Mediaboss Marketing

The president of the United States, Joe Biden asked to ban the use of assault weapons and approve the immigration reform, once and for all. These two issues have been key and have been promoted by the government of President Lpez Obrador.

During his speech on the State of the Union before both Houses of Congress The US president called on Congress to conduct a universal background check, as well as ban the use of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines in the United States.

Biden called for repealing the liability shield that makes weapons manufacturers be the only industry that cannot be sued. These laws do not violate the Second Amendment. They save lives, she said.

Let us unite to protect our communities, restore trust and hold law enforcement authorities accountable, he said.

On the other hand, the American requested that the immigration reform include a path to citizenship for millions of undocumented immigrants living in the country.

Immigration reform is something that everyone supports, from unions to religious leaders, including the US Chamber of Commerce. Lets approve it once and for all, he stressed.

Read also: We must stop the aggressor as soon as possible, says Volodimir Zelensky after call with Joe Biden

Biden assured that this is not only the right thing to do, but it is also economically smart, and asked to make sure that families do not have to wait decades to reunite.

We can keep burning the torch of freedom that brought generations of immigrants to this country, my ancestors and many of yours, Biden asked lawmakers.

Read also: Biden will speak with allies to coordinate response to Ukraine invasion, White House says

* With information from EFE

vare/ml

Read the original:
asks to ban assault weapons and approve immigration reform, once and for all - D1SoftballNews.com

A new film premiering on Wednesday at Arizona State University's Tempe campus aims toshed light on a conversation immigration activists have been having for years: how the"Dreamer" narrative has a harmful impact on the undocumented community.

Karina Dominguez, 22, a political organizer,produced "Rejecting the DreamerNarrative," a documentary that focuses on that conversation and why the "Dreamer"narrative should be rejected

Dominguez's film is a response to how Americans understand and talk about DACA recipients, "Dreamers"and undocumented people, she told TheRepublic.

According to Dominguez, the narrative perpetuates exclusivity and exclusionamong the 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. Those who fall under the "Dreamer" categorymake up asmall percentage of the undocumented population.

The Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act would have granted legal status to many undocumented people who were brought over to the U.S. as children. However, this bill and similar othershave failed to make it through Congress for the past 20 years since it was first introduced in 2001.

The term would stick around in the wayimmigration policy is discussed.

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals is an Obama-era policy that was born out of the failure to pass legislation through the legislative branch.

Since June 2012, the protection has provided young, undocumented immigrants a shield against deportation andwork visas.The National Immigration Forum estimates that there are 643,560 DACA recipients in the U.S., out of a population of 1,326,000 people who are DACA-eligible.

State of the Union: Advocates see urgency for immigrationreform in Biden's speech

Arizona is home to23,070DACA recipients,according to 2021data from USCIS.

Dominguez, whograduated from ASU in 2020 with a bachelor's in sustainability,became frustrated with the conversations surrounding "Dreamers"and how that mirrored the support the universityoffered undocumented students.

While I was a student, I often came across scholarships that would pride themselves in accepting applications from 'Dreamers.'Most of the time, those 'Dreamers' were only DACA recipients and not undocumented students without DACA, Dominguez said.

Dominguez said that the "Dreamer" narrative has created a support gap that she wants to shed light on.

Many politicians and activists see the fight for 'Dreamers' as the easy fight. They do not put effort and resources into fighting for all current 11 million undocumented immigrants and those who will be undocumented in the future, she said.

Dominguez is looking to refocus the conversation in the pro-immigration movement with this film.The goal, she said, is to create a more inclusive way of talking about immigrant people, with more dimension, within the movement. She imagines a movement that, protects everyone and does not perpetuate the good versusbad migrant narrative.

Dominguez produced this film as a Creative Fellow for Fuerte Arts Movement, an Arizona-based non-profit that works in the intersection of art and advocacy.

Xenia Orona, co-executive director at Fuerte, said her organization works to tell stories from the community to push for a better future for Black, Indigenous and people of color in Arizona.

Many of Fuertes members, like Dominguez,have been involved in political organizing in the immigrant rights movement.Dominguezis currentlyworking at Fuerte as the Climate Justice Program lead.

