The Wonk Room

Minuteman Civil Defense Corps President Named In Property Tax Scam Lawsuit

The Phoenix New Times reports that Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard is alleging that Carmen Mercer, president of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps (MCDC), participated in a scam that involved offering homeowners phony property tax reduction services. The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps is the More »« Less border vigilante group in the US.

Mercer is accused of participating in a scheme in which official-looking letters were sent to homeowners offering to reduce their property taxes in exchange for a $189 processing fee. The lawsuit alleges that the solicitations were “completely fraudulent and deceptive” and that the defendants duped consumers into believing they were paying a legitimate business for services that could not be performed. Mercer was identified as the owner of the Post Office box listed on the scam letters. She claims that she was asked to open the Post Office box by a friend and that she did not know its intended purpose.

It’s pretty ironic that someone who is so worried about “illegal” immigrants harming US citizens is currently being accused of scamming unsuspecting American homeowners and breaking the law herself. However, Mercer’s legal woes are miniscule compared to those faced by other Minuteman leaders. Most recently, Shawna Forde, leader of the Minuteman American Defense group, was charged with the brutal murder of a 9-year-old girl. In 2007, former leaders of the Minuteman Project sued founder Jim Gilchrist for allegedly using $300,000 of the group’s money to promote his book and run for Congress. Gilchrist then filed a defamation suit against his colleagues.

Former MCDC President Chris Simcox was also mired in legal controversy. Anti-immigration advocates across the country turned against him when he failed to account for $1.6-$1.8 million in private donations he claimed to have raised for an “Israeli-style” barrier” based on “the fences used in Gaza and the West Bank.” The project turned out to be little more than a two mile-long barbed-wire cattle fence. Simcox’s own ex-wife fought to obtain full custody of their son, describing Simcox as being “prone to sudden, violent rages.” In January 2003, Simcox was arrested while while on patrol with Civil Homeland Defense for illegally carrying a .45-caliber semi-automatic handgun in a national park. Simcox is planning on running against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) this fall, claiming “I work for the people, period.”

Mercer’s predecessor Al Garza resigned two weeks ago saying that MCDC “is now on a path that I cannot endorse.”

Anti-Immigrant Hate Group Director Dan Stein Thinks ‘Illegal Aliens’ Will Receive Health Care

Yesterday, Dan Stein, Executive Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) — an anti-immigrant designated hate group — appeared on MSNBC’s Dr. Nancy claiming that his years of experience tell him that “illegal aliens” will receive coverage if health care reform passes:

STEIN: Well, I’ve been working this issue for almost thirty years. The way H.R. 3200 is drafted, this is the way it’s drafted: illegal aliens can qualify for the public plan. And the Congressional Hispanic Caucus is pushing to retain that language. And for the affordability credits for the subsidy, if one member of the family is here legally, then the entire family can qualify. And most importantly, there’s no way to verify that eligibility standard. So, the bottom line is, based on all these years of watching and experience at FAIR, we know illegal aliens under this bill will get health care.

Watch it:

You’d think thirty years of experience would’ve taught Stein that undocumented and legal immigrants alike rarely qualify for public benefits and health care reform doesn’t look like it’s going to be any exception. If Stein had actually done his research and read the drafted health care reform legislation, he would’ve noticed that Sec. 242 and 246 explicitly state that only individuals who are lawfully present in US will receive any of the benefits provided in the bill. That language also applies to affordability credits, meaning that only family members who are “affordable credit eligible individuals” will receive government assistance and “affordable credit eligible individuals” are defined as someone who is lawfully present in the US. Even the Congressional Hispanic Caucus — which Stein cites as pressing for inclusion of the undocumented — has issued a statement supporting coverage only for “legal, law abiding” immigrants who pay their “fair share.” In fact, the bill “severely restricts” health care benefits even for legal immigrants.

Ultimately, Stein has his own agenda and it has little do with health care. Today, the Washington Independent reports:

“As the heat gets turned up on the health care reform debate, anti-immigrant activists are using the issue to whip up fear and anger toward immigrants, portraying them as a costly and burdensome drain on any taxpayer-supported U.S. health care system. Angry questions about illegal immigrants getting health care at town hall meetings across the country have put many lawmakers on the defensive…The protesters are spurred on in large part by immigration restrictionist groups who are using the health care debate to spread fears about immigrants.”

Anti-immigrant rhetoric aside, Executive Director of Voto Latino Maria Teresa Kumar — who appeared on the same segment opposite of Stein — also pointed out that the more people who are included in any health insurance plan, the more costs for everyone involved go down.

CNN Airs Anti-Immigrant Front Group’s ‘Pro-Labor’ Incendiary Ad

CNN is once again airing an incendiary ad by the an anti-immigrant front group, Coalition For The Future Of The American Worker, which warns that the US government is letting in 1.5 million foreign workers a year to take jobs from the 15 million unemployed Americans. Roy Beck, Executive Director of the anti-immigrant group NumbersUSA and principal spokesperson for the Coalition, called on supporters to discuss the ad at town hall meetings and declared the need for an “immigration suspension” bill to “champion workers.” A previous version of the ad aired earlier this year. Watch it:

To begin with, the supposedly labor-friendly “Coalition” is nothing more than a self-proclaimed “umbrella group” of the country’s leading anti-immigrant organizations which includes several designated hate groups: Californians for Population Stabilization, Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), NumbersUSA, and the American Immigration Control Foundation (AICF). Several of these organizations have been classified as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center. According to the Center for Community Change New Community, FAIR and AICF have both received funding from the white supremacist and racial eugenic foundation, the Pioneer Fund.

