It is clear that border security and immigration reform are two separate issues. Yet the two must be linked together as we try to develop a responsible solution to both of these problems facing our nation. Today, in Houston, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is visiting to make a speech about border security and the job her department is doing. It is interesting that she chose Houston as the place to deliver this. Texans have been hammering her about border security from the day she took office.

The truth is, and we must acknowledge this, the border between the U.S. and Mexico is more secure now than it has ever been. One of the few good things the Obama Administration has done is to increase security along the border. Is it “secure”?  Few Texans, especially those living in South Texas, would say yes. But it is more secure. However, we still must continue to press the federal government to do more and to be more effective.

Yet, securing the border without fixing our broken immigration system is creating new problems of its own. The increased border security has turned human smuggling and human trafficking into an even larger cash cow for the drug cartels. Not only are they charging more to smuggle people into our country, especially from places other than Mexico and South America, they can use them to haul their drug cargo at the same time. A “slave labor” market if you will.

The difficulty in crossing the border has led to increased lawlessness in our nation. There is more corruption in law enforcement and administration because of the increased pressure of drug cartel money. But there is another unintended consequence of tighter borders – undocumented immigrants are indirectly encouraged to stay longer and to bring their families with them.

A guest worker program would help address this unintended consequence. If these workers were properly identified and documented, they would be free to travel back and forth to their home country as work plays out. This would let them keep their families at home and reduce the burden on taxpayers of education and healthcare. It would reduce the human rights abuses of these people who want to come here to work as they would no longer have to deal with the drug cartels and harsh conditions of sneaking into our country.

It would also reduce the abuse of workers by unethical companies who often work them at sub-standard wages, don’t pay overtime, don’t withhold taxes and child support and who don’t provide workman’s comp coverage, which increases taxpayer exposure for healthcare for work related injuries.

Many take the position of “we must secure the border first.” This is a short sided position as it allows the lawlessness along our border to continue. It also is a national security risk as we are doing nothing to identify the existing undocumented aliens who travel freely about our country.

We are a smart enough group of people to address two problems at once. We cannot reform immigration without securing the border because those who don’t qualify under a new program would still come here illegally. But we also cannot simply secure the border without reforming immigration as this creates the costly and abusive problems talked about above.

Senator Rand Paul told Sean Hannity that we should seek a “trust but verify” solution with our government. Sen. Paul is taking an aggressive stand on moving immigration reform forward along with border security. Take a look at his plan and let him know your support.

“Republicans need to become parents of a new future with Latino voters or we will need to resign ourselves to permanent minority status. The Republican Party has insisted for years that we stand for freedom and family values. I am most proud of my party when it stands for both. The vast majority of Latino voters agree with us on these issues but Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration.” – Rand Paul

There is a lack of trust that must be healed as we move forward. An immigration reform/border security combined solution could put measurable requirements on Homeland Security to continue securing the border and to force them to carry out the new programs as they come into practice.

After the Reagan amnesty, we went to sleep and did not monitor our government’s commitment to verify employees that are eligible to work. We allowed this problem to be created through our own complacency and perhaps the greed of cheap labor. We are asleep no more, and the companies seeking “cheap labor” are on notice that we will not tolerate their misclassification and abuse of workers. Texas laws need to be made tougher on employers who abuse workers, but we must also be ready to supply legally documented workers to meed the labor demands of industry and agriculture.

We can and must do both. Immigration reform and border security should both be addressed and it should be done this year. We cannot afford to wait and we cannot continue the de facto amnesty that is currently in place because of blind opposition to immigration reform.

####

Bob Price is the Texas state leader for Cafe Con Leche Republicans, and a blogger for TexasGOPVote.com. Reposted with permission – original link.

By Thomas Martin Salazar (originally published at Cafe Con Leche Republicans Blog)

Growing up my father (a Mexican national) taught me the importance of having three basic priorities that should govern my life. These priorities were to always place God first, family second, and work/school third above everything else. After the spanking the Republicans  received this last election day, it seems as if we as a party could benefit from considering these priorities, especially when it comes to the family.  I understand that not every Hispanic person is the same, nor is every Mexican American for that matter. But I do believe that these priorities are important and relatable to the Hispanic and Latino community. While the GOP tends to do a great job at defending religious liberty and is the most active in the defense of the unborn, it seems to neglect one of the most important priorities – family and fails miserably at communicating the third – work/education.

