Mediaboss Marketing

Sen. Joe ManchinJoe ManchinBiden risks first major fight with progressives Biden sets off Capitol Hill scramble on spending, taxes White House moves to reshape role of US capitalism MORE (D-W.Va.) said on Thursday after visiting the U.S.-Mexico border that it is "past time" for Congress to address immigration reform, including a path to citizenship,and called the border surge a "crisis."

"It is beyond time, past time, to do immigration reform. Immigration reform should be a pathway to citizenship. People that have been here, they might have come here the wrong way but they came here for the right reason," Manchin said during a press conference.

"We have children that came here that have no other home but America.There should be a pathway for that, for our dreamers," he added.

Manchin and Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) toured the U.S.-Mexico border on Thursday, including taking a helicopter and boat tour with Customs and Border Protection. They also visited a Laredo, Texas, port of entry and met with migrant families.

Manchin, during the press conference,floated a 90-day moratorium on immigration, saying that he was "just throwing out different ideas."

"We've got a human crisis that I'm seeing here ... so if that means shutting everything down for 90 days of how we have people come into our country, sending that message that we're not going to be taking people into this country until we get our ability to make sure we're able to do it and do it right, is that going to put the pressure?" Manchin asked.

"Something has to be done and it has to be expedited. ... This problem is not going away. This problem will not cure itself, I can assure you, and they're coming in droves," he said.

Manchin also backed beefed up border security, more immigration judges and allowing for immigrants to apply for asylum back in their home countries rather than making an often dangerous journey to the United States.

"It would be safer. It would be much more humane. ... It's something that we should be doing," he said.

Manchin, part of a shrinking group of centrist senators, is at the center of the 50-50 Senate, where he has an outsized influence on nearly every policy debate. Cuellar noted near the start of the press conference that Manchin "plays a very important role."

The border trip comes as Biden has come under criticism from Republicans, and Democrats have shown signs of concern about asurge of unaccompanied children arriving along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The U.S. was in custody of at least 15,000 migrant children as of late last week, and the federal government has struggled to secure enough housing for all of them, particularly during the pandemic.

Manchin said that his characterization of the surge as a "crisis," wasn't criticism of Biden.

"When I call this a crisis, I'm not blaming the crisis on the present administration of President BidenJoe BidenThe Hill's Morning Report - GOP pounces on Biden's infrastructure plan Biden administration unveils network of community leaders to urge COVID-19 vaccinations Pompeo 'regrets' not making more progress with North Korea MORE, the former administration of PresidentTrump," he said. "This has been a human crisis for a long, long time."

Manchin added that he planned to return to Washington, D.C., and discuss his trip with both Biden and his colleagues.

Biden has proposed a sweeping, comprehensive immigration reform bill, though it's unlikely that could pass in the Senate where 10 GOP votes would be needed. A bipartisan group is also holding talks about a smaller bill that would address immigrants brought into the country illegally as children.

"This can happen," Manchin added about immigration legislation. "Common sense can prevail and that's what we're hopeful for."

See original here:
Manchin after border visit: 'Past time to do immigration reform' | TheHill - The Hill

Rep. Veronica Escobar (D.-Tex.) during a press conference in Washington, D.C., in November 2019.

Last week, President Biden tapped Vice President Kamala Harris to take charge of the influx of immigrants arriving at the U.S.-Mexico borderan issue that has long been a political lightning rod but has become especially contentious over the last several weeks.

At its core, immigration reform is a humanitarian issue. But its also a subject that has myriad consequences on American business and the entrepreneurial ecosystem: Immigrants make up roughly 15% of workers in the U.S., yet they are 80% more likely than U.S.-born workers to become entrepreneurs,according to a recent Wharton/National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) paper. Separate research shows that these immigrant-founded businesses drive more than $1 trillion in sales and employ some 8 million people in the U.S.

Even the Business Roundtablea collection of Americas top CEOshas advocated for the need for better immigration policies. A 2018 study by the BRT found that scaling back a program that encourages the employment of highly skilled immigrants would result in the loss of 443,000 jobs over the next decade, a number that includes some 25o,000 jobs held by American-born workers.

The voices of these CEOs are important, but some of the most effective advocates on behalf of a better approach to immigration, however, happen to be womenwomen who are over the age of 50. And so, as part of our regular segment on Morning Joe highlighting women over the age of 50 who are changing the world, Forbes and Know Your Value want to shine a light on the women who have raised their voices in support of immigration reform. They are:

Veronica Escobar, 51: A third-generation El Pasoan, Escobar was sworn in as her citys first female member of Congressand the first of two Latinas from Texas to serve in Congressin January 2019.

