Mediaboss Marketing

San Antonio Express-News

Texas Gov. Greg Abbotts decision to bus migrants to New York City and Washington, D.C., has amplified the desperate need for comprehensive immigration reform. Since April, Abbott has bused more than 7,200 migrants from Texas to President Joe Bidens backyard. Since Aug. 5, hes bused more than 1,500 migrants to New York City.

Immigration is a federal issue, but it is an acute challenge for border states. And we cant help but notice that Abbotts busing program has had an interesting side effect. It has prompted comments from Mayors Eric Adams and Muriel Bowser, of New York City and Washington, D.C., that give voice to the pressures border communities face.

We need help, and were reaching out to the federal government to tell them that we need help, Adams said just after the first bus arrival.

So, in a narrow sense, props to Abbott for prompting Adams and Bowser to articulate the concerns of border communities, which bear the brunt of a broken immigration system. And if this, in turn, leads to comprehensive immigration reform, then it would be a master stroke. But our concern is this is more about scoring political points than bringing attention to the issue of immigration with appropriate moral urgency. Consider what Abbott said in a statement this month about busing:

Because of President Bidens continued refusal to acknowledge the crisis caused by his open border policies, the State of Texas has had to take unprecedented action to keep our communities safe he said. In addition to Washington, D.C., New York City is the ideal destination for these migrants, who can receive the abundance of city services and housing that Mayor Eric Adams has boasted about within the sanctuary city. .

Immigration is a federal issue, but for border communities its local, and the pressure is intense. The flow of migrants in the Del Rio sector has been off the charts.

In a recent Editorial Board meeting, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told us smuggling organizations are far more sophisticated than they were in the past. And he said this is a unique moment in terms of immigration flow.

What we are seeing is something very, very different than what preceded over the last x number of years, he said. Because its not simply, or merely, migration from the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. We are seeing a tremendous increase in Venezuelans, Nicaraguans, Cubans, Brazilians, Peruvians.

Given shifting global immigration patterns and federal political gridlock, just what is a border governor to do? No wonder Mark P. Jones, a political science professor at Rice University, told us busing immigrants to Washington and New York is smart politics on Abbotts part because his GOP base overwhelmingly supports his immigration efforts. And, of course, he has brought broader attention to the issue.

On one level, what Abbott has offered migrants, if you remove the obvious politics, is a pretty good deal. They receive a free bus ride to Washington or New York, where asylum is granted more often than in Texas and organizations are better resourced to provide aid. Its the kind of offer that might inspire more migrants to come here, an irony Abbotts supporters should ponder.

But while busing might be smart politics, we wonder what Abbotts end game is , or whether there is a moral driving force. In our interview, Mayorkas said the governors actions on the border, when done in coordination with DHS, can be beneficial. But when the state acts unilaterally, it can wreak havoc.

In this case, the busing doesnt wreak havoc, but, Mayorkas said, The unilateral busing of migrants, irrespective of the capacity of particular locales to address the needs of those individuals, also can prove problematic.

Were concerned about how it turns migrants into political props; plays states against each other; and presents immigrants strictly in terms of cost while ignoring the economic benefits they bring.

As the buses flow to New York City and Washington, D.C., and mayors in those cities echo the words of mayors along the border, as migrants cross in the Del Rio sector, lets all take stock of what words and actions truly lead to the comprehensive reforms so long overdue and desperately needed.

View original post here:
Other voices: If only busing migrants would spur comprehensive reform - Longview News-Journal

There was a time when the Lone Star State deserved a little consideration from the rest of the nation for shouldering a Texas-sized share of the burden of this countrys immigration challenges. Until Congress finally gets its act together and approves comprehensive immigration reform legislation that provides a path to legal residency for more foreign nationals while shoring up border security a compromise thats been attempted and failed repeatedly since Ronald Reagan was president the United States will continue to struggle with a piecemeal approach that is neither fair nor humane, nor is it helpful to the economy or public safety. Its not even rational.

