White House pressured businesses to drop their Chamber membership
Welcome to Obama/Chicago style of politics: hardball and bullying.
American Thinker Blog
White House pressured businesses to drop their Chamber membership
Welcome to Obama/Chicago style of politics: hardball and bullying.
American Thinker Blog
How Lieberman Got Amazon To Drop Wikileaks
Early this week, after hacker attacks on its site, Wikileaks moved its operation, including all those diplomatic cables, to the greener pastures of Amazon.com’s cloud servers. But today, it was down again and mid-afternoon we found out the reason: Amazon had axed Wikileaks from its servers.
The announcement came from Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee. Lieberman said in a statement that Amazon’s “decision to cut off Wikileaks now is the right decision and should set the standard for other companies Wikileaks is using to distribute its illegally seized material.”
Committee staff had seen news reports yesterday that Wikileaks was being hosted on Amazon’s servers, a committee spokeswoman told TPM. The service, we should note, is self-serve; as with services like YouTube, the company does not screen or pre-approve the content posted on its servers.
Staffers then, according to the spokeswoman, Leslie Phillips, called Amazon to ask about it, and left questions with a press secretary including, “Are there plans to take the site down?”
Amazon called them back this morning to say they had kicked Wikileaks off, Phillips said. Amazon said the site had violated unspecified terms of use.
Amazon has not responded to requests for comment. Its terms of acceptable use include a ban on illegal activities (it’s not yet clear whether Wikileaks has broken any laws) and content “that may be harmful to our users, operations, or reputation.” It also prohibits using Amazon’s servers “to violate the security or integrity of any network, computer or communications system,” although Wikileaks obviously obtained the cables long before hopping on Amazon’s servers.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a group that advocates for Internet freedom of speech by defending court cases, said the axing certainly doesn’t violate the First Amendment. But it is, according to senior staff attorney Kevin Bankston, “disappointing.”
“This certainly implicates First Amendment rights to the extent that web hosts may, based on direct or informal pressure, limit the materials the American public has a First Amendment right to access,” Bankston told TPM.
Wikileaks is reportedly back on servers based in Sweden. Lieberman, in his statement today, called on “any other company or organization that is hosting Wikileaks to immediately terminate its relationship with them.”
Phillips said Lieberman has no plans to reach out to other web-hosting services that may host Wikileaks, and has not contacted the Swedish government to discuss servers in its country.
“Sen. Lieberman hopes that the Amazon case will send the message to other companies that might host Wikileaks that it would be irresponsible to host the site,” she said.
Document drop: S. 3992, the Dems’ latest Illegal Alien DREAM Act bill
I told you this morning that the Dems were cooking up a new version of the DREAM Act to lure squishy Republicans and fence-sitting Democrats.
Here it is in full. Note: There are now four versions of the bill on the legislative calendar. None have been reviewed in the Senate judiciary committee. Once again, the Dems are rushing to cram ill-conceived entitlements down Americans’ throats and subverting the deliberative process.
In this version, they’ve extended the conditional residency period from six to ten years to make the amnesty look more palatable (see Section 5). They also have added an obligatory health exclusion (which will no doubt be abandoned as soon as the DHS Secretary starts issuing “public-interest” waivers built into the legislation). The waiver authority has also been expanded in this version of the bill. This bill also expands what qualifies as an “educational institution.” Bottom line: They can tweak all they want, but this warped-priority political pay-off is still a reckless, tone-deaf down payment on a broader illegal alien amnesty at a time of near-double-digit unemployment and border chaos.
Keep up your calls.
***
S. 3992
To authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment of status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents and who entered the United States as children and for other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
l
Mr. DURBIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on ____
A BILL to authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment of status of certain alien students who are long-term United States residents and who entered the United States as children and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2010’’ or the ‘‘DREAM Act of 2010’’.
SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.
The table of contents for this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title. Sec. 2. Table of contents. Sec. 3. Definitions. Sec. 4. Cancellation of removal of certain long-term residents who entered the
United States as children. Sec. 5. Conditional nonimmigrant status. Sec. 6. Adjustment of status. Sec. 7. Retroactive benefits. Sec. 8. Exclusive jurisdiction. Sec. 9. Penalties for false statements. Sec. 10. Confidentiality of information. Sec. 11. Higher education assistance. Sec. 12. Treatment of aliens with adjusted status for certain purposes. Sec. 13. Military enlistment. Sec. 14. GAO report.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise specifically provided, a term used in this Act that is used in the immigration laws shall have the meaning given such term in the immigration laws.
(2) ARMED FORCES.—The term ‘‘Armed Forces’’ has the meaning given the term ‘‘armed forces’’ in section 101(a) of title 10, United States Code.
(3) CONDITIONAL NONIMMIGRANT.— (A) DEFINITION.—The term ‘‘conditional
nonimmigrant’’ means an alien who is granted conditional nonimmigrant status under this Act. (B) DESCRIPTION.—A conditional non-
immigrant—
(i) shall be considered to be an alien within a nonimmigrant class for purposes of the immigration laws;
(ii) may have the intention perma- nently to reside in the United States; and (iii) is not required to have a foreign residence which the alien has no intention of abandoning.
(4) IMMIGRATION LAWS.—The term ‘‘immigration laws’’ has the meaning given such term in sec- tion 101(a)(17) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17)).
(5) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—The term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the High- er Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002), except that the term does not include an institution of high- er education outside the United States.
SEC. 4. CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL OF CERTAIN LONG- ERM RESIDENTS WHO ENTERED THE UNITED STATES AS CHILDREN.
(a) SPECIAL RULE FOR CERTAIN LONG-TERM RESI- DENTS WHO ENTERED THE UNITED STATES AS CHILDREN.
