Brush Fires (State/Local)
 All Forums
 All FireSociety

Full Search Here
RSS Feed Subscribe to Topics

Diane Feinsteins Ag Bill to give Amnesty to CA Farm workers

Forums Home | Brush Fires (State/Local) | Local/State Issues -- West
Posts 1-16 of 16 | Latest Post
August 11, 2007 10:35 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

To All CA Grassfire Members - I urge you to stop Diane Feinsteins Ag Bill - write to her now. 

Here is my letter - feel free to copy or change a tad and send.  CA is becaming a 3rd World corrupt country in many of our cities.  There is more than one city in CA where 87% of the people living in the city do not speak English.  Don't let Mexico come in the back door and quietly take CA for it's own.

Dear Senator Feinstein,

Knowing how important passing your AG Farm bill is to you, I would like you to consider the long term effects on CA and the Nation.  Please read the following article and reconsider if you really want to push this bill:

Watching America Slip Away

 

By Renee Taylor

 

Two tomato processing firms based in Monticello, Arkansas – Candy Brand, LLC and Tomato Shippers, LLC – as well as four local Bradley County, Arkansas, residents – Charles Searcy, Randy Clanton, Dale McGinnis and Brooks Lisenby – are the subjects of a lawsuit filed by the Southern Poverty Law Firm, Montgomery, Alabama, on behalf of three Mexican migrant workers: Rosalino Perez-Benites, Luis Alberto Ascienco-Vasquesz and Pascual Noriego-Narvaez. The lawsuit recently was filed in the U.S. District Court, Western Division, El Dorado, Arkansas.

The lawsuit contends that the plaintiffs were hired out of Mexico on an H-2A visa to work in the tomato fields. The plaintiffs allege the defendants did not pay them the prevailing wage for migrant workers – $8.01 in 2007 and $7.58 in 2006. Their suit covers a time period of 2002 – 2007. They further allege their employers did not reimburse them for travel, visa and other hiring fees. 

The Little Rock attorney for the defendants, Michael S. Moore, stated there was no basis for the claim, and has filed a motion for a more definite statement from the plaintiffs. He has also requested a jury trial.

Known for its pink tomatoes, Bradley County, with Warren as its county seat, is a quiet rural community in Southeast Arkansas, first settled in the 1800s. The family names from those days still grace the thin Warren phone book and until a few years ago, it was a tightly knit community where residents felt “at home” and safe. Adults knew which children belonged to whom and we all shopped at the local hardware and auto parts stores that ran "accounts" for residents based upon familiarity and trust. Now we more often see stores like Lowe’s and Home Depot, whose workers have no earthly idea who we are…or care. Such are the fruits of “progress”.

But there is also an unease settling into our once-proud community, creating anxiety for all of us about our future and our children’s fate. Many residents are concerned about the myriad effects of migrant workers, many suspected to be illegal, brought in by the tomato growers to work their lands. Downtown Warren, once the home of a thriving furniture and appliance store and an upscale jewelry store, among many other robust small businesses, now houses empty buildings, a "check into cash" business that advertises the ease of sending Western Union to Mexico, and a storefront with signs in Spanish advertising cheap clothing and music. Around the corner, another such storefront catering to the Mexican community has emerged. Young migrants loiter at the local Mad Butcher grocery store. Several local residents have voiced concerns of the suspected gang-type clans that roam the parking lot. No longer do they feel safe picking up a gallon of milk after 5 pm.

The local health department provides "free" (free to the recipients but not to the American taxpayers) medical care to the families of the migrant workers, who pick up the voter registration cards on the waiting room tables as they leave. It’s important to note here that it is against the law to vote if one is not a citizen. At the local revenue office, the workers bring interpreters and their recent electric bills to obtain a driver’s license or other identification. Even though it is well known that many crimes and worrisome events, including the purchase of handguns, can be completed by illegals who obtain such licenses – the 9/11 terrorists had tens of driver’s licenses among them – this practice continues unabated.

