On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee began its mark-up of Title III of S.744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. When the mark-up continues on Monday, Senators are likely to vote on...
Yesterday was day 3 of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s mark-up on S. 744, the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill. While it wasn’t as exciting as the first two days—no dramatic speeches or vocal disagreement—several important...
For the third day of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s mark-up of the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act,” committee members continued to work through Title Four (specifically regarding the W visa program) and...
Join us for a community gathering and press conference: Monday – October 11, 2010 at 10:00 am (please arrive by 9:45 am so we can be sure to start on time) One Voice (Gay) Community Center 725 W Indian School Road, Suite #125 Phoenix, AZ 85013 602-712-0111 Click here to get directions
Immigration has no “significant” effect on the number of jobs available to U.S.-born workers and helps boost incomes and productivity over time, according to a paper by an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
“There is no evidence that immigrants crowd out U.S.-born workers in either the short or long run,” Giovanni Peri, an associate professor at the University of California-Davis and a visiting scholar at the San Francisco Fed, said in the paper released today. “Data show that, on net, immigrants expand the U.S. economy’s productive capacity, stimulate investment, and promote specialization that in the long run boosts productivity.”
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is entering the nation's charged debate over immigration, agreeing to hear a challenge from business and civil liberties groups to an Arizona law that cracks down on employers who hire undocumented workers.
The justices on Monday accepted an appeal from the Chamber of Commerce, American Civil Liberties Union and others to a lower court ruling that upheld Arizona's law. The measure requires employers to verify the eligibility of prospective employees through a federal database called E-Verify and imposes sanctions on companies that knowingly hire undocumented workers.
Until the 1990s, the presence of undocumented immigrants in Arizona was a familiar and generally tolerated fact. They were — and remain — an essential component of the state’s economy. However, the large influx of undocumented immigrants over the past 20 years has sharpened public attitudes and presented Arizona with serious public-policy challenges. Addressing these challenges in today’s highly charged atmosphere have been further complicated by the divisive effects of potent and oftrepeated assertions concerning illegal immigration. Some assertions are well founded, while others are either demonstratively false or not clearly established because data are not available to support or disprove them. Such claims fuel strong feelings on both sides and reduce the chances of an impartial collective resolution of this critical public-policy issue. Reviewing several of the more prominent assertions may help move Arizona’s debate onto a more productive path. Here are some of those assertions, followed by facts:
“I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (Jn 13:34-35).
The Church from her earliest days has been known for the remarkable way in which her faithful have put into practice this command of the Lord to “love one another.” This love was so clearly seen it caused the pagans, while observing the behavior of early Christians, to exclaim, “See how they love one another!” In fact, many were moved to become Christians themselves because of what they witnessed.
Arizona has a long, shameful history of demonizing Mexican migrants
Geraldo L. Cadava Special To The Arizona Daily Star | Posted: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 12:00 am
Arizona has become the focal point of our national immigration debate, ever since Gov. Jan Brewer signed the law requiring state agents to verify the immigration status of individuals they suspect of being there illegally. In response, thousands of May Day marchers called for boycotts of the state, wearing T-shirts with slogans like, "You look suspicious, Arizona."
Frank Rich of the New York Times recently wrote, "don't blame it all on Arizona," since the state's "hysteria" is only a symptom of the "political virus" sweeping across America - from the birthers movement to tea party activism. He made a good point, but he ignored the long history of discrimination, xenophobia and scapegoating in a state where government has served its citizens poorly.
The inclination of Arizonans to target Mexicans as the cause of their political and financial problems has shaped the state's history for at least a century. In the middle of World War I, employers used fears of socialism as an excuse to fire Mexican workers, even as agricultural employers cited wartime labor shortages to justify hiring more. During the Great Depression, when Mexicans were seen as competition for jobs and burdens to public welfare, Arizonans used racist threats and scare tactics to
Governor Brewer's signing of Arizona law SB1070 late last month has shifted the debate concerning immigration reform in our country and changed the very environment into which migrants (legal and extra legal) now live.
The law, which at its most basic seeks to "deter the unlawful entry and presence of illegal aliens and economic activity by illegal aliens in the United States," moves the debate from the issue of immigration policy writ large to one that is focused squarely on the migrant and although not stated, the undocumented Mexican migrant.
Supporters argue that the law seeks only to implement and put into practice federal standards that are not now enforced. And while the supporters of SB1070 wrap themselves in the belief that they are only doing the work that the federal government cannot or will not engage, immigration reform does not begin with criminalizing the actions of a specific group of movers. In fact, there is no solution in this law to the challenges that immigration may (or may not) pose to our nation. Rather, SB1070 is little more than a bill that takes a vulnerable population and increases its vulnerability. Read more . . .
Rubio: Arizona Immigration Bill 'Concerns' Me
Arizona's tough new immigration law has created a variety of headaches for the national Republican Party, which recognizes its precarious standing with the Hispanic community but has traditionally supported enhanced law enforcement intervention.
Perhaps no major Republican figure is more challenged by the law than Marco Rubio, the upstart Senatorial candidate in Florida who is a descendant of immigrants but also the belle of the ball in conservative circles. In a statement offered on Tuesday, the former Florida House Speaker, who has been pressed in recent days to make his position known, came down against the statute. While saying he understood why -- in the absence of national action on immigration -- Arizona went forward with its bill, Rubio said the bill caused "concerns" and suggested it could lead to racial profiling.
"From what I have read in news reports, I do have concerns about this legislation," Rubio said. "While I don't believe Arizona's policy was based on anything other than trying to get a handle on our broken borders, I think aspects of the law, especially that dealing with 'reasonable suspicion,' are going to put our law enforcement officers in an incredibly difficult position. It could also unreasonably single out people who are here legally, including many American citizens." Read entire statement . . .
But he also faulted the Democratic and Republican parties for failing to come up with a national policy and opening the door for laws like Arizona's, which makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally.
"A pox on both parties," Ridge, a Republican, said in an interview with The Associated Press.