Motley Moose – Archive

So, there’s this thing – #GivingTuesday, to follow Black Friday & Cyber Monday, where people (supposedly) were all being self-indulgent. I like it not only because I’m raising money for Austin Children’s Services, but it seems to balance things out. Let me tell you why you should give to Austin Children’s Services.

I’m training for a half-marathon in February with a group whose charity is ACS. Here’s what they say about themselves:

Our Mission

Austin Children’s Services protects and heals children, young adults and families in need.

Who We Are

At Austin Children’s Services we believe that every child and young adult in our community deserves to feel safe and to receive nurturing care in order to grow into happy, responsible and fulfilled adults. Our goal is to end child abuse and neglect; to create a community and a world that has no need of a shelter for abused or neglected children.

For the first 25 years, we worked toward achieving that vision by providing emergency shelter for children that had been removed from their homes because of abuse and neglect. Today, we embrace a broader continuum of services to address the needs of children and their families. Our programs include Austin Children’s Shelter residential care (Emergency Shelter, Transitional Living Program, Teen Parent Program and Respite Care), Foster in Austin, Care Academy child development and family support center and a child abuse prevention program through Strong Start.

We are:

A social service provider focused on protecting and healing children, young adults and families.

A founding partner with SafePlace in the LIFT Alliance, a partnership of victim/survivor-centered non-profit agencies responding to and preventing child, domestic, and sexual abuse.

And we are committed to individual and collective action at a community, statewide and national level.

This time of year, thinking about kids who face the kind of situations that call for a place like the Children’s Shelter is pretty hard. Here is one of their success stories, to tell you what they do:

Building Trust and Confidence

Adriana came to the Austin Children’s Shelter as a 17-year-old, pregnant and with a toddler in tow. She and her siblings had been taken into the care of the State because of ongoing neglect in their home. From her life thus far Adriana had learned to survive by trusting no one – the adults in her life couldn’t be trusted to care for her – much less help her learn to care for her children. One of our most important goals has been to help this teenager grow in her confidence as a mother and to do so has required that a bond of trust be built between Adriana and ACS Youth Care Workers.

Adriana brought a lifetime of mistrust and shattered hopes with her when she came to the Shelter. She consistently avoided personal interactions and became defensive when offered support of any kind. In some ways, she was like a phantom in the house, drifting in and straight to her room. When Adriana’s second child was born, the added stress became immediately evident. She would swing the full spectrum of emotions; from trying to do everything on her own to becoming overwhelmed and wanting the shelter youth care workers to care for her children full time.

“Adriana’s circumstance led to an opportunity for us to step in and teach her how to juggle the responsibilities of motherhood, school and life as a teen,” said her ACS Case Manager Amanda Moreno. For several months, the youth care workers spent one-on-one time with Adriana, teaching basic positive child care and guiding her day to day. Together, they established boundaries and expectations regarding care for her children and created daily routines that fostered a sense of normalcy, moments of calm, and nurturing interactions.

Helping Adriana see her way through a stressful time, and helping her set the rules for her own children, slowly built her trust of staff while also building confidence in her abilities as a mother. Recently, Adriana established a time out structure for her two-year-old child, wrote it on the white board, and asked staff to follow it. This simple act demonstrated her new confidence in her own capabilities as a mom and her belief in cottage staff as her partners.

Now, having learned to trust and to manage her time, she is often seen around the cottage giggling with the other mothers, playing on the floor with her daughters, or reading a book for her toddler while rocking her infant. Her youth care workers continue to be there for her as a sounding board and to provide advice and support.

please give to Austin Children’s Services, any amount is welcome – my goal is $750 & I’m nowhere near it, so no matter the amount, it’ll make a big difference

And because it’s traditional, a U2 song – a cover of I Believe in Father Christmas, which may make you cry – it certainly does for me

Welcome to The Moose Pond! The Welcomings diaries give the Moose, old and new, a place to visit and share words about the weather, life, the world at large and the small parts of Moosylvania that we each inhabit.

In lieu of daily check-ins, which have gone on hiatus, Welcomings diaries will be posted at the start of each week (every Sunday morning) and then, if necessary due to a large number of comments, again on Wednesday or Thursday to close out the week. To find the diaries, just bookmark this link and Voila! (which is Moose for “I found everyone!!”).

The format is simple: each day, the first moose to arrive on-line will post a comment welcoming the new day and complaining (or bragging!) about their weather. Or mentioning an interesting or thought provoking news item. Or simply checking in.

So … what’s going on in your part of Moosylvania?

…

When we look around and think things appear pretty gloomy for big D Democracy (the kind that focuses on making people’s lives better), we can take comfort in the knowledge that our political opponents will, for the second time in 4 years, be in disarray as they try to choose whether to hate in the open or hate in a less full-throated way.

The field of Republican 2016 hopefuls has the potential for more white-on-white violence than a Walmart Black Friday event. One author breaks the candidates into the following categories:

THE BIG THREE

These candidates will leverage strong donor bases and have the most potential to bridge the establishment vs. conservative gap.

– Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.)

– Gov. Chris Christie (N.J.)

– Former Gov. Jeb Bush (Fla.)

THE CONSERVATIVE GUNNERS

The 2012 Republican field was roiled by conservative upstarts, but those driving the conversation to the right this time around will be more polished and better funded.

