Mediaboss Marketing

Jean Nsengiyunva, who escaped the Democratic Republic of the Congo as a child, has been trying for three years to gain refugee admittance for his wife and 3-year-old daughter. (IBJ photo/Eric Learned)

Gov. Eric Holcomb is giving the green light for federal officials to continue placing refugees in Indiana, following in the footsteps of a growing group of both Democratic and Republican governors who are opting in to the federal program.

The move comes after President Donald Trump issued an executive order in September that, for the first time, required states and local government to provide written consent to continue to receive even a handful of the 26million refugees worldwide.

Its part of the Trump administrations larger effort to reduce refugee resettlement in the United States.

Varga

And even though the state has allowed refugees to resettle here for years, Holcombs decision was not considered a slam dunkhes a Republican in Vice President Mike Pences home state at a time immigration (which is different but related to refugee resettlement) is especially controversial. While governor, Pence tried to block federal officials from placing Syrian refugees in Indiana.

Holcomb could have effectively vetoed refugees from coming to the state, said Cole Varga, executive director of Exodus Refugee Immigration Inc., a group that helps bring refugees to Indiana and receives federal funding for its programs. Exodus is affiliated with Church World Service, which is one of nine national organizations that work directly with the federal government to settle refugees in the United States.

The initial deadline for submitting that consent was Dec. 2590 days after the executive order was issuedbut Varga said guidance from the State Department has indicated the deadline is now Jan. 21.

Holcomb sent a letter on Dec. 13 offering his consent.

Our long tradition of welcoming and helping to resettle refugees with support from our federal partners, shows the world the compassion of Hoosiers and our willingness to give others the ability to grow and prosper in the great state of Indiana, Holcomb wrote.

He is one of eight Republican governors who have given consent or said they will do so. Fifteen Democratic governors have taken similar action.

Yang

On Dec. 17, Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett sent a letter with his consent, which was also needed for refugees to be allowed to continue coming to Marion County.

In other parts of the state, the responsibility is on county commissioners to offer consent. Varga said Exodus and the two other organizations in Indiana that help refugees once they arriveCatholic Charities of Fort Wayne and Catholic Charities Indianapolisare working to secure letters from other local governments.

National organizations have also gotten involvedBaltimore-based World Relief and Washington, D.C.-based Evangelical Immigration Table this month sent letters to 15 governors, including Holcomb, urging their support.

Jenny Yang, vice president of advocacy and policy at World Relief, said her group targeted governors they believed might be on the fence about what to do and those in states that welcome large numbers of refugees.

Indiana has welcomed more than 11,600 refugees since 2011, and is home to the most Burmese refugees in this country.

Indiana took in nearly 1,900 refugees in 2016, just before Trump took office. It took in 865 last year and has placed just 116 this year. The steep drop has been the direct result of Trumps efforts to cut back on the program.

Yang said she wasnt necessarily surprised by Holcombs decision to continue to take in refugees, but shes grateful he took that step.

We wanted to make sure he was aware of how many churches and church leaders wanted to welcome refugees, she said.

Its complicated

Downs

Andy Downs, director of the Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics at Purdue University Fort Wayne, said Indiana Republicans have a nuanced relationship with refugee policies.

I think that a good number of conservative individuals understand and believe that they should help refugees, he said. But were also fearful about our safety.

Immigration reform has been a top priority for Republicans as the Trump administration has pursued some controversial policies, like building a wall along the U.S. and Mexico border to prevent individuals from crossing it illegally.

Refugees, on the other hand, are individuals fleeing persecution for race, religion, nationality, political opinion or social group.

Holcomb stressed that point in his letter of support to Exodus.

These are NOT illegal or unlawful immigrants but individuals who have gone through all the proper channels, were persecuted for their religious or political beliefs in their homeland and have sought and been granted refugee status in our nation of immigrants, Holcomb wrote.

Downs said Holcomb can also make a compelling political argument for opting in Indiana, because he would not have wanted to be one of the only governors that didnt do so.

Part of the beauty here is, this is a federal program, Downs said. If something goes wrong, hell be able to point at the feds.

That doesnt mean he wont suffer at least a little political consequence from the far-right side of the Indiana Republican Party.

But thats a fraction of the party, and hed only have to worry about that in the primary, Downs said.

Republican Brian Roth has announced plans to challenge Holcomb in 2020, but Roth has to gather 4,500 signatures500 from each of the states congressional districtsto even get on the ballot. Even if Roth meets that threshold, Holcomb is expected to easily survive the primary.

Downs said an issue like this could change the minds of some voters, but its likely most Republicans approve of Holcombs decisions on other topics, like spending or taxes.

It could be that someone says, Yeah, he got that wrong, but he got tax policy right, Downs said. Its just hard to imagine it being enough to energize anyone.

