Latino voters' impact varied by region

Few Republican candidates in the midterm election paid a price for adopting a hard-line immigration stance — except in the West


Republican Susana Martinez of New Mexico was elected the first U.S. Latina governor

With images of menacing, tattooed Latinos and beleaguered whites, the TV ad contended that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was too soft on illegal immigrants. "It's clear whose side he's on," the announcer said, "and it's not yours."

Sharron Angle, a "tea party" favorite and Reid's Republican challenger, had attempted to pummel Reid for his support for legalizing illegal immigrants. But Angle paid a price for her tough stance when Nevada's Latino voters came out in record numbers last week and helped Reid win a fifth term.

Across the country, Lou Barletta, the mayor of a small Pennsylvania city who is best known for backing a law forbidding property owners from renting to illegal immigrants, had little difficulty winning election to the House of Representatives.

A look at the electoral map shows that, outside selected parts of the Southwest, few Republican candidates this year paid a price for adopting a hard-line immigration stance.

The reason is that most of the historic wave that swept Democrats from office last week was in Midwestern or Rust Belt states, where Latinos make up only a fragment of the voting population. For example, Democrats lost five House seats, a Senate seat and the governorship in Pennsylvania, where only 3% of eligible voters are Latino.

Jennifer Duffy, a senior editor at the Cook report who tracks congressional races, has a message to activists who contend immigration is the Democrats' salvation: Don't hold your breath. "You've got to have states where [immigration] matters, where that Latino vote is enough to tip races," Duffy said. "Those states are in the West."

Although Latinos have been moving to more remote parts of the country in recent years, many may be too young to vote or may lack citizenship status. That makes it even tougher to replicate the Western experience in places such as Pennsylvania, she said. "Not only do they not have the Latino vote to help, they have an illegal immigrant problem," Duffy said of Democrats. "It's a double whammy."

Analysts agree that most voters do not choose candidates based solely on their immigration position. In exit polls this year, only 8% of voters nationwide said immigration was their top issue. Latino voters placed immigration well behind the economy and jobs.

Barletta, a Republican, said immigration never really factored into his successful race against veteran Democratic Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski. "The issue really took a back seat to jobs, the economy and healthcare," he said in a telephone interview. Still, Barletta first came to wider fame because of his work on the immigration ordinance in the city of Hazleton, and said he was often approached by voters who favored his position.

A hard-line immigration stance has become almost standard for GOP candidates nationally, as an older generation that backed immigration reform is pushed out by conservative activists. Even though it wasn't the centerpiece of their agenda, GOP candidates weren't shy about talking about the need to secure the border or their backing of Arizona's controversial new immigration law.

The election pushed Congress sharply to the right on immigration matters. Numbers USA, which advocates tougher immigration restrictions, estimates that 40 congressional representatives and senators who favored some sort of legal residency for illegal immigrants were replaced by hardliners this election.

Some of those new Republican officeholders are themselves Latino. Raul Labrador, an immigration attorney of Puerto Rican descent, ousted Democrat Rep. Walt Minnick in Idaho while declaring in his formal immigration policy statement: "Illegal is illegal!"

Susana Martinez of New Mexico became the first Latina governor in the nation after criticizing her Democratic predecessor's decision to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Brian Sandoval won the governorship in Nevada and Marco Rubio a Senate seat in Florida. "I think what you're seeing is that there is no longer the notion that if you have a Spanish surname, you must be a Democrat," said Javier Ortiz, an Atlanta-based GOP operative who has been working to get Republican Latinos elected.

Still, polls show Latinos are fairly reliably in the Democratic column. Jill Hanauer of Project New West, which tracks Western political trends, said that Latino candidates like Martinez and Rubio are notable because they were able to oppose immigration reform in a way that did not alienate the Latino electorate. "In Nevada and Colorado, you had candidates use immigration to really motivate angry white voters," Hanauer said. The Latino Republicans "didn't go over the line." Even so, Sandoval got 33% of the Latino vote in exit polls, and Martinez 38%.

The damage the immigration issue inflicted on Western Republicans was not limited to Nevada. In California, Latinos overwhelmingly backed Democrats Jerry Brown for governor and Barbara Boxer for Senate over Republicans who struggled to sell their tough stance on illegal immigration.

In Colorado's Senate race, Republican challenger Ken Buck had a record of being aggressive in immigration enforcement as a district attorney, and he narrowly lost. Former Rep. Tom Tancredo, a vocal foe of illegal immigration, lost his bid for governor here, though he ran a quixotic third-party campaign and was never given much chance of winning.

Arizona was another story. In the epicenter of the immigration fight this year, Republicans swept statewide races and picked up two congressional seats after backing its new immigration law. Gov. Jan Brewer, who became a celebrity after signing the measure in April, coasted to reelection.

