Hispanic support for Republicans' hardline immigration policies may keep Texas red

 BY MARK P. JONES, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR

Democratic hopes for turning Texas blue hinge heavily on winning the vote of a large majority of the state’s growing Hispanic population. Democrats often contrast their progressive policies on immigration and border security with the more conservative policies advocated by Republicans as a reason why their share of the Hispanic vote will increase. 

And yet, when Texas Hispanics are asked about their opinions on immigration and border policies, their preferences tend to align more with those of Republicans than Democrats.

Many Democrats were convinced that Donald Trump’s conservative, and at times offensive, policies on immigration and border security would alienate Hispanics to such an extent that they would flock in droves to the Democratic Party in 2020.  Instead, according to exit polls, Trump won 32 percent of the Latino vote nationally (up from 28 percent in 2016) and 41 percent of the Latino vote in Texas (up from 34 percent in 2016). In the Rio Grande Valley’s two most populous countries (Hidalgo and Cameron; directly across the border from Mexico), where Hispanics account for more than 90 percent of the population, Trump won 41 percent and 43 percent of the vote in 2020 (up from 28 percent and 32 percent, respectively, in 2016). 

In late October the Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation conducted a representative public opinion survey of 1,402 Texas registered voters, including 616 Texas Hispanics, who are the focus here. 

The survey results reveal that more Texas Hispanics support than oppose four out of five of the border security policies that have been implemented by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott on his own via executive actions or through legislation passed by the Texas Legislature under the leadership of Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Republican House Speaker Dade Phelan.

Twice as many Texas Hispanics support (51 percent) than oppose (25 percent) the Texas policy of having Department of Public Safety (DPS) officers and local law enforcement arrest immigrants who cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally. (The remaining 24 percent neither support nor oppose the policy.)

Far more Hispanics support dispatching DPS officers (48 percent) and Texas National Guard soldiers (46 percent) to patrol along the border than oppose these policies (30 percent and 32 percent).

A narrow plurality of Texas Hispanics even supports spending $1.5 billion of state funds annually on border security, funds that could be used instead to help address documented needs in Texas public schools, where more than half of the students are Hispanic.

The only Texas policy opposed by a plurality of Texas Hispanics is the state building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, which is opposed by 45 percent, but is nonetheless still supported by 38 percent.

The closer one gets to the South Texas-Mexico border, the greater the level of support among Texas Hispanics for Republicans’ border security policies. This is a problem for congressional Democrats, since under the new Republican-drawn Texas congressional map, only three congressional districts (the 15th, 23rd and 28th) are considered to be competitive, and all three are located either in whole or part in South Texas, with two presently held by Democrats and one by a Republican. 

Turning to federal immigration policies, if national Democrats believe creating more open borders and making it easier for immigrants to seek asylum will significantly boost their support among Hispanics, they are likely mistaken, at least in regard to the Lone Star State. 

When it comes to increasing the number of immigrants allowed into the United States from Mexico and Central America, Texas Hispanics are evenly split, with 39 percent in opposition and 37 percent in support. This is a policy that has an adverse impact on the Democratic Party’s ability to generate support within the Anglo (non-Hispanic white) community. In Texas, 59 percent of whites oppose this policy, compared to 25 percent who support it.

On the related policy of increasing the number of refugees and asylum seekers allowed into the United States, 42 percent of Texas Hispanics oppose this policy compared to 35 percent who support it. And while this policy is at best a breakeven proposition among Texas Hispanics, it is quite unpopular among Anglo Texans, 59 percent of whom oppose it compared to 27 percent who support it.

Both Gov. Abbott and President Biden are underwater in regard to Texas Hispanic approval of their handling of the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border.  But Abbott (42 percent approve/48 percent disapprove) is far closer to the surface than Biden (35 percent/55percent).

Texas Hispanics will in large part determine whether Texas remains red or turns purple or even blue this decade. For years commentators have predicted Texas would turn blue as the Hispanic share of the state population increased, to the point where in 2022 it will eclipse the Anglo population. 

But that prediction depended on Hispanics voting overwhelmingly for Democrats, something not seen in the Lone Star State, where statewide GOP candidates continue to win between 35 percent and 45 percent of the Hispanic vote.  

