Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON (AP) President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats proposed a major immigration overhaul Thursday that would offer an eight-year pathway to citizenship to the estimated 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally.

The legislation reflects the broad priorities for immigration changes that Biden laid out on his first day in office, including an increase in visas, more money to process asylum applications and new technology at the southern border.

It would be a sharp reversal of Trump administration policies, and parts are likely to face opposition from a number of Republicans. Biden has acknowledged he might accept a more-piecemeal approach if separate major elements could be approved.

We have an economic and moral imperative to pass big, bold and inclusive immigration reform, said New Jersey Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez, one of the lead sponsors of the bill, in unveiling it Thursday.

Menendez said Democrats have failed in the past because they have too quickly given in to fringe voices who have refused to accept the humanity and contributions of immigrants to our country and dismiss everything, no matter how significant it is in terms of the national security, as amnesty.

Separately, enforcement guidelines released Thursday by the new administration would target immigration enforcement more directly at people in the country illegally who pose a threat. That, too, would be a reversal from the broader targeting policy of Immigration and Customs Enforcement under Trump.

The major immigration overhaul legislation would offer one of the fastest pathways to citizenship of any proposed measure in recent years, but it would do so without offering any enhanced border security, which past immigration negotiations have used as a way to win Republican votes. Without enhanced security, it faces tough odds in a closely divided Congress.

Menendez said he had been speaking to Republican colleagues in an effort toward putting the pieces of a puzzle together on a bill that would receive enough votes to pass. He acknowledged the final product is likely to change significantly. But he also suggested that elements of the proposal could be included through a parliamentary maneuver in a budget bill that would only require 51 votes.

The bill Democrats introduced Thursday would immediately provide green cards to farm workers, immigrants with temporary protected status and young people who arrived in the U.S. illegally as children. For others living in the U.S. as of Jan. 1, 2021, the plan establishes a five-year path to temporary legal status. If they pass background checks, pay taxes and fulfill other basic requirements, then, after three years, they can pursue citizenship.

The plan also would raise the current per-country caps for family and employment-based immigrant visas. It would eliminate the penalty barring those immigrants who live in the U.S. without authorization and who then leave the country from returning for three to 10 years. It also would provide resources for more judges, support staff and technology to address the backlog in processing asylum seekers.

The bill would expand transnational anti-drug task forces in Central America and enhance technology at the border. And it would set up refugee processing in Central America, to try to prevent some of the immigrant caravans that have overwhelmed border security in recent years.

The plan includes $4 billion spread over four years to try to boost economic development and tackle corruption in Latin American countries, to lessen pressure for migration to the U.S.

Democratic lawmakers, including lead sponsors California Rep. Linda Sanchez and Menendez, held a virtual press conference Thursday to unveil the bill.

Our border policy is broken, period, Sanchez said. But this bill employs a multipronged approach that will manage the border, address the root causes of migration crack down on bad actors and create safe and legal channels for those who are seeking protection.

Comprehensive immigration legislation has struggled to gain traction in Congress for decades.

Menendez was part of the bipartisan Gang of Eight senators who negotiated a 2013 bill that ultimately collapsed. Prior to that, a bill backed by President George W. Bush failed in Congress as well, after multiple attempts at compromise.

Republican immigration hardliners were already panning the bill Thursday. Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, charged in a statement that the bill rewards those who broke the law and floods the labor market at a time when millions of Americans are out of work.

President Bidens radical proposal is a nonstarter and should be rejected by Congress, he said.

Sanchez noted that Congress has tried and failed in the past, and we arent naive about the challenges that we face. But she contended that there is a broad coalition that wants to deliver on real reform.

While Biden is pushing a comprehensive bill, he suggested earlier this week he may be open to a more piecemeal approach. During a CNN town hall Tuesday night, he said that while a pathway to citizenship would be essential in any immigration bill, theres things I would deal by itself. That could leave the door open to standalone bills focused on providing a pathway to citizenship for various populations.

Menendez, too, seemed to suggest he was open to a piece-by-piece approach.

If we can get certain elements of this standing up and passed individually both in the House and the Senate, thats great, he said.

