Immigration News

[Soldier4Christ]

Minutemen dispute Reuters report of attack
News agency implied volunteers provoked physical confrontation with protesters

Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist and his co-author Jerome Corsi dispute a Reuters report of their book-tour kickoff at Ground Zero in New York City that implied the citizen border-watch group provoked a physical confrontation with protesters.

The second paragraph of a Reuters story by Michelle Nichols said Minuteman members "pushed and shoved members of an immigrant rights group that showed up at the event."

In fact, Gilchrist told WND, it was the radical activist group that launched an assault while he was answering questions from the media. The group of about 125 broke through a police barrier across the street and pushed and shoved members of Gilchrist's entourage, including his wife, before police intervened

A handful of New York City police officers, trying to protect Gilchrist and his colleagues, quickly whisked them away in cabs.

Gilchrist and Corsi are authors of "Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America's Border", described as a first-hand account of how the nation's southern border has disintegrated into a "Wild West of human trafficking, drug smuggling and violent gangs."

Corsi called the Reuters report a "distortion," insisting that if there was any pushing and shoving by Minuteman members, it was done in an attempt to avoid getting knocked down by the protesters flooding in from across the street.

"There was a little bit of screaming," Corsi said by telephone on his way to from New York City to Washington. "Once we were out of the area everything diffused right away."

The Reuters reporter could not be reached for comment.

Gilchrist, also on his way to the nation's capital, said that prior to the event he came across an e-mail from a coalition of groups that planned to protest his appearance Wednesday.

One of the e-mail's authors is Teresa Gutierrez of the New York City-based May 1st Coalition, who also is co-director of the radical anti-war group A.N.S.W.E.R. and was a candidate for president in 2004 representing the socialist Workers World Party.

Messages on the protesters' signs Wednesday included, "Racist MinuteKlan out of NYC."

Gilchrist said the attack Wednesday literally took the microphone out of his hands, stifling his First Amendment free-speech rights.

"I'm getting so tired of it," he said. "I'm ready to go to Congress to insist they pass legislation to stop the intimidation of the First Amendment."

While protesters have a right to assemble, he argued, they don't have a right to "call out their hostile forces to attack Minutemen."

"I thought I couldn't be attacked without criminal liability," he said. "I'm going to see my congressman. If there's no legislation [under which] Gutierrez can be prosecuted, I will spearhead legislation myself."

In addition to his own representative, Republican Rep. John Campbell of California, Gilchrist said he plans to make appointments to see Rep. Tom Tancredo, Re-Colo., J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz., and other like-minded lawmakers to "stop this chaos and abuse of our First Amendment."

[Soldier4Christ]

Leader of notorious MS-13 gang arrested

A top leader of the notorious MS-13 street gang was arrested this morning in Richmond by a task force of federal and local law enforcement agents seeking to stop the Los Angeles-based gang from establishing itself in the Bay Area, authorities said.

Jose Santos Bonilla, 33, was arrested during a 6 a.m. raid on a southeast Richmond home. Since Bonilla came to the East Bay from San Francisco six months ago, MS-13 members have been linked to three homicides and several other shootings as it sought to carve out territory and intimidate other gangs, authorities said this morning.

Police recovered a loaded shotgun and a handgun at the scene, but searches at two other locations failed to net any additional gang members. An officer shot a dog at Bonilla's house when it broke free from the woman who answered the door and it charged police.

Bonilla joked and laughed with heavily armed officers while being led in handcuffs to a police van. The letters "MS" were tattooed on the back of his shaved skull.

"The MS-13 has established itself as a very violent gang (and) they're starting to get a foothold in the Bay Area," said Richmond Police Lt. Mark Gagan. "Several of the other individuals we targeted today are implicated in murders and assaults with deadly weapons."

The violence stems from a street war between MS-13 and a rival gang called RST (Richmond Sureno Trece), authorities said. The homicides made police realize MS-13 was branching into the area.

Police declined to release further information on the homicides.

"We were surprised to see we had a number of MS-13 gang members living in Richmond," Gagan said. "This was a safe place to live while they committed their crimes in the Bay Area."

The house in the 1500 block of Monterey Street is in a quiet area of one- and two-story single-family homes with little drug activity. Many neighbors were shocked when a convoy of police vehicles arrived and about 30 heavily armed men and women surrounded the house.

