Mediaboss Marketing

Immigration reform is an issue that Washington cant seem to address. Few disagree on beefing up security at the nations borders. But politicians part ways when discussing how to handle the countrys 11 million undocumented workers, who have either overstayed their visas or entered without permission. The resulting gridlock has left them in limbo for decades.

For the Left, the solution is to create a path to citizenship. Many arguments are made to support it. Undocumented workers pay their taxes, though in many cases because it may help them gain legal status. And undocumented workers have been here a long time without ever having had a legal right to establish permanent residence, but set that fact aside for the moment. The weakest rationale for granting them a path to citizenship is this: that they have toiled hard on American soil, contributing to the national economy.They have, but they have done so by violating the nations immigration laws. The end doesnt justify the means.

So whats the solution?

Government could get tough on those who hire undocumented workers. Stiffer penalties would mean fewer jobprospects for the job seekers. And studies show there there is a net outflow of workers when available jobs are scarce. But businesses want migrant labor, and immigration enforcement has long been overlooked to make sure they get it. Many rightly note that parked on Americas doorstep is a sign that reads Keep Out on one side and, on the other, Help Wanted.

This hypocrisy has augmented the problem of mixed-status families: cases in which some family members most notably, children have the legal right to be here while others do not. Nearly 5 million American kids have at least one undocumented parent. Confronting that reality means accepting that forced deportations, long touted as a solution, are socially unviable. They are also fiscally irresponsible. One estimate pegs the cost of deporting 11 million people at over $400 billion.

A more pragmatic solution would be to offer a path to legalization that stops short of citizenship. That would meet the humanitarian imperative to keep families together. But it would also hold those who have violated immigration laws accountable for their actions. This would apply only to undocumented workers who were of legal age when they entered the United States; those who were not of legal age should be given a citizenship path identical to the one that is available to legal immigrants.

Except for those who were born on American soil, citizenship is not a right. Its a privilege. A path short of citizenship sends a powerful message to Americas legal-immigrant community, whose members have worked tirelessly to follow existing immigration guidelines. There is a rule of law, and citizenship is granted to those who follow it.

A path short of citizenship would assuage Republican concerns that immigration reform would hurt the GOP. Many undocumented workers hail from Latin America, and Latinos have long favored Democrats over Republicans. Some Republicans worry that granting these workers a path to citizenship would tip the future balance of political power. That may sound petty, and it is. But it is also a political reality.

Withholding citizenship, the Left will argue, creates a working class who will never truly feel that America is their home. Citizenship, they maintain, holds the key to becoming a full and open member of American society. Yet a significant number of legal immigrants who can naturalize dont. They have pursued an education, own homes, and have forged links in American society. Not being citizens hasnt stopped them from claiming their piece of the American dream. Why would it be any different for undocumented workers?

The fact that not all legal immigrants claim American citizenship challenges another liberal argument: that citizenship increases wages. Many advocates of a path to citizenship tout studies that show that when immigrants naturalize, earnings increase by as much as 25 percent, according to one account. If that were true, wouldnt all eligible immigrants line up for American passports? Wage increases, after all, would be a powerful a powerful incentive.

The reality is that evidence linking citizenship to wage increases is weak. Researchers often mix legal noncitizens with undocumented workers when looking at earnings an approach that skews results in favor of the liberal position. More important, many studies dont control for occupational choice. The salaries of physicians who are American citizens will always be higher than those of secretaries who are legal noncitizens. Nationality has little to do with it. Choice of profession does.

Citizenship can improve wages by offering access to jobs previously off limits. These include high-paying public- and private-sector positions that require security clearances. But they also require advanced education and skills training. As a whole, undocumented workers, nearly half of whom havent graduated high school, are ill equipped for such employment. And suggestions that immigrants tend to pursue higher education as a consequence of enjoying citizenship are not backed up by hard data.

One thing is certain. The needs of Americas changing economy cannot be met by laws that havent been touched in 25 years. Overhauling the nations immigration system requires a dose of pragmatism. And the current occupant of the White House, as unconventional as he may seem, mightjust be the one to deliver.

Ashley Nunes writes on work-force productivity, regulatory policy, and behavioral economics.

READ MORE:

See the original post here:
A Path to Legal Status but Not Citizenship - National Review

Last Novembers election brought significant changes to Washington, DC. President Trump is not your typical politician. Some of his actions have generated controversy, particularly in the Bay Area. But one thing is beyond dispute: he is focused like a laser on creating and keeping jobs here in the United States.

Unfortunately, employers today often face a shortage of qualified workers. Many positions require specific skills that involve years of advanced technical and scientific training. This problem is particularly acute in the tech sector, where employers need workers with intricate knowledge of computer science and engineering.

