Mediaboss Marketing

Its an annual headline. Every April as the deadline for H-1B guest worker applications approaches there is the predictable news that far more applications are filed than there are visas available. And the usual interpretation spun by the tech employers is that the number of visas available is woefully inadequate to meet the industrys demands. This year was no exception 200,000 applications for 65,000 visas.

The annual headline is inevitably followed by the inevitable lament that the American tech industry cant find qualified workers in this country and that it is being hamstrung by the stingy number of guest worker visas made available each year. For years, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) has been disputing these self-serving industry claims. Now, a new Ford Foundation-funded report by the Kapor Center and the Harris Polling company confirms that the tech industrys labor problems are not the result of a dearth of qualified workers, but their own dysfunctional work environments.

The Kapor report concludes that many workers are leaving their jobs with tech companies because unfairness, in the form of everyday behavior (stereotyping, harassment, bullying, etc.) is a real and destructive part of the tech work environment, particularly affecting underrepresented groups and driving talent out the door. These reprehensible (if not outright illegal) employment practices are costing the industry $16 billion a year in lost productivity, finds the report.

If the tech industry is having a difficult time finding qualified workers for available jobs in this country, its not because those workers do not exist here. Its just that American workers dont particularly like being stereotyped, harassed, and bullied and well-educated and skilled workers often have other options. It also seems that many highly profitable companies would rather rely on beholden guest workers than reform the work cultures that are driving American workers away.

Read more:
The Real Reason Tech Companies Demand Immigrants and Guest Workers: They're Lousy Places to Work - ImmigrationReform.com (blog)

The Florida House of Representatives is gearing up to ban sanctuary policies in the state after the House Judiciary Committee approved House Bill (HB) 697 on April 25. HB 697, also known as the Rule of Law Adherence Act, was introduced by Representative Larry Metz (R-32) earlier this year. The measure will ensure the state fully participates in immigration enforcement and will eliminate policies that impede enforcement efforts in the state.

Specifically, HB 697 requires all state and local entities to comply with and support immigration enforcement to the full extent permitted by law. The measure also prohibits state and local entities from stopping or limiting public officials ability to maintain or communicate immigration status information with the federal government. Law enforcement agencies, under HB 697, are also required to comply with detainers issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

HB 697 also guarantees whistle-blower protections to any state or local employees that reports violation of the Act. Any state or local entity that violates HB 697 may be subject of fines up to $5,000 per day they are determined to be in violation of the Act.

Representative Metz introduced HB 697 to support immigration enforcement and maintain Floridas commitment to the rule of law. Its all-important in my view that the rule of law be followed, Metz said. If we simply say, If you can get here, you can stay here, and we dont care about the legal distinctions, were going to have more and more people coming here illegally and fewer coming here through the legal immigration system.

Senator Aaron Bean, who introduced a similar bill in the Senate, also commented on the proposal. The one thing that everybody should know in our country is: We cant choose which laws well obey or which laws we dont obey, said Senator Bean.

State lawmakers around the country have made eliminating expensive sanctuary policies a priority this legislative session. Policies that block immigration enforcement efforts are especially expensive in Florida. In 2014, the Federation for American Immigration Reform estimated that Florida taxpayers pay as much as $5.2 billion annually in costs associated with illegal immigration. Florida has one of the highest populations of illegal aliens in the country, behind California, Texas, and New York.

HB 697 has been put on the third reading calendar and must be approved by the full Florida House before it can be sent to the Florida Senate for consideration. The Florida House passed a similar bill prohibiting sanctuary policies last year, but it failed to advance due to insufficient support in the Florida Senate.

Read more here:
Florida House Gearing Up To Ban Sanctuary Policies - ImmigrationReform.com (blog)

Earlier this week President Trump hosted a roundtable of farmers at the White House to discuss issues facing agriculture.

The panel of 14 people included farmers, one national FFA officer and the newly confirmed Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue.

We had a very diverse group not only in regard to production agriculture but also diversity in regard to gender, ethnicity and age, says Hank Choate, a seventh-generation dairy and row crop farmer near Cement City, Mich.

The group discussed many of the issues farmers are currently up against including immigration, labor, trade, regulation and infrastructure.

Choate says the discussion on immigration was encouraging and that it seems the President began to have a clearer picture of the need for reform.

The farmers in the group made it abundantly clear that many of the immigrant workers on farms have been working for those farms for a long time and are law abiding citizens.

According to Choate, Mr. Trump said the administration will develop a program that not only gives security and piece of mind to those workers but will also provide farmers the skilled labor they need.

The H2A Visa program was also a hot topic during the discussion. A nursery grower from Ohio shared how it had been harder for him to hire employees through the program as the number of visas accessible had been reduced under the Obama administration.

Choate says the President turned to Sonny Perdue and asked that problem be addressed as soon as possible.

