Mediaboss Marketing

In light of President Obama's decision to delay his much-anticipated edict on immigration until after November's elections, some critics are asking why the president and Democrats in Congress didn't pass immigration reform back when they had overwhelming majorities in both House and Senate.

It's a good question and a good reason to revisit 2009 and 2010, when immigration reform could have become a reality.

As a presidential candidate, Obama promised to put comprehensive immigration reform back on the nation's agenda during my first year in office. After victory in 2008, he had the clout to do so: sky-high approval ratings, 257 Democrats in the House and, for a while, a filibuster-proof majority of 60 Democrats in the Senate.

Immigration activists pressed hard for Obama to act; after all, he had promised.

As 2009 unfolded, Obama encouraged the activists to believe he was committed to introducing a comprehensive reform bill. After a White House meeting, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Illinois, told reporters Obama had promised a bill in the very near future.

The next month, April 2009, the White House sent out word that Obama was preparing to move. The New York Times reported: (O)ver the summer he will convene working groups, including lawmakers from both parties and a range of immigration groups, to begin discussing possible legislation for as early as this fall.

Things seemed to be on track.

Throughout June, Obama and top Democrats promised action. After meeting with congressional leaders, Obama declared they all want to actively get something done and not put it off until a year, two years, three years, five years from now.

As the summer of 2009 went on, though, the talk slowed down as work on health care reform consumed the administration. Immigration fell out of the first tier, if it had ever really been there. By August, Obama put reform at the bottom of a long list.

Immigration reform would have to wait for 2010. And then 2011. And then 2012. And then 2013. And now 2014.

Read more:
Immigration reform still a promise

Less than a week after Pope Francis named Bishop Blase Cupich the next archbishop of Chicago, the appointee spoke of his move to Illinois, citing immigration reform as chief among the issues to tackle here.

In a news conference this morning in Spokane, Wash., Cupich said he was prepared to work with political and community leaders on immigration reform.

It has been held hostage, I think, to too many views that need to examine whether or not the common good is being secured, saidCupich, 65.

The bishop said he would support state recognition for immigrants, though not necessarily citizenship, in order to better account for immigrants living in the United States.

These people pay taxes, they contribute to the common good it is a matter of making sure we can give them legal status, he said.

Cupich also described the call he received Sept. 11 when the papal nuncio told him that he had been selected for the Chicago position.

I prayed that the Lord would deliver our country from all disaster, then I was appointed to Chicago, Cupich said jokingly. You figure that one out.

Pope Francis named Cupich as the next archbishop Sept. 20. The announcement came just after the Vatican announced the resignation of the cancer-stricken Cardinal Francis George, 77, earlier that morning.

Cupich will step in as leader of the areas 2 million Roman Catholics after his planned installation Nov. 18. George will maintain the position until then.

Throughout the news conference Cupich displayed his sense of humor, joking that he would adopt a Chicago accent and adapt to Chicago sports teams that would likely not win as often as the Gonzaga University Zags of Spokane.

Continue reading here:
Cupich discusses immigration reform and move to Chicago

President Barack Obamas broken promise of enacting administrative immigration reform by the end of the summer will undoubtedly have dire consequences for countless families in this country.

Contrary to the administrations assertion that it has targeted criminal aliens for deportation, only one in five of those deported this fiscal year had engaged in any type of criminal activity, and for the most part that activity involved driving offenses, such as driving with a suspended license or without a license. A staggering 80 percent of those deported committed only civil immigration offenses, rather than criminal. In addition, many of those deported are the parents of U.S. citizens and the primary earners in the household, creating a devastating issue for their families left behind.

But what harm will waiting an additional two to three months cause? It will inflict serious, life-changing harm on the multitude of individuals who will be deported in the meantime and perhaps permanently separated from their loved ones. In the past 11 months, immigration judges have ordered 82,878 individuals to be deported. This amounts to roughly 7,534 deportations a month. Therefore, by waiting another two months, a jaw-dropping additional 15,068 people will be deported.