"They're in and out all the time. They have the dogs out front - pit bulls -- guarding the place," said neighborhood resident Oscar Bradley, 26, as he watched police go in and out of the house. "Everybody knows everyone here, but they never talked to anyone."

Bonilla, who police referred to as a "shot caller" because of his alleged high status, has a record of previous arrests on assault with a deadly weapon and firearms charges. He was arrested this morning for immigration violations and could face additional criminal charges stemming from his alleged gang activities.

"When you dismantle a gang, you have to start at the upper echelons," Gagan said.

The raid was the culmination of a six-month operation and included members of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Richmond Police Department.

MS-13, also known as Mara Salvatrucha, is a predominantly Salvadoran gang that has long been active in Central America and Los Angeles, authorities said. In recent years it has spread to several other major U.S. cities.

Many gang members are former members of the Salvadoran military and have gained a reputation for extreme violence, including machete attacks on its enemies. Several local gangs were intimidated by MS-13 as it muscled its way into the Richmond area, police said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Immigrant rights groups split on Senate bill
‘Better no law than a bad law,’ says one advocate

Even as Congress is stalled over legislation dealing with the growing number of illegal immigrants, a split has emerged among pro-immigrant rights groups over whether to back the Senate measure, seen as the more lenient of the two bills being considered by lawmakers.

A number of the larger and more well-known organizations, such as the National Immigration Forum and the National Council of La Raza, back the Senate bill, albeit reluctantly. But a growing number of other liberal immigrant rights advocates, dismayed at what they say are onerous provisions of the Senate measure, are now saying they would prefer that Congress not enact an immigration law this year.

The split among pro-immigrant rights groups has the potential of complicating efforts by lawmakers to cobble together compromise legislation between the House and Senate versions, which some advocates say suits them just fine.

"Neither the House nor the Senate bill in current form can be effectively, fairly and wisely implemented," said Rick Swartz, a Washington lawyer who has often coordinated legislative efforts for pro-immigration groups. "Therefore, better no law than a bad law."

The Senate measure, sponsored by Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), contains a guest-worker program and provides a means for many illegal immigrants to gain citizenship. It is backed by President Bush but vilified by supporters of the House bill, which emphasizes tough enforcement of immigration laws.

But a number of liberal, pro-immigrant rights advocates said the Senate bill contains "dangerous" loopholes that could criminalize individuals, including legal immigrants, for helping family members or friends who are in the country illegally.

"So far, both bills do not meet the requirements we think are needed for successful reform," said Judith Golub, executive director of the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, a San Francisco-based organization that aims to advance immigrant rights. "While the Senate bill has some good provisions, it also has some that are fatally flawed."

John J. Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, previously said he was deeply disappointed with the Senate bill: "This is not the time to start popping champagne corks."

Immigrant rights groups supporting the Senate measure acknowledged that it is flawed. But they said it is headed in the right direction and support it to head off enactment of the House bill.

‘Hearts and minds’
"We have concerns, but this is a battle for the hearts and minds of the people," said Angela Kelley, deputy director at the National Immigration Forum. "First and foremost, the battle has to be won to put to bed the notion of enforcement first and enforcement alone. I want to make the Senate bill better, but I want to win the first battle before we begin the second."

Supporters such as the Immigration Forum and La Raza calculated that if they can beat back the House bill, they will be able to eliminate or soften provisions in the Senate bill they find objectionable. Michele Waslin, director of immigration policy research for La Raza, said her organization has "deep concerns with many of its provisions. We supported its passage, because it's important to advance the debate. But we understand that vast improvements will need to be made if it gets into law."

Immigrant rights advocates who oppose the Senate bill said they reached their conclusions after close scrutiny of the measure. A report from the Immigrant Legal Resource Center said that teachers could be prosecuted if they helped undocumented students, although this is an interpretation disputed by others.

Some fear that U.S. citizens or legal immigrants who have sent money to family members abroad that was used in an attempt to enter the United States illegally could find themselves facing criminal charges. Caroline Fredrickson, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington legislative office, said neither bill offered adequate safeguards for U.S. citizens and legal immigrants: "We have always thought both bills were bad. We think it is better to start from scratch."

Their opposition stems from the fact that both the Senate and the House reforms would make more people vulnerable to jail sentences for crimes that would normally be considered misdemeanors. Both expand the number of acts considered "aggravated felonies" for immigration purposes. This means that immigrants who have lived legally in the United States for decades could find themselves detained and deported for relatively minor crimes.

