deferred action

Feb. 13 - Hearing on HB 2787 - instate tuition for illegal aliens

Alert date: 
2013-02-10
Alert body: 

On Wednesday, February 13 at 8:00am, the Higher Education Committee will hear testimony regarding HB 2787 - giving instate tuition benefits to students illegally in the country.  Testimony will be accepted from both proponents and opponents.  If you would like to testify about this bill, get there early to sign in.

If you don't want to testify, but would like to show your support for those who are testifying against this misguided legislation, please join us in Hearing Room D at the Capitol Building before 8:00am.  Bring quarters for the meter.

Most likely, proponents of the bill will bus in hundreds of kids (taking them out of school), to overwhelm the hearing rooms and create the appearance of a majority.  In the past, I have asked several of the children why they were at the Capitol...they didn't even know...but they were excited to be able to skip school to be there.

 

 

Do you think Congress should create a path to citizenship for "Dreamers"?

Poll: Do you think Congress should create a path to citizenship for "Dreamers," illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. at a young age?

Yes 455 (15%)

No 2476 (81%)****

Undecided 119 (3%)

Other 23 (0%)

 

We the people have an opinion...are you listening?

While the following poll is not scientific and the question offered gives a limited number of choices, it seems clear what the public is thinking.

Enforce the law!  It's against the law to hire an illegal alien to work for you.  If illegal aliens could not find a job here, they would likely move on, or return to their native country.

It's quite telling that the Oregon Legislature, in the past, has refused to even hear a bill that was written requiring all state employers to use the FREE, 99.6% accurate and easy to use E-Verify matching program.  In other words, if the State of Oregon, using taxpayer money, needs to hire someone for a job, they are not required to be certain they are hiring a LEGAL worker.  How ridiculous is that? With over 160,000 unemployed Oregonians, wouldn't you think the State should hire one of those workers and not an illegal alien?

The bill has been posted again for the upcoming 2013 session of the Oregon Legislature.  House Bill 2358 is sponsored by Representative Thatcher, Representatives Weidner and Whisnant.

Please, contact your Legislator and ask them to support this bill.  It's a no cost solution to a problem that is only getting bigger everyday.

If they don't hear from you, they will succumb to the pressure of the pro-illegal alien advocacy groups that are pushing for even more rights and benefits for foreign nationals illegally present in our country.

StatesmanJournal.com

POLL RESULTS

YESTERDAY’S QUESTION

Which immigration reform proposed by the White House or Senate is most important to you?

- Providing those in the U.S. illegally a path to become citizens – 1.9%

- Strengthening border security — 31.1%

- Cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants – 52.4%

- Streamlining the legal immigration system – 1.2%

- All of the above – 12.2%

- None of the above – 1.3%

(Yesterdays online poll results appeared in the January 31, 2013 hardcopy Statesman Journal newspaper.)

DACA - just another form of amnesty

One of OFIR's original founders, Elizabeth VanStaaveren spells out the meaning behind the madness of the DACA -  Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.  Read the full article here.

Poll results don't support Legislature's plans

These are the final results of the Statesman Journal’s online poll yesterday. Results were printed in the hardcopy edition of the newspaper today, January 28, 2013. The paper’s practice is to give results in the print edition the day after each poll closes, and results are not posted online after the poll has closed.

Statesman Journal, Monday, Jan. 28, 2013, p.5C (editorial page)

POLL RESULTS TO YESTERDAY’S QUESTION

Should immigrants in Oregon be allowed to pay in-state college tuition if they met these conditions?

- 3 years in Oregon high school

- Graduation from Oregon High school

- Admission to a state university

- Actively working toward U.S. citizenship

Yes 31.5%

No 66.6%

Don’t Know 1.4%

Don’t Care 0.5%

---------------------------------

Several OFIR members objected to the wording of the question, which omitted the word “illegal” in referring to immigrants. In the context of the paper’s recent coverage of immigration issues, it is reasonable to assume the question meant illegal immigrants, and most viewers read the question that way. Of course the question should have been made clear to all by specifically referring to illegal immigrants, not just “immigrants.”

Missing the point on immigration

A recent report on immigration enforcement from the Migration Policy Institute, touted in these pages by one of its authors Beyond secure borders, op-ed, Jan 7, was both mistaken and missed the point. The news release about the report announced: "The U.S. government spends more on federal immigration enforcement than on all other principal federal criminal law enforcement agencies combined."

This finding was the basis of widespread media coverage and will, as intended, be cited in the coming congressional debate over President Obama's plans to legalize the illegal-immigrant population and increase legal immigration beyond the level of 1 million people each year. The political purpose of the report is to enable supporters of the president's approach, both Democrats and Republicans, to claim that the "enforcement first" demand that sank President George W. Bush's amnesty effort in 2007 has finally been satisfied, so no legitimate objection remains to "moving beyond" enforcement.

