Mediaboss Marketing

Can Americans agree on anything anymore? If you pay attention to Congress and the presidential contest, the answer sure seems to be No. But if you ask the American people, youll find the opposite is true. This is the case with one of the most pressing and supposedly divisive issues of our time: immigration.

According to Gallup, more than 75 percent of Americans say immigration is good for the country. On the economy, values and culture, more people say immigrants have made a positive difference than a negative one. In fact, the percentage of Americans who say immigration helps the economy has been rising for a decade. More than three-quarters of adults want Congress to come up with a plan to help undocumented immigrants, admit people to America who have skills the country needs, and secure the border. Our citizens want us to do all of the above, not choose between the options.

The polling is clear: Americans want action on immigration. Yet, year after year, Congress does nothing. Why? Because Republicans and Democrats arent feeling pressure from society to get the job done. To solve this issue, they need to feel that pressure.

It has been said that politics is downstream from culture, and that holds true on immigration. Our leaders and lawmakers wont cooperate until and unless they see the rest of us cooperating. This may seem like a tall task in these partisan times, but nothing is more important for anyone who wants to see immigration reform get done and done right.

What does cooperation look like in practice? It means conservatives partnering with liberals, different faith traditions uniting their voices, business groups and labor unions working together, and other diverse people and groups recognizing that they have common views on this issue. There already is an immigration consensus that cuts across economic, ideological, religious and political lines. Its just a matter of intentionally elevating it.

This has happened before. The criminal justice reform movement that culminated with the First Step Act in 2018 had a diversity of voices many of whom disagreed on most other issues. They achieved success precisely because they put those differences aside. Similarly, with immigration the facts that are obscured by political bickering have a better chance of breaking through when highlighted by people of varied backgrounds and beliefs.

To start, immigration is at the heart of the American story. It is part and parcel of the countrys growth, with each generation seeing a new influx of people from across the globe. Look back far enough and nearly every American can trace their heritage to people who came here in search of a better life. For some, its their parents. For others, its their great-great-great grandparents, or maybe further back. All are testament to Americas appeal and its power to uplift all who come here.

Immigration is essential to the American economy. Not only do immigrants fill millions of jobs, they create millions of jobs, too. Immigrants are twice as likely to start businesses; they have founded 40 percent of the companies on the Fortune 500. To keep the economy growing, our country needs more immigrants, not fewer, to foster innovations, build companies, take new jobs, and create opportunities and prosperity that benefit us all.

Finally, immigration is an expression of Americas commitment to justice and human dignity. Theres a reason that nearly 90 percent of our fellow citizens want the Dreamers undocumented immigrants brought here as children to be allowed to stay. Its the same reason we hold up Ellis Island as a proud national symbol. We believe in the ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, even for those who werent born here. We welcome people who want to use their talents to contribute to Americas success.

These views are widely held across our country. If we hope to turn that consensus into concrete action, Americans of all stripes need to come together and demand better from our leaders. Cooperation isnt just possible, its essential to achieve the kind of immigration reform that Americans deserve and want.

Tim Busch is founder and CEO of the Pacific Hospitality Group, founder of the Napa Institute, and a supporter of Stand Together.

See the rest here:
Let's show Congress how to cooperate on immigration reform | TheHill - The Hill

Left-wing reform groups are pushing for the mass release of prisoners, a reduction in arrests, and limits on enforcement of immigration law as ways to combat the coronavirus outbreak in the United States, according to a Washington Free Beacon report.

The initiative comes in response to warnings from experts that the coronavirus, officially known as COVID-19, could "wreak havoc" on U.S. jails because the facilities, often deficient in basic elements of infection control such as clean sinks and an abundance of soap and paper towels, would be less equipped to handle an outbreak should the virus breach the prison walls.

Instead of calling for increased sanitization standards in prisons, however, several of the groups appear to be using the outbreak to push criminal justice reform measures.

Here's more from the Free Beacon:

The Prison Policy Initiative on Friday published recommendations for how to aid the "justice-involved population" during the outbreak. It also called for the release of "medically fragile and older adults," citing higher rates of chronic illness among prisoners.

In addition to the release of certain individuals, the Prison Policy Initiative recommendations also include taking steps to reduce the intake of prisoners. The group suggested law enforcement and sentencing institutions should start reclassifying misdemeanor offenses, using citations for lesser crimes, and diverting criminals away from jails and toward mental health and substance abuse programs in their communities.

But criminal justice reform isn't the only issue being pushed as the pandemic grows in America.

Major liberal think tank the Center for American Progress called on the Department of Homeland Security earlier this week to "suspend certain immigration enforcement practices during the coronavirus outbreak."

Specifically, CAP suggested that the Trump administration "issue a formal statement assuring the public that health care facilities will be 'immigration enforcement-free zones' for the duration of the outbreak." The group characterized its suggestion as an "important step" "to ensure that all people in the United States have the ability to seek necessary medical care regardless of immigration status."

Read more:
Left-wing groups pushing for jailbreak, immigration reform amid the coronavirus outbreak - TheBlaze

Modern society seems to be locked in an endless tug-of-war between What We Are Told versus Reality. We were told the Titanic was unsinkable, until it sank. We were told the 1980 Soviet hockey team was unbeatable, until Team USA beat them. We were told Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump faces toughest crisis of presidency in coronavirus House passes bill to help prop up economy from coronavirus White House physician: Trump doesn't require test after exposure to 2 people with coronavirus MORE would suffer the worst defeat in the history of presidential elections, until he won. This has proven to be a lopsided contest. Reality often takes time to catch up to What We Are Told, but it always wins in the end.

The latest chapter in this battle has recently been settled. We were told that sanctuary laws make communities safer. We were told that they make a more welcoming and inclusive community. Reality has spoken, and it turns out none of that is true. Sanctuary laws make communities more dangerous. Innocent people are being victimized by sanctuary laws, and immigrants are no safer because of them. It is time for sanctuary laws to go into the ash bin of historically bad ideas, along with the blood-soaked, unintended consequences that they bring.

Since the murder of Kate Steinle by an illegal alien on Pier 14 in San Francisco first brought the issue widespread attention in 2015, there has been a steady stream of incidents where an unacceptably high number of people are now dead who would still be alive if not for sanctuary laws in their communities. Its a national disgrace that dare not be discussed in the halls of power in Washington and elsewhere.

The victims in this tragic farce are our sons, daughters, spouses and grandparents. The response from our elected leaders is a toxic stew of gaslighting and coldhearted arrogance. In Chicago, Mayor Lori Lightfoot has been under fire after a criminal alien previously released under the citys sanctuary law was arrested for sexually assaulting a three-year-old girl in a McDonalds bathroom. Read that again: a three-year-old girl. The mayorsresponsecould not have been more tone-deaf.

"If ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is complaining, then they should do their job better, she said. "They're critical because we have said very clearly we are a welcoming city, a sanctuary city. Chicago Police Department will not cooperate with ICE on any immigration-related business. And that's affected their ability to conduct immigration raids across the city. But that's exactly our intention.

The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) recently exposed the case of Roberto Antonio Garza-Palacios, a criminal alien in Montgomery County, Md., whose negligence while driving caused the deaths of two people including an FBI agent in 2017. His punishment? A $280 fine, no deportation, and no prohibitions against driving. The IRLIinvestigationfound that Garza-Palacios, who had a long criminal record and was shielded by sanctuary laws, was back on the streets driving just a few months ago before allegedly flipping his car and fleeing the scene. Who among us would feel comfortable with their teenage driver sharing the roads with this person? In what fantasy world does this make for a safer community?

While politicians lecture us on the need to be more welcoming to non-citizens who break our laws, the number ofstolen livesresulting from sanctuary laws and out-of-control mass migration only grows.

The claim that sanctuary laws make a community safer is simply the opposite of the truth. The Department of Homeland Securitys Office of the Inspector General just released ascathing reporton the damage caused by sanctuary laws. Its findings showed that forcing ICE to apprehend criminal aliens anywhere besides a controlled environment like a jail causes much greater danger to the ICE agents, those arrested and those living nearby. No one is safer this way.

Another fraudulent argument by defenders of this disastrous policy is that sanctuary laws encourage illegal aliens to cooperate with police, as they will be unafraid of being deported themselves. Aside from the fact that many victims of illegal alien crimes are other illegal aliens, this claim doesnt fly either. ICE does not apprehend or deport anyone who gives them a tip on a criminal alien.

In fact, the federal government specifically protects people in this circumstance. TheU-visasafeguards victims of certain crimes and those who are helpful to law enforcement in the investigation of criminal activity. A pox on local politicians who shamelessly lie to illegal aliens in their communities and stoke fear that cooperation with law enforcement will lead to their deportation.

We as a society would be better served by casting a more skeptical eye toward What We Are Told and placing more trust in Reality. The latter is telling us there is a better way than sanctuary laws. Its up to us to demand it.

Brian Lonergan is director of communications at theImmigration Reform Law Institute, a public interest law firm working to defend the rights and interests of the American people from the negative effects of illegal migration.

Read more from the original source:
Reality is smashing the sanctuary city charade | TheHill - The Hill

With Sen. Bernie Sanders announcing that he is staying in the race against Joe Biden, attention turned to their first one on one debate in Washington D.C. on Sunday, where the Biden campaign has telegraphed publicly, and suggested to Mediaite, that Sanders previous votes on immigration will come up again.

Biden previously brought up Sanders vote against an immigration overhaul at the February debate, saying the only person in here that has a worse record on immigration is Bernie, because Bernie voted against the 2007 bill. Whenever this topic comes up, Sanders uses the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) as sword and shield, because the national Latino organization opposed the bill, as well. Unfortunately, LULAC, among other groups, Latino groups, saw that bill having provisions akin to slavery, Joe, Sanders replied.

When Beto ORourke endorsed him, Biden started to say that the other guy voted against immigration reform, but stopped himself. Asked about it, a Biden campaign aide coyly suggested it would come up again. Asked for comment, senior advisor Cristobal Alex slammed Sanders for the vote.

In 2007, Senator Sanders sided with Republicans to kill a sweeping reform package that would have brought six million undocumented immigrants out of the shadows and onto a pathway to citizenship, Alex said. The Latino community needs a president who will have our backs and Joe Biden will do just that, by ending Trumps disgusting immigration policies and introducing an immigration reform bill in his first week in office.

A high-level Univision source told Mediaite they expected influential anchor Jorge Ramos, who has been tough on Biden on immigration throughout the primary, to also go after Sanders on his immigration record, which a second Univision source confirmed. But that plan has been thrown into question after Ramos was exposed to the coronavirus and will now not serve as a debate moderator.

A senior Sanders aide said the campaign isnt worried because he is more progressive than Biden. We have an immigration platform written by Dreamers on his campaign, so we welcome that debate.

For these reasons its worth examining how Sanders talked about the 2007 immigration bill at the time, and how he has couched his opposition since, ahead of the March 15 debate on Sunday.

In a June 21, 2007 interview on CNN, Sanders was most worried about the economic implications of the guest worker programs.

If poverty is increasing and if wages are going down, I dont know why we need millions of people to be coming into this country as guest workers who will work for lower wages than American workers and drive wages down even lower than they are now, he said.

The bill would have legalized more than 11 million undocumented immigrants and created a temporary worker program, while strengthening punishments against employers who hired workers illegally and strengthening border security. At the time LULAC executive director Brent Wilkes said it would separate families and lead to the exploitation of immigrant workers, but if this worried the Vermont senator, he didnt bring it up with Dobbs.

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Sanders, as he is now, was also very concerned with big-money, special interests, leading the way on the immigration bill, but said nothing as Dobbs lamented socioethnic-centric interest groups pushing amnesty legislation with very little regard for the traditions of this country, the values of this country or the constituents.

And as we know, the principal industries which hire the bulk of illegal aliens, that is construction, landscaping, Dobbs continued, using the term for undocumented immigrants that many on the right have embraced, but Democrats have since shunned. Those are all industries in which wages are declining. I dont hear that discussed on the Senate floor by the proponents of this amnesty legislation.

Thats right. They have no good response, Sanders said, before adding that he read that a lot of people coming into the country are coming in as lifeguards. I guess we cant find thats right. We cant find American workers to work as lifeguards.

Dobbs went on, railing against Bill Gates as a witness to Congress, telling Ted Kennedy he wanted unlimited H1B visas, obviously uninformed to the fact that seven out of 10 visas under the H1B program goes to Indian corporations that are outsourcing those positions to American corporations in this country and that four out of five of those jobs that are supposed to be high-skilled jobs are actually category one jobs, which is low skill.