The weekly county newspaper's "Arrest Report" is filled with migrant workers arrested for drunk driving, driving without a license or insurance, disorderly conduct and other crimes. This is not a surprise, as violent crime and drug distribution and possession is prevalent among illegal aliens, so over 25% of today's federal prison population is comprised of illegals. In some areas of the country, 12% of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens.

Locals have known for many years of the buses sent to the Mexican border to pick up people to work the fields and tomato sheds – many never leaving. They have watched as once quiet, well-maintained neighborhoods have transformed into something more closely resembling "Little Juarez". They grow increasingly frustrated at a system that refuses to enforce immigration laws. 

Bradley County is only one of hundreds, maybe thousands, of examples where American tradition and sovereignty are being destroyed utterly by a system that encourages illegal immigration; the hiring of “migrant farm workers" who refuse to learn or speak English, and who have no respect for our laws and customs; and the tolerance for elitist politicians who do not take these issues seriously, are ignorant of them, or care only about their next elections…certainly not about their constituents. 

Wages on farms and in poultry plants have been forced down dramatically due to the influx of migrant workers, causing residents to leave in search of employment elsewhere to support their families. A once-proud American community that sent its sons and daughters to fight to preserve the unmatched quality and richness of American life, in wars ranging from World War I to Operation Iraqi Freedom, Bradley County is now itself dying a slow and agonizing death. It raises the question: what did we fight for?  What did we protect?

 

I suspect that Bradley County, Arkansas, is only one small example of many, many more American towns and counties that have been overtaken by the current wave of illegal aliens who do not at all resemble America’s legal immigrants who built our great nation. What kind of future do our politicians envision when they vote to protect such law-breaking foreign nationals and their version of American life, and not to protect law-abiding, true Americans – legal immigrants and native-born alike - people like you and me?

 

Are we too late to save ourselves? We shall see when the next election rolls around. Our votes count more now, than ever.

 

##

 The voters of CA spoke loud and clear over 10 years ago when they voted in support of Prop 187.  The Federal Government let them down and turned their back on the American citizens in favor of big business.

 

Please review your current bill for "amnesty" for illegal alien farm workers and put America and her legal citizens first in your thoughts.

 

Regards,

 

 
August 11, 2007 11:21 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

CALIFORNIAN's and Grassfire members:

Here is what Steve is saying:

#1--Amnesty bills back after Labor Day.
Like those dreaded villains in the Terminator movies, it looks like the Bush-Kennedy amnesty bill is coming back after Labor Day -- this time in sections that the amnesty Congressmen think they can sneak by us. We are closely watching two bills: the AG Jobs bill that would give amnesty to millions of illegals in agriculture; and the so-called "Dream Act" that is really an "Anchor Child" program giving amnesty to over a million illegals under 18. Grassfire will be spearheading efforts to defeat these amnesty bills while we expand our "Where's The Fence?" campaign.

Send letters NOW - we have until Sept 4th to let them know this Ag Bill is DEAD - when it comes to supporters.
August 13, 2007 02:45 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007
Change of Heart on Immigration?
The White House thinks it’s calling America’s bluff.

By Mark Krikorian

“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

This Mencken sentiment appears to be the guiding idea behind the administration’s announcement Friday of stepped-up immigration enforcement. After its relentless six-year campaign for amnesty crashed and burned in June at the hands of the common people, the White House has come up with a new plan: to start enforcing some of the laws they should have been enforcing all along, and so thoroughly scare the public with the consequences that there will be a popular groundswell for amnesty that will finally vindicate the administration position. You can almost hear the president thinking, “be careful what you wish for.”

#ad#Or as DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff put it, “There will be some unhappy consequences for the economy out of doing this.”

But just as the administration completely misread public sentiment on immigration — the president appears to have genuinely believed his “I’ll see you at the bill signing” bravado — they’re now misreading the likely reaction to increased enforcement. Because despite the hysterical exaggerations we can look forward to from some farmers and other employers of illegal aliens, the produce department of your local supermarket won’t be shutting down any time soon.