1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 2 provision of law and except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security may 4 cancel removal of an alien who is inadmissible or deportable from the United States, and grant the alien conditional nonimmigrant status, if the alien demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that—
A) the alien has been physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 5 years immediately preceding the date of the enactment of this Act and was younger than 16 years of age on the date the 13 alien initially entered the United States;
(B) the alien has been a person of good moral character since the date the alien initially entered the United States; (C) the alien—
(i) is not inadmissible under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), (6)(E), (6)(G), (8), (10)(A), (10)(C), or (10)(D) of section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 22 Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a));
(ii) is not deportable under paragraph 24 (1)(E), (1)(G), (2), (4), (5), or (6) of section 237(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)); (iii) has not ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution 5 of any person on account of race, religion, 6 nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion; and (iv) has not been convicted of
(I) any offense under Federal or State law punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 1 year; or
(II) 3 or more offenses under Federal or State law, for which the alien was convicted on different dates for each of the 3 offenses and sentenced to imprisonment for an aggregate of 90 days or more;
(D) the alien
(i) has been admitted to an institutionof higher education in the United States;
(ii) has earned a high school diploma or obtained a general education development certificate in the United States;
(E) the alien has never been under a final administrative or judicial order of exclusion, deportation, or removal, unless the alien—
(i) has remained in the United States under color of law after such order was issued; or
(ii) received the order before attaining the age of 16 years; and (F) the alien was younger than 30 years of
age on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) WAIVER.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Secretary of Homeland Security may waive the ground of ineligibility under paragraph (1), (4), or (6) of section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and the ground of deportability under paragraph (1) of section 237(a) of that Act for hu- manitarian purposes or family unity or when it is otherwise in the public interest.
(3) PROCEDURES.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a procedure by regulation allowing eligible individuals to apply affirmatively for the relief available under this subsection without being placed in removal proceedings.
(4) DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF APPLICA- TION.—An alien shall submit an application for cancellation of removal and conditional nonimmigrant status under this subsection no later than the date that is 1 year after the later of—
(A) the date the alien was admitted to an
institution of higher education in the United States;
(B) the date the alien earned a high school diploma or obtained a general education devel- opment certificate in the United States; or
(C) the date of the enactment of this Act.
(5) SUBMISSION OF BIOMETRIC AND BIO- GRAPHIC DATA.—The Secretary of Homeland Secu- rity may not cancel the removal of an alien or grant conditional nonimmigrant status to the alien under this subsection unless the alien submits biometric and biographic data, in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary. The Secretary shall provide an alternative procedure for applicants who are unable to provide such biometric or biographic data because of a physical impairment.
(6) BACKGROUND CHECKS.—
(A) REQUIREMENT FOR BACKGROUND CHECKS.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall utilize biometric, biographic, and other data that the Secretary determines is appropriate—
(i) to conduct security and law en- 4 forcement background checks of an alien seeking relief available under this subsection; and
(ii) to determine whether there is any criminal, national security, or other factor that would render the alien ineligible for such relief.
(B) COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND CHECKS.—
The security and law enforcement background checks required by subparagraph (A)(i) shall be completed, to the satisfaction of the Secretary, prior to the date the Secretary cancels the removal of the alien under this subection.
(7) MEDICAL EXAMINATION.—An alien applying for relief available under this subsection shall undergo a medical observation and examination. The Secretary of Homeland Security, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall prescribe policies and procedures for the nature, frequency, and timing of such observation and 25 examination.
(8) MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE.—An alienapplying for relief available under this subsection shall establish that the alien has registered under the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 5 451 et seq.), if the alien is subject to such registration under that Act.
(b) TERMINATION OF CONTINUOUS PERIOD.—For purposes of this section, any period of continuous residence or continuous physical presence in the United Statesof an alien who applies for cancellation of removal under subsection (a) shall not terminate when the alien is served a notice to appear under section 239(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229(a)).
(c) TREATMENT OF CERTAIN BREAKS IN PRESENCE
(1) IN GENERAL.—An alien shall be considered o have failed to maintain continuous physical presence in the United States under subsection (a) if the 19 alien has departed from the United States for any period in excess of 90 days or for any periods in the aggregate exceeding 180 days.
(2) EXTENSIONS FOR EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES.—The Secretary of Homeland Security 24 may extend the time periods described in paragraph 25 (1) if the alien demonstrates that the failure to timely return to the United States was due to excep- 2 tional circumstances. The exceptional circumstances 3 determined sufficient to justify an extension should 4 be no less compelling than serious illness of the 5 alien, or death or serious illness of a parent, grand- 6 parent, sibling, or child.
7 (d) EXEMPTION FROM NUMERICAL LIMITATIONS.— 8 Nothing in this section may be construed to apply a nu- 9 merical limitation to the number of aliens who may be eli-
10 gible for cancellation of removal under subsection (a). 11 (e) REGULATIONS.— 12 (1) INITIAL PUBLICATION.—Not later than 180 13 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 14 Secretary of Homeland Security shall publish regula- 15 tions implementing this section. 16 (2) INTERIM REGULATIONS.—Notwithstanding 17 section 553 of title 5, United States Code, the regu- 18 lations required by paragraph (1) shall be effective, 19 on an interim basis, immediately upon publication 20 but may be subject to change and revision after pub- 21 lic notice and opportunity for a period of public com- 22 ment. 23 (3) FINAL REGULATIONS.—Within a reasonable 24 time after publication of the interim regulations in 25 accordance with paragraph (1), the Secretary of
EAS10505 S.L.C. 11
1 2 3 4 land 5
6 7 8 9
Homeland Security shall publish final regulations implementing this section. (f) REMOVAL OF ALIEN.—The Secretary of Home- Security may not remove any alien who—
(1) has a pending application for conditional nonimmigrant status under this Act; and
(2) establishes prima facie eligibility for can- cellation of removal and conditional nonimmigrant status under subsection (a).
