1. Candidates agree on and ignore issue
2. OR Senator's business under scrutiny
3. Senate candidates diverge in GA
4. House candidates in NC split in issue
5. Study finds boost in NY economy
6. LPR applicants fight backlog

1.
Candidates agree on reforming immigration
Neither talks about it on campaign trail
By Michael Collins
The Ventura County Star (CA), October 20, 2008

Washington, DC -- They may disagree over the war in Iraq or the fundamentals of the economy or any number of other pressing issues.

But when it comes to immigration reform — a topic so volatile that, not long ago, it touched off massive street protests across the country — there's not a lot of difference in the positions staked out by presidential candidates Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

"It's pretty much the same," said David Rodriguez, a Latino activist from Ventura.

Indeed, immigration reform may be the singular issue of the 2008 presidential campaign in which Obama and McCain agree the most.

Both want to secure the nation's borders and voted in 2006 to build a 700-mile fence along the southern boundary with Mexico. Both argue that legal status should be offered to immigrants who entered the United States illegally as long as they learn English, pay fines and pass background checks.

Both promise to crack down on employers who hire undocumented workers. But both also favor increasing the number of people who can enter the country legally to meet the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill.

There's also this: Neither candidate has devoted much time or energy on immigration reform while on the campaign trail, much to the dismay of those on both sides of the debate.

"Neither party seems to want to get close to this immigration issue right now because it's such an inflammatory thing," said Bill Glenn, a former Border Patrol administrator who lives in Santa Paula and supports enforcement of immigration laws. "It's risky territory."

'Risk losing a lot of votes'

Rodriguez, who favors comprehensive immigration reform, said both candidates are "purposely evading" the issue.

"Neither political party wants to alienate voters since Americans are so divided on the issue," said Rodriguez, who serves as California deputy director of the League of United Latin American Citizens. "They don't want to risk losing a lot of votes either way, either from the right or from Hispanics, who we think are going to be key to the election."
. . .
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/oct/20/candidates-agree-on-re...

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

2.
Smith food plant in U.S. Senate race spotlight
By Susan Goldsmith
The Oregonian (Portland), October 17, 2008
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/10/smith_food_plant_in_us_...

Weston, OR -- Tucked away on a remote road northeast of Pendleton sits Smith Frozen Foods, an 80,000-square-foot processing plant that provides about 10 percent of the nation's frozen peas, carrots and corn.

Founded by his grandfather in 1919, the family business is owned by U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., and operated by his wife, Sharon Smith. The operation is deeply rooted in the eastern Oregon landscape, with the plant's vast machinery grinding into gear just hours after the vegetables are harvested. The company motto: "To freeze the freshest vegetables, you build your kitchen next to the garden."

To process up to 1,300 tons of vegetables a day, Smith Foods hires 300 to 400 workers for two-week stints, often with little notice.

Whether any of these seasonal workers is an illegal immigrant is a question that keeps coming up for Smith as he campaigns for a third Senate term.

"There is no company in Oregon under greater scrutiny," Smith says. "I'm proud of my company. There are 400 people working in a factory. Is that a bad thing?"

His company does everything it can to ensure compliance with the law, Smith says, and every worker is documented.

Federal immigration laws governing Smith Foods, however, do not guarantee that every worker at the plant is in the United States legally.

The best tool available to businesses to check whether employees are documented -- a federal electronic program called E-Verify -- is not used at Smith Foods. Company officials argue that it is not 100 percent accurate even though Smith himself voted three times in the Senate to fund the program.

The federal verification system is voluntary, and a bill that would have required all Oregon companies to use E-Verify was derailed in the Legislature last year -- ironically by Smith's Democratic rival in the Senate race, House Speaker Jeff Merkley.

Federal law doesn't require companies to keep records such as copies of Social Security or guest worker ID cards. It doesn't require companies to check the authenticity of these records even though the nation is flooded with counterfeit documents that federal officials say are easily obtained by illegal immigrants.

At Smith Foods, potential employees must show their documents, and the company decides whether they are legitimate. Company officials write the names of the documents they receive on a sheet they keep in their files. They write down the title of the document, the issuing authority, number and expiration date. But no copies of the documents are made, and no one checks whether they are fake.

'86 law helps fuel fraud

Wallace Huffman, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University, says research suggests that more than 50 percent of the nation's farming and related industries employ illegal immigrants, largely from Mexico. It has been that way since 1986, when Congress gave 2.7 million illegal workers citizenship amnesty while making it illegal to hire undocumented laborers.