For years, weve had a process for bringing high-skilled workers from other countries to the United States to fill jobs for which there is a shortage of American labor. This system does not replace American jobs; rather, it supplements our workforce with talent from other countries in industries where there are simply not enough qualified American workers to meet market demand.

But the system is out-of-date. Our immigration laws cap the number of high-skilled worker visasalso called H-1B visasthat employers may obtain each year at a number that is far below demand.

Our laws also lack a straightforward path for companies to hire foreign students at American universities on a permanent basis after graduation. We educate some of the worlds best and brightest here in America and then send them back home because they cant get permanent work in the U.S. This makes no sense.

At the same time, a handful of companies have found ways to game the H-1B system to displace American employees with lower-paid foreign workers. That was never the intent of our immigration laws, and it must not be allowed to continue.

For the past two Congresses, Ive championed legislation to bring our outmoded high-skilled immigration system into the 21stCentury. My bill, theImmigration Innovation Actor I-Squared, would make it easier for employers to find the high-skilled workers they need to grow their companies and create new jobs.

Im working on updating I-Squared for the new Congress and plan to reintroduce it in the coming weeks.

Among other things, the updated bill will contain a streamlined green card process for high-skilled workers and strict penalties for companies that use H-1B workers to displace American employees. It will also create a better procedure for H-1B workers who wish to stay in the United States long-term to change jobs so that employers cannot lock them in at below-market wages.

I know that many in Silicon Valley and surrounding communities have expressed concerns about the new administrations immigration policies. But I believe high-skilled immigration is an area where the tech community and the administration can work together. President Trump comes to office with a business background and recognizes the crucial need for qualified workers.

As a longtime proponent of the tech community and as the Chairman of the Senate Republican High-Tech Task Force, I can serve as a bridge between the President and Silicon Valley. I have a good working relationship with the president and a deep understanding of the issues that matter to the tech industry.

With a new and improved I-Squared as our guide, Im convinced we can enact meaningful high-skilled immigration reform so that employers can hire the employees they need to grow our economy and create even more high-paying jobs.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)is the chairman of the Senate Republican High-Tech Task Force and the former chairman and longest-serving member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He wrote this for The Mercury News.

Read this article:
Orrin Hatch: I can be a bridge for H-1B visa reforms - The Mercury News

The Justice Department is seeking to play a more muscular role in the Trump administrations immigration enforcement strategy, a move that is alarming immigrant rights advocates who fear Attorney General Jeff Sessions hard-line ideology could give Justice too much clout in determining policy.

To highlight the departments expanding role, Sessions is considering making his first trip to the southern border in mid-April to Nogales, Ariz., a busy border crossing region that features a major patrol station and already has miles of fencing and walls designed to keep out illegal immigrants from Mexico. Aides emphasized that his itinerary is still being developed and the stop in Nogales which would come as Sessions travels to a conference of state police officials from around the country 200 miles away in Litchfield Park is still tentative.

If he follows through, the border visit would come at a time when President Trump is asking Congress for billions of dollars to begin construction on a longer and larger wall between the United States and Mexico, a central campaign promise.

In recent weeks, Sessions has taken steps to increase his departments focus on immigration.

He signed on to a letter released Friday with Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly backing the practice of arresting undocumented immigrants at courthouses, saying officials had to resort to such measures when states wouldnt cooperate on immigration enforcement.

On Thursday, Sessions announced he is expanding a program to deport undocumented immigrants convicted of crimes after they serve their prison sentences, with the hope that the Justice Department can move more people straight from prison to their home countries rather than first moving them to immigrant detention facilities.

Justice said it would expand to 20 the number of prisons participating in the Institutional Hearing Program, which has immigration judges come directly to prisons or has the inmates participate in deportation hearings via video.

We owe it to the American people to ensure that illegal aliens who have been convicted of crimes and are serving time in our federal prisons are expeditiously removed from our country as the law requires, Sessions said in a statement.

Earlier this month, Sessions used the release of a Federal Justice Statistics report on arrests and prosecution to highlight cases involving immigration offenses and he also issued a statement in support of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement report that listed cities that fail to comply with enforcement orders.

Last week, Sessions appeared in the White House briefing room to issue a threat to those cities that his agency could withhold federal law enforcement grants if they do not start to cooperate.

Sessionss activism has alarmed immigrant rights advocates concerned the department will play too powerful a role in a policy area that is typically the responsibility of the Department of Homeland Security.

I think we want clarity over whos running immigration policy, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said in an interview Thursday in Washington. Garcetti signed a directive two weeks ago prohibiting all city employees from using public resources to aide federal civil immigration actions.