– Former Gov. Mike Huckabee (Ark.)

– Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas)

THE SECOND TIER

In any other year, these two might be near the top of the list but each has a glaring issue that knocks them down a peg.

– Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)

– Gov. Scott Walker (Wis.)

NEEDS AN IOWA MIRACLE

The strong competition and narrow path for these candidates has some questioning whether they’ll be able to break through.

– Gov. Rick Perry (Texas)

– Dr. Ben Carson

WAITING IN THE WINGS

Expect to see a lot of this bunch on the campaign trail, even if it’s just to build chits for a potential Cabinet spot or vice presidential candidacy.

– Gov. Mike Pence (Ind.)

– Gov. Bobby Jindal (La.)

– Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio)

– Gov. John Kasich (Ohio)

More …

But missing from this list is the front runner in the latest New Hampshire Poll: Mitt Romney. The first poll of the 2016 campaign cycle found this:

Romney leads with 30 percent of the vote in a Bloomberg Politics/St. Anselm New Hampshire poll released Monday. It is a healthy 19-point lead over other possible GOP names, including Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who trails at 11 percent. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie received 9 percent, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush won 8 percent, and Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon and conservative commentator, follows with 6 percent.

One percent chose “Someone else”, “None of the above (these were the choices offered by the pollster: “Mitt Romney,  Chris  Christie,  Rand  Paul,  Bobby  Jindal,  Jeb  Bush,  Rick Perry,  Ted  Cruz,  Paul  Ryan,  Mike  Huckabee,  and  Ben  Carson”) won 3%. Huckabee, Ryan, and Cruz each tallied 5%, with Jindal receiving 3% and Perry trailing the pack with 2%. Eleven percent said they didn’t know.

Another poll, the Quinnipiac also noted the groundswell of support for Mitt but additionally showed the results of a Mitt-less 2016:

Republican voters nationwide look towards 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney to get back in the game for 2016, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released Wednesday.

Voters give the former Massachusetts governor the top rank at 19 percent in an early glimpse of the 2016 presidential race. Romney continues to insist he will not seek the White House for a third time.

With Romney out of the race, however, former Gov. Jeb Bush leads with 14 percent, followed by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie at 11 percent. Neurosurgeon Ben Carson, a conservative Tea Party favorite, gets 9 percent, while U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky gets 8 percent. Another 19 percent remain undecided.

Who do you think will win the nomination or is there a dark horse candidate who will emerge to unite the nativist wing of the party with the Wall Street wing of the party?  

[poll id=”

185

“]

On Wednesday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced new regulations to cut ground level ozone (smog) levels in order to improve public health.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy:

Her editorial, published at CNN.com, explains the new regulations:

For 44 years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has defended the American people’s right to breathe clean air by setting national air quality standards for common air pollutants.

Successful public health protection depends on the latest science. Think of it this way: If your doctor wasn’t using the latest medical science, you’d be worried you weren’t getting the best care.

That’s why the Clean Air Act requires EPA to update air quality standards every five years, to ensure standards “protect public health with an adequate margin of safety” based on the latest scientific evidence.

So today, following science and the law, I am proposing to update national ozone pollution standards to clean up our air, improve access to crucial air quality information, and protect those most at-risk — our children, our elderly, and people already suffering from lung diseases like asthma. […]

Ground-level ozone pollution, commonly known as smog, comes from industrial action, motor vehicles, power plants, and other activities. Breathing ozone irritates the nose, throat, and lungs. Thousands of scientific studies (from renowned institutions like Harvard University, the University of North Carolina Medical School, and many others) tell us that cutting air pollution to meet ozone standards lowers the risk of asthma, permanent lung damage, cardiovascular harm, and premature death.

The science behind the regulations:

According to EPA’s analysis, strengthening the standard to a range of 65 to 70 ppb will provide significantly better protection for children, preventing from 320,000 to 960,000 asthma attacks and from 330,000 to 1 million missed school days. Strengthening the standard to a range of 70 to 65 ppb would better protect both children and adults by preventing more than 750 to 4,300 premature deaths; 1,400 to 4,300 asthma-related emergency room visits; and 65,000 to 180,000 missed workdays.

EPA estimates that the benefits of meeting the proposed standards will significantly outweigh the costs. If the standards are finalized, every dollar we invest to meet them will return up to three dollars in health benefits. These large health benefits will be gained from avoiding asthma attacks, heart attacks, missed school days and premature deaths, among other health effects valued at $6.4 to $13 billion annually in 2025 for a standard of 70 ppb, and $19 to $38 billion annually in 2025 for a standard of 65 ppb. Annual costs are estimated at $3.9 billion in 2025 for a standard of 70 ppb, and $15 billion for a standard at 65 ppb.

Of course, industry is howling … because that is what they do! Their perfect world is one where “job creators” can befoul our earth, sicken us, and then deny us the right to health care.

Job killing blah blah blah, costs trillions blah blah blah, Obama is an emperor blah blah blah.