The only reason the White House thinks this gamble might pay off is that some of the measures announced last week really can make a difference. The complete fact sheet is here, and since it’s a p.r. document, it should come as no surprise that there’s a good deal of padding. Some of the measures included are just continuations of current policy (completion of about half the border fencing by the end of next year, for instance) or not likely to have major impacts (expanding the number of foreign criminal gangs whose members are ineligible for visas). These efforts are welcome, but should be routine.

However, there are several novel elements (well, not so novel, since you could have read about them in NR), that must be part of any comprehensive attrition strategy to reduce the illegal population. Most important is the final rule on Social Security “no-match” letters. These are letters sent by the Social Security Administration to employers who’ve submitted W-2 forms for employees whose names and numbers don’t match the agency’s records. Some instances, of course, are the result of clerical mistakes or unreported name changes, but the majority are illegal aliens using fake or stolen Social Security numbers to gain employment.

This matters because more than half of illegal immigrants with jobs aren’t living “in the shadows” but instead are working on the books. In the past, no-match letters were sent only to employers with the largest number of problem files, and created no obligation to follow up. In fact, one version of the letter advised employers that “You should not use this letter to take any adverse action against an employee just because his or her Social Security number appears on the list, such as laying off, suspending, firing, or discriminating against that individual. Doing so could, in fact, violate state or federal law and subject you to legal consequences.”

As you can imagine, after that caveat most letters were just thrown away.

The new rule sets out common-sense steps an employer must take upon receiving a no-match letter to ensure that he won’t be held liable if the worker turns out to be an illegal alien. Social Security is now sending out these letters to employers with more than ten mismatches that make up more than one half of one percent of its workforce — covering about 80 percent of all mismatches. Most employers are likely to follow through the process and, if necessary, fire those workers who turn out to be illegals (most of whom will likely have left anyway by that point); while some may re-hire the workers off the books, “An employer who does that,” as Secretary Chertoff points out, “is making a deliberate decision to compound their legal difficulties by committing tax crimes as well as immigration crimes.” (In other words, “You may not think much of my department, but the IRS isn’t fooling around.”)

The underlying rationale for ensuring that no-match letters are acted on by employers is to turn off the magnet of jobs that attracts — and keeps — illegal aliens here. As it becomes harder to get a job, and as the jobs illegals can get are less stable, sneaking across the border or overstaying a visa will become less and less attractive, and illegals already here — especially those with fewer attachments — will start deporting themselves.

Along the same lines is another, less-noticed measure in last week’s announcement. The administration says it will begin to draft a new rule to require all federal contractors to use the online system, redubbed E-Verify, that enables employers to check if new hires are authorized to work in the United States. This probably won’t identify a large number of illegal workers, but it will change the environment, representing an important step toward internalizing legal status as a labor standard.

Lobbyists for farmers and roofing contractors and others will soon be screaming bloody murder. But Congress and the media would do well not to take at face value the squealing of firms losing their cheap-labor subsidy. When the end of the last big guestworker program was being debated in the early 1960s, California farmers claimed that “the use of braceros [Mexican guestworkers] is absolutely essential to the survival of the tomato industry.” Instead, termination of the program prompted mechanization which caused a quintupling of production for tomatoes grown for processing, an 89-percent drop in demand for harvest labor, and a fall in real prices.

The same sort of thing happened half a century earlier, when the textile industry predicted disaster if child labor were ended. At a Senate hearing in 1916, one mill owner said that limiting child labor would “stop my machines”; another said “investors would never receive another dividend”; while a third said that ending child labor would “paralyze the country.”

We’re going to hear a lot more of this sort of thing — the White House is counting on it. Standing up to the coming lobbyist onslaught will be the final stage of the battle against amnesty.

Sending this article to Diane Feinstein and Barbra Boxer - please send to all of your Senators too!

Let them know we aren't fooled!  Just say NO to the Ag / Farm bill!
August 13, 2007 03:05 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

 

 
Also sent this to my Congressman: 


Dear Congressman Waxman,

Senator Diane Feinstein is trying to push a Ag / Farm bill to allow illegal aliens to be given Amnesty. I am against this bill and I have found this article that explains it better than I thought I could:

Change of Heart on Immigration?