If Republicans wish to gain back the support of the Latino vote, especially that of the Mexican Americans in many southwestern states, then we need to end the rhetorical attacks on their families. Hispanics are not going to vote for any candidate whom they  think is going to deport their abuelita or go after their parents, husbands or wives.  They also will not support candidates of a party who want to end birthright citizenship. If we are to be the party of family values which I believe we are, then we must let go of our rhetoric and reach out in good faith to work towards some form of immigration reform just as George W. Bush tried to do. Conservatives seem to think and fear that Hispanics are inherently liberal. I disagree. The Democratic party does not hold our values; but neither do they pander to the immigration enforcement only crowd as republicans tend to do. I am not calling for open borders or lax enforcement. I am suggesting that we use our enforcement resources on the border and go after the criminals and the cartels, meanwhile, finding a humane way to keep families united and help build a better future for America and the Republican Party. When the Republicans finally embrace pro-family policies and cease the rhetoric that has been perceived as anti-Hispanic, then the door will be opened for further dialogue.

After we reach out in good faith, then we, as a party, must communicate better toward Hispanics and Latinos in general. We need candidates and organized groups to reach out and educate them on economic issues. Both employment and education are top priorities for many Hispanics, but if they do not see the connection from the policy played out in their daily lives, then we are failing to communicate.  Republicans must do a better job at explaining how raising tax rates and continued deficit spending will negatively impact them. While at the same time, Republicans need to articulately respond with fiscally sound economic policies that will lead to economic growth and rising incomes. Moreover, we need to defend the free market and explain how it is their inherent right as human beings, created by God, to choose how to spend and use their money. Republicans should also educate Hispanic voters on  the myriads of federal regulations and taxes that are inhibiting his or her ability to freely choose, by decreasing growth and upward mobility.

Furthermore,  we need to work harder at  defending educational choice for parents. We have an over regulated education system that sends billions of dollars to bureaucrats in the Department of Education, while spending on students and their classrooms  are both neglected. Moreover, Republicans can definitely win on the issue of school choice. School choice is not a federal program; it is the right for parents to have the choice whether to send their children to public, private or charter schools or even homeschool if they wish. Parents should be afforded all options because each child learns differently and no one size fits all federal education program will meet those needs. We must oppose federal one size fits all cookie cutter educational standards and move  towards state rights  and parental rights. Education is a pivotal issue for each and every Hispanic mother and father. This goal will be hindered if  we do not reach out and clearly articulate to Hispanic voters our educational polices.

Thus, we must do better at articulating our values to the Hispanic and in particular  the Mexican American community. I do believe this goal is attainable and I am optimistic.  Just recently, conservative talk show host, Sean Hannity, came out in favor for immigration reform and the Speaker of the House,  John Boehner, said he is “confident”  that the Republican congress can reach a deal on an immigration reform bill. Again, we are the ones who need to reach out in good faith and restart the dialogue. Therefore, I pray that the GOP will heed these words and consider the three top priorities of this frustrated Republican: God, family, and work/education. If we do anything less, failure is inevitable.

Editors note: as with all blog postings that appear with a by-line, the opinions presented are the author’s and not necessarily the positions of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.

Thomas Martin Salazar is an Arizona leader of the Café con Leche Republicans. Thomas was born and raised in Arizona. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in History from Grand Canyon University and is currently working on obtaining a MDiv in Biblical Communication from Phoenix Seminary. Thomas has also served as the Grand Canyon University College Republicans Vice President and interim President (February 2007-April 2008) and as a Maricopa County Republican Precinct committeeman (August 2009 – August 2012).

By Thomas Martin Salazar, (content originally Published through Cafe con Leche Republicans)

In 2008 President Obama made a promise to many Hispanics and Latinos that said he would make immigration reform priority. He promised that immigration reform was an important issue that should not wait to be addressed down the road, but during his first term.

Here we are four years later and in an interview with Univision, Obama tells the American people that his greatest failure was not passing comprehensive immigration reform.  This would be ironic if it was not such a tragic understatement. In fact, President Obama and his administration are aggressively  enforcing  immigration laws.

In the last four years President Obama rounded up and deported more than 1.5 million illegal immigrants. Moreover, he masqueraded as an immigration reformer – working to seduce the Latino community, by suing Arizona all the way up to the Supreme Court for passing SB 1070 and by opposing Maricopa county Sheriff, Joe Arpaio. Yes Obama and his campaign surrogates boast with pride about how Obama is the immigrant’s champion, but they neglect to tell the truth about Obama’s own immigration policies.