See the original post:
Democrats consider piecemeal approach to immigration reform - The Associated Press

The Week

Britain's Supreme Court ruled unanimously Friday that drivers for the ride-hailing service Uber are company "workers," not independent contractors, and are therefore entitled to the national minimum wage, paid annual leave, and other benefits. The court also agreed with lower courts that Uber drivers are on the clock when they are logged in to the app, ready to accept passengers, not as Uber had argued only when they are actually driving people to their destination. Uber has 65,000 active drivers in the U.K., The Associated Press reports, and the ruling threatens to upend its entire business model in the country. "Questions still remain about how the new classification will work, and how it affects gig economy workers who work not only for Uber, but also for other competing apps," BBC News reports. This was Uber's final appeal, after losing in three lower tribunals starting in 2016. "I think it's a massive achievement in a way that we were able to stand up against a giant," said Yaseen Aslam, president of the App Drivers & Couriers Union (ADCU) and one of the original plaintiffs in the case. Another original litigant, ADCU general secretary James Farrar, called the ruling "a win-win-win for drivers, passengers and cities," because "Uber now has the correct economic incentives not to oversupply the market with too many vehicles and too many drivers." Uber shares were down more than 3 percent in premarket trading in New York, AP notes. More stories from theweek.comHow Rush Limbaugh broke the old media and built the new one5 outrageously funny cartoons about Ted Cruz's Cancun getawayAmerican politicians hide behind the palace walls

More:
Democrats immigration reform bill would increase technology at borders, provide path to earned citizenship: Rep. Titus - Yahoo News

Our commenting has been temporarily disabled.

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to ourTerms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sentvia e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

Go here to see the original:
Letter to the editor: Trump the only one to act on immigration reform - TribLIVE

What are rare earth metals and why should you care about them? Rare earth metals are critical for manufacturing just about every electronic device that you, and all of the world's modern militaries, use every day. They're essential for making screens, hard drives, and precision glass.

Without rare earths, you can't use a cell phone, save a document, watch a Netflix series, drive a new car, take a digital photograph, fly a drone, target a missile, or build a fighter jet. You wouldn't even be able to read Signal though we promise to make hard copies available if it comes to that.

It just so happens that China has a near-monopoly on the business of refining these metals for use in manufacturing. Since the 1990s, when environmental regulations in the US made it cheaper to refine rare earths in China, Beijing's share of the industry has risen from about 30 percent to more than 80 percent today. With that kind of market power, China can throw its weight around, and the US-China rivalry over technology creates a powerful incentive to do just that.

What is China threatening? According to the Financial Times scoop, China is conducting a fresh study to determine whether cutting off rare earths exports to the US would cripple the US defense industry, which relies on the stuff to make all of its key weapons systems. A single F-35 fighter jet, for example, contains close to 1,000 pounds of rare earths metals, according to a US congressional report.

The Pentagon knows all this, right? Of course. For years, Pentagon planners have been looking for ways to secure more access to rare earths mines, in particular by making inroads in southern African countries that are rich in reserves. And the Trump administration last year issued an emergency order to boost rare earths production in the US.

But the challenge isn't so much in finding rare earths which are, despite their name, present all over the world, including in the US. It's extracting them and then refining them that costs and pollutes a lot. Private investors haven't been able to make it profitable under US rules, so US agencies and lawmakers have explored subsidizing production or making regulatory changes that make more rare earths available for refining.

But for a Biden administration that has put environmental protection at the center of its agenda, this could mean a tough tradeoff: protect the defense industry and Silicon Valley, or protect the environment.

Would China really do this? Cutting off rare earth supplies to the US would be a huge blow to the US defense industry, and could also complicate things for Silicon Valley, which relies on Chinese rare earths as well though less so because so much of their manufacturing is actually in China at the moment.

Washington would almost certainly respond with severe sanctions or export limitations of its own. The US has already moved to limit China's ability to buy semiconductors, an area where China is almost entirely dependent on the outside world, in particular on Taiwan.

But there's another consideration for China don't rock your own boat. By threatening to cut rare earths supply, the Chinese government adds to other countries' sense of urgency about developing their own mining and refining. While that obviously won't happen overnight, the threat of losing access to 80-90 percent of the world's rare earths supply would accelerate things significantly.

More Show less

More here:
Can Biden work with Lpez Obrador on meaningful immigration reform? - GZERO Media

My motto is, get something done, said Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.). Whatever we do, we can't walk away empty-handed.

Like many other Democrats committed to an immigration overhaul, Gomez didn't publicly close the door to a massive deal, hoping to give Biden's team a chance: Does it mean a big immigration reform package? Maybe. Does it mean using budget reconciliation? Possibly. Or does it mean individual bills? Could be.

But Democratic veterans say they learned from the party's big immigration letdown in 2009, the last time it held all levers of power. Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) said he remembered then-President Barack Obama telling the Congressional Hispanic Caucus about his overhaul plans in April that year. The Blue Dog Democrat then leaned over to a colleague and whispered, It aint gonna happen."

And he warned the same thing could happen under Biden.

"Bottom line is, even when we had a supermajority in a better situation than were in right now, we did not pass anything," Cuellar said. Im not saying no way, Im just saying it would be very difficult.