The Coalition obviously has had little interaction with the nation’s two largest labor federations which are calling for comprehensive immigration reform that provides a path to legalization for undocumented workers and recommend the creation of an independent commission to assess and determine future levels of immigration. The local AFL-CIO in Detroit — where so many American autoworkers have been laid off — recently adopted a resolution vigorously supporting the labor federations’ immigration principles.

How the Coalition arrives at the notion that the US is even accepting 1.5 million “new” foreign workers is baffling. A few months ago, when NumbersUSA trumpeted the data (then estimated at 1.6 million immigrant workers), Walter Ewing of the Immigration Policy Center picked the far-fetched estimate apart. According to Ewing, the estimate is “so full of holes as to be virtually meaningless” and consists of two broken parts: an “extravagantly inflated estimate” of 744,000 “new” Green Card holders and “the unverifiable assertion” that the US is letting in another 913,000 non-permanent foreign workers. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) statistics clearly indicate that the majority of “new” Green Card holders are not actually new immigrants, but rather students, refugees and temporary workers who have applied for an “adjustment of status” while already in the US. As for the second number, NumbersUSA doesn’t clearly define it and also fails to provide its source. All in all, legal avenues for foreigners wanting to work in the US are actually extremely restricted and green card numbers are tightly capped and limited to certain categories of persons.

This past election season, the Coalition sponsored a series of inflammatory ads that were blasted as “borderline racist” and pulled off their air by one Iowa station. While CNN refuses to air an ad criticizing the insurance industry which is actually backed by labor, the “Coalition” of anti-immigrant labor-friendly posers has its misleading ad placed on regular rotation.

Lou Dobbs Show Promotes Myth That ‘Gaping Loophole’ Will Provide Health Care Coverage For ‘Illegals’

Last night, Lou Dobbs Show correspondent Lisa Sylvester reported that “people who break immigration laws” will be “rewarded” with free health care coverage due to “gaping loopholes” in the proposed health care bill. Sylvester interviewed right-wing immigration hardliners and health care opponents to make her case:

ROBERT RECTOR, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: What we’re doing is creating a new program for low-income people to give them free medical care and giving illegal immigrants free and total access to that system. It’s a huge transformation. It’s radically different than anything the country has done in the past.

SYLVESTER: An amendment was offered that would have enabled states to use the Welfare Eligibility data base to keep illegal immigrants from qualifying for health care benefits. But that amendment was defeated in committee on a party line vote. And there’s another provision in this bill that some Republicans take issue with. It says that if one member of a family is eligible to receive universal health coverage then the entire family is eligible. Representative Lamar Smith calls that another loophole that he says will permit illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer funded health coverage.

Watch it:

Far from “free and total access,” there is specific language in both the House and Senate bills that prohibits undocumented immigrants from obtaining any federal health care assistance. However, several conservatives are still whining about the failure of the Heller Amendment, which Sylvester also cites above. None of them have mentioned that the amendment would have given private insurance providers unprecedented access to the sensitive income and identity information of all those applying for health care assistance while curtailing the privacy and redress responsibilities that the Social Security Act requires of government agencies.

The second “loophole” that Smith falsely claims will allow undocumented immigrants to receive universal coverage through legal family members represents another distortion. The House bill clearly stipulates that only family members who are “affordable credit eligible individuals” will receive government assistance. “Affordable credit eligible individuals” are defined as someone who is lawfully present in the US.

Rather than requiring Americans to hand over sensitive information to private insurers, the eligibility provision is enforceable via less invasive documentation requirements. If Congress decides to take up comprehensive immigration reform, there’s also the likely possibility that illegal immigration will be addressed head-on by putting undocumented immigrants on a path to legalization which is when and how this whole topic should be addressed in the first place.

Sen. Kay Hutchison Blames Texas Uninsured Rate On ‘Illegal Immigrant Population’

Texas has the largest uninsured population and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) decided to pin the blame on undocumented immigrants at a Dallas press conference this past Friday. “We have the highest number of uninsured. Mostly because of the illegal immigrant population,” said Hutchison.

However, state hospital officials were quick to point out that Hutchison is wrong. Ann Ward, Vice President with the Texas Hospital Association, points out:

“People say illegal immigrants are a large part of the uninsured population but the studies I’ve seen by the Texas Department of Insurance, it’s less than 20 percent of uninsured are illegal immigrants. And one thing we know, many of the people who come to hospitals for care. They pay, they pay cash.”

Ward explains that Texas has the highest rate of uninsured because of the large number of low-wage workers who cannot afford private insurance and the small business which do not offer their employees health care benefits. Another national study shows that U.S. citizens make up the majority of the nonelderly uninsured (78%), while legal and undocumented immigrants account for only 22%.

Listen here:

Michelle Malkin: ‘Obamacare’ Is A Means To ‘Amnestizing’ ‘Border Jumpers’

Michelle Malkin appeared on Fox and Friends this morning promoting the hysterical claim that millions of “illegal lawbreakers, border jumpers, visa overstayers, and deportation fugitives” will be receiving health care because House Democrats decided to vote down an amendment to the health care bill proposed by Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) that would have used immigration to drive yet another wedge into the volatile health care debate:

MALKIN: The democrat leaders are vehemently denying that the Obamacare would cover illegal lawbreakers, border jumpers, visa overstayers, deportation fugitives, but I think their actions speak louder than words…Remember that Obama at the same time has parallel plans to grant amnesty. And what you’re really seeing is that universal health care is being used as a vehicle, as a means to achieve other ideological and partisan ends. And one of those ends is amnestizing the entire illegal alien population so they can be guaranteed democrat voters in the future.