Steve Camarota at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, which advocates for tougher immigration restrictions, said that it was obvious that enforcement was more popular politically than legalization because Democrats didn't push legalization when Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D- San Francisco) was speaker of the House. "If she thought it was a political winner, don't you think she'd have brought it up?" Camarota said.

SOURCE





Republican Resurgence Likely to Derail 'Immigration Reform'

As part of an 11th-hour appeal, President Obama warned Hispanic voters last month that the fate of "comprehensive immigration reform" would hinge largely on Tuesday's midterm elections. Now that Republicans, through sweeping gains in those elections, have captured the House and diminished the Democratic majority in the Senate, the fate of that initiative is very much in doubt.

Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who is expected to become chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said "immigration reform" will be pushed aside for streamlined enforcement of current laws. "The enforcement of our immigration laws is critical to both our national security and economic prosperity," he told the San Antonio Express. "We need to know who is entering our country, and why."

He told the newspaper that the committee under his leadership would "enact policies that will better secure our border and discourage illegal immigration, human smuggling and drug trafficking."

A Fox News national exit poll found that of the 8 percent of voters polled who identified illegal immigration as their top issue in the 2010 election, 68 percent were Republican while 27 percent were Democrat. Another poll, conducted on Election Day by the anti-illegal immigration group FAIR, found that 69 percent of people surveyed consider immigration an important issue and 61 percent believe Obama "has not been aggressive enough in enforcing immigration law."

FAIR is pushing the new Congress to focus on border security. "FAIR urges the leadership of the next Congress to embrace the agenda of the American people and transform our immigration policy to place their interests first," Dan Stein, president of FAIR, said. "The American people want our immigration laws enforced and overall levels of immigration reduced. They have clearly repudiated efforts to enact amnesty for millions of illegal aliens and increase foreign labor for business interests."

Republicans now have a record number of Latinos joining the next Congress, including Marco Rubio in the Senate and seven others in the House. They could prove a convincing force in the drive to shore up weak immigration laws.

Democrats tried to pounce on Republicans for their support of Arizona's controversial law that clamped down on illegal immigrants and their opposition to birthright citizenship and earned-citizenship proposals.

A week before Tuesday's election, Obama appealed to Hispanics in an interview on Univision Radio to vote for Democrats who would give him the support he needed to pass bills that overhaul the immigration system and provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in this country. "And if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, we're going to punish our enemies and we're going to reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us, if they don't see that kind upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it's going to be harder – and that's why I think it's so important that people focus on voting on Nov. 2," he said. Obama later said he should have used the word "opponents" instead of "enemies."

But not only did Republicans shake up Washington, they also captured a majority of governor's mansions across the country, which is also likely to affect the national debate on immigration reform.

Two Hispanic Republican-elect governors – Brian Sandoval in Nevada and Susanna Martinez in New Mexico – both will represent Southwest states, but they aren’t bowing to immigration doves.

Sandoval has said he supports Arizona's immigration law but has been told by law enforcement officials that it is not needed in Nevada, which tops the nation in unemployed and illegal workers. Martinez has vowed to start seeking to repeal a state law that allows illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses and opposes providing illegal immigrants with free tuition through taxpayer-funded lottery scholarships.

But some Democrats aren't giving up on immigration reform just yet. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid promised before his re-election victory that he would bring up the DREAM Act for a vote in the lame duck session. The measure would grant conditional legal status to some illegal immigrant students under certain conditions.

Rep. Michael Honda, D-Calif., chairman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, said he intends to introduce an immigration reform bill in the next Congress. "With Republicans now in the majority in the House of Representatives, many policies will probably change radically," he wrote in an opinion article published in the San Francisco Chronicle. "What must not change, however, is work on immigration reform."

Honda said his bill will allow all Americans to be reunited with their families, including gay couples. "The benefits of this policy cannot be overstated: American workers with their families by their side are happier, healthier and more able to succeed than those living apart from loved ones for years on end," he wrote. "This is a time when we must use every available resource to stimulate our economy and control government spending. That is why comprehensive immigration reform makes good sense."

SOURCE

DJs, Kabaddi players, comedians and models beat British government's migrant cap

Magicians, disc jockeys, waitresses, comedians and models have all benefited from a route into the UK excluded from the Government’s immigration cap.

The revelations intensified the row over the Coalition’s decision to exempt intra-company transfers from the annual cap on non-EU economic immigrants.

As the furore continues, Home Secretary Theresa May will today make her first major immigration speech. She will announce a crackdown on foreign students and a new salary limit for economic migrants.