Karina's filmdirectly questions the efficacy of creating a 'good immigrant'archetype in our larger immigrant rights culture, and whether it's time to move on from this archetype to a more inclusive organizing strategy, Orona said. It is in line with our values as an organization because we understand that we all lose when we leave members of our community behind.

Along with the screening of her film, Dominguez partnered with the Undocumented Students for Education Equity club at ASU to put on a panel discussionon the subject.

Salma Ortiz Diaz, one of the panelists, is the advocacy director at USEE and isfeatured in Dominguez's documentary.

Her involvement in the film came from working alongside Dominguez in immigrant advocacy work.

"Shes been such an amazing influence within the migrant movement," Ortiz said. "'Rejecting the Dreamer Narrative' is a conversation that local migrant organizers have been having. Karina wanted to bring this conversation to life."

Ortiz felt like it was her duty to share her perspective and knowledge in the film. Her own work is all about inclusivity in the migrant movement space.

As a DACA recipient, I have so much privilege. I can recognize that I did absolutely nothing to earn my status except be at the right placeat the right time, Ortizsaid. The migrant movement needs to focus on who else we can be including when addressing an immigration reform, and not excluding.

She said that USEE at ASU works to bring this inclusivity onto campus and address some of the gaps created by current immigration policy.

AtUSEE, we try our best to keep an open mind by having difficult conversations and finding solutions, Ortiz said.

The "Dreamer" narrative conversation is one that Dominguez is looking to spark in the community.

People in Arizona should watch this film to understand that even if you use the ('Dreamer') term and the narrative with good intentions, it harms the community. To be good allies, it is important to stay educated and listen to those who are directly impacted," Dominguez said.

The screening will take place Wednesday, March 2, at ASUs Tempe campus in the Memorial Union building at301 E Orange St., Tempe, AZ 85281, in the Pima Room230from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m.

A panel discussion will followthe film premier in the same room. The panel will include Dominguez, Ortiz and other community members.

The event is open to the general public. You can registerat this link.

Wednesday's premiere is organized by Fuerte Arts Movement and the Undocumented Students for Education Equity club at ASU.

See original here:
New film explores harmful impact of Dreamer narrative on undocumented community - The Arizona Republic

Harvard spent $560,000 on federal lobbying during President Joe Bidens first year in office, pacing the Ivy League alongside Yale, which spent the same amount. The school's expenditures put it atop the Ivy League for the fifth time in the last six years.

The Universitys lobbying expenditures rose $5,000 from 2020 levels, breaking a four-year trend of decreases. In the last decade, Harvards lobbying peaked in 2017 under former President Donald J. Trumps administration, reaching $610,000.

During 2021, representatives from Harvards Office of Federal Relations and University President Lawrence S. Bacow continued to lobby the White House and Capitol Hill on key issues related to immigration and higher education, according to Harvard spokesperson Jason A. Newton.

Key issues include robust federal funding for research and student aid, welcoming immigration policies for international students and scholars, support for DREAMers and other undocumented students, balanced research policies, and incentives for charitable giving, Newton wrote in an emailed statement.

Harvard also continued to support Covid-19 relief and stimulus bills.

The University spent $130,000 lobbying in the first quarter of 2021, gradually increasing its quarterly expenditures before plateauing at $145,000 for the second half of the year.

Harvard continued to lobby for increased funding for higher education, including the Pell Grant Preservation and Expansion Act, which is supported by more than 60 American research universities. The act would double the maximum grant amounts under the program and expand its coverage, which currently includes 34 percent of American undergraduates.

Harvard also lobbied in favor of the National Science Foundation for the Future Act, which would fund the NSF through 2026 and expand STEM education.

The University also continued to lobby for immigration reform, most notably the American Dream and Promise Act along with the Dream Act. Both bills would create new avenues to citizenship.

Bacow has penned multiple letters advocating for immigration reform, including one last year calling on the Department of Homeland Security to reinstate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, a position endorsed by the Biden administration.

While no immigration reform bills Harvard lobbied for in 2021 passed into law, Congress passed the American Rescue Plan, a Covid-19 relief bill backed by Harvard. Additional bills addressing the pandemic including the RISE Act to support research related to Covid-19 or disrupted by the pandemic continue to languish in Congress.

The Harvard School of Public Health also hired Center Road Solutions, a Washington, D.C.-based lobbying firm. HPSH spent less than $35,000 on its lobbying efforts a drop from last years total of $40,000.

