Obama calls on Congress to work on immigration reform

Washington (News Today) - President Obama on Wednesday called on Congress to work on comprehensive immigration reform this year, saying it would be the best way to fix the nation's broken immigration system.

Speaking at a Cinco de Mayo celebration at the White House, Obama again criticized the recently enacted Arizona immigration law as the wrong approach.

"The answer isn't to undermine fundamental principles that define us as a nation," Obama said to applause. He called instead for "common-sense comprehensive immigration reform."

In an apparent effort to clarify his comment last week that the political climate might be too difficult to take up immigration reform, Obama said Congress should begin work now on the issue.

"I was pleased to see a strong proposal for comprehensive reform presented in the Senate last week, and I was pleased it was based on a bipartisan framework," Obama said. "I want to begin work this year. And I want Democrats and Republicans to work with me."

Without a comprehensive federal approach, the president said, state and local authorities would continue to take "misconceived" steps at addressing the illegal immigration problem, such as the recently enacted Arizona law that allows police to ask anyone for proof of legal U.S. residency.

Critics say the law will lead to racial profiling, while supporters say it involves no racial profiling and is needed to crack down on increasing crime involving illegal immigrants.

In Arizona, the city councils of Tucson and Flagstaff have decided to file a lawsuit against the new immigration law. Members of the Phoenix Suns basketball team, meanwhile, planned to wear jerseys in Wednesday night's playoff game that say "Los Suns" as a tribute to the state's Latino community, Suns' managing partner Robert Sarver said in a statement.

Obama made a reference to the basketball team's gesture, saying that some attending the White House celebration probably wanted to watch the game between the San Antonio Spurs and "Los Suns."

"Make no mistake -- our immigration system is broken" and people were right to be frustrated, including those in border states such as Arizona, Obama said.

However, "we can't start singling out people depending on who they look like or how they talk or how they dress," he said, adding he has asked for a review of the Arizona law.

Comprehensive immigration reform would include continuing government efforts to secure borders from illegal immigrants as well as steps to crack down on businesses employing illegal immigrants, Obama said.

In addition, he said, those living illegally in the United States would have to pay a penalty and any taxes they owe, learn English, "make themselves right with the law" and then start the process of gaining legal citizenship.

Getting congressional approval for a bill would be tough, he said.

"We need bipartisan support, but it can be done and it needs to be done."

Source : CNN

Read More

Obama was top recipient of BP-related dollars in 2008

Washington (News Today) - As petroleum giant BP comes under congressional scrutiny as its ruptured oil rig pumps thousands of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, its political contributions are being scrutinized, too.

The top recipient of BP-related donations during the 2008 presidential election was Barack Obama, who collected $71,000, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

When questioned about the donations Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs made a point of noting that the money came from employees and not the company itself.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt added that Obama wasn't tied to big oil companies.

"This claim lacks one thing: credibility," LaBolt said in a statement. "President Obama didn't accept a dime from corporate PACs or federal lobbyists during his presidential campaign. He raised $750 million from nearly 4 million Americans. And since he became President, he rolled back tax breaks and giveaways for the oil and gas industry, spearheaded a G20 agreement to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and made the largest investment in American history in clean energy incentives."

BP employees gave more than $3 million in campaign contributions during the past decade and almost $110,000 in 2010.

Fifty-seven percent of BP's contributions went to Republicans, while 43 percent went to Democrats.

BP America President Lamar McKay has been asked to appear next week to discuss the oil spill before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, whose members received the largest share of BP's campaign contributions over the last two election cycles, the Center for Responsive Politics notes.

"In 2009, individuals and political action committees associated with BP donated $16,000 to members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee," the center found.

The center says five of the top 10 recipients of BP dollars in the House sit on that committee: John Dingell, D-Michigan; Joe Barton, R-Texas; Ralph Hall, R-Texas; Roy Blunt, R-Missouri; and Fred Upton, R-Michigan.

"All have received upward of $13,000 from BP-related individuals and political action committees during the past two decades," according to the Center for Responsive Politics. "Dingell, the second most favored recipient of BP money in the House, has received $31,000."

Congress is demanding answers in its investigation of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and the BP executives likely to be grilled in the weeks ahead are no strangers to the ways of Washington.

"If BP faces heavy federal scrutiny, it's well-positioned to fight back: The London-based company has consistently spent top dollar to influence legislative and regulatory activity in Washington, D.C.," according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The company spent almost $16 million lobbying Congress in 2009 and more than $3.5 million this year, the center found.