On Wednesday it emerged that Lib Dem Business Secretary Vince Cable had successfully argued that intra-company transfer of ‘skilled workers’ from abroad was crucial to the competitiveness of British business. But internal government figures show the route has been exploited by companies seeking to bring in entertainers or – in some cases – traditionally low-paid staff.

They have included commentators, comedians, ice hockey coaches, magicians, acupuncturists, disc jockeys, models, and polo grooms and players. In recent years, businesses have even brought in waitresses from outside the EU. One source said: ‘We were told they are bringing in skilled workers. We have to be honest and say they are not all brain surgeons or rocket scientists.’

The biggest number of intra-company transfers involved IT workers – of whom more than 65,000 were allowed in between 1999 and 2008. The unemployment rate among British IT workers is around 16 per cent. In total, Labour allowed in around 350,000 people using the intra-company transfers route.

Tory MP James Clappison, who unearthed the figures, said the Coalition had to be alive to the dangers of excluding intra-company transfers from the flagship cap policy. ‘There have to be legitimate questions about the intra-company transfer system when one looks at the numbers of people, and the types of work they are doing,’ he said. ‘They are ignoring the labour market in the UK and also in the EU to bring people in from outside. One company has brought in 19,000 people.’

In her speech, Mrs May is expected to promise that the intra-company transfer system – while not part of the cap – will still be subject to a new salary limit. Companies must pay any employee they wish to bring in a minimum wage, which could be fixed at £40,000 or more.

A review of the student visa system will be announced, with the aim of slashing the 300,000 visas handed out every year.

Mrs May is also expected to promise that net migration will be halved – taking it from almost 200,000 a year to the ‘tens of thousands’.

SOURCE






Asylum-seekers are not criminals Australia's Immigration Minister tells angry residents

In that case, why does the government jail them?

Chris Bowen has rejected claims people campaigning against detention centres being built in their communities are racists. But the Immigration Minister insists asylum-seekers are safe and unlikely to escape detention and break the law.

Mr Bowen is trying to hose down community concerns after a meeting in Northam, about 100km northeast of Perth, on Thursday night in which the Department of Immigration and the local council answered questions from angry residents about the plan to house 1500 asylum-seekers in the community.

West Australian Labor senator Glenn Sterle was invited to the meeting but left when he was denied a chance to address the nearly 700-strong audience by the meeting's facilitator, former state Labor MP Gavan Troy.

Many residents raised concerns about the detention centre's impact on Northam's already strained and understaffed hospital and the contingency plans in place if there were a riot.

Senator Sterle condemned the constant "heckling and throwing of racist statements" for drowning out what were some genuine concerns about the centre. Mr Bowen said he believed in freedom of speech and people should be able to raise views.

The meeting was dominated by people voicing intense hostility to the detention centre and to asylum-seekers, with some labelling them "criminals" who could escape and attack local women.

Mr Bowen said there had been very few escapes from detention centres. "I'm not aware of any evidence that people who do escape from detention centres on very rare occasions undertake criminal acts," he said. "All the evidence shows that people while their claims are being processed conduct themselves in a perfectly appropriate way."

Liberal Premier Colin Barnett called on the Gillard government to halve the number of male asylum-seekers planned for the Northam detention centre, saying he understood the "great anxiety" expressed by furious locals. But he said T-shirts with "Bomb their boats" written on them worn by two residents at the meeting were inappropriate. He said it showed the issue needed to be handled carefully and there should have been proper prior consultation.

Northam resident Chris David yesterday claimed the meeting had been hijacked by a vocal minority bent on fearmongering. Another resident, Nigel Sutton, said he was shocked when he heard One Nation state deputy president Lyn Vickery tell the meeting asylum-seekers would "slit your throat".

SOURCE

Where is immigration reform now after the election?

To say that Democrats got their heads handed to them during the midterm elections would be putting it rather kindly; in addition to securing a whopping 690 state legislative seats, the GOP victory tally also features approximately 60 seats in the house.

Already a somewhat sobered President Barack Obama has conceded that the loss of the stronghold, which his administration enjoyed in the House, now requires a re-working of the strained working relationships between Democrats and Republicans.

This now begs the question what will happen to the much-discussed idea of immigration reform. Prior to the GOP victory, the Arizona anti-illegal immigration law was held up as a sign of all that was wrong with conservative politics. Yet Gov. Jan Brewer's re-election against the backdrop of the immigration debate cements what Congress might not have wanted to hear: Americans support legal immigrants but do not take kindly to having an administration turn a blind eye to illegal immigration.

With immigration a major talking point in numerous midterm races -- and immigration reform wisely put off until after election day 2010 -- there is little consensus as to where to go from here.