But empathy toward Texas, which shares over 1,200 border miles with Mexico, has dissipated over the years as the states leadership has reduced immigration issues to a problem of Mexican and Central American illegals, ignoring this countrys longstanding immigration roots as well as all the hardship and suffering many people face, leading them to seek a life in the states. Now, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has chosen to dispatch busloads of migrants to New York City and Washington, D.C., to make a public relations point about such sanctuary cities, where local laws or policies often protect undocumented immigrants from deportation or prosecution, and to protest what his office calls the Biden Administrations refusal to secure the border.

The message is simple: You deal with the crisis, because we dont want to. Theres no regard for the migrants themselves or the communities receiving them. And its certainly not deterring anyone. According to research from Syracuse University, highlighted in the Texas Tribune, the busing could actually help the migrants stay in the country longer. While Dallas has denied 70% of asylum applications over the past two decades, New York City courts have approved 70%.

Imagine if other communities burdened by insufficient federal policies sent their challenges elsewhere to handle. Baltimore is awash in guns, for example, yet Washington cant seem to approve sufficient regulation legislation thanks to NRA buddies like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. Since Texas claims to be all about law-and-order, perhaps we should ship our seized illegal firearms to Americas second largest state.

Climate change is one of Marylands most worrisome long-term problems, but Congress hasnt taken stronger action to reduce emissions because oil and gas producing states like Texas have too much clout on Capitol Hill. Alas, even if we pipe our collective emissions back to those Texas deniers, we still get global warming, so heres our best alternative: Ship them our gas guzzlers. Lets make a point to the big petroleum companies that were headed, like California, to a future of electric vehicles, as soon as possible. The less gasoline we consume in Maryland, the better off well be.

Then theres plastic waste. From bags and bottles to packaging material and drinking straws, millions of tons of plastic debris are not only filling our landfills, floating in our oceans and destroying habitat, but they are also damaging human health. These are made from petrochemicals, another example of something coming out of Texas thats bad for everyone else. So lets start loading the garbage trucks and dumping our plastic back where it came from Texas.

Of course, the alternative to all that reciprocity and revenge would be for politicians like Mr. Abbott to sit down and stop treating migrants as subhuman and recognize this is a complex problem that requires a nuanced solution as do gun violence, climate change and plastic waste. Texans may have forgotten that it was President Reagan, the beloved leader of the political right, who granted amnesty to several million undocumented immigrants when Congress passed the last immigration reform deal in 1986. We hope they consider this a reminder.

Baltimore Sun editorial writers offer opinions and analysis on news and issues relevant to readers. They operate separately from the newsroom.

Go here to read the rest:
If Texas is going to punt challenges elsewhere, here's what Maryland should send to Texas. | COMMENTARY - Baltimore Sun

Work and Family Mobility Act deserves our support

As Marcela Garca noted in her Aug. 23 Opinion column, Fear and loathing of immigrants drives license ballot question, Massachusetts residents may decide the fate of the Work and Family Mobility Act this fall, voting on whether individuals may acquire drivers licenses regardless of immigration status. We firmly believe that voters should support this law.

One of the greatest perks of providing drivers licenses to individuals regardless of immigration status is increased public safety. By making drivers licenses more widely available, the state ensures that all drivers take the same road test, understand the same rules of the road, and become properly registered and insured. Increased public safety is one of the prime reasons police chiefs and district attorneys across Massachusetts have supported this reform.

But providing drivers licenses to individuals regardless of immigration status has many other benefits. Drivers would probably experience lower insurance premiums as more drivers acquire auto insurance. The state would also benefit financially, since more drivers will pay license fees.

Get Today in Opinion

Globe Opinion's must-reads, delivered to you every Sunday-Friday.

Beacon Hill passed the Work and Family Mobility Act this year because of benefits like these. If this issue does come before voters in November, we will stand alongside our allies and tirelessly support this law.

