Media Search:



5 Things to Know About Agriculture Amnesty Bill – Heritage.org

The House of Representatives is expected this week to take up one of the most egregious immigration amnesty bills in recent memory, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act.

In 2019, the House passed the bill, but fortunately, it went nowhere in the Senate. Now, the new Congress is taking it up.

The legislation would, among other things:

1) Reward illegal agricultural workers and their employers. The bill doesnt merely allow illegal agricultural workers to become part of the current temporary H-2A agricultural worker program. It goes way beyond that. The legislation creates a special, new legal pathway to citizenship for illegal agricultural workers in the country. Through the proposed system, some illegal agricultural workers could be eligible for their green cards in as little as four years.

2) Provide amnesty potentially for millions. Nobody can reasonably claim this bill isnt amnesty. It allows illegal aliens to stay in the country while they are provided an easy pathway to citizenship, rewarding lawbreakers and punishing legal aliens who abide by the rules to become citizens.

Estimates suggest that anywhere from about 50% to 70% of agricultural workers are in this country illegally. There are likely at least 1.5 million illegal agricultural workers in the country. But thats not the full scope of the amnesty. Theres also the amnesty that would be provided to the workers spouses and children.

3) Create a non-solution for farmers. This amnesty presumably exists in large part to help farmers, but at best it would provide a short-term benefit to farmers who have employed illegal workers. Many of the illegal agricultural workers who get this new pathway will almost certainly move off the farm. That] movement away from the farm is precisely what happened when the United States granted amnesty to more than 1 million agricultural workers in 1986.

4) Undermine the legal immigration system. This amnesty bill would likely do major harm to the current legal immigration systems legitimacy and undermine future reform efforts. It sends a message that the nations immigration laws should serve as no obstacle to illegally working in the country. It is one thing for Congress to reform legal pathways, but its quite another to reward illegal agricultural workers and agricultural employers who have ignored the law altogether.

5) Ignore the pandemic and proper process. When the House passed the agriculture amnesty bill in 2019, there was something consequential that didnt exist then; namely, COVID-19. It was bad for the House to pass the bill then, and it would be unconscionable to pass it now, especially without carefully considering the impact of the pandemic in connection with this amnesty.

Further, the House is rushing the bill to the floor without the new Congress having a chance to discuss this extreme legislation in committee.If the House is going to grant amnesty to potentially millions of illegal workers and undermine the legal immigration system, then it should at least spend a proper amount of time thinking about the implications of taking such a drastic action.

When considering immigration in agriculture, it isnt a binary choice between doing nothing and creating this extreme amnesty bill.

There should be a thoughtful dialogue regarding how to improve the legal immigration system without simultaneously undermining its legitimacy. Legislators should take the time to come up with such a solution.

This piece originally appeared in The Daily Signal.

See more here:
5 Things to Know About Agriculture Amnesty Bill - Heritage.org

Political Misdirection: Why Republican pundits blame Biden for the broken immigration system he inherited – Milwaukee Independent

Texas governor Greg Abbott says that if coronavirus spreads further in his state, it will not be because of his order to get rid of masks and business restrictions, but because President Biden is admitting undocumented immigrants who carry the virus. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is also talking up the immigration issue, suggesting (falsely) that the American Rescue Plan would send $1400 of taxpayer money to every illegal alien in America.

Right-wing media is also running with stories of a wave of immigrants at the border, but what is really happening needs some untangling.

When Trump launched his run for the presidency with attacks on Mexican immigrants, and later tweeted that Democrats dont care about crime and want illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and infest our Country, he was tangling up our long history of Mexican immigration with a recent, startling trend of refugees from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras (and blaming Democrats for both). That tendency to mash all immigrants and refugees together and put them on our southern border badly misrepresents whats really going on.

Mexican immigration is nothing new; our western agribusinesses were built on migrant labor of Mexicans, Japanese, and poor whites, among others. From the time the current border was set in 1848 until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without restrictions. But in 1965, Congress passed the Hart-Celler Act, putting a cap on Latin American immigration for the first time. The cap was low: just 20,000, although 50,000 workers were coming annually.

After 1965, workers continued to come as they always had, and to be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986, Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million Mexicans who were living in the U.S. and by cracking down on employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning the process of guarding and militarizing the border. Until then, migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.

