Home » Archives by category » Archivos Enero 2008-Marzo 2009 » Hispanic News (Page 3)
Senator Marco Rubio
Speech at National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials
June 22, 2012
Rubio: “As long as this issue of immigration is a political ping pong that each side uses to win elections and influence votes, I’m telling you it won’t get solved. Because there are too many people who have concluded that this issue unresolved is more powerful. They want it to stay unresolved. It’s easier to use to influence elections. It’s easier to use to raise money. The only way to solve it is a balanced approach that recognizes that this is complicated.”
In Speech, Romney Provides Few Details on Immigration Policy
This week, Mitt Romney gave a much-anticipated speech in which he was expected to address whether—as President—he would reverse the new Obama administration policy toward immigrant youths who would qualify for the DREAM Act. The answer? It’s still unclear. Despite adopting a noticeably softer tone toward undocumented immigrants, Romney again failed to say whether he would overturn the policy and provided few other details as to how he would tackle the most intractable problem of the immigration debate.
DHS Creates Obstacles for Small Businesses Seeking High-Skilled Immigrants
Politicians love small businesses. They also love high-skilled workers. One might assume, then, that entrepreneurs and start-up companies would have a relatively easy time hiring immigrant professionals through the H-1B program. Not so. In fact, a recently released memo confirms that far from receiving preferential treatment, small businesses are singled out for heightened fraud investigations by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
New Data Reveals Immigrants’ Voting Potential at the Local Level
Newly obtained data from the DHS Office of Immigration Statistics provide another indication that immigrants in the United States hold untapped electoral power. There are 8.1 million legal immigrants who arrived in this country between 1985 and 2005 and who are likely eligible to become naturalized U.S. citizens with the power to vote. If these immigrants were already U.S. citizens, and if they registered to vote at the same rate as other naturalized citizens (61%), counties across the nation would see their voter registration rolls jump dramatically.
President Obama Issued a Memo, Not an “Executive Order” or “New Law”
Immigration hardliners were predictably quick to criticize President Obama’s recent announcement that DHS will use discretion to halt the deportations of eligible immigrant youth. Immigration restrictionists wasted no time in hurling some base-stirring claims—“administrative amnesty,” “end-runs around Congress,” “executive fiat.” However, while folks are free to criticize the President, they should at least strive for accuracy. For instance, Friday’s announcement was not an executive order. The President did not create a new law, sign an executive order or grant anyone citizenship or amnesty, he merely directed DHS to exercise discretion to grant deferred action to qualified immigrant youth—an action that is well within his power as President.
A Breakdown of DHS’s Deferred Action for DREAMers
While recent headlines assess the significance of President Obama’s deferred action announcement on Friday, many are still sorting through the news to get answers to basic questions about who is covered under the new program. Prior to President Obama’s statement that DHS would halt the deportation of immigrant youth who met criteria similar to the DREAM Act, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano released a memo and a set of questions and answers that outline eligibility and a basic timeline for implementing the new directive.
Even a Fifth Grader Realizes the Power of the American Dream
Shortly after President Obama announced that DHS will halt the deportations of eligible undocumented youth, a Chicago-area fifth grader delivered a speech of his own. Over the weekend, Alexander Tymouch was honored as the National 5th Grade Creative Writing Contest winner at the American Immigration Council’s Annual Benefit Dinner where he read his essay, “America, the Magical Land,” alongside Grammy-nominated musicians at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel in Nashville.
This Week in Council Publications:
·Q&A Guide to Deferred Action for Immigrant Youth (IPC Fact Check, June 2012)
·Listen to Experts Discuss Deferred Action for Immigrant Youth (Telebriefing, June 21, 2012)
·Don’t Get Scammed: AILA’s Consumer Advisory on Deferred Action for Immigrant Youth (AILA, June 2012)
·Creating Opportunity: The Economic Benefits of Granting Deferred Action to Unauthorized Immigrants Brought to the United States as Children (IPC Fact Check, June 2012)
·Prosecturial Discretion and Executive Authority (IPC Resource Page, June 2012)
Background and Resources on Supreme Court Case Arizona v. United States (IPC Resource Page, June 2012)
On June 20, young Latinas enrolled in the National Hispana Leadership Institute’s Latinas Learning to Lead program participated in Ready, Safe, Drive! –an interactive, hands-on car care and safety workshop in the Washington, DC area. Mechanics from Lindsay Ford taught the young women practical skills such as how to change a tire and check the oil. The participants also learned what to do if stranded in a vehicle on the side of the road, the importance of avoiding distractions while driving, and how to increase their fuel economy.Created by Ford Motor Company and Safe Smart Women, Ready, Safe, Drive!teaches young women how to stay safe on the road.