Think Progress reminds us that chicken littling is the default position for industry and their Republican enablers and that these claims are often proven overblown and provides a handy graph:  

… both industry groups and Republicans have been overestimating the cost of regulations like this since the EPA first began issuing regulation of this kind. In addition, the EPA has historically underestimated the benefits. Those statements are backed up by a survey done by The Economic Policy Institute, which in 1997 found that estimates made before EPA regulations went into effect – even the estimates made by the EPA itself – nearly always significantly overshot how much those regulations would actually cost American industry.

This same kind of industry gloom and doom prediction happened when the EPA strengthened its ozone regulation in the 90s, too. And according to an analysis of the effects of those regulations from the Center for American Progress, those predictions didn’t pan out – in fact, the areas most impacted by those regulations experienced very similar economic growth and employment rates to the nation as a whole.

As Administrator McCarthy pointed out in her op-ed:

Critics play a dangerous game when they denounce the science and law EPA has used to defend clean air for more than 40 years. The American people know better.

In the 1970s, those same critics said EPA action to remove toxic lead from gasoline would put the brakes on auto production. Instead, blood lead levels in children worst affected have plummeted nearly 90% since 1976. And auto makers didn’t fold, they flourished. Today, the number of cars rolling off American assembly lines reached its highest level in 12 years.

In the 1990s, those same critics said fighting acid rain would make electricity prices go up and our lights go out. They said industry would die “a quiet death.” Instead, industry is alive and well, our lights are still on, and the health benefits of our acid rain program exceed costs 40 to 1.

Time after time, when science pointed to health risks, special interests cried the sky was falling. And time after time, EPA obeyed the law, followed the science, protected public health, and fortified a strong American economy.

Over four decades, we’ve cut air pollution by nearly 70%, while our economy has tripled in size. The sky never fell. Today’s action follows that proven path.

Of course, the law being enforced is not a new Emperor Obama law but the Clean Air Act, signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1963, expanded in 1967 and 1970 and improved in 1990 (under Emperor George H.W. Bush) by amendments which “addressed acid rain, ozone depletion and toxic air pollution, established a national permits program for stationary sources, and increased enforcement authority.”

Protecting the air we breathe should be nonpartisan and has been in the past.

Thank goodness for the EPA … and for Democratic administrations that care about people’s health and the future of our planet.

Found on the Internets …

From the White House: President Obama Delivers a Statement on the Ferguson Grand Jury’s Decision

Transcript

PRESIDENT OBAMA: First and foremost, we are a nation built on the rule of law.  And so we need to accept that this decision was the grand jury’s to make.  There are Americans who agree with it, and there are Americans who are deeply disappointed, even angry.  It’s an understandable reaction.  But I join Michael’s parents in asking anyone who protests this decision to do so peacefully.  Let me repeat Michael’s father’s words:  “Hurting others or destroying property is not the answer.  No matter what the grand jury decides, I do not want my son’s death to be in vain.  I want it to lead to incredible change, positive change, change that makes the St. Louis region better for everyone.”  Michael Brown’s parents have lost more than anyone.  We should be honoring their wishes.   […]

Finally, we need to recognize that the situation in Ferguson speaks to broader challenges that we still face as a nation.  The fact is, in too many parts of this country, a deep distrust exists between law enforcement and communities of color.  Some of this is the result of the legacy of racial discrimination in this country.  And this is tragic, because nobody needs good policing more than poor communities with higher crime rates.  The good news is we know there are things we can do to help.  And I’ve instructed Attorney General Holder to work with cities across the country to help build better relations between communities and law enforcement. […]

Those of you who are watching tonight understand that there’s never an excuse for violence, particularly when there are a lot of people in goodwill out there who are willing to work on these issues.

On the other hand, those who are only interested in focusing on the violence and just want the problem to go away need to recognize that we do have work to do here, and we shouldn’t try to paper it over.  Whenever we do that, the anger may momentarily subside, but over time, it builds up and America isn’t everything that it could be.

More …

Holder: Federal Investigation Into Ferguson Shooting Still Ongoing

Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday that the federal investigation into the shooting of Michael Brown is still underway and remains independent of the local probe.

“Though we have shared information with local prosecutors during the course of our investigation, the federal inquiry has been independent of the local one from the start, and remains so now,” Holder said in a statement released after a state prosecutor in Missouri announced a gran jury had declined to indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson. “And although federal civil rights law imposes a high legal bar in these types of cases, we have resisted forming premature conclusions.”

Legal Experts Explain Why The Ferguson Grand Jury Was Set Up For Failure

[T]wo experienced attorneys explain what, in their view, are serious flaws with the grand jury process in the Darren Wilson case. The lawyers, St. Louis University law professor Susan McGraugh and Jerryl T. Christmas, a defense attorney and former prosecutor in St. Louis, are unsparing in their criticism of county prosecutor Bob McCulloch. (Christmas has participated in protests following Brown’s death.)

Specifically, McGraugh and Christmas question McCulloch’s unusual decision to present “all evidence” to the grand jury. Typically, prosecutors present to the grand jury only the evidence necessary to establish probable cause. (A grand jury does not determine guilt or innocence but only if a reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty.) McGraugh and Christmas are especially critical of McCulloch’s decision to allow Wilson to testify for hours in front of the grand jury.

