Monday, April 29, 2013

Great Letter to the Editor

ORANGE COUNTY ( CALIFORNIA ) NEWSPAPER-New Immigrants. This is a very good letter to the editor. This woman made some good points ...

For some reason, people have difficulty structuring their arguments when arguing against supporting the currently proposed immigration revisions. This lady made the argument pretty simple. NOT printed in the Orange County Paper …..

Newspapers simply won't publish letters to the editor which they either deem politically incorrect (read below) or which does not agree with the philosophy they're pushing on the public. This woman wrote a great letter to the editor that should have been published; but, with your help it will get published via cyberspace!

From: "David LaBonte"

My wife, Rosemary, wrote a wonderful letter to the editor of the OC Register which, of course, was not printed. So, I decided to "print" it myself by sending it out on the Internet. Pass it along if you feel so inclined. Written in response to a series of letters to the editor in the Orange County Register:

Dear Editor:

So many letter writers have based their arguments on how this land is made up of immigrants. Ernie Lujan for one, suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because the people now in question aren't being treated the same as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports of entry.

Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people like Mr. Lujan why today's American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented. Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home.

They had waved good bye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity. Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. My father fought along side men whose parents had come straight over from Germany, Italy, France, and  Japan.

None of these 1st generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. They were defending the United States of America as one people.

When we liberated  France, no one in those villages were looking for the French-American or the German American or the Irish American. The people of France saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country's flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.

And here we are with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country. I'm sorry, that's not what being an American is all about. I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900's deserve better than that for all the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags.

And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of Liberty, it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn't start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.

Rosemary LaBonte

Reprinted with the permission (and encouragement) of the author.

To comment on this post or any other, click the "no comments" link below, or send your comments to

Ben Ferro

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Why are ICE Employees So Quiet on this Issue?

Today during a Senate hearing on immigration reform, Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano engaged in a nasty repartee over the performance of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. Video of that spirited back-and-forth appears below.

Given that the morale of ICE agents has apparently plummeted as a result of their being asked by the Administration not to fully enforce this country’s immigration laws, it’s easy to see why Senator Sessions is so concerned.

But where is the concern of the ICE employees themselves? Why are you guys so quiet? If you feel you have a legitimate gripe on this issue, or any immigration issue, send it to us and let us air it for you. As they say, the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Just email your concerns to Your anonymity is guaranteed!

To comment on this post, click the "no comments" link below, or send your comments to 

Ben Ferro

Monday, April 22, 2013

Can this plan work?

I’m not so sure this bill will work; here’s why -

The bill which was recently introduced into the U.S. Senate, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, requires the achievement and maintenance an effectiveness rate of 90 percent or higher in all high risk border patrol sectors before the Registered Provisional Immigrant (Amnesty provisions) application processes can even commence.

The bill defines ‘‘effectiveness rate’’, in the case of a border patrol sector, as the percentage calculated by dividing the number of apprehensions and turn backs in the sector during a fiscal year by the total number of illegal entries in the sector during such fiscal year.

The question, however, must be asked, if illegal entries are made surreptitiously, by evading DHS border security, then how is it remotely possible to know the number of illegal entries made during any time period? As such, there is absolutely no way to calculate “effectiveness rate”.

Additionally, the commencement of the legalization (RPI) process outlined in the bill is also dependent upon notification that the Secretary of DHS has implemented a mandatory employment verification system to be used by all employers to prevent unauthorized workers from obtaining employment in the United States.

This system would need to be much more technologically sophisticated than the E-Verify System currently being used by DHS, as it would be required to allow any individual to view and monitor their own record in the system, contain a photo tool which would be used by the employer to verify an employee’s identity, and would need to include mechanisms to measure employer compliance, system error rates, and any misuse of the system. Considering the time it has taken for DHS to get the E-Verify system to its current state, this appears to be yet another major stumbling block in the path of immigration reform.

Finally, it is noted that DHS cannot start taking applications for RPI status until DHS is using an electronic exit system at air and sea ports of entry that operates by collecting machine readable visa or passport information from air and vessel carriers.

For 17 years Congress has tried to force the establishment of an exit-tracking program, first on  the INS and now on DHS, to no avail. This task has recently been shuffled off from USVISIT to CBP, but there is no indication that this exit verification part of the USVISIT system will be accomplished any time soon.

In the final analysis, one must ask, were these prerequisites, which seem to be impossible to accomplish, put in place intentionally by those who oppose immigration reform to doom this bill to failure?

A current DHS official (name, title, agency and location withheld at the author’s request).


Current or former INS/USCIS/ICE/CBP employees: we want you to make your forum to share with your fellow employees and tell the American public your thoughts and concerns regarding the issues and challenges facing DHS Immigration agencies. So please send those thoughts to us at (please do not include any attachments). For current and former employees, please rest assured that, if you wish not to be identified, your anonymity will be guaranteed if your thoughts are published in this forum.

