On immigration, demographics and math

Posted on by Ruby Powers in immigration bill, Immigration Law, Legislative Reform, pathway to citizenship Leave a comment

On immigration, demographics and math

By Mark Murray, Senior Political Editor, NBC News

With the immigration debate now moving over the Republican-led House of Representatives,MSNBC.com’s Benjy Sarlin writes how some conservatives believe that wooing Latino voters is less important than improving on their performance with white voters.

On election night, Fox News anchor Brit Hume called the “demographic” threat posed by Latino voters “absolutely real” and suggested Mitt Romney’s “hardline position on immigration” may be to blame for election losses. On Monday, Hume declared that argument “baloney.” The Hispanic vote, he said, “is not nearly as important, still, as the white vote.”

Sean Hannity, a reliable bellwether on the right, has been on a similar journey since the fall. He announced the day after President Obama’s re-election that he had “evolved” on immigration reform and now supported a “path to citizenship” in order to improve relations with Hispanic voters. Hannity has now flipped hard against the Senate’s bill.

“Not only do I doubt the current legislation will solve the immigration problem,” he wrote in a June column, “but it also won’t help the GOP in future elections.”

Hannity and Hume didn’t arrive at their latest destination by accident. They’re just the latest figures on the right to embrace the compelling new message that’s whipping Republicans against immigration reform while still promising a better tomorrow for the GOP’s presidential candidates.

It’s uncertain if Republicans supporting immigration reform will result in more Latinos who vote Republican in presidential contest, but this is pretty clear: White voters are only declining as a share of the electorate.

Consider: In 2000, whites made up more than 80% of all voters, according to the exit polls. In 2004, that share dropped to 77%. In 2008, it declined to 74%. And in 2012, white voters made up 72% of the electorate. At that current pace and because of demographic trends, you could expect — though it’s not a sure thing — that the white percentage could drop to 70% by 2016 and 68% by 2020.

Also consider: President Obama won just 39% of the white vote in 2012, which was the worst performance for a Democratic presidential nominee since 1984. But Obama carried more than 80% of the non-white vote, which gave him his 51%-47% popular-vote win over Mitt Romney.

So extrapolate that out to 2016 and 2020, given the demographic trends showing that the country is on pace to be a majority-minority nation 30 years from now. In 2016, a future Democratic presidential candidate — say Hillary Clinton? — who gets 40% of the white vote and 80% of the non-white vote could win 52% of the popular vote. In 2020, that overall percentage would jump up to nearly 53%.

Now it’s important to acknowledge the difference between presidential elections (where there’s greater minority participation) and midterm elections (where there’s less). It’s also important to state that it’s impossible to predict who, exactly, will turn out in an election. Indeed, RealClearPolitics’ Sean Trende has cautioned that it’s very possible that future Democratic presidential candidates don’t get 80% of the non-white vote, especially when the nation’s first African-American president no longer remains on the top of the ticket. And that’s probably a good assumption.

But here’s the power of changing demographics: In 2004, John Kerry won 41% of the white vote and about 71% of the non-white vote, giving him 48% of the overall popular vote. But come 2016, if the white share is at 70% and non-white at 30%, then Kerry’s ’04 performance gets to you to 50% of the popular vote.

Let that sink in — Kerry goes from a losing 48% to a possibly winning 50%.

So while it’s debatable if the Republican Party can benefit from supporting the immigration legislation, it isn’t debatable that the white portion of the electorate is getting smaller — and that has consequences for future elections.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/02/19252850-on-immigration-demographics-and-math?lite


10 things you need to know about the Senate immigration bill

Posted on by Ruby Powers in Immigration Law Leave a comment

by Raul A. Reyes

1:00 am on 04/16/2013

The path to comprehensive immigration reform has never been smooth. Coming the day before the Senate’s “Gang of 8” were to present their immigration proposal, the tragic events in Boston may have delayed its official announcement. It is a long-awaited proposal that Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) called “a starting point” on Sunday’s Meet The Press. In anticipation of its imminent unveiling, here are the major takeaways of the Senate plan.

Illegal Immigration

1. The Senate plan includes a pathway to citizenship for the undocumented that will take 13 years. Undocumented immigrants who can prove continuous presence in the country before December 31, 2011 will be eligible to adjust their status. They must have clean records and pay taxes and a $500 fine, in addition to any fees. Then they can apply for “Registered Provision Immigrant” status.

2. People with Registered Provision Immigrant status can live and work legally in the U.S., and travel outside the country. Another $500 fine will kick in after six years as a Registered Provision Immigrant. After 10 years, a Registered Provision Immigrant may apply for a green card if they know English, pay taxes, and pay a $1,000 fine. It will take an additional three years for a green card to be converted into citizenship. However, these provisions are all dependent upon the Department of Homeland Security meeting their border security goals.

3. DREAMers and agricultural workers will have a shorter path to citizenship. People who were brought illegally to the U.S as children and would otherwise qualify for the DREAM Act can obtain green cards in five years (and are exempted from the $500 fine). They will then be eligible for citizenship immediately. The Senate plan also includes the AgJobs Act, which will allow current agricultural workers to obtain legal status through the Agricultural Card Program.

