This is our chance-action needed

That's what I've got from my congressman not a senator...and I should say he is right at some point.

Dear sir:

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 418, the Real ID Act
of 2005. I appreciate hearing from you.

H.R. 418, introduced by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI),
claims to increase national security by preventing illegal
immigrants from obtaining drivers licenses as a form of
identification. In fact, this bill contains many of the
contentious anti-immigrant provisions that delayed final
passage of the 9/11 Intelligence Reform Act during the 108th
Congress as well as other provisions that could harm the
environment and limit freedoms for Americans.

H.R. 418 would make it much harder for refugees fleeing
persecution to seek asylum in the United States. The bill
would also subject detained immigrants with less than five
years in the country to deportation without a hearing,
prohibit the acceptance of secure foreign identification
documents, and limit access to judicial review. Another
provision would make it easier to deport certain detained
aliens to nations where they are likely to face
interrogation under torture. These provisions were
ultimately stricken from the 9/11 Intelligence Reform Act
after the 9/11 Commission Co-Chairs urged their removal.

In addition, the Real ID Act would permit, and in some
cases require, the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive
any and all laws to build barriers and roads along the
nation's borders and surrounding areas. This language
allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to ignore all
federal environmental and labor regulations, state property
rights and even local zoning ordinances in order to speed
construction of any barriers he sees fit. The bill also
prohibits courts from reviewing any decision made under this
waiver authority.

The Real ID Act passed the House on February 10, 2005, by a
vote of 261 to 161. I voted against this bill because it
contains many provisions harmful to immigrants, while
providing no real improvement in national security. H.R.
418 is now awaiting consideration in the Senate.

I support stopping illegal immigration through stronger
border control, better employment verification, and efforts
to stop admission of criminal aliens and terrorists.
However, I also support limited and controlled legal
immigration. We are a country of immigrants, and I believe
it is important that those living legally within our borders
have access to basic consumer services.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I hope that you will
continue to do so in the future on issues that are important
to you.



Sincerely,


Tom Allen
Member of Congress
 
H.R. 418 is now awaiting consideration in the Senate.


Does anyone know when approximately this should get resolved in the Senate?

Also, how long does it usually take for it to become a active law? ( from the time it gets approved in the Senate )
 
2/17/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

The bill could stay in committee indefinitely, until someone decides to call it for a vote/debate.

It becomes law only after the President signs the bill.
 
Minsk said:
That's what I've got from my congressman not a senator...and I should say he is right at some point.

Dear sir:

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 418, the Real ID Act
of 2005. I appreciate hearing from you.

H.R. 418, introduced by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI),
claims to increase national security by preventing illegal
immigrants from obtaining drivers licenses as a form of
identification. In fact, this bill contains many of the
contentious anti-immigrant provisions that delayed final
passage of the 9/11 Intelligence Reform Act during the 108th
Congress as well as other provisions that could harm the
environment and limit freedoms for Americans.

H.R. 418 would make it much harder for refugees fleeing
persecution to seek asylum in the United States. The bill
would also subject detained immigrants with less than five
years in the country to deportation without a hearing,
prohibit the acceptance of secure foreign identification
documents, and limit access to judicial review. Another
provision would make it easier to deport certain detained
aliens to nations where they are likely to face
interrogation under torture. These provisions were
ultimately stricken from the 9/11 Intelligence Reform Act
after the 9/11 Commission Co-Chairs urged their removal.

In addition, the Real ID Act would permit, and in some
cases require, the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive
any and all laws to build barriers and roads along the
nation's borders and surrounding areas. This language
allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to ignore all
federal environmental and labor regulations, state property
rights and even local zoning ordinances in order to speed
construction of any barriers he sees fit. The bill also
prohibits courts from reviewing any decision made under this
waiver authority.

The Real ID Act passed the House on February 10, 2005, by a
vote of 261 to 161. I voted against this bill because it
contains many provisions harmful to immigrants, while
providing no real improvement in national security. H.R.
418 is now awaiting consideration in the Senate.