They conveniently ignore the fact that Obama has pioneered the Secure Communities program. According to a Research Report by Aarti Kohli, Peter Markowitz, and Lisa Chavez, President Obama took this pilot program, which was started under President Bush, from 14 jurisdictions to 1,595. This program empowers state and local police all throughout the United States, to do the very exact things for which his administration sued Arizona and Maricopa county Sheriff Joe Arpaio. More revealing statistics from the same research study states,

“Latinos comprise 93% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities though they only comprise 77% of the undocumented population in the United States;”

And

“Only 2% of non-citizens arrested through Secure Communities are granted relief from deportation by an immigration judge as compared to 14% of all immigration court respondents who are granted relief”

This is unequivocally a disproportionate assault on Latinos. But the facts do not stop here.  The President has deported more than 1.5 million illegal immigrants, which averages to just below 400,000 people a year. Furthermore, Obama’s immigration policies have left more than 5,000 American citizens in foster care because their parents were rounded up and deported. His administration in the name of national security continues to deny passports to United States citizens whose birth certificates came from midwife and not through a hospital. This has disproportionately affected Latinos. This new policy of no longer accepting midwife birth certificates as an acceptable form of Identification goes far beyond just impacting Latinos who are seeking to obtain passports; in fact, there are even incidents where Federal immigration officials coerced United States citizens into signing away their citizenship. These are not the actions of a man who cares about immigrants and their families nor is it the actions of an immigration reformer.

Recently Obama has again been making his rounds – reaching out to Latinos with his promise and message of reform. Ironically, Obama and his campaign want Americans to believe that immigration reform will become a reality within the next four years. Indeed, it is such an important issue to our President that he failed to even reference immigration in his new glossy pamphlet. Thus it seems that immigration reform is not as important as the President claims.  Then again, in the first four years immigration reform was supposedly a high priority.

While the President plays the victim, blaming lack of bipartisanship for why he has failed to pass immigration reform, I would ask you to look at his real record on immigration. Look at the millions of people he has rounded up and deported. Moreover, how debased it is that our government would see fit to seize children from their own parents, and place them in the foster care system. What type of nation have we become, when basic parental rights and child rights are neglected? Sadly, under President Obama this is a reality. Obama needs to be held accountable for his deception. In the end, Latinos have a choice of either voting for the deporter-in-chief or they can vote for a new direction.

Editors note: as with all blog postings that appear with a by-line, the opinions presented are the author’s and not necessarily the positions of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.

Thomas Martin Salazar is an Arizona leader of the Café con Leche Republicans. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in History from Grand Canyon University and is currently working on obtaining a MDiv in Biblical Communication from Phoenix Seminary. Thomas has also served as the Grand Canyon University College Republicans Vice President and interim President (February 2007-April 2008) and as a Maricopa County Republican Precinct committeeman (August 2009 – August 2012).

by Bob Quasius

Yes, Mr. President, words do matter. We will remember in November!

By Thomas Martin Salazar:

Originally published on Cafe Con Leche Republicans blog

You hear it all the time, Libertarians and Ron Paul people demanding people to pay attention to their new man for president, Gary Johnson. They argue that he is one of the most credible Libertarian candidates, because he not only served as a two term governor but he was the “King of Vetoes”. Moreover, his supporters tend to bring up the fact that Johnson won his elections in a Democrat majority state. At first glance, Johnson seems to boast an impressive track record, and besides this, he is probably the candidate with the best views on the issue of immigration reform.

While Johnson may talk the talk and may even have the policies to back it up, is it likely that he can do what needs to be done? Can Johnson actually win the election, eliminate the budget deficit and pass immigration reform?

The answer is doubtful. First, Governor Johnson is not running in New Mexico where the popular vote was the deciding factor. Instead, Governor Johnson is running to obtain 270 Electoral College votes. Furthermore, Johnson’s defenders forget that when Johnson won the 1994 and 1998 elections in New Mexico, he was running as the Republican candidate, and not as a Libertarian. If one takes these factors into consideration, Johnson’s chances of winning this election are slim to none.