Watch it:

While Malkin and others are paranoid that Democrats are working towards greater “ideological and partisan ends,” it’s members of the GOP who are using every trick in the book to derail the health care bill and smear immigration reform before it even hits the floor. The Heller Amendment would have required each and every individual to prove his or her public health insurance or credit eligibility using the Income and Eligibility Verification System (IEVS) and the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) programs. Dragging complex citizen verification systems from the immigration debate into health care reform and giving private insurance providers access to them would’ve forced Congress to address database errors, misuse, abuse and hammer out details on complaint and redress procedures, privacy protections, educational outreach, and increased funding.

Democrats are “vehemently denying” that America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 will cover undocumented immigrants because there’s specific language in the bill which excludes them. Secondly, though Malkin chooses to adamantly oppose comprehensive immigration reform and boil it down to “amnestizing,” the Obama administration and members of Congress have made clear that an electronic verification system and other enforcement measures must accompany any earned legalization program for undocumented immigrants.

Ultimately, the progressive’s “grand plan” involves an ambituous legislative agenda which seeks to remove barriers to quality health care and fix the broken immigration system through separate pieces of legislation because they are in fact two very different goals. The only thing that will actually “guarantee democrat voters” in the future is if the GOP continues to thwart progress on both issues in an effort to please its aging right-wing base.

GOP Congressmen Mislead Again: ‘Millions’ Of ‘Criminal Illegal Aliens’ Will Receive Health Care

Yesterday, three Republican congressmen continued spreading the poorly fabricated myth that “criminal illegal aliens” will be covered by America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, despite the fact that the bill excludes undocumented immigrants from receiving federal funds to buy health insurance from either a private or government plan.

Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) and Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) relied on fear and misinformation to garner opposition to both immigration and health care reform to essentially kill two birds with one stone:

AKIN: If before we had trouble with people coming here illegally, if we give them free health insurance and health coverage that’s going to make it more attractive for them to come. So if you don’t like illegal immigration, then you’re not going to like this bill either…

BROUN: We don’t know how many illegal aliens are here — they’re not immigrants — they’re aliens. They’ve committed crimes, so they’re criminals…they’re guilty of many law infractions. This health care plan, Obamacare, is going to give every single one of those illegal aliens health insurance at the cost of taxpayers.

Akin and Broun apparently overlooked the section of the House’s health care bill that reads:

“Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

They also should’ve done some research before rattling on about immigration. The global economic recession has shown more than ever that the labor market, not health care, drives migration. Even if foreigners are under the false impression that undocumented immigrants in the US are receiving health care, in most cases it’s not going to be the reason they drop everything and leave.

Rep. John Fleming (R-LA) took a slightly less antagonistic approach:

AKIN: Is this bill going to give illegal immigrants health care?

FLEMING: About 10 million…that’s 10 million people who either should be here legally and then paying into the system and paying their way or they should go back home because they’re here illegally to begin with and that would not be a cost or a burden.

Though Fleming apparently didn’t coordinate with his colleague Rep. Steve King (R-IA) who put the number at 5.6 million yesterday, he provided a reasonable suggestion. That is, requiring all those in the country illegally to fix their status so that Republicans can stop using the immigration issue to drive a wedge through policy proposals they don’t like. Most undocumented immigrants actually do pay taxes, but maybe passing comprehensive immigration reform would force the “whacko wing” of the GOP to finally stop griping and grumbling about “illegal aliens” and start focusing on solving the issues at hand. Meanwhile, a policy designed to send 10 million undocumented immigrants “back home” would cost taxpayers at least $206 billion over five years, or $41.2 billion annually.

Watch it:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio Will Donate Portion Of Salary To ‘Anti-Illegal Immigration Donation Fund’

Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio is asking his officers to take 56 hours of unpaid leave in fiscal year 2010 as the state of Arizona faces a $3.4 billion budget deficit that has forced Arpaio to trim his own budget by 17%. In solidarity, he has agreed to put a miniscule dent in his $97,000 annual salary by donating $2,613 to three charities set up by his agency which includes his own “Anti-Illegal Immigration Donation Fund.”

Arpaio blames his budget crisis on city council members that voted to limit his funds. Back in April, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors in Arizona voted to postpone the acceptance of $1.6 million from the state that would’ve gone towards Arpaio’s controversial immigration enforcement tactics which allegedly include racial profiling and discrimination. At the time, Arpaio warned that “(Board Chairman Max Wilson) better be careful on cutting my budget, since I am investigating the Board of Supervisors.” Since Arpaio’s empty threats didn’t work, he is now suggesting that county supervisors should take furloughs or salary cuts as well when in fact some of them already have.

County Manager David Smith says he has decided to take a $23,000 pay cut this year — an amount that dwarfs Arpaio’s meager “charitable contribution.” Maybe Arpaio wasn’t aware of it since Smith didn’t hold a self-aggrandizing press conference to announce his goodwill to the world. Arizona Central reporter Yvonne Wingett points out that supervisors Don Stapley, Andy Kunasek and Max Wilson already donate thousands of dollars to charities every year.

As for himself, Arpaio says he can’t take a furlough because he is an elected official. But what he could do is change the way he operates his police department to cut costs and fight crime. According to a Pulitzer Prize-winning series of articles published in the East Valley Tribune, Arpaio’s budget nearly doubled from $37 million to $72.5 million since 2001. As of 2008, his office created a $1.3 million deficit in just three months. According to the Tribune, these costs are all a result of his immigration-enforcement crusade that has netted a lot of brown-skinned traffic violators, but neglected violent crimes and homicides which have gone up by 166%.