If current Hispanic support for Republican immigration policies is any signal, we can expect Texas Republicans to maintain the backing of roughly two-fifths of Texas Hispanic voters in the 2022 midterms. This would mean the continuation of the Republican statewide winning streak that dates back to 1996 and a GOP net gain of between one and three U.S. House seats. This advantage could prove pivotal to the Republican effort to retake control of the U.S. House.

Mark P. Jones is the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy’s fellow in political science and the Joseph D. Jamail chair in Latin American Studies at Rice University as well as a co-author of “Texas Politics Today.” Follow him on Twitter @MarkPJonesTX.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Money alone isn't enough to atone for family separation

 BY KATHRYN HAMPTON AND RANIT MISHORI, OPINION CONTRIBUTORS

Confidential settlement negotiations between the Justice Department and counsel for migrant families forcibly separated during the Trump administration, which leaked recently, revealed that financial damages may reach $450,000 for some of the traumatized families. 

President Biden called that news report “garbage” and said “it’s not gonna happen,” remarks later walked back by White House staff. The recent media focus on the potential dollar figure and President Biden’s inflammatory comments have diverted attention away from the real matter at hand: The horrific suffering of forcibly separated parents and children, inflicted intentionally by the U.S. government. 

Expert clinicians at our organization, Physicians for Human Rights, have conducted evaluations of 44 parents and children affected by this abhorrent policy. We concluded in our 2020 report, “You Will Never See Your Child Again,” that the experiences of these individuals and their families meet the criteria for two grave human rights violations: Temporary enforced disappearance and torture. Parents and children displayed severe symptoms of trauma and met diagnostic criteria for mental health conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression — life-altering conditions that have persisted even years after family reunifications.

The cruel acts that the U.S. government perpetrated against asylum seekers demand more than a financial settlement. 

U.S. and international law requires the government to ensure access to an effective remedy for victims of torture. But can money alone ever compensate for the deep trauma suffered by separated families? In addition to financial compensation, other types of remedies are also crucial to obtain a measure of justice.

A better way to look at what we, as a nation, owe those affected by the “Zero Tolerance” or family separation policy of the Trump administration is through the lens of reparations. Reparations recognize that human rights violations affect not only our physical and mental health but are also an attempted assault on our essential human dignity and worth. Reparations include not only financial compensation but also full acknowledgment, policy reforms and guarantees of non-repetition.

The United Nations Convention Against Torture, which the United States has ratified, obligates national governments that have committed torture to provide redress to survivors and to ensure that the domestic legal system ensures “an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible.” 

The “as possible” is heartbreaking — it acknowledges that physical and emotional scars from torture can be lifelong, even with treatment. This poignant reality only underscores the urgency of providing remedy and redress as speedily as possible, especially for the children. Torture affecting children should be assessed with special consideration for their total dependence on adults, their extreme vulnerability, their sensitivity to pain and the possibility of long-term trauma due to their developmental stage. The suffering of small children was at the heart of this heinous policy and should weigh heavily in our thinking about the reparations and redress that are due.

Currently, the U.S. government, compelled by litigation, is providing only rehabilitation to separated families, in the form of some psychological services. 

But given the profound mental health trauma that parents and children experienced, the U.S. government should also offer access to long-term health services and psychosocial care, and family social support. The concept of reparations goes beyond monetary damages, rehabilitation and restitution and can be interpreted more broadly and creatively to address the root causes of the issue while recognizing that nothing can restore the months or years that young children were forced to be away from their parents, often not knowing where they were. 

We strongly advocate for the government to implement transformative reparations, which Dr. Michelle Bachelet, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, herself a pediatrician, endorses as underscoring the “catalytic power” that genuine remedies hold for victims, families and even entire countries”. 

While reparations can take many forms, they must respect culture and community. Reparations must be carried out in consultation with the affected groups since what may matter to them may be different than what lawyers or government officials may perceive to be important. Such practices may include validation of the claims, an acknowledgment of wrongs by the state, special inquiries, truth commissions and symbolic reparations (e.g., ceremonies and formal apologies), as well as efforts to reform domestic legislation. Survivors of the U.S. family separation policy should have a seat at the table in all deliberations over reparations. 

