Mediaboss Marketing

Plenty is bound to change in the first year of a new president, no matter who is elected. And Donald Trump is certainly more of a change agent than any president in recent memory.

On immigration, things are in a state of flux. But how on-the-ground policy has changed and will change under the Trump Administration is unclear. Anecdotal evidence has popped up of increased raids and deportations of domestic violence victims, farm workers and community linchpins across the nation, but there is also increased media scrutiny on the issue due to Trumps extreme campaign rhetoric.

We know Trump has ordered stricter enforcement of immigration laws, more detention and deportation and has plans to hire 15,000 more ICE agents. He has also promised a new travel ban from war-torn countries to replace a previous iteration that was declared unconstitutional.

In Umatilla County, immigration will be the primary issue in 2017. Perhaps it has been for a few years already.

Fear from the presidents promises has resonated locally, especially in immigrant communities in Hermiston, Milton-Freewater and Umatilla. Social unrest has rippled through each town, and school districts are dealing with increased absences caused by families distrustful of government in any form even public schools.

There have also been strains of celebration by those hoping the harder stance on people living here illegally will cure some of our social ills.

Much of the growth in Umatilla and Morrow counties is due to immigrants both documented and undocumented, some with full citizenship, others with work visas and still others with no legitimate paperwork. Those communities are an irreplaceable part of our economy. We have a lot to lose with a change in immigration policy, but a lot to gain, too.

This newspaper has reported on immigration issues multiple times since the election. It has been surprising to see the basic rights many readers want to rip from noncitizens Miranda rights, the right not to incriminate yourself and the right to attend public schools, for instance.

The Fourteenth Amendment addresses citizenship questions and the rights of citizens of this country and those who live here. It reads in part: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The equal protections clause may be the most powerful and defining words in all of the U.S. Constitution. It is among the most commonly used and most commonly fought over phrase in a court of law. The phrase has helped decide landmark cases like Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade and Bush v. Gore.

We can and should argue about changing our immigration laws and how best to enforce them, but we should allow everyone the same human rights that American citizens have. That cannot be up for debate.

Yet the debate is here. And its worth noting that its existence is directly tied to governments failure to solve a clear problem. For decades, both political parties admitted our immigration system was a wreck, and neither did anything about it.

That is one reason the presidents views, equal parts extremist and overly simplistic, have gained traction. Building a multi-billion dollar beautiful wall along our 2,000-mile border with Mexico is patently absurd, but neither political party has put any meaningful effort toward a better plan.

When our government cannot solve problems that exist for generations, it causes enmity and anger from citizens. Sometimes those citizens revolt at the ballot box, and those in control realizes they should have taken action long ago, before things got out of control.

Lets hope it doesnt get to that point. Eastern Oregon has a lot to lose.

Go here to read the rest:
Immigration reform will affect Oregon directly | As Others See It ... - NRToday.com

Members of the Lowell House of Prayer attend a prayer campaign (above and below) for immigration reform on a recent Wednesday in Lowell. SUN photos by Amaris Castillo

Sun staff photos can be ordered by visiting our SmugMug site.

LOWELL -- Members of the Lowell House of Prayer are placing their faith in the cause for immigration reform, part of a 12-day campaign launched last week.

"The purpose is to gather people together in praying for immigration reform -- laws for immigration reform that could meet our reality," senior pastor Marco Romeiro said last Wednesday inside the house of worship located at 14 McIntyre St., Lowell. "The intention is to go to a higher authority, going to God's presence for that."

Behind Romeiro stood a member of his predominantly Brazilian congregation on a stage, warming up a guitar before the special service began. Portuguese chatter filled the air as parishioners greeted one another.

Romeiro said he respects President Donald Trump.

Sun staff photos can be ordered by visiting our SmugMug site.

"He was elected by the people and we pray for him, like the Bible says, and we understand that he's dealing with his promises during the campaign," Romeiro said. "But for us, every crisis is an opportunity for God's intervention."

Trump on Monday signed a new executive order that blocks citizens of six Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. The revised order, which removed Iraq and continues the 90-day ban on travelers, follows protests fueled by the president's initial immigration directive on Jan. 27.

"As threats to our security continue to evolve and change, common sense dictates that we continually re-evaluate and reassess the systems we rely upon to protect our country," said U.S.

Romeiro described Trump's initial order as too extreme.

"You have to find the terrorists," he said, "but hurting good people because of this is not fair."