The White House thinks it’s calling America’s bluff. By Mark Krikorian

“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

This Mencken sentiment appears to be the guiding idea behind the administration’s announcement Friday of stepped-up immigration enforcement.

After its relentless six-year campaign for amnesty crashed and burned in June at the hands of the common people, the White House has come up with a new plan: to start enforcing some of the laws they should have been enforcing all along, and so thoroughly scare the public with the consequences that there will be a popular groundswell for amnesty that will finally vindicate the administration position.

You can almost hear the president thinking, “be careful what you wish for.” #ad#Or as DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff put it, “There will be some unhappy consequences for the economy out of doing this.” But just as the administration completely misread public sentiment on immigration — the president appears to have genuinely believed his “I’ll see you at the bill signing” bravado — they’re now misreading the likely reaction to increased enforcement.

Because despite the hysterical exaggerations we can look forward to from some farmers and other employers of illegal aliens, the produce department of your local supermarket won’t be shutting down any time soon.

The only reason the White House thinks this gamble might pay off is that some of the measures announced last week really can make a difference. The complete fact sheet is here, and since it’s a p.r. document, it should come as no surprise that there’s a good deal of padding.

Some of the measures included are just continuations of current policy (completion of about half the border fencing by the end of next year, for instance) or not likely to have major impacts (expanding the number of foreign criminal gangs whose members are ineligible for visas). These efforts are welcome, but should be routine.

 However, there are several novel elements (well, not so novel, since you could have read about them in NR), that must be part of any comprehensive attrition strategy to reduce the illegal population. Most important is the final rule on Social Security “no-match” letters. These are letters sent by the Social Security Administration to employers who’ve submitted W-2 forms for employees whose names and numbers don’t match the agency’s records. Some instances, of course, are the result of clerical mistakes or unreported name changes, but the majority are illegal aliens using fake or stolen Social Security numbers to gain employment. This matters because more than half of illegal immigrants with jobs aren’t living “in the shadows” but instead are working on the books. In the past, no-match letters were sent only to employers with the largest number of problem files, and created no obligation to follow up. In fact, one version of the letter advised employers that “You should not use this letter to take any adverse action against an employee just because his or her Social Security number appears on the list, such as laying off, suspending, firing, or discriminating against that individual. Doing so could, in fact, violate state or federal law and subject you to legal consequences.”

As you can imagine, after that caveat most letters were just thrown away. The new rule sets out common-sense steps an employer must take upon receiving a no-match letter to ensure that he won’t be held liable if the worker turns out to be an illegal alien. Social Security is now sending out these letters to employers with more than ten mismatches that make up more than one half of one percent of its workforce — covering about 80 percent of all mismatches. Most employers are likely to follow through the process and, if necessary, fire those workers who turn out to be illegals (most of whom will likely have left anyway by that point); while some may re-hire the workers off the books, “An employer who does that,” as Secretary Chertoff points out, “is making a deliberate decision to compound their legal difficulties by committing tax crimes as well as immigration crimes.” (In other words, “You may not think much of my department, but the IRS isn’t fooling around.”) The underlying rationale for ensuring that no-match letters are acted on by employers is to turn off the magnet of jobs that attracts — and keeps — illegal aliens here.

As it becomes harder to get a job, and as the jobs illegals can get are less stable, sneaking across the border or overstaying a visa will become less and less attractive, and illegals already here — especially those with fewer attachments — will start deporting themselves.

Along the same lines is another, less-noticed measure in last week’s announcement. The administration says it will begin to draft a new rule to require all federal contractors to use the online system, redubbed E-Verify, that enables employers to check if new hires are authorized to work in the United States. This probably won’t identify a large number of illegal workers, but it will change the environment, representing an important step toward internalizing legal status as a labor standard.

Lobbyists for farmers and roofing contractors and others will soon be screaming bloody murder. But Congress and the media would do well not to take at face value the squealing of firms losing their cheap-labor subsidy.

