Monday, August 6, 2018

VALUE LIFE! - Adopt a child with love and help those who would murder their unborn


ABORTION KILLS…. the innocent!

America’s baby murdering factories…. Your tax dollars at work

“I Cut the Vocal Cord So The Baby Can't Scream.”

Dr. Leah Torres, an OB/GYN in Salt Lake City, Utah, said that when she performs certain abortions she cuts the vocal cord of the baby so "there's really no opportunity" for the child to scream. She also described herself as a "uterus ripper outer" because she performs hysterectomies.

Toby’s Adoption Day

KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ — Kathryn Jean Lopez is a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and an editor-at-large of National Review. Sign up for her weekly NRI newsletter HERE

In gratitude for loving parents — all of them.
doption is a beautiful thing. But it is also a terrifying thing. It is a maddening thing. It is a mystifying thing.” Emily Stimpson Chapman was writing in the final days of the pregnancy of the woman who would make her dream of being a mother come true.
“It’s like praying for an organ transplant,” Chapman, a freelance writer, continued, writing with great sensitivity to the sacrifice of one mother for another. “One person has to die, so another person can live, except, in this case, one woman has to give up her child, so I can have a child. One woman has to renounce her motherhood, so I can become a mother. It’s not a physical death she has to go through, but it’s a death just the same.” About the birth mother, she added: “She is in so much pain — so much gut-wrenching, heart-searing, soul-piercing pain — not just about the adoption, but about all the uncertainty that lies ahead for her.”
This is one of the graces of our cyber connections, which can often seem like an overwhelming onslaught of hyperstimulation, a perpetually pending doom against which we are powerless. For Chapman, a first-time expecting parent, Facebook and a blog site were opportunities to share the adoption journey, with all its pain and fear, hope and joy. This is a gift not just to the adoptive and birth parents — who in this case all benefit from a community of prayer — but to every potential reader whose encounter may be a source of education or inspiration or even an instrument of healing of wounds from decisions past that stay with us.
Adoption and foster care are subjects that, like abortion, tend to be obscured from public view. If it happens to you, you know — and may feel quite alone in it. If not, it may be something foreign, the stuff of bad headlines or miserable politics. And adoption and fostering, being much rarer than abortion, also suffer from our lack of attention: Whether you’re a birth, adoptive, or foster parent, you may have to go it alone in your community. Even our language is woefully inadequate: “Giving a child up for adoption” sounds to a lot of people, most especially and unjustly birth mothers, like abandonment — when in truth it’s the most selfless act there is. When we throw around the word love in the most casual of ways, we should stop to reflect that this is exactly what it is: radical self-sacrifice. In this case, wanting the best for another, and knowing you may not be the best for them.
The birth mom has struggled with addiction and the law, finances, homelessness, and relationships, to name a few. But Chapman reflects: “I also know there is no other way for her. She has to place the baby for adoption. Not because I need it, but because the baby needs it. She is not physically, mentally, or emotionally capable of raising a child, nor is there is anyone else in her life or the father’s life who can care for him. Adoption is the only and best option for this little boy.”
Toby was born on July 25, and the adoption became official a few days later, after a little last-minute drama. The Chapmans were able to stay overnight in the hospital and do all the things parents so naturally do with their new arrivals. Seeing the pictures of the new parents, Emily and Christopher, feeding Toby — this gift of another’s heart — is the kind of image we should have in front of us more often. Some days we seem addicted to our screens and the most recent outrage, rather than seeking out ways to give ourselves over to the love that gives and transforms life. Having heard about only some of the scares along the way, I know it’s a miracle that his birth mom had the strength of commitment to see the way through to delivery. He’s been loved into the world and received into a home so eager to nourish him with the same. So many today suffer from a lack of love, and it has repercussions we see in our harsh and frequently despairing culture, often desperate for distractions from the pain. Even with some early medical challenges, with such an outpouring of love so early on, Toby is an icon of hope and his parents — all of them — are a call to deeper love.
What more can we do to love someone into flourishing? There is a pregnant woman who does not know there is room in your heart and home for the unexpected child within her she knows she cannot raise herself. There are orphans who have given up expecting anyone to come to welcome them into their home for a time or forever. Perhaps it is a miracle in itself that a little sharing on social media can raise such challenges, but can we rise to them?
This column is based on one available through Andrews McMeel Universal’s Newspaper Enterprise Association.


Sessions: DOJ Will Continue to Pursue an End to DACA and Fight Activist Courts

Sessions: DOJ Will Continue to Pursue an End to DACA and Fight Activist Courts
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is vowing to pursue the end of DACA after a federal judge ruled last week the amnesty program must be reinstated in full. President Trump ended the program in September 2017 and called on Congress to come up with a fix.
"We strongly disagree with the district court’s decision on Friday in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) case.  The executive branch’s authority to simply rescind a policy, established only by a letter from the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, is clearly established. The Department of Justice will take every lawful measure to vindicate the Department of Homeland Security’s lawful rescission of DACA," Sessions released in a statement Monday afternoon.
Sessions went on to make the case that the rescinding of DACA is consistent with federal law and that the previous administration was in violation when President Obama pushed through the program by executive order. 
"The last administration violated its duty to enforce our immigration laws by directing and implementing a categorical, multipronged non-enforcement immigration policy for a massive group of illegal aliens. This wrongful action left DACA open to the same legal challenges that effectively invalidated another program they established—Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). DAPA’s implementation was blocked by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and never entered into effect. These two policies declared by officials of the previous administration—by policy letters only—had been considered by Congress and rejected, Sessions said. "The Trump Administration’s action to withdraw the policy letters simply reestablished the legal policies consistent with the law. Not only did the Trump Administration have the authority to withdraw this guidance letter, it had a duty to do so. As former President Obama previously said, the changes they attempted to effect through this policy letter can only be lawfully achieved by congressional action. The judicial branch has no power to eviscerate the lawful directives of Congress—nor to enjoin the executive branch from enforcing such mandates."

In the meantime, the U.S. government is required to continue processing DACA applications. 
"We have recently witnessed a number of decisions in which courts have improperly used judicial power to steer, enjoin, modify, and direct executive policy.  This ignores the wisdom of our Founders and transfers policy making questions from the constitutionally empowered and politically accountable branches to the judicial branch," Sessions said. "It also improperly undermines this Administration’s ability to protect our nation, its borders, and its citizens.  The Trump Administration and this Department of Justice will continue to aggressively defend the executive branch's lawful authority and duty to ensure a lawful system of immigration for our country."


Approximately 55.8 percent of all H-2A-certified workers are concentrated in just five states: North Carolina, Washington, Florida, Georgia, and California. 
Washington, D.C. (August 6, 2018) -  A report by the Center for Immigration Studies provides analysis of newly disclosed data on the H-2A program. This visa program allows U.S. companies to hire an unlimited number of foreign guestworkers in temporary, seasonal positions related to agriculture. The new data should help in evaluating the possible impact of the 2019 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill that recently pass the House Appropriations Committee with an amendment that would allow H-2A guestworker visas to be used for year-round workers.