Based on the horrific stories that survivors have bravely recounted and that PHR research has documented, we believe that the United States will not fulfill its obligation under the U.N. Convention Against Torture by only focusing on a dollar figure. Settlements must be paired with an official apology to all of the families that fully acknowledges the harm the U.S. government perpetrated, a concerted effort to meaningfully reform U.S. immigration laws and border enforcement policies so that such separations can never happen again and a grant of permanent immigration status so that these affected families do not have to fear that they will be separated in the future.

Kathryn Hampton, MST, MA, is deputy director at Physicians for Human Rights’ Asylum Program. Ranit Mishori, MD, MHS, FAAFP is the senior medical advisor at Physicians for Human Rights and a professor of Family Medicine at Georgetown University School of Medicine. 

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Migrants in US-bound caravan say they'll accept deal for Mexican visas

 BY RAFAEL BERNAL

Thousands of migrants who had organized a U.S.-bound caravan have taken a deal to disband their group in exchange for visas to stay in Mexico, according to a report by Reuters.

The caravan had recently left the southern Mexican city of Tapachula, traveling as a group to defend themselves against criminals and potential harassment from authorities. The migrants, traveling by foot, had walked about 30 miles from Tapachula to the town of Mapastepec, both in the hot and humid coastal region of the southern state of Chiapas.

Luis Garcia Villagran of Pueblo Sin Fronteras, one of the caravan's organizers, told Reuters that the group struck a deal with the Mexican government that allows the migrants to settle across multiple Mexican states in exchange for a promise not to organize future caravans.

Mexico's National Migration Institute said in a statement that authorities and the migrants had reached an agreement for resettlement with humanitarian visas.

Mexico also offered to house the migrants in shelters run by the country's social welfare institute, known as DIF, as long as they remain in the states to which they are resettled.

The chosen states are all in central and southern Mexico, away from the borders with Guatemala and the United States.

The caravan was among two organized earlier this month, as migrants complained that Tapachula had essentially become an open air prison for asylum-seekers, who were not allowed to leave the impoverished border city.

Many of the migrants in the caravans are either Central American or Haitian.

The number of Haitian migrants attempting to enter the United States plummeted in October, but migration experts warned that potentially more than 100,000 Haitians and South American-born children of Haitians are currently in transit through Central America and Mexico.

Mexico has ratcheted up its migration enforcement and its asylum system in recent years, as the Biden and Trump administrations had both asked the country to take a more active role in managing the region's migration patterns.

Still, conditions in Central America and Haiti — and for Haitian refugees in South America — have worsened because of a combination of factors, including the coronavirus pandemic, and flows are expected to continue.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

Historic immigration reform included in House-passed spending bill

 BY RAFAEL BERNAL AND REBECCA BEITSCH

The social spending bill approved by the House Friday in a 220-213 vote includes the most extensive immigration reform package reviewed by Congress in 35 years, albeit in a much reduced version from what proponents originally sought.

If the provision is approved by the Senate as-is, the immigration measure in the bill would allow undocumented people present in the U.S. since before 2011 up to 10 years of work authorization, falling short of an initial goal to offer them a pathway to citizenship.

The provision approved by the House offers a sort of waiver to immigration laws, using a process known as parole to allow people to stay in the country for five years with the option to extend for another five years thereafter.

About 6.5 million people would stand to benefit from the measure directly, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

According to that analysis, about 3 million of those people would become eligible to springboard from the parole status to legal permanent residency, the first step toward citizenship.

“CHC remains focused on passing immigration reform. The Build Back Better Act includes long-term work permits and protections for seven million hardworking immigrant essential workers that will help prevent family separation, stabilize our workforce, boost our economy, and create jobs," said Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) Chair Raúl Ruiz (D-Calif.).

"The CHC urges the Senate to protect the work-permits and protections and we are hopeful they will use the Senate rules to build upon them and create an earned pathway to citizenship to further improve our nation’s economy," added Ruiz.

Still, the immigration provisions fall short of Democrats' initial goal of providing a pathway to citizenship for an estimated 11 million undocumented people living in the U.S.

Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) lamented that the package was ultimately reduced to protections through a decade of work authorization.

“While that is absolutely inadequate, we have to get that across the goal line. We have to. That would provide the ability for so many of these incredible people to be able to get to work every day without fear of retaliation, and to be able to live without fear of deportation. And in fact, for millions of them it would allow them the important step towards stabilizing their situation,” she told reporters Thursday.