Perhaps a bit cocky in the wake of the resounding GOP victory, Republican Lamar Smith from the Texas 21st U.S. House district predicts that reform may be put off in favor of border enforcement. Staunchly opposing the administration's hints at wanting to set up a "path to citizenship" that would legalize virtually millions of illegal immigrants currently living and working in the United States, the GOP victory may point toward the road blocks that immigration reform must face at this time.

Truth be told, it is short-sighted to assume that illegal immigration will be a topic that now slinks into the background. While the victories of GOP candidates running on an anti-illegal immigration platform in general -- and Jan Brewer's gubernatorial victory in particular -- may give the impression that reform is off the table and enforcement is the call of the hour, there were plenty of candidates for whom illegal immigration was an insurmountable stumbling block. Cases in point were Sharron Angle, who failed to give Harry Reid his marching papers, and also Meg Whitman, whose ambiguous stance on the issue most likely cost her a good portion of the conservative and also independent vote.

After the new congressional members are sworn in and have picked out their drapes and rugs, it is crucial to remember that immigration reform is still every bit as much of a talking point among the electorate as it was prior to the midterm elections. If Congress and the administration fail to act on this understanding and choose to put illegal immigration on the back burner once again, the trouncing at the next presidential election may be of biblical proportions.

SOURCE






Australian government not only shelters thug illegals from justice but approves their refugee claims and releases them into the community

Given their behaviour, there is a clear likelihood that the thugs concerned are former Tamil Tiger terrorists

A Perth magistrate says the immigration department "effectively sabotaged" police investigations into a riot by detainees on Christmas Island and allowed key players to escape justice.

Magistrate Stephen Malley on Thursday also criticised federal police as he delivered his verdicts on charges against five Sri Lankan Tamil detainees following the riot at the detention centre on November 21 last year.

He said it was "bizarre" that within 48 hours of the extremely violent confrontation, the immigration department shipped off 40 detainees to the mainland, many of whom were involved in the violence. The actions of the department "effectively sabotaged" investigations into the riot by the Australian Federal Police (AFP), Mr Malley said.

The Perth Magistrates Court heard that Afghan detainees were violently set upon by Sri Lankan detainees following a dispute between the two groups. Mr Malley said rioters armed themselves with tree branches, pool cues, mop handles, chairs and parts of soccer goal posts that were dismantled during the violence.

He said that following the riot the immigration department showed "little or no regard whether those they were releasing committed serious or criminal acts". Those more seriously involved were in effect "assisted to evade prosecution", the magistrate said. The department showed "reckless disregard" for the significance of the events and had given limited assistance to the AFP, he said.

Mr Malley also said video interviews conducted by police were "poorly done and in most instances worthless" while photo boards used for identification were inadequate.

He found that staff employed by the firm Serco, charged with running the centre, were "not well trained in the manner in which to deal with these events".

Originally 11 Sri Lankans were put on trial over the riots but six had charges against them dismissed. Mr Malley said the case had been frustrating for the court given the inadequacy of the investigations and the "considerable money" invested in bringing lesser players before the courts.

The magistrate found two of the five Sri Lankans guilty on charges of rioting and weapons possession and another guilty of possessing a weapon. On the rioting charges, Pranavan Sivasubramaniyam and Anburajan Anton were given six-month jail sentences suspended for six months. They and Gnararajah Jesurajah were put on good behaviour bonds of $500 on the weapons possession charges. Anantharajeevan Thangarasha and Kokilakumar Subramanian were found not guilty on the charges against them.

The court heard the riot started in a compound at the detention centre and spread onto the sports oval. Sri Lankans, agitated over an earlier confrontation in which Tamils were injured, gathered and pursued outnumbered Afghans, bashing many of them in a "violent confrontation based on racial lines", Mr Malley found. "The evidence is of a running battle, with Afghanis retreating towards the medical compound chased by the Sri Lankan detainees."

In sentencing, Mr Malley told the convicted men they had allowed their emotions to affect their better judgment. The five Sri Lankans have been granted refugee status but have been kept in detention in Perth pending the result of their trial. They are expected to be released from detention within weeks.

SOURCE

British government vows to curb every migrant route

Immigrants face an unprecedented crackdown on every route into the UK amid a warning from MPs that the Coalition’s cap on foreign workers will make ‘little difference’.

A report claims the plan for an annual limit on non-EU work permits could reduce overall immigration levels by just one per cent. Only 20 per cent of the 500,000 migrants who come here each year will even be covered by the cap, let alone be barred, the Commons home affairs select committee says. It also claimed the cap would be damaging to British business and concluded the only way to slash net migration is to also cut the number of foreign students.

Ministers responded by saying it had always been their intention to impose restrictions on every different route migrants use to enter the UK. This will lead to huge reductions in the 300,000-plus foreign students given visas every year, and tighter controls on people coming here to marry.