These tips were part of a recent car care clinic where Latinas were empowered to practice safe, smart driving.
Ford Motor Company Eco Driving Tips
As fuel costs rise and concerns about the environment increase, many vehicle owners are wondering what they can do to conserve fuel. To help address these concerns, Ford has assembled an Eco-Driving learning module. Check it out, and learn how to save time and money when driving.
Here are 10 quick tips to help improve fuel economy by an average of 24%!
1. Slow down and watch speed - Drive 55 miles per hour instead of 65 to save fuel. EPA estimates a 10-15 percent improvement in fuel economy by following this tip. Also, aim for a constant speed. Pumping the accelerator sends more fuel into the engine. Using cruise control whenever possible on the highway helps maintain speeds and conserve fuel.
2. Accelerate and brake smoothly - Accelerating smoothly from a stop and braking softly conserves fuel. Fast starts, weaving in and out of traffic and hard braking wastes fuel and wears out some of the car components, such as brakes and tires, more quickly. Maintain a safe distance between vehicles and anticipate traffic conditions to allow for more time to brake and accelerate gradually.
3. No idling - Today’s engines don’t need a warm up. Start the car immediately and gently drive away. Don’t leave your car idling. Prolonged idling increases emissions and wastes fuel. Turn the engine off in non-traffic situations, such as at bank and fast food drive-up windows, when idling more than 30 seconds.
4. Check your tires - Keep tires properly inflated to the recommended tire pressure. This alone can reduce the average amount of fuel use by 3-4 percent. Under-inflated tires increase rolling resistance and reduce fuel economy. They also wear more rapidly. Check the vehicle’s door-post sticker for minimum cold tire inflation pressure.
5. Be kind to your vehicle - Maintain proper engine tune-up to keep vehicles running efficiently. Keep the wheels aligned. Wheels that are fighting each other waste fuel. Replace air filters as recommended. Use a fuel with good detergent additives to keep the vehicle engine clean and performing efficiently. Always consult the Owner’s Manual for proper maintenance.
6. Travel light - Avoid piling a lot of luggage on the roof rack. The added frontal area reduces aerodynamics and will hurt fuel economy, reducing it by as much as 5 percent. Remove excess weight from the vehicle. Unnecessary weight, such as unneeded items in the trunk, makes the engine work harder and consumes more fuel.
7. Minimize use of heater and air conditioning - Use heating and air conditioning selectively to reduce the load on the engine. Decreasing your usage of the air conditioner when temperatures are above 80 degrees can help you save 10-15 percent of fuel. Use the vent setting as much as possible. Park in the shade to keep car cool and reduce the need for air conditioning.
8. Close windows at high speeds - Don’t drive with the windows open unless your keep your speed under 50 mph. Driving with the windows open at highways speeds increases aerodynamic drag on the vehicle and lowers fuel economy.
9. Choose the right oil - Use good quality, energy-conserving EC oils with the viscosity grade recommended in the Owner’s Manual. Look for cans marked with the symbol ECII, which is the American Society of Testing Materials logo for fuel-efficient oils.
10. Consolidate trips - Plan ahead to consolidate your trips. This will enable you to bypass congested routes, lead to less idling, fewer start-ups and less stop-and-go traffic. Whenever feasible, share a ride and/or carpool.
President Obama addressed this week the bipartisan National Association of Latino Local and Elected Officials (NALEO). The president’s address at the annual conference came one day after Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney delivered remarks. The following is a statement from SEIU International Secretary-Treasurer Eliseo Medina:
“What a difference a day makes. President Obama connects with Latino voters in a way Mitt Romney cannot even imagine.
“The president entered the room today with wide public support for his recent decision to defer deportations of law-abiding undocumented young immigrants, known as DREAMers, who were brought to this country as children.
“In contrast to Romney, who has insulted immigrants by claiming that we only come to the U.S. for a ‘free deal,’ the president described immigrants as strivers, dreamers, who work hard and ‘who are not looking for a handout.’