The Phoenix News Times blog accuses Arpaio and many of his top commanders of “double dipping,” or collecting both retirement benefits and a salary. Arpaio reportedly is paid a pension in addition to his $97,000 salary from his former employer, the DEA.

CIS’ Jerry Kammer Says Immigration Raids ‘Boost’ Union Organizing To Promote Anti-Immigrant Agenda

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the “nativist lobby’s independent think tank which has never found any aspect of immigration it likes,” has come out with a new report claiming that immigration raids “boost” union organizing. The author, Jerry Kammer, comes to the counter-intuitive conclusion that the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) won its 15-year-long unionizing battle at Smithfield Food’s largest hog processing plant in Tar Heel, NC thanks to ramped-up enforcement measures and immigration raids conducted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in 2007.

Kammer’s glaring lack of labor history knowledge coupled with the anti-immigrant mission of his employer can serve as the only possible explanations for his gross misrepresentation of what happened at Smithfield between 1994 and 2009. The UFCW’s organizing win was not the result of immigration raids, but rather a bitter labor struggle that unified the workforce and culminated in a game-changing legal dispute:

1994 & 1997: The UFCW loses its first two elections amidst allegations of widespread coercion, intimidation, and targeted layoffs.

2000: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issues a decision finding massive violations of labor laws on behalf of Smithfield.

2004: The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirms the 2000 decision, finding that Smithfield had engaged in “intense and widespread” coercion in both elections. Smithfield agrees to hold a third union election, but the UFCW argues that the company should recognize card-check organizing instead.

2007: Smithfield files a federal lawsuit against the UFCW, accusing the union of libel and slander.

2008: When the suit is settled, both parties agree to another closely supervised election which the UFCW wins 2,041 to 1,879.

2009: Nearly 7 months after the union win, Tar Heel workers ratify their first union contract.

Kammer is also apparently ignorant to the well-known fact that immigration raids have more often been the bane of a union organizer’s existence. Following the Smithfield immigration raids, union officials claimed that Smithfield had collaborated with ICE authorities to discourage its workers from organizing. Smithfield’s immigrant intimidation tactics were also extensively documented in a Human Rights Watch report as having been used to crush union organizing efforts. Union organizer Eduardo Peña compared the Smithfield immigration raids to a “nuclear bomb.” Ultimately, the immigration measures backfired on Smithfield. In 2006, over 300 workers walked out in protest of the company’s immigration tactics. The success of the workplace action impressed African American workers and fueled increased unity between them and Latino workers.

It’s true that immigrant workers — both documented and undocumented — are difficult to organize. However, it’s a problem that could be solved more cheaply and more effectively with mechanisms like the ones provided in the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which make it harder for employers to intimidate workers that are trying to organize.

The UFCW couldn’t comment on Kammer’s report due to the Smithfield lawsuit settlement which prevents them from discussing the terms of the organizing process. However, they weren’t too fond of Kammer’s last report which also advocated for increased immigration raids and enforcement-only solutions from a deceptively pro-labor perspective.

Examiner Reporter Wonders Whether ‘Illegal Alien’ Voter Fraud Helped Franken Win

Today, the anti-immigrant group, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC), re-posted an article that was featured in yesterday’s Examiner in which “reporter” Jim Kouri warned against the infinite dangers of “illegal alien voter fraud,” suggesting that the phenomenon might have played a role in the election of Minnesota’s new senator, Al Franken:

“Just last month, in an extremely close race in Minnesota between incumbent Senator Norm Coleman and comedian Al Franken, Franken was finally declared a winner months after the actual election. While the recount battle raged, no one within the government or within the news media gave a thought to investigating whether or not illegal aliens or legal immigrants voted in the Minnesota for that contested senate seat.”

Kouri also suggests that “illegal aliens” may have cost Al Gore the state of Florida during the 2000 presidential race. He goes as far to include a nasty quote from New Jersey GOP strategist Janice Martin who seems to pose her own conspiracy theory:

“Americans would be shocked to discover that hundreds of thousands of general election voters are illegal aliens, green-card immigrants, and criminals who’ve murdered, raped and robbed US citizens. And guess which political party benefits the most from their votes? The one that’s pushing for amnesty and a bag full of free goodies.“

Kouri relies on a 2008 Heritage Report which uses anecdotal “research” and self-contradicting arguments to fan the flames of paranoia and convince right-wingers that they’ve acquired more dirt on the immigrant population. The report repeatedly contradicts itself, first claiming that “thousands of non-citizens are registered to vote in some states, and tens if not hundreds of thousands in total may be present on the voter rolls nationwide,” and then later admitting “there is no reliable method to determine the number of non-citizens registered or actually voting.”

If a reliable method did exist, chances are it would make Kouri and the Heritage Foundation blush. NYU Law School’s Brennan Center for Justice goes as far to claim that one is more likely to be struck by lightening than to come across a case of case of widespread voter fraud. The Brennan Center explains that many accusations of voter fraud, such as those put forth by Kouri and the Heritage Foundation, are actually due to database errors. The report ultimately states:

“Many of the claims of voter fraud amount to a great deal of smoke without much fire…These claims of voter fraud are frequently used to justify policies that do not solve the alleged wrongs, but that could well disenfranchise legitimate voters. Overly restrictive identification requirements for voters at the polls — which address a sort of voter fraud more rare than death by lightning — is only the most prominent example.”

Anti-Immigrant Group Argues For Immigrant Population Controls To Lower Energy Consumption

In yet another attempt to pander to progressive soft spots, the anti-immigrant Federation For American Immigration Reform (FAIR) has released a report based on the mixed-up notion that, in order to reach U.S. greenhouse emission goals, the U.S. must curb immigration. FAIR complains that Congress is currently considering caps on energy consumption, but not on population growth. The organization recommends implementing a strict “population policy” that is tied to immigration.