Take the case of Pedro Hernandez-Ramirez. A Mexican national married to a U.S. citizen and father to three stepchildren (one of whom suffers from severe cerebral palsy) and one biological son, Hernandez-Ramirez has lived in this country for more than a decade. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has now advised him that he will be deported. Hernandez-Ramirez, employed in nurseries, is the breadwinner in the household. He is also the only one in his family who can physically lift and care for his 25-year-old disabled stepson. Another Mexican immigrant facing imminent deportation is Nora Galvez, the mother of an 8-year-old U.S. citizen son. Galvez makes a living doing what most Americans wont do picking and packing apples. She was apprehended by ICE during a routine traffic stop. For Noras son and Pedros family, a two-month delay will, at minimum, cause lifelong trauma, and may even prove fatal.

The fact is that many of the individuals illegally in the country hold jobs that need to be filled but that no U.S. workers will take or would want. Imagine if everyone who is illegally in the U.S. stopped working today. Our country would collapse. Crops would rot in the fields. Americans would have to pay $10 for a head of lettuce. Homes would not be built. American parents would not be able to work because their children and elderly parents would have no one to care for them.

Despite the presidents assertions that ICE will focus on priority cases such as foreigners convicted of serious crimes or caught crossing the border illegally, many foreign nationals who do not fit within these priorities and who would most certainly benefit from administrative reform will undoubtedly be deported within in the next several months because of the presidents delay.

Obama must reinforce that, given its limited resources, ICE must strategically target those who pose a threat to the security of the U.S. or have been convicted of serious criminal offenses, not mere civil immigration violators. It certainly makes no sense to use our governments limited resources to deport immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who pose no threat to the security of this country, and hurt their families chances of survival by leaving.

Read this article:
Commentary: Dire consequences of delayed immigration reform

MILWAUKEE -- Immigration rights supporters are gathering in downtown Milwaukee today as part of a national week of events pushing for immigration reform.

Earlier this month, President Barack Obama said he would not issue and executive orders dealing with immigration until after the November election. That decision is not sitting well with immigration advocates, who say they are taking a stand and demanding an end to government practices that criminalize minority communities.

Organizers say they're fighting to protect families from detention and being deported, and that Obama is the only one who can end it by using his executive authority.

Milwaukee's rally will cover more than immigration rights.Families affected by police brutality will also join today's rally to call for policy changes within the criminal justice system.

A march and rally is planned for 12:15 p.m. today in front of the MATC downtown campus, and is part of a national week of action led by the Fair Immigration Reform Movement.

CBS 58's Marshanna Hester has more.

See more here:
Immigration reform advocates to hold rally in downtown Milwaukee

Breaking from the antiamnesty, secure-the-border hawkishness coursing through the national Republican Party, New Jersey's GOP nominee for a U.S. Senate seat says he would fight for "comprehensive immigration reform" in Washington.

And like many Republicans, Jeff Bell is claiming the mantle of Ronald Reagan.

"Ronald Reagan once said, 'Latinos are Republicans - they just don't know it yet.' Maybe that's politically incorrect to repeat in 2014," Bell wrote in an e-mail to supporters Wednesday. "But I do agree with the premise behind his assertion: If the Republican Party makes the case to them, Hispanics will vote GOP."

Republican Gov. Christie won 51 percent of the Latino vote when he was reelected last year, although he has not taken a position on federal immigration policy.

Other Republicans, both locally (Steve Lonegan) and nationally (U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz), have embraced Reagan but have endorsed immigration policies radically different from Bell's.

Cruz, for one, has opposed a Senate bill that would create a path to citizenship. Bell, who is running a quixotic campaign focused on a return to the gold standard, supports granting citizenship to the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

Booker also supports a path to citizenship.

The chances of passing immigration reform plummeted in recent months amid an influx of Central American migrants streaming across the Mexican border.

See more here:
In N.J., GOP Senate candidate endorses immigration reform