“The president’s actions have spoken louder than his words. He is fighting for us and understands the issues we face. His healthcare policies would expand affordable coverage to nine million Latinos, his economic plans are geared toward tax cuts for the 99%, and his administration is working to reduce the threat of home foreclosures for working families.
“Romney, meanwhile, refused to say whether he supports or would end President Obama’s policy on DREAMers if elected. He has threatened several times to veto the DREAM Act that would create a permanent solution. During his speech, Romney said he would reform the immigration system but without saying how. It is a distinction without a difference.
“Romney’s words and actions during the recent GOP primary race already have spoken volumes about his lack of serious regard for Latinos, and voters know that Romney’s policies would be devastating for them.
“Besides wanting to veto the DREAM Act, Romney espouses policies that would make life so difficult for immigrants that they would ‘self-deport.’ He has condescendingly joked about his ‘unemployment status’ when his pockets are lined with millions of dollars that he made by taking over companies and stripping workers of their jobs, benefits and pensions.
“The NALEO speech was Romney’s chance to say something meaningful to Latino office holders from across the U.S. who deal with community issues every day.
“This was Romney’s moment to say he would not reverse President Obama’s decision to block deportations of otherwise law-abiding undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country as children. He could have outlined proposals for real comprehensive immigration reform (and reversed his call for self-deportation). He could have addressed the demands by the 99 percent for good jobs; a better education; and proposals to prevent foreclosures on the homes of hardworking Americans.
“But he didn’t. He only offered the same old pabulum. Mitt Romney is so politically tone deaf, so out of step with the concerns of Latinos and all working Americans, that when he speaks, he sounds like a panderer. The only thing worse than a pandering politician is one who talks and says nothing.
“The choice is clear. On Nov. 6, we can re-elect a president who watches our backs, or we can elect a politician who tries to mislead us to our faces.
“Latino voters have the power to decide this election, and we must use that power wisely.”
During his speech at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) conference, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney underwhelmed and failed the leadership test, according to pro immigrant groups.
Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice:
“Romney’s remarks on immigration today? FAIL. He once again dodged the question on whether he will keep or rescind the President’s executive action for DREAMers. He promised a mandatory employment verification system – which is the underpinning of his radical ‘self-deportation’ position – with no mention of a line to get into for the millions of undocumented workers currently in the U.S. He refused to distance himself from his hardline primary stances of pledging to veto the DREAM Act and supporting Arizona’s immigration bill that uses racial profiling in an attempt to purge immigrants from the state.
“Platitudes about legal immigration policies were expected. But if Romney really does want to be President, he can’t continue to dodge the key questions: What about the 11.5 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S.? Would he keep or rescind Obama’s new directive on DREAM-eligible young people? Given his promise to veto the DREAM Act, when he calls for a permanent solution for DREAMers, what exactly does he mean? How will he protect the up to 1.4 million DREAMers expected to benefit from President Obama’s recent executive action? Does he still think that ‘self-deportation’ is the right approach for their parents and the millions of other immigrants living and working here without papers?
“Today’s speech did nothing to boost his credibility – or his chances – in November. Latino voters are looking for leadership and someone who will stand up to the anti-immigrant minority in the GOP who continue to block immigration reforms. Yet Romney again failed to take the golden opportunity to do so today, showing that he remains tethered to the party’s hardline right. Romney told the NALEO audience, ‘you do have an alternative.’ Unfortunately, on immigration, Romney failed to provide a shred of reason why that alternative should be him.”
Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum Action Fund:
“At his NALEO speech, Mitt Romney fell short. American voters want — and the Republican Party needs — visionary plans to fix the immigration system, not tweaks around the margin where the only path to legal status for grandmothers is to enlist in the military. For the leader of the Republican Party to ignore his Senate colleagues’ obstructions to the DREAM Act in 2010 is revisionist history.”
Center for American Progress:
When Mitt Romney outlined his ideas about immigration policy at a Latino conference in Florida, he endorsed removing the cap on visas for the spouses and children of lawful permanent residents. This measure would allow the more than 300,000 people who are waiting for a family-sponsored green card to skip the years-long wait for a visa under a Romney presidency. “We will exempt from caps the spouses and minor children of legal permanent residents. And we will eliminate other forms of bureaucratic red tape that keep families from being together,” he told the crowd at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials conference.