I support stopping illegal immigration through stronger
border control, better employment verification, and efforts
to stop admission of criminal aliens and terrorists.
However, I also support limited and controlled legal
immigration. We are a country of immigrants, and I believe
it is important that those living legally within our borders
have access to basic consumer services.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I hope that you will
continue to do so in the future on issues that are important
to you.



Sincerely,


Tom Allen
Member of Congress
Click to expand...
Well said
 
That's what I received today by mail, not an email.

United States Senate
Committee on
Homeland Security and Government Affairs

Dear Sir,

Thank u for contacting me regarding provisions in H.R. 418.I appreciate your taking time to do so.

I understand ur concerns regarding illegal immigration. Our nation simply cannot accomodate every individiual who wishes to immigrate here, and illigal immigaration is especially unfair to those people who are playing by the rules and patiantly staying in their home countries waiting for an immigant visa. In addition, it is imperative that our border security be enhanced to assist in the detection of terrorists and to interdict drug smugglers and other criminals. I assure u, I will continue to work to rectify this important problem we are facing.
H.R. 418 would establish new standards for driver's licenses in an attempt to address abuses of asylum laws. . The Bill passed in the House of Representative on February 2,2005, and is now pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee, on which I do not serve.I look forward to a continued discussion with my colleagues regarding ways to strengthen our national security.

Sincerely,
Susan Collins


They consider asylum laws abusive and this is the opinion of the Chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committe. Not a single word about cap's elimination.It's gonna be tough for us guys and every applicant for asylum in the future.
 
Minsk said:
That's what I received today by mail, not an email.

United States Senate
Committee on
Homeland Security and Government Affairs

Dear Sir,

Thank u for contacting me regarding provisions in H.R. 418.I appreciate your taking time to do so.

I understand ur concerns regarding illegal immigration. Our nation simply cannot accomodate every individiual who wishes to immigrate here, and illigal immigaration is especially unfair to those people who are playing by the rules and patiantly staying in their home countries waiting for an immigant visa. In addition, it is imperative that our border security be enhanced to assist in the detection of terrorists and to interdict drug smugglers and other criminals. I assure u, I will continue to work to rectify this important problem we are facing.
H.R. 418 would establish new standards for driver's licenses in an attempt to address abuses of asylum laws. . The Bill passed in the House of Representative on February 2,2005, and is now pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee, on which I do not serve.I look forward to a continued discussion with my colleagues regarding ways to strengthen our national security.

Sincerely,
Susan Collins


They consider asylum laws abusive and this is the opinion of the Chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committe. Not a single word about cap's elimination.It's gonna be tough for us guys and every applicant for asylum in the future.
Click to expand...

She's talking about the abuse of asylum law read "fake cases" that have made the whole asylum process a joke....
 
sound like they are not even thinking about the cap .. all what they are doing is to make our life harder and push this to law .. it is BUSH era
 
waitinglifetime said:
sound like they are not even thinking about the cap .. all what they are doing is to make our life harder and push this to law .. it is BUSH era
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Yes Bush can't wait to get up in the morning and find ways to make your life harder ... BTW Bush pressed for including the elemination of the cap on HR 418....The senate doesn't have to think about the cap it is already on the bill hopefully they would vote on it soon
 
is that mean if the senate voted for the bill and become a law .. there will be no cap .. and will get our GC's in a year or 2 ..

I read part of the bill I can't see any about cap's elimination .. did anyone read the cap's elimination in the bill ?
 
waitinglifetime said:
is that mean if the senate voted for the bill and become a law .. there will be no cap .. and will get our GC's in a year or 2 ..

I read part of the bill I can't see any about cap's elimination .. did anyone read the cap's elimination in the bill ?
Click to expand...

It's in there. There were some links posted before, do a search... I don't know about getting the GC in a year or two but for sure not in 5+ years.
 
waitinglifetime said:
when do you this the senate will vote on this bill ??
Click to expand...

Nobody knows for sure when But sure hope will be soon All we can do right now is send faxes to the senators....
 
faxed to California senators

I faxed to the two California senators for supporting the Real ID act and I did emphasize that all I care is the removal of the ridiculous 10,000 CAP! Hope the senators got my point!!
 