Since 1986, politicians have refused to deal with this disconnect, which grew in the 1990s when the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) flooded Mexico with U.S. corn and drove Mexican farmers to find work, largely in the American Southeast. But this problem is neither new nor catastrophic. While about 6 million undocumented Mexicans currently live in the United States, most of them 78% are long-term residents, here more than ten years.

Only 7% have lived here less than five years. (This ratio is much more stable than that for undocumented immigrants from any other country, and indeed, about twice as many undocumented immigrants come legally and overstay their visas than come illegally across the southern border.)

Since 2007, the number of undocumented Mexicans living in the United States has declined by more than a million. Lately, more Mexicans are leaving America than are coming. What is happening right now at Americas southern border is not really about Mexican migrant workers.

Beginning around 2014, people began to flee warlike levels of violence in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, coming to the U.S. for asylum. This is legal, although most come illegally, taking their chances with smugglers who collect fees to protect migrants on the Mexican side of the border and to get them into the U.S.

The Obama administration tried to deter migrants by expanding the detention of families, and made significant investments in Central America in an attempt to stabilize the region by expanding economic development and promoting security. The Trump administration emphasized deterrence. It cut off support to Central American countries, worked with authoritarians to try to stop regional gangs, drastically limited the number of refugees the U.S. would admit, andinfamouslydeliberately separated children from their parents to deter would-be asylum seekers.

The number of migrants to the U.S. began to drop in 2000 and continued to drop throughout Trumps years in office.

Now, with a new administration, the dislocation of the pandemic, and two catastrophic storms in Central America in addition to the violence, people are again surging to the border to try to get into the U.S. In the last month, the Border Patrol encountered more than 100,000 people. They are encouraged by smugglers, who falsely tell them the border is now open. Numbers released on March 10 show that the number of children and families coming to the border doubled between January and February.

The Biden administration is warning them not to comeyet. The Trump administration gutted immigration staff and facilities, while the pandemic has further cut available beds. Most of those trying to cross the border are single adults, and the Biden administration is turning all of them back under a pandemic public health order. (It is possible that the 100,000 number is inflated as people are making repeated attempts.)

At the same time, border officials are temporarily holding families to evaluate their claims to asylum, and are also evaluating the cases of about 65,000 asylum seekers forced by the Trump administration to stay in dangerous conditions in Mexicothis backlog is swelling the new numbers. Once the migrants are tested for coronavirus and then processed, they are either deported or released until their asylum hearing.

This has apparently led to a number of families being released in communities in Arizona and Texas without adequate clothing or money. In normal times, churches and shelters would step in to help, but the pandemic has shut that aid down to a trickle. Residents are afraid the numbers of migrants will climb, and that they will bring Covid-19. Biden offered federal help to Texas Governor Abbott to test migrants for the coronavirus, but Abbott has refused to take responsibility for testing. (Migrants in Brownsville tested positive at a lower rate than Texas residents.)

There is yet another issue: the administration is having a hard time handling the numbers of unaccompanied minors arriving. Their numbers have tripled recently, overwhelming the system, especially in Texas where the state is still digging out from the deep freeze. The children are supposed to spend no more than 72 hours in processing with Border Patrol before they are transferred to facilities overseen by the Department of Health and Human Services while agents search for family members to take the children. But at least in some cases, the kids have been with Border Patrol for as much as 77 hours. Recently, there were more than 3,700 unaccompanied children in Border Patrol facilities and about 8,800 unaccompanied children in HHS custody.

The Biden administration is considering addressing this surge by looking for emergency shelters for minors crossing the border, activating the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or placing more HHS staff at the border. It has asked for $4 billion over four years to try to restore stability to the Central American countries hardest hit by violence. On March 12, the administration announced that HHS would not use immigration status against those coming forward to claim children, out of concern that the previous Trump-era policy made people unwilling to come forward.

See the article here:
Political Misdirection: Why Republican pundits blame Biden for the broken immigration system he inherited - Milwaukee Independent

Letter: Immigration adding to pandemic problems – Worcester Telegram

The democrats' dual track of open borders and covid lockdowns is thinly veiled.

First, they insist the country must be locked down to save Americans from covid deaths. Though the infection and death rates are dropping fast, they promote continued lockdowns, masks and social distancing. Messaging from President Biden and Dr. Fauci is "stay the course."They appear to be very concerned if the country varies from their forced lockdowns the country will return to the fall of 2020 spike.

