|
Post by killer on May 18, 2007 18:41:43 GMT -5
Are Americans headed to the poor house if this bill passes?
|
|
|
Post by kevin on May 18, 2007 20:17:13 GMT -5
The speculation says...maybe.
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 18, 2007 21:59:26 GMT -5
article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWQ0MjMzNmQ3YTNjYWY2Mzk2MDg1MWY2ODdmOTI3ZWY= GOP Sellout A senseless giveaway on immigration. By Brian Darling “Sellout.” It may be harsh, but it’s the most accurate and succinct way to sum up how conservatives feel right now about President Bush and Senate Republicans, who have cut a deal that would grant amnesty to the estimated 12 million illegal aliens living in the U.S. — not to mention the parents, spouses, and children of these illegals. Title VI of a draft copy of the bill breaks down amnesty visas into three categories: Z-1 — Illegal aliens present and working in the United States up to Jan. 1, 2007. Z-2 — Parents and spouses of illegal aliens qualifying under the Z-1 category. Z-3 — Children of illegal aliens qualifying under the Z-1 category. These “Z Visa” holders can stay in the “Z” status indefinitely, which means they never have to pursue “a pathway to citizenship.” They also would be able to get Social Security numbers and benefit from some welfare programs. Shockingly, there is no cap on the numbers of amnesty recipients in the draft language. The only thing the Z Visa holder can’t do is vote — until, that is, a liberal judge declares this limitation unconstitutional or until a liberal president can railroad through a “technical corrections” bill. Notwithstanding all you are going to hear to the contrary from President Bush, Sen. John McCain, and their new ideological partner, Sen. Ted Kennedy, Title VI of this bill is amnesty, plain and simple. According to an op-ed by former attorney general Ed Meese that appeared last year in the New York Times discussing the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, “the difference is that President Reagan called this what it was: amnesty. Indeed, look up the term ‘amnesty’ in Black’s Law Dictionary, and you’ll find it says, ‘the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act provided amnesty for undocumented aliens already in the country.’” It was amnesty then, and it’s amnesty now. Why would Republicans negotiate with Ted Kennedy, a senator with impeccable credentials with the far Left of the immigration movement? And why would John McCain imperil his wobbly campaign for the presidency by allying himself with a Kennedy-drafted immigration bill? It simply defies common sense. Some of these Republicans, I believe, have convinced themselves that they can convince the American people that “triggers,” “tough border enforcement,” and the Y Visa “temporary guest worker program” were concessions from the Left that balance out the amnesty part of the bill. Unfortunately, they’re wrong. And Senator McCain’s prospects to woo conservatives will suffer dearly. The prospect of amnesty for illegal immigrants and their families outweighs any tough border initiative that may be in the bill, or the get-tough employment-enforcement provisions. All that will matter, if the bill passes, is that President Bush and presidential wannabe John McCain enabled and are responsible for a historic giveaway — for a program that grants amnesty to millions of illegal aliens who are being rewarded for breaking the law. In the name of bipartisanship, they have given away the farm to Ted Kennedy and the left wing of the Democrat party in the Senate. I can’t imagine any self-respecting conservative in America who would not hold this against McCain, Bush, and any other politician who supports this terrible idea. — Brian Darling is director of U.S. Senate Relations at the Heritage Foundation.
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 18, 2007 21:59:56 GMT -5
counterterrorismblog.org/2007/05/immigration_reform_will_be_nat.php Immigration “Reform” Will Be National Security Disaster By Bill West Last year it appeared we dodged the bullet when proposed immigration reforms died on “The Hill.” Unfortunately, the mad rush to “do something” has taken over the common sense of too many of our political leaders and we may actually see some form of immigration reform become law in the near future. Most unfortunately, if this “reform” includes the proposed legalization and guest worker provisions currently being touted, whatever euphoria the politicos and the media may experience won’t last long because nothing passed in that context will work in the real world. In a nutshell, here’s why. The Federal immigration bureaucracy that will be tasked with administering any of these reforms will be the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). CIS is already unable to effectively deal with its existing benefit adjudication missions. Virtually all internal and external Government reviews of CIS performance have established significant problem areas, including lack of resources and management performance. The bad ghosts of the old INS, from where CIS sprang, linger in a big way. To expect an already overburdened and poorly managed Federal agency to properly deal with a sudden huge increase in mission workload is a fantasy. CIS has indicated it would need to bring in private contractor personnel to help deal with the monumental workload increase from reform legislation. Such contractors will invariably be quickly hired, poorly trained, probably low-bid, barely vetted and far more subject to bribery and corruption than permanent Government employees. Not that bribery and corruption will necessarily be that necessary. In short order, the system will be overwhelmed. Whatever minimal fraud detection and prevention safeguards might be erected won’t last long in the face of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of applications and petitions to be adjudicated. What that means is the information provided on those applications and petitions, and whatever supporting documents they may have (if any), will essentially be taken at face value. Whatever the applicant alien tells the adjudicator will essentially be taken at face value. There will be little time or process available to verify anything, perhaps beyond running the applicant’s name through a standard battery of computer databases (and, even that may become so time consuming some will slip through the cracks). And those names of the applicant aliens...those aliens who, for whatever time period they have been “undocumented” (illegal) in the United States, wherein so very many have procured and utilized false and fraudulent identification documents often in false identities...suddenly the Government will accept as true whatever those applicant aliens tell the Government on those applications and in those interviews. An undocumented alien who procured and used false documents would lie? Well, not when applying for genuine status in the US...right? So, we can be absolutely certain of who all these newly legalized persons truly are, correct? Their statements will be truthful and their support documents not fraudulent and false, right? So, when the overburdened CIS personnel...to include those minimally trained contractors...quickly process all those applicant aliens, with the primary mission of reducing the huge case backlog, the American public can feel confident in the integrity of that process that no foreign criminal or terrorist will possibly slip through the system and be granted legal status...a “path to citizenship”...like so many others have during normal immigration times. Add to the inevitable processing breakdowns will be the inevitable “me too” class action lawsuits. Large segments of excluded illegal alien populations will invariably obtain savvy legal counsel who will initiate Federal Court legal challenges to the law, claiming their clients should also be entitled to the benefits extended to others under the statute. This happened as a result of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, the other supposed one-time only legalization/amnesty, and those lawsuits lasted more than a decade resulting in many tens of thousands more illegal aliens ultimately being allowed to remain in the US. It will surely happen again. The devil truly is in the details. Conveniently for the politicians on both sides of the aisle pushing for a feel good bill, they are ignoring real world details in all this. If what is being proposed on the Hill becomes law, contrary to what some political leaders claim, there will be significant security risks emanating from the process.
