Given the election outcome, and the role that the latino community played, there is renewed momentum to push for immigration reform. It looks like the President, Senate, and House are all moving in that direction.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/29/politics/immigration-reform/index.html?hpt=hp_bn3

Quote :

"STORY HIGHLIGHTS NEW: Obama will speak at a high school with a majority of Hispanic students Eight senators, four from each party, have laid out a bipartisan blueprint for reform House legislators are also said to be working on a bipartisan immigration plan President Obama will not present legislation, but will call for action, during a speech Tuesday"

Quote :

"Last year, as his re-election campaign heated up, the Obama administration announced a halt to deportations of some young undocumented immigrants in a move that delighted the Latino community. Exit polls in November indicated that Latino voters gave overwhelming support to Obama over GOP challenger Mitt Romney, who had advocated a policy that amounted to forcing undocumented immigrants to deport themselves."

One aspect of truly comprehensive immigration reform would deal with the deportation and splitting up of bi-national married gay couples. It's something I've posted about in the past.

message_topic.aspx?topic=599388

http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/obama-will-include-same-sex-couples-in-immigration

Quote :

"Obama Will Include Same-Sex Couples In Immigration Plan WASHINGTON — Same-sex couples will be a part of the proposal for addressing immigration reform that President Obama is scheduled to unveil Tuesday in Las Vegas, BuzzFeed has confirmed with multiple sources familiar with the White House plan. A Democratic source said: "Same-sex couples will be part of his proposal." A second source confirmed that, unlike the Senate framework released Monday, same-sex bi-national couples — those with one American and one foreign partner — will be included in the White House principles. The decision by Obama seeks to remedy what advocates for same-sex couples view as one of the most searing inequalities under the existing federal limit on marriage to one man and one woman: LGBT American citizens simply have no way to confer citizenship on their romantic partners, something that is automatic — if not always simple — for straight couples. Under current law, such same-sex couples, even when married under state law, are not eligible for the green cards that opposite-sex couples can receive. Foreign partners of same-sex couples have in the past found their green card applications denied — often forcing couples to separate or move abroad. Although Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano have taken steps to examine the issue and, in some cases, prevent deportation of the foreign same-sex partners of Americans, the Defense of Marriage Act continues to prevent the granting of green cards for such individuals."

1/29/2013 12:53:09 PM

And right on cue, Rush is stirring up the "dittoheads" with that exact thing. Haha. Pathetic. . .

1/29/2013 12:54:57 PM

For this to have a chance of passing, Obama needs to take a step back from it

[Edited on January 29, 2013 at 1:10 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2013 1:10:07 PM

I think proposing ideas instead of specific legislation, and going after the bipartisan Senate group instead of before, is doing just that. But the reflexive rejection of anything this President says, even if he's quoting conservative ideas, has to stop.

I mean, I guess it doesn't, but part of the reason the right is on board with immigration reform is because of the election results, and if they back out because President Obama is also on board with immigration reform, then they aren't helping themselves.

[Edited on January 29, 2013 at 1:58 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2013 1:58:16 PM

From White House Press Secretary Carney on same-sex bi-national married couples and immigration reform:

Quote :

"The President believes that it should be included and that should come as no surprise. As we've said all along, this is consistent with the principles he has laid out over the last four years. And the President has long believed that Americans with same-sex partners from other countries should not be faced with the painful choice between staying with the person they love or staying in the country they love. And the President's position on this is consistent with how we've approached prosecutorial discretion at DHS and others."

That last part is a reference to the deprioritization of deportation of gays by the President through executive action, but unless and until DOMA is dead, it wont be stopped, short of something like UAFA being included in comprehensive immigration reform.

1/29/2013 3:20:20 PM

I went to a rally organized by the NC Congress of Latino Organizations earlier this week. They had a press conference, some folks met with legislators, they provided food to everyone from Moes, it was nice weather, and overall a fun half day.

Of course immigration was a big topic of the day, but so was advocating for in-state college tuition for kids who have grown up here not only as a matter of justice for young people who know no other home, but for sound long term economic and education policy purposes as well.

There are a lot more politically-minded Latino organizations in our state than I had realized. Here are a few pictures from the day:

4/26/2013 2:31:45 PM

Looks like the President is doing the rounds Telemundo and Univision to keep the conversation alive.
http://whitehouse.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/27/potus-focus-on-immigration-reform/

Here are some stories from people who are LGBT and undocumented:

(Uruguay, Argentina, parts of Mexico & Brazil already have marriage equality)

This huffington post article talks about the similarities in the struggles of lgbt people and undocumented ones, not only in both groups having immigration related issues important to them, but at the very basic human level of having to "come out" as belonging to that group before you can create the space to organize for change.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/prerna-lal/how-queer-undocumented_b_2973670.html

Quote :

"In 2012, the state of Maryland passed marriage equality and in-state tuition for undocumented youth. Both victories were placed in front of voters by right-wing forces in the form of Question 4 and Question 6. Emails flew back and forth, and phone calls were made to collaborate efforts between the forces for marriage equality (Equality Maryland) and the forces for the DREAM Act (Casa de la Maryland). From these conversations, the Familia es Familia coalition was formed, which recruited queer undocumented youth to use our stories to support both the need for marriage equality and the need for the DREAM Act. The cross-coalition effort delivered a historic victory in Maryland, as it became the first state to uphold both marriage equality and instate tuition for undocumented youth."