Preston Huennekens, a Center research associate and author of the report, said, "Policymakers need to consider how increases in foreign workers impact wages and opportunities for American workers. H-2A workers are paid less than the national average; certain H-2A jobs – including equipment operators, construction laborers, and supervisors – are paid between 23 percent and 95 percent less. Are these really jobs Americans won't do, or has cheap labor pushed them out of the market?"

Key Points:

• Issuances of H-2A visas for foreign agricultural guestworkers have tripled since 2007, growing an average of 13 percent a year.

• H-2A workers were paid less than the nationwide average across the top-10 occupational categories in 2017.

• Over half of all H-2A workers are concentrated in just five states: North Carolina, Washington, Florida, Georgia, and California.

• H-2A workers were registered in 165 crop categories, but 20 percent of all the guestworkers labored on just four: Apples, tobacco, blueberries, and "fruits".

Immigration Will Not Make America Great Again

Although the "progressive left" fetishizes open borders for its own sake, they nevertheless festoon their arguments with economic ornamentation in an attempt to convince fiscally-minded fence-sitters. Usually, their ploy fails.
But every once in a while a seemingly convincing argument is made.  Ruchir Sharma's piece in the New York Times, entitled "To Be Great Again, America Needs Immigrants," is one such piece.  Not only does Sharma rely on uncontested data, but his logic seems solid.  But looks can be deceiving.  Sharma's argument suffers from two main problems: Sharma misunderstands how economies grow, and he conflates gross domestic product (GDP) with prosperity.
Machines, not men
Sharma claims economic growth depends primarily upon extra population, not productivity:
The underlying growth potential of any economy is shaped not only by productivity, or output per worker, but also by the number of workers entering the labor force. . .What makes America great is, therefore, less about productivity than about population, less about Google and Stanford than about babies and immigrants.
This is wrong. Technology, not population, drives long-run economic growth.  Consider: economic growth occurs when either more stuff or better stuff is made. For example, America's economy grows when it produces more cars or (all else remaining equal) more luxurious or fuel-efficient cars. This applies to all economic output, whether goods or services.
There are two ways to make more stuff. First, work more. Working 60 hours a week will necessarily generate more wealth than working 40; likewise, 110 workers will make more stuff than 100 otherwise equivalent workers. More input, more output.
This maxim neatly sums up the archaic growth paradigm, a model of economic growth linking population and production. Importantly, growth under this model is linear – there is a one-to-one relationship between each additional worker and each additional unit of output. Thus, countries only get richer if they get bigger via natural births, immigration, or conquest. Sharma thinks this is the best way to grow the economy.
The second way to make more stuff is to increase productivity – make more stuff in the same amount of time. This is done by inventing and using better technology. For example, in 1785 an Englishman named Edmund Cartwright invented the power loom. The power loom transformed the textile industry by making English weavers forty-times more productive, and ushered in the Industrial Revolution. By the 1820s Britain wove as much cloth as the rest of Europe combined and British workers were among the richest on earth. Productivity-driven, exponential economic growth falls under the appropriately-named industrial growth paradigm.
Technology is the key to economic growth not only because it makes us more productive, but because it is also the key to making better stuff. Consider how much more useful a steel knife is compared to a copper one, or how much better a 4K UHD television is compared to an old-school cathode ray tube idiot-box. Technology unlocks real wealth. Technology grows the economy.
While Sharma does not deny this, he claims population growth is more important. This is obviously false.
Bigger pies, or bigger slices?
Sharma's main point is that because immigration boosts GDP it is good.  True, populous countries often have large economies, and adding people will grow them.  But bigger is not always better.
Most people would rather live in Monaco than India.  Why?  Although Monaco is tiny, the average Monégasque citizen is wealthy.  Conversely, although India's economy is (relatively) large, most Indians are poor.  GDP does not matter: GDP per person does.  Sharma misses this nuance, and so his argument falls flat.
Now to answer the question Sharma should have asked: does immigration make Americans (not America) richer?
In 2017 the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine released the most detailed study on the economics of immigration to date.  It is over 600 pages long, and was authored by an interdisciplinary team – it is the gold standard of academic papers on the subject.  The report found a number of interesting data.  For example, the researchers found that nearly 100 percent of immigration-driven economic growth accrued to the immigrants themselves –not to American citizens.  Immigration enriched America, but not Americans.
On top of that, the researchers also found that immigration contributes to wage stagnation for American workers.  This point should be obvious to anyone familiar with the law of supply and demand: more workers means lower wages, just as more apples means cheaper apples.  This is consistent with another study conducted by the Center for Immigration Studies, which found that mass immigration is one of the primary reasons wages for black Americans have stagnated over the last few decades.
Most importantly, the Academies' research shows that the economic impact of immigrants follows a non-linear distribution.  That is, a few hyper-productive immigrants generate most of the economic growth, while the majority of immigrants break-even, or are actually a net drain on America's economy. In fact, roughly 47 percent of immigrants are a net drain on public revenue – they consume more in government services than they contribute in taxes.  The study pegs their net present value cost at $170,000.
Net present value (NPV) is a metric that actually underestimates the real costs of non-economic immigrants.  This is because NPV is a measure of how much money the government would need to invest today, at a yield of inflation plus a certain percent (the cost of capital), to pay for said immigrant's tax deficit over the course of their lifetime.  According to an analysis done by the Heritage Foundation, each non-economic immigrant more realistically costs a net of $476,000 in welfare payouts.  As such, the true cost of immigration is higher than even the Academies' research leads us to believe.
In any event, half of all immigrants are actually a drain on America's economy.  As for the other half, most of them give only as much as they take.  In total, only about 15 percent of immigrants to America contribute to the economy in a meaningful way – this small minority of people constitutes the economic engine of immigration.
When Sharma states that immigration grows the economy he is correct – but the statement is misleading. Immigration grows the economy, but it does not enrich the average American citizen. In fact, most Americans have seen their incomes stagnate due to additional labor competition.  Only the rich truly benefit.
A means to an end. . .
Although liberals gleefully sacrifice America's economic growth to protect the environment, promote diversity, or build a social safety net, they all turn into Milton Friedman bobbleheads when it comes to immigration.  This is not only dishonest, it is profoundly unhelpful.  How can America have a genuine debate over immigration when one side refuses to tip its hand?  Until the left admits their immigration obsession, everyone is wasting their breath.
Spencer P Morrison J.D. B.A. is a writer and independent intellectual with a focus on applied philosophy, empirical history, and practical economics. He is the author of Bobbins, Not Gold and the Editor-In-Chief of the National Economics Editorial.





The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration floods the market with foreign laborspikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.   NEIL MUNRO

"The president must have uttered/tweeted the words “E-Verify” at some point over the past three years, but no instance comes immediately to mind, certainly not a recent one"

Where’s E-Verify? 

By Mark Krikorian 

The Corner at National Review Online, July 24, 2018 

Illegal immigration isn’t just about criminals and the border — but that’s almost all we’ve been hearing about, whether at the national level or in the states, as had been the case leading up to the July 24 Georgia Republican-primary runoff.

Criminal deportations are essential, of course, and need to be increased. Sanctuary cities, shielding such criminals, have to be reined in. And the routine abuse of asylum, especially using children as a ticket into the U.S., has to be quashed. 