10 SEC. 5. CONDITIONAL NONIMMIGRANT STATUS. 11 (a) LENGTH OF STATUS.—Conditional nonimmigrant 12 status granted under section 4 shall be valid for a period 13 of 10 years, subject to termination under subsection (c) 14 of this section. 15 (b) TERMS OF CONDITIONAL NONIMMIGRANT STA- 16 TUS.— 17 (1) EMPLOYMENT.—A conditional non- 18 immigrant shall be authorized to be employed in the 19 United States incident to conditional nonimmigrant 20 status. 21 (2) TRAVEL.—A conditional nonimmigrant may 22 travel outside the United States and may be admit- 23 ted (if otherwise admissible) upon return to the 24 United States without having to obtain a visa if—
EAS10505 S.L.C. 12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
(A) the alien is the bearer of valid, unex- pired documentary evidence of conditional non- immigrant status; and
(B) the alien’s absence from the United States was not for a period exceeding 180 days.
(c) TERMINATION OF STATUS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland
Security shall terminate the conditional non- immigrant status of any alien if the Secretary deter- mines that the alien—
(A) ceases to meet the requirements of subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 4(a)(1);
(B) has become a public charge; or
(C) has received a dishonorable or other than honorable discharge from the Armed Forces. (2) RETURN TO PREVIOUS IMMIGRATION STA-
TUS.—Any alien whose conditional nonimmigrant status is terminated under paragraph (1) shall re- turn to the immigration status the alien had imme- diately prior to receiving conditional nonimmigrant status.
SEC. 6. ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.
(a) IN GENERAL.—A conditional nonimmigrant may file with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in accord-
EAS10505 S.L.C. 13
1 ance with subsection (c), an application to have the alien’s 2 status adjusted to that of an alien lawfully admitted for 3 permanent residence. The application shall provide, under 4 penalty of perjury, the facts and information so that the 5 Secretary may make the determination described in para- 6 graph (b)(1).
7 (b) ADJUDICATION OF APPLICATION FOR ADJUST- 8 MENT OF STATUS.— 9 (1) IN GENERAL.—If an application is filed in
10 accordance with subsection (a) for an alien, the Sec- 11 retary of Homeland Security shall make a deter- 12 mination as to whether the alien meets the require- 13 ments set out in subparagraphs (A) through (E) of 14 subsection (d)(1).
15 (2) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS IF FAVORABLE 16 DETERMINATION.—If the Secretary determines that 17 the alien meets such requirements, the Secretary 18 shall notify the alien of such determination and ad- 19 just the alien’s status to that of an alien lawfully ad- 20 mitted for permanent residence, effective as of the 21 date of approval of the application.
22 (3) TERMINATION IF ADVERSE DETERMINA- 23 TION.—If the Secretary determines that the alien 24 does not meet such requirements, the Secretary shall 25 notify the alien of such determination and terminate
EAS10505 S.L.C. 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
the conditional nonimmigrant status of the alien as of the date of the determination. (c) TIME TO FILE APPLICATION.—An alien shall file
an application for adjustment of status during the period beginning 1 year before and ending on either the date that is 10 years after the date of the granting of conditional nonimmigrant status or any other expiration date of the conditional nonimmigrant status as extended by the Sec- retary of Homeland Security in accordance with this Act. The alien shall be deemed to be in conditional non- immigrant status in the United States during the period in which such application is pending.
(d) DETAILS OF APPLICATION.— (1) CONTENTS OF APPLICATION.—Each appli-
cation for an alien under subsection (a) shall contain information to permit the Secretary of Homeland Security to determine whether each of the following requirements is met:
(A) The alien has demonstrated good moral character during the entire period the alien has been a conditional nonimmigrant.
(B) The alien is in compliance with section 4(a)(1)(C).
(C) The alien has not abandoned the alien’s residence in the United States. The Sec-
EAS10505 S.L.C. 15
1 retary shall presume that the alien has aban- 2 doned such residence if the alien is absent from 3 the United States for more than 365 days, in 4 the aggregate, during the period of conditional 5 nonimmigrant status, unless the alien dem- 6 onstrates that the alien has not abandoned the 7 alien’s residence. An alien who is absent from 8 the United States due to active service in the 9 Armed Forces has not abandoned the alien’s
10 residence in the United States during the pe- 11 riod of such service. 12 (D) The alien has completed at least 1 of 13 the following:
14 (i) The alien has acquired a degree 15 from an institution of higher education in 16 the United States or has completed at 17 least 2 years, in good standing, in a pro- 18 gram for a bachelor’s degree or higher de- 19 gree in the United States.
20 (ii) The alien has served in the Armed 21 Forces for at least 2 years and, if dis- 22 charged, has received an honorable dis- 23 charge.
24 (E) The alien has provided a list of each 25 secondary school (as that term is defined in sec-
EAS10505 S.L.C. 16
1 tion 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary 2 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801)) that 3 the alien attended in the United States. 4 (2) HARDSHIP EXCEPTION.—
5 (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of 6 Homeland Security may, in the Secretary’s dis- 7 cretion, adjust the status of an alien if the 8 alien—
9 (i) satisfies the requirements of sub- 10 paragraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph 11 (1); 12 (ii) demonstrates compelling cir- 13 cumstances for the inability to complete 14 the requirements described in paragraph 15 (1)(D); and
16 (iii) demonstrates that the alien’s re- 17 moval from the United States would result 18 in exceptional and extremely unusual hard- 19 ship to the alien or the alien’s spouse, par- 20 ent, or child who is a citizen or a lawful 21 permanent resident of the United States. 22 (B) EXTENSION.—Upon a showing of good 23 cause, the Secretary of Homeland Security may 24 extend the period of conditional nonimmigrant
EAS10505 S.L.C. 17
1 status for the purpose of completing the re- 2 quirements described in paragraph (1)(D). 3 (e) CITIZENSHIP REQUIREMENT.— 4 (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para- 5 graph (2), the status of a conditional nonimmigrant 6 shall not be adjusted to permanent resident status 7 unless the alien demonstrates that the alien satisfies 8 the requirements of section 312(a) of the Immigra- 9 tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 312(a)).
