1. Hidden camera documentary
2. Labor Department in lawsuit
3. 'Colbert was an embarrassment'
4. Massive backlog in courts
5. Texans favor a variety

1.
Border Boletín: Another hidden camera documentary coming next week
By Brady McCombs
Arizona Daily Star, September 27, 2010

The Center for Immigration Studies is set to debut its third installment of its much-watched "Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border" documentary series next week.

The new documentary will debut Tuesday in Washington D.C. at the Army-Navy Club. Here's a link to the second installment: Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2: Drugs, Guns and 850 Illegal Aliens.

The footage comes from two websites that set up hidden cameras along known illegal immigrant and drug smuggling trails: SecureBorderIntel.org and BorderInvasionPics.com.

The Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based organization that advocates for slowing immigration, says the second installment received 540,000 hits on YouTube.

The Center says the documentary leads to the "inescapable conclusion is that hidden cameras reveal a reality that illegal-alien activity is escalating."

However, there is no empirical evidence to suggest that is true. Apprehensions by the U.S. Border Patrol have been declining for the past six years across the entire Southwest Border, including in the agency's Tucson Sector, where the footage comes from.

Apprehensions in the Tucson Sector declined to 241,000 in fiscal year 2009, down from about 491,000 in fiscal year 2004. Across the U.S-Mexico border, apprehensions dipped to 540,000 in fiscal year 2009, down from 1.1 million in fiscal year 2004.

Apprehensions are a flawed statistic, of course, because they only account to the number of times Border Patrol agents arrest an illegal immigrant and don't account for how many get past them. But, it's the best statistic available from the agency to gauge flows of illegal immigrant traffic.
. . .
http://azstarnet.com/news/blogs/border-boletin/article_b71ff1d6-c807-11d...

********
********

2.
Labor Department Does Not Track Illegal Aliens' Complaints Against Employers
By Fred Lucas
CNS News, September 27, 2010

The U.S. Department of Labor unveiled its “We Can Help” campaign to protect workers “regardless of their immigration status” as part of a big event in Chicago seven months ago. But the department is not releasing information about complaints from illegal aliens made against employers since the outreach campaign began.

That’s according to Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that announced a lawsuit against the Labor Department on Friday. Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the agency, but it has not received information on “records of complaints by undocumented workers under the Wage and Hour Davison’s ‘We Can Help’ program.”

The Labor Department does not keep data on who is undocumented or not, a Wage and Hour Division spokeswoman told CNSNews.com Friday. The Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division stresses that this is not a new program, but rather an outreach campaign designed not just for illegal aliens but for all workers.

The “We Can Help” campaign targets such industries as construction, janitorial work, hotel/motel services, food services and home health care. The department released a number of public service announcements, one featuring Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, activists Dolores Huerta and actors Jimmy Smits and Esai Morales, all who advertise the hotline, 866-4US-WAGE.

“The department is renewing its emphasis on reaching and assisting workers who often find themselves denied the pay legally guaranteed to them by law,” the Labor Department’s April 1 news release said. “The campaign also underscores that wage and hour laws apply to all workers in the United States, regardless of immigration status.”

In her public service announcement promoting the “We Can Help” campaign, Solis said,

“Remember, every worker in America has a right to be paid fairly whether documented or not.”

On the “We Can Help” Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page, one question is: “Not everyone on my job has a green card. If I complain about my pay, will workers be reported to Immigration? Is everyone who works entitled to the minimum wage?” The answer is, “WHD [Wage and Hour Division] will continue to enforce the FLSA [Fair Labor Standards Act] and MSPA [Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act] without regard to an employee’s immigration status. No employer should have an unfair advantage because he employs undocumented employees and doesn’t pay them.”

After requesting all information about illegal aliens from April 1 through July 9, the Labor Department has not responded to Judicial Watch within 20 working days as required by law, according to the lawsuit.”

The lack of transparency contrasts sharply with the publicity campaign when the campaign was introduced, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
. . .
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/75795

********
********

3.
Hoyer: Colbert's testimony 'an embarrassment'
By Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times, September 26, 2010

A top House Democrat said Sunday that TV comic Stephen Colbert's in-character testimony at a congressional hearing Friday was "an embarrassment" to the comedian and wrong for the House.

"His testimony was not appropriate. I think it was an embarrassment for Mr. Colbert more than the House," said House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, on "Fox News Sunday."

Mr. Colbert testified to the House immigration subcommittee Friday on illegal immigrant agriculture workers, after he took the United Farm Workers' "Take Our Jobs" challenge and worked a day in the field picking crops. He testified that the work was hard, but he delivered his remarks in the character of his television persona, mocking both parties, the institution of Congress and at times even the immigration issue he was defending.

Republicans have blasted the performance, saying it shows Democrats' priorities are amiss at a time when the unemployment rate remains close to 10 percent and so much business is left undone, including voting on whether to extend the Bush-era tax cuts before they expire at the end of this year.
. . .
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/26/hoyer-colberts-testimony...