Overall, the Coalition wants to at least halve net migration – the difference between the number of immigrants and those leaving – by the end of this Parliament. Currently, net migration stands at 200,000 – with the Tories planning to slash this to the ‘tens of thousands’.

Home Office minister Damian Green said: ‘We have been saying for months now we need to act on every immigration route to make the numbers sustainable.’

The select committee’s report focuses solely on the Government’s plan for an annual limit on non-EU economic migrants. An interim cap is in place, with the final number to be allowed in being fixed by April.

The interim limit was only five per cent lower than last year’s total. The MPs said that, even if visas were refused to all non-EU nationals seeking work permits, the total number of immigrants entering the UK would be reduced by ‘considerably less than 20 per cent’. They add that if the cap were implemented at the interim five per cent, the reduction would be ‘less than one per cent’.

The MPs also claim the cap will ‘damage the UK’s ability to recruit the most distinguished scientists into universities and highly talented individuals into UK companies and public services’.

In a fresh blow David Cameron’s former speechwriter Ian Birrell said the proposed cap was a political ‘gesture’. A friend of the Prime Minister, he said in an article for the London Evening Standard the Tories had come up with an ‘arbitrary cap to make it appear they had a policy on immigration’.

Mr Birrell, who has a severely disabled child, bonded with Mr Cameron over the problems suffered by his late son Ivan. In his article he warned that the care for such children could suffer. He said: ‘We should not forget the less glamorous sectors of care homes and hospitals. As the parent of a profoundly disabled child, the importance of overseas care staff cannot be overstated. ‘They are the key to survival, since few Britons are interested in the long hours and tough work of caring for chronically sick people. Already agencies are reporting problems in filling posts.’

Labour immigration spokesman Phil Woolas said the MPs’ report confirmed ‘the cap was a pre-election gimmick to con voters’.

But Government sources said a series of crackdowns would be announced in coming months. The biggest losers will be non-EU students. In the year to June this year, 362,015 foreign students were allowed to come and study in the UK, up 35 per cent on the previous year.

It could be made harder for them to do non-degree courses –90,000 are in the private sector at smaller colleges, which offer GCSEs or vocational training.

SOURCE






Locating housing for "asylum seekers" in a pretty Australian country town unwise

HOUSING asylum seekers in the idyllic South Australian town of Inverbrackie will send the wrong message to people smugglers, Tony Abbott has said.

Mr Abbott was in the Adelaide Hills on Wednesday where residents were angry at the federal government's decision to use empty defence force housing for asylum seeker families. "Just as I look at this facility, it's hard to see that bringing asylum-seeker families to a beautiful, idyllic area like this is going to send anything other than the dead wrong message to people smugglers and their customers," Mr Abbott said. "If anything it is going to add the pull factor."

Mr Abbott also met community representatives, attending a forum at Woodside organised by the Woodside Community Action Group.

His trip followed a visit from Immigration Minister Chris Bowen on Monday who has been criticised for failing to consult with South Australians before announcing 400 asylum seekers would be housed at Inverbrackie.

The Woodside action group said it represented 500 people who had a genuine entitlement to consultation on matters that directly affected their community. The group said it was concerned about the logistics of transporting 400 people in and out of the town on days of extreme fire danger during summer and was also concerned about the impact asylum seekers would have on the local health and education services.

Mr Bowen announced on Monday he had set up a community reference group to consult on the detention centre and appointed a liaison officer.

SOURCE

U.S. and Its ‘Broken’ Immigration System to Be Reviewed by U.N. Human Rights Council

The United States this week will undergo its first appraisal by the U.N. Human Rights Council, and one of the issues likely to be raised – thanks to the Obama administration – is Arizona’s new immigration law.

On Friday, representatives of HRC member states, observer countries and non-governmental organizations will evaluate the U.S. human rights record in a three-hour “interactive dialogue” at HRC headquarters in Geneva.

Known as the “universal periodic review” (UPR), the process is one every U.N. member state is expected to go through every four years.

Among the documents on the table during the evaluation will be a report by the government, presenting its assessment of the human rights situation in the U.S. Ahead of its Nov. 5 review, the State Department submitted the report to the HRC in August, and sparked a storm of controversy by including in it a reference to the Arizona legislation.

“A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world,” the report stated. “The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.”

The document went on to pledge that “President Obama remains firmly committed to fixing our broken immigration system …”

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has tasked its European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ) affiliate, which participates in the UPR process as an accredited NGO, to prepare a submission asking for the Arizona law reference to be disregarded during the UPR, on the grounds that it “falls outside the realm of human rights.”