BP's ruptured undersea well off Louisiana continues to spew about 210,000 gallons -- or 5,000 barrels -- of crude a day into the Gulf of Mexico. Efforts to corral the rapidly growing spill have been unsuccessful.

There is a sheen of oil up to 60 miles across in the Gulf, threatening the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama as well as the Florida Panhandle, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The overall area affected by the spill, CNN estimates, is almost as large as the state of Delaware.

Source : CNN

Read More

Retiring congressman: 'Frankly, I am bone tired'

Washington (News Today) - House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, a senior member of the congressional Democratic leadership, announced Wednesday that he is not seeking re-election this November.

Obey, 71, represents Wisconsin's 7th Congressional District. He was the youngest member of Congress when he was elected to his first of 21 terms in 1969.

He is the fourth-longest-serving House member, serving behind Democratic Reps. John Dingell and John Conyers, both of Michigan, and Florida Republican Rep. Bill Young.

"I think that along the way I've made a difference in the district and the state that I represent, and for the country. But there is a time to stay and a time to go, and this is my time to go," Obey said in announcing his decision.

"Frankly, I hate to do it. There is so much that needs to be done. But even more frankly, I am bone tired," he said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi praised Obey as a "transformational figure in the Congress."

"He is a visionary for a better life for the American people and a legislative genius: he has an ability to see around corners, anticipate challenges and opportunities and sustain a fight on behalf of what is right. For nearly a half century, he's been an indefatigable reformer," she said.

Obey said he considered retiring after the 2000 election, but he said he became so angered by the policies of the Bush administration "that I decided to stick around as long as they were here."

He also said that when he was asked in the past if he was contemplating retirement, he would tell reporters he didn't want to retire until Congress passed health care reform.

"Well, now it has, and I can leave with the knowledge that thanks to Speaker Pelosi and President Obama and so many others, we got the job done. I haven't done all of the big things that I wanted to do when I started out, but I've done all of the big things that I'm likely to do," he said.

Obey won the 2008 election with 61 percent of the vote.

This term, he was expected to face Republican challenger Sean Duffy, the district attorney of Ashland County. Earlier this year, Time magazine named Duffy as one of 10 GOP contenders capable of providing a Scott Brown-like upset, referring to the Republican's surprise win in the Massachusetts Senate election.

Duffy also appeared on the sixth season of MTV's "The Real World."

The National Republican Congressional Committee issued a statement saying Obey was facing "the race of his life."

"That is why it is understandable that the architect of President Obama's failed stimulus plan has decided to call it quits. It is ironic that a congressman who became infamously known for his short temper and angry tirades on the House floor, is going out with such a whimper," NRCC communications director Ken Spain said in a statement.

The nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report had characterized the district as "leaning Democratic."

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee praised Obey as a "tireless voice for progress on behalf of his constituents in Wisconsin and middle class families across America" and disputed the notion that his job was at risk.

"His success in writing a new code of ethics for the House of Representatives and ensuring passage of our historic health insurance reforms will stand as Chairman Obey's proud legacy," DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen said in a statement.

"Chairman Obey would have won re-election again had he run. We are confident that a Democrat who shares Chairman Obey's commitment to making progress for Wisconsin's middle class families will succeed him as the next Representative of Wisconsin's 7th Congressional District."

Obey also expressed confidence that he would have held on to his seat.

"Let me put it this way -- I have won 25 elections," Obey said. "Does anybody really think I don't know how to win another one? Or, for that matter, has anyone ever seen me walk away from a fight in my life?"

"The fact is there isn't a chance of a snowball in Hades of that progressive congressional district electing someone who is a poor imitation of George Bush's policies on a bad day," Obey added to applause.

Obey said he believes the job of a good politician is to be "used up" fighting for causes one believes in, and then stepping aside to let someone else carry on the battle.

"Well today folks, I feel used up," he said.

Obey said he wasn't sure what he planned to do next, but joked, "All I do know is that there has to be more to life than explaining the ridiculous accountability-destroying rules of the United States Senate to confused and angry and frustrated constituents."

Source : CNN

Read More

High court rules cross doesn't violate separation of church and state

Washington (News Terupdate) - The Supreme Court narrowly ruled Wednesday that a white cross, erected as a war memorial and sitting on national parkland in the Mojave Desert, does not violate the constitutional separation of church and state.