Struggle for families

Jean Nsengiyunva has been trying for three years to get his wife and daughter to Indianapolis. Without the written consent from Holcomb and Hogsett, that process would have essentially been stopped for the foreseeable future.

Nsengiyunvas family fled the Democratic Republic of the Congo when he was 6 years old. He spent the next 20 years in a United Nations refugee camp in Uganda waiting to come to the United States and considered the camp home.

We had lost hope of coming to the USA, Nsengiyunva said.

Varga said refugees in the camps are often uncertain when theyll be selected, but those who are the most vulnerable or who already have family members or other connections to the United States are usually priorities.

Its kind of like a lottery system, Varga said. Certain people get picked and certain people dont.

In 2014, Nsengiyunva finally started the interview process to come to the United States after 18 years in Uganda. It took two years to complete all the necessary paperwork, interviews, and background and medical checks, but in 2016, he made it to Indianapolisa place he had never heard of before.

During that two-year period, Nsengiyunva met his future wife. He tried to add her to his case, but that would have essentially restarted the process. The couple made the decision that Nsengiyunva should go without her, believing it wouldnt take as long for her to get through the system.

The federal government limits the number of people who can come into the country through the refugee process, and that number can change annually.

In 2016, the United States admitted nearly 85,000 refugees. President Barack Obama set a limit of 110,000 refugees in 2017.

Trump has since significantly slashed the program. For fiscal 2020, Trump has set a limit of 18,000 refugeesan all-time low for the program. That greatly narrows the chances that Nsengiyunva will be able to bring his family here.

We didnt know things were going to change, he said.

American support

Critics of Trumps executive order have argued its another way his administration is trying to limit access to the United States for people from other countries. But the White House says the order makes sure refugees arent being placed in communities that would be unwelcoming.

The months following the executive order have been full of uncertainty for the organizations, like Exodus, that work to place refugees. Varga said that detailssuch as how to actually submit consent letters, who has the authority to issue the consent at the local-government level, and who is responsible for getting these letters to the State Departmenthave all changed at least once.

In addition, a federal lawsuit challenging the executive order is pending, and a judge could rule before the Jan. 21 deadline to at least temporarily block it from taking effect.

Yang said Holcombs decision helps send a strong message to the Trump administration that, regardless of what party youre from or political spectrum youre on, this is something most Americans support.

Varga said accepting refugees helps Indiana prove its Hoosier hospitality mantra.

It just makes sense to welcome, to open our doors to people, he said. Were helping make Indianapolis more diverse and interesting, in addition to helping people.

Varga also said refugees are helping with the states workforce shortage, because theyre filling jobs and contributing to the economy.

Nsengiyunva works full time at a Nike warehouse in Lebanon, and lives in an apartment with his mother, father and brother, who joined him here shortly after he moved in 2016.

The New American Economy Research Fund estimated that Indiana would have lost $4.6million annually in economic impact by not welcoming refugees.

Holcomb also referenced how refugees help the states economy in his letter of support.

Developing a 21st century skilled and ready workforce is a high priority of our administration and we will welcome those who are ready to participate fully in our economy, showing civility and compassion to those who have suffered persecution, Holcomb wrote.

Nsengiyunva is still hopeful that his wife and 3-year-old daughter can move here soon. His wife has started the interview process, but the limit of 18,000 refugees nationally could push back her timeline.

Im just waiting now, he said.

See more here:
Holcomb opts in to accepting refugees - Indianapolis Business Journal

Washington was abuzz over the weekend over the decision of Rep. Jeff Van Drew to leave the Democratic Party and join the Republicans, precipitated by the Democratic House's impeachment of President Donald Trump. This was a historic move, and one likely not as knee-jerk (or single issue) as the press has been reporting.

In a November 27, 2019, post captioned "What Do Voters Really Think About Immigration? Interesting takeaways from a report apparently prepared for Democratic group", I wrote about a poll that had been purportedly commissioned by a group called "House Majority Forward", which I noted describes itself as "a progressive, non-profit organization committed to promoting economic growth and opportunity, social justice, environmental stewardship, and democracy in the United States of America."

I explained by way of background:

[T]he report purportedly covers the results of research on "two groups of White non-college voters", both male and female, from two congressional districts in New Jersey, NJ-02 (which covers the southern part of the state, currently represented in Congress by Rep. Jefferson Van Drew (D-N.J.)), and NJ-03 (in the middle of the state and cutting it in two, currently represented by Rep. Andy Kim (D-N.J.)).

Kim defeated incumbent Republican Rep. Tom MacArthur by fewer than 4,000 votes in the 2018 election, while a well-financed Van Drew defeated Republican Seth Grossman by fewer than 20,000 votes in 2018 (there were four other contenders), in a race for the seat that had previously been held by Republican Rep. Frank LoBiondo.