This messaging would be clear and justified if it was consistent, but it isn't. There is a clear problem at our southern border. Thousands of illegal immigrants are crossing the border unchecked, un-tested, un-masked, not social distancing and unvaccinated. Many are being relocated throughout the interior of the country.

So, I wonder which is it? What does this administration want? Why are illegal immigrants exempt from their rules? Why would they risk infecting American citizens with this virus? Good questions with no answers!

Gary LaVallee

Holland

See more here:
Letter: Immigration adding to pandemic problems - Worcester Telegram

ICE given marching orders on what to call those illegally crossing the border – Villages-News

To the Editor:

Under direction from Joe Biden, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is no longer referring to immigrants as illegal aliens, aliens, or undocumented aliens in internal and external communications, but to instead use the terms noncitizen, undocumented noncitizen, or undocumented individual. and is seeking to no longer use assimilation, but instead to use integration, as well as to refer to those who apply for benefits like green cards, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. as customers. The President has said these name changes are a symbolic gesture to acknowledge the U.S. as a nation of immigrants.Liberals have taken these name changes to extremes in the past. In 2019, New York City Commission on Human Rights banned the term illegal alien or illegals when its used with intent to demean, humiliate or harass a person and an offender can face up to $250,000 in fines. Hardly a symbolic gesture!The DHS, as of March 9, 2021, dropped the Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds Final Rule so Illegal aliens can now receive benefits that include Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), most forms of Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps, and will not be required to demonstrate self-sufficiency in order to remain in the U.S.In yet another change in immigration policy, Agents will no longer seek to deport immigrants for less serious offenses such as drug based crimes, assault, DUI, money laundering, property crimes, fraud, tax crimes, solicitation, or charges without convictions, said acting ICE director Tae Johnson. Agents seeking to arrest fugitives outside of jails will also need prior approval from the agencys director in Washington justifying the decision.While it is true that immigrants helped build the U.S., these people which include my great-grandparents who came here legally in the 1800s, did not rely on handouts, and were required to obey the laws of this nation. Criminals, people with contagious diseases, polygamists, anarchists, beggars and importers of prostitutes were denied entry.Fast forward to 2021. In summing up the changes in immigration law & policy for our newly christened undocumented noncitizens, violating immigration laws is no longer illegal, they can freely commit drug related crimes, assault, DUI, money laundering, property crimes, fraud, tax crimes, and prostitution without fear of deportation, are customers when applying for benefits, and no longer have to demonstrate an ability to work and be self-supportive to remain in the U.S.As Ukrainian-American comedian Yakov Smirnoff exclaimed, What a Country!

David DallasVillage of Bradford

Visit link:
ICE given marching orders on what to call those illegally crossing the border - Villages-News

Stimulus Bill as a Political Weapon? Democrats Are Counting on It. – The New York Times

WASHINGTON Triumphant over the signing of their far-reaching $1.9 trillion stimulus package, Democrats are now starting to angle for a major political payoff that would defy history: Picking up House and Senate seats in the 2022 midterm elections, even though the party in power usually loses in the midterms.

Democratic leaders are making one of the biggest electoral bets in years that the stimulus will be so transformational for Americans across party lines and demographic groups that Democrats will be able to wield it as a political weapon next year in elections against Republicans, who voted en masse against the package.

Republicans need to gain only one seat in the Senate and just five in the House in 2022 to take back control, a likely result in a normal midterm election, but perhaps a trickier one if voters credit their rivals for a strong American rebound.

Yet as Democrats prepare to start selling voters on the package, they remain haunted by what happened in 2010, the last time they were in control of the White House and both chambers of Congress and pursued an ambitious agenda: They lost 63 House seats, and the majority, and were unable to fulfill President Barack Obamas goals on issues ranging from gun control to immigration.

It has become an article of faith in the party that Mr. Obamas presidency was diminished because his two signature accomplishments, the stimulus bill and the Affordable Care Act, were not expansive enough and their pitch to the public on the benefits of both measures was lacking. By this logic, Democrats began losing elections and the full control of the government, until now, because of their initial compromises with Republicans and insufficient salesmanship.

We didnt adequately explain what we had done, President Biden told House Democrats this month about the 2009 Recovery Act. Barack was so modest, he didnt want to take, as he said, a victory lap.

Now they are determined to exorcise those old ghosts by aggressively promoting a measure they believe meets the moment and has broader appeal than the $787 billion bill they trimmed and laced with tax cuts to win a handful of Republican votes in Mr. Obamas first months in office.