But most illegal aliens are neither drunk-driving, dope-dealing rapists, nor bogus asylum seekers coached by immigration lawyers on how to game the system. They’re ordinary working stiffs, half of them arriving legally and then never leaving. They’re mainly coming to work, and that’s why weakening the magnet of jobs that attracts is essential both to the practice and the rhetoric of immigration control. 

The president must have uttered/tweeted the words “E-Verify” at some point over the past three years, but no instance comes immediately to mind, certainly not a recent one. Even just a tweet or two would help keep the issue in the public discussion, providing for a more balanced immigration message and giving traction to ongoing efforts such as that of House Judiciary chairman Bob Goodlatte to get an E-Verify mandate passed. 

The same holds true in the primary vote in Georgia. Both candidates — Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and Secretary of State Brian Kemp — check a lot of the right boxes on immigration and don’t have any really obvious red flags. But, as Georgia’s steadfast immigration activist D.A. King has noted, the two candidates: 

have mostly kept their immigration focus away from topics that may offend the Georgia Chamber of Commerce and narrowed to “sanctuary cities” and on illegal aliens who have already committed additional crimes in the United States — or “criminal illegal aliens.” 

The main driver of illegal immigration is illegal employment, which was not mentioned in either campaign. 

This matters because E-Verify is a state issue as well as a federal one. Georgia, one of the nation’s leading illegal-immigration states, does have an E-Verify mandate, but it could be further strengthened and in any case needs consistent oversight and audit. 

State troopers combine efforts against the most egregious violators with more routine enforcement to increase compliance with traffic laws. The IRS goes after money launderers but also conducts unremarkable, everyday enforcement to deter run-of-the-mill tax evasion. Immigration is no different — deporting rapists is essential, but so is conventional enforcement against ordinary people who flout the law. 


The LA RAZA DEMOCRAT PARTY and the PRO-BUSINESS GOP to keep wages for LEGALS depressed (today they are depressed to 1973 levels).
But you will still get the tax bills for the Mex welfare state and crime tidal wave!

“Illegal aliens are not supposed to work, and knowingly providing shelter for illegal aliens can be construed as harboring and shielding, elements of a felony under federal law, Title 8 U.S. Code § 1324.”  

“Where aliens and jobs are concerned, even many categories of nonimmigrant aliens (temporary visitors) including aliens who lawfully enter under the Visa Waiver Program or with tourist visas may not work in the United States and immediately become subject to removal (deportation) if they seek gainful employment.”  ----MICHAEL CUTLER – FRONTPAGE mag


 "Critics argue that giving amnesty to 12 to 30 million illegal aliens in the U.S. would have an immediate negative impact on America’s working and middle class — specifically black Americans and the white working class — who would be in direct competition for blue-collar jobs with the largely low-skilled illegal alien population." JOHN BINDER

"Additionally, under current legal immigration laws, if given amnesty, the illegal alien population would be allowed to bring an unlimited number of their foreign relatives to the U.S. This population could boost already high legal immigration levels to an unprecedented high. An amnesty for illegal aliens would also likely triple the number of border-crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border." JOHN BINDER
“At the current rate of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also through Canada) the United States will be completely over run with illegal aliens by the year 2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants who follow US law to become citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion, ILLEGAL aliens and their offspring will be the dominant population in the United States”…. Tom Barrett 

NumbersUSA’s Rosemary Jenks:


E-Verify Ignored in DACA Negotiations Because ‘Members of Congress Know It Will Work’

Members of Congress broadly oppose a legislative nationwide E-Verify mandate for employers because “they know it will work,” said NumbersUSA’s Rosemary Jenks, explaining why E-Verify is not being pushed in congressional negotiations for an amnesty deal for recipients of the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Jenks further noted that both parties are beholden to special interests supportive of “mass migration.”

Hispanic Unemployment Rate Reaches Record Low Two Months in a Row

LOS ANGELES, CA - DECEMBER 8: A worker uses a torch to clear debris from the 110 freeway after an early morning fire that destroyed a seven-story apartment building under construction on December 8, 2014 in Los Angeles, California. The fire also damaged nearby high-rise buildings and shut down freeways, …
David McNew/Getty Images

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday the Hispanic unemployment rate sunk to a record low in the month of July — marking two consecutive months where this figure hit all-time lows.

The Hispanic unemployment rate dropped from a previous record of 4.6 to 4.5 percent in July.
President Donald Trump has made job creation for minority groups a focal point of his America First economic agenda. In a meeting with inner-city pastors this week, President Trump highlighted the falling unemployment rates among the African-American community.
“So important, because we have companies, once again, coming back into our country, and they want to employ people,” the president said. “So we’re training and working with these people, and we’re getting companies to do the same. It’s been — actually, it’s been a very beautiful thing.”
At the gathering, Pastor Darrell Scott praised President Trump for enacting policies to help inner-city communities and predicted he would be the “most pro-black president in our lifetime.”
“I will say this, this administration has taken a lot of people by surprise… this is probably the most proactive administration regarding urban American and the faith-based community in my lifetime,” Scott said. “To be honest, this is probably going to be the most pro-black president in our lifetime.”
The president on Thursday evening echoed the sentiments at a rally in Wilkes-Barr, Pennsylvania with Congressman and GOP nominee for U.S. Senate Lou Barletta (R-PA). They “reached the lowest level in the history of our country. Honestly, think of that number,” President Trump his supporters. “I honestly think that’s hard for the Democrats to beat … how do you stop that?”
The U.S. economy added an additional 157,000 jobs in July, while the unemployment rate fell to 3.9 percent, according to the Department of Labor. The Manufacturing sector grew by 37,000 jobs, adding 327,000 jobs over the past 12 months. 19,000 construction jobs were added and have grown by 308,000 in the last year.

Bottom 40 percent of Americans 

have a negative net income

By Gabriel Black
3 August 2018
The bottom 40 percent of households in the United States have an average net pre-tax income of negative $11,660 a year, according to a new report by Reuters.
The report, “Poorer Americans Buckling as US Economy 

Booms,” published July 23 and written by lead author Jonathan 

Spicer, exposes how life really is for most Americans in the midst 

of the supposedly booming economy. While the official 

unemployment rate is low and growth rates are rising, the reality 

is that the working class is stretched to its limit, relying heavily 

on borrowing and working two or more low-wage jobs to survive.
The report’s data shows that the bottom two quintiles of households make, on average, $11,587 and $29,414 a year in pre-tax income, respectively. Their expenses, meanwhile, are $26,144 and $38,187, respectively. This means that the bottom quintile has an average net loss of $14,557 a year and the next quintile a loss of $8,773, prior to taxes.
How is it that the bottom 40 percent of households are losing, on average, well over $10,000 every year?
The data covers students, who are taking on student debt, and recipients of food stamps and federal benefits, who may receive small sums to help pay for expenses. However, the bottom 40 percent of households is overwhelmingly composed of low-wage workers, who, despite their immense sacrifices, are unable to cover the basic cost of living.
The next 20 percent, the middle quintile of the country, is not faring well, either. With an average pre-tax income of $51,379, it is able to achieve a net income of only $2,836 before taxes. A family making $50,000 a year in 2017 would have to pay $3,448 in federal income tax, plus state and FICA taxes. This means that even the middle 20 percent of the population is unable to save money and is, on average, taking on some form of debt.
This growing burden of debt on the bottom 60 percent of the population is expressed in the sharp drop in the US personal savings rate over the past three years, declining from 6 percent in 2015 to between 2.5 and 3 percent in the past few months. Likewise, the rate of credit cards becoming seriously delinquent rose from 3.5 percent in 2016 to 4.7 percent in March 2018. Subprime auto loan delinquencies are now higher than what they were at the height of the financial crisis.
This data from Reuters exposes the real character of the post-2008 “economic recovery.” It is a recovery for the rich at the expense of the living standards of the majority of working people. While the stock market has surged to astronomical heights, and the wealth of the millionaires and billionaires has surged alongside it, the majority of the American people are substantially worse off than they were prior to the financial crisis.
This is no accident.
The post-2008 recovery, led first by Barack 