Democratic veterans say they learned from the party's big immigration letdown in 2009, the last time it held all levers of power. Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas) said he remembered then-President Barack Obama telling the Congressional Hispanic Caucus about his overhaul plans in April that year. | Alex Brandon/AP Photo

The divide over how to reshape the nations broken immigration system is a well-known Washington tripwire. But the question of whether to pursue a piecemeal approach or take one big swing has fresh urgency with Democrats in charge of Congress and the White House.

Democrats insist they're pursuing a dual-track approach, with Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and Rep. Linda Snchez (D-Calif.) launching a full whip effort for Bidens comprehensive bill while leadership tees up more narrow proposals for floor time, likely in March.

Brian Deese, director of the White Houses National Economic Council, and Jeff Zients, Bidens coronavirus coordinator, will meet with the CHC next week. Several Democrats privately said theyre waiting on Biden to publicly signal hes open to a more step-by-step path something those close to him have expressed openness to, but the president and White House officials have yet to say outright.

April 1 looms on the calendar as Democrats face mounting pressure from immigration activists to move at least some key priorities. To skip another round of lengthy hearings, the party has to bring immigration-related bills that were passed last year such as protections for Dreamers or a farm worker modernization bill to the floor by then.

I think there is some unity around the idea" of a piecemeal strategy, Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said, while adding she would also push very, very hard for the broader plan Biden and his allies plan to release next week.

Jayapal, who started her career in politics as an immigration activist, said Democrats want to push forward on a bigger proposal while moving on a "parallel track" of bringing previously passed smaller bills to the floor.

Those tricky politics have already started playing out on the Hill as Democrats work to finalize their massive $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief bill. The debate raging behind the scenes: whether taxpaying undocumented immigrants should be eligible for the measure's $1,400 stimulus checks.

Top Democrats spent multiple days convincing members of the CHC, led by Gomez, not to offer an amendment on the issue during that bills markup this week a vote that would have been deeply uncomfortable for the partys centrists.

Nikki Haley enjoyed the MAGA glow while avoiding Trump's brash brand of politics. But in the aftermath of the Capitol insurrection, that position is becoming less and less tenable.

The California Democrat ultimately decided not to force the vote, and later said in an interview, It was something that we couldn't reach agreement on. Gomez added that he hopes to find a place for the measure in future packages and build support for it among his colleagues.

Latinos in my district, since November, had a 1,000 percent increase in deaths because of Covid, said Gomez. And I believe that since these folks are paying taxes, they deserve to get some of those benefits.

A similar non-binding amendment vote in the Senate last week also showed how sharp the divisions are, with eight Democrats breaking ranks to back a GOP amendment that would have prohibited undocumented immigrants from receiving checks.

Democrats have taken a small step to expand payment access since last year. They negotiated a new provision in December's massive relief bill to fix a glitch that prevented U.S. citizens from receiving stimulus checks if someone in their household was undocumented. And in the Covid package moving through committee this week, Democrats expanded the eligibility pool for households to receive checks to include all children who are U.S. citizens regardless of their parents' immigration status.

The benchmark is the social security number, said a White House aide.

But friction over the stimulus checks shows that despite party leaders' leftward shift on multiple issues since the Obama years, Democrats are still fractured over how ambitious they can get on immigration.

President Joe Biden entered office facing demands from immigration advocacy groups to move legislation in his first 100 days, using that window to enact massive policy changes before Congress productivity plummets as lawmakers pivot toward the next election cycle. | Alex Wong/Getty Images

Biden entered office facing demands from immigration advocacy groups to move legislation in his first 100 days, using that window to enact massive policy changes before Congress productivity plummets as lawmakers pivot toward the next election cycle.

And those expectations have sparked a frenzied internal debate over tactics and the timing of Bidens plans.

We need to see what combination of bills may indeed get those 60 votes, said Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.), referring to the necessary threshold for Senate passage. Chu said she's hoping that Biden's bill can get there but acknowledged the uphill climb and said "at least there's some alternatives, in case it doesn't."

Chu and other members of the group working on the Biden plan, dubbed The Closers, will start what she called "an all-out effort" on the Hill next week after they release the text of the presidents immigration package.

Senior House Democrats highly doubt they could wrangle 218 votes for a massive reform package and think the chances of passage in the 50-50 Senate are next to zero. Still, theyre keeping hope alive for a miracle.

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) said lawmakers are haunted by memories from the Obama administration, when Democrats missed their chance to muscle through immigration reform. Aguilar, a member of leadership, described Biden's White House as learning at least some lessons from the past.

We are in a different moment in the sense that we have the administration leaning in pretty hard on this topic and moving in sync with us and being so closely aligned, Aguilar said.

See the article here:
It would be very difficult: Dems prepare for heartburn over Biden immigration plan - POLITICO