Mediaboss Marketing

With his penchant for tweeted insults and GIFs, Donald Trump will never be mistaken for a master of the sweet art of persuasion. Yet he is clearly winning the public argument on the issue of immigration.

He isnt doing it through sustained, careful attention. No, it is the sheer fact of his November victory, and the data showing the importance of the issue of immigration to it, that has begun to shift the intellectual climate.

It had been assumed, even by many Republicans like U.S. Sen. John McCain, that opposition to amnesty and higher levels of legal immigration would doom the GOP to minority status forevermore. Trump blew up this conventional wisdom.

Now, intellectuals on the center-left are calling for Democrats to rethink the partys orthodoxy on immigration, which has become more and more hostile to enforcement and to any skepticism about current high levels of immigration.

The swing here was enormous. A Trump defeat in November after running on an exaggerated version of immigration restriction would have sent Republicans scurrying back to the comfortable, corporate-friendly cliches about so-called comprehensive immigration reform. And if Hillary Clinton had won on a platform that doubled down on President Barack Obamas executive amnesties, serious immigration enforcement would have lost its political legitimacy.

In light of the election, Josh Barro of Business Insider, William Galston of the Brookings Institution, Peter Beinart of The Atlantic, Fareed Zakaria of CNN and Stanley Greenberg of Democracy Corps, among others, have urged Democrats to recalibrate.

Many of these writers dont merely note the perilous politics of the maximalist Democratic position on immigration or argue that policy should take account of the economic costs as well as the benefits of immigration. They also give credence to cultural concerns over mass immigration concerns that much of the left considers poorly disguised hate.

In an act of heresy for the Davos set, Fareed Zakaria recommends that the party should take a position on immigration that is less absolutist and recognizes both the cultural and economic costs of large-scale immigration.

This sentiment wouldnt be so noteworthy if the Democratic Party hadnt become so radicalized on immigration. Peter Beinarts essay in The Atlantic is a trenchant reminder that as recently as 10 years ago, the left allowed much more room for dissent on immigration. Go back a little further, to the 1990s, and Bill Clinton was forthrightly denouncing illegal immigration, and liberal giant Barbara Jordan was heading a bipartisan commission that called for enhanced enforcement and reduced levels of legal immigration.

In the interim, Democrats convinced themselves that liberality on immigration has only political upside, and that immigration is in effect a civil rights issue, and therefore nonnegotiable.

Reversing field wont be easy. The House just voted on Kates Law, named after Kate Steinle, the young woman killed in the sanctuary city of San Francisco by an illegal immigrant who had re-entered the country after getting deported five times. The bill merely strengthens the penalties on repeated illegal re-entry, yet only 24 Democrats could bring themselves to vote for it.

The pull of the lefts cosmopolitanism is strong. In an attack on Peter Beinart, Dylan Matthews of Vox argues that the lefts egalitarianism cant stop at the nations borders it means a strong presumption in favor of open immigration.

So, itd be a mistake to make too much of the recent spate of articles calling for Democrats to rethink this issue. If Democrats are ever going to shift on immigration, though, elite opinion has to change first, and at least there is now an opening.

Few would have guessed that in the 1990s, conservative Republicans, so unreservedly in favor of tough sentencing, would be open to joining liberals on criminal justice reform. Perhaps Democrats will eventually recalibrate on immigration. If so, the unlikely instrument of the sea change will have been none other than Donald J. Trump.

Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review.

Read the original:
Lowry: Trump win forces liberals to rethink immigration - Boston Herald

Rosa Sabido, now receiving sanctuary in a Mancos church since her last application to stay in the country was denied, is not an example of problems caused by uncontrolled immigration. For the past 30 years, she has been gainfully employed, has paid taxes and has been an upstanding member of the community.

She is, though, the face of one large and often-undiscussed group of immigrants: those who have contributed to their community and the economy and who have tried to follow the rules that would allow them to remain in this country legally, but who, for a variety of reasons some logical and some arcane have come up short. These are the intended beneficiaries of immigration reform, which has languished on the national agenda for years. Unfortunately, a nuanced view of the complex issue, necessary for true and lasting progress, does not fit well into campaign speeches.