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 18, 2007 22:00:24 GMT -5
article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmViN2Y4NzYyMmVlNzE4OWNiN2M0YTIwMWQ2NDUxOTQ= May 18, 2007, 0:00 a.m. Rotten Deal No matter what you call it, it's amnesty. By Rich Lowry Editor's note: This column is available exclusively through King Features Syndicate. For permission to reprint or excerpt this copyrighted material, please contact: kfsreprint@hearstsc.com, or phone 800-708-7311, ext 246). The U.S. has now constructed .286 percent of the 700 miles of fencing on the southern border provided for in 2006’s Secure Fence Act. That is sufficient for a bipartisan group of senators to want to effectively declare this brief national experiment with immigration enforcement effectively over. Enough with the harsh exclusionary measures! Two miles of fencing out of 700 passed by Congress on a border stretching 1,952 miles is a milestone that should mark our departure to the next phase of immigration policy — a sweeping amnesty of illegals and an increase in legal immigration. Thus, another confirmation of the iron rule of the nation’s immigration politics: No matter how discontented the public is with our broken immigration system, the political elite’s answer is always higher levels of immigration. Rep. Duncan Hunter, (R., Calif.), noted at the second Republican presidential debate that the Department of Homeland Security has $1 billion for the fence, but “they want to drag their feet and hook this up with amnesty.” Give him points for clairvoyance. The sweetener luring some conservative Republicans into the Senate deal is that it would have enforcement benchmarks that would have to be met in theory before other provisions kick in. The benchmarks include 370 miles of fencing on the border (half what was in the Secure Fence Act) and the hiring of thousands more border agents. If these things happen, however, it still might be that more illegals come here, pulled by the allure of amnesty. The only meaningful benchmarks would be reductions in the number of border crossings and the size of the illegal population already here. The deal also provides for an electronic system to verify the legal status of employees at the workplace. This is important. But as a writer on the PowerLine points out, government is good at handing out benefits like amnesty, but bad at creating and competently running complex systems. Maybe when the FBI finally has up-to-date computers we can believe promises of a new workplace-enforcement system to accompany an amnesty. And it is an amnesty, no matter what supporters call it. Sen. John McCain, a backer of the deal, unleashed this howler at the GOP presidential debate: “I have never supported amnesty and never would.” But the 12 million illegals here before January would get probationary legal status immediately when the bill passes. Effectively, that’s amnesty. (It’s unclear why illegals arriving here after January would be excluded so coldheartedly. What does McCain want to do, deport them all?) Another 400,000 people a year would come into the country as guest workers on visas good for two years and renewable only three times. Will we have the will to hold them to that? In a nod to the fact that importing so many low-skill workers makes no sense, the deal would put a new emphasis on skills rather than family unification in admitting new legal immigrants. But before doing so, it would work through the current backlog of applicants, admitting another roughly five million people over the next eight years. All of these provisions would never pass on their own without the cover of enforcement. Which raises the question, Why not just do the enforcement? Backers of amnesty reply that it’s impossible to deport 12 million illegal immigrants. So it is. But that’s not necessary. Last year, 221,664 illegal immigrants were deported, an increase of roughly 20 percent from the year before. If we determined to keep that pace of increase during the next few years, the number of illegals deciding to come here and deciding to stay would decrease with the realization that the climate of tolerance for illegality had ended. Then, the magnitude of the problem would be more manageable, but that’s not what the bipartisan political elite wants. Instead, it wants its rotten deal.
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 18, 2007 22:03:35 GMT -5
LOW WAGES FOR LOW SKILLS New Report Corrects Misconceptions About High-Tech Visa WASHINGTON (May 2007) – There is much discussion of reorienting the legal immigration flow toward ''highly skilled'' workers, the kind of workers admitted by the H-1B visa program. That visa, which is theoretically temporary but often serves as a stepping-stone to permanent residency, is widely used by high-tech employers and is the frequent subject of debate as available slots are snapped up within hours and lawmakers call for higher limits. A new study from the Center for Immigration Studies shows how, far from the being a source of highly skilled labor, the H-1B program now operates mainly to supply U.S. employers with cheap workers. Analysis of data from the Department of Labor shows that very few H-1B workers are ''highly skilled,'' and that their wages are well below those of comparable U.S. workers. The new report, ''Low Salaries for Low Skills: Wages and Skill Levels for H-1B Computer Workers, 2005,'' by John Miano (available at www.cis.org/articles/2007/back407.html ), will be released at a panel discussion on Tuesday, May 22, at 9:30 a.m., at the Murrow Room of the National Press Club. The panel will include: * John Miano, author of ''Low Salaries for Low Skills: Wages and Skill Levels for H-1B Computer Workers, 2005'' and an expert on the U.S. software industry * Ron Hira, Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology and author of Outsourcing America: What's Behind Our National Crisis and How We Can Reclaim American Jobs * Jessica Vaughan, Senior Policy Analyst, Center for Immigration Studies, and author of ''Shortcuts to Immigration: The 'Temporary' Visa Program Is Broken'' * Moderator: Mark Krikorian, Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies The panel discussion is free and open to the public. For more information, contact John Keeley at (202) 466-8185 or jmk@cis.org .
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 18, 2007 22:23:54 GMT -5
Sell-Out: Senate Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill Capitulates to Every Special Interest Demand
PR Newswire Friday, May 18, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The immigration bill unveiled yesterday by the Senate, which would grant amnesty to virtually every illegal alien in the country, plus an unknown number of their relatives, amounts to a complete sell-out of the interests of the American public, declared the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The Senate bill, S. 1348, includes immediate and irrevocable benefits for tens of millions of illegal aliens, access to low-wage foreign labor for business interests, and nothing but more worthless promises to the American public that the government would enforce immigration laws in the future.
S. 1348, which the Senate is expected to vote on as early as Monday, was hammered out behind closed doors, bypassing the hearings process or any assessment of the fiscal, labor market or environmental impact. The bill would grant amnesty to nearly every illegal alien in the United States as well as children and elderly parents who may be residing outside the country. Within 24 hours of filing an application, illegal aliens would be granted work authorization and relief from possible deportation, without any background checks. In addition, the legislation calls for the admission of 400,000 additional "guest workers" plus their dependent family members each year, some of whom will be permitted to remain permanently.
"In agreeing to this bill, the United States Senate has broken every promise that has been made to the American people," charged Dan Stein, president of FAIR. "The bill reneges on promises that amnesty would never again be offered to people who are in this country illegally; it violates commitments that Congress has made to protect the interests of American workers; and it compromises the security of this nation by granting legal status to people who may pose a threat to the nation. Adding to the betrayal, this surrender of the public interest was negotiated by senators who had personally pledged, as recently as last year, never to agree to any bill that includes amnesty."
The provisions of the bill that call for tougher immigration enforcement in the future were described by FAIR as "worthless and an insult to the intelligence of the American public." The 2007 version of immigration reform contains the identical set of promises to secure the borders, establish a verifiable worker identification system, and enact penalties for employers who hire illegal aliens that Congress and successive administrations have made and broken countless times over the past 20 years.
"The security and enforcement provisions are less than meaningless. They will either not be funded, endlessly delayed, or ignored all together," Stein declared. "While tens of millions of illegal aliens will reap rewards and enjoy access to the courts to appeal any denial of benefits, the American public gets shafted with no avenue for appeal."