When the end of the last big guestworker program was being debated in the early 1960s, California farmers claimed that “the use of braceros [Mexican guestworkers] is absolutely essential to the survival of the tomato industry.” Instead, termination of the program prompted mechanization which caused a quintupling of production for tomatoes grown for processing, an 89-percent drop in demand for harvest labor, and a fall in real prices. T

he same sort of thing happened half a century earlier, when the textile industry predicted disaster if child labor were ended. At a Senate hearing in 1916, one mill owner said that limiting child labor would “stop my machines”; another said “investors would never receive another dividend”; while a third said that ending child labor would “paralyze the country.”

We’re going to hear a lot more of this sort of thing — the White House is counting on it. Standing up to the coming lobbyist onslaught will be the final stage of the battle against amnesty.

We aren't fooled! Just say NO to the Ag / Farm bill!

If this bill comes to you for a vote - Just Vote NO!


 

 
August 13, 2007 03:09 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

Idaho - send letters now!!!

Craig pushes immigration reform

Senator predicts millions will lose jobs after Social Security crackdown.

 http://www.idahostatesman.com/cgi-bin..., 'preview', 'width=500,height=400,resizable=1,scrollbars=1').focus();">   http://www.idahostatesman.com/244/sto... title="Digg this story" onclick="window.open('http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=ht... ($('#storyBody/h1:first').text ())+'&bodytext='+encodeURIComponent ($('#storyBody/p:first').text ())); return false;"> http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump... pushes immigration reform'), 'delicious','toolbar=no,width=700,height=400'); return false;">

By Dan Popkey - dpopkey@idahostatesman.com

Edition Date: 08/10/07

 

Pressure to pass immigration reform will intensify as millions of undocumented workers lose jobs as a result of a crackdown by the Social Security Administration, Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, said Thursday.

"What will happen over the course of the next two months is several million workers will be laid off or fired and there is no one to take their place," Craig told the Boise Rotary Club.

Craig said the Bush Administration is sending "hundreds of thousands" of letters to employers about bogus Social Security numbers. "Sorry, that name and that number don't match, or we don't have that number, or that number belongs to somebody who's already on Social Security — that's a mismatch," Craig said.

"Then you must do one of two things. You've either got to check the background of your employee, or you've got to fire them and get them off your payroll. And if you don't do that, then you're liable for the following fines starting at about 30-plus-thousands of dollars. That's the law. It's being enforced, and it should be enforced."

Craig said he's already had word from an ally in his fight for a guest worker program, a California agricultural company that laid off about 200 of its 500 employees as a result of "mismatch" letters.

Consumers will feel the impact of the unprecedented enforcement action. Craig said $3.5 billion worth of crops rotted for lack of workers last year. He predicted that figure will double because many crops are "highly dependent on the hands of working people."

Craig's AgJobs bill would allow 1.5 million guest farmworkers to obtain "blue cards" over five years. They would be eligible for "green cards" — permanent worker status — within three to five years, after paying a $500 fine and showing they are current on taxes. AgJobs is part of an immigration package stalled largely because of opposition to legalizing undocumented workers.

But if immigration laws aren't reformed, Craig said, the economy will not grow at the 3.5 percent rate he said is necessary to support Social Security benefits earned by baby boomers.

"If the borders are shut and we become a closed society, then the most we can grow is about 1.2 percent a year," Craig said. "Control it, legalize it, manage it, but recognize that if we want to continue to grow and that our grandchildren would wish to achieve the American Dream as we have, then growth is essential."
August 13, 2007 04:36 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007
For all of you in Grassfire / Farmland and otherwise - please contact your representatives and stop this bill!
August 23, 2007 04:11 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007
Feinstein to push guest-worker bill
Senator to assure that farm legislation is a priority in today's Fresno appearance.
By Michael Doyle / Bee Washington Bureau
08/23/07 01:23:48

WASHINGTON -- Get ready for another ride on the immigration roller coaster.

Today, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein will be assuring a San Joaquin Valley audience that Congress will once more take up a big agricultural guest-worker bill. A top priority for Valley farmers, the bill soon could resurface on Capitol Hill.

"Agriculture is going to push this thing," Manuel Cunha, president of the Fresno-based Nisei Farmers League, said Wednesday.