The report itself is written by FAIR’s Director of Special Projects, Jack Martin, a former U.S. Consular Diplomat with no environmental, scientific, or academic credentials to speak of. In the report Martin uses anecdotes and inferences to connect rising U.S.energy consumption to immigration levels. Without a single citation other than three endnotes included in the back of the report, Martin spends nine pages arguing that energy consumption has little do with how energy is being used and everything to do with the immigrants who are using it. FAIR’s corresponding press release claims:

[The report] addresses America’s stifled immigration policy debate: it finds that America’s massive immigration-fueled population growth was the single largest contributing factor to the nation’s increased energy consumption and carbon emissions over the past 35 years. Even without a massive amnesty for illegal aliens supported by President Obama and congressional leaders, immigration will be the driving factor as U.S. population approaches the half billion mark by mid-century.

King’s argument also invokes xenophobic panic by referencing the fertility rates of Hispanic women. His whole thesis is ultimately based on the dim-witted idea that the entire energy problem would be resolved if immigrants go away, not taking into account that they will also be consuming energy in their home countries.

Aside from basing his findings on flawed logic, King has his facts wrong. When complaining about the unfairness associated with the stringent Kyoto Protocal standards, King claims that immigration is the main reason that the rate of population growth is so much higher in the U.S. compared to Europe and therefore curbing immigration is the only way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, according to the World Resources Institute, the U.S. is home to 23% fewer people than the European nations of the EU-15, yet still produces 70% more greenhouse gases.

Scapegoating immigrants is easy, actually solving our environmental problems is a lot more complicated. FAIR fails to recognize that energy consumption is driven by a host of factors totally unrelated to population size, such as societal dependence on polluting and non-renewable fossil fuels; utilization of energy-efficient technologies; and the development of mass transit systems that minimize individual automobile use. Along those lines, the McKinsey Global Institute offers a more viable solution to residential energy consumption levels: promoting policies that boost energy productivity — the level of output achieved from the energy consumed — such as building shells, compact fluorescent lighting, and high-efficiency water heating.

FAIR isn’t the only group to blame immigrants for environmental problems — they join the ranks of hate and restrictionist groups like the American Immigration Control Foundation, the Social Contract Press, and the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), which last month released a report entitled “The Environmental Argument for Reducing Immigration to the United States.”

Rep. Steve King Says He Didn’t Want To Be Invited To White House Meeting Anyway

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) is still seething about the bipartisan meeting on immigration reform that took place at the White House last week without him. King told One News Now, “If you’re a critic of Obama, you’re probably not invited to be part of the summit on immigration — which by the way is very, very fine with me.”

However, while claiming that he didn’t want to be invited anyway, King has spent the last week attacking Obama for not inviting more representatives that oppose “amnesty”:

KING: The White House stacked the deck and packed today’s summit with amnesty advocates. President Obama wants an amnesty bill, and while cynically creating a false perception of inclusiveness and bipartisanship, brought in a group that, almost without exception, supports his vision of rewarding law breakers…By not engaging with those who disagree with his pro-amnesty views, President Obama is holding an immigration summit that gives a cold shoulder to millions of Americans. As for me, I would much rather be on the outside of the White House speaking up for the Rule of Law than on the inside going through the motions.

Obama has indicated that he wants to start a productive dialogue on immigration reform and his meeting last week was aimed at uniting “problem-solvers.” A closer look at King’s record reveals that there’s probably a good reason why he did not fit the White House’s criteria. The Anti-Defamation League writes of King:

Congressman Steve King has characterized immigrants — both legal and undocumented — as criminals and disease-carriers. He has spoken alongside leaders of border vigilante groups and advocated a border “wall” topped with electrified wire to stop what he has called a “slow motion Holocaust” of undocumented immigration into the United States. King addressed the House of Representatives and asserted that undocumented immigration is “a slow-rolling, slow-motion terrorist attack on the United States.”

King’s views have won him the the wide support of several anti-immigrant organizations, some of which are identified hate groups. Restrictionist groups such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), Numbers USA, and VDare have all praised King’s efforts and he has been a featured speaker at many of their events. King has also reportedly accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the nativist Minuteman PAC and the U.S. Immigration Reform (USIR) PAC, of which the wife of eugenacist John Tanton is the president.

King may have also been excluded from last week’s meeting because he is generally out of touch with most of the American public. King claimed that:

KING: The American people want this Administration to enforce existing immigration laws and secure our borders…The balance of the views inside the room at today’s White House immigration summit does not reflect the views of the American public.

However, a poll released today shows that 89% of King’s own GOP base of voters support comprehensive immigration reform that requires undocumented immigrants to register for legal status, pay back taxes, and learn English in order to be eligible for U.S. citizenship.

Why Legalizing 12 Million Undocumented Immigrants Would Help U.S. Economy

Yesterday, Lamar Smith published an error-ridden editorial in USA Today in which he made a desperately weak case against providing 12 million undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S. a path to legalization. Smith’s first line of reasoning is that the current economic recession would put Americans in a position in which they’re competing with immigrants for jobs. According to Smith, legalizing immigrants would flood the nation’s Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security systems and hurt U.S. taxpayers. However, Smith’s logic is mind-bogglingly flawed on a variety of levels.

