An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
My friend Tom Del Beccaro explains in his summary at Forbes how the Federal government maintains primacy over the states for immigration law and item 8 U.S. Code Section 1182, which the liberal court chose never to previously challenge.
Once the information is entered into the system, RAPS generates an appointment notice for the collection of fingerprints used to complete criminal and background checks and to create Employment Authorization Documents (EADs), as appropriate. The applicant will appear at a USCIS service center to provide fingerprints and confirm application information.
RAPS then automatically initiates several background security check processes: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Name Check, United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) and DHS’ Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT), Customs and Border Protection (CBP) TECS, FBI Fingerprint, and the ENFORCE Alien Removal Module (EARM) (for a full discussion of the background check process, see Section 5.1). RAPS also stores the results of security checks.
When a new application is entered into RAPS, it is forwarded to a USCIS Asylum Office for interview and adjudication. Asylum Offices use RAPS to schedule an asylum interview to evaluate the claim of asylum status and to conduct various aspects of case maintenance such as address changes, updates of information pertaining to dependent claimants, to record preliminary and final decisions, and to generate decision documents. An individual who files for asylum may include in his or her application any spouse or child who is within the United States and appears for the asylum interview. This is because a grant received by the principal asylum applicant is conveyed to the spouse and children included in the family group if the spouse/child is in the U.S. and not otherwise barred from a grant of asylum.
RAPS is a comprehensive case management tool that enables USCIS to handle and process applications for asylum pursuant to Section 208 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) and applications for suspension of deportation or special rule cancellation of removal pursuant to NACARA § 203. DHS offices worldwide can access RAPS as a resource of current and historic immigration status information on more than one million applicants. DHS officials can use RAPS to verify the status of asylum applicants, asylees, and their dependents to assist with the verification of an individual’s immigration history in the course of a review of visa petitions and other benefit applications as well.
RAPS Typical Transaction
A typical transaction begins when an individual initiates the process to apply for asylum by completing and filing Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, with a USCIS Service Center, or in certain circumstances directly with an asylum office. Service Center personnel receive the application in person or via mail and manually enter, most, but not all, of the information from a new application into RAPS.
As set forth in Section 451(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, Congress charged USCIS with the administration of the asylum program, which provides protection to qualified individuals in the United States who have suffered past persecution or have a well-founded fear of future persecution in their country of origin as outlined under INA § 208 and 8 CFR § 208. USCIS is also responsible for the adjudication of the benefit program established by Section 203 of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA § 203) (discussed in more detail in Section B below), in accordance with 8 CFR § 240.60 and the maintenance and administration of the credible fear and reasonable fear screening processes, in accordance with 8 CFR §§ 208.30 and 208.31. USCIS developed RAPS and APSS in order to carry out its obligations in administering these benefit programs.
Functions
RAPS and APSS track case status and facilitate the scheduling of appointments and interviews and the issuance of notices (including receipt notices, appointment notices, and decision letters) at several stages of the adjudication process. USCIS Asylum Offices use RAPS and APSS to:
record decisions and to generate decision documents such as approval, dismissal, or rescission of an asylum or NACARA § 203 application,
denial of an asylum application,
administrative closure of an asylum application, or
referral of an asylum or NACARA § 203 application to Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR).
The systems also initiate, receive, and record responses for national security and background check screening and prevent the approval of any benefit prior to the review and completion of all security checks. Finally, the systems provide fully developed and flexible means for analyzing and managing program workflows and provide the Asylum Program with statistical reports to assist with oversight of production and processing goals.
Read more from the two DHS documents here and here.
One of the requirements for allowing visa-free entry of tourists from countries in the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) is that those governments share with us information on nationals with terrorism links and/or criminal histories. According to a report of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued in May 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has obtained those agreements with most of the countries, but more than a third of the agreements have not been implemented, and no data have been received from them.
In addition, Congress has required reports from DHS on implementation of the VWP with each of the participating countries, but GAO found that DHS has failed to provide many of those reports when due.
The recommendation of agency (GAO-16-498) is that, “DHS should (1) specify time frames for working with VWP countries on the requirement to implement information-sharing agreements and (2) take steps to improve its timeliness in reporting to Congress on whether VWP countries should continue in the program.”