FAIR is calling upon the Senate to delay voting on S. 1348 until the bill receives a full public hearing, and until a thorough study of its impact is completed. "This is a bill that will quite literally affect the future of this nation. Its ramifications deserve more than a weekend's review on the part of the people who will vote on it," said Stein.
Federation for American Immigration Reform
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on May 18, 2007 22:37:09 GMT -5
Y'know...I had thought that the conservatives in Congress had gotten Bush's ear and let him know in no uncertain terms that amnesty was NOT acceptable. After all, he did sign into law the bill to build a, what, 800 mile border fence and to employ technology to patrol the areas where a physical fence was unnecessary or impractical. Obviously, Bush has a very short memory when it comes to this particular cause. I tend to agree with what a local Nashville radio host said: taken at face value, if all the various steps an illegal had to take to become a citizen, one could get behind the bill. After all, the bill calls for the borders to be secured BEFORE the new Z-Visas can be applied for and granted, the illegal has to pay a fine and at least some back taxes and must return to their home country before the process moves forward. Trouble is, I don't trust the government to enforce any of these regulations, much less all of them. Democrats might allow the bill to be passed in its present form, but they'll waste little time in removing or watering down the steps, saying that forcing a head of household to go back home will split up families, the fine is unnecessarily harsh, etc. We know why Democrats support amnesty: up to 30 or so million new voters who will tend to vote Democrat so as to be guaranteed more and more social services 30 million new Democrat voters will render the Republican party as irrelevant as the Green Party- and don't for a moment think Ted Kennedy isn't aware of this. Does Bush know? Apparently, no he doesn't. Does he love Big Business- the only constituency among Republican backers that is in favor of this amnesty bill- more than he does the Republican party? Apparently, yes he does. "Sellout". Indeed.
|
|
lawman
Apprentice Cog
Posts: 237
|
Post by lawman on May 18, 2007 22:45:29 GMT -5
and if he'd 'sell-out' the Country like that......isn't the 'war on terror' just a pre-tense....and pocket filler for 'big business?'
I mean...a 'sellout'' IS a fall (Terrible loss) for the Country!
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 18, 2007 23:18:31 GMT -5
When are people going to understand that it does not matter what PARTY someone is affiliated with! People with agendas are on both sides of the isle. I cannot say this enough! DO YOUR RESEARCH INTO THE PERSON!!!!!!!!!!! TO HELL WITH PARTY! It is the CHARACTER that matters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We are allowing ourselves to be spoon fed what those with agendas want us to to be fed. Use your brain, use your natural curiosity. Curiosity is a good thing. I makes you want to know what is going on. We ALL need a healthy dose of this!
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 18, 2007 23:23:08 GMT -5
La Raza' has virtual veto over bill Controversial group 'practically in the room' during negotiations-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: May 18, 2007 5:17 p.m. Eastern © 2007 WorldNetDaily.com Members of the "La Raza" movement envision reclaiming the American Southwest Controversial Latino groups, including the National Council of La Raza, were granted virtual veto power over the immigration bill hammered out yesterday by Senate Republicans, Democrats and the White House, the Washington Post reported. A number of prominent Republicans have rejected the bill – which still has not been issued in its final form – as "amnesty" for millions of people who came to the U.S. illegally. The National Council of La Raza, or "The Race," was condemned last year by Rep. Charles Norwood, R-Ga., as a radical "pro-illegal immigration lobbying organization that supports racist groups calling for the secession of the western United States as a Hispanic-only homeland." Norwood, writing in Human Events, called on La Raza to renounce its support of the campus group MEChA – Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan – which sees "The Race" as part of a transnational ethnic group that one day will reclaim Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of the Aztecs. In Chicano folklore, Aztlan includes California, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Texas. As WND reported, Norwood said last year the National Council of La Raza campaigned hard against a plan to provide funding, training and resources for state and local law enforcement agencies who help federal officers in capturing and detaining criminals who are illegal aliens. "For those who haven't figured it out yet, the entire illegal immigration crisis we suffer is due 100 percent from failure to enforce existing law," Norwood said. "The other side (including La Raza) knows this very well, and knows that the continued suppression of U.S. law enforcement efforts is essential to permanently destroying our borders." Regarding the new bill, Eric Gutierrez, lead lobbyist for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, told the Post there's "a real sense that the Latino community is key to the solution in this debate, so now they are reaching out to us more than ever." "Neither party wants to make a misstep politically," he said. The Post said the Latino groups "were practically in the room" as Democratic and Republican senators negotiated the bill, which would grant quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants, create a temporary worker program and increase border security. Before criticism came rolling in, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., insisted the bill is not "amnesty," but lawmakers such as Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, and Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., immediately applied that label. King called it "a pardon and reward for lawbreakers," and DeMint declared, "I don't care how you try to spin it, this is amnesty." Last year, Latino groups demonstrated their power by filling streets in cities across the nation when the House passed a bill that would have made illegal immigration a felony. The Post noted La Raza, MALDEF, the League of United Latin American Citizens, or LULAC, and the National Immigration Forum are part of a broad network of immigrant rights groups that have been speaking daily with top aides in the offices of Democratic Sens. Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader. The bill promoted by Kennedy would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" that puts them on a track for permanent residency within eight to 13 years. Fees and a fine of $5,000 are required and heads of household first must return to their home countries. The illegals would be able to obtain a probationary card right away to live and work in the U.S., but the path to citizenship cannot begin until completion of border improvements and the high-tech ID system. The temporary worker program also would be delayed until the new security measures are in place. The workers would be required to return home after two years and would not be on a track for permanent status. The guest worker visas could be renewed twice, but the worker would be required to leave for one year between each renewal. Democrats wanted guest workers to be allowed to stay indefinitely. Two tough issues remain for which Kennedy's Latino "stakeholders" likely will have sway. Republicans and Democrats still are divided on whether 400,000 foreigners entering the country as temporary workers would have to leave the country after three years or be granted a chance to remain permanently, the Post reported. Also, the parties must resolve how extended family ties should be weighed in granting visas. William Ramos, a spokesman for the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, told the Post his constituency would oppose elimination of "some aspects of family reunification" and also a policy that would force immigrants to return to their home countries for an extended period and to petition for reentry. The White House held a meeting just over two weeks ago with Latino groups, and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez have had contact. " At least they are paying attention to us," MALDEF President John Trasviña told the Post[/b]. www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55777
|
|
|
Post by kevin on May 19, 2007 4:33:00 GMT -5
When are people going to understand that it does not matter what PARTY someone is affiliated with! People with agendas are on both sides of the isle. I cannot say this enough! DO YOUR RESEARCH INTO THE PERSON!!!!!!!!!!! TO HELL WITH PARTY! It is the CHARACTER that matters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We are allowing ourselves to be spoon fed what those with agendas want us to to be fed. Use your brain, use your natural curiosity. Curiosity is a good thing. I makes you want to know what is going on. We ALL need a healthy dose of this! You mean like these: Obama Lines Up Behind Neo-Conservative Campaign Against IranPelosi's Capitulation
|
|
|
Post by richbrout on May 19, 2007 9:04:52 GMT -5
Gee, DOW at RECORD HIGHS (literally) and Unemployment at near record lows, sounds like Americans that want to work are in pretty good shape. Some of you folks in the grape picking, dishwashing, hotel cleaning business?