Obama and now overseen by Donald Trump, was

based on slashing the wages and living standards 

of the working class to extract more profit for the 

capitalists. Starting with the autoworkers and 

spreading to every major section of workers in 

the country, employers demanded “sacrifices” 

that they, and the unions, promised would be 

made up after the recovery.
The “recovery,” however, has arrived, and none of the sacrifices workers made are being paid back. Instead, it is the ultra-rich that are cashing in. This year will see a record level of share buybacks and divided payments, exceeding $1 trillion. These parasitic financial measures, which take money out of investment in new jobs, research and infrastructure, allow people like Safra Catz, CEO of Oracle, to pocket $250 million in a single year.
Data from Reuters shows that while the bottom 60 percent of the population generally saw its expenses outpace its income between 2012 and 2017, the income of the top 20 percent increasingly outpaced its expenses over this same period. On average, the top 20 percent of the population makes $188,676 and spends $112,846. This layer makes more money than all of the other income quintiles combined.
The amount the top 20 percent of the population is able to save each year ($75,831) is more than six times the average income of the bottom quintile and more than two-and-a-half times the income of the next quintile. Within the top 20 percent, there is immense social differentiation, its low end composed of workers in decent-paying professions and its high end composed of millionaires and billionaires.
The report notes that the surge in debt and general economic precariousness of the bottom half of the population threaten to trigger a new financial crisis. The authors write: “As many of the most vulnerable workers sink deeper into the red, the nearly decade-long economic expansion may be more vulnerable to a further spike in gasoline prices or an escalation of trade conflicts.”
The authors call attention to how, historically, US consumption growth is dominated by the top 40 percent of earners. However, in the past few years, the bottom 60 percent of earners has accounted for the majority of consumption as it ran down its savings. Consumption makes up for over 70 percent of all economic activity in the United States and plays a critical role in economic growth.
In the past few years, the United States has been wracked by opioid addiction, increasing suicide rates and declining life expectancy. The fundamental cause of this immense and growing social crisis is the impoverishment of the working class, the broad mass of the people.
President Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers states that the war on poverty is “largely over.” This is obviously a lie.
The Trump administration and before it the Obama administration have been fighting a war. But, it is not against poverty. They have been fighting a class war to impoverish the working population in order to further enrich the financial oligarchy that they represent.
The working class, however, is ready for a counter-offensive. Heralded by the teachers’ strikes earlier this year in West Virginia, Oklahoma and Arizona, workers are prepared to enter into struggle to take back the wealth they have created and gain control of their workplaces.

22 Illegal Aliens Arrested in Identity Fraud Scheme, Stealing Thousands in Taxpayer Money

22 Illegal Aliens Arrested in Identity Fraud Scheme, Stealing Thousands in Taxpayer Money
The Department of Justice announced charges against 25 individuals on Friday who committed fraud using Puerto Rican identities in an effort to gain government benefits and in some cases even vote. 22 of the 25 charged were illegal aliens, many with records of drug dealing, violent crimes, and some previously deported.
Imposters regularly use birth certificates and social security cards stolen or copied from Puerto Ricans to pose as American citizens in order to receive Medicare, evade arrest, and take advantage of welfare benefits such as EBT cards and food stamps. In a sting operation known as, “Operation Double Trouble” the DOJ was able to nab 25 individuals who took advantage of poor oversight at Massachusetts’ Registry of Motor Vehicles and steal people’s identities.
“Across this city and across America, teachers, truck drivers, construction workers are going to work and paying taxes that are being stolen from the public treasury by fraudsters and criminals,” Sessions said at a press conference held  earlier this week
“These government programs are intended to help the poor, the elderly, American citizens. Not those that are trespassing in the country,” Sessions added. “This kind of fraud is a theft from our seniors, a theft from our taxpayers, and a theft from the needy, theft from America.”
Illegal aliens often use Puerto Rican identities because the Hispanic surnames are less likely to cause suspicion amongst the government than non-Hispanic surnames. Lapse oversight at the RMV then allows these individuals to gain numerous identities.

Republicans Vote to Gut Enforcement, Increase Foreign Workers 

The DHS funding bill shows the skewed priorities of GOP appropriators 

By Mark Krikorian

National Review Online, July 27, 2018 

The House Appropriations Committee this week approved the Department of Homeland Security funding bill for fiscal year 2019 (starting October 1, 2018), after considering a raft of amendments. This is not necessarily the final product; the bill will likely be amended further if and when considered by the full House of Representatives, and again when the House and Senate confer on reconciling their respective versions of the legislation. 

Nevertheless, at this stage the DHS appropriations bill, passed Wednesday on a party-line vote of 29–22, is a snapshot of priorities of this most important committee. And it contains several harmful provisions that would increase illegal immigration and the importation of foreign workers on “temporary” visas — provisions passed with the support of the Republican chairmen of the full committee and its Homeland Security subcommittee. 

The following is not necessarily an exhaustive listing of its immigration-related provisions, but it highlights the most important ones. 

Funding levels. The provision most remarked on is the $5 billion for “Border Security Assets and Infrastructure,” i.e., construction of an estimated 200 miles of border barriers, without the restrictions that are in the current-year funding bill that prevent use of funds for anything like a wall. 

The bill also funds more than 400 additional Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and increases the number of detention beds by more than 3,000 over the current level, to 44,000. That said, the funds approved are very different from what the administration requested. The mostly non-immigration part of ICE, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), is given about 17 percent more funding than the administration requested, while Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO), which handles deportations, is given 19 percent less than requested. 

Asylum standards. The worst mischief comes in the amendments. Among those added in Wednesday’s markup, perhaps the most damaging is one introduced by Representative David Price (D., N.C.), supported by Representative Kevin Yoder (R., Kan.), chairman of the panel’s Homeland Security subcommittee, and approved by voice vote. The measure prevents U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) from implementing the attorney general’s ruling regarding eligibility for asylum. 

Last month, Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed the creeping expansion of asylum by formally determining that domestic abuse and gang violence are not grounds for asylum from persecution due to “membership in a particular social group,” as specified in the 1980 Refugee Act. This expansion of the grounds for asylum took place under the prior administration without congressional action and has contributed to the surge of Central American minors and families at the border. 