"The increasing criminalization of immigration law violations under either the Senate or the House bills raises many concerns from both a legal and a social policy perspective," said Stephen Yale-Loehr, who teaches immigration law at Cornell Law School.

Some of the consequences of the Senate bill that Yale-Loehr pointed to include the fact that employers could face time in jail for omitting information from an employee's immigration form.

‘Eliminating civil liberties’
It would also limit, for the first time, the right of some U.S. citizens, who have committed certain sex offenses, such as statutory rape, to petition to obtain green cards for spouses or children. The bill also calls for long-unenforced law that says green-card holders could face detention if they did not fill a change-of-address card within 10 days of moving.

"People are looking at how the legislation impacts on the 12 million undocumented people -- they should look at how this will affect the other 12 million legal residents," Golub said. "This not about enforcement, it is about eliminating due process, eliminating civil liberties."

Those who support tighter immigration controls said the people who are criticizing the bills want complete amnesty for illegal immigrants. Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that supports more controls, said: "The Senate comes up with the most radical, anti-enforcement bill ever considered, and it is still not enough. These complaints are from people who want the Senate bill to be a pure amnesty, and any effort of combining that with tougher measures is odious to them."

[Soldier4Christ]

Poll says 70% of Californians want immigration reform

A majority of California voters considers illegal immigration a very serious issue, and 70 percent want Congress to pass an immigration overhaul bill this year, according to a Field Poll released today.

The statewide survey of 494 registered voters reached findings very similar to those in a national poll released Tuesday by the Tarrance Group and Lake Research Partners. That poll found that 71 percent of likely U.S. voters favor a comprehensive plan similar to a bill passed by the Senate in May.

"This is a very hot issue, a very emotional issue," said Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo. "What has emerged is a consensus that this should be dealt with in a comprehensive way. Congress should attempt to not only address border security but guest workers and a path to citizenship. ... I was expecting more division, especially among Republicans and conservatives."

Today's poll also found that 70 percent of California voters want Congress to strengthen border security and provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants currently in the country.

And it revealed that 80 percent of California voters would like to allow the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants to stay in the country and apply for citizenship if they have a job and have learned English and paid back taxes.

By contrast, just 34 percent of those polled want Congress to require all illegal immigrants to leave the country and reapply for admission and legal work status, a tactic that is part of a new plan touted by two conservative Republicans, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Indian Rep. Mike Pence.

"In California, there are so many (illegal immigrants) here, it just doesn't arouse the same kind of fear and apprehension," said DiCamillo. "Most people don't feel they're a threat. Californians feel they're generally good people and deserve an opportunity to stay. That's a much more compassionate view than you see in other parts of the country."

Illegal immigration has as much urgency for Californians now as it did in 1994, when Gov. Pete Wilson rode an anti-immigration platform to re-election, said Jack Citrin, associate director of the Institute for Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley and an authority on immigration and politics.

But economic insecurity is less acute today, and Californians have even more familiarity with the issue, he said.

"California has more immigrants, and we've got border problems which North Dakota doesn't have," said Citrin. "But I do think people who have personal knowledge and contact, personal interaction, that tends to breed a more tolerant and positive attitude."

President Bush fared poorly in the poll, receiving bad marks from both conservatives and liberals on his handling of illegal immigration. Citrin said Bush may be getting slammed by immigration restrictionists for his more liberal immigration reform proposal and at the same time tarred by those who support his comprehensive approach because he hasn't managed to get it enacted.

"Among Republicans, maybe Bush is too soft," he said. "Among Democrats, they'll never say Bush did anything good."

The poll, a random sample of registered voters, was conducted by telephone in English and Spanish July 10-23 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

[Soldier4Christ]

Canyon commissioners want signs in English
Signs, documents, reports printed by county will be translated only if required by state, federal law

Canyon County commissioners have adopted a policy requiring that information, signs, documents, reports, pamphlets and booklets printed by the county be in English only, except where translations are required by state or federal law.

Commissioners said the new policy will have little impact, but at least one one farmworker advocate disagrees.

Commissioner Robert Vasquez, a longtime opponent of illegal immigration, crafted an English-only resolution after a county printing office employee asked how to handle requests for bilingual signs and forms. In the past, printing jobs were handled on a case-by-case basis with few requests for other languages. Vasquez and Commissioner David Ferdinand approved the resolution Tuesday. Chairman Matt Beebe was absent during the vote.