10 (2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not 11 apply to an alien who is unable because of a physical 12 or developmental disability or mental impairment to 13 meet the requirements of such paragraph.
14 (f) PAYMENT OF FEDERAL TAXES.— 15 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than the date on 16 which an application is filed under subsection (a) for 17 adjustment of status, the alien shall satisfy any ap- 18 plicable Federal tax liability due and owing on such 19 date. 20 (2) APPLICABLE FEDERAL TAX LIABILITY.— 21 For purposes of paragraph (1), the term ‘‘applicable 22 Federal tax liability’’ means liability for Federal 23 taxes imposed under the Internal Revenue Code of 24 1986, including any penalties and interest thereon.
EAS10505 S.L.C. 18
1 (g) SUBMISSION OF BIOMETRIC AND BIOGRAPHIC 2 DATA.—The Secretary of Homeland Security may not ad- 3 just the status of an alien under this section unless the 4 alien submits biometric and biographic data, in accordance 5 with procedures established by the Secretary. The Sec- 6 retary shall provide an alternative procedure for applicants 7 who are unable to provide such biometric or biographic 8 data because of a physical impairment.
9 (h) BACKGROUND CHECKS.— 10 (1) REQUIREMENT FOR BACKGROUND 11 CHECKS.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 12 utilize biometric, biographic, and other data that the 13 Secretary determines appropriate— 14 (A) to conduct security and law enforce- 15 ment background checks of an alien applying 16 for adjustment of status under this section; and 17 (B) to determine whether there is any 18 criminal, national security, or other factor that 19 would render the alien ineligible for such ad- 20 justment of status. 21 (2) COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND CHECKS.— 22 The security and law enforcement background 23 checks required by paragraph (1)(A) shall be com- 24 pleted, to the satisfaction of the Secretary, prior to 25 the date the Secretary grants adjustment of status.
EAS10505 S.L.C. 19
1 (i) EXEMPTION FROM NUMERICAL LIMITATIONS.— 2 Nothing in this section or in any other law may be con- 3 strued to apply a numerical limitation on the number of 4 aliens who may be eligible for adjustment of status under 5 this section.
6 (j) CONDITIONAL NONIMMIGRANTS OTHERWISE ELI- 7 GIBLE FOR ADJUSTMENT.—Nothing in this section may 8 be construed to limit the eligibility of a conditional non- 9 immigrant for adjustment of status, issuance of an immi-
10 grant visa, or admission as a lawful permanent resident 11 alien at any time, if the conditional nonimmigrant is other- 12 wise eligible for such benefit under the immigration laws. 13 (k) ELIGIBILITY FOR NATURALIZATION.—An alien 14 whose status is adjusted under this section to that of an 15 alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence may be 16 naturalized upon compliance with all the requirements of 17 the immigration laws except the provisions of paragraph 18 (1) of section 316(a) of the Immigration and Nationality 19 Act (8 U.S.C. 1427(a)), if such person immediately pre- 20 ceding the date of filing the application for naturalization 21 has resided continuously, after being lawfully admitted for 22 permanent residence, within the United States for at least 23 3 years, and has been physically present in the United 24 States for periods totaling at least half of that time and 25 has resided within the State or the district of U.S. Citizen-
EAS10505 S.L.C. 20
1 ship and Immigration Services in the United States in 2 which the applicant filed the application for at least 3 3 months. An alien described in this subsection may file the 4 application for naturalization as provided in the second 5 sentence of subsection (a) of section 344 of the Immigra- 6 tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1445).
7 SEC. 7. RETROACTIVE BENEFITS. 8 If, on the date of the enactment of this Act, an alien 9 has satisfied all the requirements of section 4(a)(1) and
10 section 6(d)(1)(D), the Secretary of Homeland Security 11 may cancel removal and grant conditional nonimmigrant 12 status in accordance with section 4. The alien may apply 13 for adjustment of status in accordance with section 6(a) 14 if the alien has met the requirements of subparagraphs 15 (A), (B), and (C) of section 6(d)(1) during the entire pe- 16 riod of conditional nonimmigrant status.
17 SEC. 8. EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION. 18 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Secu- 19 rity shall have exclusive jurisdiction to determine eligibility 20 for relief under this Act, except where the alien has been 21 placed into deportation, exclusion, or removal proceedings 22 either prior to or after filing an application for cancella- 23 tion of removal and conditional nonimmigrant status or 24 adjustment of status under this Act, in which case the At- 25 torney General shall have exclusive jurisdiction and shall
EAS10505 S.L.C. 21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
assume all the powers and duties of the Secretary until proceedings are terminated, or if a final order of deporta- tion, exclusion, or removal is entered the Secretary shall resume all powers and duties delegated to the Secretary under this Act.
(b) STAY OF REMOVAL OF CERTAIN ALIENS EN- ROLLED IN PRIMARY OR SECONDARY SCHOOL.—The At- torney General shall stay the removal proceedings of any alien who—
(1) meets all the requirements of subpara- graphs (A), (B), (C), and (E) of section 4(a)(1);
(2) is at least 12 years of age; and
(3) is enrolled full time in a primary or sec- ondary school.