FAIR has consistently pointed to the VWP as a national security threat and called for its termination. This GAO report underscores the security flaw and finds that it is exacerbated by cavalier implementation by DHS
What is President Clinton say in the State of the Union address in 1995 on immigration? It got a standing ovation. It is time to have this debate in a wide and deep context including the financial and social and legal consequences.
NumbersUSA: Chain Migration is the main reason that American workers have had to compete for wages and jobs with tens of millions of new immigrants who have been given lifetime work permits the last several decades.
40% IMMEDIATE REDUCTION IN ANNUAL IMMIGRATION
Sen. Cotton says his bill would reduce the number of lifetime work permits given to foreign citizens by around 40% the first year — and by around 50% in the tenth year after passage.
Ending Chain Migration is the primary way the bill would achieve that goal.
For several decades, immigrants no longer have been limited to bringing in a spouse and minor children. Chain Migration categories allow each immigrant (once a citizen) to petition for adult brothers and sisters, for adult sons and daughters, and for parents. Each of them can in turn do the same along with bringing their own spouses who can start whole new chains in their own families, and so forth in a never-ending pattern.
Sen. Cotton would stop all of that immigration which adds millions of workers each decade without any regard to their skills or how they would affect Americans competing in the same occupations.
By limiting family immigration to a spouse and minor children — including overseas adoptions and marriages by U.S. citizens — Sen. Cotton says the bill would . . .
” . . . restore historical levels of immigration in order to give working Americans a fair shot at wealth creation.”
At around one million a year since 1990, overall annual legal immigration has been some THREE times higher than the historical average before then.
A RARE OPPORTUNITY
Sen. Cotton’s bill will be the first since 1996 to challenge the Senate to eliminate future Chain Migration.
It was in 1996 that we started NumbersUSA with our Number One legislative goal being to end Chain Migration, as recommended by the bi-partisan federal commission chaired by the Civil Rights icon Barbara Jordan.
Sen. Cotton has boldly indicated today that he will assume the leadership to advance that vision of an immigration policy that first serves the interests of our national community’s workers, especially its most vulnerable.
This year represents a rare opportunity. It is the first time in nearly a hundred years that there is a President in the White House who has declared his intention to reduce the overall numerical level of immigration.
THE PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED
Sen. Cotton is titling his bill the Reforming American Immigration for Strong Employment Act.
Its initials spell RAISE. It’s the RAISE bill. Sen. Cotton wants to give hard-pressed American workers a raise by allowing labor markets to begin to tighten.
Sen. Cotton described the problem his bill is attempting to address:
For over a quarter century, the United States has accepted an average of 1 million immigrants annually—the equivalent of adding the entire state of Montana each year.
When only 1 out of every 15 immigrants arrives in the United States on a skills-based visa, the majority of the remaining immigrants are either low-skill or unskilled.
This generation-long influx of low-skilled labor has been a major factor in the downward pressure on the wages of working Americans, with the wages of recent immigrants hardest hit.
Wages for Americans with only high school diplomas have declined by 2 percent since the late 1970s, and for those who didn’t finish high school, they have declined by nearly 20 percent. This collapse in wages threatens to create a near permanent underclass for whom the American Dream is always just out of reach.
THE ‘RAISE’ SOLUTION
Sen. Cotton describes the key elements of his bill like this:
Eliminate Outdated Diversity Visa Lottery: The Lottery is plagued with fraud, it advances no economic or humanitarian interest, and it does not even deliver the diversity of its namesake. The RAISE Act would eliminate the 50,000 visas arbitrarily allocated to this lottery.
Place Responsible Limit on Permanent Residency for Refugees: The RAISE Act would limit refugees offered permanent residency to 50,000 per year, in line with a 13-year average. (This is the same annual refugee cap in Pres. Trump’s executive order. It is also the cap recommended in the 1980 Refugee Act, which is current law but which Presidents have routinely exceeded.)
Prioritize Immediate Family Households. The RAISE Act would retain immigration preferences for the spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents.
Eliminated would be green card categories for foreign citizens who are:
Adult parents of U.S. citizens
Adult brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
Unmarried adult sons & daughters of U.S. citizens
Married adult sons & daughters of U.S. citizens
Unmarried adult sons & daughters of legal permanent residents
Create Temporary Visa for Parents in Need of Caretaking: For U.S. citizens who wish to bring elderly parents in need of care-taking to the United States, the RAISE Act creates a renewable temporary visa on the condition that the parents are not permitted to work, cannot access public benefits, and must be guaranteed support and health insurance by their sponsoring children.