Commissioners said they wanted to protect the county from liability issues that might arise from inaccurate translations. They also were concerned about the cost of translating and printing large files, such as land-use applications.

"It isn't ethnicity. It isn't discrimination. It's prudent," Vasquez said. "We're not linguists; we're not certified interpreters."

But farmworker and advocate Yliana Yado Gonzales called the policy racist and said it sends the message that Canyon County doesn't want immigrants.

"I think it will hurt a lot of people," Yado Gonzales said. "It's very difficult for them to communicate."

Many immigrants are learning English and working toward their U.S. citizenship, but new language skills don't appear overnight, she said.

"In a good way, more people are determined to get education and become a citizen because of the challenges they're getting every day," she said.

The new policy won't change any existing county signs or documents, Vasquez said. For example, he said, the English and Spanish no-smoking signs in the hallways won't come down, and bilingual court documents required by state and federal law will still be used.

"This doesn't change anything," Ferdinand said.

[Soldier4Christ]

GOP to conduct 21 more hearings
House leaders say they hope to have the legislation finished this year


WASHINGTON — As Congress prepared for a summer break with no resolution on immigration legislation, House Republican leaders said Thursday that they will conduct 21 more hearings on the contentious issue in Texas and a dozen other states through Sept. 1.

The GOP leaders, accused by critics of using the hearings to delay action on the bills, said they still hope to have immigration legislation finished this year.

But they did not commit to having it done before the November congressional elections.

"I'm not going to speculate on when we're going to do it or how we're going to do it," said House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. "What I think we need to do is listen."

The hearings are considered part of a House Republican effort to build political support for the chamber's immigration bill, which calls for a crackdown on illegal immigration without establishing the guest worker program and citizenship opportunities proposed by the Senate.

The House Republicans held similar hearings during the July 4 break.

Republican Senate leader Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who supports his chamber's bill, said he doubts the next round of House hearings will affect what Congress does.

"I think that we all pretty well know what the bills say," he said.

Democrats responded that they will attend the hearings, by eight House committees, to point out the Republicans' failure to accomplish much on the issue despite controlling the White House and Congress.

"Where have they been in protecting our borders?" asked House Democratic leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Senate Democratic leader Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said House Republicans should use their hearings to further scrutinize provisions of the House bill.

This week Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, and Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., floated a potential compromise on immigration that called for a guest worker program, but only after the president had certified that border control measures have been carried out for a two-year period.

Hastert indicated that such a plan had promise.

"I'm not endorsing any one plan, but that does start to look at a pathway, that type of a solution, possibly to get this job done," he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Suit Against LAPD Immigration Policy Alive

A Superior Court judge Thursday rejected a motion by the city of Los Angeles to dismiss a legal challenge to a Police Department policy prohibiting officers from asking witnesses and suspects about their immigration status.

The action keeps alive the lawsuit by Judicial Watch, which alleged that the LAPD's Special Order 40 violates federal and state law. "The LAPD has adopted what is in effect a 'don't ask, don't tell' policy with respect to immigration status," Judicial Watch alleged in its lawsuit.

[Soldier4Christ]

DNA tests speeding immigration
Genetics helping prove relations in applications for family members

LOS ANGELES — Bradley Waite wanted to bring his adult daughter to this country from Jamaica, but couldn’t prove they were related — she was born out of wedlock, so his name was not on her original birth certificate.

U.S. immigration officials did something that is unusual but becoming more common: They asked for DNA tests.

Waite grumbled over the $1,000 cost as he submitted to the testing several weeks ago. “We needed more proof, but I wish I didn’t have to take it, because it cost too much money,” said the 52-year-old construction worker in New York City.

Genetic tests are playing a larger role in the U.S. immigration process. In some cases, the government is asking for DNA proof of a family connection; in other cases, applicants are offering to undergo testing in hopes of speeding up a process that often takes years. Either way, the applicant must bear the cost.

Though U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services says it does not track how often DNA testing is used in immigration and citizenship cases, testing companies say that in recent years they have seen a sharp increase.

Generally, U.S. citizens can petition to bring spouses, parents, children or siblings here, while legal permanent residents can apply for spouses and unmarried children.

The DNA is used only for immigration purposes and is not put into a database, immigration services spokesman Chris Bentley said.

Seattle-based Genelex Corp. has gone from administering about 10 DNA tests per month in 2001 to about 40 per month over the past year, said Kristine Ashcraft, director of client relations.