While the President and many Senators support a UAFA like element to truly comprehensive immigration reform, if I had to bet I don't think the final bill will include it. Although the GOP controlled House approved an anti-Domestic Violence bill that was inclusive of LGBT folks facing domestic violence in an attempt to appeal to the broader constituency of women, so maybe they will be supportive a UAFA type segment of the bill so long as it's also appealing to a broader constituency of latinos and immigrants. But as long as the Supreme Court kills enough or all of DOMA, then the UAFA part wouldn't be necessary.

[Edited on April 26, 2013 at 8:27 PM. Reason : .]

4/26/2013 8:26:49 PM

Is anyone following the Facebook political group that was formed to lobby for immigration reform?

They are currently running ads attacking Obama, attacking ACA, and pushing for the keystone pipeline.

4/27/2013 11:35:00 AM

I haven't seen that, but one of the group leaders during the advocacy day didn't realize until she was in the office with a Republican legislator that maybe wearing her Obama 2012 shirt might not be a great idea. She tried so hard to keep her arms crossed and papers in front of her shirt so he wouldn't see.

4/27/2013 11:47:28 AM

Today was another big national push for immigration reform, although I expect the partial government shut down will drown out any other political speech for the time being.

http://nalacc.org/october-5-more-than-150-events-all-over-the-country/

Quote :

"Events will take place in more than 100 cities in 40 states around the country on October 5, with more joining in on October 8 and 12. NALACC members will highlight the commitment of immigrant communities to the demand respect and dignity they deserve, and will call on Congress to break through partisan gridlock and move forward with desperately needed reform to our broken immigration system."

I just got back from one of those events in NC. It's cool that the LGBT UAFA piece is no longer necessary thanks to the Supreme Court ruling against DOMA earlier this year.



Of course immigration reform has already passed the Senate, but has been stuck in the House. In an effort to move it along, a bill is being pushed this month:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/10/02/immigration-democrats-file-bill/2907677/

Quote :

"WASHINGTON — House Democrats impatient with the pace of immigration legislation in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives introduced their own bill Wednesday that would overhaul the nation's immigration laws. Congress remained in the grips of the government shutdown Wednesday. Even when that's resolved, the Democratic bill faces a difficult road in the House of Representatives, where Speaker John Boehner refused to consider a similar, comprehensive bill that was passed by the Senate in July."

One difference in the House version compared to the Senate version is that it includes...

Quote :

"a proposal by Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, that would require the Department of Homeland Security to develop a border security strategy that will ensure 100% of the border is monitored and agents are stopping 90% of people trying to cross it. Supporters of the bill said they could have filed a purely Democratic bill, but they included portions of the Senate bill and McCaul's border security bill, which was approved unanimously by the House Homeland Security Committee, to show how serious they are about reaching a bipartisan agreement in the House."

Quote :

""Once Washington Democrats allow us to reopen the federal government, House Republicans will continue to work on common-sense, step-by-step reforms to our broken immigration system," said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel."

At least there is commitment to do something on both sides, even if that something is unclear.

10/5/2013 3:38:19 PM

yes! MORE people for us taxpayers to pay to pony up cash for.

10/6/2013 12:29:12 AM

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/10/polll-finds-vast-gaps-in-basic-views-on-gender-race-religion-and-politics/

Quote :

"MILLENNIALS – Millennials, another group on which Fusion will focus coverage, customarily are described as Americans born from 1982 to 2004; for adults, that’s age 18 to 31. They’re not much different from other age groups on most of the attitudes measured in this survey, with two exceptions. As noted, along with under-40s more broadly, they’re more apt to favor legal status for undocumented immigrants. And they’re 12 points less apt than their elders to say politicians should base policy positions on their religious beliefs, a result that fits with customarily lower levels of religiosity among young adults."

There's a lot of division in this polling, but it seems to show support for immigration reform is strong with the Millennial generation.

10/30/2013 12:05:13 AM

Because so many of us have grown up knowing people affected by this issue. I know that's true for me.