This is not a new idea — Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez (NJ) has championed this provision as part of a broader comprehensive immigration reform bill. But, as Menendez pointed out in a statement after Romney’s speech, Republicans have “failed to endorse” the idea of allowing more family visas. “I’ve reached out to Republicans to help me fix our legal immigration system but unfortunately to date, Republicans continue to oppose reforms to our family immigration system,” Menendez said.
Indeed, no Republican co-sponsored Menendez’s immigration proposal that would expand the number of family visas. And when the senator’s office has reached out to Republicans to compromise on the provision Romney mentioned, Republicans rejected the olive branch, a staff member told ThinkProgress.
ThinkProgress reached out to Republicans on the House and Senate Judiciary committees to see if they would support Romney’s proposal. In response, House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) said in a statement Romney is “right to recognize that immigration reform needs to be geared towards bolstering our economy and job creation,” but did not comment on the GOP candidate’s visa expansion proposal.
As an Associated Press fact check of Romney’s speech points out, Romney would need Congress’ help to expand the limit if he were president. But after failing to support legislative attempts to increase the limit, it’s unlikely Republicans will jump on board now simply because Romney has suggested it.
Read the full TP post here.
NDN and New Policy Institute (NPI) President Simon Rosenberg:
“Today in a speech to NALEO, Mitt Romney did not in any way distance himself from the “self-deportation” strategy he outlined during the GOP primaries.
While he did address other parts of the immigration policy debate, on the core and most difficult issue – what to do with the 11 million undocumented immigrants currently in the country – Mitt Romney did not alter or augment in any way what has become the position of Jan Brewer, Joe Arpaio, his own campaign and much of the rest of the Republican Party over the past few years – they want those undocumented immigrants to leave the United States as soon as possible, and intend to make their lives miserable enough so they do. He also made it clear that he will not renew the two year visas for DREAM eligible young people being currently introduced by the Obama Administration.
While we applaud Governor Romney for attending the NALEO conference, this speech offered little hope that he has the courage to do what it takes to fix America’s broken immigration system. In that sense this speech was a major disappointment.
Building on the recent launch of his “Juntos con Romney” National Steering Committee, Governor Mitt Romney announced “Juntos con Romney” leadership teams in 15 states, as well as three additional members of his national steering committee.
“These state leadership teams will play a key role in making sure Hispanic voters know that they have an alternative come November. The Hispanic community has felt first-hand the devastating effects of President Obama’s failed economic policies and broken immigration promises. Hispanic voters should know that I will work long and hard to earn their trust and vote. And, when I am elected president, I intend to keep all the promises I have made to them,” said Romney.
“With Hispanic unemployment now soaring to 11 percent, it is clear President Obama’s policies have particularly hurt the Hispanic community,” said New Mexico Lt. Gov. John Sanchez. “In fact, President Obama recently said ‘the private sector is doing fine,’ demonstrating that he does not understand how to get the country back to work. Unlike President Obama, Governor Romney has a proven record of success in the private sector, giving him the knowledge and tools to foster job creation and lasting prosperity in our communities.”
New polling released June 22, 2012 by Latino Decisions and America’s Voice finds President Obama maintaining a wide lead over Republican Mitt Romney among Latino registered voters in five key battleground states.
The poll interviewed 400 Latinos each in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Nevada and Virginia – all states expected to be very competitive in 2012 where Latino voters could decide the outcome. In Florida, the poll found Obama leading Romney by a margin of 53% to 37%, a slight increase from a 50% to 40% lead Obama held over Romney in a January 2012 Latino Decisions/Univision News poll in Florida.
In the five states combined Obama lead Romney 63% to 27%, however in southwestern battlegrounds of Arizona, Colorado and Nevada Obama performed even better. In Arizona Obama received 74% to 18% for Romney, in Colorado he was favored by 70% to 22% and in Nevada 69% to 20%. In Virginia, Obama lead 59% to 28% over Romney among Latino registered voters.
See below for Latino Decisions’ analysis of the poll (link - http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/2012/06/22/new-poll-obama-leads-romney-among-latinos-in-key-2012-battleground-states/):
LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. — Mitt Romney said Thursday that the “best and brightest” should be given green cards to stay in the United States after graduating with advanced degrees.