The amendment to the funding bill would have its immediate impact on the first step in the asylum process, called the “credible fear” interview. When an alien at a port of entry or in the custody of the Border Patrol expresses a fear of return to his home country, he is interviewed by a USCIS officer to determine whether the fear is credible and could lead to a successful asylum claim. If the alien’s fear of return is deemed credible, he may then pursue an asylum claim, though many who are released into the U.S. to do so don’t follow through, but simply disappear into the illegal population. Aliens have thus been coached by smugglers to claim asylum as a way of gaining access to the U.S. 

The attorney general’s ruling, and the subsequent guidance from USCIS to its officers, has had an immediate effect at the border. For if fear of gangs or of an abusive partner — i.e., private violence rather than state or state-sanctioned violence — is no longer a grounds for asylum, then aliens asserting such fears no longer pass the credible-fear interview and can be turned away or deported immediately. 

Were the Price-Yoder amendment to be signed into law, the attorney general’s ruling would remain unchanged, but USCIS officers could not rely on it in making credible-fear determinations. It’s not clear how that would work as a practical matter, but the clear goal is to ensure that any alien who claims “persecution” on the ineligible grounds would nonetheless be let into the United States. This would make regaining control of the border difficult, if not impossible — no matter how big the wall might be — because the Obama-era welcome mat for bogus asylum seekers would not only be restored but enshrined in statute, meaning smugglers could rely on it as a means of getting their customers past the Border Patrol and into the interior of the country. 

Foreign workers. Two amendments expanding work-visa programs were also passed by the Appropriations Committee. The first determines that H-2A seasonal-farmworker visas no longer have to be seasonal. This was done to satisfy lobbyists for the dairy industry, which works year-round and wants to import cheap foreign labor through this unlimited visa program; it is stymied by the wording of the statute, which limits the visa to work “of a temporary or seasonal nature.” The appropriations bill does not change the wording of the statute creating the farmworker visa; it merely says that workers will be admitted in FY 2019 under that provision of the law “without regard to whether such labor is, or services are, of a temporary or seasonal nature.” It would result in large, ongoing increases in the number of these “temporary” foreign workers. 

The other foreign-worker amendment affects the H-2B visa, which is the non-agricultural equivalent of the H-2A, used mainly by landscapers and hotels and restaurants. The amendment was just the latest round in lobbyists’ relentless backroom push to exempt from the visa’s numerical cap all those workers who came in prior years (in this case, in the prior two years). This was accomplished in the previous two budgets via a gutless gimmick — the DHS secretary would be authorized (wink, wink) to exempt returning workers from the cap if it seemed necessary. That way, congressmen wouldn’t have their fingerprints on the increase. At least this time they chose not to hide behind the gimmick. 

Country caps. Another amendment also benefits those on “temporary” visas, though it doesn’t increase overall numbers. This measure (which has been floating around for years and was reintroduced in this Congress as H.R. 392) would eliminate the per-country cap for employment-based visas and increase it for family-based visas. 

The per-country caps were enacted decades ago as a kind of circuit breaker, to prevent a handful of countries from monopolizing the immigration flow. Their effect today is to lengthen the wait for certain immigrants from India, China, the Philippines, and Mexico, compared with similarly situated immigrants from countries that account for less of the immigration flow. The caps result in a more diverse immigration flow. 

The lobbying juice behind this change is Big Tech and the Indian “temporary” workers it has imported on H-1B and L visas. These are also ostensibly temporary visas, but are widely used as stepping-stones to permanent immigration. But so many of them are given out that the workers endure extended periods of de facto indentured servitude waiting for their numbers to come up. Eliminating the cap would speed up the issuance of their green cards, making the H-1B that much more attractive to potential low-paid tech workers and that much more useful for employers looking to replace their American workforce with foreigners. The flip side is that people from other countries, generally more highly skilled than the H-1Bs, would be crowded out as virtually all employment-based green cards went to Indians. 

There’s more! Not to drag this out, but there are more bad amendments that the GOP appropriators tacked on. Representative Yoder himself co-sponsored a provision prohibiting the separation of children from parents unless “the parent has a criminal history, a communicable, disease, or is determined to be unfit or a danger to the child.” This is a formal, statutory exemption from prosecution for illegal entry for all adults who bring children with them — and will thus result in even more border-jumpers’ bringing (or renting) children. 

A seemingly pointless amendment prohibits the deportation of anyone in the lawless Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. It’s pointless because DACA, by definition, prevents your deportation, and the only DACA beneficiaries who get deported are those who forfeit their status because of crimes. Since the amendment can have no actual result, the real point seems to be to codify Obama’s illegal DACA power grab by getting Congress to acknowledge it and incorporate it into law. 

And needless to say, the Republican-run Appropriations Committee did nothing to defund sanctuary cities. 

It’s not clear to me why Representative Yoder, as Homeland Security subcommittee chairman, orchestrated this fiasco. He actually has a respectable career immigration grade from Numbers USA of B+; not as good as Ted Cruz’s A+ but better than John Cornyn’s C+. And, for including wall funding, Yoder was effusively endorsed by President Trump and rewarded with a ride on Air Force One — and the next day he sabotaged the president’s immigration agenda. 

Hill staff assured us that the most egregious items won’t make it to the floor or will be killed in conference (if the bill even gets that far). But why take the chance? Will the Democratic appropriators stock their bills with Republican priorities if they take over next year? 


REPORT: The assault to finish off the American middle-class is NOT over

“The report noted that many illegals don't have jobs or have difficulty in landing good jobs because of local laws.”

“However, it identified several states that have begun easing employment laws so that illegals can get a job.”

College-Grad Salaries Eroded by Hidden Army of 1.5 Million Visa-Workers

Every CEO in every company sees the business opportunity: Will I earn higher profits by replacing my American staff with cheaper H-1B workers? The answer is an obvious yes.
The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with foreign labor. That process spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.

It will more likely come on the heels of economic dislocation and dwindling wealth to redistribute.”
"The kind of people needed for violent change these days are living in off-the-grid rural compounds, or the “gangster paradise” where the businesses of drugs, guns, and prostitution are much more lucrative than “transforming” America along Cuban lines." BRUCE THORNTON

There can be no resolution to any social problem confronting the population in the United States and internationally outside of a frontal assault on the wealth of the financial elite. 
 The political system is controlled by this social layer, which uses a portion of its economic plunder to bribe politicians and government officials, whether Democratic or Republican.


"In the decade following the financial crisis of 2007-2008, the capitalist class has delivered powerful blows to the social position of the working class. As a result, the working class in the US, the world’s “richest country,” faces levels of economic hardship not seen since the 1930s."

"Inequality has reached unprecedented levels: the wealth of America’s three richest people now equals the net worth of the poorest half of the US population."

