Miller is a retired businesswoman who managed a petroleum company, serving as corporate board secretary.

Seely did not respond to a questionnaire from The League of Women Voters.

MLive and The Flint Journal in partnership with the LWV, are presenting the views of the candidates in contested primary elections through the VOTE411.org voter guide project.

All responses in the voter guide were submitted directly by the candidate and have not been edited by the League of Women Voters, except for necessary cuts if a reply exceeded character limitations. Spelling and grammar were not corrected.

Publication of candidate statements and opinions is solely in the interest of public service and should not be considered as an endorsement. The League never supports or opposes any candidates or political parties.

HEALTH CARE: What do you see as the federal governments role in health care? Given the COVID-19 pandemic, what are your concerns and plans regarding public health in the U.S.?

Junge: The goal is affordable and accessible healthcare and avoiding regulations that kick people off their healthcare plans. Government policies should allow small businesses the ability to better provide coverage for their employees, increase flexibility, empower patients and their doctors, and harness the private sectors ability to innovate and develop medications and cures.

Miller: I am for limited government. Government overreach has played a role in the pandemic and businesses and our kids have suffered. I will get our schools open and businesses thriving again!

ECONOMY: What federal policies do you support for a healthy economy and to help Americans without financial security improve their economic positions?

Junge: Families are being hit hard by the rising cost of goods and record high gas prices. We need to lower the tax burden on families and small businesses to help them afford the higher prices and to improve our economy. We need to stop the federal governments reckless spending that is driving up inflation. Additionally, we need to increase American energy production to lower gas prices. Empowering people rather than Washington DC politicians and bureaucrats will improve our economy and help people who are living paycheck-to-paycheck.

Miller: Again, I am for limited government. We need Government out of the way so businesses can compete in a global economy. The current 8th District is suffering from economic decline and we must invest in new jobs and lower taxes.

ELECTIONS: What federal policies do you support regarding elections, campaign funding and voting rights?

Junge: A photo ID should be required to vote, there needs to be strong signature verification for absentee ballots, and partisan balance among election observers is important. Voting is a fundamental right and the election process should be fair, secure, and efficient. The federal government should not be able to ban states from requiring a photo ID to vote or prevent other common sense security efforts.

Miller: I am pro-election integrity. I am for protecting our ballots and votes. One person equals one vote. No more Voter Fraud with Congresswoman Candice Miller!

SOCIAL JUSTICE: How would you address racial, economic, health and education inequities, including our countrys 16% of children and 10% of seniors living in poverty?

Junge: America needs to be the land of opportunity, which is accomplished by building a healthy economy, ensuring public safety, and providing a high-quality education for every child. We need to lean into our shared values of encouraging hard work, caring for our neighbors, investing and innovating, and leading the world in economic production and generosity.

Miller: Flint, Michigan and surrounding areas have witnessed the biggest decline due to Democratic polices. We need to invest locally and restore jobs by getting the Government out of the way to allow businesses to thrive. If we can bring jobs back to the 8th district, it will help our children and all families.

ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY: What policies do you support to meet U.S. energy needs while protecting our water, air and land for current and future generations?

Junge: There is no reason for the United States to be facing an energy crisis. We have the energy to sustain ourselves and we should promote Ultra Clean Coal (which reduces ash to 0.25% and Sulfur Dioxide to trace levels), nuclear energy (which does not release CO2 and is cost effective), oil, and natural gas. Granting energy exploration permits on Federal land and approving the Keystone pipeline brings down the price of distribution, creates jobs in the US & lowers gas prices. As energy investment and innovation grows, our environment becomes cleaner. Top priority is to harness American energy and make gas prices & utility bills more affordable.

Miller: We need to restore the infrastructure in Flint. All while stopping the government restrictions which cause a huge shortage of energy demands in our country. The EPA has too much power.

IMMIGRATION: What policies do you support relative to immigration to the U.S.?

Junge: There is a crisis at the border. We need to secure the border by building effective barriers and equipping border patrol. Additionally, we need to stop encouraging illegal immigration with handouts and other benefits. Legal immigration can help our economy and society, but uncontrolled illegal immigration leads to more crime, drugs, and lower wages.