Shes moved quickly over her last two years in office, becoming the co-chair of Congress Womens Working Group on Immigration Reform and cofounding the Congressional Moms Task Force on Family Separation. Its an issue thats close to home: In 2017, the Trump Administration quietly used El Paso as a testing ground for the shameful family separation policy, which ripped thousands of children from their parents arms at our southern border, Escobar says.

In 2020, Escobar delivered the Spanish-language Democratic response to President Trumps State of the Union address and used part of her time to focus on immigration. More recently, shes concentrating on how she can use her positionas the representative of a border communityto reshape a system that has focused on border militarization. As she wrote in the New York Times last week: Im not asking for open borders. Im simply asking for open minds.

Cecilia Munoz, 58: The daughter of Bolivian immigrants, Munoz has dedicated her career to advocating on behalf of people like her parents. While an undergraduate at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, Munoz tutored Hispanic inmates at the state prison near her school. When she was just 24 years old, she took a job with Catholic Charities in Chicagoand eventually asked her boss so many questions about how the organization was going to help immigrants get legal status under the 1986 immigration reform law that she was put in charge of the organizations legal program.

In 2000, Munoz was awarded the MacArthur Fellowship Genius Grant for her work around immigration and civil rights, and in 2009 joined the Obama Administration as the head of Intergovernmental Affairs. In 2012, she became the first Hispanic person to serve as the director of the White House Domestic Policy Counciland as such, received criticism for supporting Obamas deportation policy but was ultimately a crucial figure in helping DACA come to be.

Daca is not a permanent solution to our nations immigration problems. Far from it. We still need Congress to do its job and fix our immigration system, she wrote in 2018. Its a position she maintains to this day and one of the reasons Biden tapped her to serve on his transition team. The fundamental questions of American immigrationwho should be admitted legally, and who deserves protection when fleeing dangerare matters for Congress to answer, she wrote in The Atlantic this week.

Penny Pritzker, 61: Pritzker bridges the private and public sectors as a billionaire heir of the Pritzker familyand the founder and chairman of PSP Partners, a private investment firmand the former U.S. Secretary of Commerce, a position she held from 2013 until 2017. She is also the descendant of two immigrants who fled political oppression in czarist Russia in search of a better life in the United States, and so she sees immigration reform as a part of her familys history.

Her private sector experience means she both understands the business case for immigration reform and has a powerful voice in the matter. When she speaks, she grounds her advocacy in sound economic arguments.

Paradoxically, creating an environment in the name of security that makes foreigners less welcome and less likely to visit will make our country less prosperous and, eventually, less secure, she has said. We need to fix the legal visa process more broadly, use technology to further secure our borders and establish a pathway for the roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the shadows. We should make smart changes to the H1B visa process to ensure that we still welcome highly talented people who create jobs here in America, while simultaneously protecting against anyone trying to game the system on the margins to undercut our domestic workforce.

Shifra Rubin, 71: Judge Shifra Rubin doesnt have a national profile like the other women on this list, and as such is the unsung herobut she represents what it means to be over 50, breaking boundaries and using her voice to speak for the voiceless.

Rubin was born in Israel and grew up on three different continents, acquiring fluency in six different languages along the way. She was a promising student but left college early, marrying and starting a family. By her mid-40s, Rubin was a single mother supporting her kids in a series of dead-end jobs, and she realized she wanted more for herself. At the age of 48, after pulling all-nighters to pass the LSAT, she enrolled in Rutgers Law School. Rubin attended school at night while working full time and caring for her family during the day.

After graduating in her early 50s, Rubin dedicated the next 14 years defending immigrant rights, representing asylum seekers and others facing deportation. In 2016, then Attorney General Loretta Lynchelected Rubin to serve as a judge on the Newark Immigration Court.

She is an anomaly in many ways, Rubins daughter, Noa Yachot, told Forbes. An immigrant herself, who became a federal judge, a judge whose background is in human rights, a late-career attorney who managed to reach the top of her field, anddespite a life of financial hardshipchose a career in public service.

Originally posted here:
The Women Over 50 Proving That Immigration Reform Is Needed For Business And Society - Forbes

The BDN Editorial Board operates independently from the newsroom, and does not set policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or onbangordailynews.com.

Two groups of lawmakers took trips to the U.S-Mexico border last week. Their conclusions, like their trips, are vastly different, highlighting the difficulty of passing and enacting new laws to improve Americas broken immigration system.