Republicans say the Democratic bet is a foolhardy one, both because of how little of the spending is directly related to the coronavirus pandemic and because of fleeting voter attention spans. But Democrats say they intend to run on the bill and press Republicans over their opposition to it.

This is absolutely something I will campaign on next year, said Senator Raphael Warnock of Georgia, who may be the most vulnerable incumbent Senate Democrat in the country on the ballot in 2022. Senator Gary Peters of Michigan, who heads the Democratic Senate campaign arm, said he would go on offense against Republicans who opposed the bill and sketched out their attack: Every Republican said no in a time of need.

Party lawmakers point out that the measure Mr. Biden signed on Thursday is more popular than the 2009 bill, according to polling; contains more tangible benefits, like the $1,400 direct payments and unemployment benefits; and comes at a time when the pandemic and former President Donald Trumps continued appetite for big spending have blunted Republican attacks.

People are going to feel it right away, to me thats the biggest thing, said Representative Conor Lamb, a Pennsylvania Democrat whose 2018 special election victory presaged the partys revival. Politics is confusing, its image-based, everyone calls everyone else a liar but people are going to get the money in their bank accounts.

And, Representative Sara Jacobs of California said, Democrats have learned the lessons from 2009, we made sure we went back to our districts this weekend to tell people how much help they were going to get from this bill.

Mr. Obamas aides are quick to note that they did promote their stimulus and the health care law but ran into much more fervent, and unified, opposition on the right as the Tea Party blossomed and portrayed the measures as wasteful and ill-conceived.

At the end of last week, with the Houses first extended recess looming at months end, Speaker Nancy Pelosi pushed House Democrats to seize the moment.

Ms. Pelosis office sent an email to colleagues, forwarded to The Times, brimming with talking points the speaker hopes theyll use in town halls and news conferences. During the upcoming district work period, members are encouraged to give visibility to how the American Rescue Plan meets the needs of their communities: putting vaccines in arms, money in pockets, workers back on the job and children back in the classroom safely, it said.

For their part, White House officials said they would deploy the whole of government, as one aide put it, to market the plan, send cabinet officers on the road and focus on different components of the bill each day to highlight its expanse.

Democrats hopes for avoiding the losses typical in a presidents first midterm election will depend largely on whether Americans feel life is back to normal next year and whether they credit the party in power for thwarting the disease, despair and dysfunction that characterized the end of Mr. Trumps term.

If voters are to believe the Democrats are delivering on an American rebound, of course, its essential the country is roaring back to prepandemic strength in a way it was not at the end of 2009, when unemployment reached 10 percent.

You could be looking at an extraordinary growth spurt in the third and fourth quarters, and that takes you into the year when candidates make their way, said Representative Richard E. Neal of Massachusetts, chairman of the Ways & Means Committee, where much of the bill was crafted.

The politics of the legislation, in other words, will be clear enough by this time next year. If all the sudden you got high inflation and things are hitting the fan, Republicans are going to run on it, said Representative Filemon Vela, a Texas Democrat. If things are going well theyre going to run on something else.

For now, Republicans are expressing little appetite to contest a measure that has the support of 70 percent of voters, according to a Pew survey released last week.

Part of their challenge stems from Mr. Trumps aggressive advocacy for $2,000 direct payments in the previous stimulus package late last year, a drumbeat hes kept up in his political afterlife as he argues Republicans lost the two Georgia Senate runoffs because they did not embrace the proposal.

Its difficult for congressional Republicans to portray one of the main elements of the Democrats bill as socialism when the de facto leader of their party is an enthusiastic supporter of wealth redistribution. Moreover, right-wing media outlets have been more focused on culture war issues that are more animating to many conservatives than size-of-government questions.

Asked if they would run against the bill next year, the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, said, Theres going to be a lot of things we run against.

At the weekly news conference of House Republican leaders, Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming spoke about the stimulus for 45 seconds before changing the subject to the rising number of migrants at the Southern border.

Thestimuluspayments would be $1,400 for most recipients. Those who are eligible would also receive an identical payment for each of their children. To qualify for the full $1,400, a single person would need an adjusted gross income of $75,000 or below. For heads of household, adjusted gross income would need to be $112,500 or below, and for married couples filing jointly that number would need to be $150,000 or below. To be eligible for a payment, a person must have a Social Security number. Read more.