Unless, it turns out, they are undocumented immigrants.
A Romney aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, confirmed that Romney’s policy on visas for graduate students would not apply to undocumented immigrants.
“If you get an advanced degree here, we want you to stay here — so we will staple a green card to your diploma,” he said at a conference here for the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. “We want the best and brightest to enrich the nation through the jobs and technologies they will help create.”
Romney’s speech went into more specifics on immigration than usual for the candidate. Still, he was vague on the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States, and the so-called “DREAMers,” unauthorized young people who entered the country as children and either attend college or join the military.
Many of those young people will be granted temporary work authorization and reprieve from deportation under a policy change announced last week by President Barack Obama. Romney condemned that change, calling it an overreach and a short-term fix, but has repeatedly declined to say whether he would end the policy.
Romney spoke about keeping families together, but within the realm of legal, permanent residents with no details on how families with one or more undocumented members would be treated under his immigration plan.
“Too many families are caught in a broken system that costs them time and money, and entangles them in red tape,” he said. “For those seeking to come to America the right way, that kind of bureaucratic nightmare has to end.”
Undocumented immigrants, many of whom have American family members, have few options under current law for obtaining legal status without leaving the country.
That has big implications for children of undocumented immigrants: In April, Immigration and Customs Enforcement released data showing that more than 46,000 undocumented immigrants deported in a six-month period said they had a child who is a U.S. citizen.
Also, to Reverse Damage Resulting From Wal-Mart Supreme Court Decision.
WASHINGTON, D.C., June 20, 2012 – One year ago today, in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the Supreme Court severely limited workers’ rights to combat discrimination. To mark the anniversary of Wal-Mart, the Senate and the House have introduced the Equal Employment Opportunity Restoration Act of 2012 to reverse the damage done by the Supreme Court decision and restore workers’ rights to band together in group actions to fight systemic discrimination in the workplace.
“This legislation has great importance to the larger civil rights community, which has used group actions effectively to address systemic employment discrimination against African Americans and other minorities,” said Lawyers’ Committee Public Policy Director Tanya Clay House. “As a national leader in combating employment discrimination, the Lawyers’ Committee applauds Congress for introducing this legislation and will continue to work closely with legislators in the coming months to ensure passage of the bill.”
In Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit brought by a group of female Wal-Mart employees across the country, despite strong evidence of discrimination. The workers alleged that Wal-Mart’s policy of delegating to local managers decisions concerning pay and promotion, combined with a culture of sex stereotyping, resulted in widespread discrimination against women in pay and promotions. As described in Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissent: nationwide, women comprised 70 percent of Wal-Mart’s hourly workers but only 33 percent of managers. There are even fewer women in higher level and better-paid management jobs. Women were paid less in every region and the salary gap grew over time – even for men and women hired at the same time for the same job.
The Supreme Court placed significant hurdles in the way of any group of employees joining together to fight discrimination in the workplace by:
Making it difficult for employees to challenge subjective employment practices where managers are given discretion to make hiring, pay, and promotion decisions.
Imposing a stringent standard for showing that the claims of employees are sufficiently similar to allow them to band together in a class action.
Crediting employer non-discrimination policies even where they are not consistently and effectively enforced.
Limiting the discretion of courts to determine the best and fairest way to calculate the appropriate monetary relief to be awarded to a group, and making it extremely difficult in some cases for individuals to obtain any monetary damages.
Courts have refused to certify class actions alleging sex or race discrimination against such employers as Costco, Family Dollar Stores, Nucor, and Lockheed Martin citing to the Wal-Mart decision.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Restoration Act of 2012 restores workers’ civil rights protections:
• It creates an alternative mechanism for bringing group actions challenging discriminatory employment practices that violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, and 42 U.S.C. sec. 1981:
For more than 40 years class actions have played a crucial role in achieving racial and gender justice. Class actions were designed to change system-wide discriminatory employment practices that affect large numbers of people. When employers have system-wide policies, the only meaningful way to bring about change is through injunctive relief applicable to the whole class. Without group actions, many employees would find it financially prohibitive to finance an individual case, would have difficulty finding an attorney to take such a case and might fear retaliation.