Real Faces Behind the REAL ID Act (H.R. 418)

Real Faces Behind the REAL ID Act (H.R. 418)
(As passed the House on 2/10/05)
March 17, 2005
This document was compiled by the National Immigration Forum, Human Rights First, National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium, American Immigration Lawyers Association, Tahirih Justice Center, National Immigration Law Center, National Council of La Raza, and Amnesty International.
It consists of two sections: short explanations of how the law could be applied if passed, and examples of how the various provisions could affect immigrants, refugees, and U.S. citizens (often based on actual cases).
Contact Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia at ssivaprasad@immigrationforum.org, or any of the contributing organizations, with questions.



CONSEQUENCES OF REAL ID
Insurmountable Hurdles for Asylum-Seekers and Others (Section 101)
This legislation would encourage the denial of asylum or other protection to:
• A Soviet Jew who was beaten and robbed by police, if he can’t prove that prejudice was his persecutors’ primary motive.
• A Tibetan woman who was raped by government officials, and exhibited a detached affect during her asylum hearing when retelling the story.
• A Senegalese woman who fled certain genital mutilation, if she cannot obtain a document proving that the operation was about to occur.
• A Syrian asylum-seeker who tells the immigration inspector that she fears for her life if returned, but who tells the asylum officer that she fears for her life and her children’s lives if returned.
• A battered immigrant woman who testified that she came to the United States in May 2002 when in fact her documents show she entered in late April 2002.

The legislation broadly extends the same harsh evidentiary and credibility requirements that it imposes on asylum-seekers to other applications for relief, including withholding of removal and cancellation of removal. It makes a judge’s denial of relief based on the lack of documentary evidence immune from judicial reversal, and likewise makes discretionary judgments immune from judicial review.
“Above the Law” Status to Expedite Border Fence Construction (Section 102)
This legislation gives the Secretary of DHS complete authority to:
• Circumvent environmental protection laws that would otherwise have to be satisfied before constructing a major barrier on the border.
• Seize private property and Native American land in order to construct a border fence.

1
• Permit construction companies to violate wage and hour, hiring, and occupational safety laws when they work on the fence. Companies could force workers to labor without safety equipment, and would be exempt from paying minimum wage or even workmen’s compensation/other restitution if something goes wrong.
• These construction companies could even hire undocumented immigrants to get the job done, as immigration laws could also be waived under this broad power!
• The legislation even goes so far as to say that DHS’ decisions to waive these laws are unreviewable—granting the secretary supreme authority to circumvent any laws in a way that raises serious Constitutional concerns.

Denial of Entry, Deportation for First Amendment-Protected Activity (Sections 103 and 104)
This legislation would deny entry or asylum to, or permit the deportation of:
• A legal permanent resident who donates online to a Tsunami relief fund that is a subsidiary of an organization in a Tamil Tiger-controlled region of Sri Lanka. The green card holder would have to show “clear and convincing evidence” that she did not know the associations of the charity she chose to donate to, and it’s very hard to prove the absence of knowledge.
• A student who has done Arab-Israeli conflict resolution work in Gaza, because part of that work included food and clothing donations to various groups there.
• A person who urged support of the Northern Alliance against the Taliban, who supported the Contras in Nicaragua, or who supported the African National Congress before it came to power in South Africa—indeed anyone who ever wrote in defense of the use of force for national liberation, including our Founding Fathers.
• A spouse or child of anyone in the above situations (unless the association happened over 5 years ago).

Shotgun Deportations and Denial of Constitutional Rights (Section 105)
This legislation would deny:
• Federal court review for a Haitian asylum-seeker who enters the US without papers, is detained and referred to an asylum officer for a credible fear interview, and issued a negative credibility finding by the immigration judge.
• A single father of three from Iceland the opportunity to challenge his green card denial, which was based on subjective and legal errors by the judge, by restricting federal court review to pure questions of law and Constitutional claims.
• A Guatemalan woman seeking asylum the right to remain in the U.S. until her case is finally decided, by eliminating stays of removal—sending her back to her persecutors.

