Please visit our YouTube and Facebook pages.

1. Refugee applications delayed
2. Health care bill may stall
3. Former ICE boss emphasizes 287(g)
4. TX group warns of weak security
5. CNN anchor eyes politics

1.
U.S. antiterrorism laws causing immigration delays for refugees
More than 18,000 people affected since 2001, report says
By N.C. Aizenman
The Washington Post, November 12, 2009

U.S. antiterrorism laws are being applied so strictly that thousands of refugees who fled persecution in their home countries and appear to pose no threat to the United States have had their asylum and immigration applications denied or indefinitely delayed, according to a report released Wednesday.

The study, by Human Rights First, a nonpartisan organization based in New York and Washington, documented cases in which people have been inexplicably labeled terrorists.

Sachin Karmakar, a Bangladeshi advocate for the rights of religious minorities, was recently granted asylum after facing political and religious harassment. But his application for permanent residency faces indefinite delay because he took part in his nation's successful struggle for independence in 1971.

A teenage girl who was forced to become a child soldier at 12 in the Democratic Republic of Congo and who faces threats for speaking out against her captors has had her asylum application snagged on the grounds that during the period she was kidnapped, she was a member of a terrorist group.

A refugee from Burundi, whom Human Rights First identified only by his first name, Louis, was detained for 20 months, although an immigration judge thought he qualified for asylum because he had provided "material support" to a terrorist organization when an armed rebel group robbed him of $4 and his lunch.

The report found that more than 18,000 refugees and asylum-seekers have been affected since 2001. Of those, at least 7,500 cases remain unresolved. Most involve people already in the United States who have filed for permanent residency or are trying to bring over family members. The Department of Homeland Security has placed their cases on indefinite hold rather than deporting those involved.

However, an undetermined number of people in similar circumstances who, for technical reasons, are pursuing their cases in immigration courts are at risk of being deported.

The report's author, Anwen Hughes, found that efforts by Congress and the Bush and Obama administrations to address the issue by creating a waiver system have moved at a glacial pace and continue to leave out huge categories of immigrants.
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR200911...

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

2.
Illegal Immigration May Be a Rift Issue
By Kevin Sack
The New York Times, November 11, 2009

Abortion will not be the only social issue dividing Congress as it seeks to construct a compromise health care bill capable of passing both houses. The legislation the House passed on Saturday by a narrow margin also sets up a looming confrontation with the Senate over the extent to which illegal immigrants should have access to public resources.

In this case, the public resource is a government-run health insurance exchange, or marketplace, that would be designed to slow the growth of premiums by allowing consumers to comparison shop for standardized policies.

Neither the House bill nor the bill that has passed the Senate Finance Committee would allow illegal immigrants to benefit directly from government-subsidized health coverage. As now, they would not be eligible for Medicaid or Medicare, the government insurance programs for the poor, elderly and disabled. Nor would they qualify for new tax credits intended to make premiums affordable for those making up to four times the federal poverty level, or $88,200 for a family of four.

But under pressure from members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, whose votes were needed for passage, House leaders decided to allow illegal immigrants to shop for insurance on the exchange. The immigrants would have to pay the full cost of their policies. But the exchange, which would be created and operated with taxpayer dollars, might provide them with lower prices than available on the open market. And one option would be a new government insurance plan.

In the Senate, there is a dispute between bills passed by the Finance Committee, which would bar illegal immigrants from exchanges, and the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which would not. But the ban is expected to be included in the compromise legislation now being drafted by Senate leaders, with President Obama’s support. Under either bill, emergency rooms would still have to treat illegal immigrants who are in medical crisis.

Those who oppose allowing illegal immigrants in the exchange acknowledge that their position is largely symbolic. They doubt that significant numbers of uninsured immigrants would be able to afford the exchange’s premiums without subsidies.

Although the numbers are speculative, researchers estimate that about 7 million of the country’s 46 million uninsured are illegal immigrants. And researchers estimate that more than 90 percent of them fall under the affordability threshold of four times the poverty level. (Some illegal immigrants – perhaps 40 percent — are insured, often through employers or a spouse.)

But even allowing undocumented workers into the exchanges “would seem to leave the sense that the government is not very serious about its immigration laws,” said Steven A. Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors strict enforcement of immigration laws.

Mr. Camarota also said he feared that allowing illegal immigrants to shop on the exchange would open the door to direct benefits. “There’s not a lot of confidence that once you let them into the exchange that you’re actually going to bar them from getting subsidies or Medicaid,” he said.
. . .
http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/illegal-immigrants-may...

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

3.
Section 287(g) Vital to Immigration Reform, Myers Wood Says
By Mickey McCarter
HS Today, November 12, 2009

Ex-chief of ICE calls for more flexiblity to enforce law
The success of any plan to enact comprehensive immigration reform will depend on strengthening the law permitting federal authorities to deputize local police to detain illegal immigrants for deportation, the last head of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) told Homeland Security Today.

As Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano prepares to make a major speech on immigration reform in Washington, DC, Friday, former ICE chief Julie Myers Wood pointed out that the agency's Section 287(g) program will be a vital part of enforcing immigration laws to prevent fraud under the program and to keep ineligible criminal aliens from gaining any benefits from it.

"After there is some sort of amnesty or path to citizenship, how is it that law enforcement is able to enforce going forward? Absent 287(g), how are you able to do that very successfully? I don't think you can. So I think you absolutely need it. It's just as critical right now though," Myers Wood commented.

Myers Wood, however, expects challenges to the program during the congressional debate on comprehensive immigration reform, expected to occur next year. Many groups who support a path to legalization for the estimated 12 million or so illegal immigrants currently in the United States also generally oppose the 287(g) program, criticizing it as an infringement on civil rights, a means to encourage racial profiling, or an unjust expansion of government power.

But Myers Wood and other advocates of the program, enacted as a section of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (Public Law 104-208) in 1996, view it as a vital tool in identifying and deporting criminal aliens.

"ICE has a tough time with the 287(g) program," Myers Wood acknowledged. "They are criticized from all sides no matter what they do. They are criticized for keeping the program going; they are criticized for not expanding it enough. So they are trying to walk a fine line in expanding the program but doing in a smart way.
. . .
http://www.hstoday.us/content/view/11041/128/

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

4.
Texas group warns of weaknesses at land ports
By Christopher Sherman
The Associated Press, November 12, 2009

McAllen, TX (AP) -- The country's understaffed land ports of entry need massive investments in infrastructure, technology and personnel to avoid becoming the path of choice for human and drug smugglers, according to a report released Wednesday by a border advocacy group.

The Texas Border Coalition, a group representing border city mayors, county judges and economic development commissions, called for $6 billion to improve land ports of entry and 5,000 new customs officers during the next four years. The group said the money is needed to correct the imbalance between the security at ports of entry and the security covering the points between.

"We definitely have to redirect the way we've been thinking," said Monica Weisberg-Stewart, chairwoman of the coalition's Border Security and Immigration Committee. In addition to shoring up security at the ports of entry, the additional funding and staffing would also help with facilitating legitimate trade and travel, said Weisberg-Stewart, a McAllen business owner.

From 1993 to a projected 2010, the Border Patrol budget has grown from $400 million to an expected $3.5 billion while funding for customs inspectors increased from $1.6 billion to an anticipated $2.7 billion during the same period, according to the report.

Comparisons between the security situation in the two areas are difficult. The only hard numbers available are for apprehensions of illegal immigrants, leaving how much gets by beyond that to guessing. But the coalition argues that the funding discrepancy is making ports of entry more attractive targets for smuggling.

"In the present environment, the (drug) cartels are choosing to conduct their trade across the bridges and highways, through the ports of entry and are rejecting the risk of crossing the Rio Grande and open spaces between the ports of entry," the report said.

It echoed one of the recommendations from the Southwest Border Task Force, created by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, which advised in September that the ports of entry were in serious need of improvement.
. . .
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ifAyAKJeZz9FqhQzbFSkiL...

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

5.
Anchor Lou Dobbs resigns from CNN
By Howard Kurtz
The Washington Post, November 12, 2009

Lou Dobbs, the most opinionated and divisive anchor at a cable network that bills itself as a straight-news oasis, resigned from CNN on Wednesday night, saying in his final broadcast that he wants "to go beyond the role" of a television journalist in tackling the country's problems.

Framing his move as a response to the urging of "some leaders in media, politics and business," Dobbs struck a populist tone, attempting to position himself as a political leader who would mount a campaign "to overcome the lack of true representation in Washington, D.C." He said that public debate was now defined by "partisanship and ideology" and that he would continue to speak out "in the most honest and direct language possible."

Liberal groups such as NDN and Media Matters had mounted a "Dump Dobbs" campaign, and Latino organizations challenged such Dobbs declarations as his 2006 statement that about one-third of the U.S. prison population "is estimated to be illegal aliens"--which the anchor later acknowledged was way too high. But his position at CNN seemed secure.

The surprise announcement by Dobbs, whose fervent opposition to illegal immigration has come to define his career, stunned most staffers at the network he helped launch in 1980. He only hinted at disagreements with CNN President Jon Klein, saying that after extensive talks Klein had agreed to let him out of his multimillion-dollar contract.

In a statement, Klein praised the 64-year-old Dobbs for having "fearlessly and tirelessly pursued some of the most important and complex stories of our time, often well ahead of the pack." He added: "With characteristic forthrightness, Lou has now decided to carry the banner of advocacy journalism elsewhere."

Signaling his already apparent opposition to the Obama administration, Dobbs said that in the last six months "strong winds have buffeted this country." He vowed to "be a leader" in a "national conversation" about immigration, jobs, health care, climate change and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- as well as "our now-weakened capitalist economy."
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR200911...