“By including the Arizona immigration law in the report, the Obama Administration undercut American sovereignty, the well-established principle of federalism, and the popular will of the people,” said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for ACLJ and ECLJ.

The Arizona law comes before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco on Monday. Brewer is appealing a lower-court ruling that put on hold key provisions of the law. A decision is not expected for weeks or months.

Among issues expected to come up during the U.S. UPR on Friday, based on U.N. documents prepared for the meeting as well as questions submitted in advance by various countries, are:

-- Stateless persons

The U.N. High Commission for Refugees wants the U.S. to provide “a pathway to permanent legal status” for people inside the country who are stateless. For those who do not qualify for legal status, it recommends that administrative reforms be made to ease the restrictions placed on them. Norway plans to ask the U.S. delegation whether there is any intention to revise “the amended immigration and asylum laws.”

-- The death penalty

A number of countries raise the death penalty issue, including the Netherlands, which asks whether the U.S. would consider abolishing or declaring a moratorium on the death penalty within federal and military jurisdictions, and if not, then to “elaborate on the challenges” preventing it from doing so.

-- Treatment of detained terror suspects

Russia asks what steps are being taken against those responsible for torturing detainees at “secret prisons” and detention facilities at Bagram and Guantanamo Bay. Russia also wants to know what is being done to provide effective remedies to “civilian victims of the ‘war on terror,’ including detainees at “secret prisons” and Bagram and Guantanamo Bay. Britain asks the U.S. to outline the steps needed to ensure the final closure of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.

After Friday’s session, a troika of randomly-selected countries – Cameroon, France and Japan – will compile a document containing recommendations arising from the proceedings. The HRC will then “adopt” that document, at a session scheduled for Tuesday Nov. 9.

When the HRC was established in 2006 as part of a series of U.N. reforms, the UPR was held up as one of its most significant mechanisms – a means to ensure that every country, including the most egregious human rights violators, would periodically find itself in the spotlight and have to explain its policies to the rest of the international community.

In practice, however, the UPR has disappointed many human rights advocates. Countries with poor rights records, such as Iran and China, have eased through the process shrugging off criticism by Western countries and winning applause from their allies.

SOURCE






Latest from the CIS

See here for the blog. The CIS main page is here.

1. The Hispanic Vote in the Upcoming 2010 Elections (Memorandum)

2. Panel: 'Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2' (Video)

3. Remittance-Senders (Mostly Illegals) Ship $25 Billion a Year Out of the U.S. (Blog)

4. Hidden Good News: Both Judges and DHS (Silently) Zap Religious Worker Fraud (Blog)

5. Big Prison — Call Me! (Blog)

6. New Hispanic Poll on Immigration (Blog)

7. 'I Do' – Wink-Wink, Nudge-Nudge (Blog)

8. Shades of Richard Nixon: Obama to Latinos – 'Punish Our Enemies' (Blog)

9. Labor Department Takes Restrictionist Position, Gets Zapped by the Courts (Blog)

10. There They Go Again: Non-Citizen Voting Arguments: Round II – 'Fairness' (Blog)

11. Wonder of Wonders (Blog)

12. There They Go Again: Non-Citizen Voting Arguments: Round I (Blog)

13. Bureau of Land Management Covers Its Tracks (Blog)

14. An Immigration Policy Puzzle: Peruvians vs. Dominicans, Why So Different? (Blog)

15. Déjà Vu All Over Again: Non-Citizen Voting (Blog)

16. American Apparel Learns Breaking Immigration Law Is Bad for the Bottom Line (Blog)

New GOP class tougher on immigration?

The Republican class set to sweep into the House after Tuesday’s midterm elections could include several freshmen who have some real world experience cracking down on illegal immigration.

Candidates like Lou Barletta, mayor of Hazleton, Pa., promise to pressure Republicans already in Congress to make sure immigration doesn’t get lost among all the talk about creating jobs and otherwise bolstering the nation’s still sagging economy.

Barletta, who’s trying to unseat veteran Democratic Rep. Paul Kanjorski, got national attention with a 2006 ordinance that would revoke the licenses of businesses that employ illegal immigrants and fine landlords for renting to illegal immigrants. It was struck down in a federal court in September, though, and hasn’t been enforced.

“We can convince others, if we’re going to deal with the deficit and the budget, you can’t exclude the illegal immigration problem out of that equation because it has a direct effect on the budget,” Barletta told POLITICO. “Not dealing with it would be like having a car with three wheels.”

Then there’s State Sen. Jeff Perry, who’s running against Democrat William Keating for an open seat in a Massachusetts district that includes Cape Cod. For the past four years, Perry has introduced a bill that would ban illegal immigrants from accessing social services such as public housing.