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 19, 2007 9:17:59 GMT -5
Rich are you aware that when a person runs out of unemployment benefits they fall off the charts? In other words we do not know how many millions of americans are out of work because they are no longer on the scale? How am I supposed to believe the rose colored glasses senario knowing that we have millions of people out of work due to outsourcing, plants moving, increases in H1B visas and illegal immigration? Sorry but I don't buy it. Here is a good site for you to follow what is really going on with the economy. www.moneyfiles.org/
|
|
|
Post by richbrout on May 19, 2007 9:33:30 GMT -5
I hear this argument all the time that really unempolyment ranks are high their unemployment period has run out, for this to be true at SOME point the numbers would have had to been high and they haven't been for over four years.
I believe that if you have public K-12 free education and speak the language, an average 6th grade educated non English speaking worker and you should not be in competition for the same job and if you are, its on you. The baby boomers are leaving the workforce and we don't have the numbers to replace them. This issue is dead. The Republicans controlled both houses and the Presidency and didn't do anything. We need to give these people guest worker status, make them pay taxes and give them a path to citizenship.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on May 19, 2007 15:59:52 GMT -5
rich-
While I tend to agree with you end goals, this ain't the way to go about it.
Citizenship should be the prize to be earned by acts of a positive nature.
In this Amnesty Bill, the illegals earn citizenship as a reward for breaking our laws and managing not to get caught while doing so.
At this point, I don't think it's going to pass. Conservatives are opposed to it because it isn't tough enough and Liberals are opposed to it because it's too tough.
Good...the only thing worse than no bill at all is a bad one.
|
|
|
Post by lawman on May 19, 2007 16:11:22 GMT -5
Rich are you aware that when a person runs out of unemployment benefits they fall off the charts? In other words we do not know how many millions of americans are out of work because they are no longer on the scale? How am I supposed to believe the rose colored glasses senario knowing that we have millions of people out of work due to outsourcing, plants moving, increases in H1B visas and illegal immigration? Sorry but I don't buy it. Here is a good site for you to follow what is really going on with the economy. www.moneyfiles.org/ commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/andrew_clark/2007/04/buy_buy_buy.html''Still, investors do seem to have adopted a knack of only looking on the bright side - and the prospect of a bail-out by some sucker with wads of cash to splash is a usefully encouraging back-up plan. Sometime over the next two years we will discover whether private equity firms are really as effective as they consider themselves to be in squeezing profits from unloved, undervalued businesses. If they're not reaping the rewards they hope for, the supply of suckers will very quickly evaporate, leaving a trail of destruction in its wake.''
Sadly dixie56, you are a 'prophet of doom' and people don't want to hear those prophet's, ..........but you're 'dead on target' so take heart.......they didn't want to 'hear' Noah warning about the impending flood either!
|
|
|
Post by richbrout on May 19, 2007 17:52:28 GMT -5
I was thinking more Chicken Little than Noah.
They don't want to hear it because they look around in their own lives and are unaffected. Look at the polls, Americans are not all worked up on this.
|
|
|
Post by lawman on May 19, 2007 18:07:31 GMT -5
I was thinking more Chicken Little than Noah. They don't want to hear it because they look around in their own lives and are unaffected. Look at the polls, Americans are not all worked up on this. Yeah.......well, 'they' are about to be ''affected'' when those prophetic words become reality.........worse that that 'crash' of '29!
|
|
|
Post by kevin on May 19, 2007 18:23:20 GMT -5
This is all I really have to say But, we better be careful
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 19, 2007 19:29:25 GMT -5
Well done Kevin! A picture is worth a thousand words!
We are in for some bad times folks and you had better get your heads out of the sand.
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 19, 2007 19:33:38 GMT -5
This is very long but I think people need to look into this. There is much that is UN driven. I now understand why I would see signs to get us out of the UN! nord.twu.net/acl/agenda21.html
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 19, 2007 19:39:00 GMT -5
For you Richbrout...more to follow as soon as I find them www.europe2020.org/spip.php?article472&lang=enPublic announcement GEAB N°15 16/05/2007 As reveals the study conducted by LEAP/E2020, namely via calculations in world’s five main currencies (US dollar, Euro, British pound, Yen and Yuan), the US economy actually went into recession during the first quarter of 2007. It is indeed during this period that the value of the US GDP started to decrease when calculated in three of the four non-USD currencies, that is in Euros, Pounds and Yuans (see 2000-2007 comparative tables below). The LEAP/E2020 researchers estimate that this tendency will increase in the second and third quarters of 2007 and show it in the present issue of GEAB: during the second quarter, the recession will be confirmed in the four non-USD currencies -including in Yens, leading the US straight into the “very great depression” anticipated in GEAB N°11 as early as January 2007. Comparative table of US GDP over the 2000-2007 period in world’s five main currencies ($, €, ₤,¥, Ұ) / LEAP/E2020 estimated growth rates for the US over 2nd and 3rd quarters 2007 / Value in billions ($, €, ₤), tens of billions ( Ұ), hundreds of billions (¥) - Source LEAP/E2020 This method, so-called « multi-currency localisation » of an economy’s course, has been implemented by LEAP/E2020 for two years in order to follow the evolution of major global economies by clinging as closely as possible to a constantly moving economic and financial reality, due to the ongoing global systemic crisis. The phase of impact of this crisis in particular puts the final straw on the post-1945 economic and financial order based on the might of US economy and of the dollar. It has therefore appeared very early to LEAP/E2020 that new measurement tools were required, such as this « multi-currency » device, in order to understand better this globalised world where different strategic players, each of them representing constantly changing relative-weights, are at the centre of the world’s economic and financial activity [1]. A measurement in US dollar solely can no longer grasp this new reality. Below, LEAP/E2020 describes the various underlied facts and assumptions: yearly exchange rates, estimated growth rates and exchange rates in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. It is important to bear in mind that LEAP/E2020 was eager to base its study on the most conservative assumptions in order to avoid a statistic bias that could contribute to increase the trend. Therefore, as regards the US growth, our team used the official provisional figure of 1.3 percent GDP growth in the first quarter of 2007 [2], knowing that if we consider the 10 percent increase in the US trade deficit in March 2007 (reaching 63.9 billion USD) [3], it is very likely that the final US growth result in the first quarter will in fact range between 0.6 and 1.1 percent. Nevertheless, even based on optimistic growth figures in USD, the recession has arrived and is about to worsen quickly. Thus, as anticipated by LEAP/E2020 in February 2007 (GEAB N°12), the month of April 2007 marks the tipping point of the phase of impact of the global systemic crisis, and signals the objective entry of the US into recession, even though official US figures are still trying to conceal the trend. Besides, in relation to this fundamental piece of information, April 2007 was also a turning point on a number of key-factors of the global systemic crisis whose evolution will experience a new acceleration. In this month’s issue of GEAB, LEAP/E2020 enters into the details of the two following analyses: - Aggravation of the US consumer’s insolvency, profit reduction for companies depending on the US market and massive layoffs contribute to a negative retroactive loop - Acceleration of dollar collapse, imported inflation, increase in balance of payment deficit and trade tensions with Asia and Europe smash the Fed’s consensus and thrust the US into the « very great depression » By the beginning of next summer, the consequences of these evolving factors will directly shape the next step of the impact phase of the global systemic crisis. LEAP/E2020 already insisted on it, this crisis develops along a « spiral » type of process (whose epicentre remains in the US for the time being), not as a linear collapse. The complexity of the globalised world where this crisis takes place means that the degradation of the ancient order unfolds simultaneously but at different paces and with variable consequences throughout a whole range of sectors (economic, financial, military, diplomatic, cultural, political…). Illustration of the spiral-process affecting the US, epicentre of the global systemic crisis Even when one parameter seems to stabilize, it only means that the crisis is developing on another front. As much as it is necessary to use several benchmarks to measure properly the GDPs of this century’s major economic powers and evaluate seriously their real evolution, it is necessary to watch after a whole range of factors simultaneously in order to measure, understand and anticipate the course of the ongoing global systemic crisis. Month after month, this is what the LEAP/E2020 researchers strive to do in order to anticipate not only the specific features of the crisis, but also the configuration along which the crisis will stop as it should some time between 2009-10, going from an descending spiral to an ascending one: a figure symbolically called « a surface of revolution ».