DOJ can give some opinions, but its not primarily in their jurisdiction, Garcetti said. So I know Senator Sessions has been very engaged, interested and involved in this area, but is he empowered by this administration beyond his formal responsibilities?

Sessions, a former Republican senator from Alabama, was one of Congresss fiercest border hawks, and he helped scuttle former president Barack Obamas 2013 immigration reform effort on Capitol Hill that featured a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. One of his former Senate staffers, Stephen Miller, is Trumps senior policy adviser.

Kelly, a former Marine general with little experience in immigration issues, has also signaled that he will pursue a tougher stance on enforcement at DHS. He issued a pair of memos in February aimed at implementing Trumps executive orders to broaden the pool of undocumented immigrants prioritized for removal and beef up other border security measures.

But legal experts said Sessions could significantly restructure the Justice Department by ramping up the number of immigration judges sent to the border to speed up hearings and by pursuing more criminal prosecutions against immigrants in the United States beyond those associated with drug cartels and human smugglers that past administrations have focused on.

The Sessions Justice Department also could move to strip some protections from undocumented immigrants, such as how much time they have to find a lawyer; more robustly defend DHS enforcement policies that are challenged in court; and use the Office of the Special Counsel to aggressively prevent employers from discriminating against American workers by hiring undocumented workers, said Leon Fresco, a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Obama administration.

I think they will be incredibly active, said Fresco, who helped draft the 2013 immigration bill while serving as an aide to Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). The only thing that could slow Sessions, he added, was finding enough individuals with expertise and the willingness to speed these issues along.

If Sessions follows through, it would represent a sharp break from the policies of his predecessors in the Obama administration. In 2010, the Justice Department, then led by Eric H. Holder Jr., sued Arizona over a state law that granted broad immigration enforcement powers to local law enforcement agencies. The Supreme Court in 2012 upheld a lower courts ban on key provisions in the law.

In January, Holder was hired by the California Legislature to represent the state in potential legal fights with the Trump White House.

I believe there is nothing wrong, legally, morally or intellectually, with a lawful system of immigration that serves the national interest. Whats wrong with that? Sessions said in a speech to a conference of state attorneys general last month.

People who come here unlawfully, who commit crimes, are going to be out of here, he added, punching a finger in the air for emphasis. The law says that they have to be deported and were going to insist that that happens.

Trumps budget proposal outlines how Sessions could turn his rhetoric into action.

It calls for the Justice Department to hire 75 more immigration judge teams to speed removal proceedings, along with 60 more border enforcement prosecutors and 40 more deputy U.S. marshals to apprehend and transport those in the country illegally.

The budget also calls for an additional $171 million to buy short-term detention space, much of which will likely be used to house undocumented immigrants.

Immigration is one of their top priorities, permeating every part of their agenda, and every part of the federal government and agencies, Marielena Hincapi, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, said of the Trump White House.

Sessions is very much aligned with their ideology, she said. He is very knowledgeable. Hes worked on these issues for decades now and has very strong opinions. Hes finally in a position of power to use the department toward his vision and use the attorney general role as a bully pulpit.

In Nogales, Sessions would tour a border region that was once viewed as the most porous section, leading authorities to build the border walls and fences. In 2013, a bipartisan group of senators, led by John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Schumer, visited the area during the immigration reform deliberations.

During the tour, McCain wrote on Twitter that they saw a woman scale the 18-foot bollard fence and drop down to the U.S. side of the border before she was apprehended by patrol agents. Some advocates suggested that the event was staged to support Republican calls for additional border security spending.

The Nogales barriers have had mixed results, officials said. Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, emphasized that any single-layered fencing is defeatable.

Overall, Judd said, we do not think a 2,000-mile wall, a great wall of the United States, is necessary. But we 100 percent support a wall in strategic locations that allow us to dictate the crossing points.

Visit link:
Sessions seeks greater role for Justice in immigration enforcement - Washington Post

Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant (R) ensured another victory for true immigration reform supporters by signing anti-sanctuary legislation into law Monday. The measure, Senate Bill (SB) 2710, prohibits sanctuary policies, which are designed to protect criminal aliens from detection and removal from the United State by restricting communication with federal officials and compliance with detainer requests, often called ICE holds.

Introduced by Senate Judiciary A Chairman Sean Tindell (R-49), SB 2710 specifically prohibits all localities and state agencies, including the states public universities and colleges, from adopting or implementing any policy that limits or prohibits communication or cooperation with federal agencies or officials. SB 2710 therefore facilitates the enforcement of immigration law by federal immigration officials by allowing law enforcement and other public officials to cooperate with the federal agency as Congress intended. Weve had instances of cities attempting to ignore federal law or have law enforcement not check immigration status, Senator Tindell explained.