Activists Play The Long Game

Activist and writer Ashley Yates has lived in the St. Louis area since she was 15 years old, so the fatal shooting of Michael Brown hit close to home literally and figuratively. A young black woman in her 20s, Yates plays an instrumental role in mobilizing people who were fed up the with status quo long before Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown on August 9, around the epidemic of police brutality and devaluation of black lives. But she’s not new to organizing and leadership. As a student at the University of Missouri-Columbia, Yates was the political chair of the Legion of Black Collegians and was actively involved in community work. Now, she’s using her previous experience and passion for social justice to call for a paradigm shift. […]

Yates co-founded Millennial Activists United (MAU), a grassroots organization, with Alexis Templeton and Brittany Ferrell, after the three recognized an absence of women’s voices among organizers. “The omission wasn’t intentional, just something that needed to be addressed,” she said. […]

But at the heart of this dynamic movement are youth who want both justice for victims like Brown and Myers and larger changes in the political and economic system. In conjunction with Thoughtworks, a software tech company, Kambale Musavuli relocated to Ferguson and helped to start Hands Up in August. Once there, he was floored by young people in the community.

Editor’s Note: Feel free to share other news stories in the comments.

In the wake of the recent elections: an essay by a conservative analyst that is making the rounds, after the jump ….  

An article by a conservative pundit has received some notice across the blogosphere; even mentioned in this DK diary recently. He wasn’t the only pundit noting this, and I’d like to mention them (as well as some additional context to be looked at). And part of which is: a look at the 1988 electoral college map …. which seems hard-to-believe, more than twenty-five years on.

First, let’s consider a 2001 book entitled The Last Campaign: How Harry Truman Won the 1948 Election by Zachary Karabell. And while most political junkies read it for the second part of the title …. I was drawn to it by the first part of the title. (You may well find it at your public library or available on interloan).

The notion of a “last campaign” came to Karabell during his research, where he saw (in hindsight) that 1948 was the end-of-an-era of presidential campaigning. Not something one could sense right away …….. but with the passing of time, it was clear that the 1952 election was different. Some of the changes he noted:

1) 1948 was the last time a presidential race would be dominated by radio and print media. Television was still an infant technology, which would only begin to emerge in 1952.

2) 1948 was the last campaign where the railroad “whistle stops” were a prime means of travel. Air travel began to become more important by 1952.

3) The 1948 conventions marked “the end of a particular type of back-room politics, the end of the hidden convention.” The smoke-filled rooms began to fade with the increasing importance of the party primary system. For example, the first New Hampshire primary was in 1916, but it wasn’t until 1952 that it really attracted attention: when the candidates’ actual names were listed on the ballot (unlike before when only unknown party reps were listed). Turnout more than doubled in 1952 and the results were announced on national TV.

4) 1948 was the last time progressive and far-Left viewpoints were openly debated and covered in the mainstream press, before the Cold War consensus placed an entire spectrum of political views beyond the pale. Henry Wallace was head of the Progressive Party, the governor of South Carolina (Strom Thurmond) was part of a party that was referred to as the Dixiecrats, and also on the ballot (in a lot of states) was the old-time Socialist, Norman Thomas.

5) Finally, 1948 was the last time the pollsters so miscalled a presidential election. Modern polling was born in the wake of that election.

If you fast-forward an additional forty years to 1988, I believe we can see another end-of-an-era in politics. This was during the victory of George Bush the Elder vs. Mike Dukakis, with this Electoral College map.

An essayist in Bloomberg News noted:

Bush, who won 40 states, 426 electoral votes and 53.4 percent of the popular vote, got a bigger vote percentage in Florida (60.9%), his fifth-best state, than in Wyoming (60.5%). In 2012, Florida was the closest state and Wyoming was Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s second-best state in his losing effort against President Barack Obama.

Bush did better in New Jersey (56.2%) than in North Dakota (56.0%) – unthinkable for a Republican presidential candidate today. Dukakis did better in West Virginia (52.2%) than in New York (51.6%). He did better in Iowa (54.7%), where the farm economy faltered during the 1980s, than in his native Massachusetts (53.2%).  

I recall reading about the strategy during Bill Clinton’s 1992 run for president, with analysts talking about holding the “Dukakis Ten” (states) and building from there. Needless to say, they succeeded.

What they were able to achieve was to add (to those ten states) the likes of California, Illinois, New Jersey, Michigan, Vermont, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine and Pennsylvania … who have held solid ever since. (Only West Virginia has left the Dukakis Ten since).

But don’t just listen to Democratic strategists on this: GOP pundit David Gergen wrote this on the morning of Election Day, advising GOP hopefuls to beware the “Blue Wall”:

The blue wall is a powerful phalanx of 18 states and the District of Columbia that have voted for the Democrats in every single presidential election for 20 years — six straight. Some states have been in the Democratic column even longer.

It’s not just the number of blue states but how huge an advantage they provide for the Democratic presidential nominee. Altogether, these 18 states plus the District of Columbia account for 242 electoral votes — just 28 shy of the 270 magic total required to win the White House. If the wall holds firm, the Democratic nominee only has to win a handful of purple states to go over the top. Florida’s 29 electoral votes alone would seal the election.

Note: the map above misidentifies New Mexico as part of the six-election-straight Blue Wall. Or …….. does it any longer? Read on.