Buying insurance through the government program known as COBRA would temporarily become a lot cheaper. COBRA, for the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, generally lets someone who loses a job buy coverage via the former employer. But its expensive: Under normal circumstances, a person may have to pay at least 102 percent of the cost of the premium. Under the relief bill, the government would pay the entire COBRA premium from April 1 through Sept. 30. A person who qualified for new, employer-based health insurance someplace else before Sept. 30 would lose eligibility for the no-cost coverage. And someone who left a job voluntarily would not be eligible, either. Read more

This credit, which helps working families offset the cost of care for children under 13 and other dependents, would be significantly expanded for a single year. More people would be eligible, and many recipients would get a bigger break. The bill would also make the credit fully refundable, which means you could collect the money as a refund even if your tax bill was zero. That will be helpful to people at the lower end of the income scale, said Mark Luscombe, principal federal tax analyst at Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting. Read more.

There would be a big one for people who already have debt. You wouldnt have to pay income taxes on forgiven debt if you qualify for loan forgiveness or cancellation for example, if youve been in an income-driven repayment plan for the requisite number of years, if your school defrauded you or if Congress or the president wipes away $10,000 of debt for large numbers of people. This would be the case for debt forgiven between Jan. 1, 2021, and the end of 2025. Read more.

The bill would provide billions of dollars in rental and utility assistance to people who are struggling and in danger of being evicted from their homes. About $27 billion would go toward emergency rental assistance. The vast majority of it would replenish the so-called Coronavirus Relief Fund, created by the CARES Act and distributed through state, local and tribal governments,accordingto the National Low Income Housing Coalition. Thats on top of the $25 billion in assistance provided by the relief package passed in December. To receive financial assistance which could be used for rent, utilities and other housing expenses households would have to meet severalconditions. Household income could not exceed 80 percent of the area median income, at least one household member must be at risk of homelessness or housing instability, and individuals would have to qualify for unemployment benefits or have experienced financial hardship (directly or indirectly) because of the pandemic. Assistance could be provided for up to 18 months,accordingto the National Low Income Housing Coalition. Lower-income families that have been unemployed for three months or more would be given priority for assistance. Read more.

And by the end of the week, Mr. McCarthy announced he and a group of House Republicans would travel to the border on Monday in a bid to highlight the problem there and change the subject.

After spending the campaign vowing to find common ground with Republicans and make Washington work again, Mr. Biden, in his first major act as president, prioritized speed and scale over bipartisanship.

He and his top aides believe in legislative momentum, that success begets success and that theyll be able to push through another pricey bill this one to build roads, bridges and broadband because of their early win on Covid-19 relief.

The fact that we could do it without Republicans forces them to the table, said a senior White House official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the nitty-gritty of lawmaking.

Yet to the G.O.P. lawmakers who have signaled a willingness to work with the new administration, Mr. Bidens determination to push through the stimulus without G.O.P. votes will imperil the rest of his agenda.

What I would be worried about if I were them is what does this do to jeopardize bipartisan cooperation on other things you want to do you cant do everything by reconciliation, said Senator John Cornyn of Texas, alluding to the parliamentary procedure by which the Senate can approve legislation by a simple majority. Ive heard some of our members say that, If youre going to waste all this money on unrelated matters, Im really not interested in spending a bunch more money on infrastructure.

To Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, who was one of the Senate Republicans who went to the White House last month pitching a slimmed-down stimulus, its downright bizarre to hear Democrats claiming their 2010 difficulties stemmed from not going big.

I would argue it was too big, it was unfocused, it was wasted money, Ms. Capito said.

To Democrats, though, they are avoiding, not repeating, their past mistakes.

The public didnt know about the Affordable Care Act and the administration was not exactly advertising, Ms. Pelosi told reporters last week.

Senator Chuck Schumer, the majority leader, was just as blunt, singling out the Maine moderate who was wooed by Mr. Obama to ensure bipartisan support for the 2009 Recovery Act but whose appeals for a far-smaller compromise bill were ignored last month.

We made a big mistake in 2009 and 10, Susan Collins was part of that mistake, Mr. Schumer said on CNN. We cut back on the stimulus dramatically and we stayed in recession for five years.

And, he could have noted, his party would not have full control of both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue for another decade.

Read the rest here:
Stimulus Bill as a Political Weapon? Democrats Are Counting on It. - The New York Times