Elizabeth Sweet

Executive director

Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition

Boston

Concern over illegal immigration is a bipartisan issue

Im co-chair of the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform, an organization advocating for reduced immigration to the United States. We are a coalition of 240 members (35 percent Democrats and 65 percent Republicans). Concern over immigration is a bipartisan issue.

When I read Marcela Garcas columns on this subject, I think about how the right has distorted the image of immigrants seeking to enter this country illegally, vilifying them as less human than citizens. At the same time, Garca vilifies thoughtful people who want to protect the United States. Many Massachusetts residents oppose drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants and favor enforcement of immigration laws.

If Garca seeks to understand opposition to immigration, we invite her to meet with us. She may be surprised that civil rights, the unfair racial and economic effect of immigration on overall wages, and the environment top our list of concerns that drive us to seek limits to immigration. For example we just won a step in court demanding that the federal government pass any immigration policies through the lens of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Steve Kropper

Lincoln

Continued here:
Two coalitions, two views on immigrants and drivers licenses - The Boston Globe

By Julian Grace, WRAL anchor/reporter

Wake County, N.C. The two challengers for Wake County Sheriff shared their plans to address illegal immigration, and neither will include a controversial federal program called 287(g).

The federal program allows foreign born people to be screened by deputies for their legal status.

Both contenders made it clear 287(g) is not the right policy. They both shared plans for more of comprehensive approach for Wake County.

There was fallout from the controversial 287(g) program in Wake County with protest and marches back in 2018.

Sheriff Candidate Donnie Harrison has used the federal program before during a previous stint as Wake County Sheriff, and if elected again he said he wont use it.

We know 287(g) was out of the window, said Harrison. It's just not working. it has taken too many to the cleaners that didnt do anything.

Candidate Willie Rowe said using 287(g) is not on his agenda and he wont use it.

That program is not cost effective and not productive in any way, said Rowe.

So whats the plan?

Harrison is calling on a universal background check where everyone arrested, no matter the age gender or background, will be checked for wants and warrants.

Everybody needs to go to the same process," said Harrison. "We want to make sure people know we are being fair to them and treating them the way they want to be treated.

Rowe said Wake County already has a similar universal background check that Harrison is proposing.

Instead Rowe would like to see an all inclusive approach from Congress on how to address illegal immigration.

"I call on Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration reform so we are operating at the same page," said Rowe. "People undocumented can come out of the dark into the light without the threat of deportation."

Both Harrison and Rowe agree that anyone arrested in Wake County needs to go through a background check to make sure they are not wanted by another sheriff office.

Original post:
Neither Wake sheriff candidate to support controversial immigration program 287(g) - WRAL News

As Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, a Democrat, is set to face-off with Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson in the Nov. 8, 2022, election, his stance on immigration has taken a hit from the Republican opposition.

Or at least his perceived stance.

In an Aug. 10, 2022,news release, part of a series aiming to paint Barnes as extreme, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), claimed that Barnes "supports abolishing ICE."

ICE, of course, is U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, one of three agencies created in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks when Congress passed the Homeland Security Act.

The agency says its "mission is to protect America from the cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety." The agencys detention and deportation operations have faced the ire of immigration rights groups and others, putting ICE at the center of controversy for many years.

But it wasnt until spring2018 when "the Abolish ICE movement began to shift from a hashtag to a more formal stance," according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Even then, as with the "defund the police" efforts, there are many different views on just what it means. Some want the agency eliminated entirely, others prefer reforms.

In a July 2018 article, the Brennan Center noted that if ICE were to be abolished, "other parts of the government would likely take up some of the agencys responsibilities."

So, returning to the claim: Does Barnes support "abolishing ICE"?

Does Barnes really want to abolish ICE?