To begin with, study after study shows that there is little, if any, relationship between immigration and unemployment rates at the regional, state, or county level. Furthermore, the potential economic benefits of a legalization program have been widely documented. Available research suggests that — had the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 passed — it would have generated a much needed $66 billion in new revenue during 2007-2016 from income and payroll taxes, as well as various administrative fees. Giovanni Peri, Associate Professor of Economics at the University of California-Davis, further suggests that immigrants don’t even compete with the majority of natives for the same jobs because they tend to work in different occupations. Smith also sidesteps the argument that by legalizing the undocumented population, the “trap door” that artificially suppresses wages, benefits, and working conditions would be removed so that workers could compete fairly in an above-ground economy.

Smith hysterically claims that a flood of immigrants will flow into the country as soon as “amnesty” is passed and that a harsh policy of “attrition through enforcement” is the best way to deal with the nation’s immigration woes. Yet a study released today by the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows that the global economic recession is causing an international migration slow-down, echoing the well-documented claim that immigration is primarily driven by economics. Meanwhile, the OECD advises nations like the U.S. to “keep doors open” to immigrant workers in order to meet long-term labor needs. Watch the OECD’s video on the study’s findings:

Smith’s proposed solution of “attrition through enforcement,” a harsh strategy used to “wear down the will” of undocumented immigrants through deportations, detentions, and anti-immigrant ordinances, would cost taxpayers at least $206 billion over five years, or $41.2 billion annually. Finally, Smith cited a 2006 Zogby poll which showed that the majority of Americans prefer harsh enforcement policies that destroy communities, terrorize workers and rip families apart. Three years later, 2009 polling indicates that 68% of voters believe that undocumented immigrants should be required to register, meet conditions, and eventually be allowed to apply for citizenship.

Mark Krikorian And CIS Conflate ‘Uninsured Crisis’ With ‘Immigration Crisis’

Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the anti-immigrant Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), recently told Michigan’s WXMI-GR news that the biggest growth in the uninsured has come from an increase in immigration — both legal and illegal. According to Krikorian, “From 1989 on, more than 70% of the increase in the total number of uninsured people is immigrants or their young kids.” Watch it:

CIS’ “findings” were also featured in Jerome Corsi’s Red Alert newsletter. Corsi is already well known for authoring two error-ridden anti-Obama books. His “controversial and often bizarre views,” include xenophobic government conspiracy theories as expressed in his book, “The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger With Mexico and Canada.” Stephen Camarota, Director of CIS Research, told Corsi, “It is not too much to say that the nation’s problem with those lacking health care insurance is being driven by the nation’s immigration policy.” Krikorian is also quoted as saying, “We don’t have an uninsured crisis…We have an immigration crisis.”

What Corsi, Krikorian, and Camarota all conveniently fail to mention is that there were years during the post-1989 period during which the number of uninsured native-born citizens dropped dramatically. By leaving out this significant piece of information, anti-immigrant zealots are able to make it look as if immigrants were a larger share of the total increase in the uninsured than is really the case.

In a personal email correspondence, Dr. Walter Ewing, Senior Researcher at the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) further criticizes CIS for muddying the national health care debate with their anti-immigrant agenda. “Given that nearly 80 percent of the uninsured adults and children in this country are U.S. citizens, it is difficult to fathom how Mark Krikorian can treat this as an immigration issue,” says Ewing.

Ezra Klein has pointed out that excluding immigrants from a national health care system, as groups like CIS advocate, could do more harm than good as unskilled or semi-skilled insured native workers are left to compete with cheaper uninsured undocumented immigrants. As CIS and their anti-immigrant allies exploit the health care issue to make the case against immigration, some have gone as far to argue that immigration reform which includes a legalization program for undocumented immigrants could actually solve labor cost disparities and pave the way for health care reform:

“Most immigrants—legal and illegal—to this country are hard-working, young, and in relatively good physical shape (especially compared to native-born Americans). They make far fewer demands on the public purse than, for example, the average retiring baby boomer. If placed on a pathway to citizenship, they comprise a potentially huge new block of taxpayers—taxpayers that could be critical to balancing the long-term ledger for health care, social security, and other entitlements.”

Anti-Immigrant Group Mistakenly Bashes Cornyn’s ‘Pro-Amnesty’ Stance

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX)

“Sen. Cornyn has been making incredibly frightening pro-amnesty statements lately. Only you in Texas can shake him back to some degree of sensibility. Earlier this spring at a Senate hearing, he said that he is in agreement on most immigration issues with Sen. Schumer (the radically pro-amnesty Democrat from New York who chairs the Senate panel on immigration). Then yesterday, the authoritative Capitol Hill newspaper — Roll Call — said Cornyn intends to goad Obama into moving faster to pass comprehensive immigration reform. That terminology almost always means amnesty.”

Numbers USA, rest assured — in Cornyn’s case, his tempered “terminology” means nothing of the such. Though Sen. Cornyn praised Obama for beginning the immigration discussion, this weekend he reassured Texas voters that he strongly opposes “amnesty” in the same breath that he harshly criticized the unproductive agenda of groups like Numbers USA:

“Unfortunately you see groups like that basically are more interested in using money by using fear tactics rather than they are in talking about a subject in a rational and intelligent way…I do oppose amnesty, because I think my constituents in Texas oppose amnesty overwhelmingly. But that’s not to say that there can’t be some practical solution that falls short of amnesty that allows us to improve the status quo.”

Cornyn might want to double check with his constituents, but most polling indicates that the majority of Americans support a path to legalization for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the US. The very health of the GOP largely hinges on the party’s ability to regain the confidence of Latino voters who largely favor immigration reform legislation that contains a legalization component.

Cornyn has instead indicated that the only “practical solution” he is willing to support is a guest worker program — a controversial element of the immigration debate that labor groups strongly oppose. The nation’s two largest labor federations equate any new guest worker program to an “indentured servant” initiative.