With that in mind, let’s look at the recent buzz – a conservative pundit named Chris Ladd has gone even further than Gergen. For those who have not read it: in an essay published in the Houston Chronicle he argues thusly:

– Republican Senate candidates lost every single race behind the Blue Wall. Every one.

– Behind the Blue Wall there were some new Republican Governors, but their success was very specific and did not translate down the ballot.

– Vote suppression is working remarkably well, but that won’t last. Eventually Democrats will help people get the documentation they need to meet the ridiculous and confusing new requirements. The whole ‘voter integrity’ sham may have given Republicans a one or maybe two-election boost in low-turnout races. Meanwhile we kissed off minority votes for the foreseeable future.

– Across the country, every major Democratic ballot initiative was successful, including every minimum wage increase, even in the red states. Every personhood amendment failed.

More pertinently, he suggests the Blue Wall is now even larger, adding Nevada (6 EV) plus New Mexico (5 EV) as shown on his own-generated electoral college map …. and then he went on to write:

The Blue Wall is block of states that no Republican Presidential candidate can realistically hope to win. Tuesday that block finally extended to New Hampshire, meaning that at the outset of any Presidential campaign, a minimally effective Democratic candidate can expect to win 257 electoral votes without even trying. That’s 257 out of the 270 needed to win.

Arguably Virginia now sits behind that wall as well. Democrats won the Senate seat there without campaigning in a year when hardly anyone but Republicans showed up to vote and the GOP enjoyed its largest wave in modern history. Virginia would take that tally to 270. Again, that’s 270 out of 270.

He cited no statistics or reports for declaring Nevada and New Mexico as hopelessly lost to the GOP (possibly due to their growing Latino populations?) nor anything on New Hampshire.

As a 27-year resident, I have certainly seen New Hampshire become more blue up-ballot. In fact it has voted Democratic 5 of the past 6 elections (post-1988) and would be part of the Blue Wall had not Al Gore abandoned his campaign here early in 2000, only to see the results become: a Bush win by only 7,000 votes (a 1.2% margin). Many of us here believe that simply competing as if it were a competitive state … history may have been different. Although he did not prevail in 2004, John Kerry did pay attention and won the Granite State by 9,000 votes (a 1.4% margin) despite the “terrorists will kill us all” Bush campaign that was persuasive elsewhere.

In 2012, Barack Obama won by a 5.5% margin …. and this year we did hold onto the governor’s race (Maggie Hassan), US Senate (Jeanne Shaheen) and the 2nd of the state’s two congressional districts (Ann Kuster, my representative), bucking national trends.

We did lose Carol Shea-Porter’s 1st congressional seat, perhaps the nation’s most competitive district (and more conservative than mine). If she runs again in 2016, she probably wins.

So, it may be a stretch to consider the Granite State beyond GOP reach …. yet I will not complain if it becomes so. The notion of merely having to “hold serve” on our Blue Wall and seek opportunities elsewhere is a comforting thought after what we went through this month. Plus, the notion that we can choose a capable candidate – rather than a “perfect” candidate – is also encouraging.

Welcome to The Moose Pond! The Welcomings diaries give the Moose, old and new, a place to visit and share words about the weather, life, the world at large and the small parts of Moosylvania that we each inhabit.

In lieu of daily check-ins, which have gone on hiatus, Welcomings diaries will be posted at the start of each week (every Sunday morning) and then, if necessary due to a large number of comments, again on Wednesday or Thursday to close out the week. To find the diaries, just bookmark this link and Voila! (which is Moose for “I found everyone!!”).

The format is simple: each day, the first moose to arrive on-line will post a comment welcoming the new day and complaining (or bragging!) about their weather. Or mentioning an interesting or thought provoking news item. Or simply checking in.

So … what’s going on in your part of Moosylvania?

…

The President’s Weekly Address post is also an Open News Thread. Feel free to share other news stories in the comments.

From the White House – Weekly Address

In this week’s address, the President laid out the steps he took this past week to fix our broken immigration system. Enacted within his legal authority, the President’s plan focuses on cracking down on illegal immigration at the border; deporting felons, not families; and accountability through criminal background checks and taxes. These are commonsense steps, but only Congress can finish the job.

As the President acts, he’ll continue to work with Congress on a comprehensive, bipartisan bill — like the one passed by the Senate more than a year ago — that can replace these actions and fix the whole system.

Transcript: Weekly Address: Immigration Accountability Executive Action

Hi everybody. Today, I’m at Del Sol High School, in Las Vegas, to talk with students and families about immigration.

We are a nation of immigrants. It has always given America a big advantage over other nations. It keeps our country young, dynamic, and entrepreneurial. But today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it.

That’s why, nearly two years ago, I came to this school and laid out principles for immigration reform. And five months later, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents in the Senate came together to pass a commonsense compromise bill. That bill would have secured our border, while giving undocumented immigrants who already live here a pathway to citizenship if they paid a fine, started paying their taxes, and went to the back of the line. Independent experts said it would grow our economy, and shrink our deficits.

Now, had the House of Representatives allowed a yes-or-no vote on that kind of bill, it would have passed with support from both parties. Today it would be the law. But for a year and a half, Republican leaders in the House have refused to allow that simple vote. Now, I still believe that the best way to solve this problem is by working together — both parties — to pass that kind of bipartisan law. But until that happens, there are actions I have the legal authority to take as President — the same kinds of actions taken by Democratic and Republican Presidents before me — that will help make our immigration system more fair and more just.