If he wins, Perry plans to introduce federal legislation that would stop social services funding, just like the law he tried to get through in Massachusetts, and supports ideas such as a mandatory national verification program that isn’t popular with business groups and Republican House leaders.

“It impacts people who are trying to create jobs and people who are trying to find jobs,” Perry said. “We have a lot of small businesses here in this congressional district. There’s not a week that goes by that I don’t’ hear from them. They’re frustrated.”

“Especially in the blue collar trades,” he said, “they’re competing against illegal immigrants who don’t pay their taxes. They don’t play by the same rules and that needs to change.”

In Alabama, Montgomery City Council member Martha Roby, who shepherded an ordinance through the council that goes after businesses who hire illegal immigrants, has a shot at knocking off Democratic Rep. Bobby Bright.

In Florida, state Rep. Sandy Adams, who’s looking to oust Democratic Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, has repeatedly pushed legislation to stop illegal immigrants from getting drivers’ licenses or from being able to pay university tuition at in-state rates. She’s also introduced a bill to crack down on government contractors who hire illegal immigrants.

And several other candidates in Arizona and New Mexico, among other states – like Steve Pearce and Jesse Kelly – persistently have campaigned hard right on immigration.

Their support for measures that crack down on businesses could run into strong opposition from Republican congressional leaders, who avoided laying out a plan for comprehensive immigration reform in the GOP “Pledge to America.”

The national immigration debate trickled down to the state and local level in 2005 and 2006, prompting several local politicians who are now running for congressional seats to address the issue.

In 1994, few of the new Republicans had tackled immigration, and the pressure for reform came from incumbents such Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and a bipartisan congressional commission.

Should Republicans gain control of the House Tuesday, Smith and Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) would likely be leading investigations of the Obama administration’s enforcement of existing laws as the likely new chairmen of the House Judiciary Committee and its Immigration Subcommittee.

Smith has campaigned for Perry in his district, praising him for his work on immigration and saying wants to see Perry on the Judiciary Committee.

Smith and King lobbied to get leaders to promise to solve immigration earlier this year, when the party was drafting the Pledge to America, but weren’t successful. Now, they’re counting on pressure from conservative freshmen to help them bring immigration legislation to the floor. “I hope they are not easily led. I hope they are the leaders themselves,” King said.

SOURCE






Government of Canada Announces 2011 Immigration Plan

The Government of Canada will maintain high immigration levels to help sustain the economic recovery, Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism Minister Jason Kenney announced today upon tabling the annual immigration plan in Parliament.

It is estimated that Canada will welcome between 240,000 and 265,000 new permanent residents in 2011. Sixty percent of these immigrants will come through economic streams.

"Canada's post-recession economy demands a high level of legal immigration to keep our work force strong," he said. "At the same time, we are maintaining our commitment to family reunification and refugees."

Like many other countries with ageing populations and low birth rates, in the not too distant future Canada will not have enough people to keep our work force growing. While the majority of new entrants to our labour force will continue to come from within Canada, without immigration, the size of our work force will shrink. Within the next five years, all of our labour force growth will come from immigration.

Highlights of the 2011 immigration plan include a higher range of admissions for spouses and children in the family category. In keeping with recent reforms to Canada's refugee system, the 2011 plan also includes an additional 1,125 refugees resettled in Canada as part of the commitment to increase total refugee resettlement by 2,500 over three years. In 2008, the last year for which figures are available, Canada resettled more bona fide refugees than any country but the United States. Canada resettles over one in 10 of the world's refugees.

"These refugees are selected and screened by Canada, and come here legally," noted Minister Kenney. "We look forward to giving them a safe, new beginning."

Within the economic category, the 2011 plan balances projected admissions between federally and provincially selected workers to meet Canada's national and regional labour market needs. Provincial programs help distribute the benefits of immigrants across the entire country. Twenty-five percent of economic immigrants are now destined for provinces other than Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec, compared to 11 percent in 1997.

The Federal Skilled Worker Program remains a significant portion of the economic category. The program admits a range of workers, including technicians, skilled tradespersons, managers and professionals, who help to supplement the Canadian-born work force.

The annual immigration plan is part of Citizenship and Immigration Canada's annual report tabled in Parliament by November 1 each year.

SOURCE

Reid Promises Immigration Vote After Election

He's referring to the dreaded "lame duck" session when lots of defeated Democrats will have nothing left to lose. This announcement might help make him one of them

Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic majority leader fighting to hold his seat in Nevada, said on a taped television appearance on Sunday he planned to bring legislation that would create a path for some illegal immigrants to gain legal status to a vote in the post-election session of Congress.

The move may thrust the issue of immigration into the heart of the political debate in the hours leading to Tuesday’s midterm elections.