The special service last Wednesday included prayer, testimonies, and performances. Romeiro told his members at the very beginning that the focus was immigration reform.

"We're so happy, Lord," Romeiro said in Portuguese. "We know You will do great things."

The man with the guitar later took over the stage and engaged the congregation in praise songs. Some members bowed their heads, while others raised their hands and swayed to the music. "Vim para adorar-te," they sang, which translates to "Here I am to worship."

Read more from the original source:
Lowell House organizes campaign for immigration reform in USA - Lowell Sun

The Pew Hispanic Center has just released a new report that indicates that the U.S. population would fall in the future if current levels of legal and illegal immigration were not continued.

The projection is that between now and 2065 immigration will account for 88 percent of the countrys population growth. But the study is not focused on the total population, but rather the working-age population. It depicts a drop from 173 million persons aged 25-64 to 166 million if there were no further immigration. Of course, no one is advocating zero immigration. With the continued present level of immigration, the working-age population would increase to 183 million.

The reason for the drop in the working age population without immigration is that the spike in population growth of the postwar baby boom increase is passing as that generation ages and dies. This, of course, is a natural phenomenon that has been long anticipated. The passing of the baby boom is destined to restore population dynamics to a more stable long-term balance.

So, what is the purpose of this report? Pew supports liberal immigration. The report is ammunition for the business interests that oppose the agenda of the Trump administration to tighten enforcement against illegal immigration and to reduce legal immigration and refugee flows. Economists and business interests generally support population growth fueled by immigration because of the view that the availability of more workers holds down wages and the availability of more consumers props up consumption of manufactured products.

That is a glass half full perspective. The contrary perspective is a nation with decreased crowding, less demand for new infrastructure, less intrusion on the nations environment and non-renewable resources. Currently efforts to make the country more energy independent and less reliant on fossil fuels are eroded by the growing population of energy consumers. That Sisyphean challenge will be much more realistic when the population tends to stabilize with a lower level of immigration.

The rest is here:
What if the U.S. Population Wanes? | Immigration Reform Blog - ImmigrationReform.com (blog)

One of the many sideshows overshadowing serious national and international issues is over who will pay for the big beautiful wall along the southern border that President Trump has promised to build. The president says Mexico will. The Mexicans say they wont.

Lost in the barrage of schoolyard taunts are several important matters. First, not only would the United States benefit from secure barriers along the border, but so too would many Mexicans. Second, taxing, or imposing fees on, remittances sent out of the country (not just to Mexico) is not an unreasonable proposition.

The lawless border between the two countries is not just a problem for the United States. Communities in Mexico are plagued by criminal cartels that engage in cross-border activities like smuggling of drugs and human beings. Interdicting rampant criminal activity along the border would loosen the grip of these violent syndicates on communities in northern Mexico, ending their reign of terror, and enabling honest and productive businesses to flourish.

From the standpoint of the United States, collecting fees on money transfers out of the country would not be entirely punitive. Remittances represent a very significant but often overlooked cost of mass immigration. According to the World Bank, $133.5 billion flowed out of the U.S. in 2015. In 2016, remittances to Mexico (mostly from the U.S.) hit an all-time high of $27 billion exceeding that countrys revenues from oil exports.

This massive outflow of money harms local economies in the U.S. The $133.5 billion that was earned here and shipped elsewhere is money that is not recirculated through local economies, stimulating local economic growth and generating revenues for local governments. Moreover, many of those working here illegally are being paid under the table, so the money is not taxed when it is earned. It is not unreasonable, therefore, for the United States to consider recouping some of the cost of the fence by collecting fees or taxes on funds being transferred abroad.

Most importantly, regardless of who pays for the fence, both the United States and Mexico would benefit greatly from a secure shared border that is open to legitimate commerce and travel, but secured against illegal immigration and criminal activity.

Read this article:
Mexico Would Benefit from a Wall Too | Immigration Reform Blog - ImmigrationReform.com (blog)

The Daily Banter

My Family Is Living In Hell Thanks To Donald Trump's Inhumane Immigration Policies The Daily Banter We could not fathom the thought of our child growing up without his father so we stopped the process and hoped Congress would pass immigration reform. Over the next decade we built a life together and our son grew into a well-adjusted, smartass pre ...

The rest is here:
My Family Is Living In Hell Thanks To Donald Trump's Inhumane Immigration Policies - The Daily Banter