Associated Press – Fri Jan 28, 8:07 pm ET
PHOENIX – Arizona legislators have reintroduced legislation aimed at making President Barack Obama prove his U.S. nationality by birth.
The measure in the Arizona House would prohibit placing presidential and vice-presidential candidates on the state's ballot unless they submit specified documentation of their U.S. birth and other constitutional requirements.
Hawaii officials have repeatedly confirmed Obama's birth in that state, but so-called "birthers" contend Obama was actually born in Kenya, his father's homeland.
The state House narrowly passed a version of the bill in 2010 but it died in the Senate without a vote in the closing days of the legislative session. Secretary of State Ken Bennett had voiced concerns about the 2010 legislation's provision that would have prohibited his office from placing a candidate on the ballot if documents submitted on behalf of a candidate left reasonable doubt about the candidate's eligibility. That would have left the secretary of state with too much discretion, Bennett said through a spokesman at the time.
On Friday, Bennett noted that the reasonable doubt wording is not included in the 2011 version; instead, it mandates submissions of specific sworn statements and a copy of a birth certificate with specific information.
Bennett said he has questions about the new legislation's proposed requirements, noting that required information, including names of a hospital, attending physician and witnesses, might not be on all birth certificates. It would be best if federal-level processes assured the eligibility of presidential candidates, Bennett said.
"But it seems to be obvious that they must not have a process sufficiently implemented at the federal level or we wouldn't still be having questions about the president's birth status."
Bennett, a Republican and a former state Senate president, said he personally believes Obama was born in Hawaii.
This year's bill has not yet been assigned to a committee for a possible hearing. It has 41 co-sponsors, all Republicans and one more than last year. The Legislature has 90 members, with both chambers controlled by Republicans.
The bill's main sponsor, Republican Rep. Judy Burgess of Skull Valley, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Similar bills have been introduced in other states, including Georgia, Missouri, Nebraska, Connecticut, Oklahoma and Texas.
Meanwhile, a legislative bill introduced in Hawaii would change a privacy law barring the release of birth records unless the requester is someone with a tangible interest, such as a close family member.
The Hawaii bill, intended by Obama supporters to dispel claims that Obama was not born in the state, would allow anyone to get a copy of his birth records for a $100 fee.
Friday, January 28, 2011
News Web site News .House OKs amended illegal immigration bill
The version of an illegal immigration bill that passed the House Thursday has new provisions that may be too tough for one party and too lenient for the other.
District 53 Rep. Bobby Moak, D-Bogue Chitto, said the amended version of Senate Bill 2179, the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act of 2011, contains stiff penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants and a sweetener for local law enforcement agencies who jail them.
"You need to shut the door right there," said Moak, who presented the bill on the House floor. "What the House did was hear from Mississippians who said the cause of this problem is people who continue to bring these folks in illegally. That's what needs to stop."
The amended legislation now stipulates businesses found guilty of hiring illegal immigrants may face fines of not less than $5,000 per day and not more than $25,000 per day, with those funds placed in an account accessible by local governments for reimbursement of costs or to pay for more training for law enforcement officers. The amount of the fine is up to the judge, Moak said.
Employers found guilty of hiring illegal immigrants will likewise be stripped of tax benefits, bonds and grants, and the state auditor's office will be charged with recovering any money the state has invested in that company.
Illegal immigrants found guilty of a non-violent crime would serve one-third of their sentence and then be eligible to be returned to their country of origin under a federal program, Moak said. If that illegal immigrant is caught in Mississippi a second time, they will serve the remainder of the sentence with no chance for parole, he said.
House leaders removed a provision in the original bill that would have allowed any Mississippi citizen to bring suit against local law enforcement agencies or governments suspected of refusing to enforce the immigration law.
Instead, agencies that comply and jail illegal immigrants will be reimbursed $36 per day on a program similar to the money the state sends to local jails for housing state inmates. The latter rate is $20 per day.
"Suing is not the answer," Moak said. "Let's say you win. Who gets to pay for it? You do, the local taxpayers."
The bill now returns to the Senate for review, where it could be amended even more.
"If it was up to me, it's either take it or leave it," Moak said.
District 92 Rep. Becky Currie, R-Brookhaven, said Republicans supported the amended version of the bill in force in order to keep it alive in the Legislature, but not all GOP members are happy with the House's changes. She said the bill underwent 55 deletions and 43 insertions of new language that she fears has crippled its ability to be enforced.
"For Democrats to walk away from this and say, 'Well, we passed the immigration bill,' no one needs to be fooled by that," Currie said. "Not everything in it is terrible, but it's just watered down."