A group of U.S. Senate Republicans traveled to a Border Patrol detention facility in Texas and to the border at the Rio Grande River. At a riverside press conference, some of the senators placed the blame for the crisis solely on President Joe Biden, largely blaming his halting construction of a border wall.

A few hundred miles away, Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives visited a detention center, run by the Department of Health and Human Services, where unaccompanied minors are being held. Members of that delegation emphasized that they want to ensure that migrant children are not mistreated and blamed the Trump administration for the problems at the border.

These two perspectives might be hard to bridge, but that is no excuse for Congress to continue to duck its responsibility to develop immigration policies that address both concerns for border security and for the humane treatment of migrants who are traveling to the U.S. border seeking to escape violence, poverty and natural disasters in their home countries.

Comprehensive immigration legislation has a poor history in the Capitol. The last most successful attempt at comprehensive reform, in 2013, failed when House Speaker John Boehner refused to bring a Senate-passed bill to the floor. That bill, which passed on a strong bipartisan 68-32 vote in the Senate, addressed many aspects of immigration including funding for border security, a shift toward work-based visas, a path toward citizenship for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. and requirements for employers to verify the status of workers.

President Biden has sent an extensive immigration bill to Congress this year. It has already been panned by many Republican lawmakers, although House Republicans have offered a different plan.

In Texas last week, Sen. Chuck Grassley said there was no point in lawmakers talking about immigration reform while the border was open.

How can you pass an immigration bill when you have an open border? Grassley asked during a press conference at the Rio Grande River. If they want to accomplish anything on immigration and I want to help them it would be secure the border. You have to stop the bleeding before you can take care of the problem.

For the record, the border is not wide open. The border remains largely closed as Biden continues to use a public health authority that Trump invoked in March 2020 to allow for migrants apprehended at the border to be immediately expelled due to the pandemic, Politico reported earlier this month. The administration has made exceptions for unaccompanied children and some families arriving with small children.

Apprehensions have increased dramatically this year. The U.S. Border Patrol reported apprehending nearly 100,000 migrants in February. This comes after a precipitous drop in apprehensions from a recent high of nearly 133,000 in May 2019.

Thousands of unaccompanied children are being held at Customs and Border Patrol facilities along the border and another 10,500 children are in emergency facilities overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services.

These situations highlight the need for significant and quick changes in immigration policy and practices.

Those changes should come from Congress.

It is extremely frustrating that this isnt a more bipartisan effort, Rep. Tony Gonzalez, a Republican from Texas, recently told The Hill. He added: It starts by coming together and having a conversation.

Right now theres two trains of thought either youre for border patrol and against immigration, or youre for immigration and against border patrol. Thats the wrong answer, said Gonzalez who was not on a weekend trip to the border.

We need to have both for a secure border as well as being compassionate and having a robust immigration system.

Gonzalezs model is precisely what Congress should do.

In the absence of congressional action, presidents have turned to executive orders to change immigration policies. This has caused a see-saw set of policies that change with each administration.

Former President Donald Trump used hundreds of executive actions to limit immigration to the United States and to divert billions of dollars in Pentagon funding to support construction on a border wall. Democrats criticized the former president for his use of executive orders to limit immigration and to target specific groups, such as Muslims. On the day he took office, Biden stopped the construction of border barriers through an executive order. Other orders he signed regarding immigration implement reviews and wont immediately change policy.

Those who object to Bidens immigration executive orders and support more funding for border security, and those who want a humane immigration system that also supports the millions of undocumented migrants who are living in the United States, must stop grandstanding and start working together.

Crafting workable, meaningful immigration policies that address current realities is difficult. It hasnt always made it across the finish line, but this has been done before. Congress can do it again.

Original post:
Editorial: Congress must take up comprehensive immigration reforms - Bangor Daily News

At the urging of President Biden, two members of Congress Senator Robert Menendez and Representative Linda Sanchez introduced companion 353-page bills last month in the Senate and the House entitled the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021.

Presented as a comprehensive modernization of our nations long outdated immigration laws, this proposed legislation uniformly lauded by Democrats and opposed by Republicans features many provisions that U.S. employers may welcome, including, as this White House Fact Sheet details, a path to legal status, employment authorization, and eventually, American citizenship, for some 11 million undocumented noncitizens; relief for Dreamers, persons in Temporary Protected Status, and immigrant farmworkers; and improvements to the legal, employment-based immigration system.

Although the media has widely reported on the proposal in broad strokes, little attention has been given to one significant part known as Title V (Employment Authorization and Protecting Workers from Exploitation).