“And hopefully at some point, getting them fully protected through a pathway to citizenship. It buys Congress more time, so that we can fulfill our obligation and ensure that we give them the path to citizenship that they deserve.”

The bill also includes visa recapture, preventing the loss of some 222,000 unused family-based visas and 157,000 employment-based visas that otherwise expired at the end of last fiscal year. The move will help retain immigration pathways for those abroad who often wait years to immigrate to the U.S.

The inclusion of immigration provisions has taken a secondary role in the political fight to craft President Biden's signature legislative package, as Democrats have publicly quarreled about the top-line pricing of the bill.

The immigration provisions, while a relatively small line item within the larger bill, are expected to raise deficits by around $111 billion over the next decade, according to the CBO analysis.

While the immigration debate was a minor issue through negotiations for the Build Back Better bill, as the spending proposal is known, it pitted Democrats and immigration advocates against each other behind closed doors.

Advocates often called out Democrats for showing a lack of interest in an issue that's personal for millions of U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in the country.

At the center of that friction was the debate over whether Democrats should push for a path to citizenship in the bill, or settle for parole — only a temporary respite from immigration enforcement for millions of immigrants.

Three House Democrats, Reps. Jesús García (Ill.), Adriano Espaillat (N.Y.) and Lou Correa (Calif.) became known as "the three amigos" for their threat to withhold their votes for the final bill unless immigration provisions were included.

The three later campaigned to include permanent residency rather than parole in the bill, but those efforts faltered as the CHC failed to coalesce behind their cause.

“This is a good first step forward that allows our constituents to breathe. This historic legislation includes work authorizations and protection from deportation for more than 7 million individuals," said the three lawmakers in a joint statement after the bill's passage.

"Make no mistake, while this is the most transformational policy our communities have seen in over three decades, much work remains in our efforts to ensure a pathway to citizenship," they added.

The core issue that protracted itself over weeks — and remains unresolved — was the Senate parliamentarian's advisory opinion on what could and could not be included in a reconciliation bill, which is limited to budgetary line items.

The House-passed bill will now go to the Senate under reconciliation rules in an effort to sidestep a Republican filibuster and pass the package with only Democratic support.

The parliamentarian, an unelected official who provides counsel on Senate rules, advised the first two Democratic immigration proposals were incompatible with reconciliation, warning they went beyond a budgetary impact and represented a substantial change in policy.

Those two proposals would have granted the possibility of legal permanent residency, also known as green cards, to millions of foreign nationals, including undocumented immigrants.

The first proposal was innovative in that it made green cards available to specific groups of undocumented immigrants and other foreign nationals, in this case so-called Dreamers, beneficiaries of the temporary protected status program, essential workers and agricultural workers.

The second proposal nixed by the parliamentarian revived a provision of immigration law that's been dormant since the Reagan administration, which allows Congress to change the registry date prohibiting certain immigrants from adjusting their status, essentially enacting a statute of limitations for long-tenured immigrants.

The parliamentarian's ruling against that proposal stunned the five Senate Democrats who led the way on immigration — Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Alex Padilla (Calif.), Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.) and Ben Ray Luján (N.M.) — because of the registry proposal's historical precedent.

A third proposal — the parole option included in the House bill — has yet to be presented to the parliamentarian.

Menéndez on Friday celebrated House passage of the bill, saing "it provides long-overdue legal protections for millions of undocumented immigrants that kept the country afloat during the pandemic."

 

"Now, the Senate will continue to fight for the broadest immigration relief possible. We cannot fully build back better without protecting the dignity of millions of people who are critical to our long-term economic recovery. This is their home, and it is time for the Senate to help them fulfill their American dream," added Menéndez.

Grassroots groups and García, Espaillat and Correa explicitly called for the House to send the registry proposal to the Senate, giving the five Senate Democrats a stronger negotiating position, but that view was overruled by Democratic leaders and advocacy groups closer to party politics.

“We should be trying to do the most we can, push the most we can — we shouldn't be negotiating against ourselves,” Correa previously told The Hill. 

While the House version's loophole could quell some of the tensions between Democrats and grassroots immigration advocates, a reversal from the parliamentarian could quickly reignite those flames.