“Many immigrants are realizing the test could cut down on the length of an application,” said Ashcraft.

That is what motivated Joseph Mataley, a Ghanaian who paid $1,500 for testing on himself and his four young daughters soon after he filed their U.S. residency applications.

It was a lot of money for Mataley, who works two jobs in Denver, but “it probably would have taken another year without doing the DNA so quickly,” he said. He was reunited with his daughters in April after a three-year application process.

[Soldier4Christ]

Current Immigration Boom Dwarfs Great Wave of 1910
   

The current boom in the United States immigrant population dwarfs the peak of the great immigration wave of 1910, according to a study by the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, DC.

The study indicates that there are 35.2 million immigrants -- legal and illegal -- living in the US making it the largest immigrant population in US history. Also, the current wave is two and a half times the 13.5 million immigrants in 1910.

Nearly half of the post-2000 immigration arrivals are believed to be illegal aliens, who've either entered the country illegally or are part of the almost 3 million visa overstays.

States with the largest increases in their immigrant populations are California, Texas, Georgia, New Jersey, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Washington, Virginia, Arizona, Tennessee, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, South Carolina and Mississippi.

The CIS study reveals that the poverty rate for immigrants is 57 percent higher than that of US citizens and that one-third lack health insurance, while almost one-third are on some type of government welfare program.

Lower educational attainment of many immigrants plus their low wages are the primary reasons given by the CIS for why so many immigrants use welfare programs and cannot pay for healthcare.

[Soldier4Christ]

Mexico holds out for U.S. immigration bill

Foreign minister: Fox's successor will continue to press for reform



MEXICO CITY – Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez said Thursday that Mexico remains hopeful that the U.S. will pass an immigration-reform measure this year and that, if not, the next Mexican administration will continue to press the case.

Mr. Derbez said at a news conference that the government is encouraged by the actions of U.S. senators and representatives who have the "will to reach an immigration pact that would provide concrete solutions before the end of the year."

Mr. Derbez stressed that efforts to bring about change in U.S. immigration policy would not cease when President Vicente Fox steps down Dec. 1.

"The next administration will have all the information, all the contacts at their fingertips, all the experience so that it will help ... with continuity," he said.

Foreign Ministry officials also discussed a reported 45 percent decline in arrests along the U.S.-Mexico border.

They attributed the drop not just to the presence of National Guard troops but also to the Mexican government's information campaign to discourage illegal immigration and to immigrants using border crossings with less surveillance.

Border Patrol Chief David Aguilar reported the decline in the number of people arrested from May 16 to July 23.

[Soldier4Christ]

Town bans hiring or housing illegal immigrants


TRENTON, N.J. -- The southern New Jersey community of Riverside has banned the hiring and housing of undocumented immigrants.

The Township Council unanimously approved the "Illegal Immigration Relief Act," making renting or leasing property to a person who cannot prove he or she is legally in the United States a violation punishable by fines starting at $1,000. Employing such individuals would incur a similar penalty, and could cost employers their local business license.

The five-member council affirmed the proposal Wednesday before a noisy crowd of several hundred people, whose numbers forced the group to relocate from town hall to a high school auditorium.

The ordinance mirrors one passed earlier this month in Hazleton, Pa. Local governments across the country _ from California to Idaho to Florida _ are considering similar actions. This is believed to be the first such ordinance passed in the Garden State.

A spokesman for New Jersey Attorney General Zulima Farber said Thursday the office's Division of Civil Rights will review Riverside's ordinance.

A town of 8,000 located in Burlington County located about halfway between Camden and Trenton, Riverside Township is unofficially home to between 1,500 and 3,500 illegal immigrants, mostly from Brazil, according to Mayor Charles Hilton.

Municipal leaders say the influx has crowded schools and housing, strained public services and made parking spaces scarce.

Newspaper reports of the meeting describe a jeering, flag-waving crowd that shouted down a Latino minister who raised concerns about racial profiling. A recess was called and several people were escorted out by eight police officers _ half the town's force.

It was not clear how soon the ordinance would take effect, who would enforce it, or the cost of training township employees in verifying federal immigration documents. Riverside Township's solicitor told The Philadelphia Inquirer for Thursday's editions that an amendment to clarify the language would be forthcoming. Neither Hilton nor top township officials returned several phone messages left Thursday.