Altogether, Ivy League schools spent more than $2.7 million on lobbying in 2021.

Yale also spent $560,000 on lobbying last year, tying Harvard. Cornell and the University of Pennsylvania trailed close behind, with expenditures of $480,000 and $405,000, respectively. Consistent with previous years, Columbia, Brown, and Dartmouth spent the least out of the Ivy League schools in 2021.

For several consecutive years, Dartmouths lobbying activity has fallen below the minimum threshold for disclosure.

Yale, Princeton, and Harvard saw slight increases in lobbying expenditures compared to 2020. Brown, Cornell, and the University of Pennsylvania all continued downward trends in spending that began in 2019.

Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and the University of Pennsylvania lobbied against the excise tax on large university endowments, supporting the Dont Tax Higher Education Act a bill that would repeal the endowment tax.

Harvard and Penn also backed a second endowment tax bill, the Higher Education Endowment Tax Reform Act, which would phase out the tax so long as universities give financial aid to students.

Harvard has long contended that the endowment tax undercuts the schools ability to support its students and research. In an interview with The Crimson in November 2017, former University President Drew G. Faust called the endowment tax a blow at the strength of higher education.

The endowment tax is a part of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the flagship tax reform championed by the Trump administration.

The University, a charitable tax-exempt organization, is non-partisan, but is active in Washington with policymakers in Congress and the Administration on issues of importance to the University and its faculty and students, Newton, the Harvard spokesperson, wrote.

Staff writer Cara J. Chang can be reached at cara.chang@thecrimson.com. Follow her on Twitter @CaraChang20.

Staff writer Isabella B. Cho can be reached at isabella.cho@thecrimson.com. Follow her on Twitter @izbcho.

See the original post:
Harvard Spent $560,000 on Federal Lobbying in Biden's First Year | News - Harvard Crimson

March 3, 2022 - WASHINGTON, D.C. U.S. SenatorAlex Padilla (D-Calif.), Chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee onImmigration,joined Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and four of their Senate colleagues in introducing theResolving Extended Limbo for Immigrant Employees and Families (RELIEF) Act, legislation toeliminate the family and employment green card backlog by increasing the number of green cards available.

Almost four million future Americans are on the State Departments immigrant visa waiting list, in addition to hundreds of thousands of immigrants in the U.S. who are also waiting for green cards. However, under current law, only 226,000 family green cards and 140,000 employment green cards are available annually. Children and spouses of lawful permanent residents (LPRs) count against these numbers, further restricting the number of available green cards.

Immigrants are the backbone of our nation andour communities arestronger because of them,said Senator Padilla.For far too long, thebacklog of green card applications has restrictedaccess to the American dream for millions of people who are ready to contribute to ourcountry. This bill is a commonsensestep toward eliminating the green card backlog andproviding relief for immigrant families.

In addition to Padilla and Durbin, theRELIEF Actis cosponsored by Senators Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

Along with eliminating the family and employment green card backlog within five years, this bill will help keep families together by classifying spouses and children of LPRs as immediate relatives and exempting derivative beneficiaries of employment-based petitions from annual green card limits, protect aging out children who qualify for LPR status based on a parents immigration petition, and lift per-country limitations.

Specifically, theRELIEF Actwill:

Padilla is a strong advocate for immigration reform. He is anoriginal cosponsorof theU.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, legislation to overhaul the American immigration system, restore fairness and humanity to the system, strengthen families, boost our economy, and open a pathway to citizenship for millions. He recentlycalledon the Biden administration to Provide Temporary Protected Status for Ukrainians on a visa in the United States. Padilla has alsopushedthe State Department to address the international student visa backlog.Source: Senator Alex Padilla

Read more from the original source:
California's US Senator Alex Padilla, Colleagues Introduce Legislation to Increase Number of Green Cards and Eliminate Backlog - Sierra Sun Times

President Biden came to CapitolHill on the 404th day of his presidency, during perhaps the most pivotal moment of his short tenure to deliver the State of the Union address.