(c) EMPLOYMENT.—An alien whose removal is stayed pursuant to subsection (b) may be engaged in employment in the United States consistent with the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) and State and local laws governing minimum age for employment.
(d) LIFT OF STAY.—The Attorney General shall lift the stay granted pursuant to subsection (b) if the alien— (1) is no longer enrolled in a primary or sec-
ondary school; or (2) ceases to meet the requirements of sub-
section (b)(1).
EAS10505 S.L.C. 22
1 SEC. 9. PENALTIES FOR FALSE STATEMENTS. 2 Whoever files an application for any benefit under 3 this Act and willfully and knowingly falsifies, misrepre- 4 sents, or conceals a material fact or makes any false or 5 fraudulent statement or representation, or makes or uses 6 any false writing or document knowing the same to con- 7 tain any false or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be 8 fined in accordance with title 18, United States Code, im- 9 prisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
10 SEC. 10. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION. 11 (a) PROHIBITION.—Except as provided in subsection 12 (b), no officer or employee of the United States may— 13 (1) use the information furnished by an indi- 14 vidual pursuant to an application filed under this 15 Act to initiate removal proceedings against any per- 16 son identified in the application; 17 (2) make any publication whereby the informa- 18 tion furnished by any particular individual pursuant 19 to an application under this Act can be identified; or 20 (3) permit anyone other than an officer or em- 21 ployee of the United States Government or, in the 22 case of an application filed under this Act with a 23 designated entity, that designated entity, to examine 24 such application filed under this Act. 25 (b) REQUIRED DISCLOSURE.—The Attorney General 26 or the Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide the
EAS10505 S.L.C. 23
1 information furnished under this Act, and any other infor- 2 mation derived from such furnished information, to— 3 (1) a Federal, State, tribal, or local law enforce- 4 ment agency, intelligence agency, national security 5 agency, component of the Department of Homeland 6 Security, court, or grand jury in connection with a 7 criminal investigation or prosecution, a background 8 check conducted pursuant to the Brady Handgun 9 Violence Protection Act (Public Law 103–159; 107
10 Stat. 1536) or an amendment made by that Act, or 11 for homeland security or national security purposes, 12 if such information is requested by such entity or 13 consistent with an information sharing agreement or 14 mechanism; or
15 (2) an official coroner for purposes of affirma- 16 tively identifying a deceased individual (whether or 17 not such individual is deceased as a result of a 18 crime).
19 (c) FRAUD IN APPLICATION PROCESS OR CRIMINAL 20 CONDUCT.—Notwithstanding any other provision of this 21 section, information concerning whether an alien seeking 22 relief under this Act has engaged in fraud in an applica- 23 tion for such relief or at any time committed a crime may 24 be used or released for immigration enforcement, law en- 25 forcement, or national security purposes.
EAS10505 S.L.C. 24
1 (d) PENALTY.—Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, 2 or permits information to be examined in violation of this 3 section shall be fined not more than $ 10,000. 4 SEC. 11. HIGHER EDUCATION ASSISTANCE.
5 Notwithstanding any provision of the Higher Edu- 6 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), with respect 7 to assistance provided under title IV of the Higher Edu- 8 cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.), an alien who 9 is granted conditional nonimmigrant status or lawful per-
10 manent resident status under this Act shall be eligible only 11 for the following assistance under such title: 12 (1) Student loans under parts B, D, and E of 13 such title IV (20 U.S.C. 1071 et seq., 1087a et seq., 14 1087aa et seq.), subject to the requirements of such 15 parts.
16 (2) Federal work-study programs under part C 17 of such title IV (42 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), subject to 18 the requirements of such part. 19 (3) Services under such title IV (20 U.S.C. 20 1070 et seq.), subject to the requirements for such 21 services.
22 SEC. 12. TREATMENT OF ALIENS WITH ADJUSTED STATUS 23 FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES. 24 (a) IN GENERAL.—An individual granted conditional 25 nonimmigrant status under this Act shall, while such indi-
EAS10505 S.L.C. 25
1 vidual remains in such status, be considered lawfully 2 present for all purposes except— 3 (1) section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code 4 of 1986 (concerning premium tax credits), as added 5 by section 1401 of the Patient Protection and Af- 6 fordable Care Act (Public Law 111–148); and
7 (2) section 1402 of the Patient Protection and 8 Affordable Care Act (concerning reduced cost shar- 9 ing; 42 U.S.C. 18071).
10 (b) FOR PURPOSES OF THE 5-YEAR ELIGIBILITY 11 WAITING PERIOD UNDER PRWORA.—An individual who 12 has met the requirements under this Act for adjustment 13 from conditional nonimmigrant status to lawful perma- 14 nent resident status shall be considered, as of the date 15 of such adjustment, to have completed the 5-year period 16 specified in section 403 of the Personal Responsibility and 17 Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 18 1613).
19 SEC. 13. MILITARY ENLISTMENT. 20 Section 504(b)(1) of title 10, United States Code, is 21 amended by adding at the end the following new subpara- 22 graph: 23 ‘‘(D) An alien who is a conditional non- 24 immigrant (as that term is defined in section 3 of 25 the DREAM Act of 2010).’’.
EAS10505 S.L.C. 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
SEC. 14. GAO REPORT.
Not later than 7 years after the date of the enact- ment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report setting forth—
(1) the number of aliens who were eligible for cancellation of removal and grant of conditional non- immigrant status under section 4(a);
(2) the number of aliens who applied for can- cellation of removal and grant of conditional non- immigrant status under section 4(a);
(3) the number of aliens who were granted con- ditional nonimmigrant status under section 4(a); and
(4) the number of aliens whose status was ad- justed to that of an alien lawfully admitted for per- manent residence under section 6.