Angela Mateo-Gonzalez, director of Servicios Latinos de Burlington County, said many longtime Riverside residents are legitimately frustrated about such public safety issues as overcrowded apartments catering to low-wage residents.

But such concerns should be addressed by enforcing existing codes applying to all building owners, she said. She called the mood at the council meeting disturbing.

"I think it's going to increase racial tension," Mateo-Gonzalez said. "A veteran told me he was at the grocery store and he got racial comments. He fought in two wars for this country. You don't want to go back to a time where if you have different color skin, people will look at you differently."

Martin Perez, president of the Latino Leadership Alliance, said Riverside's new law would be discussed at a board meeting this weekend, and a lawsuit to oppose it could be forthcoming.

He said his group met with leaders in Freehold last year to urge them away from ordinances over crowded housing that he said were discriminatory.

"It's a housing code problem, not an immigration problem," Perez said. "Often they realize the problem is more complicated than they thought at first."

[Soldier4Christ]

Republicans Tie Minimum Wage to Tax Cut

Congress would pass an increase in the minimum wage before leaving Washington for vacation, but only as part of a package rolling back taxes on the heirs of multimillionaires, a Senate leadership aide said Friday.

The GOP package would also contain a popular package of expiring tax breaks, including a research and development credit for businesses, and deductions for college tuition and state sales taxes.

The wage would increase from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour, phased in over the next two years, the aide said.

The maneuver is aimed at defusing the wage hike as a campaign issue for Democrats while using its popularity to spur enactment of the Republican Party's long-sought goal of permanently cutting taxes on millionaires' estates.

But it seemed certain to provoke outrage from Democrats clamoring for a measure devoted solely to raising the minimum wage.

"It's outrageous the Republican Congress can't simply help poor people without doing something for their wealthy contributors," said Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio.

House lawmakers were to discuss the package at an early afternoon session, while the Senate GOP aide professed confidence the bill could advance through the chamber next week.

The aide asked not to be identified publicly because of the ongoing closed strategy sessions on the bill.

"It's the one chance for Democrats who want to get a minimum wage increase," the aide said.

The move comes after almost 50 rank-and-file Republican lawmakers pressed House leaders - who strongly oppose the wage hike and have thus far prevented a vote - to schedule the measure for debate. Democrats have been hammering away on the wage hike issue and have public opinion behind them

"We weren't going to be denied," said Rep. Steve LaTourette, R-Ohio, a leader in the effort. "How can you defend $5.15 an hour in today's economy?"

It was a decade ago, during the hotly contested campaign year of 1996, that Congress voted to increase the minimum wage. A person working 40 hours per week at minimum wage makes $10,700, which is below the poverty line for workers with families.

In advancing the tax plan, GOP leaders excluded a measure popular with small businesses that would make it easier for small businesses and the self-employed to band together and buy health insurance plans for employees at a lower cost.

That idea was blasted as a "poison pill" by Democrats and labor unions. The small business health insurance bill exempts new "association health plans" from state regulations requiring insurers to cover treatments such as mental health and maternity care. And opponents fear they would offer inferior prescription drug benefits.

Democrats have made increasing the wage a pillar of their campaign platform and are pushing to raise the wage to $7.25 per hour over two years. In June, the Republican-controlled Senate refused to raise the minimum wage, rejecting a proposal from Democrats.

It's long been clear that there is wide support for the wage increase in the House, but Republican leaders have a general policy of bringing legislation to the floor only if it has support from a majority of Republicans. Perhaps one-fourth of House Republicans support the wage increase.

Inflation has eroded the minimum wage's buying power to the lowest level in about 50 years. Yet lawmakers have won cost-of-living wage increases totaling about $35,000 for themselves over that time.

Lawmakers fear being pounded with 30-second campaign ads over the August recess that would tie Congress' upcoming $3,300 pay increase with Republicans' refusal to raise the minimum wage.

[Soldier4Christ]

Immigrant camps in canyon to be removed

CARMEL VALLEY – Police say they are preparing to remove up to 300 immigrant men who live in shanty homes in McGonigle Canyon by the end of August.

“There are plans to close the camps in McGonigle in the next 30 days,” said San Diego Police Capt. Jim Collins with the Northeast Division.

It's not clear who owns the property, but police officials are talking with Pardee Homes and the city of San Diego, the probable owners of the lots, about clearing the camp, Collins said.

Once ownership is determined, police officers would post signs ordering the men, who are mostly from southern Mexico, to leave. Should they refuse, police would likely evict them.