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Immigration Reform Proposal Hits the U.S. Senate

Well,  Folks, as predicted right here in, it looks like immigration reform is coming and coming quickly, as witnessed by the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, which was introduced today into the U.S. Senate.

After sifting through the various news accounts regarding this Bill, here are what appear to be a number of it’s major provisions:

  1. The family-based fourth preference category for siblings of U. S. Citizens will be discontinued, but anyone already “in line”, by virtue of having an approved visa petition in their behalf by a U.S. Citizen brother or sister, will be issued an immediate visa number to immigrate. 
  1. The family-based second preference visa category for spouses and children unmarried children of lawful permanent residents will be moved into a non-quota category, thereby eliminating the need to obtain a visa number in order to immigrate. In effect, they will be treated like immediate relatives (spouses, children and parents) of U.S. citizens are today. 
  1. Extra visa numbers which would have been used by these family-based second and fourth preference categories, will go to other categories, and, thereby, lessen their wait for a visa number. 
  1. The family-based third preference (married sons and daughters of U.S. Citizens) will be amended to limit this benefit to sons and daughters who are under 31 years of age. 
  1. The bill would provide a Registered Provisional Immigrant status for any qualifying illegal immigrant who applied for, and was granted, such status. Persons granted this provisional status would have to remain in such status for 10 years before they were granted lawful permanent residence in the U.S. Provisional status would require the undocumented immigrant to pay a fee of $1,000 to gain such status, and an additional $1,000 when granted lawful permanent residence. They would also have to pass at least 2 background reviews, one at initial filing, and one after being a provisional resident for 6 years, and pay any back taxes owed. Persons granted lawful permanent residence under this provision would be eligible to apply for U.S. Citizenship after being a permanent resident for 3 years. 
  1. The cutoff date for undocumented immigrants to benefit from the Senate bill will be entry to the U.S. by December 31, 2011. Anyone entering after that date will not be eligible; however, spouses and children of Registered Provisional Immigrants who are in the U.S. would be eligible to be petitioned for derivative provisional status, regardless of when they entered the U.S. 
  1. Persons granted Registered Provisional Immigrant status would be able to work anywhere they wanted and to travel in and out of the U.S.   
  1. The requirements for provisional legal residence in the U.S. for illegal immigrants who entered this country as children with their parents (DREAM Act  children) would be less stringent; they would only need to be in Registered Provisional Immigrant  status for 5 years to file for Lawful Permanent Residence, and would be immediately eligible to file for U.S. citizenship once lawful permanent residence was granted. 
  1. Persons who qualify for a special Agricultural Worker provision of this Bill would have the same requirements for provisional residence as Dream Act  children. 
  1. The bill repeals the current Diversity Visa Program (DV). 
  1.  The bill introduces the concept of a Merit Based Visa, which provides a limited number of visas for persons based upon points they accrue as a result of their education, length of residence in the U.S., and employment. 
  1. With regards to the H-1B program, the visa cap for these workers would increase from the current 65,000 to 110,000, and could increase as high as 180,000, based upon a demand for highly skilled workers. As a compromise there would be  a renewed emphasis on compliance and solidification of the H-1B dependency provisions. 
  1. There will be a new W Nonimmigrant classification for low skill workers. 
  1. The bill would require the mandatory use of the E-Verify system by all employers to verify that employees are authorized to work in the U.S. 
  1. The bill would also require increased border security be in place before any “amnesty” provisions went into effect. 

As always, your comments, concerns, and feedback are welcomed.

Ben Ferro

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Two Weeks and Still No Answer

An Open Letter To Secretary Napolitano (initially published 3/23/2013)

Dear Secretary Napolitano:

With regard to the Administration's proposal for Immigration Reform, we have recently received the following questions on just who would be ineligible for immigration amnesty under the restrictions concerning "serious crimes"

A Supervisor of Special Agents within the Department of Homeland Security had asked specifically:

Is Identity Theft a "serious crime?" (it would be hard to find many working illegal aliens not using a stolen social security card or other documents)

Is fraud in obtaining government benefits a "serious crime"? (food stamps, drivers licenses, unemployment benefits all require sworn signatures as to identity) 

Is Reentry after Deportation, a felony punishable by 5 years in Jail, a "serious crime? How about multiple illegal entries?

Is marriage fraud a "serious crime"? Previously thought of by Homeland Security as one of the most egregious immigration violations.

Is the false claim of child dependents on income tax forms a "serious crime"? (Said to be a very common claim made by illegal filers)

Is failure to declare income on income tax forms a "serious crime? (Most illegal aliens paid under the table do not claim such income)
US citizens go to Jail!

Most importantly, will my Special Agents be responsible for and permitted to pursue these and other lines of questions of applicants for amnesty? During the last amnesty in 1986, I'm told Special Agents were prohibited from doing so.

The nation awaits your response.

Thank you. 
Ben Ferro, Editor, INSideINS