Outrageous Authority Granted Bounty Hunters; Pricing Liberty Out of Most Immigrants’ Reach (Sections 106, 107, and 108)

This legislation would allow: 2

• A bail bondsman/bounty hunter to round up an immigrant he thinks could be a flight risk—even if the immigrant is not in violation of his bond. This is currently known as “kidnapping” and is illegal.
• Bail bondsmen unprecedented access to individuals’ personal information.
• Liberty to be priced out of most immigrants’ reach (requires a $10,000 minimum bond and no release on own recognizance for immigrants in deportation proceedings).

Complicated, Restrictive, and Expensive Driver’s License Requirements (Title II)
This legislation would deny driver’s licenses to:
• A U.S. citizen whose utility company won’t verify to the DMV employee that they issued a specific bill on a specific date.
• U.S. “nationals” who are not citizens (e.g. American Samoans, Swain’s Islanders).
• Marshall Islanders.
• American Indians born in Canada.
• An immigrant with temporary protected status whose work authorization was extended, but who hasn’t yet received the paperwork from USCIS.
• A naturalized U.S. citizen whose “immigration status” hasn’t yet been updated in the notoriously out of date USCIS computer system.
• A Central American refugee who applied for relief under NACARA decades ago, but hasn’t yet been processed for her green card and has no updated “proof” of her pending status.
• Applicants for non-immigrant visas already in the United States, including victims of trafficking (T visa) and victims of crime (U visa).
• People who have been “paroled” (a technical immigration term that permits entry) into the United States (i.e. Cuban parolees before they apply for Cuban adjustment), as well as people who have been granted withholding of removal or other forms of humanitarian relief.
• Undocumented immigrants in the states that to date allow people to get driver’s licenses regardless of immigration status, because these states believe it enhances public safety to have all drivers licensed.

It would:
• Put more unlicensed, untrained, and uninsured drivers on our nation’s roads (not only undocumented immigrants, but legal immigrants and temporary visitors who will have a hard time getting a license).
• Undermine the usefulness of DMV databases that are regularly used by law enforcement.
• Turn a “day at the DMV” into “weeks waiting for your license” as ordinary U.S. citizens would have to wait for document-issuing agencies (like utilities, passport agencies, and the like) to verify all of their individual documents.
• Expect untrained and unqualified DMV clerks to interpret complex questions related to immigration status.
• Legislate over the just-passed intelligence reform law that included document integrity and standardization provisions endorsed by the 9/11 Commission
 
The Real Id Act (h.r. 418):

THE REAL ID ACT (H.R. 418):
A Real Threat to Due Process and Civil Liberties

Issue: Many of the troubling anti-immigrant provisions that were wisely stripped from the intelligence reform bill at the end of last year have resurfaced as part of the REAL ID Act (H.R. 418). None of the provisions in this legislation will make us safer. To the contrary, if enacted, these provisions will undermine our security while further marginalizing our moral standing in the international community.
Despite resounding opposition from across the political spectrum by conservative organizations, faith-based organizations, state governments, human rights groups, immigrant rights groups, environmental organizations, national security experts, and international entities, the House of Representatives passed this misguided measure by a 100-vote margin. The ultimate fate of the bill now rests with the Senate and the White House.
Background: Under intense pressure from the bill’s chief sponsor, Representative Sensenbrenner (R-WI), House leadership agreed to by-pass regular order and bring H.R. 418 directly to the House floor for a vote. As a result, none of the provisions in the bill was ever subject to hearings or debate. Legislators were thereby deprived of the opportunity to hear and consider expert testimony describing the myriad concerns raised by the bill. Equally troubling was the dubious procedural maneuvering that foreclosed all opportunity for the bill’s opponents to offer amendments countering provisions that were added at the eleventh hour pursuant to a manager’s amendment.
This renewed assault on the rights of noncitizens includes, among others, the following deeply troubling provisions:
• Restrictions on Asylum: H.R. 418 changes the standards and evidentiary burdens governing asylum applications, applications for withholding of removal, and other discretionary grants of relief from removal. Specifically, it would deny asylum to legitimate applicants who cannot prove the central motive of their persecutor, who cannot produce corroborating evidence of their account, who provide inconsistent testimony on minor facts irrelevant to their claim, or whose demeanor is inconsistent with an immigration judge’s preconceived expectations. Asylum applicants already undergo more extensive security checks than any other foreign nationals who come to this country. Terrorists and others who pose a danger to our security already are ineligible for asylum. While H.R. 418 would do nothing to make us safer, it would clearly preclude legitimate asylum seekers from obtaining relief.
• Expansion of Grounds of Inadmissibility and Removal: The REAL ID Act amends the PATRIOT Act by expanding the terrorism-related grounds of inadmissibility and removal. It would permit the deportation of noncitizens who are members of or support any political organization that has used, or threatened to use, violence, even if the organization has not been designated as a “foreign terrorist organization.” This provision is unnecessary and likely unconstitutional. By imposing guilt by association, the