Updated at 3:03 p.m.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

Fried v. Wynn Las Vegas

 An employer’s response to a third party’s unwelcome sexual advances toward an employee can independently create a hostile work environment.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

US citizens urged to leave Haiti

 BY RAFAEL BERNAL 

The State Department on Wednesday urged all U.S. citizens in Haiti to leave the country on commercial flights, amid deepening political strife and economic disarray.

"Widespread fuel shortages may limit essential services in an emergency, including access to banks, money transfers, urgent medical care, internet and telecommunications, and public and private transportation options," reads a warning from the State Department.

The statement added that the U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince "is unlikely to be able to assist U.S. citizens in Haiti with departure if commercial options become unavailable."

The warning to U.S. citizens comes as the Biden administration has expelled more than 8,500 Haitians from the United States to Haiti since September, without allowing them to claim asylum.

In August, the Biden administration also tripled the number of Haitian beneficiaries of Temporary Protected Status, raising to around 150,000 the number of Haitians who are allowed to work and live in the United States because of the ongoing crisis in their country.

Still, the warning for U.S. citizens to leave Haiti is the latest sign that the Biden administration is not confident conditions will improve in the short term in the Caribbean nation.

The Associated Press first reported the State Department's security alert, adding that it's unclear how many Americans live in Haiti.

The country's political instability was aggravated by the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse in July but had been brewing during Moïse's term in office, to the point where Moïse was essentially ruling by decree.

The political vacuum and lingering corruption among the country's officials have fostered an environment where criminal gangs run rampant, carrying out kidnappings and hijackings that further destabilize the country's economy.

According to the AP, Defense Minister Enold Joseph said authorities are investigating the disappearance of 30 fuel tankers while acknowledging the existence of a black market for gasoline.

The fuel shortage threatens transportation, medical care and even the country's water supply, which depends on generators, reported the AP.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

GOP strategy on spending bill: Make Dems take tough votes

 BY JORDAIN CARNEY

Republicans are planning their lines of attack against President Biden's spending bill as they gear up to try to water down the legislation and squeeze Democrats with tough votes. 

After months of being stuck on the sidelines as Democrats haggled over the legislation, Senate Republicans will soon get their chance to change the bill. 

Republicans are hoping to replicate some of their success from a budget fight earlier this year where they were able to secure several nonbinding changes but also gather fodder to use against Democrats in the 2022 midterms.

"We usually have buckets and there's kind of a rhyme or reason or methodology to our madness," said Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican. "There's a strategy to it, and particular issues that we want to get votes on." 

The House could vote on the social and climate spending bill as soon as next week, teeing it up for consideration in the Senate. Because Democrats are using arcane budget rules to bypass the threat of a GOP filibuster, they have to go through a chaotic floor process known as vote-a-rama. 

That process, which frequently goes all night, allows senators to force a vote on any change to the measure. It gives Republicans their best shot at influencing the bill, which they are all expected to oppose in the end, with many amendments only needing a simple majority to be added. That means if Republicans can peel off just one Democrat, while keeping their own caucus unified, they could get their idea into the legislation or water down a provision that they oppose. 

"There is a process on amendments, and you can be assured that we'll have a robust amendment process during the vote-a-rama," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters during a recent press conference. 

Republicans took a similar tack on a coronavirus relief bill earlier this year, where concerns that they could peel off Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on an unemployment amendment threw the bill into limbo for hours as Democrats tried to cut a deal with Manchin. 

Republicans could try to peel  off Manchin - who has pushed back on paid leave language, a nicotine tax and climate provisions - and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) as well as Democrats up for election next year.

"The best thing we can do if we want to change the bill, or derail it ... you've got to figure out a way you can make amendments attractive to Dems," Thune said. 

The Democrats' bill, while still being negotiated in the Senate, touches on a broad sweep of policy areas, including housing, child care, education, climate change, immigration and tax reform. 

No Republican is expected to vote for the legislation in the House or the Senate, with GOP lawmakers labeling it a "reckless tax and spending spree." 

Republicans have already had two early wins, with the Senate parliamentarian warning Democrats that two plans to provide a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants didn't comply with rules governing what can be passed under the budget process. Republican staffers made the argument to the Senate referee that the two plans didn't fall within the scope of reconciliation, though activists are now urging Democrats to ignore the guidance. 