Illegal Immigration and Poor Americans

The Democrats and the left have a rallying cry regarding the Trump administration's policy toward those crossing the border illegally.  They point to the separation of children from their parents and deplorable conditions.  They claim that it is a humanitarian effort, but how humanitarian is it to drop off numerous unaccompanied children or release them into an unknown territory where they can become the victims of predators?  They never address the negative impact on the poor American citizen.
They are calling attention to pictures of children in cells, yet, in 2014, when Obama was president, American Thinker interviewed then-governor of Arizona Jan Brewer, who stated, "Each child has a designation of cells, such as 'cell 7 or cell 8.'  There is a chain link fence surrounding them and they are sleeping on bed mats with just a blanket.  It breaks my heart to see babies being born in these facilities.  I spoke with a fifteen-year-old who is pregnant.  I was told by a lot of these children that they had to pay between $5,000 and $7,000 and that they still owe money to those who brought them here.  You know what these cartels will do – use extortion.  We need to question if there were any children that never arrived, and what happened to them?  What about the potential for these children to be part of a human-trafficking ring?  Do we know anything about the people they are being released to?  As a mother, I can never conceive that these children would be sent with a stranger to a strange land on a fifteen-day hazardous journey.  I understand the humanitarian argument and feel the situation is pathetic and pitiful.  But what about the children who are American citizens living in ghettos and are fearful for their lives because of gang violence?  The bottom line is, America is not big enough or rich enough to accept all these people."
Another instance was told to American Thinker by a member of the Civil Rights Commission, Peter Kirsanow, who also happens to be a great thriller-writer, his latest being Second Strike.  A few years ago, he and his colleagues went to a Texas detention center and found the conditions to be the opposite of Arizona's.  "We found very nice facilities where the people there were given three meals a day, dental/medical care, clothing, and a nice recreational area.  Yet the majority report included two photos showing horrific conditions.  My assistant discovered that these were not of the detention center, but of prisons," which also separate families when either a mother or father is incarcerated.
Kirsanow is frustrated with what is happening in America today.  He is a black American and believes that illegal immigration has a devastating effect on low-income American citizens.  It seems that the Democrats and left are just using the illegal immigration issue as a talking point, supporting aliens at others' expense.  "We need to understand illegal immigrants have some negative competitive effects on American workers.  They drag down wage rates, drag down employment, and compete directly with blacks in industries such as service, hospitality, and construction.  Welfare and college spots have been taken from Americans and given to illegal immigrants.  They are a net drain on the economy."
Steven A. Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, agrees.  "Because the overwhelming share of illegal immigrants residing in the country have not completed high school or have only a high school education, it would require highly implausible assumptions to avoid a substantial net fiscal drain from this population.  In short, illegal immigrants are a large net fiscal drain because of their education levels, and this fact drives the results."
He compared the amount in annual expenditures on children in detention centers to those of American children: "the March 2017 Current Population Survey has 24 percent of American children living in a household making $35,000 or less.  And it is my understanding that is what we spend on kids in detention."
Senator Robert Kennedy was in the Mississippi Delta 50 years ago for a Senate subcommittee examination of War on Poverty programs.  Ellen B. Meacham wrote in an op-ed, "What he saw on his widely publicized trip shocked a nation, but Americans would be even more shocked to know that 50 years later, the Delta remains desperately poor," with one in three people running out of food each month.  Perhaps this is because the attention has shifted to the illegal alien.
Concerning the separation of families, the Heritage Foundation found that single parents make up the overwhelming majority of all poor families with children in the United States.  Welfare programs create disincentives to marriage because benefits are reduced as a family's income rises, such as food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, day care, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
It is striking that the conditions of a poor American child do not draw the same attention and sympathy as children of illegal aliens.  Kirsanow wants people to understand that 73% of black children are born to a single mother, up from 20% in the 1960s.  "Liberal policies have been responsible for this.  The Democratic policies facilitate single parenthood, separating children from their families."
Kirsanow cites the statistic that competition from illegal aliens has caused 40% of the nineteen-point decline of black employment levels over a couple of decades.  "We are talking over a million jobs.  Black wage rates were suppressed by $1,000 annually.  Democrats are throwing blacks under the bus by appealing for the Hispanic vote by calling for open borders.  The lives of blacks in cities like Detroit, with uninterrupted Democratic rule for decades, have not improved significantly.  These policies have been devastating to blacks."
All Americans should strive to protect our fellow citizens and their interests first.  As Kirsanow summarized, "it is really disappointing to see an entire party more invested in the plight of foreigners than in the welfare of Americans.  The Democrats understand that even though they have policies devastating to blacks they still get 90% of their votes.  They have disjointed appeals to different identity groups, with electoral politics trumping all."
The author writes for American Thinker.  She has done book reviews and author interviews and has written a number of national security, political, and foreign policy articles.

GOP Rep. Yoder Offers Green-Card Giveaway to 200,000 Foreign College-Grads

Immigrants Great
Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images

Kansas GOP Rep. Kevin Yoder engineered a committee vote in the House which puts 200,000 Indian visa-workers on a fast-track to green cards and citizenship, despite the growing economic impact of visa workers on American college graduates.

Yoder’s Indian-giveaway amendment was approved July 25 even without an on-the-record vote by the GOP-run House appropriations committee, and it is being applauded by tech firms which prefer to hire cheap Indian college-graduate workers instead of young American graduates.
If made law, Yoder’s 2019 budget amendment will widen the Indian pipeline of graduate contract-workers which are already flooding the labor market for U.S. college graduates, said John Miano, an immigration lawyer and former software professional
Yoder’s amendment will also skew the nation’s immigration system by making it difficult for non-Indian foreigners to get green-cards over the next five years, Miano said. “I don’t think Mr. Yoder has thought through what his amendment does … He has not looked at the big picture,” Miano added. 
Current federal immigration law sets “country caps” to spread the distribution of the 140,000 green cards which are allocated to employers. Yoder’s amendment kills those 7 percent country-caps as “national discrimination” and allows the huge backlog of more than 300,000 Indian visa-workers — plus a similar number of family members — to jump to the head of the green-card line. Once the Indians jump to the head of the line, people from other countries are pushed into a wait of at least five years.
“From the Indian perspective, this is wonderful —  it transforms the American immigration system into an Indian-first system,” said Miano. “Every [other] ethnic lobbying group will be screaming because only people from India will be getting [employer-sponsored] green cards,” he said. 
The removal of the country caps will also lock-in India’s critical role in the U.S. software sector, Miano said. Without the caps, U.S. companies will face a multi-year delay before they can provide green cards for valuable foreign experts who are not Indian. The delay will deter them from trying to create a non-Indian pipeline because few foreign experts will stay with U.S. firms if they cannot quickly migrate into the United States, he said.
Non-Indian visa-workers in the backlog are already protesting their likely exclusion:

We're now visiting @casapuebloorg in -- a self-sustaining community group that produces coffee, manages local forests, teaches kids & is solar powered. ’s energy future should be renewable! Learn more:
Dear Congresswomen and Congressmen
Please remove the from DHS appropriation bill. It is for sure against the US commitment to diversity. Highly-skilled applicants from more than 100 nations will suffer from it. Please say