Republicans May Be Pressuring Reid To Drop DADT Repeal In Return For A Vote On START And Bush Tax Cuts
This morning, during an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) — the sponsor of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in the Senate — said he has been “talking” to his friend Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) but was “not making progress in my effort” to sway him to vote for cloture on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — the underlining bill that includes the repeal amendment. Lieberman reiterated that he believes he has 60 votes for cloture on the bill and urged Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to bring up the measure under an open amendment process:
LIEBERMAN: I don’t know if I can say I’ve been lobbying my friend John McCain, [but] I’ve been talking to him. I can say that I’m not making progress in my efforts with Senator McCain. But I believe we have more than 60 Senators, including a good solid handful of Republicans, who are prepared to vote to take up the Armed Services bill, which already has within it the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
And the real challenge here is the clock. Will we take the time to have the debate, not just on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell but on the underlining Defense Authorization bill. And I can tell you that some of the Republicans who want to be for this, also want to make sure that Senator Reid offers them a fair amendment process.
Watch it:
Still it remains unclear if moderate Republicans — who had said they would wait for the results of the study before deciding how to vote on repeal — are interested in pursuing the measure during the lame duck session. As the Wonk Room points out, some GOP leaders are hinting that they will try to run-out the clock or pressure Democrats to drop the measure in return for Republican cooperation on the New START treaty.
Are Republicans Pressuring Reid To Drop DADT Repeal In Return For A Vote On START And Taxes?
This morning, during an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) — the sponsor of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in the Senate — said he has been “talking” to his friend Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) but was “not making progress in my effort” to sway him to vote for cloture on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — the underlining bill that includes the repeal amendment. Lieberman reiterated that he believes he has 60 votes for cloture on the bill and urged Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to bring up the measure under an open amendment process:
LIEBERMAN: I don’t know if I can say I’ve been lobbying my friend John McCain, I’ve been talking to him. I can say that I’m not making progress in my efforts with Senator McCain. But I believe we have more than 60 Senators, including a good solid handful of Republicans who are prepared to vote to take up the Armed Services bill, which already has within it the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
And the real challenge here is the clock. Will we take the time to have the debate, not just on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell but on the underlining Defense Authorization bill. And I can tell you that some of the Republicans who want to be for this, also want to make sure that Senator Reid offers them a fair amendment process.
Watch it:
Still it remains unclear if moderate Republicans — who had said they would wait for the results of the study before deciding how to vote on the measure — are interested in pursuing the measure during the lame duck session, with some GOP leaders hinting that they will try to run-out the clock or pressure Democrats to drop the measure in return for Republican cooperation on the New START treaty:
– SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): “It’s possible, in my view, to do some serious things in the lame duck…It’s not possible to do START, taxes, unemployment insurance, the Dream Act, the firefighters thing and ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
– SEN. BOB CORKER (R-TN): “To me the question is: Does the majority want to take up START, if they do that means really not taking up all of these other issues they continue to talk about…Let’s deal with the issue of extending tax policy, let’s deal with the continuing resolution (to fund the government) and let’s spend the couple of weeks that it might take on the floor with START.”
– SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): “I think the view — the unanimous view of Senate Republicans is let’s take care of the tax issue; let’s take care of how we’re going to fund the government for the next 10 months; and then if there’s time left for other matters, it will be up to the majority leader, Senator Reid, to decide whether we turn to other things before we adjourn for the year.”
The other alternative for Republicans, moreover, would be to strip so-called “controversial” provisions out of the NDAA and pass a slimmer version of the measure.
The Senate Armed Services Committee will hold hearings into the Pentagon’s report about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell tomorrow and Friday and advocates expect Reid to clarify how he will proceed with the matter before the end of the week.
Obamacare Forces Union to Drop Insurance for 6,000 Children
-By Warner Todd Huston
Remember how Obama said that if you liked your healthcare plan you could keep it? Apparently someone forgot to tell the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) in New York because they’ve announced that Obamacare is forcing them to drop coverage for the children of its 30,000 low-wage members.
The union will be dropping coverage for 6,000 children starting in the new year because new state and federal rules will drive up its costs 60% causing it to face a “dramatic shortfall” between what employers contribute and the premiums charged by the insurance provider.
The union is blaming both state and federal rules but had this to say about the new rules Obamacare is forcing upon it.
“In addition, new federal health-care reform legislation requires plans with dependent coverage to expand that coverage up to age 26,” Behroozi wrote in a letter to members Oct. 22. “Our limited resources are already stretched as far as possible, and meeting this new requirement would be financially impossible.”
And what is the solution to this, wonders the SEIU? Why more payoffs from government, of course.
“We hope the state of New York will do the right thing and provide the funding necessary for this most vulnerable population of direct caregivers,” the union said in a statement.
Unbelievable. Government makes laws forcing a union to drop coverage after telling everyone it would never do such and thing and the union wants even more government as a solution?
How does that saying go? “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again always expecting different results.”
Manufacturing orders drop, housing sales tank in October
Good news on jobless claims?
A trio of economic indicators released today indicate that the economy may not be as rosy in the fourth quarter as even the stagnation level GDP revision announced yesterday indicates for the third quarter. Durable goods orders declined 3.3%, a significant downturn as the US heads into its busiest retail season. Reuters pronounces itself shocked, […]
Ratings For ‘Sarah Palin’s Alaska’ Drop 40% In One Week
One suspects that this can be attributed the winnowing away of the people who aren’t generally fans of Sarah Palin the politician:
Sarah Palin lost almost half of her premiere audience in the second airing of her TLC reality series Sarah Palin’s Alaska. On Sunday, the series executive produced by Mark Burnett, drew 3 million viewers. That is down 40% from the 5 million who tuned in for the debut last Sunday. In adults 18-49, Palin averaged 885,000, down 45% and also posted a similar decline, 46%, in adults 25-54.