But let’s say by some miracle he does win the election; will Governor Johnson be the best man for the job? Again this is doubtful. He is an ideologue and because of that, he won’t be able to pass legislation that will bring about the important reforms that our nation desperately needs. Washington does not work like New Mexico or any other state. The congress and the senate won’t play along with Mr. Veto, but instead they could simply ignore the President all together. For instance, the senate has refused to pass a budget during the last three years. If Harry Reid’s senate would not vote on bills with Obama as president, it is unlikely they will change if Johnson is inaugurated.

To pass major reform bills, we do not need a veto machine driven by ideology. We need legislators, both men and women, who will be brave and draw up these much needed reforms. These bills will be written by Democrats and Republicans. What we need in America is a president who is able to work with the leadership of both parties to get the major reform bills passed. Gary Johnson is not that man.

In conclusion, the President must have the ability to do more than just veto legislations and pass executive orders.  Rather, the President needs to be a leader who can take control and deal with the important issues of the day. Thus, for those who dream of immigration reform and balanced budgets, I would not look to Gary Johnson. He is not your man, besides the fact that it is impossible for him to win the Electoral College. Therefore, in November you can vote for Gary Johnson because he fits your ideological mold (knowing that he will lose), or you can sacrifice your pride and vote for a leader who can work across party lines to set our nation back on track.

Editors note: as with all blog postings that appear with a by-line, the opinions presented are the author’s and not necessarily the positions of Cafe Con Leche Republicans.

Thomas Martin Salazar is an Arizona leader of the Café con Leche Republicans. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in History from Grand Canyon University, and is currently in working on obtaining his MDiv in Biblical Communication from Phoenix Seminary. Thomas has also served as the Grand Canyon University College Republicans Vice President and interim President (February 2007-April 2008), and as a Maricopa County Republican Precinct committeeman from August 2009 – August 2012.

by Andy Kirchoff (Reposted from Cafe Con Leche Republicans with permission)

It’s been a tumultuous 3 years for the U.S. Catholic Bishops. The Obama Administration’s HHS mandate caught even the most liberal Catholic by surprise, and the economic recession has forced many a Diocese to either close or consolidate many parishes and schools. At the administrative level, the Bishops’ Conference is undergoing a period of “generational shift”: as many elderly Bishops retire, Pope Benedict XVI has often assigned young, conservative-leaning Priests to take their place. Many prominent laity have quietly retired from influential positions in the USCCB’s lobbying arm (the retirement of 30-year USCCB lobbying veteran John Carr being the most recent example), leaving a void that only the new “John Paul II” generation of Catholics seems eager to fill. Demographic shifts among the laity, largely due to immigration, continue to transform parishes and schools from “close-knit” mono-cultural institutions into multi-ethnic communities.

Needless to say, these changes are having profound impacts on the Bishops’ political advocacy. It has left them open to charges of “Republican partisanship” because of their strong pro-life advocacy and their admirable defense of their religious freedom, even as their lobbying efforts include promoting issues such as immigration reform, environmental sustainability, and other causes more often associated with political liberalism.

Additionally, for some Catholics, the Bishops’ efforts to be pro-life without being partisan aren’t enough. A petition to “stop the scandal” of Obama’s appearance at the Catholic Charities annual Al Smith Dinner has been making the rounds among conservative pro-life Catholics, despite Cardinal Dolan’s insistence that his decision to host the dinner doesn’t amount to an endorsement. Likewise for liberal Catholics, opposing Paul Ryan’s budget plan isn’t enough; no, protests at Georgetown University and castigations of Ryan “the Ayn Rand worshipper” are the response the Bishops should take, as far as these “more Catholic than the Pope” types are concerned.

The reality that escapes both of these sects (and other rabble-rousing groups within the Church) is that the Bishop’s methods of non-partisan advocacy is the correct course of action, from both a Catholic and a political point of view. Indeed, it is because of these lobbying methods that the USCCB commands bi-partisan respect on Capitol Hill. It’s also the reason why Obama’s HHS mandate is causing such angst among even the most liberal Bishops in the Conference today.

Catholics of all political persuasions would do well to support their Bishop’s recent advocacy campaigns, rather than whining that these efforts are somehow insufficient. As a Catholic who also happens to be a Republican, I applaud the Bishops’ method of utilizing their moral authority without descending into partisan politics. To quote my own Ordinary, Cardinal Francis George, “The Church cannot be seen as yet another political party, because it would lose its moral voice.”

Nowhere is the fruit of this strategy more apparent than in Arizona, where the Diocese has been careful to both praise Gov. Jan Brewer’s laudable pro-life/pro-religious liberty legislation as well as denouncing her trademark immigration legislation, sb1070.

