Labels

...the reality of most of migration today reveals the unequal relations between rich & poor, between North and South, between whiteness and its others.” ― Harsha Walia


DAILY SPECIALS









IMMIGRATION

IMMIGRATION COMES ROARING BACK ... SEVEN HOUSE REPUBLICANS have signed a GOP discharge petition this morning to bring up H.Res 774, a measure that would allow for a free-wheeling immigration debate on the House floor. The seven Republicans: Reps. Carlos Curbelo, Mario Diaz Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, Jeff Denham and David Valadao of California, Will Hurd of Texas and Mia Love of Utah.
-- THE RESOLUTION THEY ARE BRINGING TO THE FLOOR would allow votes on Rep. Bob Goodlatte's (R-Va.) immigration bill, which is favored by conservative and goes farther than the White House. It would allow votes on bills by Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard of California, Paul Ryan and Denham. THIS IS A PROCESS THAT WOULD SET UP A FREE FOR ALL in the middle of the election year.
-- FOR THIS PETITION TO WORK, 193 Democrats would need to sign on -- which seems likely. If that happens, 18 more Republicans need to get on board to force this debate. Track the signatories here http://bit.ly/2wrCTIf
-- THE PROCESS ... IF THE PETITION GETS THE REQUISITE SIGNATURES, Roybal-Allard, Ryan and Denham all get a chance to offer a bill as a substitute to the Goodlatte bill. The bill with the highest vote total is considered adopted. In the case of a tie, the last bill with the highest vote total wins. The order of votes can't be changed. So, this pushes the process in favor of the Denham bill, which is the most moderate option, at the moment, and will get the last vote. (We say at the moment because there is no "Ryan bill," but the authors of this resolution seem to be giving Ryan a place to insert his own bill.)
-- SPEAKER PAUL RYAN tried to shut this down earlier this week when he spoke to Curbelo on the House floor, but Curbelo is tired of waiting, according to sources familiar with his thinking.
-- OPPONENTS TO THIS STRATEGY say this is born of political expediency, and will only lead to a bill that Trump will end up vetoing.
THIS WILL DEFINITELY revive immigration as a top-of-the-mind issue. And it could force action later this year. [Playbook Power Briefing, May 9, 2018]



ICE




THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION -- "U.S. embassy cables warned against expelling 300,000 immigrants. Trump officials did it anyway," by WaPo's Nick Miroff, Seung Min Kim and Joshua Partlow: "In the past six months, the Trump administration has moved to expel 300,000 Central Americans and Haitians living and working legally in the United States, disregarding senior U.S. diplomats who warned that mass deportations could destabilize the region and trigger a new surge of illegal immigration. The warnings were transmitted to top State Department officials last year in embassy cables now at the center of an investigation by Senate Democrats, whose findings were recently referred to the Government Accountability Office. ... 

"Then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson dismissed the advice and joined other administration officials in pressuring leaders at the Department of Homeland Security to strip the immigrants of their protections." https://wapo.st/2K8U5nY [POLITICO Playbook, May 9, 2018]





DOJ

DOJ PLANS COURT REORGANIZATION: The Justice Department plans to issue an interim final rule in June that would make changes to "internal structure and organization" within the federal immigration court system, according to the administration's spring regulatory roadmap, which was posted online Wednesday. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has sought to use the courts to combat illegal immigration, ordering judges to the border to adjudicate cases and personally reviewing decisions that could affect the ability of asylum seekers to make claims. The department sent a memo to judges in April that outlined a new quota system meant to speed along case processing in the face of a growing backlog.
The Justice Department said in the regulatory agenda that organizational changes are needed because of the creation of a new immigration court policy office in 2017. The office will serve as a "kind of a central quarterbacking entity," EOIR Director James McHenry told the restrictionist Center for Immigration Studies earlier this month. McHenry said the new office aims to "make sure that we have coordinated policies across all of our adjudicatory bodies." Presumably the forthcoming regulation would give it the power to do so. Read the CIS interview with McHenry here and the regulatory preview here.
Related data dive: The DOJ released new statistics Wednesday on case processing within the immigration courts. The case backlog continued to grow through the first six months of fiscal year 2018. By March 31, it stood at roughly 698,000 cases, up from 652,000 at the end of the previous fiscal year. But the courts appear to have made some headway: judges closed approximately 92,000 cases through the first six month of FY18, which put the courts on pace to close more cases than in FY17. Read through the data here. [POLITICO's Morning Shift, May 10, 2018]