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 19, 2007 19:42:13 GMT -5
www.tiesweb.org/dialogues/incorrect/archives/biancheri56.php3#117/02/2006 The Laboratoire européen d’Anticipation Politique Europe 2020 (LEAP/E2020) now estimates to over 80% the probability that the week of March 20-26, 2006 will be the beginning of the most significant political crisis the world has known since the Fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, together with an economic and financial crisis of a scope comparable with that of 1929. This last week of March 2006 will be the turning-point of a number of critical developments, resulting in an acceleration of all the factors leading to a major crisis, disregard any American or Israeli military intervention against Iran. In case such an intervention is conducted, the probability of a major crisis to start rises up to 100%, according to LEAP/E2020. An Alarm based on 2 verifiable events The announcement of this crisis results from the analysis of decisions taken by the two key-actors of the main on-going international crisis, i.e. the United States and Iran: --> on the one hand there is the Iranian decision of opening the first oil bourse priced in Euros on March 20th, 2006 in Teheran, available to all oil producers of the region ; --> on the other hand, there is the decision of the American Federal Reserve to stop publishing M3 figures (the most reliable indicator on the amount of dollars circulating in the world) from March 23, 2006 onward [1]. These two decisions constitute altogether the indicators, the causes and the consequences of the historical transition in progress between the order created after World War II and the new international equilibrium in gestation since the collapse of the USSR. Their magnitude as much as their simultaneity will catalyse all the tensions, weaknesses and imbalances accumulated since more than a decade throughout the international system. A world crisis declined in 7 sector-based crises LEAP/E2020's researchers and analysts thus identified 7 convergent crises that the American and Iranian decisions coming into effect during the last week of March 2006, will catalyse and turn into a total crisis, affecting the whole planet in the political, economic and financial fields, as well as in the military field most probably too: 1. Crisis of confidence in the Dollar 2. Crisis of US financial imbalances 3. Oil crisis 4. Crisis of the American leadership 5. Crisis of the Arabo-Muslim world 6. Global governance crisis 7. European governance crisis The entire process of anticipation of this crisis will be described in detail in the coming issues of LEAP/E2020’s confidential letter – the GlobalEurope Anticipation Bulletin, and in particular in the 2nd issue to be released on February 16, 2006. These coming issues will present the detailed analysis of each of the 7 crises, together with a large set of recommendations intended for various categories of players (governments and companies, namely), as well as with a number of operational and strategic advices for the European Union. Decoding of the event “Creation of the Iranian Oil Bourse priced in Euros” However, and in order not to limit this information to decision makers solely, LEAP/E2020 has decided to circulate widely this official statement together with the following series of arguments resulting from work conducted. Iran's opening of an Oil Bourse priced in Euros at the end of March 2006 will be the end of the monopoly of the Dollar on the global oil market. The immediate result is likely to upset the international currency market as producing countries will be able to charge their production in Euros also. In parallel, European countries in particular will be able to buy oil directly in their own currency without going though the Dollar. Concretely speaking, in both cases this means that a lesser number of economic actors will need a lesser number of Dollars [2]. This double development will thus head to the same direction, i.e. a very significant reduction of the importance of the Dollar as the international reserve currency, and therefore a significant and sustainable weakening of the American currency, in particular compared to the Euro. The most conservative evaluations give €1 to $1,30 US Dollar by the end of 2006. But if the crisis reaches the scope anticipated by LEAP/E2020, estimates of €1 for $1,70 in 2007 are no longer unrealistic. Decoding of the event “End of publication of the M3 macro-economic indicator” The end of the publication by the American Federal Reserve of the M3 monetary aggregate (and that of other components) [3] , a decision vehemently criticized by the community of economists and financial analysts, will have as a consequence to lose transparency on the evolution of the amount of Dollars in circulation worldwide. For some months already, M3 has significantly increased (indicating that « money printing » has already speeded up in Washington), knowing that the new President of the US Federal Reserve, Matt Bernanke, is a self-acknowledged fan of « money printing » [4]. Considering that a strong fall of the Dollar would probably result in a massive sale of the US Treasury Bonds held in Asia, in Europe and in the oil-producing countries, LEAP/E2020 estimates that the American decision to stop publishing M3 aims at hiding as long as possible two US decisions, partly imposed by the political and economic choices made these last years [5]: . the ‘monetarisation’ of the US debt . the launch of a monetary policy to support US economic activity. … two policies to be implemented until at least the October 2006 « mid-term » elections, in order to prevent the Republican Party from being sent in reeling. This M3-related decision also illustrates the incapacity of the US and international monetary and financial authorities put in a situation where they will in the end prefer to remove the indicator rather than try to act on the reality. Decoding of the aggravating factor “The military intervention against Iran” Iran holds some significant geo-strategic assets in the current crisis, such as its ability to intervene easily and with a major impact on the oil provisioning of Asia and Europe (by blocking the Strait of Ormuz), on the conflicts in progress in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the possible recourse to international terrorism. But besides these aspects, the growing distrust towards Washington creates a particularly problematic situation. Far from calming both Asian and European fears concerning the accession of Iran to the statute of nuclear power, a military intervention against Iran would result in an quasi-immediate dissociation of the European public opinions [6] which, in a context where Washington has lost its credibility in handling properly this type of case since the invasion of Iraq, will prevent the European governments from making any thing else than follow their public opinions. In parallel, the rising cost of oil which would follow such an intervention will lead Asian countries, China first and foremost, to oppose this option, thus forcing the United States (or Israel) to intervene on their own, without UN guarantee, therefore adding a severe military and diplomatic crisis to the economic and financial crisis. Relevant factors of the American economic crisis LEAP/E2020 anticipate that these two non-official decisions will involve the United States and the world in a monetary, financial, and soon economic crisis without precedent on a planetary scale. The ‘monetarisation’ of the US debt is indeed a very technical term describing a catastrophically simple reality: the United States undertake not to refund their debt, or more exactly to refund it in "monkey currency". LEAP/E2020 also anticipate that the process will accelerate at the