Still, Currie - who introduced her own Arizona-style immigration bill in the House - called the passing of the bill "absolutely a step in the right direction" and commended Moak for the way he handled the bill on the floor.
"We'll do what the people of Mississippi want us to do - take care of the illegal immigration problem," she said. "The federal government won't do its job, so the states will have to step up and do theirs."
District 53 Rep. Bobby Moak, D-Bogue Chitto, said the amended version of Senate Bill 2179, the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act of 2011, contains stiff penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants and a sweetener for local law enforcement agencies who jail them.
"You need to shut the door right there," said Moak, who presented the bill on the House floor. "What the House did was hear from Mississippians who said the cause of this problem is people who continue to bring these folks in illegally. That's what needs to stop."
The amended legislation now stipulates businesses found guilty of hiring illegal immigrants may face fines of not less than $5,000 per day and not more than $25,000 per day, with those funds placed in an account accessible by local governments for reimbursement of costs or to pay for more training for law enforcement officers. The amount of the fine is up to the judge, Moak said.
Employers found guilty of hiring illegal immigrants will likewise be stripped of tax benefits, bonds and grants, and the state auditor's office will be charged with recovering any money the state has invested in that company.
Illegal immigrants found guilty of a non-violent crime would serve one-third of their sentence and then be eligible to be returned to their country of origin under a federal program, Moak said. If that illegal immigrant is caught in Mississippi a second time, they will serve the remainder of the sentence with no chance for parole, he said.
House leaders removed a provision in the original bill that would have allowed any Mississippi citizen to bring suit against local law enforcement agencies or governments suspected of refusing to enforce the immigration law.
Instead, agencies that comply and jail illegal immigrants will be reimbursed $36 per day on a program similar to the money the state sends to local jails for housing state inmates. The latter rate is $20 per day.
"Suing is not the answer," Moak said. "Let's say you win. Who gets to pay for it? You do, the local taxpayers."
The bill now returns to the Senate for review, where it could be amended even more.
"If it was up to me, it's either take it or leave it," Moak said.
District 92 Rep. Becky Currie, R-Brookhaven, said Republicans supported the amended version of the bill in force in order to keep it alive in the Legislature, but not all GOP members are happy with the House's changes. She said the bill underwent 55 deletions and 43 insertions of new language that she fears has crippled its ability to be enforced.
"For Democrats to walk away from this and say, 'Well, we passed the immigration bill,' no one needs to be fooled by that," Currie said. "Not everything in it is terrible, but it's just watered down."
Still, Currie - who introduced her own Arizona-style immigration bill in the House - called the passing of the bill "absolutely a step in the right direction" and commended Moak for the way he handled the bill on the floor.
"We'll do what the people of Mississippi want us to do - take care of the illegal immigration problem," she said. "The federal government won't do its job, so the states will have to step up and do theirs."
Sunday, January 16, 2011
US cancels 'virtual fence' along Mexican border. What's Plan B?
Christian Science Monitor - The dream of a high-tech barrier stretching from one end of America’s southern border to the other – originally hailed by then-President George W. Bush as “the most technically advanced border security initiative” ever – is officially burst.
In announcing that it would pull the plug on the troubled “virtual fence” project, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said Friday it would instead pursue a region-by-region approach, with different parts of the US border protected in different ways as dictated by terrain and other area-specific conditions.
“This new strategy is tailored to the unique needs of each border region, providing faster deployment of technology, better coverage, and a more effective balance between cost and capability,” said DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano in a statement.
Almost from the onset, the virtual fence – known as the Secure Border Initiative network, or SBInet – ran into problems. As pilot projects were built in two spots in Arizona along the border with Mexico, cost overruns mounted. Just as worrisome was that the technology – in the form of camera-topped surveillance towers that was supposed to pinpoint for border agents in a distant command post the exact location of illegal border-crossers – was often flummoxed by conditions on the ground such as terrain and weather.
“Cameras don’t come down off the poles and grab people by the ankle and arrest them,” T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council representing border patrol agents, told the Monitor in 2009. The technology, he said at the time, was effective only on level ground; in terrain with mountains and valleys it was ineffective beyond a few hundred feet.
In all, the government spent almost $1 billion on the virtual fence project since its inception in 2005, as contractor Boeing Co. endeavored to work out the kinks and refine SBInet’s capabilities. In the end, though, the cost per mile of coverage made it grossly inefficient: It is operational along 53 miles of Arizona’s 386-mile border with Mexico.