It would not be the first time that immigrant camps in McGonigle are removed.

A wide undeveloped expanse of land between Carmel Valley and Rancho Peñasquitos, the canyon had about 750 people living there almost a dozen years ago, when the city of San Diego moved families out. Families were relocated from the massive shantytown into affordable housing.

Last year, Sharon Johnson, city of San Diego homeless services administrator, told the City Council that some 100 men were living in the canyon. Police estimate the number today could be as high as 300.

Before moving the men, police are working with agencies to try to find homes for them, Collins said, though he did not say which groups.

Johnson said the Section 8 rent subsidies and affordable housing resources that were available 12 years ago have been largely cut by the federal government.

“You keep looking for solutions,” Johnson said, adding that the city has been looking for a site to build farmworker housing for the men for more than a year. “But we haven't found it.”

Every summer, some of the shanty homes made from loose boards and plastic sheeting are torn down by private property owners, said Carlos Maldonado, a community worker with the California Rural Legal Assistance nonprofit that helps the migrant workers.

Collins agreed that the camps are periodically moved, but he said the camp dwellers often return to the same spots or nearby campsites.

Collins said police have continually monitored the camps because of the potentially unsafe living conditions.

The camps could present a fire danger because sometimes men cook over open flames, and officials are concerned about damaging environmentally sensitive areas, Collins said.

Recently, Minutemen and their supporters filmed the camps, which has angered immigrants and their supporters.

Rancho Peñasquitos resident Julie Adams said the threat of fires, crime and sanitary conditions are what's leading her to push police and city officials to close the camps.

She has called city officials and sent e-mails to other residents asking them to join her effort.

On Wednesday, police were called to the camp to calm down a heated exchange between Minutemen supporters, including Adams, and staff from a mobile health clinic treating men at the camp.

Police say there was “a shoving match,” but no reports were filed and no one was arrested.

Men at the camp said they were frightened by the visit.

The Minutemen group said the incident was exaggerated.

“It's not a good situation,” said Claudia Smith, with California Rural Legal Assistance, who is concerned about Minutemen tactics.

Several men at the camp, meanwhile, said they don't know where they will go if they are evicted.

“It's hard to get work,” said Saul Martinez, 25, a day laborer from Guerrero who lives in the canyon. “I can't afford a place.”

[Soldier4Christ]

Border agent gets 5 years for smuggling

SAN DIEGO - A Border Patrol agent who admitted smuggling more than 100 illegal immigrants into the U.S. from Mexico, some of them in his government truck, was sentenced Friday to five years in prison.

Prosecutors had asked for about three years, but U.S. District Judge John A. Houston decided a stiffer punishment was required for 29-year-old Oscar Antonio Ortiz.

"You violated the sacred trust of your comrades," the judge said. "As a link in the chain, they depended on you."

The corruption case is one in a spate involving Border Patrol agents at a time when the agency is on a hiring spree.

Ortiz himself came to the United States illegally as a boy, and not long before he applied for a job with the Border Patrol, he was arrested and accused of trying to drive two illegal immigrants across from Mexico.

But his superiors did not know any of that when he applied, because he produced a fake birth certificate.

Ortiz was arrested last August and pleaded guilty to charges that included conspiracy to bring in illegal aliens and making a false claim to U.S. citizenship.

His attorney, Stephen White, said Ortiz's mother obtained the fake birth certificate when Ortiz was 3, and Ortiz said he grew up thinking he was a U.S. citizen.

"I was blind at the time I made my mistake of smuggling," Ortiz said. "I regret it."

[Soldier4Christ]

Illegal-immigration law casts wide net

Colorado's new landmark anti-illegal-immigration law cuts a wide swath through local and state government and will require tens of thousands of Coloradans to prove they're in the country legally before obtaining benefits.

Interviews with officials at more than 20 state and local agencies indicate that House Bill 1023 will impact services ranging from liquor and business licenses, unemployment benefits, in-state tuition and government-issued college financial aid.

The tentacles of the law - expected to take effect Tuesday - also touch nonprofit and private organizations that administer publicly funded services, according to guidelines issued late Friday afternoon by the State Attorney General's Office.

Passed July 10 during a special legislative session, HB 1023 is being touted as the toughest anti-illegal-immigration law in the country.

It has also generated widespread confusion among government agencies that were given three weeks to figure out how to comply.