The difference in this being a wonderful bill and it being an incredibly helpful law is likely to be the degree to which the 8 million members of NumbersUSA’s online grassroots army make it clear to their Members of Congress and to Pres. Trump that this is a TRUE PRIORITY.
The Guardian takes huge exception to what President Trump said. There is merit in the Guardian’s rebuke. What could be in question however, is the outcome of the estimated thousand domestic cases the FBI is or was investigating, and this does remain unclear. Yet, it could be too that President Trump and his team are conflating the definition of terror attacks as there are cases of murder, too many to list done at the hands of illegals across the homeland.
TIMELINE: September, 2014 – December, 2016
NUMBER OF ATTACKS: 78
It is not clear why these dates were chosen. A December 2016 cut-off excludes the Québec City mosque attack from the list. There were more than 78 terrorist attacks in that period – the ones selected by the White House are almost exclusively those linked – or rumoured to be linked – to Islamic State. The White House text is reproduced in bold and its errors have been kept.
MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA September, 2014
TARGET: Two police officers wounded in knife attack
ATTACKER: Abdul Numan Haider
Global media organisations including the Guardian, BBC, CNN and Fox News were among those who covered this story.
TIZI OUZOU, ALGERIA September, 2014
TARGET: One French citizen beheaded
ATTACKER: Jund al-Khilafah in Algeria
OTTAWA, CANADA October, 2014
TARGET: One soldier killed at war memorial; two wounded in shootings at Parliament building
ATTACKER: Michael Zehaf-Bibeau
People place flowers in remembrance of Cpl Nathan Cirillo after he was killed by a gunman in Ottawa. Photograph: Andrew Burton/Getty Images
NEW YORK CITY, NY, USA October, 2014
TARGET: Two police officers wounded in knife attack
ATTACKER: US person
This is vague but seems to refer to Zale Thompson, also known as Zaim Farouq Abdul-Malik, described as a “self-radicalised” Muslim convert. He was killed by police.
RIYADH, SAUDI ARABIA November, 2014
TARGET: One Danish citizen wounded in shooting
ATTACKERS: Three Saudi Arabia-based ISIL members
TRIPOLI, LIBYA January, 2015
TARGET: Ten killed, including one US citizen, and five wounded in bombing and shooting at a hotel frequented by westerners
ATTACKERS: As many as five ISIL-Libya members
The Corinthia hotel comes under attack in Tripoli. Photograph: AP
RIYADH, SAUDI ARABIA January, 2015
TARGET: Two US citizens wounded in shooting
ATTACKER: Saudi Arabia-based ISIL supporter
It’s not clear to which incident this refers. It could be two employees of Vinnell Arabia who were attacked by a former colleague in Al Ahsa, not Riyadh, that month; or the killing in October 2014 of another US VA employee, which did take place in Riyadh.
NICE, FRANCE February, 2015
TARGET: Two French soldiers wounded in knife attack outside a Jewish community center
ATTACKER: Moussa Coulibaly
COPENHAGEN, DENMARK February, 2015
TARGET: One civilian killed in shooting at a free-speech rally and one security guard killed outside the city’s main synagogue
ATTACKER: Omar Abdel Hamid el-Hussein
Flowers are placed at the site of the shooting in Copenhagen. Photograph: Scanpix Denmark/Reuters
TUNIS, TUNISIA March, 2015
TARGET: 21 tourists killed, including 16 westerners, and 55 wounded in shooting at the Bardo Museum
ATTACKERS: Two ISIL-aligned extremists
In fact 22 people were killed, not including two perpetrators. Mention of “16 westerners” presumably excludes the Tunisian, Japanese and Colombian victims. Isis did claim responsibility but the Tunisian government blamed an al-Qaida splinter group. The story was carried live by many news outlets.
KARACHI, PAKISTAN April, 2015
TARGET: One US citizen wounded in knife attack
ATTACKERS: Pakistan-based ISIL supporters
PARIS, FRANCE April, 2015
TARGET: Catholic churches targeted; one civilian killed in shooting, possibly during an attempted carjacking
ATTACKER: Sid Ahmed Ghlam
Sid Ahmed Ghlam is charged with the attack and is awaiting trial.
ZVORNIK, BOSNIA April, 2015
TARGET: One police officer killed and two wounded in shooting
ATTACKER: Nerdin Ibric
It is true there are few English-language reports on this attack. Here is one.