As we shall show, employers should be wary of Title V because, if this title were passed as a standalone act, or tacked onto (even in pieces) must-pass legislation in the Democratic-controlled house and a (post-filibuster) Democratic-controlled Senate, it would dramatically expand potential employer liability, create new penalties, and increase compliance obligations involving I-9 and E-Verify employment eligibility verification. It would also create a legal basis for noncitizens who are material witnesses or deemed likely to be helpful to the investigation of a workplace claim under a host of federal, state and local employment laws to be granted an array of immigration benefits under the legal immigration system (including U visa status, temporary relief from removal, employment authorization, and a path to lawful permanent resident status).

Expanded Employer Liability for Discrimination Based on National Origin or Citizenship Status

If enacted, Title V ( 5105) would expand the population of potential claimants protected against citizenship status discrimination to include all noncitizens with employment authorization, including presumably employment-based nonimmigrants and holders of Employment Authorization Documents (EADs). Under current law, Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 274B(a), only protected individuals may claim citizenship status discrimination. Protected individuals are currently defined as U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents who are not yet eligible to apply for naturalization or who have applied within six months of eligibility, and persons granted asylum or refugee status. Under 5105, enforcement jurisdiction over such claims would remain with the Immigrant and Employee Rights (IER) Section of the Civil Rights Division within the Department of Justice (formerly, the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices). This change would thus prevent employers from refusing to sponsor nonimmigrants for employment-based immigration benefits (such as STEM-based optional practical training, work visas, and green cards) for particular positions if the employer already has a practice of sponsoring foreign workers in these jobs.

Additionally, Title V ( 5105) would extend protection against national origin and citizenship status discrimination beyond the acts of hiring and discharge from employment to also include verification of the individuals eligibility to work in the United States or verification of employment authorization, and would transfer enforcement jurisdiction over this form of national origin discrimination from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to the IER.

Expanded Employer Liability for Unfair Documentary Practices and for I-9 and E-Verify violations

Title V ( 5105) would expand liability for unfair documentary practices (i.e., where an employer requests more or different documents than minimally required to verify employment eligibility, or refuses to accept such documents). It would also add the disparate impact standard of proof through statistical, pattern-based evidence, and extend such liability beyond citizenship status discrimination to include national origin discrimination as well. (Under current law, unfair documentary practices can only be established based on proof of an intention or purpose to discriminate, i.e., the disparate treatment standard, and such liability is now limited to citizenship status discrimination.)

Moreover, Title V ( 5105) would create new forms of unfair immigration-related employment practices involving improper use of the employment verification system in INA 274A (i.e., the I-9 process and the E-Verify system), referred to in 5105 as the System, if an employer were to (A) deny workers employment or post-employment benefits; (B) misuse the System to discriminate based on national origin or citizenship status; (C) require an employee or prospective employee to use any self-verification feature of the System as a condition of application or employment; (D) use an immigration status verification system, service, or method other than the System; (E) grant unauthorized access to document verification or System data; or (F) fail to take reasonable safeguards against unauthorized loss, use, alteration, or destruction of System data.

Further, Title V ( 5105) would prohibit withholding of employment records required to be maintained under federal, state, or local law, including dates or hours of work and wages received, and penalize the failure to provide such records to any employee, as to whom the records pertain, upon the employees request. It would also require the EEOC to refer all matters alleging immigration-related unfair employment practices filed with the Employment Authorization Commission (established under 5101 of Title V, described below) to the IER.

In addition, Title V ( 5105) would increase existing civil fine amounts across the board for unlawful immigration-related discrimination or other unlawful practices committed against individuals, with fines levied on a per-person basis and adjusted according to the rate of inflation. The new fine levels would take effect one year after the enactment of the statute and cover violations which occur during the intervening 12 months since enactment. Depending on the type of unlawful immigration-related discrimination or other unlawful practices found to have been committed, fines under this section would be pegged at $2,000 to $5,000 for each individual subjected to an unfair immigration-related employment practice, with penalties increasing to as much as $25,000 per person for employers who are repeat offenders.

Protecting Workers from Exploitation

Under Title V ( 5102) a noncitizen with information provided in good faith about a labor or employment violation resulting in a workplace claim would be given U nonimmigrant visa status, as long as any government official involved in labor and employment law enforcement were to certify that the individual cooperated with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Labor (DOL), the EEOC, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), or certain other federal, state or local government agencies in the investigation and prosecution of the claim. In the event DHS conducts an enforcement action at a facility where a workplace claim has been filed or based upon information an employer provided to DHS in retaliation against noncitizen employees, DHS will allow any arrested or detained noncitizens to remain in the U.S. until after DHS notifies law enforcement and allows the enforcing agency the opportunity to conduct interviews of these noncitizens. In addition, individuals who have filed a workplace claim and are material witnesses or have filed a U visa application based upon this section will be entitled to a stay of removal and employment authorization until either the adjudication of the U visa application or resolution of the workplace claim.