Indians play a central role in the U.S. software sector because the Indian tech industry has created a large pipeline of contractors who are willing to work at low wages in the hope of eventually getting citizenship, said Miano. Their central role is made worse because U.S. CEOs allow the growing number of Indian subcontractors in the United States to quietly exclude Americans from contracts and opportunities sought by Indians, said Miano. “I have personally experienced it and I hear more and more of that is going on,” said Miano. ‘Their [U.S.] clients want cheap foreign workers from overseas,” not Americans, he added.
Yoder, who is chairman of the House’s homeland defense appropriations subcommittee, did not try to trade his giveaway to business for reforms which could help Americans, such as curbs on visa-worker outsourcing or reforms to asylum laws. No Republican on the committee spoke against Yoder’s giveaway, but a Democratic leader said they would oppose the giveaway because it did not also include a “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.
In the same markup meeting, Yoder also helped pass amendments to triple the inflow of H-2B blue-collar visa-workers, to increase the number of H-2A visa-workers for farmers, and also to revive President Barack Obama’s catch-and-release rules on the Mexican border, all of which help to suppress wages for blue-collar Americans. 
GOP opposition to Yoder’s amendments was muted partly because he can use his chairmanship of the homeland defense subcommittee to quietly punish other GOP legislators who publicly oppose his priorities.
Yoder’s office did not answer questions from Breitbart News about the green card plan.
Yoder’s visa-worker giveaway is being applauded by Indian lobby groups and by the huge employers who are hiring Indian college-graduates for professional-track jobs at Americans’ hospitals and universities, as well as software, insurance, banking and business-consulting firms. Yoder’s amendment was applauded by Amazon, Microsoft, and, an advocacy group of tech-industry investors who want cheaper foreign white-collar labor.

Amazon applauds @KevinYoder on the passage of his amendment to the @DHSgov appropriations bill, H.R. 392, that would remove the per-country limit on green cards. This is an important step towards green card reform, and Amazonians thank you for your leadership on this issue.

Thank you @RepKevinYoder for being a champion of . Your amendment to the FY19 Homeland Security @HouseAppropsGOP bill is an important step forward to fixing the green card backlog.

The lobby groups formed by the Indian visa-workers also applauded Yoder’s giveaway:

Immigration Voice

Indian workers are a bargain for U.S. companies because they accept low wages and work long hours in the hope of getting a hugely valuable deferred bonus — the federal government’s offer of citizenship to them, their spouses and children, their parents, and their chain-migration in-laws. In contrast, American graduates must get all of their pay in company dollars that are also wanted by company CEOs and investors, such as Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.
The vast majority of Indians get into the United States — and onto the green card backlog — via the outsourcing programs for visa-workers.
The visa-worker programs include the H-1B program, the little-known L-1 program, the Optional Practical Training program, the E-1 visa, the TN visa and the J-1 visa. Overall, these laws are outsourcing roughly 1.5 million jobs to a resident population of roughly 1.5 million foreign college-grad workers. This huge population of foreign workers is helping to suppress American graduates’ salary growth even below the slow growth in blue-collar wages. The resulting profits spike higher stock values on Wall Street.
These programs deliver foreign workers into many professions in academia and software, engineering and health, in every state. In 2017, for example, Kansas employers asked the federal government for 951 H-1B visa workers, according to The employers wanted H-1B visa-workers to fill 25 physician jobs, 16 financial-analyst jobs, 15 biochemist jobs, and 28 engineering jobs, even though Kansas produces many skilled graduates each year. The employers wanted foreign workers for 399 jobs in Yoder’s district around Overland Park  — including 80 jobs at three Indian-owned companies.
In 2000, Congress allowed these visa workers to extend their temporary stay by applying for employer-sponsored green-cards, so converting the visa program into multi-step immigration programs.
In general, Indians dominate the software sector, while Chinese postgraduate students are hired into the nation’s science laboratories. This reliance means a very large number of Indian and Chinese nationals apply for the employer green cards. The country caps limit the number of Indians and Chinese who get the cards, so there is a huge and growing backlog of former visa workers from India and China who are working in the United States while waiting for green cards.
The backlog hurts Americans graduates because it effectively smuggles roughly 400,000 additional Indian and Chinese college-graduates into the U.S. labor market. The problem could be ended if agencies simply established a regulation saying additional applications would be rejected once the waiting list has reached past five years, said Miano.
The backlog now includes 306,000 Indian workers, plus their 325,000 spouses and children. These migrants have a huge incentive to lobby for the removal of the country cap because the change would vault them to the head of the line — and also allow them to sponsor their parents and in-laws to arrive in the United States.
Indian advocates fighting the country cap say the wives of the Indian visa-workers have proved to be the most persuasive, partly because U.S. politicians do not want to be seen as rejecting their pleas. For example, Yoder has repeatedly showcased the Indian wife of an H-1B worker murdered in Olathe, Kansas, February 2017. During the July 25 appropriations committee markup, Yoder mentioned Sunayana Dumala repeatedly, saying:
She has become an inspiration as an outspoken advocate for this legislation. We’re so proud to have her here today.
To pass his amendment, Yoder emotionally painted the country caps as unfair discrimination against Dumala, while he ignored the impact of cheap visa-workers on the young Americans in his Kansas district: 
Without this fix, Sunayana will very likely never become an American citizen ….  Her backlog may make it so that she never become a United States citizen. Yet someone born today in almost any other country around the world, save for China or India, someone born today can go through school, go through higher education, can come to America, 30, 40 50 years from now on a high skilled H-1B visa and still get in line before Sunayana Dumala because she happens to be from India.
Mr. Chairman, that is discriminatory, it is wrong, it is unjust, and we have a chance here today in this committee in a bipartisan way to put a stop to that, to make this a first-come, first served basis and to quit this horrible discriminatory practice and to stand up for the Sunayana Dumalas of this country
Yoder also invited Sunayana Dumala to the 2018 State of the Union speech. He told a newspaper for Indians in the United States that:
“It was my idea—I’ve gotten to know Sunayana very well over the last year after the tragedy –the murder of her husband in a hate crime,” he said. “She’s become a very powerful symbol against some of the hate in this country directed toward minorities, with her response of love and kindness and trying to bring this country together that has been so inspirational. I thought a lot about it this week even and it really speaks to Dr. Martin Luther King’s message that it’s only love and light that can drive out the darkness and hate. And, she is the walking embodiment of that and so, I have a lot of respect for her and her struggle and her courage. So, we thought it would be fitting to have her as my guest at the State of the Union.”
In 2017, Yoder explained his reasons for supporting the country-caps bill to Forbes magazine:
We have a strong and vibrant Indian community in my district. They’ve been kind enough to invite me into their community, I’ve been able to participate in many of their cultural events – I’ve even taken a stab at playing a game of cricket. Many of them have brought this issue to my attention and when Representative Chaffetz retired and the bill needed a new lead sponsor, I was eager to jump at the opportunity. I’ve heard their personal stories and the discrimination they face and uncertainty and fear they live with. Many of these immigrants are my neighbors and friends and they need a voice to stand up for them in Congress, to tell their story.
Advocates with the main advocacy group, Immigrant Voice, celebrated after the vote:

Outside Appropriations Committee room in the US Capitol, as congressman @KevinYoder & widow of the Austin’s bar shooting, Sunayana Dumala, celebrate passage of amendment to adopt (what she advocated for as Yoder’s guest for state of the union). Photo from Yoder team