10/30/2013 7:59:01 AM

http://www.wral.com/fact-check-gop-senate-candidates-make-some-questionable-claims/13589575/

Quote :

" @NCCapitol @NCCapitol Fact check: GOP Senate candidates make some questionable claims Tags: U.S. Senate Campaign, Immigration, Public Assistance Posted 8:57 p.m. Wednesday Updated 3:36 p.m. Thursday Analysis of GOP Senate debate @NCCapitol Fact Check Logo More on this Second debate solidifies roles Video, chat: April 23 US Senate debate Red light, green light, fact check: A guide to how we make our calls House Speaker Thom Tillis, Wilkesboro nurse Heather Grant, Dr. Greg Brannon of Cary and Rev. Mark Harris of Charlotte engaged in a debate among leading Republican candidates for U.S. Senate on April 23, 2014. Former Shelby mayor Ted Alexander, Alex Bradshaw, a computer programmer from Icard, Edward Kryn, a retired doctor from Clayton, and Lexington lawyer Jim Snyder debated on April 24, 2014. 30 By Mark Binker and Matthew Burns Raleigh, N.C. — WRAL News hosted a debate among the four leading Republican candidates for U.S. Senate: Cary doctor Greg Brannon, Wilkesboro nurse Heather Grant, Charlotte pastor Mark Harris and state House Speaker Thom Tillis Wednesday night. During the 30-minute debate, WRAL anchor David Crabtree pushed each of the candidates for specific answers. And in some of their specific replies, the candidates made some questionable claims. Here are quick fact checks: CLIMATE CHANGE: During a debate earlier this week, all four candidates were asked whether climate change caused by humans was a fact. All four said no. Crabtree followed up in the WRAL News debate by asking what was causing climate change and does the federal government have a role in reacting to it. Candidates continued to express skepticism about the topic. "The point is the liberal agenda – the Obama agenda, the Kay Hagan agenda – trying to use it as a Trojan horse for their energy policy," Tillis said. "They're trying to use it as a tool to put fear in people." He went on to say Democrats were using "false science" to promote their policy agenda. Grant said that the federal government should not play a role, and the state governments should respond to any effects of climate change. Harris echoed that position, saying the federal government needs to "stay away from this" issue. "Climate changes every day," Brannon said. "Does a human being affect it? The answer is no." Fact Check RedFact check: We could go with news outlets such as The Guardian or The Washington Post, but we'll let NASA carry our water here: "Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position." Tillis' claim is that climate change is "false science" created to drive a political agenda. Brannon clearly says humans aren't driving climate change. The preponderance of scientific opinion disagrees. This claim gets a red light on our fact-checking scale. FAITH: Crabtree asked what role faith should play in a political campaign, given that the United States is a country that professes to believe in the separation of church and state. Each candidate said individual faith informs his actions, but Brannon went further. "This whole fallacy of a separation between church and state is nowhere found in our founding documents," Brannon said. "It was a letter written by (Thomas) Jefferson back to the Danbury convention back in Connecticut saying that the federal government can never make a wall that they can go over. The individual is free to be how they want to be." Fact check: The letter Brannon referenced was addressed to the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut and read, in part, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." Fact Check RedIt's worth noting that the text of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." And as the folks over at Cornell Law School explain, "Two clauses in the First Amendment guarantee freedom of religion. The establishment clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the 'separation of church and state.' " While you might not find the words "separation of church and state" in the Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court has found that government ought to stay out of religion, and vice versa, over the years. This claim gets a red light. IMMIGRATION: Crabtree pushed the candidates on the issue of immigration. Specifically, he wanted to know if they thought the federal government ought to undertake the cost of deporting some 12 million people estimated to be in the United States illegally. "Who’s paying for them now?" Grant asked. "We’re paying for their health care. We’re paying for their HUD housing." She continued, "There’s SNAP, the advertising for SNAP in Mexico is a huge cost to us. Their HUD housing is a huge cost to us. Their Medicaid is a huge cost to us." Fact Check RedFact check: According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban development, "Eligibility for a housing voucher is … limited to US citizens and specified categories of non-citizens who have eligible immigration status." That doesn't apply to people here illegally. This claim gets a red light. SNAP benefits are food benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, eligibility is limited to "most legal immigrants" who have lived in the U.S. for five years, are under 18 or are disabled. "Certain non-citizens such as those admitted for humanitarian reasons and those admitted for permanent residence may also eligible for the program." Fact Check YellowAs for the claim about advertising SNAP benefits in Mexico, according to the SNAP program the USDA signed an agreement with Mexico in 2004, under then-President George W. Bush, to "help educate eligible Mexican nationals living in the United States about available nutrition assistance." Mexico used its embassy and consular offices to disseminate the information. The outreach program targets "Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals working in America and migrant communities in America. The information is specifically focused on eligibility criteria and access." This claim gets a yellow light."

4/26/2014 2:07:51 PM