The first problem with this is that the report's central claim is false. As the names of the relevant agencies suggest — Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE); Customs and Border Protection (CBP) — much of what they do has nothing to do with immigration. Recent ICE news releases, for instance, highlight a drug seizure, the sentencing of a child pornographer and a guilty plea by someone trying to smuggle dinosaur fossils. Important activities, no doubt, but ones clearly unrelated to immigration enforcement.

Beyond that, the report focuses on the wrong thing. In typical Washington bureaucratic fashion, it confuses resource inputs with policy results. There has indeed been a significant increase in funding for immigration enforcement, and this increase was desperately needed after decades of neglect — something that became undeniable after 9/11. But to claim, as Doris Meissner wrote in The Post, that a certain percentage increase in appropriated funds has allowed the nation to build "a formidable immigration enforcement machinery" is incorrect.

The report suggests that the billions spent on immigration enforcement have reached a point of diminishing returns. But take the example of the U.S. Border Patrol, a CBP agency. The number of agents has doubled over the past decade, to more than 21,000. That seems impressive until you consider that the Border Patrol is still smaller than the New York Police Department — and has 8,000 miles to monitor. It's certainly possible that the Border Patrol doesn't need more agents, but that's not evident merely by doubling the previously small number of agents.

Something similar can be said of deportations: As the report and administration spokesmen have pointed out, the number of people deported (technically, "removed") is at a record level: about 400,000 per year. But the steady growth in the number of deportations, starting in the Clinton administration, came to a halt with Obama's inauguration. Perhaps 400,000 deportations a year, out of 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants, is enough but not just because it's a record.

And although one might be able to argue that the U.S. immigration enforcement machinery is adequate at the border or for deportations, fundamental pieces are still not in place despite the money that has been spent. For instance, the online E-Verify screening system is still not used for all new hires. The Social Security Administration and the IRS know the identities and locations of millions of people who are in this country illegally but shield them based on a fanciful interpretation of privacy law. The United States has only the most rudimentary system for tracking the departures of foreign visitors — and if you don't know who has left the country, you can't know who is still here. This is important because nearly half of the illegal-immigrant population came here legally but then didn't leave.

These are not trivial, last-minute agenda items designed to postpone consideration of an amnesty. An immigration enforcement machinery that lacks these elements is simply incomplete.

And any law enforcement infrastructure is only as effective as the use to which it is put. The Obama administration has made clear that it views immigration violations as secondary matters, like not wearing a seat belt, which can lead to a citation only if some other, "real" law is violated. The most lavishly funded, gold-plated enforcement system in the world can't make up for systematic nullification of the immigration law through prosecutorial discretion, deferred action and other means used by this administration to protect illegal immigrants.

Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
 

Delayed-deportation immigrants can drive in Oregon

Oregon will issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants accepted into a new federal program that delays deportation for some young people brought illegally to the United States as children, officials said Wednesday.

The decision by the Driver and Motor Vehicle Services Division ends months of uncertainty over how the DMV would handle applications for driving privileges or state identification from illegal immigrants given a two-year deportation delay and the opportunity to obtain a work permit. Oregon law requires proof of legal presence in the United States to get a driver's license, permit or identification card.

Immigrant-rights activists cheered the decision.

"It allows folks to move forward with their lives," said Erik Sorensen, a spokesman for Causa, an immigrant-rights group.

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, announced last summer, allows young people brought illegally to the U.S. before their 16th birthday to obtain a temporary reprieve from deportation and the opportunity to obtain a work permit if they meet certain conditions. Immigrants do not get legal status in the United States, however, creating complicated legal questions for DMV officials.

As of Dec. 13, more than 350,000 people had been accepted into the program nationwide. The Department of Homeland Security wouldn't say how many are from Oregon.

Oregon driver's licenses issued to immigrants in the program will expire on the same day as their deferred-action status.

Jim Ludwick, a vocal opponent of illegal immigration, said Oregon should not be issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, even if the federal government has told them they won't be deported.

"Apparently we are no longer a nation of the rule of law," Ludwick said. "We've now morphed into a politicization of that, where certain people will be held to the rule of law and others won't."

Gov. John Kitzhaber said in a statement in English, Spanish, Vietnamese and Russian saying he was pleased with the DMV's decision. People with authorization to work must be able to get there, he said.

"It's the right decision, and it will provide certainty for working families and employers," Kitzhaber said.