Maybe theres hope for immigration reform that benefits farmers after all.

Original post:
Trump Promises Immigration Reform That Will Work for Agriculture - AgWeb

Kristopher Hooks, KXTV 1:53 PM. PDT April 28, 2017

WASHINGTON, DC - President Donald Trump holds a news conference with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in the East Room of the White House April 12, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) (Photo: Chip Somodevilla, 2017 Getty Images)

During his campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump vowed to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program immediately. But Trump's tone has apparently shifted since taking over the White House.

Now, like his predecessor Barack Obama, President Donald Trump is saying his administration is focusing on deporting criminals and not families or people who dont pose a threat to public safety. In an interview with the Associated Press, Trump said that dreamers can rest easy.

What that means exactly is yet to be seen. But for the over 1.6 million DACA recipients, approved by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, resting easy isnt something that just happens.

ABC10s Michael Anthony Adams spoke with some local DACA recipients who told stories of both struggle and success. But, in order for us to understand how the country got here, we must know where we came from in terms of DACA and immigration.

Here is a recent timeline of immigration reform in America.

Obama on the Illinois version of the DREAM Act (legislation he sponsored as senator) at the Democratic Primary Debate in Jan. 2008:

Children who are brought here through no fault of their own are able to go to college because we actually want well educated kids in our country who are able to succeed and become part of this economy and part of the American dream.

Obama in 2008 on immigration reform policy in his first term, if elected:

The American people need us to put an end to the petty partisanship that passes for politics in Washington. And they need us to enact comprehensive immigration reform once and for all. We cant wait 20 years from now to do it, we cant wait 10 years now to do it, we need to do it before the end of my first president of the United States of America. And I will make it a top priority in my first year as president, not only because we have an obligation to get control who comes in and out of our country, not only because we need to crack down on employers who are abusing undocumented immigrants instead of hiring citizens, but because we have to finally bring undocumented immigrants out of the shadows. It is time we did that.

Obama on Sept. 20, 2012 at the University of Miami Town Hall with Univision journalist Jorge Ramos on not fulfilling his immigration reform campaign promise:

Jorge Ramos:I want to emphasize "the first year." At the beginning of your governing, you had control of both chambers of Congress, and yet you did not introduce immigration reform. And before I continue, I want for you to acknowledge that you did not keep your promise.Obama: Well, let me first of all, Jorge, make a point that when we talked about immigration reform in the first year, thats before the economy was on the verge of collapse -- Lehman Brothers had collapsed, the stock market was collapsing. And so my first priority was making sure that we prevented us from going into a Great Depression.

He continued, And what I confess I did not expect -- and so Im happy to take responsibility for being naive here -- is that Republicans who had previously supported comprehensive immigration reform -- my opponent in 2008, who had been a champion of it and who attended these meetings -- suddenly would walk away. Thats what I did not anticipate.

Ramos pushed back on the issue: It was a promise, Mr. President. And I don't want to -- because this is very important, I dont want to get you off the explanation. You promised that. And a promise is a promise. And with all due respect, you didnt keep that promise.

Obama: We have to have cooperation from all these sources in order to get something done. And so I am happy to take responsibility for the fact that we didnt get it done, but I did not make a promise that I would get everything done, 100 percent, when I was elected as President.

What I promised was that I would work every single day as hard as I can to make sure that everybody in this country, regardless of who they are, what they look like, where they come from, that they would have a fair shot at the American Dream. And I have -- that promise Ive kept.

On June 15, 2012 the Obama administration introduced DACA program:

Through Department of Homeland Security, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program suspends deportation for two years for people who came to the country illegally before they turned 16 years old, were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012, or lived in the country continuously for 5 years.

Obama on Nov. 20, 2014 during his Immigration reform speech:

Obama introduced DAPA, or Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, a deferred-deportation and work-authorization policy for immigrants whose children are citizens, lawful permanent residents, or had been living in the country since Jan. 1, 2010.

During his speech introducing the unilateral executive action, Obama said:

Today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it. Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules. all of us take offense take offense of anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America. When I took office, I committed to fixing this broken immigration system, and i began by doing what I could to secure our borders.

Lets be honest, tracking down, rounding up and deporting millions of people isnt realistic. Anyone who suggests otherwise isnt being straight with you.

On Dec. 3, 2014, 26 states, led by Texas, filed a suit to block the DAPA action

Texas and other states brought forth the suit in the U.S. District Court in Texas, saying that the DAPA Executive Order, which bypassed the GOP-led Congress, violated the Administrative Procedure Act notice-and-comment requirements for new federal agency rules.

On Feb. 16, 2015, a Texas judge blocked the enforcement of the Obama order

U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen of Brownsville, Texas issues an injunction to block enforcement of the DAPA program nationwide. Hanen said the Obama administration failed to offer notice and seek comment under the APA. The Obama Administration appealed the ruling, countering that the program came from Homeland Security discretion on deportation priorities.