By contrast, the DHS expects that security for the rest of Arizona’s border can be buttressed for $750 million, by using commercially available surveillance measures, unmanned drones, thermal imaging, and other equipment.
“SBInet cannot meet its original objective of providing a single, integrated border-security technology solution,” Secretary Napolitano said Friday. It now falls to her department to propose alternative, region-by-region plans for improving border security, which she said would come later this year. In surrendering the “one-size-fits-all” solution offered by the virtual fence, DHS expects to use some of its proven components elsewhere.
The Obama administration has from the beginning made a point of highlighting its efforts to improve border security, knowing it will stand no chance of reforming America’s broken immigration policy unless it demonstrates to Congress and the public that it has first moved aggressively to prevent illegal entry into the US. Indeed, the DREAM Act, a bill to resolve the status of some illegal immigrants already in the US, failed to pass the Senate late last year.
The president, for his part, last year signed legislation to spend $600 million on two more unmanned drones to patrol the border and on 1,500 additional Border Patrol agents and other law-enforcement personnel to crack down on illegal immigrants and drug traffickers. And DHS noted Friday that Border Patrol manpower has doubled – now at a force of 20,500 – since 2004.
Few lamented the demise of the virtual fence project – even those who have criticized the Obama administration for not doing enough to tighten the southern border.
Rep. Peter King (R) of New York, now chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, told The New York Times that the Obama administration should have ended SBInet before now.
Nor did Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona object to ending the project in his home state. “I am pleased to hear that Secretary Napolitano finally allowed the SBInet contract to expire,” he told The Arizona Republic. “A complete and thorough investigation should be conducted related to this waste.”
In announcing that it would pull the plug on the troubled “virtual fence” project, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said Friday it would instead pursue a region-by-region approach, with different parts of the US border protected in different ways as dictated by terrain and other area-specific conditions.
“This new strategy is tailored to the unique needs of each border region, providing faster deployment of technology, better coverage, and a more effective balance between cost and capability,” said DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano in a statement.
Almost from the onset, the virtual fence – known as the Secure Border Initiative network, or SBInet – ran into problems. As pilot projects were built in two spots in Arizona along the border with Mexico, cost overruns mounted. Just as worrisome was that the technology – in the form of camera-topped surveillance towers that was supposed to pinpoint for border agents in a distant command post the exact location of illegal border-crossers – was often flummoxed by conditions on the ground such as terrain and weather.
“Cameras don’t come down off the poles and grab people by the ankle and arrest them,” T.J. Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council representing border patrol agents, told the Monitor in 2009. The technology, he said at the time, was effective only on level ground; in terrain with mountains and valleys it was ineffective beyond a few hundred feet.
In all, the government spent almost $1 billion on the virtual fence project since its inception in 2005, as contractor Boeing Co. endeavored to work out the kinks and refine SBInet’s capabilities. In the end, though, the cost per mile of coverage made it grossly inefficient: It is operational along 53 miles of Arizona’s 386-mile border with Mexico.
By contrast, the DHS expects that security for the rest of Arizona’s border can be buttressed for $750 million, by using commercially available surveillance measures, unmanned drones, thermal imaging, and other equipment.
“SBInet cannot meet its original objective of providing a single, integrated border-security technology solution,” Secretary Napolitano said Friday. It now falls to her department to propose alternative, region-by-region plans for improving border security, which she said would come later this year. In surrendering the “one-size-fits-all” solution offered by the virtual fence, DHS expects to use some of its proven components elsewhere.
The Obama administration has from the beginning made a point of highlighting its efforts to improve border security, knowing it will stand no chance of reforming America’s broken immigration policy unless it demonstrates to Congress and the public that it has first moved aggressively to prevent illegal entry into the US. Indeed, the DREAM Act, a bill to resolve the status of some illegal immigrants already in the US, failed to pass the Senate late last year.
The president, for his part, last year signed legislation to spend $600 million on two more unmanned drones to patrol the border and on 1,500 additional Border Patrol agents and other law-enforcement personnel to crack down on illegal immigrants and drug traffickers. And DHS noted Friday that Border Patrol manpower has doubled – now at a force of 20,500 – since 2004.
Few lamented the demise of the virtual fence project – even those who have criticized the Obama administration for not doing enough to tighten the southern border.
Rep. Peter King (R) of New York, now chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, told The New York Times that the Obama administration should have ended SBInet before now.
Nor did Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona object to ending the project in his home state. “I am pleased to hear that Secretary Napolitano finally allowed the SBInet contract to expire,” he told The Arizona Republic. “A complete and thorough investigation should be conducted related to this waste.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