The United States gains no specific benefit by deporting Sabido. It would be better served with a sensible immigration policy that focused on identifying, locating and deporting those who are a danger to the country, and at the same time, dealing realistically with those whose only crime is being undocumented.

The problem with immigration is not only the behavior of individual immigrants, it is the effect of their aggregate number, and the specific issue for those like Sabido is not that they are causing trouble; its that their legal status does not allow them to stay.

Laws necessarily must be written in ways that cannot address every individuals circumstances, even though Sabidos legal circumstance indeed seems unfair. That she narrowly missed at least two opportunities that would have paved the way for permanent residency, including President Ronald Reagans broad path to citizenship, is sad but ultimately irrelevant; wherever a line is drawn, some people will fall just outside it. The law is the law, and selective enforcement without legal reform has contributed to the immigration mess that now exists.

The Mancos United Methodist Church has shown impressive caring and courage in shielding Sabido from a law that they believe is wrong or is being applied unfairly, and in taking a stand in opposition to the law. President Donald Trump has made clear that he disapproves of IRS regulations that penalize religious organizations from expressing political opinions, and although he surely did not intend it to play out in this way, the logical extension of that is for congregations to act on their beliefs. Kudos to this body for doing so.

Churches have no special legal status that exempts their premises from enforcement actions, only a tradition of being respected. The hands-off policy will not last much longer, although when ICE agents are ordered to breach a religious sanctuary, expect them to be in pursuit of someone far less appealing than Sabido.

This kind of sanctuary is not available to all who might wish to use it, and it is not a broad solution to the immigration dilemma. Elsewhere, families are being split, crops rot unpicked and some of the immigrants the president termed bad hombres evade deportation.

The true solution is reform, and Sabido and the church sheltering her have drawn attention to that need. This is one way change begins to happen, and that change is badly needed.

View post:
Rosa Sabido: Immigration reform must address cases like hers - The Durango Herald

News & Observer

Are immigrants taking farm jobs from US citizens? In NC, farmers say no. News & Observer The messages on immigration reform from the White House have been mixed. In April, Trump and Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue hosted a roundtable, which included N.C. Commissioner of Agriculture Steve Troxler, to address farmers' concerns. and more »

Read the rest here:
Are immigrants taking farm jobs from US citizens? In NC, farmers say no. - News & Observer

As a pastor at St. Andrews Presbyterian Church, Jim Rigby spends a lot of time preparing sermons in his office and preaching to the congregation from his pulpit. But this man of faith has recently expanded his venue beyond the walls of this sanctuary.

"This is what I like to do, this is what I train for and I love, the other is more duty, its something that when people are in harms way, may faith demands that I stand by my neighbor, said Pastor Rigby.

The sanctuary Pastor Rigby seems to be talking a lot about lately is one he doesn't like. SB4, the controversial law passed during the regular session that bans local communities from enacting sanctuary city policies. On May 1st, the pastor was among those who took part in this sit in to protest the legislation.

He was arrested on a misdemeanor criminal trespass charge.

"I was always the kid that never got in trouble in school, and I was thinking the worst thing I could do was to get in trouble, said Pastor Rigby.

Getting in troubled caught the public eye, prompting appearances on national TV programs.

His discussions,most recently with FOX's Tucker Carlson, provided the protesting preacher with a new audience. "I dont understand whats happening, just to be honest with you, because I've been doing human rights work for a long time but there is something about this issue, said Pastor Rigby.

That issue is the impasse between those wanting an expansion of immigration rights and those who want tougher enforcement of immigration law. Last year, St. Andrews became a flashpoint in that debate after providing sanctuary to a woman and her son who fled Guatemala.

While the two won a brief reprieve from deportation, the political debate has only intensified.