• It makes clear that employees can challenge subjective employment practices:
One of the most common forms of employment policy or practice is to leave personnel decisions to the discretion of supervisors. The bill makes clear that such practices are not immune from challenges of discrimination. Subjective practices may be challenged in the same way as other employment practices. If an employer adopts an employment practice of allowing supervisors to make individual decisions, these decisions constitute a single employment practice.
• Employer Written Non-Discrimination Policies Are Only to Be Considered Where the Policies are Enforced Consistently and Effectively:
Wal-Mart suggests that the mere existence of a written nondiscrimination policy may shield an employer from liability. The Act requires that an employer prove that its non-discrimination policy in fact operates to prevent such discrimination.
• The Act Restores the Flexibility and Discretion Given to Courts to Fashion Relief So as to Make Whole Victims of Discrimination:
When an employer is found to have discriminated against a group, the civil rights statutes provide that the victims of this discrimination are to be made whole. Make-whole relief includes damages for lost wages and other forms of monetary relief. Courts have traditionally been given broad discretion to determine what remedies to award victims and how to calculate monetary relief. Courts have approved the use of formulas, statistical models, mathematical calculations and individual adjudication. The Act restores judicial discretion to use those procedures that will best ensure that members of the group will be made whole in the most reliable and efficient way.
“The Equal Employment Opportunity Restoration Act of 2012 will ensure that employees have the tools to come together to combat continuing workplace discrimination through group actions. The Act also provides courts with the flexibility to award injunctive and monetary relief to victims of discrimination,” said Lawyers’ Committee Employment Discrimination Project Senior Counsel Jane Dolkart.
New Analysis Finds GOP Approach to Bush Tax Cuts would Give Richest 1 Percent of Marylanders 58,340 Per Year More and Give Poorest 20 Percent $100 Less on Average than Obama’s Approach.
Baltimore– Middle-income and low-income Marylanders would pay somewhat more in taxes under the Congressional Republicans’ approach to extending the Bush tax cuts than they would under President Obama’s approach, while high-income Marylanders would pay far less under the Republican approach, according to a new analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) and Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ). National figures show the same pattern.
“Marylanders need a fair tax system at the federal and state levels that works for all of us, not just the wealthiest among us,” said Kate Planco Waybright, interim executive director of Progressive Maryland.
Under President Obama’s approach, in 2013, the poorest 20 percent of Marylanders would receive an average tax cut of $210 while the richest one percent would get an average tax cut of 19,110. Under the Congressional Republicans’ approach, the poorest 20 percent of Marylanders would receive an average tax cut of 110 while the richest one percent would receive an average cut of 77,450.
The study also finds that in 2013: Of tax cuts that go to Marylanders under Obama’s approach, 2 percent would go to the poorest 20 percent, 10 percent would go to the middle 20 percent, and 9.4 percent would go to the richest 1 percent; under the Republican plan, 1 percent of the cuts would go to the poorest 20 percent of Marylanders, 7.7 percent would go to the middle 20 percent, and 30 percent would go to the richest one percent.
The Bush tax cuts extension outlined by the President would cost one trillion dollars less over 10 years than would making all the Bush tax cuts permanent.
“Both President Obama and Congressional Republicans have proposed to extend far too many of these unaffordable tax cuts,” said Robert S. McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice. “But if we have to choose between the Congressional Republicans’ and President Obama’s approach, however, the President’s proposal is fairer and more responsible.”
The term “Bush tax cuts” refers to income tax cuts and estate tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 and extended several times since then. In 2009, President Obama expanded some parts of these tax cuts that benefit low income and working families. In December of 2010, the President and Congress agreed to extend all of these tax cuts through the end of 2012.
The Republicans in Congress have indicated that they would extend all of the tax cuts first enacted in 2001 and 2003, but not the 2009 expansions for lower income families. President Obama wants to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts only for the first 250,000 a married couple makes annually, or the first 200,000 a single person makes. Obama also wants to extend the 2009 expansions.
The national findings from CTJ and ITEP show that in 2013:
* Under the President’s approach, the poorest 20 percent of Americans would receive an average tax cut of $270 while the richest one percent would get an average tax cut of 20,130. Under the Congressional Republicans’ approach, the poorest 20 percent of Americans would receive an average tax cut of 120 while the richest one percent would receive an average cut of 70,790.