end of March, in coincidence with the launching of the Iranian Oil Bourse, which can only precipitate the sales of US Treasury Bonds by their non-American holders. In this perspective, it is useful to contemplate the following information 7: the share of the debt of the US government owned by US banks fell down to 1,7% in 2004, as opposed to 18% in 1982. In parallel, the share of this same debt owned by foreign operators went from 17% in 1982 up to 49% in 2004. --> Question: How comes that US banks got rid of almost all their share of the US national debt over the last years? Moreover, in order to try to avoid the explosion of the "real-estate bubble" on which rests the US household consumption, and at a time when the US saving rate has become negative for the first time since 1932 and 1933 (in the middle of the "Great Depression"), the Bush administration, in partnership with the new owner of the US Federal Reserve and a follower of this monetary approach, will flood the US market of liquidities. Some anticipated effects of this systemic rupture According to LEAP/E2020, the non-accidental conjunction of the Iranian and American decisions, is a decisive stage in the release of a systemic crisis marking the end of the international order set up after World War II, and will be characterised between the end of March and the end of the year 2006 by a plunge in the dollar (possibly down to 1 Euro = 1,70 US Dollars in 2007) putting an immense upward pressure on the Euro, a significant rise of the oil price (over 100$ per barrel), an aggravation of the American and British military situations in the Middle East, a US budgetary, financial and economic crisis comparable in scope with the 1929 crisis, very serious economic and financial consequences for Asia in particular (namely China) but also for the United Kingdom [8], a sudden stop in the economic process of globalisation, a collapse of the transatlantic axis leading to a general increase of all the domestic and external political dangers all over the world. For individual dollar-holders, as for trans-national corporations or political and administrative decision makers, the consequences of this last week of March 2006 will be crucial. These consequences require some difficult decisions to be made as soon as possible (crisis anticipation is always a complex process since it relies on a bet) because once the crisis begins, the stampede starts and all those who chose to wait lose. For private individuals, the choice is clear: the US Dollar no longer is a “refuge” currency. The rising-cost of gold over the last year shows that many people have already anticipated this trend of the US currency. Anticipating… or being swept away by the winds of history For companies and governments - European ones in particular - LEAP/E2020 has developed in its confidential letter – the GlobalEurope Anticipation Bulletin -, and in particular in the next issue, a series of strategic and operational recommendations which, if integrated in today's decision-making processes, can contribute to soften significantly the "monetary, financial and economic tsunami" which will break on the planet at the end of next month. To use a simple image – by the way, one used in the political anticipation scenario « USA 2010 » [9] -, the impact of the events of the last week of March 2006 on the “Western World” we have known since 1945 will be comparable to the impact of the Fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989 on the “Soviet Block”. If this Alarm is so precise, it is that LEAP/E2020’s analyses concluded that all possible scenarios now lead to one single result: we collectively approach a "historical node" which is henceforth inevitable whatever the action of international or national actors. At this stage, only a direct and immediate action on the part of the US administration aimed at preventing a military confrontation with Iran on the one hand, and at giving up the idea to monetarise the US foreign debt on the other hand, could change the course of events. For LEAP/E2020 it is obvious that not only such actions will not be initiated by the current leaders in Washington, but that on the contrary they have already chosen "to force the destiny" by shirking their economic and financial problems at the expense of the rest of the world. European governments in particular should draw very quickly all the conclusions from this fact. For information, LEAP/E2020's original method of political anticipation has allowed several of its experts to anticipate (and publish) in particular : in 1988, the pproaching end of the Iron Curtain; in 1997, the progressive collapse in capacity of action and democratic legitimacy of the European institutional system; in 2002, the US being stuck in Iraq’s quagmire and above all the sustainable collapse of US international credibility; in 2003, the failure of the referenda on the European Constitution. Its methodology of anticipation of "systemic ruptures" now being well established, it is our duty as researchers and citizens to share it with the citizens and the European decision makers; especially because for individual or collective, private or public players, it is still time to undertake measures in order to reduce significantly the impact of this crisis on their positions whether these are economic, political or financial. LEAP/E2020's complete analysis, as well as its strategic and operational recommendations intended for the private and public actors, will be detailed in the next issues of the GlobalEurope Anticipation Bulletin, and more particularly in the econd one (issued February 16th, 2006). 1. These decisions were made a few months ago already: . the information on the creation by the Iranian government of an oil bourse priced in Euros (http://www.mehrnews.com/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=260851 ) first appeared in Summer 2004 in the specialised press. . the Federal Reserve announced on November 10, 2005 that it would cease publisging the information concerning M3 from March 23, 2006 onward : www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/discm3.htm2. By examining Table 13B of the December 2005 Securities Statistics of the Bank for International Settlements entitled International Bonds and Notes (in billions of US dollars), by currency ), one can notice that at the end of 2004 (China not-included), 37.0% of the international financial assets were labelled in USD vs 46,8% in Euros ; while in 2000, the proportion was contrary with 49,6% labelled in USD for 30,1% only in Euros. It indicates that the March 2006 decisions will most probably accelerate the trend of exit-strategy from the dollar. 3. Monetary aggregates (M1, M2, M3, M4) are statistical economic indicators. M0 is the value of all currency - here the dollar - that exists in actual bank notes and coins. M1 is M0 + checking accounts of this currency. M2 is M1 + money market accounts and Certificates of Deposits (CD) under $100,000. M3 is M2 + all larger holdings in the dollar (Eurodollar reserves, larger instruments and most non-European nations' reserve holdings) of $100,000 and more. The key point here is that when the Fed stops reporting M3, the entire world will lose transparency on the value of reserve holdings in dollars by other nations and major financial institutions. 