The unintended consequence of the 1986 law was to help fuel a boom in phony documents.

"The document fraud problem is widespread," Huffman says. "Employers are required to check documents, but they're not required to be experts in determining whether documentation is fraudulent or not."

Two years ago, business groups joined President Bush and others in lobbying Congress to again grant amnesty to illegal immigrants in exchange for tightening borders and other sanctions. But Congress balked under pressure from a coalition of Republicans who opposed amnesty and labor Democrats who argued that it would depress wages.

Hoffman's research has shown that agricultural work -- with its long hours, tough physical demands and low pay -- doesn't appeal to most U.S. workers. While many farmers and food processing companies have tried to mechanize their operations, hand harvesting and human skills are still required.

99.5 percent accurate

Though federal law doesn't require it, Department of Homeland Security officials say E-Verify has a 99.5 percent accuracy rate in vetting identification documents.

"E-Verify takes all the worry out of verifying someone," says Sharon Rummery, spokeswoman for the nation's Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency under the Homeland Security Department. "Either someone is confirmed, or not. If the person is not confirmed, they have the right to show us they are authorized to work."

Employers get answers within seconds of punching in a potential hire's information, while rectifying a wrongful denial takes no more than a week, Rummery said.

In Congress, Smith has voted three times to fund the E-Verify program. He told The Oregonian: "If it's reliable, it should be used. If it is reliable, I would tell my company to use it."

Why doesn't Smith Foods use it?

His campaign spokeswoman, Lindsay Gilbride, said that although Smith has repeatedly voted to fund the system, it remains a "slowly improving program that someday may be a solution."

Mike Lesko, who oversees hiring for Smith Foods, adds: "There's no reason for us to be using it. It's not accurate."

Lesko provided The Oregonian with a copy of a 2006 Social Security Administration Inspector General report that found E-Verify to have a 4 percent error rate.

Federal officials say the program's accuracy has improved since that report. In Oregon, 646 businesses use E-Verify at 2,400 places of employment, federal records show. The federal government uses the Internet-based program to screen its hires along with 11 states, says Janice Kephart, director of national security studies at the Washington nonpartisan think tank Center for Immigration Studies.

"This program tells you who you are hiring. If you don't want to know who you are hiring, you don't use it," said Kephart, who served as counsel to the 9/11 commission. "This is the best interior border program we have."

Democrat Jeff Merkley has criticized Smith for allowing illegal immigrants to work at Smith Foods. But the House speaker helped kill a bill in the 2007 session that would have required Oregon companies to use E-Verify.

House Bill 2715, which had four Republican and four Democratic co-sponsors, died after Merkley's office pulled it out of committee. Jim Ludwick, president of the anti-illegal immigrants group Oregonians for Immigration Reform, says his group pushed the bill as part of its efforts to crack down on illegal immigrants.

Merkley's office released a statement saying E-Verify had glitches at the time, and it's since been improved. "Companies that claim to 'go the extra mile' should use it," Merkley said in the statement.

Bryan Griffith, a spokesman at the Center for Immigration Studies, says that despite its improvements and photo ID capabilities, E-Verify continues to meet resistance from businesses who rely on illegal workers. "Businesses have a lot riding on not having to follow through with these kind of requirements."

Dave Zepponi, president of Northwest Food Processors Association, which represents Smith Foods and similar employers, says the government bears the ultimate responsibility for checking citizenship.

"We can document up to a point and ask for things like driver's licenses that establish residency, but to go beyond that and determine whether they're valid or not is beyond the scope of what we believe the industry should do."

+++

Worker issues dogging Smith Senate campaign
The Associated Press, October 18, 2008
http://www.kval.com/news/local/31239954.html

Weston, OR (AP) -- Who picks the peas and carrots have stayed up there with hot dogs, office furniture and golf clubs as issues in the tight U.S. Senate race between Republican incumbent Gordon Smith and his Democratic challenger, Oregon House Speaker Jeff Merkley.

Smith Frozen Foods provides about 10 percent of the nation's frozen peas, carrots and corn. It processes up to 1,300 tons of vegetables and hires up to 400 workers for two-week stints.