"I want us to be able to talk to each other in this country, I want, because I coming from one side and others from another side, to get past the vocabulary of conflict and say what does every human being deserve, thats what we are talking about, we are not enemies in this country, we've gotten trapped like two parts, you want to be conservative or you want to be liberal, the problems of the world needs both, we've got to get both hands on deck, with this thing, said Pastor Rigby.

Pastor Rigby says he doesnt endorse acts of violence by protesters but believes a radical change in thought and policy is needed. "The way I see it is, when you set somebody else' home on fire and arrest them for trespassing when they flee through your back yard, there is something wrong with that, said Pastor Rigby. The pastor did say he is troubled by recent incidents where protesters have gotten aggressive.

Things like the group of SB4 protesters who on Tuesday tried to block the Cedar Park Fourth of July parade.

The pastor said doing that is counterproductive and can cause more harm than good.

Originally posted here:
Pulpit to Soapbox: Austin preacher wants immigration reform - FOX 7 Austin

The Utah Coalition looks to bring together community members in support of the national organization's goals of promoting "smart border security" and a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States.

FWD.us estimates on its website that the result of such reform would be to reduce the federal deficit by $897 billion over 20 years and create 3.22 million jobs by 2024.

For Hatch, immigration reform is an important way to establish a technology industry in Utah's "Silicon Slopes" and for the nation to stay technologically competitive in an increasingly globalized world. He also cited a statistic from the National Foundation for American Policy that immigrants have played a founding role in 51 percent of billion-dollar startups in the United States as a reason to keep talent in the country.

"We have people who are educated in our society and could be great contributors to our society," he told The Tribune. "We should stop pushing them out and we should provide an HB-1 visa for them so they can stay and work in our country. Why not get the benefit of all the education we've given to them? Why force them out of the country so they can go help other countries in competition with our own?"

Hatch said he plans to introduce a bill to reform HB-1 visas, which allow U.S. employers to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations. Hatch said he expects to find a willing and helpful partner with immigration reform in President Donald Trump, though many have expressed fear over his rhetoric around the issue.

"[Trump's] evolving on immigration," Hatch said. "First, he was going to build a huge wall, and nobody knew what he meant by 'wall.' Now he's talking about a high-tech wall that will keep people out. And I think he's sincere about that. But he also realizes the importance of high-tech immigration."

Todd Schulte, president of FWD.us, said the organization's tactics have changed under Trump's administration but noted the group's principal goal of "fixing" America's broken immigration system has remained the same.

"As we are looking ahead to the future, we think that it's great to hear Senator Hatch talking about how he's going to be introducing high-skill legislation," Schulte said. "I think that's critical to make it easier to bring the world's best and brightest to the United States, as well as protect American jobs."

This is the first time Hatch has worked directly with FWD.us, though he's crossed paths with the organization before. In 2013, the group launched an ad campaign hoping to convince Republicans to support immigration reform. The ad aired in Utah was believed to target Hatch, who was seen as a swing vote on the bipartisan bill. Hatch did vote in favor of the bill, which later died in the House.

Though Hatch noted immigration reform is one of the most politically divisive issues in the country, Utah has long been welcoming to immigrants likely because more than 60 percent of its residents are Mormon, whose ancestors faced persecution until settling in the Salt Lake Valley. More than 60,000 refugees have been settled in the state since 1970, with about 1,200 arriving annually in recent years.

During a panel discussion following Hatch's remarks, state Sen. Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City, lauded the efforts of Utah leaders on immigration.

"I'm personally very proud of the state of Utah; we've done really good things," she said. "We are actually a role model in other states, and I say that as a member of the minority party in this Legislature, where we struggle with other issues. On immigration, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have been very clear: We're not about punishing people."

Ultimately, she encouraged people to remember that the issue isn't as one-dimensional as some may try to make it.

"It is a social issue, but it's also an issue of fairness. It's an issue of justice and at the end really will reflect profoundly on who we are as a nation for generations to come."

Read more:
Zuckerberg. Gates. Hatch? New immigration board has big-name supporters - Salt Lake Tribune