The agricultural guest-worker package is getting its second wind two months after comprehensive immigration reform collapsed in the Senate. It still faces very steep odds. However, political optimists can sketch out a scenario for snatching success from seeming defeat.

Dubbed AgJobs, the legislation first introduced in September 2003 culminated years of negotiations among farmers and the United Farm Workers. It would offer legal residency, and eventually U.S. citizenship, to 1.5 million illegal immigrants now working in agriculture. It also would streamline an existing guest-worker program.

Step one in the plan for passage calls for farmers and their allies to emphasize anew the dangers of losing an agricultural work force.

One-third or more of U.S. farmworkers are in this country illegally, according to conventional estimates.

"You can't pick peaches or operate a canning plant if you don't have the people," Cunha said.

An active player in immigration negotiations, Cunha will be watching Feinstein's appearance today at Fresno's Sunnyside Country Club. Recently, Cunha took part in an immigration conference call with White House officials who are maneuvering in their own way.

Step two relies on the latest promise by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that he will help pass an agricultural guest-worker bill this year. With Senate floor time limited, and the legislative calendar running out, a commitment like this becomes essential.

"I am committed to doing something about AgJobs," Reid declared in late July, in response to Feinstein's questions. "I hope we can do something soon."

Revealing one potential but controversial new tactic, Reid specified he "will do everything" he can to include the agricultural guest-worker package as part of a larger farm bill. The House already has passed its version of a farm bill, without immigration provisions.

The Senate will take up the issue next.

But with billions of dollars of agricultural subsidies at stake, the farm bill has a political constituency that may be hesitant about getting bogged down in immigration.

"There are some issues that are going to require some major amending before we will be agreeable to bringing that bill up on the farm bill," Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia cautioned during debate.

If the farm bill doesn't work out as a vehicle, Reid added, he will try to bring up the 109-page agricultural guest-worker bill as a "freestanding" bill or perhaps attach it to something else.

"There is no industry in the United States that faces the crisis agriculture does right now," Feinstein declared.

Step three in the AgJobs game plan relies on employer anxiety over a new Bush administration plan for cracking down on companies that hire illegal immigrants. Two weeks ago, the White House announced plans to send out tens of thousands of so-called "no-match" letters.

These letters will notify employers that an employee's name and Social Security number don't match government records. Potentially, employers could be fined for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants. More than one agricultural lobbyist believes the White House hopes that angry business leaders will now lean on Congress to change the immigration laws.

"I think that's going to increase the motivation," Cunha said.

Thirty senators currently co-sponsor the AgJobs bill, although Feinstein said she believes she has the 60 votes needed to overcome a potential filibuster. Even so, the House would then have to approve its own version of the bill, which is something that Reps. Jim Costa, D-Fresno, and George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, have urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to do.

The reporter can be reached at mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com or (202) 383-0006.
August 23, 2007 04:41 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
August 16, 2007

This must be another try to pull wool over eyes.  According to the Facts File from Lou Dobs dated  August 7, 2007......H-2A Temporary Ag Workers has an unlimited cap.  The H-2B Temporary or Seasonal Workers - cap 66,000 ("returning workers" from 3 priors years are exempt from the cap). 

Is it too hard for these people to get appropriate paperwork???  I have no problem with them coming to work every year and then returning to their country where they wish to be.  But to stay and bring all these problems?>?

And to expect rights??

 
August 23, 2007 06:13 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
June 16, 2007
Comment updated August 23, 2007 06:14 PM

"It would  offer legal residency, and eventually U.S. citizenship, to 1.5 million illegal immigrants now working in agriculture."

Bottom line : its for more Democrat votes- they hope.  The representatives of the Latinos in government are increasing in number seemingly.  I  know that a lot of Latinos don't vote, but the  Latino citizens and their representatives are now trying to wake up those who don't and are  encouraging legal residents to become citizens guaranteeing them the right to vote. We have a culture war on our hands.



CITIZEN OF TEXAS....."GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!"- Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
August 23, 2007 07:31 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
August 16, 2007
Comment updated August 23, 2007 07:37 PM

Grrrr...I realize the difference between visa'a and amnesty....