********
********

4.
Growing illegal immigration backlog in court
By Jeremy Redmon
The Atlanta Journal Constitution, September 26, 2010

Immigrants suspected of being in the United States illegally are being held in a detention center in southwest Georgia for months at taxpayer expense, and others remain free on bond for years here amid a severe backlog in the nation’s immigration courts, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has learned.

Critics say the court delays are unfair both to citizens and, in some cases, to immigrants. Some believe the backlogs allow illegal immigrants to compete with U.S. citizens for jobs and use taxpayer-funded services while they are free on bond.

U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey, a Marietta Republican and critic of the Obama administration’s handling of immigration, described the situation as “unconscionable.”

“Those who are able to post bond are out there, still taking jobs away from our citizens and permanent legal residents,” Gingrey said. “And it is even more unconscionable that people who are poor and downtrodden and don’t have the ability to post bond languish in our jails‚ at taxpayer expense, waiting for the federal government to do (its) job.”

The nationwide court backlog is documented in a recent study by Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a research organization that monitors the federal government. The study says the number of pending cases in Georgia reached an all-time high of 7,046 this summer. The vast majority of those were deportation cases. Nationwide, there were 247,922 immigration cases pending as of June 21, another all-time high. Georgia ranks 10th among states based on its pending caseload.

Atlanta’s immigration court is so flooded with deportation cases that it takes more than a year — 450 days — to resolve one on average. Cases for inmates at the Stewart Detention Center in Lumpkin are pending for 63 days on average. Meanwhile, it costs taxpayers $60.50 a day on average to house an inmate at the Stewart County facility. As of Sept. 17, the center was holding 1,890 inmates. That works out to a daily cost of $114,345, based on the average expense.

Federal officials say they are seeking to cut the backlog by hiring more immigration judges and dismissing some cases involving people who have not committed crimes and who appear eligible to remain here legally. John Morton, the head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, issued the criteria for dismissing such cases in an Aug. 20 memo.

Critics say ICE is usurping congressional authority and sending the wrong message to people who might be considering coming here illegally. But ICE officials said they are trying avoid wasting taxpayer dollars on cases that are likely to be dismissed.

“This administration is committed to smart, effective immigration reform, prioritizing the arrest and removal of criminal aliens and those who pose a danger to national security,” ICE spokesman Brian Hale said.

People end up facing deportation in these courts for numerous reasons. Some are caught entering the United States illegally. Others are caught committing petty, or even violent, crimes after they enter the country illegally. And still others come here legally but then do something to change their status, such as overstay a visa. Last fiscal year, about 80 percent of the cases immigration judges decided resulted in “removals,” or deportations, according to federal statistics.
. . .
http://www.ajc.com/news/growing-illegal-immigration-backlog-634891.html

********
********

5.
Texans favor illegal immigration crackdown up to a point
By Christy Hoppe
The Dallas Morning News, September 27, 2010

Texans appear fed up with illegal immigration, with most backing an Arizona-type crackdown and many willing to change the U.S. Constitution to discourage women from entering the country to give birth.

But some experts said that Texas, while roiled by the issue, still isn't as captivated by it as other places – especially for a border state with a decidedly Republican tilt.

A statewide poll by The Dallas Morning News showed that 53 percent of registered voters say police should verify whether people they've stopped are in the country legally, even if it could lead to racial profiling. Thirty-eight percent oppose it.

Meanwhile, Texans were almost evenly divided on changing the 14th Amendment, which grants citizenship to those born in the U.S., with 45 percent favoring change and 43 percent opposing it, the poll found.

"If there's a surprise, it's that the margins are so narrow," said Jerry Polinard, University of Texas-Pan American political science professor. "Overall, immigration has been on the agenda of the state for the past six or seven years, but it hasn't lit the sparks that it has in some of the other states."

Profiling concerns

Texans' reluctance to change the Constitution mirrors national polls on the subject. But Texans are less enthusiastic than the nation at large about the Arizona law, which allowed law officers to ask people about their immigration status if officers suspect people are in the country illegally. The law largely is on hold while it is challenged in federal court.

Mark P. Jones, political science chairman at Rice University, said Texas voters might have peeled off because the poll raised the concern over racial profiling.

Also, Hispanic culture has long been a part of Texas history, he said.

"It's hard to argue that there is an overwhelming feeling by Texans that we need that law," Jones said.

Although some Republicans have vowed to push in next year's Legislature for a similar law, GOP Gov. Rick Perry has been lukewarm, saying it's not needed in Texas. His Democratic opponent, Bill White, has opposed it, saying it would distract police officers from protecting the public from crime.

The News' poll showed clear breaks between Republicans (78 percent favoring it) and Democrats (71 percent opposing it), and Hispanics (76 percent opposing) and whites (68 percent favoring).

Blum & Weprin Associates conducted the telephone poll of 1,072 registered voters Sept. 15-22 for five major Texas newspapers. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
. . .
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/state/stories/...