This isn’t entirely surprising in that the appeal of the show does seem rather limited.
AFSCME calls on GOP members to drop health care
The giant public sector workers’ union AFSCME is pressing the White House’s attack on an incoming Republican member of Congress who asked that his health insurance start sooner, calling on Republican members of Congress to stay out of the Federal Employees’ Health Benefits Plan.
“These Republicans want to repeal health reform, putting the insurance companies back in charge and putting affordable coverage out of reach of millions of Americans,” says AFSCME President Gerald W. McEntee in a statement going out shortly. “If they enroll in the taxpayer-funded health care system provided to members of Congress, they deserve to be denounced as hypocrites.”
“If you campaigned for repeal, you should go without taxpayer-funded coverage first,” he says.
State road fixing projects to drop more than half
Due to further reductions in gas tax revenue the state of Michigan is expected to cut spending on projects to fix the state’s roads in 2012 by more than 50 percent compared to last year. The Detroit News reports:
Michigan could see half of its road construction budget disappear by 2012, taking with it scores of repair projects and thousands of jobs in a state that relies heavily on its freeways.
A freefall in gas tax revenue over the last decade has the Michigan Department of Transportation projecting its repair budget for 2012 to be $ 626 million, a slice of the $ 1.4 billion spent in 2010. And Michigan barely escaped the same fate for 2011, said Bill Shreck, MDOT director of communications, when it faced an $ 84 million shortfall in its effort to qualify for federal matching funds.
Another compelling reason why Gov-Elect Rick Snyder and the incoming legislature needs to put the state budget on a firm revenue footing.
AG Candidate Dean Concedes to Jepsen, Belatedly; Says She Will Drop a Legal Challenge of His Credentials
Sixteen days after Connecticut’s long-count election, Republican Martha Dean, the unsuccessful candidate for state Attorney General, quietly conceded to Democratic victor George Jepsen and said she is dropping her legal challenge of Jepsen’s eligibility to hold office – perhaps reluctantly.
“Unfortunately, the Supreme Court informed the public and the AG candidates of the eligibility criteria too late in the election cycle for this issue to be brought to the voters’ attention properly,” Dean said in a statement posted on one of her campaign web pages. “Mr. Jepsen, the voters, and I all learned of the Court’s interpretation of the statutory eligibility criteria’s full-meaning just days before the election.”
On the eve of the Nov. 2 election, Dean, who was trailing, went to court in an effort to block Jepsen’s candidacy by arguing that he lacked the legal experience required by state law to serve as attorney general. Jepsen disagreed.
Dean filed suit against Jepsen four days after the state Supreme Court issued a written opinion upholding an identical challenge by the state Republican Party of Secretary of the State and former Attorney General candidate Susan Bysiewicz’s legal credentials. When Dean sued in state court, she said the timing was not an election stunt, but rather was dependent on the timing of the Supreme Court decision.
Two days after Jepsen won the election, Superior Court Judge Julia Aurigemma dismissed Dean’s suit. Aurigemma based the dismissal on a variety of legal grounds and concluded, among other things, that Dean lacked the legal standing or statutory authority to bring the suit.
“At this juncture, I believe the best path forward is allow the AG-elect to focus on trying to run the AG’s Office in a way that helps pull Connecticut out of its severe crisis.” Dean said in the statement posted on her campaign web page. “It was a pleasure running against George. We went head to head on the issues, focusing on substance, and we shared humor along the way. That says a lot about both of us as candidates. I acknowledge his victory and I wish him well.”
A Jepsen spokesman said that Dean called to concede Thursday afternoon.
Revolt: Orlando airport to drop TSA as security screeners
Competition.
The bad news: It’s not Orlando International but the much smaller Orlando Sanford International, which services such popular destinations as Allentown, Pennsylvania, Youngstown, Ohio, and of course Iceland. So if you’re thinking about taking your next vacation in Reykjavik, rest easy — hopefully there’ll be no junk-touching for you. The good news: All it takes […]
Israel To US: Drop Dead (Round II)
Marc Tracy notices the uncanny parallels between now and March:
Biden visit; housing announcement; U.S. pushback. In March, Prime Minister Netanyahu retorted with the defiant declaration: “Jerusalem is not a settlement”; yesterday, Prime Minister Netanyahu retorted with the defiant declaration: … I’ll just let you guess.
There is an aggressive assumption by Netanyahu that all of Jerusalem is unequivocally Israel's, which all but rules out any viable two-state solution (as, one suspects, it is designed to). But instead of resisting this, a classic AJE member, Aaron David Miller, emits this contemptuous remark:
“Building in Jerusalem is as natural as breathing.”
Really? For whom? For those Palestinians who are evicted or see their neighborhoods transformed by a government obviously intent on ethnic social engineering in occupied lands? East Jerusalem, in any case, is not the real obstacle, since Israel's government just permitted a thousand new homes in Ariel, way past the green lines in the West Bank, sabotaging any chance of negotiations, and all but telling the US (and the rest of the world) to go pull a Cheney. The next step will be Netanyahu's meeting with secretary of state Clinton tomorrow.
I remain of the view that Netanyahu believes
he can wait out Obama and get a Republican US president prepared to enable Israel in its doomed occupation (past the point of no return) and eager to bomb Iran as some kind of global power-move.