Miller: I am 100% SECURE BORDERS! We need to continue to build a wall on the southern border to prevent illegal immigration. I am America First and support taking care of our own country and not those here illegally.

More here:
Meet the GOP candidates aiming to knock Dan Kildee out of Congress - MLive.com

Advertisement

Over the past few years, the terrorist threats facing the eastern Malaysian regions on the island of Borneo have become subject for alarm. Since 2021, residents in the Eastern Sabah Security Zone (ESSZONE) have been undergoing frequent curfews that have lasted until this year, with a recent announcement that the curfew has been extended to July 9. Authorities have revealed that curfews are in force due to unabating terrorist threats, along with kidnapping attempts and cross-border crimes linked to the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG). The latest intelligence published in March 2022, suggests that the ASGs second-in-command, a figure named Mundi, is seeking refuge in Sabah, raising concerns that ASG-linked local groups and sympathizers may become active.

Furthermore, Sabah has emerged as the preferred transit point for Indonesian militants infiltrating the southern Philippines in order to commit terrorist acts there. The combination of these factors foreshadows a monumental risk to Malaysian national security. Putrajaya must therefore be proactive and act immediately to nip the terrorist threats in the bud before any bloodshed takes place. The Lahad Datu incursion by Jamalul Kiram III of the Sulu Sultanate into Sabah in 2013, which caused the deaths of over 60 individuals, including civilians and authorities, should have been a critical signal for Putrajaya to bolster Bornean security in ensuring such threats will not recur.

Against this backdrop, Putrajaya must act vehemently to deter the reemerging threat of the ASG and other militant groups, while preparing for a possible militant incursion in East Malaysia. A threat looms over Sabah in particular, as indicated by the governments continuous imposition of curfews in the region.

Putrajaya is currently strengthening East Malaysian security through various initiatives. The recent acquisition of three AW139 helicopters by the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) is a prime example, indicating that assets will be mobilized to enhance patrols in Bornean waters. Furthermore, the Ministry of Defense initiated a new army base in Lahad Datu earlier this year, at a cost of 646.15 million ringgit ($146 million) that aims to strengthen Sabahs security and ability to deal with the emerging threats. Finally, one unit of Special Action Unit commandos has been dispatched to Sabah to combat the ASG threat.

Get briefed on the story of the week, and developing stories to watch across the Asia-Pacific.

Malaysias initiatives to empower Bornean security readiness and capability are timely given the growing non-traditional security threats to East Malaysia. Apart from terrorism, other non-terrorist challenges, such as cross-border kidnapping for ransom (KFR) and illegal immigration, remain rampant in East Malaysia and demonstrate the need for Putrajaya to up the ante on border security in the region.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

Cases of cross-border KFR and armed robberies have plagued Sabah since the year 2000. In that year, bandits from the ASG kidnapped 21 people, including foreign tourists, from Sipadan Island. Following these incidents, Malaysia launched a military operation called Ops Pasir in September 2000 which sought to eliminate further cross-border crimes at a cost of 300 million ringgit ($67.8 million) annually. Although generally effective, Ops Pasir was not enough to prevent incidents such as the 2013 Lahad Datu incursion. This outcome should necessitate Putrajaya to diversify away from its heavy reliance on a military approach to the regions security challenges.

The Lahad Datu incident dictates the current development of Sabahs border security. Following the incident, Putrajaya recognized the need for even greater maritime security in Eastern Sabah, leading to the establishment of the Eastern Sabah Security Command (ESSCOM) to protect ESSZONE. However, ESSCOM was criticized after its formation for being inefficient in achieving its primary objective of preventing transnational crime, raising questions about Putrajayas military approach to Sabahs borders. As a seasoned Sabahan politician stated in 2016, ESSCOM is not the solution as there were more cross-border kidnappings during ESSCOMs three years than the last 20 years without ESSCOM.

Although the federal government has taken military measures to address cross-border crimes in Sabah, these challenges have been immensely difficult to solve. Geographical factors play a central role here. For example, Sabahs 1,450-kilometer-long porous maritime border lies close to the Philippine province of Tawi-Tawi, and contains 107 islands that intruders can use as staging points before entering Sabahs waters. More military resources are arguably required to protect the coastline, but we must question the viability of a solely military approach to protecting Sabahs borders. Ops Pasirs inability to prevent the 2013 incursion demonstrates the need to explore non-military measures in order to support current initiatives.