Physician groups oppose potential Title X changes. Cutting family planning funds for health providers that also perform abortions and prohibiting providers from talking about abortion would have dire consequences for the family planning safety net, representatives from American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Physicians said on a recent call with reporters. The restrictions are among the sweeping changes that the Trump administration is seeking in the Title X program, a decades old program to fund family planning services that has long enjoyed bipartisan support.
Shari Erickson, an ACP vice president, and Hal C. Lawrence, ACOG's CEO, said the proposed changes would strain the capacity of federally qualified health centers, many of which aren't equipped to provide family planning services, erode the standard of care that physicians practice and force providers into ethically compromising situations where they can't openly discuss legal family planning options with patients. The changes "can only turn back the clock on women's health," said Lawrence.
HHS is already facing legal action over other changes to Title X: Last week Planned Parenthood affiliates and National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association sued the administration for its emphasis on abstinence as an approach to birth control. Separately, watchdog group Equity Forward is also suing the administration for failing to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request seeking correspondence between HHS officials and executives from several anti-abortion groups. [POLITICO Pulse, May 7. 2018]



JUDICIARY

California counties sue drug companies over opioids. Thirty of California's 58 counties have filed lawsuits in federal court against some of the nation's largest drug makers and distributors over their role in the opioid epidemic. The lawsuits, expected to be transferred into multi-district litigation originating out of Ohio, allege that the pharmaceutical manufacturers misinformed doctors about the drugs' addictive properties, and seeks reimbursement of taxpayer funds to manage the problem.
The counties also point fingers at drug distributors - the same players who, at a House panel on Tuesday, shifted the blame for the crisis onto doctors and pharmacies. The mostly rural northern and central counties filing suit represent some 10.5 million Californians. [PoliticoPulse, May 10, 2018]



READ







HEALTHCARE

KAISER SURVEY: DEMOCRATS MORE FOCUSED ON HEALTH CARE THAN REPUBLICANS - Health care is the most important issue for 30 percent of Democratic voters, narrowly topping gun violence as the top choice, according to the latest Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll. By contrast, just 15 percent of Republican voters chose health care as their top issue, behind jobs and the economy, immigration and gun violence. There was no clear consensus among independents, with about one in five each selecting health care, gun policy, and jobs and the economy as their top issue.
There's widespread consensus among voters of all political stripes about the importance of addressing health care costs. Roughly seven in 10 voters say they are more likely to back candidates who support bringing down the cost of prescription drugs and insurance.
But there remains a stark partisan divide on most other issues, including Obamacare. Overall, 49 percent of respondents indicated a favorable opinion of the Affordable Care Act, while 43 percent expressed disapproval. Roughly eight in 10 Democrats back the law, while the same share of Republicans have an unfavorable opinion of it. See the full poll results here.
Fewer Americans confident they can afford health care. Meanwhile, a Commonwealth Fund survey out today finds 62.4 percent of respondents feel they could afford health care if they fell seriously ill - down from 69 percent in 2015. About 46 percent of those surveyed said they wouldn't be able to pay a surprise $1,000 medical bill within 30 days. See the full survey here. [PoliticoPulse, May 10, 2018]









NIKKI HALEY    
United States Ambassador to the United Nations   





GAMES & SPORTS





FROM THE PORCH




FAMILY




CANDIDATES




NOTE: The news sources here vary.  Not all sources have the same credibility, but in an effort to share some different perspectives, they are included here.  This compendium itself cannot claim to be unbiased.  Please take into consideration where these different perspectives originate in assessing their value.  Thank you

NOTE: I have no official connection to any organization from which information is shared.. Occasionally, I post informational material and/or an opportunity to donate or join as  a "community service" announcement.  These again are shared for their varying perspectives.

Any commercial or business interest information shared is purely informational, not an endorsement.  I have no connection with any such commercial or business interest.

Any books listed are random or topic-related to something else in the post.  Think of these as a "library bookshelf" to browse.  They are shared for informational or entertainment value only, not as being recommended.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment