Mediaboss Marketing

To beat former President Donald J. Trump in the coming months, Nikki Haley, his former ambassador to the United Nations, must stitch together a coalition of Republicans: Mr. Trumps most faithful supporters, voters who like his policies but who have grown weary of him personally, and the smaller but still vocal contingent who abhor him entirely.

Its a challenge that will test what political strategists and those who have observed Ms. Haleys ascent from her first underdog win in South Carolina have said is among her greatest skills as a candidate: an ability to calibrate her message to the moment.

Since announcing her bid in February, she has campaigned much like an old guard Republican: hawkish on foreign policy, supportive of legal immigration reform and staunchly in favor of the international alliances that Mr. Trump questioned during his administration. She has also sounded a lot like the former president, whose America First rhetoric she echoed while serving as one of his diplomats, with aggressive calls to send the U.S. military into Mexico and remarks about the need to rid schools and the military of perceived left-wing influences on hot-button cultural issues like race and transgender rights.

Other than how she has navigated Mr. Trump himself, perhaps no issue best exemplifies Ms. Haleys approach than abortion. She backed harsh restrictions on the procedure as governor of South Carolina and has called herself unapologetically pro-life on the trail, but she has struck a flexible tone as her party has flailed in countering the electoral backlash the conservative majority on the Supreme Court triggered when it overturned Roe v. Wade. Her appeals for consensus have been among the most common reasons cited for her upward climb in the polls in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Ryan Williams, a Republican strategist and a former aide to Mitt Romney who has known Ms. Haley since she was a state lawmaker first running for governor, said she has always been a pragmatic conservative." She is comfortable in her own skin, and she is going to win or lose based on her own values and beliefs, he said. Still, the difficulty for her, as for all the candidates attempting to emerge as a Trump alternative, is that what a conservative is has been redefined by Trump himself, he said.

Mr. Trumps lead over the field is dominant nationally and in every early state polled, and it remains uncertain that Ms. Haley could peel away enough of his faithful, no matter her approach, to come out on top. And what has so far propelled her could also become a liability, should she alienate one or more faction. Her rivals, including Mr. Trump and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, have sought to portray her as insufficiently conservative and as someone who panders to Democrats. Jaime Harrison, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, labeled her a snake oil salesman who will say whatever she needs to say to get power.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

We are confirming your access to this article, this will take just a moment. However, if you are using Reader mode pleaselog in,subscribe, or exit Reader mode since we are unable to verify access in that state.

Confirming article access.

If you are a subscriber, please log in.

Read the original here:
To Beat Trump, Nikki Haley Is Trying to Speak to All Sides of a ... - The New York Times

FAIR Take | November2023

Last Wednesday, Congressional leaders in the House and Senate agreed on something keep the government open and kick the can down the road on solving the Biden Border Crisis. Congress finished its business before the 11thhour andpassed a Continuing Resolution (CR)to keep the government funded until after the new year. However, the deal orchestrated by House Republican leadership fails to do anything to secure the border and stop the surge of illegal aliens wreaking havoc on Americancommunities.

The deal adopted a novel approach, developed by the new Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.), creating two separate funding deadlines for government agencies. Funding for some departments and agencies will expire on January 19, 2024, while funding for others, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), will expire on February 2,2024.

But despite its structure, the continuing resolution simply maintains Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 spending levels, without any real policy measures to stop mass illegal immigration. It does nothing to end the mass catch-and-release of illegal aliens, stop asylum abuse, or limit the abuse of parole. In short, the funding bill simply reinforces thestatusquo.

The failure of Congress to act on immigration comes at a critical moment for our national security. In the past few weeks, top experts issued dire warnings of terror threats posed by our wide-open borders. Recentgovernment data shows that a record172 individuals on the terror watchlisthad been apprehended by the Border Patrol illegally crossing into the country in FY23 alone.Hostile nationals and their proxy terror groups have openly threatened the American people in recent months.And over70,000 Special Interest Alienswere encountered by U.S. border agents between October 2021 and October 2023,including 6,386 Afghans, 3,153 Egyptians, 659 Iranians, and538Syrians.

Further, in October, encounters of aliens entering the country illegally once again exceeded 300,000. This is on top of the more than 3.2 million illegal aliens that were encountered last fiscal year alone, and the more than 1.7 million gotaways that evaded the Border Patrol. Congress has about 75 days before government funding expires again, and in that time, at the current rate, nearly one million more migrants will illegally enter theU.S.

Before the vote last Wednesday, FAIR issued stern warnings that funding alone would not solve the crisis and that DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas should not be allowed to waste more taxpayer money to process and release illegal aliens into American communities. FAIR also argued that Congress must be held accountable for its failure to stop the border crisis.House Republicans have now squandered a full year of their two-year control without passing a budget to force the Administration to end its reckless immigration policies. Halting the Biden Border Crisis was an explicit promise made last year when Republicans asked American voters to entrust them with leadership oftheHouse.

The Senate, meanwhile, has refused to put forward any solutions. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has said that immigration policy changes are non-starters. Fortunately, Minority Leader McConnell (R-Ky.) has laid down his marker and said that policy changes not just more moneymust be part of any package. On thefloor, McConnell said, Its hard to ignore the crisis on our southern border. It has erupted under Washington Democrats watch. McConnell continued to say that Democrats are not ready to seriously address the issues driving the bordercrisis.

A small group in the Senate is currently working on a border security package, but that package fails to adequately reform our asylum system or address the surge of unaccompanied children that are being encountered or trafficked into the country. Meanwhile, Congress has now adjourned until November 28th, at which time they could return to Washington to consider the Presidentssupplemental budget requestto provide over $13.6 billion for Israel, Ukraine andDHS.

As part of that supplemental request, Congress must ensure that our borders are secured, and policy changes are implemented to stop the flood of illegal immigration. FAIR plans to push hard for policy changes that will strengthen border security and will remain on the front line to ensure Americans are prioritized in any spending package. The message: House leadership must insist that H.R. 2 be included in any spending package moving forward, and the Biden Administration and Senate Democrats must commit to real border andimmigrationenforcement.

See more here:
Shutdown Averted but Congress Leaves the Border in Chaos ... - Federation for American Immigration Reform

WASHINGTON U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND), penned an op-ed in the Forum emphasizing the need for merit-based immigration reform to better support rural states like North Dakota in hiring highly-skilled, foreign-trained doctors to help fill open positions in hospitals and clinics across the country after introducing the bipartisan Healthcare Workforce Resilience Act. This legislation makes a limited number of green cards available to qualified immigrant doctors and nurses to address critical healthcare workforce shortages, allotting up to 25,000 immigrant visas for nurses and up to 15,000 immigrant visas for physicians.

Additionally, this legislation requires employers to attest immigrants from overseas who receive these visas will not displace an American worker. Eligible immigrant medical professionals will need to meet licensing requirements, pay filing fees, and clear rigorous national security and criminal history background checks before they can receive recaptured green cards.

Most of the conversation around immigration to the United States gets caught up in the lawlessness of the southern border, and rightfully so.The Biden administration has turned a blind eye to the law of the land, making legal, commonsense immigration reforms all the more difficult. But real needs exist, and bipartisan solutions are available if Washington would follow the law and focus on policies designed to welcome the workforce our communities need, wrote Senator Cramer.

In North Dakota, we rely on thousands of highly-skilled immigrants, especially for our rural health care. About a quarter of the physicians in our state are foreign-trained doctors who disproportionately serve in rural areas. We still have fewer physicians per 10,000 residents than most of the country, and we have more than 15 counties without a single primary care physician. This creates a challenging environment for a patients consistent and timely access to care. However, it also provides an opportunity to connect foreign trained healthcare professionals with communities in need, through a merit-based immigration approach, continued Senator Cramer.

It is no secret our immigration system is broken, but we should advance efforts to fix the system where bipartisan support exists. With its rapid economic growth and rural landscape, North Dakota relies heavily on legal immigrants to meet the high demand for healthcare providers in our communities. They are often the reason many of us have access to the high-quality medical care we expect. It is time to do the right thing by making it easier for highly skilled immigrants to live, raise their families, and work in our country, allowing them to contribute in meaningful ways to states like North Dakota, concluded Senator Cramer.

Most of the conversation around immigration to the United States gets caught up in the lawlessness of the southern border, and rightfully so.The Biden administration has turned a blind eye to the law of the land, making legal, commonsense immigration reforms all the more difficult. But real needs exist, and bipartisan solutions are available if Washington would follow the law and focus on policies designed to welcome the workforce our communities need.

One of the most obvious signs of the value of high-skilled immigration is likely at your local medical providers office. I often talk about how globally connected North Dakotans are as a result of our energy and agricultural exports. In the same way, our technically-trained doctors and nurses in clinics across the state are also part of our global connection.

In North Dakota, we rely on thousands of highly-skilled immigrants, especially for our rural health care. About a quarter of the physicians in our state are foreign-trained doctors who disproportionately serve in rural areas. We still have fewer physicians per 10,000 residents than most of the country, and we have more than 15 counties without a single primary care physician. This creates a challenging environment for a patients consistent and timely access to care. However, it also provides an opportunity to connect foreign trained healthcare professionals with communities in need, through a merit-based immigration approach.

According to the American Hospital Association, 610,388 nurses reported their intent to leave the nursing field by 2027, and the Association of American Medical Colleges estimates the U.S. could see a shortage of up to 124,000 physicians by 2034. North Dakota and the United States as a whole simply do not have enough doctors, nurses, and medical professionals to fill the positions needed to adequately care for our population. This hits especially hard in lower population, rural states like our own which are forced to compete with larger states and health systems for a constrained supply of these critical professionals.

Last week, I joined Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., in reintroducing our bipartisan Healthcare Workforce Resilience Act. Our bill is the first step to solve healthcare workforce issues and reform our broken immigration system. Instead of allowing unused visas to go to waste, the Healthcare Workforce Resilience Act recaptures visas Congress has already authorized.

The Healthcare Workforce Resilience Act would allow up to 25,000 doctors and 15,000 nurses to come to the United States to help fill open positions in hospitals and clinics across the country. Our bill also includes a provision to ensure the United States only grants visas to foreign practitioners if we cannot fill the position with an American doctor or nurse. The Healthcare Workforce Resilience Acthas broad bipartisan support in Congress, because it recognizes quality health care simply is not possible without a strong workforce.

Allowing up to 40,000 visas for medical professionals is a win-win, proving we can find solutions to keep healthy staffing at medical facilities, while also making meaningful and productive reforms to our broken immigration system.

Similarly, I reintroduced the Equal Access to Green Cards for Legal Employment Act with Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo.,to make it easier for employers to hire the right person for the job, whether they were born in New Salem or New Delhi. Existing law places arbitrary per-country caps on employment-based immigrant visas, leaving visas for high-skilled immigrants unused and creating massive backlogs. The EAGLE Act would gradually remove these caps and also raise the per-country limit on family-sponsored visas. While our economy and workforce demands have changed, the employment-based immigration system has remained the same since 1990.

Our current immigration system ties temporary visa holders to their job, leaving them in limbo and unable to change jobs while they wait for permanent residency status. It is time we allow American employers to focus on hiring immigrants based on their merits, not their birthplace. Both these bills do not authorize any new immigration. They simply use the visas already in statute for the highly-trained workforce our country needs.

It is no secret our immigration system is broken, but we should advance efforts to fix the system where bipartisan support exists. With its rapid economic growth and rural landscape, North Dakota relies heavily on legal immigrants to meet the high demand for healthcare providers in our communities. They are often the reason many of us have access to the high-quality medical care we expect.

It is time to do the right thing by making it easier for highly skilled immigrants to live, raise their families, and work in our country, allowing them to contribute in meaningful ways to states like North Dakota.

Read the original:
ICYMI: Sen. Cramer Op-Ed: Immigration Reform Promotes a Healthy ... - Kevin Cramer

In the October Ag Economists Monthly Monitor, a survey of nearly 70 ag economists from across the U.S., economists were asked if they expected to see any movement on immigration reform in 2024. Nearly 83% of respondents said no. Just over 8% said yes, with the remaining economists, or just over 8%, unsure about the outcome in 2024. (Lori Hayes)

The debate over immigration and border policies continues to be a point of contention in Washington. With a renewed push by the GOP to address illegal border crossings, and the White House emphasizing the need to allocate more than $13 billion to manage the increase of migrants into the U.S., the topic as at the forefront of policy discussion once again. However, ag economists are still skeptical immigration reform will finally see movement in Washington.

In the October Ag Economists Monthly Monitor, a survey of nearly 70 ag economists from across the U.S., economists were asked if they expected to see any movement on immigration reform in 2024. Nearly 83% of respondents said no. Just over 8% said yes, with the remaining economists, or just over 8%, unsure about the outcome in 2024.

Of the overwhelming number of economists who said they dont think Congress will move on immigration reform in 2024, the reasons included:

The biggest hurdle, according to respondents, is the fact its an election year, as well as how controversial the issue is. One economist even called it politically unpopular.

Congress has a vested interest in keeping this issue unresolved in the current partisan environment, responded an economist in the latest survey.

Another economist said, Getting anything started and passed in an election year will be tough, let alone something as confrontational as immigration.

A different economist in the October survey said immigration reform wont happen because, Too many other issues to happen first. Congress and the administration are too far apart to find an acceptable resolution. Legislators dont have the fortitude to address it.

However, one economist who thinks Congress may address immigration reform in 2024 said their response is due to the fact that Right to Shelter will be rescinded in certain major cities that have reached the breaking point.

Its evident immigration reform is a major issue for agriculture. One economist said, Immigration reform is a huge issue for the U.S. economy and MUST be addressed. However, it is so politically sensitive that very few Senators or Congressmen are willing to push the issue.

The survey also asked economists if they thought U.S. agriculture will be able to utilize the influx of immigrants at the southern border to fill the void in ag labor. While the feedback was mixed, most were not confident due to mismatched skills and what they called noise in the system. Other economists indicated that some of that labor could possibly be used, particularly for specialty crops like fruits and vegetables.

The immigration problem at the Mexican border is a humanitarian problem, as well as an immigration issue, said one economist. Many of the new immigrants entering at the Mexican border are being moved to the East or West Coast. It will be hard for ag to access this potential workforce.

As the issue continues to draw criticism and debate, economists were asked: whats the one thing that would need to happen in order for Congress to take action on immigration reform in the next couple of years? While sentiments were largely pessimistic on any action, some economists think increased pressure from labor markets could prompt Congress to take action.

One economist said cooler minds is what it would take for Congress to find compromise.

A perceived crisis where both parties can agree on a solution. In other words, a very unlikely situation, said another economist.

Another economist said, Elect smart people. While one economist in the anonymous survey said, One part would need to gain total control.

Another economist thinks the only way to find a solution is to, Separate ag labor from broader immigration discussion.

A Bipartisan Issue?

According to Farm Journal Washington correspondent Jim Wiesemeyer, Republicans are currently pushing for changes in immigration policiesaimed at deterring illegal border crossings. He says they want to address border security issues and make it more difficult for migrants to enter the U.S. without proper documentation.

At the same time, Wiesemeyer reports Democrats, including President Joe Biden, emphasize the need to allocate $13.6 billion to manage the increasing number of migrant arrivals. They argue that this funding is essential to address the current challenges at the border.

The debate over immigration is causing tensions in Congress, particularly as it relates to funding for Ukraine and other foreign aid initiatives. There is a risk that disagreements over immigration policies could lead to delays or the derailment of government spending and aid packages, reports Wiesemeyer.

He also points out that Democrats are facing pressure to compromiseon immigration, with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) pledging to link a substantial border package to aid for Ukraine. He says Senate Republicans are also seeking to incorporate policy changes in an emergency funding discussion with some Republicans advocating for bipartisan effortsto address border security.

They are proposing changes to asylum policies, including raising the bar for credible fear claims and reinstating the Remain in Mexico policy for asylum-seekers, says Wiesemeyer.

He also reports key Democrats are opposed to Republican demands on immigration policy changes, as they doubt the possibility of reaching a workable middle ground during time-sensitive funding negotiations. But some Democratic lawmakers, such as Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), express a willingness to address border security issuesbut reject draconian policy ideas that could harm migrants. They seek more humane solutions.

Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Gary Peters (D-Mich.) urged colleagues to focus on measures that already have bipartisan support, such as increasing the number of border patrol agents and Customs and Border Protection officers, which align with President Bidens request. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) indicated a willingness to consider any bipartisan border proposal put forward by the Senate.

Read the original here:
Will Border Security Issues Force Congress To Take Action On ... - AgFax

The French Senate has amended proposed reforms to the countrys immigration system, making the language of the document tougher in areas of birthright citizenship, family reunification, and welfare benefits.

The largely conservative French Senate adopted the new immigration bill on its first reading by a vote of 210 to 115, following around a week of debate and amendments to the bill, Le Figaro reports.

Among the amendments described by Les Rpublicains Senator Franois-Nol Buffet as beefing up the text of the bill were abolishing state medical aid, introducing quotas for migrants, more powers to facilitate the expulsion of illegal immigrants, and restrictions on the ability of migrants to bring their family members to France.

Regular immigration is chosen; our choice is that of qualitative economic immigration and quality integration. And on illegal immigration, there is zero tolerance. We need to be clear, he said.

Senator Olivier Bitz, who is part of the faction allied with President Emmanuel Macron, stated that, while the Macronist faction voted for the new measures, they were still critical of some aspects, such as abolishing state medical aid for migrants, saying, This is a serious mistake in terms of public health.

In 2021, it was revealed that the French government budgeted a massive 1 billion euros for medical and healthcare costs for illegal migrants, which did not cover emergency care, as hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants benefit from state medical aid.

The programme has been criticised for years by conservative politicians, with some arguing that the state medical aid should only cover emergency care rather than 100% of migrants medical expenses.

French left-wing senators were highly critical of the immigration bill, with Communist Ian Brossat calling it tough cruel its an absolute disgrace.

Interior Minister Grald Darmanin, who is the main figure behind the immigration reform, stated that he was happy with the Senates amendments to the bill, saying, Not many people would have bet that this text, although amended, would be adopted, including with a regularisation measure. I welcome that.

Darmanin has called for immigration reform for over a year, largely focusing on the issue of deporting illegal immigrants who already have orders to leave France.

In November of last year, Darmanin proposed to cut off social benefits to those with an Obligation to Leave French Territory (OQTF), saying, The prefect will make it impossible for them to live, for example, by ensuring that they no longer receive social benefits or social housing. We are shifting gears.

The shift in policy came as many noted how few OQTFs are actually carried out, with just 18,000 forced departures in 2021 despite there being 122,000 OQTFs issued that year.

Darmanin also proposed to put all those with an OQTF on the criminal wanted person lists and to simplify the procedures for those who wish to make appeals.

Earlier this year, Darmanin stated that he wanted to see dangerous illegal immigrants deported far more swiftly, saying that France would deport them even before they would have an opportunity to file an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

But should we keep [them] with us when they can also cause death in our country? Darmanin said, referring to dangerous illegal migrants, and added, What is the role of the interior minister? To protect the population.

Following the Senate vote, the immigration bill will pass to the French National Assembly, where it may be further amended and debated as President Macrons bloc does not have a majority in the chamber.

The second-largest party in the National Assembly, the populist Rassemblement National (RN), led in the chamber by MP Marine Le Pen, is likely to support the tougher measures voted on by the French Senate, but allies of Macron, along with the Left, may oppose some of the measures.

Le Pen has previously called for a number of national referendums on immigration, which would have included votes on birthright citizenship, restrictions on family reunification, and outsourcing asylum claims overseas.

Read more from the original source:
French Senate Toughens Immigration Bill The European Conservative - The European Conservative