Well, you raise a good point, in that this whole immigration guest worker program is the other side of the trade issue, Sanders responded. On one hand, you have large multinationals trying to shut down plants in the America, move to China, and on the other hand, you have the service industry bringing in low wage workers from abroad. The result is the same middle class gets shrunken and wages go down.

By the time February 2016 rolled around, Hillary Clinton was hitting Sanders on his 2007 vote to kill immigration reform. Then, Sanders emphasized different reasoning. The Southern Poverty Law Center, among other groups, said that the guest worker programs that were embedded in this agreement were akin to slavery akin to slavery where people came into this country to do guest work were abused, were exploited.

A month later, at the Miami debate in March 2016, Sanders debuted a line about LULAC opposing the bill.

With regard to that 2007 immigration bill, as you may know, LULAC, the major Hispanic organization in his country, also opposed that bill as did many other Latino organizations, he said. You know, I think its very hard to make the case that Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, me, La Raza, United Farmworkers, Dolores Huerta, leaders of the Latino community, would have supported a bill that actually promoted modern slavery. That was one of the many excuses used not to vote for the 2007 bill.

As Clinton did then, Biden said at the debate last month that there would be millions of new American citizens if immigration reform had passed in 2007, which is true.

Its also true that groups had reservations about the 2007 legislation, which seemed to be less of an issue in the 2013 Senate overhaul. Sanders said he still had serious concerns over the guest worker provisions in that bill, but ultimately supported the legislation.

This cycle, Sanders has grown his support from the Latino community across the country, including young Latinos who have always supported him strongly, but also from many of their parents. The issue impacts the community but immigration thus far hasnt come up often, or in a robust way, in debates.

That could change Sunday.

Have a tip we should know? [emailprotected]

The rest is here:
Sanders To Lou Dobbs On Immigration Bill In 2007: I Dont Know Why We Need Millions Of People Coming Into This Country - Mediaite

Published Mar 13, 2020 at 8:00 am(Updated Mar 13, 2020 at 8:00 am)

Town hall meeting: Colin Anderson, the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of National Security, told an audience of about 30 people that the immigration bill was focused on mixed-status families and the repatriation of Bermudians (Owain Johnston-Barnes)

Immigration legislation to be debated next week is only the first step, a town hall meeting was told last night.

Colin Anderson, the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of National Security, told an audience of about 30 people that the Bill was focused on mixed-status families and the repatriation of Bermudians.

Speaking at a town hall meeting at CedarBridge Academy, Mr Anderson said: Immigration reform means something different for everybody.

In some places I talk about immigration reform and they all want to talk about work permits.

Some people want to talk about status or that all they are interested in is the Job Makers Act.

It means something different for everyone, and that is part of the challenge.

He said the changes meant children born overseas to Bermudians up to two generations back will be automatically Bermudian. For children born before the legislation, a Bermudian parent would still have to prove they were domiciled in Bermuda, but he said the process would be simpler.

Children from mixed-status families and earlier left without status, would become eligible to qualify through the Bermuda status of brothers or sisters.

The legislation would also create a two-year window for the children of permanent residents certificate holders to apply for PRC status. Mr Anderson said the window was a temporary solution which would allow the Government two years to tackle the problem of PRC holders.

He said: The issue is how can we have a situation where PRC holders can pass it on indefinitely?

This will lead to other problems. People will not want to stay here indefinitely and be happy that they are not Bermudian. Thats not sustainable.

Mr Anderson added: In the next two years we have to put forward legislation that deals with the issue of PRCs.

Its a compromise, but some times compromise is not a bad word.

The legislation, tabled in the House of Assembly last Friday, is expected to be debated on March 20.

The individuals behind the Supporting Fair Immigration Reform Facebook group backed the legislation earlier this week.

A spokeswoman for the group said: The tabling of this Act is a step in the right direction and shows progress for bipartisan immigration reform.

This Amendment Act will help to regularise families in Bermuda who are divided into different immigration categories.

These people have ties to Bermuda. They have grown up in Bermuda, paid their taxes and continue to live here, but they cant be in the same immigration category as their parents, as the current immigration laws do not allow them to qualify for Bermudian status or a permanent residents certificate.

The spokeswoman added that the Bill was a small step and that more work was needed.

She said: There are much more challenging topics to be discussed.

We look forward to receiving further updates on how this government will fulfil its own stated promise of comprehensive bipartisan immigration reform.

Read the original here:
Immigration Bill just the first step, town hall told - Royal Gazette