I noted that there was an interesting takeaway in the "Overview" section of the report:

Most of the respondents across all of the groups said they side with Trump on immigration. Almost to a person, immigration was described as a matter of bringing "control" to our borders and immigration system (the treatment of children at the border barely came up during the groups).

In fact, among the males surveyed, national security and immigration were more important than abortion rights and government spending, and the respondents did not mention impeachment or Syria until they were asked.

Logically, Van Drew had to have known of this report (not that I think he reads my column, but it focused on his district and the report received attention but not a lot elsewhere). Long story short, if that report is accurate, his constituents plainly supported the administration on immigration, but were not that interested in impeachment, positions directly at odds with Democratic party leadership.

Switching parties is not as common as one would think. Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.-3) switched from Republican to independent in July, but that was largely because he is a libertarian and believed that the GOP was no longer a party of "limited government, economic freedom and individual liberty", and because he was fed up with the two-party system, which he views as "an existential threat to American principles and institutions". It is doubtful that he would find a home in the current Democratic party he has voted with the president's positions more often in the current 116th Congress (81.1 percent of the time) than he did in the last Congress (54.2 percent) but he did vote to proceed with impeachment. He is more of a man without a party than a man in the wrong one.

Rep. Parker Griffith (Ala.-5) opted to leave the Democratic Party and become a Republican almost a decade ago out of frustration with then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House leadership. His switch was a bellwether for GOP successes in the 112th Congress (2011-2013), when the party won back control of the lower chamber. It didn't help Griffith much, though he lost to Republican Mo Brooks in the ensuing primary, and then lost to him again in the next one.

Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) switched from Republican to Democrat in 2009, all but giving the Democrats a supermajority in President Barack Obama's first term. It did not help him or the Democrats in the long-run, either: Specter lost the 2010 primary in a landslide to Rep. Joe Sestak, who lost the general election to Republican Pat Toomey.

Notably, as CNN reported at the time: "Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele ripped Specter, calling him a Republican in name only who was out of step with the rest of the party because of his 'left-wing voting record.'" I worked with his staff on legislation, and would have been a bit more charitable, but Steele was not entirely wrong.

Sen. Richard Shelby (Ala.) switched from Democrat to Republican in 1994, reflecting a trend in the South toward the GOP, as did Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (Colo.) in 1995 following the defeat of a balanced-budget amendment that he supported and Democrats opposed. Sen. Jim Jeffords (Vt.) switched from Republican to independent, caucusing with the Democrats and giving them control of the Senate in 2001. Jeffords' defection reflected a rift between moderates and conservatives in the GOP, and shifting allegiances in the Green Mountain State.

It is difficult to view Van Drew's switch as anything other than a rejection of the Democratic party's positions on many issues, including immigration. I gave plenty of caveats about the validity of the House Majority Forward survey in my November post, but one particular finding resounded with me: "When asked what Congress should try to work with Trump to achieve, immigration was the dominant response and as we heard in the beginning of the conversation, that would mean controlling immigration."

There are real problems at the border that the president has identified on numerous occasions, but Democrats in power and their supporters in the media seemed to be oblivious to them until they were undeniable. Even then, their responses were largely just a rehash of the positions they had taken before, and an effort to deflect blame on to the president.

For example, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) blamed President Trump's "'refusal to move forward' on comprehensive immigration reform as 'contributing to that humanitarian crisis'", while at the same time asserting that "'there's a lot we could do jointly and should do jointly' in Congress ... to address the border situation." Of course, no such legislation has been forthcoming, despite the president's stated willingness to reach a deal.

There is a saying on Capitol Hill: "When you stop representing your constituents, soon you will stop representing your constituents." Jeff Van Drew has learned this lesson. Immigration propelled Donald Trump to the White House. For the sake of the now 30 Democratic House members in seats the president won in the 2016 election, and her own speakership, Nancy Pelosi should learn this lesson on immigration as well.

Link:
Rep. Van Drew Joins the GOP - Immigration Blog

Rep. Tom Reed applauded the passage of the Bipartisan and Problem Solvers Caucus endorsed Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2019 to help struggling farmers in New York gain access to much needed farm workers.

I hear it every time I step on family farms in Upstate New York when is Washington going to do something about access for farm labor?' Reed said. This common sense bipartisan compromise is a step in the right direction for this decades old problem, and will deliver relief to the farmers we care about across the nation to give them fair access to workers they need to prosper. I am proud the Problem Solvers Caucus could get behind this bill as we pushed it over the finish line in the House and onto the Senate.

However, this is just the start of immigration reform. We must secure our southern border and continue to fight to ensure a merit-based system is fully implemented such as the one proposed by President Trump this spring, concluded Reed.