The mid-terms will only have reinforced that presumption. For that reason, I think it's clear that talks will fail because the Israelis and their supporters have no desire to see them succeed, and now also believe that the US needs them more than they need the US. The response to this should be at some point soon to end the attempt to get both sides to agree, establish the partition that the US believes is the best solution, and move to the UN, bypassing Israel altogether. When you see the much broader and wider challenges to US global power, and the albatross that Israel's occupation places on America's ability to pursue its legitimate interests elsewhere (even Indonesia regards a two-state solution as the core evidence of the US's genuineness in reaching out to the moderate Muslim world), you realize what a burden the Israel alliance is placing on the US.
The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan
Drop Everything: The Simpson-Bowles Reax
My take (and that of a fiscally conservative mouse) below. The basics:
Their recommendations are more or less a list of the third-rail issues of American politics, including cuts in the number of federal workers; increasing the costs of participating in veterans and military health care systems; increasing the age of Social Security eligibility; and major cuts in defense and foreign policy spending. They also encompass a range of tax system reforms that have been floated by many in Washington for years to little effect, including funding tax rates reductions by eliminating many beloved credits and deductions.
Yay! David Kurtz gives important context:
The commission’s final recommendations aren’t due until December 1. The commission can basically recommend whatever it wants, but if 14 of the 18 commissioners agree with the recommendations, then Congress has agreed to take them up. So that’s basically the key charge of the commission co-chairs: create enough of a consensus plan that 14 commissioners can support it. Without that, the recommendations become just another report gathering dust on a shelf.
So today Bowles and Simpson unveiled their proposal to the commission in a closed meeting. To paraphrase, the reactions of commissioners leaving the meeting ranged from ‘over my dead body’ to ‘like hell we are.’ … it appears that the co-chairs are laying down their markers to get the ball rolling on negotiating among the commissioners a series of final recommendations that will achieve a consensus. The commission has been at work now for months, but the real work will be over the next 3 weeks as they try to hammer out some kind of agreement amongst themselves. This appears to be the opening salvo in that effort.
Mankiw is happy, Krugman and DeLong are upset. The home mortgage interest deduction goes and income tax rates are 8, 14, and 23 percent. No one thinks this is the final deal. I would say evaluate this as you would a movie trailer: will it get people to take the next step of thinking about a ticket purchase? … As a movie preview I judge this as “good enough.” It basically declares that some major deductions have to be on the table and it gets us to the next step.
The co-chairmen have some interesting policy ideas for how to balance the budget, but as of yet, they’ve not made any discernible progress on the political deadlock preventing us from balancing the budget. And it’s the deadlock, not the policy questions, that they were asked to solve.
Yes and no. This draft proposal is part of solving the political problem – and pushing these concrete proposals onto the laps of the public, the administration and the GOP is a great start.
Perhaps the most significant recommendation – and one that health care economists have been making for decades – is a strict cap on the amount of employer-provided health insurance expenses that are tax deductible. The ACA sets an extremely high cap that won’t kick in until 2018. The proposal from the debt commission goes much further, recommending that health insurance tax exclusion be capped at the actuarial value of the standard option available to government workers in the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan.
The idea I like is to revisit the tax break for home interest mortgage payments-a tax break that is as misguided as it is large. It gives bigger tax reductions to people with more expensive homes. And it skews government resources away from renters, who, on the whole, need more help than homeowners anyway. It’s part of a strategy for tax simplification, a goal that responsible members of both parties can embrace.
The idea I don’t like? It’s actually a number: 21. The two chairmen recommend that, over the long term, the federal government limit both taxes and expenditures to 21 percent of the gross domestic product. I don’t know what makes 21 percent a magic number. I do know that taxes and government spending reach 50 percent in Scandinavian countries. Their economies have not suffered, while their societies are more equal and their citizens have more economic security.
Of course, I love the idea of restraining government to one fifth of the economy. The question will be: why would the Tea Party oppose this? Calculated Risk:
I doubt the mortgage interest deduction will be eliminated, but maybe it could be reduced over time. Same with the exemption for health benefits. I’d prefer if they left Social Security out of this proposal completely, and just addressed the General Fund deficit. Then, after reaching agreement on the General Fund deficit reduction, they could return to Social Security in the future.
It’s worth noting that the co-chairs’ proposal actually goes beyond achieving primary fiscal balance by 2015, and that the plan is focused on spending. The action on the revenue side comes from deep cuts to tax expenditures.
The commission’s co-chairmen, former GOP Senator Alan Simpson and Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles, go much further than Defense Secretary Robert Gates in cutting the defense budget. Gates wants to trim out $ 100 billion in overhead and administrative costs over five years and put that cash back into shipbuilding, gun-buying and plane-purchasing.
But the two chairman, who released their non-binding plan this afternoon, want to put that money “to deficit reduction instead,” with an annual savings of $ 28 billion. And there’s much more on the chopping block: their plan calls for reducing $ 100 billion from the Defense Department’s non-war budget, a little less than 20 percent. War-related expenses aren’t touched.
But we get a proposal to cut a third of the forces stationed in Europe. Doug Mataconis:
Already, the knives are out on both sides of the political aisle. Jane Hamsher at FireDogLake has been calling the Debt Commission the “Cat Food Commission” for months now, while conservatives have been berating co-chairman, and long-time conservative Republican, Alan Simpson’s membership on the Commission as being a surrender on tax increases.
If we lived in a country with adult political parties, the release of the Commission’s report would serve as the beginning of a long overdue national conversation about how to get our fiscal house in order. Liberals would recognize that social spending would have to be cut, and conservatives would recognize that defense spending cuts and tax increases would have to be on the table. Instead, what we’re likely to see is more of the same political gamesmanship — liberals accusing the GOP of wanting to starve Grandma, conservatives accusing liberals of just wanting to raise taxes so they can spend more. And the debt will continue to rise.
Not if more and more people get behind the proposals. And by people, I mean the tea-partiers. Are you anti-debt or anti-Obama? We shall soon find out.