Apart from the KFR threat, illegal immigration continues to be one of the central issues in Sabah. From 1990 to 2007, 298,601 immigrants, mostly Filipinos and Indonesians, were deported from Sabah, not including those who remain undetected by authorities. As of 2020, the number of illegal immigrants in Sabah totaled 1.2 million, with the highest concentration in Tawau, the region closest to the southern Philippines. The underlying cause of such high degrees of illegal immigration can be traced to two main reasons: kinship and economic opportunities.

Before the advent of modern borders, some of the earliest immigrants to have set foot in Sabah were the Bajau and Sulu from the Mindanao region of todays Philippines, a fact that forms the basis of the Philippines historic claim over Sabah. Following the Moro conflict in the late twentieth century, many crossed illegally into Sabah, capitalizing on kinship and family ties in order to integrate. Relatives or friends provide illegal immigrants with shelter and nourishment, perpetuating chain migration.

Furthermore, the potential kinship between Sabahan security personnel and illegal immigrants may result in lax enforcement of immigration laws. Poor economic opportunities back home provide additional justification for migrants to cross the border. Due to these reasons, 300 million ringgit per year in military expenditures are insufficient to deter illegal border crossings. It is clear that Sabah also requires soft policies to eliminate illegal immigration effectively.

Sarawak is equally at risk from illegal immigration, stemming from its equally porous border with Kalimantan, the Indonesian portion of the island of Borneo. Indonesias new capital Nusantara in Kalimantan will begin development in the second half of this year, which should prompt Putrajaya to double down on Sarawakian security concerns. It is expected that the Nusantara project will involve the eventual relocation of some 30 million Indonesians, leading many Sarawakians to believe that it could increase illegal border crossings into Malaysia. If unaddressed, transnational crime syndicates may flourish, threatening Sarawaks security.

East Malaysias geographical complexities and diverse demographics require a multi-pronged approach to improving border security and addressing the regions growing non-traditional security threats. Sheer military might will deter some, but will not succeed in preventing all instances of border violations, as seen with Ops Pasir. In any event, the Malaysian federal budget does not have the margins to support the increases in defense spending for Sabah and Sarawak that some are recommending.

For example, Budget 2022 has allocated 26.4 million ringgit ($5.9 million) to ESSCOM, a reduction from Budget 2021s allocation of 26.8 million ringgit ($6.1 million). While ESSCOMs commander has called for increased resources, it is understandably difficult for Putrajaya to fulfill his wishes. Only 75 billion ringgit ($16.9 billion), or 22.6 percent of Budget 2022, is committed to development costs, with the remaining 233.5 billion ($52.7 billion) spent on operational costs. Thus, margins for defense development are slim, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic. As the government pushes an expansionary fiscal policy post-COVID-19, increased defense spending is unlikely to be a top priority.

Instead, a multistep compromise is needed. For Sabah, Putrajaya should consider relocating pre-existing Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA) and RMN assets from Peninsular Malaysia to Sabah, as there is substantially less risk of a maritime threat to the former. This gives East Malaysian security operations the assets they require without increasing financial commitments. Additionally, Putrajaya ought to increase the MMEAs scope within ESSCOM whilst reducing the purview of the Malaysian Armed Forces, given that the former focuses specifically on maritime issues.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

Furthermore, minilateral efforts on the Trilateral Cooperative Agreement (TCA) between Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines to patrol the Sulu Sea have been successful in reducing transnational crimes. In March 2022, all three TCA signatories pledged to increase patrols in the area. However, this must be translated into swift action given the persistent threats of cross-border crimes along East Malaysias border.

Finally, the last piece of the puzzle for East Malaysian border security is the pursuit of softer approaches. The Malaysian government must explore how better to tackle the root causes of the emerging non-traditional security threats. Grassroots initiatives in border communities are necessary to instill the nationalism needed to overcome crossborder kinship ties. Putrajaya should also utilize its network of Village Security and Development Committees in rural areas to educate villagers on the importance of their role in protecting national security and to rebuild trust in the Federation.