I took those actions this week. We’re providing more resources at the border to help law enforcement personnel stop illegal crossings, and send home those who do cross over. We’ll focus enforcement resources on people who are threats to our security — felons, not families; criminals, not children. And we’ll bring more undocumented immigrants out of the shadows so they can play by the rules, pay their full share of taxes, pass a criminal background check, and get right with the law.

Nothing about this action will benefit anyone who has come to this country recently, or who might try and come to America illegally in the future. It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive. And it’s certainly not amnesty, no matter how often the critics say it. Amnesty is the immigration system we have today — millions of people living here without paying their taxes, or playing by the rules. And the actions I took this week will finally start fixing that.

As you might have heard, there are Members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better. Well, I have one answer for that: Pass a bill. The day I sign it into law, the actions I’ve taken to help solve this problem will no longer be necessary.

In the meantime, we can’t allow a disagreement over a single issue to be a dealbreaker on every issue. That’s not how our democracy works. This debate deserves more than politics as usual. It’s important for our future. It’s about who we are, and the future we want to build.

We are only here because this country welcomed our forebears, and taught them that being American is about more than what we look like or where we come from. What makes us Americans is our shared commitment to an ideal — that all of us are created equal, and all of us have the chance to make of our lives what we will. That’s the country we inherited, and it’s the one we have to leave for future generations.

Thank you, God bless you, and have a great weekend.

Bolding added.

~

From the White House – The President Speaks on Fixing America’s Broken Immigration System

In an address to the nation, President Obama lays out the executive action he’s taking to fix our nation’s broken immigration system.

Transcript: Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on Immigration

Cross Hall

8:01 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: My fellow Americans, tonight, I’d like to talk with you about immigration.

For more than 200 years, our tradition of welcoming immigrants from around the world has given us a tremendous advantage over other nations. It’s kept us youthful, dynamic, and entrepreneurial. It has shaped our character as a people with limitless possibilities — people not trapped by our past, but able to remake ourselves as we choose.

But today, our immigration system is broken — and everybody knows it.

Families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules watch others flout the rules. Business owners who offer their workers good wages and benefits see the competition exploit undocumented immigrants by paying them far less. All of us take offense to anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America. And undocumented immigrants who desperately want to embrace those responsibilities see little option but to remain in the shadows, or risk their families being torn apart.

It’s been this way for decades. And for decades, we haven’t done much about it.

When I took office, I committed to fixing this broken immigration system. And I began by doing what I could to secure our borders. Today, we have more agents and technology deployed to secure our southern border than at any time in our history. And over the past six years, illegal border crossings have been cut by more than half. Although this summer, there was a brief spike in unaccompanied children being apprehended at our border, the number of such children is now actually lower than it’s been in nearly two years. Overall, the number of people trying to cross our border illegally is at its lowest level since the 1970s. Those are the facts.

Meanwhile, I worked with Congress on a comprehensive fix, and last year, 68 Democrats, Republicans, and independents came together to pass a bipartisan bill in the Senate. It wasn’t perfect. It was a compromise. But it reflected common sense. It would have doubled the number of border patrol agents while giving undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship if they paid a fine, started paying their taxes, and went to the back of the line. And independent experts said that it would help grow our economy and shrink our deficits.

Had the House of Representatives allowed that kind of bill a simple yes-or-no vote, it would have passed with support from both parties, and today it would be the law. But for a year and a half now, Republican leaders in the House have refused to allow that simple vote.

Now, I continue to believe that the best way to solve this problem is by working together to pass that kind of common sense law. But until that happens, there are actions I have the legal authority to take as President — the same kinds of actions taken by Democratic and Republican presidents before me — that will help make our immigration system more fair and more just.

Tonight, I am announcing those actions.

First, we’ll build on our progress at the border with additional resources for our law enforcement personnel so that they can stem the flow of illegal crossings, and speed the return of those who do cross over.

Second, I’ll make it easier and faster for high-skilled immigrants, graduates, and entrepreneurs to stay and contribute to our economy, as so many business leaders have proposed.

Third, we’ll take steps to deal responsibly with the millions of undocumented immigrants who already live in our country.

I want to say more about this third issue, because it generates the most passion and controversy. Even as we are a nation of immigrants, we’re also a nation of laws. Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable — especially those who may be dangerous. That’s why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent. And that’s why we’re going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security. Felons, not families. Criminals, not children. Gang members, not a mom who’s working hard to provide for her kids. We’ll prioritize, just like law enforcement does every day.

But even as we focus on deporting criminals, the fact is, millions of immigrants in every state, of every race and nationality still live here illegally. And let’s be honest — tracking down, rounding up, and deporting millions of people isn’t realistic. Anyone who suggests otherwise isn’t being straight with you. It’s also not who we are as Americans. After all, most of these immigrants have been here a long time. They work hard, often in tough, low-paying jobs. They support their families. They worship at our churches. Many of their kids are American-born or spent most of their lives here, and their hopes, dreams, and patriotism are just like ours. As my predecessor, President Bush, once put it: “They are a part of American life.”

Now here’s the thing: We expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect that those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded. So we’re going to offer the following deal: If you’ve been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes — you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. That’s what this deal is.