On Nov. 9, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the ruling by Judge Hanen.

On Jan. 19, 2016, the Supreme Court agreed to the case.

On Feb. 13, 2016, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died.

Before Justice Antonin Scalias death, the Supreme Court sat 5 conservative judges and 4 liberal judges. After Scalias death, the bench was split 4-4, leaving a possibility for deadlock decision.

On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court split its vote, signaling defeat for the Obama Administration

Two months after hearing oral arguments from both sides in the United States v. Texas case, the Supreme Court is split 4-4, leaving in place the 5th Circuits ruling to block Obamas executive action.

2017 KXTV-TV

Go here to see the original:
Dreaming in America: A recent timeline of immigration reform - ABC10

The Texas Major Cities Chiefs and the Texas Police Chiefs Association would like to take this opportunity to respectfully oppose Senate Bill 4 as amended by the Texas House of Representatives.

SB 4 requires law enforcement agencies to become more involved in the enforcement of federal immigration laws.

No one believes in the rule of law more than the agencies represented by these two organizations. We work tirelessly to make our communities safer within the confines of the Constitution by arresting those who commit crimes that threaten our communities. We specifically target individuals committing violent crimes and arrest anyone who threatens the safety of our communities regardless of their immigration status.

Members of these organizations work extremely hard to build and maintain trust, communication and stronger relationships with minority communities through community-based policing and outreach programs. Broad mandates like those imposed by SB 4, require local law enforcement to take a more active role in immigration enforcement and will further strain the relationship between local law enforcement and the diverse communities we serve. Officers will start inquiring about the immigration status of every person they come in contact with or worse, only inquire about the immigration status of individuals based on their appearance. This will lead to distrust of police, less cooperation from members of the community and will foster the belief that they cannot seek assistance from police for fear of being subjected to an immigration status investigation.

Distrust and fear of contacting or assisting the police has already become evident among legal immigrants as well. Legal immigrants are beginning to avoid contact with the police for fear that they themselves or undocumented family members or friends may become subject to immigration enforcement. Such a divide between the local police and immigrant groups will result in increased crime against immigrants and in the broader community; create a class of silent victims; and eliminate the potential for assistance from immigrants in solving crimes or preventing crime.

It should not be forgotten that by not arresting criminals who victimize our immigrant communities, we are also allowing them to remain free to victimize every one of us. When it comes to criminals, we are in this together regardless of race, sex, religion or nation of origin. SB 4 will have the unintended consequence of making our communities more dangerous not safer, as we presume the Texas Legislature had intended.

Law enforcement in Texas works cooperatively with federal law enforcement agencies including Immigration and Customs Enforcement to disrupt violent street gangs and others who threaten our communities. If federal agencies file criminal charges or obtain judicially reviewed warrants on any person, local law enforcement officers arrest the person regardless of immigration status.

SB 4 reinforces the call by some for local police to become more involved in enforcing federal immigration laws; however, to comply with these constitutionally questionable requirements means stretching already-limited resources. At a time of strained law enforcement budgets and critically low jail space, narrowing the focus to violent criminals, human traffickers, gun traffickers and members of organized crime syndicates is critical. Requiring local law enforcement to prioritize immigration efforts without adequate funding or increased support from involved governmental agencies will hinder an agencys ability to focus its limited resources on the unique needs of the community it serves.

Immigration enforcement is first and foremost a federal obligation. Any immigration reform must begin with the federal government. While the federal government has not been able or willing to address this issue, any effort by the state of Texas to address immigration reform will be ineffective.

SB 4 is not the answer to comprehensive immigration reform; it is political pandering that will make our communities more dangerous. If the Texas Legislature is intent on passing legislation to address immigration reform, passing laws like SB 4 that require local law enforcement to become immigration agents is not the answer.

If the Legislature were serious about removing undocumented people, there are better ways to address this issue than forcing law enforcement to become immigration agents. The Texas Legislature could easily start by addressing the businesses that hire undocumented workers, which is why the majority of the honest, hard-working people emigrate to this country with or without documentation. By addressing the primary reason undocumented persons enter this state, it would free law enforcement to address those persons who are committing crimes.

Our organizations respectfully request that the members of the Texas Legislature withdraw the amendments to SB 4 that was passed by the Texas House of Representatives. This legislation is bad for Texas and will make our communities more dangerous for all.

By Austin interim Police Chief Brian Manley; Chief Will Johnson of Arlington; interim Chief David Pughes of Dallas; Chief Joel Fitzgerald of Fort Worth; Chief Art Acevedo of Houston; Chief William McManus of San Antonio; and James McLaughlin, executive director of Texas Police Chiefs Association.

See the article here:
Texas police chiefs: SB 4 is not comprehensive immigration reform - MyStatesman.com