My point was the number of Temporary Agriculture and seasonal visas already available.....so why an amnesty push?

The Temp Agriculture one has NO CAP.......I have to assume Lou Dobbs fact file is accurate.
August 23, 2007 08:16 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

I sent the article to Numbers USA and asked for help!

Hopefully they will send out "action" buttons to all of their over 500K members and get the faxes geared up.

In the meantime I am going to a local Senator Boxer meeting tomorrow and taking my list of grips!  Just one more to add to the list.

Will let you know how it goes.
October 28, 2007 02:43 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
March 2, 2007
Alert! HR 3531 would deny funds to sanctuary cities!
 
At long last, the federal government is demonstrating some tepid increase in attempts to provide interior enforcement of our immigration laws. Yet, even these mild efforts are hamstrung by local cities that declare themselves sanctuaries from immigration enforcement.

The Accountability in Enforcing Immigration Laws Act of 2007 (Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-FL) would tackle the troubling trend of local governments to require their police officers to ignore the immigration status of suspects they encounter while performing their jobs.

To learn more and to take action, click here.


Jim
October 28, 2007 03:06 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

Thanks for the post.  I had this sent to me via an e-mail, which for some reason I couldn't copy and paste.  But if you look at the number of bills offered by Congressmen and the number that actually make it through committee and get called to the floor, it's very little.  If HR3531 goes anywhere it'll be surprizing.  Tom Tancredo entered a similar amendment to the appropriations bill and it didn't go anywhere, yet.  Several others have too.  Here's what they've done so far:

ALL ACTIONS:

9/14/2007:
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
9/14/2007:
Referred to House Judiciary
9/14/2007:
Referred to House Homeland Security
9/18/2007:
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection.

Rep Dan Burton of IN filed HR 3549 to withdraw federal funds to States/cities that interfere with federal immigration law enforcement as well on 9/17.  It's also been referred to House Judiciary.

It's all at the discretion of Pelosi as to whether, if or when she wants to take action once the get committee recommendation.  There are some as far back as May that are 'still in committee'. 

We have a HORRIBLE judiciary system.  It all depends on whether one person, namely the Speaker of the House likes the bill or wants to present it.



Washington State
November 5, 2007 08:45 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

AgJOBS Amnesty Threat Expected to Re-surface This Week

A remnant of the Senate's "comprehensive" amnesty bill that was rejected in Congress last spring could return to the Senate floor as early as this week. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D- Calif.) is expected to attach her revised Agricultural Job Opportunities, Benefits, and Security Act of 2007 (AgJOBS) to the Farm Bill Extension Act of 2007 and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) is apparently trying to convince his Republican Senate colleagues that the AgJOBS amnesty has been changed enough to make it palatable to them this time around. If enacted, AgJOBS would reward an estimated 1.5 million illegal aliens with amnesty (plus their spouses and children which could push the total to three million or more). This measure also would provide amnesty for employers who broke the law by hiring illegal aliens...

Click here to learn more about AgJOBS.

Click here to view actions you can take right now to stop this massive amnesty.
November 5, 2007 08:47 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007

AgJOBS Amnesty Threat Expected to Re-surface This Week

A remnant of the Senate's "comprehensive" amnesty bill that was rejected in Congress last spring could return to the Senate floor as early as this week. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D- Calif.) is expected to attach her revised Agricultural Job Opportunities, Benefits, and Security Act of 2007 (AgJOBS) to the Farm Bill Extension Act of 2007 and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) is apparently trying to convince his Republican Senate colleagues that the AgJOBS amnesty has been changed enough to make it palatable to them this time around. If enacted, AgJOBS would reward an estimated 1.5 million illegal aliens with amnesty (plus their spouses and children which could push the total to three million or more). This measure also would provide amnesty for employers who broke the law by hiring illegal aliens...

Click here to learn more about AgJOBS.

Click here to view actions you can take right now to stop this massive amnesty.
November 5, 2007 09:48 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 8, 2007

Source: ANNE MANETAS - www.numbersUSA.com /> URL Source: http://www.numbersUSAS.com
Published: Nov 4, 2007
Post Date: 2007-11-04 22:19:25 by blackhorse

AgJOBS AMNESTY THREAT THIS WEEK!