Officers secure an area near to a police station following a shooting in Zvornik. Photograph: Amel Emric/AP
GARLAND, TX, USA May, 2015
TARGET: One security guard wounded in shooting at the Prophet Muhammad cartoon event
ATTACKERS: Two US persons
The “two US persons” were Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi, both killed in the attack.
BOSTON, MA, USA June, 2015
TARGET: No casualties; one police officer attacked with knife
ATTACKER: US person
Very vague but could refer to Usaama Rahim, who was shot dead by police after officers said he “threatened” (not “attacked”) them with a knife. He was under counter-terrorism surveillance.
EL GORA (AL JURAH), EGYPT June, 2015
TARGET: No casualties; camp used by Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) troops attacked in shooting and bombing attack
ATTACKERS: Unknown number of ISIL-Sinai members
Few reports on this in mainstream press, possibly explained by the “no casualties”.
LUXOR, EGYPT June, 2015
TARGET: One police officer killed by suicide bomb near the Temple of Karnak
ATTACKER: Unidentified
This could be wrong. A police officer sustained minor injuries in an attempted suicide bombing at Karnak in which two would-be assailants were killed and one injured. Possibly muddled with an earlier attack near Giza pyramids in which two police officers were killed.
SOUSSE, TUNISIA June, 2015
TARGET: 38 killed and 39 wounded in shooting at a beach frequented by westerners
ATTACKERS: Seifeddine Rezgui and another unidentified attacker
The Sousse massacre was extensively covered. Inquests into the deaths of British victims are ongoing.
CAIRO, EGYPT July, 2015
TARGET: One Croatian national kidnapped; beheaded on August 12 at an unknown location
ATTACKER: Unidentified ISIL-Sinai operative
The kidnapping and beheading of Tomislav Salopek received worldwide attention.
PARIS, FRANCE August, 2015
TARGET: Two civilians and one US soldier wounded with firearms and knife on a passenger train
ATTACKER: Ayoub el-Khazzani
Passengers who helped subdue the attacker were awarded the French legion of honour. Barack Obama personally called the three Americans involved to thank them.
EL GORA, EGYPT September, 2015
TARGET: Four US and two MFO troops wounded in IED attack
ATTACKER: Unidentified
MERCED, CA, US November, 2015
TARGET: Four wounded in knife attack on a college campus ATTAKER: US person
Faisal Mohammad, whom the FBI called an Isis-inspired “lone wolf”, was shot dead. But why highlight this and the Ohio State University attack and not, say, these other campus attacks?
PARIS, FRANCE November, 2015
TARGET: At least 129 killed and approximately 400 wounded in series of shootings and IED attacks
ATTAKERS: Brahim Abdelslam, Saleh Abdeslam, Ismail Mostefai, Bilal Hadfi, Samy Amimour, Chakib Ahrouh, Foued Mohamed Aggad, and Abdelhamid Abaaoud
The White House surely cannot include the Paris attacks in the “most” on this list that it thinks were under-reported. It omits the names of three of the 11 men involved in the attack, and spells Chakib Akrouh’s name wrong. The death toll for the attacks stands at 130.
CAIRO, EGYPT January, 2016
TARGET: Two wounded in drive-by shooting outside a hotel frequented by tourists
ATTAKERS: Unidentified ISIL operatives
Another unclear one. There was a drive-by shooting outside a Cairo hotel that month, though no injuries were reported. A police officer and a soldier were shot dead in a separate incident in the following days.
PARIS, FRANCE January, 2016
TARGET: No casualties; attacker killed after attempted knife attack on Paris police station
ATTAKER: Tarek Belgacem
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA January, 2016
TARGET: One police officer wounded in shooting
ATTAKER: US person
The case of Jesse Hartnett, the police labor union said after the White House claim, was covered adequately and fairly.
HURGHADA, EGYPT January, 2016
TARGET: One German and one Danish national wounded in knife attack at a tourist resort
ATTAKER: Unidentified
As with the Cairo incident cited above, this is not clear. Three people – two Austrians and a Swede – were stabbed at a Hurghada resort. One perpetrator was shot dead.