4. Some deportees will be allowed to legally re-enter the U.S. Undocumented immigrants who were here before December 31, 2011 and were deported for non-criminal reasons can apply to re-enter the country if they are the spouse or a parent of a citizen or lawful permanent resident. This is good news for many of the nearly 250,000 deportees with citizen children; they will have a chance to reunite with their families.

Legal Immigration

5. More visas will be allocated on a merit-based system. Our current system allows roughly two-thirds of legal immigration on the basis of family unification, and 14 percent based on employment. Now the allotment for employment visas for skilled workers and professionals will gradually rise.

6. The number of H1B visas will be increased. H1B visas are for workers with college degrees or in skilled occupations. They are capped at 65,000 per year, with an additional exemption of 20,000 for people with advanced degrees. This has often proved inadequate for the number of applicants; the 2014 cap was reached in only 5 days. The Senate plan raises the yearly cap to 110,000, and the advanced degree exemption to 25,000. To prevent employers from seeking to undercut American workers, employers will be required to pay H1B workers higher wages. Employers will face additional scrutiny from the government in order to prevent abuse of the H1B program.

7. Family-sponsored immigration will be somewhat curtailed. Within eighteen months of the bill’s enactment, citizens may no longer petition for visas for their siblings. Still, clearing the existing backlog of family-based visa petitions is a key goal of this proposal. And the existing V-visa program will expand to cover sponsorship of single adult children and married adult children under age 31.

8. Lower-skilled immigrant workers will be eligible for the new W-Visa. The W- Visa will cover people working in the service sectors as well as agriculture. Employers can petition the government to allow 20,000 such workers beginning in 2015, with this number rising as high as 75,000 within four years (The construction industry is limited to 15,000 workers a year).Immigrants on W-visas can move to other employers if they choose, and will be eligible for residency and citizenship. W-Visa immigrants may not be hired to replace striking American workers. Once the W-Visa program is operational, the much-maligned H2A visa program forseasonal agricultural workers will end.

9. No more Diversity Visas. The Senate proposal will end the “Diversity Lottery,” which allots 55,000 random visas to countries that are underrepresented in our immigration system. But people who were selected for the 2013 or 2014 Diversity Visas will still be eligible to receive them.

10. No immigration equality for same-sex couples. To the almost certain disappointment of the LGBT community and their allies, the Senate plan contains no provisions for immigration equality for same-sex couples.


Path to citizenship best way to reform immigration

Posted on by Ruby Powers in citizenship, Immigration Law, Immigration Trends Leave a comment

 

The Miami Herald

Path to citizenship best way to reform immigration

BY THOMAS WENSKI
Miamiarch.org

Now that the elections are over, perhaps a new bipartisan consensus can be forged to finally fix our broken immigration system.Both Democrats and Republicans can read the demographic tea leaves — in the last election the president’s perceived support for immigration reform gained for him wide support from both Hispanic and Asian voters. Lawmakers in both parties have made strong statements about “fixing” immigration in 2013.This is good news. Of course, any immigration reform legislation would need to address the legal status of the 11 million undocumented in our nation. But instead of providing this population a chance to earn their citizenship, some in Washington are suggesting that these immigrants should receive legal status but not an opportunity to become citizens.

They propose something like President Obama’s administrative action to grant “deferred departure” to the “Dreamers” — those who were brought here without legal status by their parents. In other words, these policy makers would extend protection from deportation and perhaps work authorization, but would not provide this population an earned path to citizenship.

An earned path to citizenship for the undocumented, supported by the U.S. Catholic bishops and a strong majority of the American people, does not have to mean an “amnesty”. Reasonable requirements for permanent legal status and a chance at citizenship — such as paying a fine and any back taxes still owed or learning English — would in fact be gladly embraced by these immigrants who remain in illegal status not because they want to but because legal remedies are not available to them.

A bill introduced in the last Congress by Sens. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., and Kay Hutchinson, R-Texas, modeled somewhat after the DREAM Act would not provide a path to citizenship for young immigrants. A similar proposal from Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida never put in bill form, would have done the same thing. Both proposals essentially addressed a situation that was already partially addressed by President Obama’s deferred action last year.

And like President Obama’s measure their proposal still leaves this population in limbo — with a quasi-legal status but no chance to upgrade to citizenship.

Even President Obama has given credence to the idea of legal status but not citizenship. In his first press conference after the election, he used the term “path to legal status” to describe a potential legalization program for the 11 million. It might have been a slip of the tongue, but words matter in Washington.

While perhaps better than no status, such an arrangement risks creating in our country a permanent underclass of persons who would never enjoy the rights of U.S. citizens. The lingering social costs of another era’s Jim Crow legislation show us that this is not the way to go. A path to citizenship is the best way to ensure that immigrants integrate fully into American society by allowing their civic participation and assuring them of access to full due process rights. It is, after all, the American way.

If the administration and Congress are serious about fixing our broken immigration system, they should fix it correctly, and not create more problems. A path to citizenship for the undocumented should be the centerpiece of any immigration reform effort this year. A path to citizenship offers immigrants the opportunities and freedom that are the essential components of the American dream. Both the party of Jefferson as well as the party of Lincoln should be able to embrace that.

Thomas Wenski is Archbishop of Miami.


© 2013 Miami Herald Media Company. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.miamiherald.com

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/16/v-print/3185886/path-to-citizenship-best-way-to.html#storylink=cpy

 


Facebook

YouTube

LinkedId