The 5-4 conservative majority said Congress acted properly when it tried to transfer land around the Mojave Memorial Cross to veterans groups, an effort to eliminate any Establishment Clause violation. The land then would have been declared a national memorial. A federal appeals panel had blocked that land swap.

"It is reasonable to interpret the congressional designation as giving recognition to the historical meaning that the cross had attained," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote. "The Constitution does not oblige government to avoid any public acknowledgment of religion's role in society."

But even among the conservatives who voted to allow the cross to stand, there was strong disagreement about how similar disputes should be settled, an indication of the contentious nature of church-and-state cases.

At issue before the justices was whether the display violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

More specifically, can one individual who protests the cross have legal standing to take his case to court and prevail? And do congressional efforts to minimize the appearance of a constitutional violation carry any weight?

The 6-foot Latin cross was first erected in 1934 by a local Veterans of Foreign Wars unit in a remote part of the California desert to honor war dead. It has been rebuilt several times over the years, and Easter services take place on the site annually.

The land now is part of the Mojave National Preserve, a unit of the National Park Service, encompassing 1.6 million acres, or 2,500 square miles.

A former Park Service employee brought suit, saying such symbols represent government endorsement of the Christian faith. A federal appeals court ultimately agreed, and rejected a move by Congress in 2003 to transfer the tiny portion of land where the cross sits back to the VFW, as a privately held national memorial. The area in question is a prominent outcropping known as Sunrise Rock.

Kennedy said the cross represents more than just a religion, echoing the views of the VFW.

"Here one Latin cross in the desert evokes far more than religion," he wrote. "It evokes thousands of small crosses in foreign fields marking the graves of Americans who fell in battles, battles whose tragedies are compounded if the fallen are forgotten."

The court sent the case back to the lower federal courts to resolve, and said the man who brought the suit, Frank Buono, could continue his legal fight over how the future land transfer is handled. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas said they would go further and end all litigation of the land transfer.

The appeals court noted that the land transfer effort singled out the VFW for special treatment and that officials had rejected a proposal to erect a nearby Buddhist stupa, or shrine. Jewish and Muslim veterans groups in the U.S. say the Mojave Cross symbolizes the sacrifice of Christian veterans, excluding other faiths.

In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens -- who is retiring at the end of the term in June -- said the land transfer does not remedy the constitutional concerns.

"Such measures would not completely end the government endorsement of this cross," he wrote, "as the land would have been transferred in a manner favoring the cross and the cross would remain designated as a national memorial."

As the only war veteran on the court, Stevens, who served in World War II as an intelligence officer, added, "I certainly agree that the nation should memorialize the service of those who fought and died in World War I, but it cannot lawfully do so by continued endorsement of a starkly sectarian message."

The American Civil Liberties Union is representing Buono. Attorney Peter Eliasberg told the court "the government had favored one party to come on, contrary to the government's own regulations, and erect a permanent symbol, while not allowing others."

The case is Salazar v. Buono (08-472).

Source : CNN

Read More

Black farmers call on Congress to pay racial bias settlement

(News Terupdate) - African-American farmers hoping for government settlement money in a racial bias case met with lawmakers Wednesday and called on Congress to come up with a way to fund the $1 billion deal.

Litigation known as the Pigford Case established a longstanding pattern of discrimination at the U.S. Agriculture Department against African-American farmers who had applied for farm loans and support from federal programs.

Under the terms of an involved process overseen by a federal judge and dating to 1999, qualified farmers could receive $50,000 each to settle claims of racial bias. In addition, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has said those farmers may pursue a claim for actual damages from the bias and potentially receive up to $250,000.

Ralph Paige, executive director of the Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund, said Wednesday that he believed that Congress was "very close" to coming up with a way to pay the settlement, which covers as many as 80,000 African-American farmers.

"These farmers have suffered much, much too long, and it's time that this thing get behind us. We can settle Pigford once and for all and send a clear message to the country that we are on the right track as a nation," Paige said at news conference.

"We're talking about much more than the money. We are talking about remedying past discrimination," Paige said.

A March 31 deadline to appropriate the funds has passed, and farmers now may withdraw from the settlement and pursue independent litigation against the government. Congress now has a target date of the end of May to come up with a plan.

"We spend a billion dollars on a jet to go bomb somebody. We're talking about a billion dollars to help feed our country, and I just don't see why Congress and the president can't go ahead and find [the funds]. It is an emergency," said Gary Grant, with the Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association.

Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-North Carolina, said there is a "total commitment" from President Obama and the majority party in the House and Senate to make sure the settlement is taken care of. Butterfield represents his state's First Congressional District, which is home to Timothy Pigford, who filed the class-action lawsuit more than a decade ago.

Butterfield said lawmakers need to work out how to pay for the settlement under the PAYGO rule, meaning Congress must balance any increased spending with equal savings elsewhere. The other option would be to designate the settlement as an emergency, which would be exempt from PAYGO.

Lawmakers are looking for an appropriate piece of legislation in which to include the settlement to avoid adding to the deficit, Butterfield said.

"If we cannot find the appropriate vehicle, then I would certainly support declaring this settlement as a national emergency and adding it to the next supplemental that may be on the House floor," he said.

Farmers have until May 31 to withdraw from the pending class-action settlement and pursue an independent claim against the government if they feel their chances would be better for a payout. If they choose to stay in the class, they will wait as a group to apply for the promised monetary damages.

Vilsack has said there's no question the damages are due for African-American farmers. In a statement last week, he said, "I have met with and talked to key stakeholders and members of Congress reiterating the administration's ongoing efforts to close this chapter in the history of the department."

Source : CNN

Read More

Latino lawmakers urge veto of Arizona immigration law

Washington (News Terupdate) - Latino members of Congress Tuesday called on Arizona's governor to kill a state bill that would require police to determine whether people are in the United States legally, arguing that it unconstitutionally authorizes discrimination.

"When you institutionalize a law like this one, you are targeting and discriminating at a wholesale level against a group of people," Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Arizona, told reporters. Grijalva and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, the chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said Republican Gov. Jan Brewer should veto the measure, which the state Senate approved Monday.

The bill would require immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and require police to question people if there's reason to suspect they're in the United States illegally. It also targets those who hire illegal immigrant day laborers or knowingly transport them.

Brewer, a Republican, has yet to take a public stance on the bill.

Grijalva, whose congressional district runs from the Mexican border to the outskirts of Phoenix, said the legislation "is not just mean-spirited, it is directed at a specific population." Gutierrez, D-Illinois, said the measure infringes on the federal government's authority over immigration laws as well as being discriminatory.

"I'm Puerto Rican. I was born in Chicago, and my family has been U.S. citizens for generations," Gutierrez said. "But look at my face, listen to my voice. I'd probably get picked up in Arizona and questioned. Is that what we want in America?"

Currently, officers can check someone's immigration status if the person is suspected in another crime. Critics argue the new law would foster racial profiling, saying that most police officers don't have enough training to look past race while investigating a person's legal status.

The bill is considered to be among the toughest immigration measures in the nation. Supporters say the measure is needed to fill a void left by the federal government's failure to enforce its immigration laws. Its leading sponsor, state Sen. Russell Pearce, said, "Illegal is not a race, it's a crime."

"We're going to take the handcuffs off of law enforcement. We're going to put them on the bad guy," Pearce, a Republican, told CNN.

"You know, this is amazing to me. We trust officers, we put guns on them, they make life and death decisions every day," he added. "They investigate capital crimes, they investigate sophisticated crimes, but we're afraid they're going to pick up the phone and call ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement]."

The tough rhetoric has angered immigration advocates, such as Isabel Garcia, an Arizona legal defender, who says the legislation "legalizes racial profiling."

"I think this bill represents the most dangerous precedent in this country, violating all of our due process rights," she told CNN. "We have not seen this kind of legislation since the Jim Crow laws. And targeting our communities, it is the single ... largest attack on our communities."

The state Senate's Democratic leadership slammed Monday's vote, saying the bill doesn't truly address Arizona's real immigration problems.

Senate Bill 1070 "is exactly why the federal government must act on immigration reform," said Democratic leader Jorge Luis Garcia in a written statement. "We cannot have states creating a jigsaw puzzle of immigration laws. This bill opens the doors to racial profiling with the provision that allows an officer to ask for citizenship papers from someone who only looks illegal."

The bill is an unfunded mandate that is "turning police officers into ICE agents and opening departments to lawsuits allowed by this bill," said Sen. Rebecca Rios.

Rios was referring to a provision in the bill that allows residents to sue their local governments if they feel the law isn't being enforced effectively.

Gutierrez is a leading supporter of a proposed overhaul of U.S. immigration laws, and said the Arizona issue shows why an overhaul is necessary. He urged President Obama to "put his back into the push" and to let Arizona know that federal law trumps state legislation on the issue.

Source : CNN

Read More