Now, let’s be clear about what it isn’t. This deal does not apply to anyone who has come to this country recently. It does not apply to anyone who might come to America illegally in the future. It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive — only Congress can do that. All we’re saying is we’re not going to deport you.

I know some of the critics of this action call it amnesty. Well, it’s not. Amnesty is the immigration system we have today — millions of people who live here without paying their taxes or playing by the rules while politicians use the issue to scare people and whip up votes at election time.

That’s the real amnesty — leaving this broken system the way it is. Mass amnesty would be unfair. Mass deportation would be both impossible and contrary to our character. What I’m describing is accountability — a common-sense, middle-ground approach: If you meet the criteria, you can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. If you’re a criminal, you’ll be deported. If you plan to enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught and sent back just went up.

The actions I’m taking are not only lawful, they’re the kinds of actions taken by every single Republican President and every single Democratic President for the past half century. And to those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better, or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill.

I want to work with both parties to pass a more permanent legislative solution. And the day I sign that bill into law, the actions I take will no longer be necessary. Meanwhile, don’t let a disagreement over a single issue be a dealbreaker on every issue. That’s not how our democracy works, and Congress certainly shouldn’t shut down our government again just because we disagree on this. Americans are tired of gridlock. What our country needs from us right now is a common purpose — a higher purpose.

Most Americans support the types of reforms I’ve talked about tonight. But I understand the disagreements held by many of you at home. Millions of us, myself included, go back generations in this country, with ancestors who put in the painstaking work to become citizens. So we don’t like the notion that anyone might get a free pass to American citizenship.

I know some worry immigration will change the very fabric of who we are, or take our jobs, or stick it to middle-class families at a time when they already feel like they’ve gotten the raw deal for over a decade. I hear these concerns. But that’s not what these steps would do. Our history and the facts show that immigrants are a net plus for our economy and our society. And I believe it’s important that all of us have this debate without impugning each other’s character.

Because for all the back and forth of Washington, we have to remember that this debate is about something bigger. It’s about who we are as a country, and who we want to be for future generations.

Are we a nation that tolerates the hypocrisy of a system where workers who pick our fruit and make our beds never have a chance to get right with the law? Or are we a nation that gives them a chance to make amends, take responsibility, and give their kids a better future?

Are we a nation that accepts the cruelty of ripping children from their parents’ arms? Or are we a nation that values families, and works together to keep them together?

Are we a nation that educates the world’s best and brightest in our universities, only to send them home to create businesses in countries that compete against us? Or are we a nation that encourages them to stay and create jobs here, create businesses here, create industries right here in America?

That’s what this debate is all about. We need more than politics as usual when it comes to immigration. We need reasoned, thoughtful, compassionate debate that focuses on our hopes, not our fears. I know the politics of this issue are tough. But let me tell you why I have come to feel so strongly about it.

Over the past few years, I have seen the determination of immigrant fathers who worked two or three jobs without taking a dime from the government, and at risk any moment of losing it all, just to build a better life for their kids. I’ve seen the heartbreak and anxiety of children whose mothers might be taken away from them just because they didn’t have the right papers. I’ve seen the courage of students who, except for the circumstances of their birth, are as American as Malia or Sasha; students who bravely come out as undocumented in hopes they could make a difference in the country they love.

These people — our neighbors, our classmates, our friends — they did not come here in search of a free ride or an easy life. They came to work, and study, and serve in our military, and above all, contribute to America’s success.

Tomorrow, I’ll travel to Las Vegas and meet with some of these students, including a young woman named Astrid Silva. Astrid was brought to America when she was four years old. Her only possessions were a cross, her doll, and the frilly dress she had on. When she started school, she didn’t speak any English. She caught up to other kids by reading newspapers and watching PBS, and she became a good student. Her father worked in landscaping. Her mom cleaned other people’s homes. They wouldn’t let Astrid apply to a technology magnet school, not because they didn’t love her, but because they were afraid the paperwork would out her as an undocumented immigrant — so she applied behind their back and got in. Still, she mostly lived in the shadows — until her grandmother, who visited every year from Mexico, passed away, and she couldn’t travel to the funeral without risk of being found out and deported. It was around that time she decided to begin advocating for herself and others like her, and today, Astrid Silva is a college student working on her third degree.

Are we a nation that kicks out a striving, hopeful immigrant like Astrid, or are we a nation that finds a way to welcome her in? Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger — we were strangers once, too.

My fellow Americans, we are and always will be a nation of immigrants. We were strangers once, too. And whether our forebears were strangers who crossed the Atlantic, or the Pacific, or the Rio Grande, we are here only because this country welcomed them in, and taught them that to be an American is about something more than what we look like, or what our last names are, or how we worship. What makes us Americans is our shared commitment to an ideal — that all of us are created equal, and all of us have the chance to make of our lives what we will.

That’s the country our parents and grandparents and generations before them built for us. That’s the tradition we must uphold. That’s the legacy we must leave for those who are yet to come.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless this country we love.

END

8:16 P.M. EST

Bolding added.