As they await the bill, Republicans are launching symbolic attempts to slow down the legislation. McConnell and top GOP senators sent Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) a letter calling for both a Congressional Budget Office score, which analyzes the cost of a bill, and hearings.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), the top Republican on the Budget Committee, said that he would invite the research group behind the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which predicted that the Democratic bill could cost $4 trillion over a decade if all the spending and revenue provisions were made permanent, to testify. 

"Whether or not [Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie] Sanders [I-Vt.] allows me to do that as part of the committee, I will do that as a side event," he said. 

But Senate Democrats are expected to bring the bill, once it passes the House, directly to the floor, meaning Republicans' best shot is at making changes amid the vote-a-rama.

Graham pointed to three areas that would be prime for attempted GOP changes once the legislation is on the Senate floor: the electric vehicle tax credit, immigration and a plan to extend the child tax credit. 

"This reconciliation bill is a fraud. It's going to be pouring gasoline on the inflation problems we have in the country and it rewards special interests at the expense of the public. I take issue with both the process and the substance," Graham said.

Sen. Rick Scott (Fla.), who chairs the Senate GOP campaign arm, has also targeted a plan to lift the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap. House Democrats are looking at raising the deduction cap from $10,000 to $80,000 through 2030, while Senate Democrats are looking at leaving the $10,000 cap in place but exempting taxpayers with incomes between $400,000 and $550,000.

Scott accused Democrats of creating a "carve-out " and "huge tax breaks for their rich friends in liberal, high-tax states with a massive SALT cap repeal."

Republicans also got nonbinding amendments included in a budget resolution earlier this year that greenlit the spending bill, providing a potential map for GOP senators on what amendments could be prime for Democratic support. The nonbinding amendments Republicans were able to get into the budget resolution include proposals on opposing defunding the police, preserving the Hyde Amendment, hiring 100,000 police officers and nonbinding immigration language. 

Thune said he, Graham and GOP senators from key committees will vet the GOP amendments ahead of time, though he acknowledged that vote-a-rama can be a "wide open game" because any senator can force an amendment. 

"We try to figure out what the universe is as much as possible. We prioritize them," he said. "We have a way of figuring out what we want to get voted on."'

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

US citizens urged to leave Haiti

 BY RAFAEL BERNAL 

The State Department on Wednesday urged all U.S. citizens in Haiti to leave the country on commercial flights, amid deepening political strife and economic disarray.

"Widespread fuel shortages may limit essential services in an emergency, including access to banks, money transfers, urgent medical care, internet and telecommunications, and public and private transportation options," reads a warning from the State Department.

The statement added that the U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince "is unlikely to be able to assist U.S. citizens in Haiti with departure if commercial options become unavailable."

The warning to U.S. citizens comes as the Biden administration has expelled more than 8,500 Haitians from the United States to Haiti since September, without allowing them to claim asylum.

In August, the Biden administration also tripled the number of Haitian beneficiaries of Temporary Protected Status, raising to around 150,000 the number of Haitians who are allowed to work and live in the United States because of the ongoing crisis in their country.

Still, the warning for U.S. citizens to leave Haiti is the latest sign that the Biden administration is not confident conditions will improve in the short term in the Caribbean nation.

The Associated Press first reported the State Department's security alert, adding that it's unclear how many Americans live in Haiti.

The country's political instability was aggravated by the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse in July but had been brewing during Moïse's term in office, to the point where Moïse was essentially ruling by decree.

The political vacuum and lingering corruption among the country's officials have fostered an environment where criminal gangs run rampant, carrying out kidnappings and hijackings that further destabilize the country's economy.

According to the AP, Defense Minister Enold Joseph said authorities are investigating the disappearance of 30 fuel tankers while acknowledging the existence of a black market for gasoline.

The fuel shortage threatens transportation, medical care and even the country's water supply, which depends on generators, reported the AP.

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html

GOP strategy on spending bill: Make Dems take tough votes

 BY JORDAIN CARNEY

Republicans are planning their lines of attack against President Biden's spending bill as they gear up to try to water down the legislation and squeeze Democrats with tough votes. 

After months of being stuck on the sidelines as Democrats haggled over the legislation, Senate Republicans will soon get their chance to change the bill. 

Republicans are hoping to replicate some of their success from a budget fight earlier this year where they were able to secure several nonbinding changes but also gather fodder to use against Democrats in the 2022 midterms.