* Of the tax cuts going to Americans under Obama’s approach, three percent would go to the poorest 20 percent of Americans, 9.9 percent would go to the middle 20 percent and 11.4 percent would go to the richest 1 percent.
* Of the tax cuts going to Americans under the Congressional Republicans’ approach, one percent would go to the poorest 20 percent of Americans, 7.4 percent would go to the middle 20 percent of Americans and 31.8 percent would go to the richest one percent of Americans.
The report also addresses the economic effects of tax cuts versus direct government spending and cites Moody Analytics research concluding that government spending is more stimulative by a factor of five, or more, than tax cuts.
The full report is available at http://ctj.org/bushtaxcuts2012.php and shows the specific distribution of the benefits, and amounts of tax cuts, from the two different approaches in each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia as well as nationally.
Progressive Maryland is a grassroots, nonprofit organization of over 20,000 supporters and 50 affiliated religious, community, and labor organizations. Through research, public education, and direct political action in Annapolis, Washington and communities statewide, we strive to improve the lives of working families in our state (http://progressivemaryland.org).
Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ), founded in 1979, is a 501 (c)(4) public interest research and advocacy organization focusing on federal, state and local tax policies and their impact upon our nation ( http://ctj.org).
Founded in 1980, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit, non-partisan research organization based in Washington, DC that focuses on federal and state tax policy. ITEP’s mission is to inform policymakers and the public of the effects of current and proposed tax policies on ta
DRM Capitol Group:
By failing to respond whether or not he would rescind the President’s decision not to deport undocumented youth, Mitt Romney is showing he truly does not support undocumented youth and the Latino community. Instead of welcoming the announcement and pressuring Congress to act on legislation to permanently bring relief, Mitt Romney is implicitly siding with anti-immigrant Republicans like Rep. Steve King and Rep. Lamar Smith to rescind the President’s decision to not deport DREAMers. Even if he fails to answer, his record on immigration is clear: he embraces self-deportation, SB1070, and would veto the DREAM Act.
Undocumented youth will escalate our actions against Mitt Romney until he supports the President’s new immigration policy. For all those who have been waiting, in some cases decades, for the DREAM Act, the President’s order is a long-overdue breath of fresh air, and a signal that undocumented youth can truly move on with their lives and contribute to this country they call home.
The President’s new immigration policy represents the most hope undocumented youth have had since Reagan’s amnesty in the 80’s. Republicans are criticizing this order, and it isn’t surprising. They were, after all, the party that filibustered the DREAM Act. They say that the President should have instead waited for a legislative solution from the most gridlocked legislature we’ve ever had, and that his actions are harming a long-term solution. They say this as though they were just on the cusp of producing better results for the Latino community, but the truth is that they most likely never would have offered even as much as the President’s executive order.
DRM Capitol Group serves as a voice for undocumented youth and lobbying arm of the dream movement. Our work ensures that undocumented youth are represented in the halls of power and are correctly and directly informed of the actions of Congress, Executive Agencies, and the Courts.
Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice:
“On Friday President Obama showed what leadership looks like. He took bold executive action, protected hundreds of thousands of talented young people who are Americans in all but paperwork and risked political capital in doing so. He did the right thing.
“Today, the leader of the Republican Party, Mitt Romney, showed what political cowardice looks like. He refused to address the simple question of what he would do as President when the two year reprieve for Dreamers is up for renewal. He refused to say whether he would protect them or try to deport them. He refused to take on his nativist base or to spend political capital to reach out to Latino voters. He did the political thing.
“Going forward, the choice has been clarified. Voters who care about immigration can support a leader who stepped up and did the right thing. Or they can support a candidate who has vowed to veto the traditionally bipartisan DREAM Act, supports “self-deportation” for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S., calls Arizona anti-immigrant laws a ‘model’ for the nation – and refuses to answer the simple question of what he would do as President when the new policy comes up for renewal.”
Rep. Xavier Becerra:
“… Romney has given us yet another reminder of his lack of leadership and of his adherence to the extreme fringes of the Republican party when it comes to matters of importance to the Latino community. Romney continuously refused to say whether he would repeal or uphold the Presidents new immigration order that prevents the deportation of deserving students who were brought here through no fault of their own. How can we expect Mitt Romney to do what’s right for our community and our country when he cannot even stand up to his own party? Talk is cheap indeed Mr. Romney.”