The Kansas City Star newspaper posted an interview with Dumala and reported:
She flew from Johnson County to Washington Wednesday morning. Her travel was funded by the advocacy group Immigration Voice, a move intended to hold the Johnson County Republican to his promise to deliver the legislation to the president’s desk in the near future.After the vote, Yoder emerged in the hall to cheers and high fives from the widow and other Indian immigrants from Kansas who had traveled to Washington for the vote. “Hey, hey,” he said spreading his arms wide. Then he enfolded a tearful Dumala into a hug.
“It’s a powerful moment,” said Yoder. “We’ve been working a long time to get to this moment.”
“Congress does not work for Americans …. they don’t do a thing for Americans,” Miano said. 
Many Indian visa-workers will get their green cards in the next few years even if Yoder’s change is rejected, so his amendment benefits the roughly 200,000 Indian workers — and their 200,000 family members — who now have to wait for more than five years to get a green card.
Government data shows the biggest backlog among Indians are those with a Master’s degree, partly because many Indians earn Masters degrees at U.S. universities to get into the H-1B program:
To suppress Americans’ growing opposition to the outsourcing programs, pro-migration advocates accuse critics of discrimination against foreign nationals, despite the widespread discrimination against Americans. Leon Fresco, a lobbyist for the Indian visa-workers, tweeted:

the only reason to oppose HR392 is if you believe that our laws should intentionally discriminate based on national origin. HR392 simply says someone born in 2060 should not receive a green card before someone who applied 10 years ago, solely based upon the country their births.

Fresco, an immigration lawyer and a former official in President Brack Obama’s administration, also argued that Yoder giveaway is good for Americans because its means Indians will not serve as cheap indentured workers for many years before they can get green cards.

(1/4) simple 4 part lesson for HR392 opponents to understand using only facts—no country caps exist for student visas. India sends less than 15 percent of all foreign students. 

(2/4) but Indian nationals represent over 70% of H-1b recipients, which is the feeder system for green cards? Why is that, when employers have all of these other students to choose from?

(3/4) the reason is because the per-country limits mean that if an employer hires an H-1B from India, they can keep that worker indentured to them on H-1B for several decades because they cannot change jobs while waiting for green card without tremendous difficulty and risk.

(4/4) Why would an employer then choose someone from any other country who could leave immediately with a green card? Only HR392 solves this problem and levels playing field for all, including US workers!!

Fresco’s “indentured servant” argument is logical — but Miano argues that Yoder’s offer of fast-track green cards will encourage even more Indians to become visa-workers via the H-1B program and the uncapped L-1 and OPT visa-worker programs. Any greater supply of visa-workers shrinks salaries for American graduates, and make it difficult for blue-collar parents to help their children get into white-collar jobs, he said.
Fresco also defended the Yoder amendment by saying it does not create additional H-1B visas:

(5/4) Once no country cap, green cards will become MORE diversified, no less. will look like the distribution of student visas (where India is less than 15 percent). Claims of “cheap labor” make no sense here because not even 1 additional GC or H-1B visa is part of HR392.

But Fresco’s statement does not mention the L-1 visa-worker program — and there is no limit on the number of L-1 visas which Indian workers can use to get on Yoder’s fast-track to citizenship.
In 2013, Fresco served as the top immigration aide to Sen. Chuck Schumer during the “Gang of Eight” controversy. That bill allowed an unlimited number of foreign college-graduates to get jobs in the United States, Fresco told this reporter in 2013.
Yoder’s amendment was backed by Amazon. According to, Amazon has asked for 1,441 green cards for visa-workers since 2015. Half of those workers are from India, and one-seventh are from China.

Amazon also asks for hundreds of H-1B visas each year:
Amazon does not use L-1 workers, but many Indian subcontracting firms use large numbers of L-1 visa workers. The total number is hidden from the public because the Department of Homeland Security does not release the number of L-1B workers who are imported via “blanket petitions.”
Overall, the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap foreign labor. That process spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions. Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because investment flows towards the large immigrant populations living in the coastal states.
Got any tips about the H-1B, L-1 and OPT programs?  Email Neil Munro here or at 

Number of foreign college graduates staying in U.S. to work climbed again in 2017, but growth has slowed

A record number of foreign graduates of U.S. colleges and universities obtained temporary authorization to work in the United States through the Optional Practical Training (OPT)program in 2017, but growth in the once-booming program has slowed dramatically, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of government data.
Growth of foreign graduates who stayed and worked in the U.S. slowed in 2017In recent years, the OPT program has surpassed the H-1B visa program as the nation’s largest source of new temporary high-skilled immigrant workers. In 2017, a record 276,500 foreign graduates received work permits under the OPT program, up from 257,100 in 2016, according to data obtained from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement through a public records request. However, growth has slowed considerably: The number of enrollees grew by 8% in 2017, compared with 34% in 2016. That’s the largest decline in the annual growth rate since 2004, the first year for which data on all foreign students are available. The slowed growth also follows a longer period of rapid expansion for the program. From 2014 to 2016, the number of enrollees nearly doubled in size, growing by 93%.
Declining growth of the OPT program is due in part to a smaller increase last year in the program’s foreign graduates who majored in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM) fields. In 2017, enrollment of STEM graduates in OPT grew by 13% over the previous year, compared with 48% annual growth in 2016. This slowdown happened despite the maximum length of employment increasing from 12 to 36 months in 2016 for foreign graduates with STEM degrees. (By contrast, an extension for STEM degree holders in 2008 did contribute to a large increase in OPT approvals.) The decline in 2017 also coincided with low unemployment rates for U.S. workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher.
The Trump administration has tightened regulations that govern the OPT program. Under U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services rules posted online in January, foreign graduates working under OPT must now work at the employer’s place of business. (Previously, foreign workers could work at a third-party site, such as at a client’s office.) In addition, the administration has announced plans to roll back the 2016 employment extension for STEM graduates, though this change had not been implemented as of July 2018.
Indian foreign graduates under OPT saw largest decline in growth, 2016 to 2017OPT enrollment growth slowed substantially in 2017 among foreign students from India and China, the program’s two largest countries of origin. In fact, only France, Nepal and Nigeria saw their annual growth rates increase in 2017 (among nations with 10,000 or more foreign students enrolled in OPT from 2004 to 2017).
Growth of master's degree holders who stayed and worked in U.S. under OPT slowed considerably in 2017Growth in the number of foreign graduates under OPT slowed in 2017 across all degree levels, but the trend was most pronounced among master’s degree holders. About 188,600 foreign students held master’s degrees in 2017, a 9% increase over the previous year – far lower than the 45% annual increase seen in 2016. This slowdown follows a period of rapid growth: From 2014 to 2015, the number of foreign students with master’s degrees jumped by 57%, the highest annual increase of any degree level since 2004.
Note: The full methodology for this analysis can be found here. Also, see where foreign student graduates worked in the U.S. between 2004 and 2016 in our interactive.
  1. Photo of Neil G. Ruiz
     is associate director of global migration and demography at Pew Research Center.
  2.  is a research assistant focusing on global migration at Pew Research Center.