Chairman of the House Judiciary B committee, Representative Andy Gipson (R-77), also supported SB 2710. This doesnt mandate any action, it just says were not going to turn a blind eye to the immigration law we have on the books. Thats federal law, Gipson said during a committee hearing on the measure.

In a statement, Governor Bryant explained his support for SB 2710. Taxpayers expect their state and its political subdivisions to abide by federal immigration laws. He added, I appreciate the Legislatures work on Senate Bill 2710. Lieutenant Governor Tate Reeves (R) also commented on the victory, calling SB 2710 a major step forward for law and order in Mississippi.

Mississippi is not the only state advancing anti-sanctuary legislation this year. State lawmakers around the country amplified the movement to combat these policies after mayors in many of the countrys largest sanctuary cities promised illegal aliens that city officials will continue to ignore federal law following the election of President Donald Trump. Lawmakers in at least 25 states have responded to the public outcry against sanctuary policies and introduced legislation to eliminate them in their states.

More here:
Mississippi Governor Signs Anti-Sanctuary Bill - ImmigrationReform.com (blog)

The deadline for contractors wishing to bid on construction of the Trump administrations proposed wall along the along the U.S.-Mexico border originally scheduled for this week -- was extended until next Tuesday. Some of those in the running include companies owned and operated by Hispanic Americans or immigrants.

On Tuesday, Senate Republicans signaled funding for the wall would likely not be included in the spending bill that Congress will vote to approve next month in order to prevent a government shutdown, and instead will be considered at a later date. Thats a new snag for the administration, and the more than 600 companies that have already submitted designs for the wall, 10% of which are considered Hispanic American owned, according to the Guardian.

Michael Evangelista-Ysasaga, CEO of the Texas-based Penna Group, put in a bid to design and construct the border wall. However, the decision wasnt an easy one for Evangelista-Ysasaga, the descendant of Mexican immigrants, who told FOX Business his company also employs many workers of Hispanic descent. He said he was motivated to submit a humane design when he became aware of some less civilized, even lethal, proposals.

It is our hope that once we secure our borders, we can have a national conversation about immigration reform. After 35 years of worsening immigration problems its become clear that the American people and our politicians will not pass any new laws regarding immigration reform without first enforcing the laws on the books, including securing our borders, Evangelista-Ysasaga said.

Mario Burgos, president and CEO of the Albuquerque, New Mexico-based Burgos Group, put in a bid to provide general and electrical contracting services for the project, despite being the son of an Ecuadorian immigrant.

I value the contributions immigrants, like my father, grandparents and other members of our family have made and continue to make to this country, Burgos told FOX Business.

Continue Reading Below

ADVERTISEMENT

To Burgos, immigration policy and border security should be considered as two completely separate issues.

I think it is unfortunate that the political rhetoric particularly during the campaign has resulted in border security and immigration policy being discussed as though they are synonymous. They are not one and the same. I am not aware of a country in the world that does not want to control its borders. Immigration policy is a completely separate issue, Burgos said.

Over the weekend, the Catholic Archdiocese of Mexico condemned Mexicans who wish to help build Trump's planned border wall as immoral.

"Any company intending to invest in the wall of the fanatic Trump would be immoral, but above all, its shareholders and owners should be considered traitors to the homeland," the countrys largest Archdiocese wrote in its weekly editorial.

One Puerto Rico-based company that put in a bid for the assignment, San Diego Project Management, is certainly feeling societal pressure, experiencing blowback [from] many directions.

I do get calls from people from the mainland, begging me to desist and they end up calling me names, the companys managing partner Patrick Balcazar told FOX Business.

While Balcazar, whose firm is listed as one of the Hispanic companies involved according to The Guardian, said some detractors are against the proposed wall because they believe it is racially motivated, not all of the feedback has been negative.

In Puerto Rico, I am surprised how many people approve of me participating They recognize it for what it is, work. I am a businessman, and I do not make policy, everyone (except my wife) agrees with my effort to bring more work to Puerto Rico which is undergoing an economic crisis, Balcazar said.

According to preliminary guidelines released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency wants the wall to be between 18 feet to 30 feet tall and appear aesthetically pleasing when viewed from the U.S. It also needs to extend six feet underground to prevent tunneling, and should be unclimbable, the agency said.

A new CBP briefing on the wall shows the fiscal year 2018 budget blueprint will ask for about $2.6 billion to construct less than 75 miles worth of the wall, according to a press release from Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), a top Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security Committee. At that rate the wall would end up costing $66.9 billion in total. Earlier estimates from the Department of Homeland Security valued the project at $21.6 billion for 1,250 miles.

More here:
For Bidders, Trump's Wall is Pro-Business, Not Anti-Immigration - Fox Business