Savage Blames Immigrant ‘Gang-Bangers’ For ‘Destroying California’

Yesterday, Media Matters highlighted statements made by “shock-jock” radio host Michael Savage on his Friday show in which he lashed out at immigrant “gang-bangers” for “destroying California.” Savage, whose inflammatory rhetoric recently got him banned from entering the U.K., vowed that only God himself will shut him up:

SAVAGE: The illegals [immigrants] have destroyed the state of California. They’ve sucked it dry like lemons. They’ve sucked it dry. Free medical, free schooling, knocking out babies like tasty bread. What do you want me to say it’s not true? What do you think I’m blind? You think they’re going to reign me in? You think those people on the left are going to scare me into not telling you what’s real? I’m never going to stop. God will stop me, not you. Go walk around and see who’s having the babies in the state of California–14 year-old-gang-banger children are knocking them out like tasty bread.

Savage proceeded to victimize California white males for carrying the economic burden of the state:

SAVAGE: Go blame everybody. Go blame the white male who makes the money in the state. Blame the white male who makes all the money in the state for bankrupting the state. Go ahead.

Listen:

California’s budget crisis is no white man’s burden and white males certainly aren’t the only individuals contributing to the state economy. Immigrants have been called the “super-stars” of California’s profitable high-tech industry. Google, Ebay, and Intel were all started by California’s immigrants.

And while Savage might like to think that most of California’s immigrant population is busy robbing grandmas and pushing baby carriages all day long, immigrants — both legal and illegal — make up more than 1/3 of California’s labor force. In fact, according to economist Giovanni Peri of the University of California, immigrant workers complement native-born California workers and most native-born Californians have experienced wage gains as a result. While there is a cost associated with immigrants and their children — as there is with any individual who lives and goes to school in the United States — California’s immigrants pay roughly $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, and $4.6 billion in sales taxes each year.

Most sources attribute California’s budget shortfall to the state’s long-term investment projects that rely heavily on income taxes during a time of high unemployment and the state’s inability to pass workable solutions due to the political stalemate caused by the complicated state legislative system.

Anti-Immigrant Front Group Courts Progressives With Shoddy Polling Data

The deceptively named anti-immigrant front group, Progressives for Immigration Reform (PFIR), released a set of counter-intuitive polling data today suggesting that while over half of 600 polled liberals support a pathway to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the US, they also see immigration as an economic, social, and environmental liability.

The anti-immigration movement has long been trying to woo progressives by exploiting pro-labor and environmental arguments to make the case against immigrants. The Center for New Community’s (CNC) Eric Ward warns:

“PFIR is simply another addition to a growing list of anti-immigrant groups being set up under the Tanton Network to give the illusion that the anti-immigrant movement is broader than it really is. This network of organizations is named after white nationalist John Tanton the founder and key leader in a network of anti-immigrant organizations, spin-offs and front groups. Key entities include Center for Immigration Studies, Social Contract Press, and the Coalition for the Future American Worker.”

PFIR’s Executive Director Leah Durant is listed as the Federation for American Immigration Reform’s (FAIR) Legal Analyst. Frank Morris, PFIR’s vice president, is also a board member of the Center for Immigration Studies and sits on FAIR’s national board of advisors. According to the CNC, PFIR’s “sister group,” the House Immigration Reform Caucus, chaired by Republican Rep. Brian Bilbray (CA), has an abominable voting record on environmental and labor issues.

According to the poll, 67% of liberals/progressives feel that immigration causes population growth which “negatively impacts the quality of life.” 58% feel that immigration is environmentally harmful and 63% think immigration hurts American workers. Yet over half support a pathway to citizenship.

PFIR’s confusing findings might also have something to do with their polling company, “Pulse Opinion Research,” the favored pollster of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a group which was recently pinned for fueling hate crimes with its anti-immigrant rhetoric and the Eagle Forum, a “pro-family” organization that opposes the “liberal agenda,” “radical feminists,” and supports “American identity.” The pollster has also been used to promote the presidential bids of Libertarian candidates Bob Barr and George Phillies. Yet, while Pulse Opinion Research’s findings were used to predict the relative success of Barr and Phillies, Phillies lost his bid for the Libertarian Party’s nomination to Barr who only won 0.4% of the national vote — compared to the 7% win that Pulse Opinion Research predicted.

Most immigration polling backs the claim that the majority of Americans support a legalization program for undocumented immigrants. Yet, it’s hard to find any polling that shows the same respondents holding immigrants responsible for the nation’s woes. According to a Benenson Strategy Group poll, 71% of 1,000 likely voters said that immigrants are not responsible for taking American jobs. A poll conducted by Bendixon and Associates for the progressive think tank, the New Democratic Network (NDN), found that 60% of voters in four battleground states echoed similar views. Both surveys were bi-partisan polls that consistently showed Democrats leaning towards pro-immigrant views and solutions. None of polls connected immigration to environmental or population growth concerns, however the progressive Green Party itself specifically condemns scapegoating immigrants for social and environmental problems:

“While we recognize that there must be some controls on immigration, if only for the sake of national security, the Green Party would endorse a friendlier (less intimidating) attitude towards immigration in all nations within certain guidelines…We oppose those who seek to divide us for political gain by raising ethnic and racial hatreds, and by blaming immigrants for social and economic problems.”

Polling data aside, US government scientists say there’s insufficient evidence to draw any clear conclusion on immigration’s impact on the environment.

SF Chronicle Reporter Honored By Anti-Immigrant Group Blamed For Hate Crimes

San Francisco’s alternative news source, Beyond Chron, pointed out yesterday that San Francisco Chronicle reporter Jaxon Van Derbeken was honored by the vehemently anti-immigrant group, Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), when they awarded him with their “Eugene Katz Award for Excellence in the Coverage of Immigration” last week.