According to aWashington Post-ABC News poll, Bidens presidential approval rating is at a new low, with 37 percent saying they approve of the job he is doing and 55 percent saying they disapprove.Inflation is at a four-decade zenith and shows few signs of receding. Bidens appointments to the Federal Reserve are wedged behind an increasingly obdurate Republicanblockade. The COVID pandemic finally seems to be easing but faces a public rightlyskepticalthe virus is gone indefinitely and there is a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape.

If his approval rating were above 40 percent this would have been a typical State of the Union address, but it was not. In many respects, the nation and the world are balancing on a tightrope.

On almost every issue raised,Biden took a position that puts him in stark contrast with his party, especially the more progressive wing of the party. With 250 daysuntil the midterm elections,when voters will render judgment on Democrats control of Washington,the State of the Union,in my estimation did not move the needle. And the American people who are lukewarm about his presidency and unsure of how we might intervene in the Ukrainian crisis remain unmotivated or feel deflated.

So, who among the base, or generally, did this State of the Union address excite?

The president spent more time discussing the war in Ukraine than the war against voting rights at home. He also discussed strained engagements between some communities, especially communities of color, and law enforcement. He proclaimed, The answer is not to defund the police. The answer is to fund the police, before ad-libbing: Fund them. Fund them.In that same moment, Gov. Kim Reynolds (R-Iowa) in her Republican response accused Democrats of wanting to defund the police.

This example of dog-whistle politics hit against some of the presidents most critical base young, progressive and African American voters. This is an apparent snub of the leftist wing of the party. The unfortunate political reality is that George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, the Freedom to Vote Act and the John LewisJohn LewisBiden's SOTU affirms what we already know: His progressive agenda is over The US can no longer ignore Tunisia's fight for democracy Harris to travel to Selma for 'Bloody Sunday' anniversary MORE Voting Rights Act are dead.

Additionally, Biden did notmention Build Back Better by name his chief legislative agenda, though he mentioned critical elements of the plan. For a while now, its been pretty clear that the signature package is dormant in Congress particularly as we turn to an election year in which passing legislation is much more difficult. However, he did mention one signature Democratic agenda:the Child Tax Credit.He saidhe hoped to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour and extend the credit, which saw monthly payments expire in December. Unfortunately, there is no plan to revive them.

Also, his Test to Treat program for immunocompromised individuals and access to therapeutics might be met with resistance as new COVID-19 guidelines recommend most Americans go unmasked, harkening back to last summer before the emergence of the delta variant.

Bidens State of the Union speech was light on genuinely divisive issues. Towards the end, he briefly mentioned abortion, immigration reform, transgender rights and climate change. And at plenty of points in the speech, he seemed to be trying to speak to issues dear to Republicans and perhaps even disaffected Democrats.

Stylistically, he spokeover the applause, seeming to rush through the speech without pause to allow for more extended ovation and for critical points to have their moments. It felt swifteven with his mention of the historic appointment of Judge Ketanji Brown JacksonKetanji Brown JacksonBiden's SOTU affirms what we already know: His progressive agenda is over Sen. Lujn returns to Senate after stroke Collins to meet with Biden's Supreme Court nominee Tuesday MORE, the first Black woman appointed to the Supreme Court. There was no recognition of the landmark diversity in the judiciary and he quickly pivoted to immigration, where he failed to lay out a comprehensive plan for reform.

All things considered, President Biden affirmed what we already know he is the epitome of moderation consistently appealing to the political attitudes of right-of-center Americans and small C conservatives who dont support him despite his efforts.

Furthermore, his unity agenda, which supports needed initiatives for issues such as opioids, cancer research, mental health and veterans care, is more of the same as what we have heard previously. No innovation, no big legislative agenda, no exceptionally comforting and enduring vision for the country. Democratsneed a winning strategy; President Biden has yet to exercise his bully pulpit in full support of this strategy.

Biden concluded: Fellow Americans: Look, we cant change how divided weve been ... but we can change how to move forward on COVID-19 and other issues that we must face together. Regrettably, the president did not provide a framework for change moving forward.

He enthusiastically concluded, Go get em.And I am afraid that is precisely what the Republican Party will do deliver a shellacking to the Democrats in November.

Quardricos Bernard Driskell is an adjunct professor of legislative politics atThe George Washington University Graduate School of Political Management.Follow him on Twitter @q_driskell4

Read more here:
Biden's SOTU affirms what we already know: His progressive agenda is over | TheHill - The Hill