Contrast the Diocese’s statement regarding HB2625…

“PHOENIX (May 11, 2012) — The Bishops of the Arizona Catholic Conference are grateful that Governor Jan Brewer has signed HB 2625 into law.
HB 2625 will be very helpful in protecting religious liberty for religiously affiliated employers who have an objection to abortion inducing drugs and contraceptives.

This new law will not preempt the HHS contraceptive mandate, if it is upheld. However, if it is not, religious freedom in Arizona will be better protected.

We also want to especially thank the bill’s sponsor Representative Debbie Lesko, as well as Senator Nancy Barto, for their tremendous effort in shepherding HB 2625 through the legislative process and their unwavering support of religious liberty.”"

…with their reaction to today’s injunction regarding sb1070:

PHOENIX (Sept. 19, 2012) — Yesterday, in accordance with the earlier U.S. Supreme Court ruling on SB 1070, the injunction was lifted against the provision essentially requiring state and local officers to inquire about the immigration status of any person stopped, detained, or arrested, if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person is not lawfully present in the United States.

With SB 1070 now in effect, it is imperative that racial profiling does not occur in its implementation. In particular, the Arizona Catholic Bishops are sympathetic to the difficult situation facing police officers throughout Arizona who will face intense scrutiny while trying to properly implement this new law without unjust discrimination.

As we noted in our earlier statements, this provision of law does not fix the broken federal immigration policy in our country, but has the possibility of heightening fear in the immigrant community, sowing seeds of distrust, and separating families.

Accordingly, the Arizona Bishops will continue to work with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in advocating for comprehensive immigration policy reform that will address needed border security, provide legal avenues for workers to assist employers in our country, and to resolve the legal status of nearly 12 million hard working people who now live in the shadows.”

These are very different reactions to very different pieces of legislation, but that doesn’t mean the Bishops are “showing weakness” or are “politically schizophrenic.” It’s an acknowledgement that morality transcends political partisanship. In a hyper-charged political environment, that’s a message that desperately needs to be heard, and one that all Americans – and indeed, all people – will benefit from.

So, fellow conservative Catholics: How about a prayer of thanksgiving for the Bishops, instead of a whining session? I guarantee you that Obama – who only reluctantly accepted Cardinal Dolan’s offer to pray at the DNC in Charlotte – fears the former more than the latter.

by Bob Quasius

As I read this Fox News story and watched the video, two things impressed me.

First, crossing our borders illegally is really very dangerous, and the conditions the former INS agent talks about were many years ago when there was less border security. Nowadays it costs thousands of dollars to pay a smuggler to cross our border, and hundreds die every year from exposure, dehydration, etc. As border security has become tighter in recent years, migrant workers depend more and more on criminal cartels who also smuggle drugs too. When migrant workers get into trouble, quite often their coyotes simply abandon them to the elements. Many also drown crossing the river.

Paradoxically, some immigration attorneys have told me that because it became so much more difficult to cross illegally, many migrants began staying here in the U.S. all the time and brought their families, rather than leave family members in Mexico and return for 2-3 months each year after earning money working in the U.S. Without fixing legal immigration, the unintended effect of more border security increased the number of undocumented wives and children in the U.S. Tighter border security not only reduces the numbers entering the U.S., but also deters those here illegally who wish to leave.

Second, why would anyone pay thousands of dollars and take such risks to life and limb if all they had to do was ‘stand in line’ as anti-illegal immigration activists constantly harp about? Some statistics help put things in perspective. First, according to the 2011 DHS Immigration yearbook, 1.7 million non-citizens were admitted to the U.S. for work or training. Various other estimates peg undocumented workers in the U.S. at seven million, which is reflective of our economy’s needs for mostly unskilled workers. Only 20% of ‘guest workers’ are here with some type of visa! Visas are nearly all subject to strict quotas arbitrarily set by Congress. This sad situation reflects on just how broken our immigration system has become. We expect people to wait in a line that for most is non-existent, but then we have unmet labor needs for jobs that most Americans are unwilling to take!

Bottom line: the best way to reduce illegal border crossings, at least for the large majority who simply want to work here, it so fix legal immigration so crossing our borders illegally is not necessary to work in the U.S. We even have a plan to overhaul legal immigration to be much more in harmony with our economy, which you can read here.