According to Beyond Chron, Van Derbeken won the same award that was bestowed upon Lou Dobbs for “attacking San Francisco’s two-decade-old Sanctuary Ordinance and perpetuated harmful stereotypes against immigrant children.” Beyond Chron claims that Van Derbeken is partly responsible for Mayor Gavin Newsom’s “hasty” decision to issue a new policy “that puts innocent children in danger and undermines the fundamental right to due process.”

During his Q&A that CIS conveniently edited out of their video of the event, Van Derbeken admitted that he has often been accused of discrimination and biased reporting:

Q: Have you been accused of being racist or –

MR. VAN DERBEKEN: Yes.

Q: – intolerant or anti-immigrant or –

MR. VAN DERBEKEN: Yes, yes, yes. (Laughter.) Hysterical, unfair, biased, awful, evil, anti-Christ, yeah. (Laughter.)

At another point, Van Derbeken was asked who the “voices of sanity” were on the subject of immigration. To which he replied:

MR. VAN DERBEKEN : Well, they’re viewed as lunatics. I mean, the people who are offended by this are thought of as being right-wing lunatics, in the context of this sort of closed loop of San Francisco politics.

It turns out Van Derbeken and CIS share something in common. This past week, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund released a new report that called out CIS, along with several other anti-immigration groups, for having “inflamed the immigration debate by invoking the dehumanizing, racist stereotypes and bigotry of hate groups.” The report tied their hateful rhetoric to an overwhelming rise in hate crimes directed at Latinos and individuals “perceived” as immigrants.

Alleged Minuteman Killer Co-Hosted Anti-Immigration Event Featuring GOP Presidential Candidates

Firedoglake reports that Shawna Forde, the anti-immigrant leader of the Minuteman American Defense (M.A.D.) who was recently charged with the murder of a 9-year-old Hispanic girl and her father, co-hosted the 2007 Washington State Illegal Immigration Summit that reportedly featured presidential candidates Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, and Fred Thompson.

The Reagan Wing, a conservative blog dedicated to picking up Ronald Reagan’s “sword” still features a plug for the summit which it describes as “the pinnacle Conservative event of 2007“:

In addition the event is co-hosted by Minutemen American Defense, a Washington state-wide American citizen defense coalition headed by Shawna Forde, a re-born Rock promoter from the days of the music world-shaking Seattle Rock explosion. Shawna will speak.

Representatives (or the actual candidates) will appear from Presidential campaigns for TOM TANCREDO, DUNCAN HUNTER and FRED THOMPSON.

Minuteman leader Jim Gilchrist, who has tried to distance himself from Forde in recent days, also headlined the 2007 event.

The summit, which featured the slogan “The Great Gringo awakens from siesta,” was reportedly attended by “white supremacists, militia types, neo-Nazis, and skinheads.”

Right wing anti-immigration groups are frantically trying to distance themselves from Forde. The anti-immigrant group, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), issued a press release this afternoon denying any association with Forde after a video popped up of Shawna Forde speaking as a FAIR activist. The blog Long Island Wins reports that web pages from Gilchrist’s website where he supposedly defends Forde are nothing but broken links in a google cache. VDARE, “the homepage of educated racism” has reportedly also “scrubbed” all of its web pages that once supported Forde. So far, CNN’s Rick Sanchez has been one of the few mainstream journalists to question Forde’s connection to the larger movement against immigration.

SANCHEZ: The nation’s largest minuteman group has distanced itself from Forde we should say. And we’ve learned that within Minuteman circles she is considered a bit of a loose canon. But you do have to wonder: how did Shawna Forde–a supposed fringe element–turn up on PBS as a player in the anti-immigration movement?

Watch it:

Immigration advocates are outraged at the mainstream media’s lack of coverage and are asking their supporters to share the story of the 9-year-old victim’s death. Today, Crooks and Liars posted an emotional recording of the 911 call placed by her mother on the day of the attack.

Florida Senate Candidate Marco Rubio Speaks Spanish To Win Votes, But Espouses English-Only Policies

Marco Rubio, who recently announced that he will run for Mel Martinez’s Senate seat in Florida, came out yesterday in favor of making English the official language of the United States, randomly pointing out that his name is spelled the same way in both Spanish and English.

Rubio’s new position echoes a recent MSNBC report which discussed the recent “revival” of the controversial pro-English movement which some say is motivated by anti-immigrant sentiment and reeks of “self defeating” “simple racism.” Rubio’s hard-line immigration position has helped win him the support of right-wing Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) who called Rubio “a real diamond in our own back yard.” Meanwhile, Miami blogger Kyle Munzenrieder pointed out that Rubio must be hoping to “appeal to Florida’s Hispanic voters simply because he is Hispanic,” as his positions are not in line with the interests of the Hispanic and immigrant communities.

Yet while Marco Rubio supports English-only legislation, he’s still willing to talk about his campaign in both languages. Watch it:

Munzenrieder reminds readers that Rubio has also been accused of sending English- and Spanish-speaking voters conflicting messages:

“Great Marco, just about everyone names is spelled the same in English in Spanish. Good for you. We just wish your politics were the same in both languages. Unfortunately, what you say to your English-speaking supporters isn’t always what you say to your Spanish-speaking supporters.”

Munzenrieder is referring to critics who have accused Rubio of resorting to “hateful fear-mongering” when discussing the Obama administration in Spanish and taking a more “neutral” tone in English. Chances are Rubio probably hasn’t mentioned his pro-English position nor Demint’s endorsement to the Spanish-language media.