4. See his eloquent speech on these aspects before the National Economists Club, Washington DC, November 21, 2002 (http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2002/20021121/default.htm ) 5. It should be noticed that the upward trend of the Dollar in 2005 was mostly the result of an interest rate differential which was favourable for the US Dollar, and of the “tax break on foreign earnings” Law (only valid for 1 year) which brought back to the US over $200 billion in the course of 2005. (source : CNNmoney.com money.cnn.com/2005/10/05/news/economy/jobs_overseas_profits ) 6. As regards Europe, LEAP/E2020 wishes to underline that European governments are no longer in line with their opinions concerning the major topics, and in particular concerning the European collective interest. The January 2006 GlobalEurometre clearly highlighted the situation with a Tide-Legitimacy Indicator of 8% (showing that 92% of the panel consider that EU leaders no longer represent their collective interests) and a Tide-Action Indicator of 24% (showing that less than a quarter of the panel thinks EU leaders are capable of translating their own decisions into concrete actions). According to LEAP/E2020, public declarations of support to Washington coming from Paris, Berlin or London, should not hide the fact that the Europeans will quickly dissociate from the US in case of military attack (the GlobalEurometre is a monthly European opinion indicator publishing in the GlobalEurope Anticipation Bulletin 3 figures out of which 2 are public). 7.(source : Bond Market Association, Holders of Treasury Securities: Estimated Ownership of U.S. Public Debt Securities ; www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/28/122315/558 ) 8. The United Kingdom indeed owns close to 3,000 billion $ of credits, that is almost three times what countries such as France or Japan hold. (source Bank of International Settlements, Table 9A, Consolidated Claims of Reporting Banks on Individual Countries ) 9. Cf. GlobalEurope Anticipation Bulletin N°1 (January 2006)
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 19, 2007 19:45:56 GMT -5
Want more Rich? Plenty more where these came from. www.economicpolicymonitor.com/2006_11_01_archive.htmlSunday, November 26, 2006 Greenspan's Confession It isn't only O. J. Simpson attempting a confession in recent weeks. Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan during a speech in Canada confessed as to why he flooded the United States economy with piles of new money and how he was able to pull it off. We had some fun yesterday on this topic with our headline grabbing post: Is Alan Greenspan 'DBCB'?" In it we reported that Greenspan is blaming the real estate boom, that is now crashing, on the fall of the Berlin Wall. That post may be our most popular to date. According to our blog stats, visitors from around the world, by the thousands, are visiting the post. But it is now time to get serious and analyze Greenspan's speech. In a sense Greenspan is right about the Berlin Wall. He pointed out in his speech that more market-based economies in China and other parts of the developing world brought "billions of cheap laborers onto the scene"--along with cheap labor from Eastern Europe because of the fall of the Berlin Wall. And, indeed, these cheap laborers resulted in prices of many goods falling in the United States. But this, in and of itself, did not create the housing boom. What the cheap labor, lower prices did was create cover for Greenspan to inflate the money supply. If prices weren't being forced downward because of cheap labor from China, Eastern Europe, et al., Greenspan would not have been able to inflate as aggressively as he did because the monetary inflation would have resulted in price inflation in a much more rapid fashion and he would have had to stop or slow the money printing process. But instead, using the cheap overseas downward pressure on prices as cover, Greenspan, during his tenure from 1987 to 2006 as Fed chairman, more than doubled the money supply (M2) by increasing the total money supply by more than $4 trillion. This is where the money came from to fuel the real estate boom. As Anna Schwartz, who co-authored A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960 with the late Milton Friedman said about Greenspan's policies: Among the consequences of the policy of maintaining interest rates at an inappropriate low level [and thus exploding the money supply] were credit and mortgage-market distortions, discouragement of personal savings, incipient inflation, and depreciation of the dollar foreign exchange rate. Interestingly, Greenspan hinted at how bad things might get for the real estate market when he talked about the stock market bubble he created. FT with the details: Asked why he had not tried to raise interest rates to dampen down the technology bubble in the stock market in the late 1990s, the former Fed chairman said “we tried that in 1994/1995 and failed.” Mr Greenspan said the tightening cycle from 1994 to 1995 was “highly disruptive” but failed to rein in stock prices. “We didn’t diffuse the bubble, we made it worse,” he said. “The stock market was flat during the tightening period and when the tightening ended in 1995 the stock market took off.” In fact, Greenspan stopped tightening before the full bubble could burst because he panicked and started to see the tremendous negative consequences of what would occur if he let the bubble burst completely, so he resumed aggressive money printing. But keep these words of Greenspan's in mind: "We tried that in 1994/1995 and failed." We have had 11 more years of money printing since Greenspan's failed attempt at tightening--this created the real estate bubble. Now a new man is in at the Fed, Ben Bernanke. From all indications, he is even more of an inflationist than Greenspan. But things are different now. The real estate bubble is already starting to burst. The impact of lower prices caused by overseas cheap labor has already worked its way through the system (Prices aren't going any lower.), so this cover for further inflating no longer exists. And, the dollar is on the verge of collapse, which will result in more price inflation in the United States. Bernanke does not appear to know it yet but he is trapped. How can we say Bernanke does not yet know he is trapped? He is about to embark on a trip to China with Treasury Secretary Paulson to call on the Chinese to allow their currency to float upward on foreign exchange markets against the dollar. The dollar is about to collapse and Bernanke will be egging on the Chinese to start the collapse sooner? The man does not have a clue. Further, the cheap Chinese labor, that is in part a result of the Chinese maintaining a high dollar value, is what Greenspan now admits gave him the power to inflate the money supply. By calling for a cheaper dollar against the yuan, Bernanke is kicking another leg from out under the table that will make it even more difficult for Bernanke to fight a real estate bust--because a cheaper dollar will mean more price inflation in the United States and make it much more difficult for the Fed to lower rates. Manging the stock market bubble will look like child's play compared to managing the real estate bubble. At some point, Bernanke will fail and the real estate bubble will completely burst in dramatic fashion or Bernanke will open the money spigots and flood the economy with so much money that hyper-inflation can not to be ruled out. Labels: bernanke, dollar, greenspan, RealEstate posted by Raymond Weber @ 2:14 AM
|
|
|
Post by richbrout on May 20, 2007 9:31:03 GMT -5
"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
Chicken Little
|
|
lawman
Apprentice Cog
Posts: 237
|
Post by lawman on May 20, 2007 9:33:12 GMT -5
"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" Chicken Little You got it backwards, rich! Hell is rising!
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 20, 2007 10:13:44 GMT -5
Lawman, richbrouts reaction is typical of people that do not want to see the ugly truth. It is easier to just ignore it and hope it will go away.
|
|
lawman
Apprentice Cog
Posts: 237
|
Post by lawman on May 20, 2007 10:16:48 GMT -5
Yeah, I know dix. Check out 'kevin' and his attempt at suppression of speech, etc.