~

White House Infographic:

More than 4 Million Undocumented Immigrants Will Now Be Able to Play by the Rules

Every day while we wait to fix America’s broken immigration system, millions of undocumented immigrants continue to live in the shadows. Those who want to pay taxes and play by the same rules as everyone else have no way to live by the law. That’s why President Obama is taking executive action.

~

From the White House, Press Secretary Josh Earnest:

Our immigration system has been broken for decades — and every minute we fail to act, millions of people who live in the shadows but want to play by the rules and pay taxes have no way to live right by the law and contribute to our country.

So tonight, President Obama will address the nation to lay out the executive actions he’s taking to fix our broken immigration system. You can watch the President live Thursday night at 8 p.m. ET at WhiteHouse.gov/Live.

This is a step forward in the President’s plan to work with Congress on passing common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform. He laid out his principles for that reform two years ago in Del Sol High School in Las Vegas — and that’s where he’ll return on Friday to discuss why he is using his executive authority now, and why Republicans in Congress must act to pass a long-term solution to immigration reform.

The Senate passed a bipartisan bill more than 500 days ago, and while the country waits for House Republicans to vote, the President will act — like the Presidents before him — to fix our immigration system in the ways that he can.

So tune in Thursday night at 8 p.m. ET to learn what the President is doing to ensure that America will continue to be what it has always been: a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.

Oh, and don’t expect the address to be on broadcast television. NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox will not be covering it. But Univision, the Spanish language cable network will … and will interrupt the Latin GRAMMYs to do so.

Univision Network will air the POTUS announcement regarding Executive Action on Immigration live tomorrow. We will proceed with our coverage plans for the Latin GRAMMY’s, immediately following the President’s remarks. Complete coverage of the announcement, reactions and what it means for the US will  be covered across Univision’s news platforms, as well as on the Network’s “Despierta America” morning show.

Of course, everyone is buzzing about the president’s address on immigration tonight and some of the headlines are entertaining. From “Obama is Not a Monarch!!1!!” to “GOP Governors Hostile on Obama Immigration Plan” (it is NOT breaking news for them to be hostile towards the president on any plan) to concern trolling (call to arms?) about violence and/or civil disobedience. Oh, and lawsuits. Republicans love lawsuits … except when they help people hurt by corporate negligence.

Let’s take a look at some of the commentary …

~

ThinkProgress: Republicans Were Fine With Bush Acting On Immigration Reform Without Congress

“With his immigration bill dead, the administration rolled out a proposed rule to address some of the major issues in the failed legislation,” the Associated Press writes, before outlining some of the changes the president will enact without the consent of Congress.

But the article isn’t about President Barack Obama’s impending executive action to “expand temporary protections for millions of undocumented immigrants.” It’s from 2007 and it details President George W. Bush’s push to enact changes to immigration law after his own immigration reform bill failed in the Senate.

The rules required employers to dismiss workers whose Social Security numbers don’t match those in federal databases, tightened border security, and streamlined guest-worker programs and urging employers to fire undocumented workers.

In defending his actions, Bush sounded a lot like Obama does today.

“Although the Congress has not addressed our broken immigration system by passing comprehensive reform legislation, my administration will continue to take every possible step to build upon the progress already made,” Bush said.

~

National Journal: Critics Say Executive Action on Immigration Would Be Unprecedented. They Forget Their History.

The president’s announcement that he would soon take executive action to “to do what he could” to fix a broken immigration system in the absence of legislation has prompted critics to assert that this would be unprecedented unless first authorized by Congress. In fact, the record demonstrates the opposite. For at least the last 70 years, presidents have routinely acted first to permit the entry of people outside normal channels or to protect large numbers of people from deportation, with legislation ratifying the executive action coming later.

~

TPM: Did SCOTUS Already Greenlight Obama’s Executive Action On Immigration?

Can President Barack Obama temporarily legalize 5 million undocumented immigrants by himself?

That question has sparked a heated debate as the White House ponders the legal questions surrounding an unprecedented executive action on immigration that it says it will unveil by the end of this summer. The political implications are explosive as conservative Republicans are already floating impeachment of Obama if he unilaterally grants relief to millions of undocumented immigrants.

So, how much power does Obama have in this area?

Experts agree that the president has wide discretion to decide which migrants to target for deportation under the law enforcement theory of prosecutorial discretion. There are roughly 11 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally and officials have to prioritize which ones to remove. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that wide latitude in the 2012 ruling Arizona v. US, in which the justices said key provisions of Arizona’s strict immigration law ran afoul of federal supremacy in the area.

Then there is this:

Although a future president would unquestionably have the authority to reverse DACA and other executive actions, the politics would make that difficult. Despite a push by conservatives to sue to reverse DACA, Republicans opted not to do so in their lawsuit against the president, a sign that they’re wary of alienating Latino voters, who strongly support immigration relief. As Douthat concedes, “the politics of stripping millions of people of legal status will be too awful for a Republican Party facing an increasingly Hispanic electorate to contemplate.”

The White House is gearing up for an intense political fight. Obama’s senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer recently predicted that the president’s upcoming action on immigration will “certainly up the likelihood that [Republicans] would contemplate impeachment.”

Add the optics of a black president facing impeachment by a Republican Congress for helping Latino immigrants keep their families together and it is more than just “awful” for the GOP’s chances of ever winning a national election. It makes those chances zero. Or, as they say on Univision: Nada.