The onus is on Putrajaya to re-examine its strategy toward East Malaysias security. The incursion of Lahad Datu in 2013 is a bitter lesson that Malaysia will have to endure. To prevent a recurrence, it must undertake multilayered efforts to address East Malaysias border security challenges.

View post:
Reexamining East Malaysian Security in an Age of Growing Threats - The Diplomat

President Joe Biden has let more illegal migrants into the United States than there are people in his home state of Delaware a shocking 1.049 million, per the administrations own disclosures.

And thats just the adults they caught and released; if you add in got-aways and unaccompanied minors, that figure approaches 2 million (closer to a West Virginia or an Idaho).

Never mind the horror stories like the one about the 53 migrants who died in a truck in San Antonio, Texas, last week; a population increase of that size will have an enormous impact on the US itself. Especially so given the more than 11 million people here illegally at the start of 2022, according to estimates from the Center for Immigration Studies a massive uptick over the previous years figure, courtesy of Let-Em-In Joe.

Every month, the number of migrants encountered by US Customs and Border Protection keeps rising. Mays was the highest ever, breaking the record set in April. There wont be any letup until the White House stops its wink-and-nod routine that heartlessly encourages illegal migration.

Dont think the nation can absorb this massive influx without major changes and pain. Just look at the town of Eagle Pass in Texas. Video taken there showed hundreds of suspected illegal migrants gathered by a roadside, in a town of 30,000 thats seen 1,000 illegal migrants apprehended and processed there per day.

The towns mayor, Rolando Salinas Jr. (a Democrat), says his police and fire services are stretched thin and expresses deep frustration: The US needs to let the world know there are rules, theres laws you have to follow. If you come to the US, youre not going to get all these resources because thats what they think.

Yet thats just what the Biden administration has encouraged them to. Indeed, human traffickers allegedly call his policy La Invitacin.

Its destroying small border towns like Eagle Pass. And it has huge implications for politics, budgets and crime around the country:These numbers are like adding whole new states.

Dont believe anyone who says we cant do anything about it. These numbers were nowhere near as bad during the Trump administration. Then, the US posture was clear i.e., that immigrants must pursue legal pathways and included elements like the Remain in Mexico policy, which Biden is ending, and the Title 42 expulsion rule, which hes vowed to end.

Secure borders are better for US citizens and would-be migrants. Biden and other open-border enthusiasts can keep up their humanitarian charade and do huge collateral damage along the way.

But all the evidence we need of how deadly wrong they are can be found in Eagle Pass, San Antonio and dozens of other towns and cities.

Read the rest here:
Biden's immigration insanity is breaking the nation - New York Post

Papeles! the tall man with baggy eyes and a black Carhartt sweatshirt demanded through a small opening in the glass door.

Frightened, the young woman, who Ill refer to as Diana, rushed back to her car. Shaking, she drove down the road several blocks with her young child, where she waited for me to arrive.

I tried to explain our situation, Diana said. But he just kept screaming, Papeles!

A few minutes later, I drove up Shepard Drive toward the local U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office, which is located on the corner of Shepard and Turner. An old car wash sign towers over the parking lot, providing evidence of the buildings once civilian past.

I assured Diana that everything would be alright. Although, to be honest, I didnt know if it would. The same man who had startled her earlier cracked open the door. I explained myself, and asked if I could accompany them inside.

No, the man replied curtly.

Will they have an interpreter? I replied.

Yes, he said, but as I knew from other immigrants, interpretation is often done with Google translator.

When will they be released? I asked.

I cant say, he responded.

As I waited outside, I reflected on Dianas recent journey. Alongside her family, she fled Latin America in early May after receiving countless death threats. Members of a local guerilla group killed her husband after he refused to support the rebels cause with monthly payments. Now, they were coming after the entire family. So, they fled to the United States with the hope of being granted asylum.

Every year, over 1 million people migrate to the U.S., but only a fraction of these individuals are eligible for asylum. And even fewer receive it. In 2019, which is the most recent year with accurate data, only 46,500 people were granted asylum, down from nearly 150,000 per year in the mid-1990s. Callously, as the demand for asylum has increased, the U.S. government has consistently reduced the number of annual slots available. Under the Trump administration, the number of people granted asylum nearly bottomed out.