REAL ID Act confounds our basic understanding of liberty and could subject long-term, lawful residents to deportation for activity that was lawful when undertaken.
• Restrictions on Habeas Review and Elimination of Temporary Stays: The REAL ID Act significantly expands the restrictions on judicial review imposed by the 1996 laws. Indeed, the bill restricts for the first time since the Civil War all judicial review, including habeas review, for many individuals with legitimate challenges to their orders of detention or deportation. It also effectively eliminates the power of a federal court to temporarily stay a removal order while appeal of the order is pending before the court. This provision would have the absurd and tragic result of sending asylum seekers back to countries where they may be killed or persecuted, even though they would later win their cases once the court had the opportunity to review their claim.
• Driver’s Licenses Restrictions for Noncitizens: The REAL ID Act repeals the carefully considered driver’s license provisions enacted just months ago as part of the intelligence reform legislation. It replaces the federal-state consultative approach with federally mandated restrictions on noncitizens’ access to driver’s licenses. Such a linkage would undermine, not enhance, national security by pushing people deeper into the shadows and fueling a black market in false documents. Moreover, it would severely diminish the law enforcement utility of Department of Motor Vehicles databases by reducing, rather than expanding, government data about individuals in this country.
• Expansion of Bail Bondsmen Authority Over Noncitizens: These provisions provide unprecedented authority to bail bondsmen to “pursue, apprehend, detain and surrender” immigrants in removal proceedings. They also provide bail bondsmen unfettered access to all information the government possesses about a noncitizen subject to bonding. In addition, this provision would set the minimum bond amount at $10,000 and prohibit the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from releasing on recognizance anyone placed in proceedings. This abdication of enforcement responsibility to the private sector raises serious due process and civil rights concerns.
• Waiver of All Laws Related to Construction of Fences at Borders: This provision amends IIRAIRA to provide the Secretary of Homeland Security with unprecedented authority to waive all federal, state, and local laws the Secretary deems necessary, in his sole and absolute discretion, to expedite construction of security fences and barriers at the U.S.-Mexico and U.S.-Canada borders. It also prohibits all judicial, agency, administrative, or other review of any decision made by the Secretary under this section. This section will serve only to increase border deaths, waste resources, and obscure the need for meaningful reform of our immigration laws.

AILA’s Position: AILA categorically opposes the anti-liberty and anti-security provisions in H.R. 418 and calls on the Senate and the Administration to prevent these measures from being enacted. H.R. 418 is nothing but a dangerous distraction from the bi-partisan comprehensive immigration reform initiative embraced by President Bush and Members from both Chambers of Congress.
 
I just sent some emails to my senators, having been doing this a lot recently, just to let them know my concern, or just trying to annoy them :)

Anyone know when senate is going to vote on this one?
 
amtbooks said:
I just sent some emails to my senators, having been doing this a lot recently, just to let them know my concern, or just trying to annoy them :)

Anyone know when senate is going to vote on this one?
Click to expand...
I'm hoping HR 1268 (HR418) will get some action Monday, Apr 4....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top