When asked for backup, a spokesperson for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which aims to elect Republican senators across the country, pointed to two things:

The first is a 2018 photo of Barnes holding up a red T-shirt that reads "Abolish ICE." The photo was shared at the time on Reddit and has since made the rounds on Twitter, especially in the wake of Barnes winning the Democratic nomination in August.

The photo surfaced shortly after Barnes responded to a tweet from a Madison-based activist, who offered him the shirt from the Democratic Socialists of America.

"Don't know how I missed this reply, but I need that," Barnes replied to the tweet on July 4, 2018. At the time he was in the midst of his successful campaign for lieutenant governor.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee also pointed to when Barnes headlined an event on Nov. 15, 2021, for the Brooklyn, New York-based advocacy group Center for Popular Democracy,a group that has endorsed Barnes.

But the committee offered no reference to anything Barnes said at the event, or elsewhere on abolishing ICE.

Instead, it was mostly guilt by association: The NRSC shared a Vox article that noted the group was involved in a June 2018 march during which "protesters draped themselves in silver thermal blankets evoking images of migrant kids in shelters and chanted Abolish ICE and We care. "

In an October 2021 news release, Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, said,"The repeated violence perpetrated by (Customs and Border Patrol) and ICE prove time and time again that these agencies cannot be reformed and must be abolished."

The November 2021 event that Barnes attended, however, focused on voting rights issues and the mobilizing of young and first-time voters, especially those from Black and Latino communities.

"This group endorsed the Lt. Governor; he did not endorse them or their policies," wrote Maddy McDaniel, a spokesperson for Barnes, in an email to PolitiFact Wisconsin. "At no point in the event or during any interaction with this group did he advocate for abolishing ICE."

Thats a valid point: If Barnes supports abolishing ICE, shouldnt there be evidence of him saying so?

That brings us to the T-shirt photo.

Examining the claim

McDaniel made a similar argument, saying,"Simply holding up a T-shirt that was given as a gift does NOT equate to supporting a policy." But he did hold up the shirt.

Barnes has said little about the circumstances.

A March 2022 article in the Wisconsin Examiner noted: "He held up the Abolish ICE T-shirt, he says, as an expression of solidarity with immigrants who were reacting with horror at the time to scenes of children ripped from their parents at the border."

McDaniel declined to say anything more. Instead, she argued that: "The Lt. Governor has been crystal clear that he does not support abolishing ICE."

What is Barnes position?

Lets dig in from that angle and what Barnes himself has said. That is, the positions he has publicly taken.

Barnes has made clear during the campaign, and in recent years, that he does not support abolishing ICE. Rather, he has called for the agency to be reformed. In a video on his website, Barnes says: "We need comprehensive immigration reform that secures the border and also includes a path to citizenship."

McDaniel also pointed to articles from the Wisconsin Examiner and Spectrum News in which Barnes said he does not support abolishing ICE.

In addition, in February 2022, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel published a piece addressing questions surrounding the photo of Barnes and his stance on abolishing ICE.

"I am not a part of the Abolish ICE movement because no one slogan can capture all the work we have to do," Barnes said. "But I do support comprehensive reform in our immigration agencies that protect our borders while establishing a pathway to citizenship and ensuring no one coming to this country has to experience traumas like family separation."

Asked if he sided with Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who wants to dismantle ICE, or with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who aims to overhaul the federal agency, Barnes told the Journal Sentinel: "Im not in any one persons camp, but I respect what they both bring to this important conversation."

Our ruling

The National Republican Senatorial Committee claimed that Barnes "supports abolishing ICE."

But the group identified no direct evidence or statements from the candidates saying such a thing only an appearance for a group that supports that position, and a photo with a T-shirt.

At the same time, there is plenty of evidence that Barnes has taken a less extreme position on the matter, calling for reforms.

In other words, we have a statement that "contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression." Thats our definition of Mostly False.

And thats our rating.

Continued here:
GOP Senate group off the mark with claim that Barnes backs abolishing ICE - PolitiFact