Many workers lie low. Their legality has been made an issue as Smith campaigns for a third term. No hard evidence has been produced of Smith knowingly hiring substantial numbers of undocumented workers, although opponents suggest otherwise and his firm doesn't use a verification system judged by the government to be highly accurate.

Oregonians have been shelled with ads over the worker issue, whether one candidate was better at eating hot dogs than explaining foreign policy, the propriety of paying north of $1 million for antique golf clubs and questions about new furniture for legislative offices.

"There is no company in Oregon under greater scrutiny," Smith says. "I'm proud of my company."

Smith says all his workers are documented. But the company does not use a federal electronic program called E-Verify.

Company officials question its accuracy although Smith voted three times in the Senate to fund the program.

Mike Lesko, who oversees hiring for Smith Foods, provided The Oregonian with a copy of a 2006 Social Security Administration Inspector General report that found E-Verify to have a 4 percent error rate. Department of Homeland Security officials give E-Verify a 99.5 percent accuracy rate.

The system is voluntary, and a bill requiring all Oregon companies to use it was derailed in the Legislature last year - ironically by Merkley.

Federal law doesn't require companies to keep copies of documents offered by workers or to check their authenticity, and high-quality bogus documents are easily obtained.

Smith Foods executives decide whether they are legitimate.

Wallace Huffman, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University, says research suggests that more than half of the nation's farming and related industries employ illegal immigrants and have since 1986, when Congress gave 2.7 million illegal workers citizenship amnesty while making it illegal to hire undocumented laborers.

The unintended consequence was a boom in a phony documents industry.

Two years ago, business groups joined President Bush and others in lobbying Congress to again grant amnesty to illegal immigrants in exchange for tightening borders and other sanctions.

But both parties in Congress resisted it, some Republicans because of proposed amnesty and labor Democrats who argued that it would depress wages.

"E-Verify takes all the worry out of verifying someone," says Sharon Rummery, spokeswoman for the nation's Citizenship and Immigration Services, an agency under the Homeland Security Department. "If the person is not confirmed, they have the right to show us they are authorized to work." Verification takes a few seconds, she said.

Smith's campaign spokeswoman, Lindsay Gilbride, said Smith voted to fund the system but that it remains a "slowly improving program that someday may be a solution."

In Oregon, 646 businesses use E-Verify at 2,400 places of employment, federal records show.

"This program tells you who you are hiring. If you don't want to know who you are hiring, you don't use it," said Janice Kephart, director of national security studies at the Washington nonpartisan think tank Center for Immigration Studies.

Merkley has criticized Smith in the worker issue but helped kill a bill in the 2007 session that would have required Oregon companies to use E-Verify after Merkley's office pulled it out of committee, saying it had glitches but has since been improved.

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

3.
Senate candidates disagree on immigration
By Walter C. Jones
The Morris News Service, October 20, 2008

Atlanta -- Immigration was the most potent issue in early 2007 when candidates were deciding whether to run for the U.S. Senate, and even though problems with gasoline and the financial system have overshadowed immigration, it's still a major point of disagreement among the three party nominees.

U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, the Republican incumbent, and his two challengers, Democrat Jim Martin and Libertarian Allen Buckley, each started their campaigns talking frequently about what to do about the flow of undocumented immigrants that had swelled to 12 million across the United States.

Mr. Chambliss, as the senior Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, made comments early last year about the importance of immigrants as a source of labor for farmers and food processors. When he drew boos from members of his own party at the state convention in May 2007, he shifted his position away from support of President Bush's proposal to give the existing illegal immigrants a way to become citizens. Instead, the senator began calling for greater resources for enforcing existing immigration laws and for border security.

"In 2007, during the immigration bill debate, we listened and heard overwhelmingly from Georgians that they do not trust the federal government to enforce our immigration laws," he wrote on his Senate Web site. "Taking immediate action to secure our borders is what Georgians demand and deserve, and it is the best way to restore credibility with the American people."

Many pundits predicted Mr. Chambliss might be vulnerable because of his original stance, and the Democratic primary quickly filled with candidates seeking the chance to challenge him. Mr. Martin, the ultimate winner in that five-man primary, attacked the incumbent.

"Saxby Chambliss has voted four times against increased funding for border security and has taken millions of dollars from the business interests that benefit from the broken Bush system," Mr. Martin said during the primary. "When he was chair of the immigration subcommittee, Mr. Chambliss should have been holding the administration accountable, not toeing the line for special interests."