The bill takes a two-pronged approach to meet year-round labor needs: creating a new, capped program for employers seeking to bring in temporary workers for year-round needs; and builds off current law dedicating an additional 40,000 employment-based green cards per year for agricultural workers. It also includes mandatory e-verify, new investments in farmworker housing, H-2A wage reform, and streamlined recruiting.

Access to a reliable workforce is a critical issue for Upstate New York dairy farmers like me, said family farmer David White from Clymer. I milk my cows 365 days a year. Current agricultural visa programs are seasonal and therefore dont provide a solution to dairys unique challenges. I commend Congressman Tom Reed for his work to support and pass the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act to address this critical issue for our Upstate economy.

New York Farm Bureau appreciates Rep. Reeds leadership in cosponsoring the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act. Farms in his district and across the state need access to reliable labor in order to produce the food we need and to support our rural economy. This legislation would especially support dairy farmers who have long been without access to the agricultural visa program, said David Fisher, New York Farm Bureau President.

We applaud House passage today of the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act, which takes significant strides to make badly needed improvements to agriculture immigration policy that address dairys unique workforce challenges, said Jim Mulhern, President and CEO of the National Milk Producers Federation. Congressman Reed has been a vocal champion on this issue for Upstate New York dairy farmers and we thank him for cosponsoring this bipartisan bill and working to build momentum for this win in the House.

A resounding Thank You to all who have helped to call attention to Fredonia in the Small Business Revolution! ...

LAKEWOOD The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation recently issued bid invitations for a ...

OLEAN Tina Hastings, executive director of the Tri County Arts Council, recently announced that she will be ...

By TODD TRANUMPresident and CEO of the Chautauqua County Chamber of Commerce & Executive Director of the ...

Original post:
Reed applauds passage of bill to help NY farmers with access to workers | News, Sports, Jobs - Evening Observer

I still think your client is as guilty as hell. FBI Agent Shaw, Richard Jewell

On the recommendation of @cliffordbrown and others, I went to see Richard Jewell. It is a profoundly disturbing movie.

The protagonist is the kind of person who steps up in a crisis to do the right thing. Hes not perfect; his love affair with law enforcement seems to get him to go into beyond his job duties, and he is trying to help even when the FBI is targeting him but we would hope that a security officer took his job seriously. Remember If you see something, say something! Richard saved lives and really tried his best to do a good job.

For this, the FBI profiled him as a terrorist. All of his idiosyncrasies were turned into signs of guilt, and he was fed into the media wood chipper. For all the complaining about the heartless journalist and portrayal of the media, the journalist actually reconsiders. The FBI agent does not. Even as the situation changes, they stretch the theory of the case. And at no time is there any direct evidence the FBI decided he was guilty, and that was that. The quote above is as the agents hands over a letter clearing Richards name.

It is a nightmare. The full weight of the government brought against a law-abiding citizen for doing the right thing. It makes me think of George Zimmerman, who stopped to try to help the police deal with a crime rather than walk on by. He was then put under the microscope for his actions, declared to be white, and prosecuted on shoddy evidence that was revealed to be fraudulent. Incentives work if you punish good behavior, expect less of it.

This movie is also one of the best portrayals of an annoying defense lawyer as a heroic figure. Hes a jerk, but thats because he is adversarial. Its a paean to the adversarial justice system. You need a lawyer because the FBI might just decide to exploit any law-abiding traits to screw you over. I think lawyers would benefit from having defendants watch it, particularly regular citizens.

See more here:
Quote of the Day: Richard Jewell - Ricochet.com

One of my favorite photos of the last ten years comes from the Instagram of Lil Uzi Vert. In it, he and Young Thug appear to be taking a break from a shopping excursion. Thug is dripping in pearls and holding an open bag stuffed with hundred-dollar bills, but Uzi commands the frame. The eye follows his feet, clad in womens Chanel sneakers, along his tattooed calves, past a fetching cardigan short set, accented by a Chanel purse and a flute of ros, all the way up his smiling face, sandwiched between twin diamond-choked chokers and a top-knot of locs.

The decade started in darkness, with George Zimmerman killing Trayvon Martin for wearing a hoodie and further politicizing that garment. In the months and years that followed, alongside the Black Lives Matter movement, the expert display of black pain took on a bloody sheen of prestige, of importance. Affirmations of black happiness, then, emerged as a refusal of burnout, a pressure valve for the anguish of black life, and with them came an aesthetic of black boy joy: flower crowns, pastels, a visual softening of male aggression and stoicism most celebrated against a palette of cisness and straightness. Lil Uzi Vert is far from the first rapper to love fashion or wear feminine clothing, but he is a delightful bookmark for this new lens.

View post:
Why Lil Uzi Vert Is the Most Stylish Man of the Decade - GQ