Enhanced Penalties

Title V (5103) would prescribe a new penalty of up to $5,000 to be added to INA 274A (involving employment-eligibility verification) if an employer is found to have engaged in civil violations of labor laws related to wages and hours, labor relations, family and medical leave, occupational health and safety, civil rights, or discrimination as long as an enforcing agency has made a finding of a violation with respect to an unauthorized worker.

Preservation of Workplace Rights

The bill would preserve all rights, remedies, and relief provided under any federal, state, or local law relating to workplace rights, including reinstatement and back pay, notwithstanding an employees status as an unauthorized noncitizen during employment or during the back pay period, or the failure of the employer or employee to comply with the employment-eligibility verification requirements of INA 274A or with any other provisions of federal law relating to the unlawful employment of noncitizens. The bill would also allow such an employee to pursue other available causes of action in any civil proceeding. In effect, Title V would reverse the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002), which held that the NLRB had no discretion to award back pay to a noncitizen who was unauthorized for employment in the United States.

Employment Authorization Commission

Title V ( 5101) would establish an Employment Authorization Commission (EAC) comprised of six members noted for their knowledge and experience in the field of employment verification, representing the employer, labor, and civil rights communities. The EAC would (A) make recommendations to the President and Congress on policies to verify the eligibility of employment of noncitizens in the U.S.; (B) evaluate methods to verify employment that are free from discrimination and respect the rights of employment-authorized workers; (C) review error rates for E-Verify and its impact on various populations; and (D) issue a report within 180 days of the appointment of all members. Designed to be temporary in nature, the EAC would terminate within two years of its inception.

***

While the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021 is unlikely to be enacted in its present form, employers should remain vigilant about the possible inclusion of Title V in other legislation whether or not related to immigration. For if this title were enacted, its wide-ranging provisions would materially expand immigration-related worksite liabilities and penalties far beyond current law.

Seyfarth will continue to provide updates as the situation unfolds. For more information, contact the authors or your Seyfarth Business Immigration Group attorney.

Read more:
Beware the Employer Risks Nesting in President Bidens Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill - JD Supra

President Bidens appointment of Vice President Harris to coordinate a response to migration at the southern border is another nail in the coffin of filibuster reform. Republicans are inclined to oppose meaningful immigration reform to start with. Given Harriss presidential ambitions, theyll be united in opposing anything that gives her such a high-profile win. The only way Democrats will be able to deliver even the most modest immigration reform will be to end or deeply curtail the filibuster.

Russel Feldman

Newton

Senators, stop spinning your wheels

The US Senate is the graveyard of worthy progressive bills, and senators should be ashamed of their unproductive performance. Either the majority refuses to vote or the minority filibusters. Filibustering gives the minority party unearned and undeserved power. The presidential election of 2020 clearly determined Americans chose a Democratic president and Democratic majority in the House and Senate. Americans soundly rejected the Republican campaign of misinformation, voter suppression, gerrymandering, Jim Crow racism, trickle-down economics, irresponsible gun rights, anti-environmentalism, and the insurrection to overthrow a legal election.

By filibustering, Republicans can undermine that election, recalling a dark history of human rights violations and subverting the Senates ability to pass meaningful laws.

All Democrat legislators should get on board to honor the 2020 election. Senators Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia should reconsider their views on the filibuster which is not even in the Constitution and not agonize over what Republicans will do if they regain majority status. If the people change whom to support in the next election, so be it. The people will decide.

A simple majority vote can advance the progressive agenda chosen by the voters. The Senates been spinning its wheels far too long.

James Frank

Reading, Pa.

This truly is minority rule

There has been a lot of talk lately about eliminating the filibuster in the US Senate. Should Democrats move to do this? The answer is: absolutely, but not for the reason you might think.

Democrats should end the filibuster because the 50 Republican senators represent 45 percent of the population of the United States. The GOP senators may think they represent half of the country, but the actual numbers show otherwise.

Democrats: Step up and end the (minority) filibuster.

Frank Velluto

Melrose

Read the original here:
Immigration reform, and so much else, depends on eliminating the filibuster - The Boston Globe