|
|
|
Post by dixie56 on May 20, 2007 15:06:06 GMT -5
www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=20772Details Revealed of Senate Compromise Bill by Jed Babbin (more by this author) Posted 05/17/2007 ET Updated 05/17/2007 ET Here’s the section-by-section breakdown of the just-announced Senate deal on illegal immigration given to us by a Senate source. We haven’t had the time to analyze it yet, but we’ll be back with the fast, concise and hard details on what appears to be an horrifically bad deal. Border Security and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 Title I Title I requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to certify that the triggers are met before the Title IV (Guest Worker) and Title VI (Z visa ) programs can begin, with the exception of probationary status for Z workers and the programs for agricultural workers. • Triggers include: o 18,000 (CBP) Border Patrol hired o Construction of 200 miles of vehicle barriers and 370 miles of fencing o 70 ground-based radar and camera towers along the southern border o Deployment of 4 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and supporting systems o The ending of catch-and-release o Resources to detain up to 27,500 aliens per day on an annual basis o The use of secure and effective identification tools to prevent unauthorized work. o The receiving and processing and adjudicating of applications for Z status. • Title I also includes authorities and resources to augment border security including: o physical infrastructure along the border o additional field and investigative agents o comprehensive plans and studies of the border region o revisions to law enforcement techniques and enhanced authorities. Title II Title II provides for interior enforcement of immigration laws. • The stiffening of laws and penalties relate to: o the detention of criminal aliens o the definition of aggravated felony o gang violence o passport, visa, and immigration fraud, including marriage fraud o the streamlining of background checks for immigration status • Other provisions include language regarding: o Increased penalties for illegally entry and reentry o encouraging aliens to depart voluntarily o prohibiting aliens to possess firearms o alternatives to detention o state and local law enforcement reimbursement and training Title III Title III addresses workplace enforcement by increasing penalties, revising and making mandatory a system of electronic employment verification, and promoting information sharing. • This Title designs a worksite enforcement system that relies on electronic employment verification and a reduced list of documents that may be presented to employers to prove identity and work eligibility. o Also increases penalties significantly over current law for unlawful hiring, employment, and recordkeeping violations. • Verification of employees: As of the date of enactment, employers in national security-related industries, industries involving critical infrastructure, and federal contractors to electronically verify employees, including new hires and/or current employees may be required to verify individuals, with additional employers or industries added after 6 months. o All employers would be required to electronically verify new hires within 18 months of enactment, or on the date on which the Secretary certifies that the system is operational. o Once the system is implemented, all employers would be required to verify all current employees within by 3 years after enactment. • Structure of the EEVS: After the date of hire but no later than the first day of employment, the employer must transmit to the EEVS via the Internet the data that the employer has taken from the worker’s identity and work eligibility documents. • Inconclusive determinations: Where the EEVS cannot conclusively determine the status of a worker’s eligibility, a further action notice is issued and the individual must contact the appropriate federal or state agency to initiate resolution of status and the individual continues to work while the agency resolves his or her status. • Final nonconfirmation: If the employer has received a final non-confirmation regarding an individual, the employer must terminate the employment of the individual, unless the individual files an administrative appeal of a final non-confirmation notice within 15 days. • Data and Information Sharing: The Commissioner of Social Security must provide the following information to the Secretary of DHS regarding data contained within the Social Security database as in relates to employment verification. • Fraud and tamper resistant social security cards: Not later than 180 days after date of enactment, the Commissioner is required to begin work to administer and issue fraud-resistant, tamper-resistant Social Security cards. Title IV Title IV establishes a new temporary Y worker program to address future labor needs of temporary foreign workers and discourage future illegal employment of undocumented individuals. The title also includes measures to protect the rights of U.S. and foreign workers and prevent the U.S. employer from abusing the program. • Structure of new visa programs: This title creates a new future temporary worker program for workers who are coming to the U.S. to perform temporary job that the U.S. employer is unable to fill. It provides for: o non-seasonal Y temporary worker (Y-1 visa) o seasonal temporary worker Y-2A for agricultural workers, sheepherder, goat herders, and dairy workers Y-2B for non-agricultural workers; and o their spouses and minor children (Y-3 visa). • Matching Willing Workers with Willing Employers: All Y workers must be matched to a “willing employers” through an electronic database in order to qualify for a Y worker visa. • Families of Y visa holders: can only accompany Y workers if the worker can: o show proof of valid medical insurance and o demonstrate that the wages of the principal Y nonimmigrant(s) are 150% above poverty level for the household size. o Spouses and children who do not qualify for Y-3 visa may be admitted under other nonimmigrant status. • Period of admission: A Y-1 worker can be admitted for a two year period that can be renewed twice if that worker spends a period of one year outside the United States between each admission. o A Y-1 accompanied by dependents are afforded a single two year visa, non-renewable. o Workers with Y-2A and Y-2B visa qualify for 10 month visas; no extensions may be granted. • Permanent Bar: Y worker who fails to timely depart is permanently barred from any future immigration benefit. • Wage: The employer must attest that the Y worker will be paid not less than the greater of the actual wage paid by the employer to all other similarly situated workers or the “prevailing competitive wage.” • Numerical Limitation: The Y-1 visa program has an initial cap of 400,000 with yearly adjustments based on market fluctuations. o There are no numerical limitations for Y-2A while the Y-2B visas are initially capped at 100,000 with yearly adjustment based on market fluctuations. o The market-based fluctuation is adjusted every 6 months during the fiscal year. o The Y-3 visa for spouses and minor children limit may not exceed 20% of annual limit for Y-1 visas. o A newly created Standing Commission will make recommendations to Congress regarding the Y visa numerical cap for each fiscal year following the initial year of the program Title V Title V restructures and rebalances the current system by which green cards are distributed. • Rebalancing of Immigrant Visa Allocation: Resets the number of family-based, family backlog, merit-based immigrants, and eventual Z immigration green cards. o The family categories are less than under current law since several of the extended family categories are reduced, while the merit-based is increased over the current employment-based levels after the processing of the family-based backlog. o An annual total of 440,000 visas are allotted to process the backlog of family-based categories eliminated. o It is estimated that the family backlog cases can all be processed in 8 years. o An annual total of 10,000 visas are set aside for exceptional Y workers. • Merit Based Points System: The current employment based green card system will be replaced by a merit based points system. • Reducing Chain Migration and Permitting Petitions by Nationals: Elimination and reconfiguring of the following family-based preference categories: o First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens o Second: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents other than spouses and minor children of permanent residents o Third: Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens o Fourth: Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens o Sets cap of 40,000 per fiscal year on category for parents of U.S. citizens. o Sets cap of 87,000 per fiscal year on the second preference category for spouses and children of permanent residents. • Elimination of Backlog: If the family-based visa petition in the eliminated category is filed before May 1, 2005, the petition can be processed under the prior law within 8 year. Title VI This title provides a new visa for most individuals currently living within the U.S. illegally. • Creates a new four-year, renewable “Z” nonimmigrant visa to address the undocumented population within the U.S. The visa is split up into three groups: o a principal or employed alien (Z-1), o the spouse or elderly parent of that alien (Z-2), o and the minor children of that alien (Z-3). • Cut off Date: In order to be eligible for this visa, one must have been illegally present within the U.S. before January 1, 2007. • Fees and Penalties: To apply, an alien seeking Z-1 status must be currently employed and pay fees and penalties totaling $5,000 (less for derivative Z’s) to be eligible for a green card under the merit-based system. • Probationary, the Permanent Z Status: Once an applicant submits a completed application, fingerprints, and is cleared by one-day background checks he will receive probationary benefits which can eventually be converted to a Z nonimmigrant status after all background checks are clear and the triggers set forth in Title I are achieved. • LPR Status: A Z-1 nonimmigrant may adjust status to lawful permanent residence after the family backlog under Title V is eliminated if the Z applicant: o Satisfies the merit requirements in the points schedule set forth in Title V. o files the application for adjustment in the Z-1’s country of origin and o pays a penalty of $4,000. • DREAM ACT: Individuals under the age of 30 that were brought to the United States out of their own control as a minor are eligible to receive their green card after 3 years rather than 8. Title VII Title VII includes a number of miscellaneous provisions involving assimilation, including increased funding for the office of citizenship and integration ($100M)
|
|