Mr. Chambliss ultimately voted against the Bush proposal. His voting record during his six-year Senate career earns a grade of "A" from Numbers USA Education and Research Foundation, an anti-immigration interest group based in the Washington area.
. . .
http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/102008/met_480154.shtml

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

4.
Foxx, Carter disagree on bailout, immigration, same-sex marriage
By Wesley Young
The Winston-Salem Journal (NC), October 20, 2008

The crisis in the economy and the government's response to it have given both candidates for the 5th Congressional District plenty to argue about as they make their way toward Election Day on Nov. 4.
. . .
The candidates differ on illegal immigration, too. Carter believes that a path to legality should be given to illegal aliens, but Foxx said that illegal aliens must return to their home country and apply for citizenship if they want it, although she thinks that more can be done to allow the presence of temporary workers.

Foxx approaches the general election with an advantage in party registration and money. According to the state board of elections, 46 percent of the district's voters were Republicans at the beginning of the year, with 34 percent Democratic and 20 percent unaffiliated.
. . .
http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2008/oct/20/foxx-carter-disagree-on-b...

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

5.
Adelphi study says immigrants boost LI economy
By Dave Marcus
Newsday (NY), October 20, 2008

Immigrants contribute $10.6 billion a year to Long Island's economy by increasing productivity, generating new business and paying taxes, according to a study to be released today by Adelphi University's Center for Social Innovation.

While many Long Islanders have said that immigrants drain government resources, the study says they contribute $2,305 more per person in taxes and government fees than they use in schools, health care and law enforcement. It found that spending by immigrants - those who are legal residents as well as those who are undocumented - leads to creation of about 82,000 jobs a year.

Funded by the Hagedorn Foundation in Port Washington, the study is believed to be the first in-depth look at the economic impact of immigrants from all nationalities on Long Island. The author, Mariano Torras, is a professor of economics at Adelphi University and a fellow at the University of Notre Dame's Institute for Latino Studies. He analyzed census figures beginning in 1980, government budgets and other data.

Contradicting the critics

While the report doesn't mention those who have been critical of illegal immigrants, it does seek to contradict their arguments. One goal of the Hagedorn Foundation is reduction of tensions between established residents and immigrants.

"The results should blunt these criticisms," Torras said yesterday, "but I'm also aware of the realities that in these kinds of political economic controversies both sides have their minds made up and find reasons to discredit findings they don't agree with."

Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford), who had not seen the report yesterday, said he has read some nationwide reports emphasizing the economic benefits of undocumented immigrants and other reports emphasizing the costs. "But economics aside, from the security and the social points of view, we have to control who is in the country. This country has to get control of its border."
. . .
http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/longisland/ny-liimmi205891488oc...

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

6.
Muslims fighting citizenship delays may have ray of hope
By Madhu Krishnamurthy
The Daily Herald (Chicago), October 20, 2008

After 12 years living, studying, and working legally in the United States, Sheeraz Iqbal sought to trade in his Pakistani citizenship and swear allegiance to America for good.

Iqbal applied for his U.S. citizenship, and has been waiting two years for his application to move through a bureaucratic immigration system bogged down by a surge of immigrant petitions and added scrutiny post-Sept. 11, 2001.

The Elgin man said he asked immigration authorities about expediting his case because he wants to sponsor his elderly parents in Pakistan for citizenship. He awaits a date for his final immigration interview.

"It's very frustrating," said the 32-year-old senior financial consultant for a Chicago firm. "I really want to sponsor my parents, and when I hear they are getting sicker and sicker, it bothers me so much."

Iqbal is not alone. But there finally may be light at the end of the tunnel for longtime legal permanent residents waiting for citizenship.

Authorities under fire from immigration activists and legislators for dragging out the process are responding to class action lawsuits filed by Muslim immigrants in several states claiming discrimination. They say they are redoubling efforts to clear old cases by November.

And, authorities anticipate once that backlog is eliminated, newer citizenship applications should move through the system swiftly, thanks to additional resources from the federal government.

Since May, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the FBI began clearing a nationwide backlog of 82,000 immigrant applications, starting with cases pending for more than three years. The backlog is now down to 10,000 cases, officials said.

"Our goal for November 2008 is to process any name checks that are pending for more than one year," said Marilou Cabrera, USCIS Chicago spokeswoman.
. . .
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/print/?id=243876