OFIR Board member Vandermolen's letter to the editor sparks agreement

OFIR Board member Lyneil Vandermolen expressed her discontent with plans to give an instate tuition benefit to illegal alien high schoolers.  In a letter to the editor, Lyneil explains how "feel good" legislation doesn't "feel so good" to those of us who have to pay the bill.  Other readers have expressed their concerns, as well.  Read the letters here.
Our Legislators need to know and hear your discontent about their plans for the upcoming Legislature.  Please call, write or visit your Legislator.  Always be polite, respectful and to the point.  Thank them for their time.

 

 

Is this the Oregon business model we are working toward?

The Oregon Legislature will likely consider giving driver licenses to illegal aliens in our state.

Advocates frame the issue as one of jobs and safety. Jeff Stone, executive director of the Oregon Association of Nurseries, says his group supports easing driver's licenses requirements for a simple reason: "We have to deal with how to get our work force to work."

Stone is CLEARLY stating that members of OAN rely on an illegal workforce and Oregon citizens should weaken the Oregon driver license bill to accommodate their needs. 

Is this the business model we want in our state?  Do we want to make it even easier for businesses cheat?  These businesses seem to willfully break the law and make a huge profit by relying on an illegal workforce.   Then, Oregon taxpayers foot the bill of over ONE BILLION dollars every year in services to those same illegal aliens and their families.  How does it make any sense to "invite" more illegal aliens in to our state by offering a state issued form of ID?

If Stone were really "concerned" about how to get their illegal employees to work, he should organize a carpool of licensed drivers or provide shuttle services at their expense.

In-state tuition benefits are also on the table this Legislative session. While there are certainly dozens of stories about young children brought to the U.S that have gone to school and didn't get into trouble, the conclusion is that they deserve something that a U.S. citizen can't even get?  If an illegal alien (who isn't even supposed to be here in the first place) graduates from high school (on the taxpayers dime) then they should return to their country of origin and apply for citizenship.  They should not be allowed to take a coveted spot in a public university away from a US citizen.

And, when they graduate from college, they will be competing for jobs with U.S. citizens?  Wait...it's against the law for them to work in this country!  So, Oregon taxpayers have paid to educate them for as many as 16 years, but they can't be hired...legally. 

These two actions are truly folly and outright pandering at it's worst.
 

New Immigration Battle: Driver's Licenses

In a sign of growing opposition to President Obama's immigration policy, Iowa has become the latest state to deny driver's licenses to young illegal immigrants who receive deferments from deportation.

Iowa joins Michigan, Nebraska and Arizona in denying licenses or non-operator identification cards because, officials say, Obama's deferred action program doesn't grant legal status in the United States. Officials in each state cite laws restricting the licenses to foreigners who reside here legally.

The program, which began in August, offers a renewable two-year reprieve for qualified young people who were brought to the United States as children. Recipients also gain permission to work here legally. So far, more than 355,000 applicants have been accepted and nearly 103,000 have been approved, according to the latest government figures.

Iowa's Department of Transportation Director Paul Trombino III said in a statement:

"The Iowa DOT understands the exercising of this prosecutorial discretion by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security does not grant lawful status or a lawful immigration path to persons granted Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status. Rather, it is prosecutorial discretion extended in a blanket fashion to persons who are not lawfully authorized to be present in the United States."

Republicans have criticized the program as backdoor amnesty designed to boost Latino support for Obama. The four states denying licenses are led by Republican governors. One of them, Nebraska's Dave Heineman, has pledged to deny not only licenses, but welfare benefits and other services to illegal immigrants, unless required by state law.

Washington and New Mexico are among states that issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, although New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez, who is a Republican, wants her state's enabling law repealed. Illinois could be next to issue licenses after the state Senate recently approved a bill.

At issue is whether the federal program's authorization to stay and work here legally also confers temporary legalized status.

Iowa officials cite the memorandum issued by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano that outlines the new policy: "This memorandum confers no substantive right, immigration status or pathway to citizenship."

Immigrant advocates say people in deferred action status qualify for licenses under the 2005 Real ID Act, which they have used to file lawsuits to overturn the bans in Arizona and Michigan.

The Real ID law, an anti-terrorism measure aimed at creating a national driver's license system, lists people in deferred action status among the authorized noncitizens who are eligible to obtain a temporary license.

Immigrant advocates also say the states are encroaching on the federal government's authority to set immigration policy, a separation reinforced by the Supreme Court ruling this year that severely weakened Arizona's immigration enforcement law.

"Deferred action has existed for decades and decades. It is a form of lawful presence, just like other forms of administrative relief under our immigration laws," says Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which is one of the groups suing in Arizona.

"There's really no legal or constitutional support for what these states are doing," says Saenz. "Suggesting that they are not here lawfully is a rhetorical political move that a number of these states are engaging in."
 

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - deferred action