MARSEILLES, FRANCE January, 2016
TARGET: One Jewish teacher wounded in machete attack
ATTAKER: 15 year-old Ethnic Kurd from Turkey
The coffins of 12 German tourists arrive back at Berlin’s Tegel airport. Photograph: Axel Schmidt/AP
JAKARTA, INDONESIA January, 2016
TARGET: Four civilians killed and more than 20 wounded in coordinated bombing and firearms attacks near a police station and a Starbucks
ATTAKERS: Dian Joni Kurnaiadi, Muhammad Ali, Arif Sunakim, and Ahmad Muhazan bin Saron
BRUSSELS, BELGIUM March, 2016
TARGET: At least 31 killed and 270 wounded in coordinated bombings at Zaventem Airport and on a subway train
ATTAKERS: Khalid el-Bakraoui, Ibrahim el-Bakraoui, Najim Laachraoui, Mohammed Abrini, and Osama Krayem
KABUL, AFGHANISTAN June, 2016
TARGET: 14 killed in suicide attack on a bus carrying Canadian Embassy guards
ATTAKER: ISIL-Khorasan operative
Although mostly covered in Canada, the attack was reported globally. The victims were Nepalese.
ISTANBUL, TURKEY June, 2016
TARGET: 45 killed and approximately 240 wounded at Ataturk International Airport
ATTACKERS: Rakhim Bulgarov, Vadim Osmanov, and an unidentified ISIL operative
Another deadly attack in Turkey dominated news headlines. The two identified perpetrators are reported to be Russian.
DHAKA, BANGLADESH July, 2016
TARGET: 22 killed, including one American and 50 wounded after hours-long siege using machetes and firearms at holy Artisan Bakery
ATTACKERS: Nibras Islam, Rohan Imtiaz, Meer Saameh Mubasheer, Khairul Islam Paye, and Shafiqul Islam Uzzal
Officers secure the area around a police building in Charleroi. Photograph: Virginie Lefour/AFP/Getty Images
QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA August, 2016
TARGET: Two killed and one wounded in knife attack at a hostel frequented by Westerners
ATTACKER: Smail Ayad
Smail Ayad has been charged but not brought to trial; proceedings have been suspended and referred to the mental health court. Police and the mother of one of the victims have said extremism was not a factor.
COPENHAGEN, DENMAKR September, 2016
TARGET: Two police officers and a civilian wounded in shooting
ATTACKER: Mesa Hodzic
PARIS, FRANCE September, 2016
TARGET: One police officer wounded in raid after VBIED failed to detonate at Notre Dame Cathedral
ATTACKERS: Sarah Hervouet, Ines Madani, and Amel Sakaou
NEW YORK, NY; SEASIDE PARK AND ELIZABETH, NJ, US September, 2016
TARGET: 31 wounded in bombing in New York City; several explosive devices found in New York and New Jersey; one exploded without casualty at race in New Jersey; one police officer wounded in shootout
ATTACKER: Ahmad Khan Rahami
HAMBURG, GERMANY October, 2016
TARGET: One killed in knife attack
ATTACKER: Unknown
The story that a 16-year-old boy had been killed attracted global attention. Isis claimed responsibility but police say a motive has not been confirmed.
MANILA, PHILIPPINES November, 2016
TARGET: No casualties; failed IED attempt near US Embassy
ATTACKERS: Philippine nationals aligned with the Maute group
Police said there were no explosives in the package.
COLUMBUS, OH, US November, 2016
TARGET: 14 wounded by individuals who drove a vehicle into a group of pedestrians and attacked them with a knife
ATTACKER: US person
So, that is the process, allegedly done with extreme scrutiny…ahem. But what about those that come into the United States by other nefarious methods such as sneaking across our borders? They get a pass?
It is the exact time in our country to have this debate and the arguments must include the safety and financial consequences, both of which never are part of the wider discussion.
California is working to become a sanctuary state, putting all other CONUS states at extreme risk as people can travel freely. (CONUS = Continental United States).
San Francisco Police Department officials announced Wednesday that they have suspended participation with the FBI’s controversial Joint Terrorism Task Force.
According to San Francisco Police Commission protocol, all contracts require approval by the Board of Supervisors after 10 years.
The JTTF Memoranda of Understanding was signed in 2007, so that time has come, according to department officials.
The department will update its guideline for First Amendment activities and will “seek clarification” from the Police Commission as to this guideline’s application to JTTF investigations.
Once that new guideline is adopted, the department may consider renegotiating the JTTF memoranda with the FBI with guidance from the police commission.