Our Capitol Hill team expects that Sen. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA) may offer her revised AgJOBS amendment to the Farm Bill Extension Act of 2007 as early as THIS WEEK.

Senator CHUCK HAGEL (R-NE) is apparently trying to convince his GOP Senate colleagues that the AgJOBS amnesty has been changed enough to make it palatable to Republican Senators. By and large, however, this is the same AgJOBS amnesty proposed last year, which, if enacted, would reward an estimated 1.5 million illegal aliens with amnesty (plus their spouses and children which could push the total to three million or more). This measure also would provide amnesty for employers who broke the law by hiring illegal aliens.

Because Senate procedure is too unpredictable for us to wait for Sen. DIANNE FEINSTEIN to offer the amendment and hope that one of our Senate allies is on the floor to object and force a cloture vote, it is really important that you begin phoning your Republican Senator(s) today and asking them to oppose the AgJOBS amnesty.

YOUR CALLS THIS WEEK TO REPUBLICAN SENATORS CAN STOP THIS AGRICULTURE JOBS AMNESTY Amendment.

www.NumbersUSA’s Director of Government Relations, ROSEMARY JENKS, told me last night, “If we lose this battle, we're going to be fighting piecemeal amnesties until the cows come home, but a win should (finally!) be decisive. We need to win this and get back to moving the Shuler bill!”

PHONE YOUR REPUBLICAN SENATOR

You can find the telephone numbers for your two U.S. Senators at: http://www.numbersusa.com/myMembers or also a listing of all U.S. Senators here http://www.numbersusa.com/congressinfo/

Or, call the Senate switchboard at 202-224-3121.

TALKING POINTS:

You may want to make one or more of the following points when you call:

AgJOBS is a clear amnesty because illegal aliens get immediate amnesty. Even though Sen. Feinstein’s amendment calls for operational control of the borders before an illegal alien can get a green card, all the illegal workers get legal temporary status without regard to the triggers

Despite "triggers;" the illegal aliens are indentured servants from the time they get "Blue Card" status until they get permanent residence;

Even though the Employment Verification System must be operational, there is no requirement that employers must be actually using the system

The last “trigger” requires that DHS be processing and adjudicating in a timely manner applications for Blue Card status (i.e., temporary amnesty) for illegal agricultural workers

All employers get amnesty. Subject to a $10,000 fine, none of the information in the Blue Card application, including employment records, may be used for any purpose other than making a determination on the application or imposing a penalty for making a false statement in the application;

The "touchback" provision is a joke. It requires all farmworkers to depart the United States and file their application for green card status, but they don’t have to leave the country to get the temporary amnesty;

Illegal aliens amnestied under AgJOBS are not counted against annual immigrant quotas when they adjust to permanent residence;

WHY AGJOBS IS UNNECESSARY

POINT #1: We don't have an epidemic of crops "rotting on the vine." A few anecdotes are often allowed by the media to create a totally false picture of the overall situation. We've heard these scare tactics from the pro-amnesty forces for years. Somehow, we never seem to run out of food.

POINT #2: The federal government offers the H-2A visa which allows farmers to import unlimited numbers of foreign ag workers for specific short-term work. If some growers lack workers, it is only because they failed to be creative enough to attract a domestic workforce or failed to use the legal foreign guestworker program that is available to them.

POINT #3: Growers who refuse to use the H-2A program mainly do so because they have to pay an almost decent wage under the program, while illegal aliens are cheaper.

POINT #4: If growers find the H-2A program too cumbersome, they should direct their lobbyists to support H-2A reforms instead of amnesty.

MAIN POINT: Americans will do this work - at a decent wage. The Department of Labor finds that the majority of farm workers (about 55%) in the U.S. are native-born Americans!

THANK YOU Thanks to all of your hard work we were able to beat back the DREAM Amnesty last month. Let’s put the AgJOBS amnesty to rest once and for all. Your phone calls this week can help us do that.

-ANNE MANETAS-

You must login to discuss this item.


  Sponsored Links