"We usually have buckets and there's kind of a rhyme or reason or methodology to our madness," said Sen. John Thune (S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican. "There's a strategy to it, and particular issues that we want to get votes on." 

The House could vote on the social and climate spending bill as soon as next week, teeing it up for consideration in the Senate. Because Democrats are using arcane budget rules to bypass the threat of a GOP filibuster, they have to go through a chaotic floor process known as vote-a-rama. 

That process, which frequently goes all night, allows senators to force a vote on any change to the measure. It gives Republicans their best shot at influencing the bill, which they are all expected to oppose in the end, with many amendments only needing a simple majority to be added. That means if Republicans can peel off just one Democrat, while keeping their own caucus unified, they could get their idea into the legislation or water down a provision that they oppose. 

"There is a process on amendments, and you can be assured that we'll have a robust amendment process during the vote-a-rama," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters during a recent press conference. 

Republicans took a similar tack on a coronavirus relief bill earlier this year, where concerns that they could peel off Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on an unemployment amendment threw the bill into limbo for hours as Democrats tried to cut a deal with Manchin. 

Republicans could try to peel  off Manchin - who has pushed back on paid leave language, a nicotine tax and climate provisions - and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) as well as Democrats up for election next year.

"The best thing we can do if we want to change the bill, or derail it ... you've got to figure out a way you can make amendments attractive to Dems," Thune said. 

The Democrats' bill, while still being negotiated in the Senate, touches on a broad sweep of policy areas, including housing, child care, education, climate change, immigration and tax reform. 

No Republican is expected to vote for the legislation in the House or the Senate, with GOP lawmakers labeling it a "reckless tax and spending spree." 

Republicans have already had two early wins, with the Senate parliamentarian warning Democrats that two plans to provide a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants didn't comply with rules governing what can be passed under the budget process. Republican staffers made the argument to the Senate referee that the two plans didn't fall within the scope of reconciliation, though activists are now urging Democrats to ignore the guidance. 

As they await the bill, Republicans are launching symbolic attempts to slow down the legislation. McConnell and top GOP senators sent Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) a letter calling for both a Congressional Budget Office score, which analyzes the cost of a bill, and hearings.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), the top Republican on the Budget Committee, said that he would invite the research group behind the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which predicted that the Democratic bill could cost $4 trillion over a decade if all the spending and revenue provisions were made permanent, to testify. 

"Whether or not [Senate Budget Committee Chairman Bernie] Sanders [I-Vt.] allows me to do that as part of the committee, I will do that as a side event," he said. 

But Senate Democrats are expected to bring the bill, once it passes the House, directly to the floor, meaning Republicans' best shot is at making changes amid the vote-a-rama.

Graham pointed to three areas that would be prime for attempted GOP changes once the legislation is on the Senate floor: the electric vehicle tax credit, immigration and a plan to extend the child tax credit. 

"This reconciliation bill is a fraud. It's going to be pouring gasoline on the inflation problems we have in the country and it rewards special interests at the expense of the public. I take issue with both the process and the substance," Graham said.

Sen. Rick Scott (Fla.), who chairs the Senate GOP campaign arm, has also targeted a plan to lift the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap. House Democrats are looking at raising the deduction cap from $10,000 to $80,000 through 2030, while Senate Democrats are looking at leaving the $10,000 cap in place but exempting taxpayers with incomes between $400,000 and $550,000.

Scott accused Democrats of creating a "carve-out " and "huge tax breaks for their rich friends in liberal, high-tax states with a massive SALT cap repeal."

Republicans also got nonbinding amendments included in a budget resolution earlier this year that greenlit the spending bill, providing a potential map for GOP senators on what amendments could be prime for Democratic support. The nonbinding amendments Republicans were able to get into the budget resolution include proposals on opposing defunding the police, preserving the Hyde Amendment, hiring 100,000 police officers and nonbinding immigration language. 

Thune said he, Graham and GOP senators from key committees will vet the GOP amendments ahead of time, though he acknowledged that vote-a-rama can be a "wide open game" because any senator can force an amendment. 

"We try to figure out what the universe is as much as possible. We prioritize them," he said. "We have a way of figuring out what we want to get voted on."

For more information contact us at http://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/index.html