Last month, the Asian Law Caucus, the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ San Francisco Bay Area office and the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California sent a letter to San Francisco Police commissioners urging them to cease the department’s participation in the JTTF.
In the Jan. 5 letter, the groups speculate that, following President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the JTTF would likely increase surveillance of Muslim communities like the New York City police did after Sept. 11, 2001.
According to the FBI, 71 JTTF field offices have been established since 2001. The first was established in New York City in 1980.
“The SFPD is committed to public safety and will continue to work diligently to keep San Francisco safe for everyone,” San Francisco police Sgt. Michael Andraychak said in a statement.
(That last statement gets a BIG REALLY DUDE?)
*** Back in 2008:
Refugee Program Halted As DNA Tests Show Fraud
Thousands in Africa Lied about Families To Gain U.S. Entry
The State Department has suspended a humanitarian program to reunite thousands of African refugees with relatives in the U.S. after unprecedented DNA testing by the government revealed widespread fraud.
The freeze affects refugees in Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda, Guinea and Ghana, many of whom have been waiting years to emigrate. More here from the WSJ. Lying and making up ghost people to get other permits? Hah….
*** Back in 2004, as a result of the 9/11 Commission Report on the issue of immigration, many robust recommendations were made of which all members of Congress at the time signed off on. They need to be reminded of that, as does the California legislature at a minimum. But going deeper in factual history, others need to be reminded of the following: (In part from Migration Policy dot org.)
Kerry Outlines Ideas on Immigration Reform
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry on June 30 announced his platform on immigration reform. In a speech to the National Council of La Raza’s national conference, Kerry said that within 100 days of taking office, he would propose a four-part plan that would give “good people who are undocumented but living here, working here, paying taxes, [and] staying out of trouble . . . a path to equal citizenship.” In addition, he said that immigrants would be required to take civics and English classes. Kerry also promised to sign two bills currently pending in Congress: the AgJobs agricultural worker program, and the DREAM Act, which would allow young, out-of-status immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates while attending college. Both bills create a path for immigrants to eventually receive legal resident status.
In an interview with the Spanish-language network Telemundo on June 29, Kerry took stances on other immigration-related issues. He stated that granting driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants violated the spirit of the law, and that immigration authorities had the right to perform raids to capture unauthorized immigrants who had broken other laws. Some analysts believe that Kerry’s comments regarding driver’s licenses could hurt his standing with Latino voters in the election. Nevertheless, the Washington Post reported on July 22 that Kerry currently has a 2 to 1 advantage over his opponent, President George W. Bush, among registered Latino voters.
Hmong Refugees Resettled to the United States
Around 15,000 Hmong refugees are expected to arrive in the United States this year. The first members of the group have already reached the U.S., and up to 3,000 more are expected by the end of August, with the remainder arriving by the end of 2004. The new arrivals fled their native country because of persecution they suffered due to their alliance with the U.S. during the Vietnam War. One third of the refugees will be resettled to Minnesota, a third will be sent to California, and the rest will be distributed among more than a dozen other states. Many of the refugees have been living illegally in a makeshift camp in Thailand, having passed up the opportunity for resettlement to the United States in the 1980s and 1990s as they clung to the hope of returning to Laos. Because the Thai military plans to close the camp by the end of 2004, most residents plan to accept the resettlement opportunity offered by the U.S. Department of State.
The refugees will receive initial assistance from U.S. resettlement agencies, which will help meet basic needs such as housing, school, language, employment, and health services. To fund these services, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on June 24 announced an additional $3.3 million allocation for Hmong resettlement costs. After one year of living in the U.S., refugees can apply to adjust their status to permanent residency and acquire a “green card.” They eventually become eligible for citizenship. In addition, unlike other immigrants, refugees are not barred from receiving welfare benefits in their first seven years of residence in the United States. The next group of Hmong refugees, approximately 2,000 individuals, is expected to arrive by the end of August.