Just a few days before the law is expected to take effect, government agencies are still struggling to identify programs that fall under the law's jurisdiction. Further complicating matters, state lawmakers passed more than 15 illegal-immigration-enforcement laws since the spring, and some of those laws overlap or conflict.

For example, officials at the Department of Regulatory Agencies didn't know whether the nearly 600,000 professional licenses it issues - for everyone from doctors to plumbers - will fall under HB 1023.

Under the attorney general's guidelines issued Friday, it appears that most of the agency's licenses will fall, instead, under a different immigration law supposed to take effect Jan. 1. HB 1009 requires applicants for professional licenses to follow a different ID-verification process.

HB 1023 was designed to prevent illegal immigrants from receiving government benefits such as welfare and in-state tuition. But the law also stipulates that people who get government contracts, loans, grants and professional and commercial licenses must also prove legal residency.

The attorney general's guidelines, the second set issued since the passage of the law, indicate that HB 1023 will also affect documents that may not be called a "license." It refers to "any government authorizations or approval required by state or local law to engage in a profession or business."

Dan Hopkins, spokesman for Gov. Owens, said the implementation of HB 1023 "is not going to be an easy process."

"This truly is landmark legislation," he said. "There will be unforeseen situations and there will be bumps in the road."

Hopkins said "it is increasingly likely" that Owens will sign the law Monday, which would allow it to take effect Tuesday. The law will take effect Aug. 9 at the latest.

"But he will not make a final decision until he reviews all of the information available that day," Hopkins said. "His review will include the pertinent legal issues."

Government officials said it could be weeks, if not months, before they clearly understand the scope and cost of the law.

"I think that one of the challenges with all of this is that people have not really understood the work that it would take to figure all of this out," said Richard Vogt, executive director of Tri-County Health Department, which serves Adams, Arapahoe and Douglas counties. "We may find, going forward, that it's more costly to try to document citizenship than the savings that we may realize."

Hundreds of government officials and their lawyers have attended numerous meetings during the past three weeks to try to analyze the law.

"It's not been done by any other state, so we're plowing some new ground here," said Liz McDonough, spokeswoman for the Department of Human Services, one of the agencies most affected by HB 1023.

The law "affects the whole scheme of government," said John "Chip" Taylor, legislative director of Colorado Counties Inc., which represents the state's county commissioners. "From acting as employers, from acting as purchasers of services, from acting as administrators of benefits, it affects us in all those ways across the board."

HB 1023 requires people who apply for non-emergency government benefits to sign an affidavit attesting to their legal immigration status. They also must show one of four IDs: a Colorado driver's license, a Colorado ID, a merchant-mariner card or a Native American tribal document. Then an agency worker must check the applicant's immigration status on an online system known as SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements).

Agencies such as the Department of Human Services are anxiously awaiting emergency rules from the Department of Revenue that would allow people who don't have the required ID - including many homeless, severely disabled and elderly - to show other forms of ID and continue to receive benefits until March 1, 2007.

The Department of Revenue will issue the rules immediately after Owens signs the law, Hopkins said.

State lawmakers are expected to review the HB 1023 ID requirements next winter and could turn the Revenue rules into law after March.

Even with a waiver system, it is clear that hundreds of thousands of people will now have to prove legal immigration status before they can receive a wide range of benefits.

The new law does not apply to emergency medical care; benefits to children under 18; temporary disaster relief; a range of medical care, including immunizations and prenatal care; and programs - including K-through-12 public education - that are required by the federal government.

Numerous agency officials said they are generally prepared to implement the law Tuesday. "Our belief is, at this point, that (the new law) won't slow the process down. If there is a delay, it won't be more than one day," said Department of Labor and Employment spokesman Bill Thoennes.

Most of the programs at the Department of Human Services are affected by HB 1023. McDonough said most clients give Social Security numbers when they apply for benefits. But agency workers don't know how many clients have a Colorado driver's license or the three other forms of ID required by the new law.

Taylor, of Colorado Counties Inc., said he expects some agencies will implement the law differently than others because of confusion.

"I would guess that there's going to be counties that err on the side of caution and do more verification initially and back off from it as we get more clarity," Taylor said.

Sen. Tom Wiens, R-Castle Rock, a critic of HB 1023, said he's concerned that states and counties will not be on the same page with the details of the law.

"It could be interesting," Wiens said. "You're going to see implementation being a creative process out there. It'll be a difficult task."

cont'd