During the Trump years, the Durango ICE facility was a lively place. Agents roamed the county, hunting down undocumented migrants. Unmarked cars were so common in trailer parks that residents set up neighborhood watch groups via WhatsApp and installed security cameras. One agent would even post up undercover on Friday nights at El Rancho Tavern.

Hed get drunk with us, and start asking questions that implicated people we knew, one member of the immigrant community recently told me. Hed even run his finger under his nose to try and bait people into selling him drugs. Can you believe that?

ICE was created in 2002 under the Homeland Security Act. As a branch of the Department of Homeland Security, ICEs ostensible mission is to protect America from the cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety. However, in practice, ICE has ushered in a historic level of government intrusion and has facilitated the abuse of individual rights and liberties.

Today, ICE continues to seed fear in our local community and they do so with absolutely no citizen oversight. Everyday immigrants like Diana are forced to attend meetings with ICE agents where their very future in this country may be determined alone. No other government agency in our community operates with such anonymity nor should they.

Democracy depends on the transparency of elections and the accountability of government officials. In the absence of these conditions, democracy withers away. In this sense, supporting the rights of local immigrants is about much more than individual lives, its about our collective future as a nation.

Ben Waddell is an associate professor of sociology at Fort Lewis College and serves on the board of Compaeros, a Durango-based immigration rights nonprofit.

Read more:
Local immigrants, ICE, our collective future converge The Durango Herald - The Durango Herald

In a blow to states that sued the Biden administration to bring the border under control, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the Department of Homeland Security isnt required to continue the Trump-era Migrant Protection Protocols better known as Remain in Mexico and that lower courts cant force the government to send illegal migrants back across the border to await their immigration hearings.

That opinion punted to the lower courts the most important questions: Can the administration continue releasing thousands of migrants daily? And what obligations does the president have to enforce the laws Congress wrote?

Unlike every previous president, Joe Biden has no policy to deter illegal entrants. Instead, his administration believes its responsibility is ensuring that there are safe, orderly, and legal pathways for every alien who enters the United States legally or otherwise to seek asylum.

That is, in part, why the administration is fighting to terminate pandemic-related orders issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under Title 42, directing the expulsion of migrants who have entered illegally. Expelled aliens cant apply for asylum, a process that can take years and a protection that only 14% of border asylum claimants historically have received.

In the absence of a border deterrence policy, illegal entries have soared. Border Patrol agents at the southwest border apprehended a record number of illegal entrants in fiscal year 2021 and set a new monthly record for apprehensions there in May.

All told, CBP has encountered more than 2.7 million illegal immigrants at the US-Mexico line since February 2021. DHS expelled about 53% of them under Title 42, but more than 1.28 million others were processed for removal proceedings, and the administration has released nearly 1.05 million of those into the United States where they will remain indefinitely through the end of May.

Thats not how its supposed to work. The immigration laws require DHS to detain illegal migrants, with one exception. Congress gave the department very limited authority to parole individuals into the United States, but only for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.

DHS asserts the surge of migrants at the southwest border has overwhelmed its detention capacity, though Immigration and Customs Enforcement is not using all of its detention beds and the president wants Congress to cut detention space by more than a quarter in FY 2023. Therefore, the administration argues, releasing illegal migrants into the United States on parole is a significant public benefit.

The Supreme Court ruled narrowly, finding that DHS has discretion to return illegal migrants back to Mexico to await their hearings and thus also has discretion not to. Additionally, the justices held that DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas latest memo terminating MPP was a final agency action, separate from an earlier version courts had found violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Finally, it determined that lower courts cant order the sorts of class-wide injunctive relief that had stymied numerous Trump administration immigration initiatives.

That leaves it to the lower courts to determine whether the law requires illegal migrants to be detained and to assess whether Congress has placed restrictions on the administrations authority to release illegal migrants on parole and, if so, what those restrictions entail.

Congressional Republicans hostile to the presidents border policy will have their say on these issues if they gain control in November, too. Thursdays Supreme Court opinion is a setback to the states, but its far from the last word on Bidens border policies.

Andrew Arthur is a former INS associate general counsel, congressional staffer and staff director, and immigration judge who now serves as the resident fellow in law and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies.

Read more:
Biden has no policy to deter illegal immigration, but the fight isn't over yet - New York Post