U.S and Mexico Sign Pact on Social Security
The United States and Mexico on June 29 signed a pact enabling Mexican workers in the U.S. and American workers in Mexico to transfer social security benefits across national borders. The pact is similar to international Social Security agreements the U.S. has with Britain and Canada, and allows workers to contribute to only one benefits system at a time. According to estimates by U.S. Social Security officials, only 7,500 U.S. citizens working in Mexico will qualify for retirement benefits, as compared to 41,000 Mexican employees likely to qualify for Social Security in the United States. Even so, the plan will have an initially limited effect because it excludes, unless or until they are legalized, an estimated six to eight million undocumented Mexican workers currently employed in the United States. While the pact will not become law without legislative approval, the United States Congress and the Mexican Senate are expected to pass the measure; U.S. lawmakers have routinely approved similar agreements with 20 other nations. (For more information on International Agreements of the Social Security Administration, see this January 2004 Migration Policy Institute Immigration Fact Sheet)
State Department Halts Mail Renewal of Visas
The Department of State on July 16 stopped accepting applications for mail renewals of visas. Under the new policy, announced on June 23, foreigners who work in the United States must return to U.S. embassies abroad to be interviewed and fingerprinted for visa renewal. The policy, which does not apply to foreign diplomats or employees of international organizations, is part of the U.S. effort to improve border controls after the September 11, 2001 attacks. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher stated that the switch was made to overseas processing because of the better capacity of U.S. embassies abroad to interview and fingerprint visa applicants. More than 50,000 people from more than 60 countries were processed in 2003.
A faithful reader of this website, reached out to me and asked for an update on a previous post. Hat tip for this great reminder. Grrr….when looking at the dollars, it has hard not to jump and down in frustration.
The cost at the State level fluctuates based on deportations and beds available. The Federal government out of the Justice Department helps pay respective states for the costs of alien incarceration. It must be understood that aliens come from hundreds of countries and since there are some countries that allegedly refuse to take back their citizens by deportation, at least the Justice Department should work all the diplomatic channels that the home countries of the criminals should pay up for all expenses and associated future costs.
All criminal aliens include both unauthorized aliens, most of whom are potentially removable, and legal aliens10 who may or may not be removable depending on specific crimes committed. This population contains the set of criminal aliens who are removable on the basis of specific crimes committed.
Criminal aliens who have been convicted of removable criminal offenses are subject to removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) even if they are otherwise legally present.11 For example, a legal permanent resident (LPR) convicted of cocaine possession is subject to removal,12 but an LPR convicted of public intoxication is not. This population also includes aggravated felons.
Criminal aliens who have been convicted of aggravated felonies13 are ineligible for most forms of relief from removal14 and are ineligible to be readmitted to the United States.15
As noted above, all three of these subpopulations—criminal aliens, removable criminal aliens, and aggravated felons—comprise an unknown mix of legally present noncitizens and unauthorized aliens.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, administers SCAAP, in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). SCAAP provides federal payments to states and localities that incurred correctional officer salary costs for incarcerating undocumented criminal aliens who have at least one felony or two misdemeanor convictions for violations of state or local law, and who are incarcerated for at least 4 consecutive days during the reporting period.
SCAAP Legislative Authority
SCAAP is governed by Section 241(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1231(i), as amended, and Title II, Subtitle C, Section 20301, Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103-322. In general terms, if a chief executive officer of a state or a political subdivision exercises authority over the incarceration of undocumented criminal aliens and submits a written request to the U.S. Attorney General, the Attorney General may provide compensation to that jurisdiction for those incarceration costs. SCAAP is subject to additional terms and conditions of yearly congressional appropriations.
ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH 8 U.S.C. § 1373
****
Just a view from the State of Texas for aliens that are not being detained or incarcerated as noted in a report from 2013:
In part from FAIRUS.org: In 2013, illegal immigration cost Texas taxpayers about $12.1 billion annually. That amounts to more than $1,197 for every Texas household headed by a native-born or naturalized U.S. citizen. The taxes paid by illegal aliens — estimated at $1.27 billion per year — do not come close to paying for those outlays, but we include an estimate of revenue from sales taxes, property taxes, alcohol taxes, and cigarette taxes.
Examining Texas’s fiscal outlays from the perspective of the current debate over adopting an amnesty for illegal aliens, we find that the fiscal burden to taxpayers would not be significantly lessened even if an amnesty like that proposed in the Senate’s S.744 were enacted. In fact, it becomes clear that the only way to significantly reduce the fiscal burden is to reduce the size of the population that illegally entered the country. State and local policymakers have options available to accomplish that objective. In Arizona, efforts to discourage the arrival of additional illegal residents and to hold employers accountable for knowingly hiring illegal workers have been effective in reducing the illegal alien population and, thereby, the fiscal costs associated with that population.