Mr. Reid announced his intentions on Univision’s “Al Punto,” a Spanish-language political talk show. His appearance was a pitch to Nevada’s Hispanic voters as he fights for re-election against Sharron Angle, a Tea Party-backed Republican with whom he is essentially tied in polls. Immigration is a dominant issue in the Nevada Senate race. And Hispanics, who turned out in droves to help elect President Obama in 2008, could give an edge to Mr. Reid.

The legislation, called the Dream Act, would grant conditional permanent residency to illegal immigrant students and illegal immigrants who agree to serve in the military.

“I have the right to bring that up any time I want; that’s why I brought it up the first time. I am a believer in our needing to do something,” Mr. Reid said in the interview, which was taped Thursday in Las Vegas.

Mr. Reid said he would bring the measure to the floor in the lame-duck session regardless of the election’s outcomes.

To pass, the measure would require some Republican support, which seems unlikely. A previous version of the Dream Act failed to overcome a Republican-led filibuster in the Senate in 2007. The measure was attached to a defense authorization bill in September 2010 but Republicans (with one Democrat) blocked the legislation.

“I just need a handful of Republicans, Mr. Reid said. “I would settle for two or three Republicans to join with me on the Dream Act and comprehensive immigration reform, but they have not been willing to step forward.”

Mr. Reid echoed Mr. Obama in placing part of the responsibility over a stalled overhaul of immigration laws on Senator John McCain. Mr. McCain, the Arizona Republican, had been a leading proponent of an immigration overhaul with former Democratic Senator Edward M. Kennedy.

“As a result of his unwillingness to help, we have not had a single Republican offer to help us with comprehensive immigration reform,” Mr. Reid said of Mr. McCain. “The system is broken and all they want to do is demagogue the issue.”

Recently, an ad for Ms. Angle characterized Mr. Reid as “the best friend an illegal alien ever had,” a label Mr. Reid said was “totally without fact our foundation.”

Asked about his re-election campaign, Mr. Reid said it was “doing just fine.” He added that it was “pretty clear” that Democrats would hold on to the Senate after the election.

“How many the numbers will be, we’ll have to decide that on Nov. 3, but we feel comfortable,” Mr. Reid said.

Source






'More immigrants should work for the state': German Chancellor

Angela Merkel adds to the country's roaring immigration debate

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has risked causing further outrage by saying that more immigrants should work for the state.

The country has been in the grip of a tense debate about the integration of Muslims for several weeks. Fuelled by divisive comments about Turks and Arabs by central banker Thilo Sarrazin, Germany has been debating how to balance an economic need for more workers with growing public concern over integration of immigrants.

Merkel spakred controversy earlier this month when she said that multiculturalism had 'utterly failed' in Germany. Her latest comments are now likely to cause more anger among citizens who feel alienated by the influx of immigrants to the country.

Interviewed by a 31-year-old Berlin policeman of Turkish origin for her latest internet podcast four days ahead of an integration summit at her chancellery, Merkel said: 'Today, people with a migrant background are under- represented in the public sector, and that needs to change.'

However, Merkel conceded that this was not always easy. 'I've also noticed that if someone has a name that doesn't sound German they can often have trouble being taken on at all in some professions,' she said.

Since Sarrazin inflamed opinion by asserting Turks and Arabs sponged off the state and refused to integrate, some of Merkel's conservatives become more critical of Muslims, who make up an estimated 4 million of Germany's 82 million population.

Sarrazin was sacked from the board of the Bundesbank for his comments, but his book has been flying off the shelves. Just two months after publication, it is already the best-selling political book by a German author in the country in the past decade, market research firm media control said. Since 2000, only U.S. author and filmmaker Michael Moore's 'Stupid White Men' had sold more in Germany, the firm said.

Among the conservatives to antagonise Muslims were Bavarian state premier Horst Seehofer, who called for an end to immigration from 'alien cultures'. He heads the Christian Social Union, sister party to Merkel's Christian Democrats.

The centre-left and leading business lobbies have criticised such comments, saying they could scare off skilled foreign workers needed to fill growing gaps in the workforce due to Germany's ageing and declining population.

Seehofer's comments have tapped into fears also played upon by Sarrazin that Germany is under threat from foreigners. A survey published this month by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, a foundation linked to the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD), said 36 percent of respondents believed the country was in danger of being overrun by foreigners. More than a third of those polled also felt foreigners came to Germany only to exploit the welfare system.

A leading demography expert said Germany was now failing to attract foreign workers in the way it used to. Reiner Klingholz, director of the Berlin Institute for Population and Development, said Germany long had an annual influx of 200,000 immigrants but in the last two years had seen a net exodus of 15,000 immigrants.

Source