JEMELE HILL - FOOLISH ACTIVIST - FIRED BY ESPN

JEMELE HILL - FOOLISH ACTIVIST - FIRED BY ESPN:

JEMELE RUINED A GREAT JOB WITH ESPN TO HELP DEMOCRATS IN 2020.

SHE WAS HIRED AS A SPORTS COMMENTATOR NOT A POLITICAL ACTIVIST.

WILL DEMOCRAT LEADERS WHO HATE TRUMP NOW OFFER JEMELE A $10 MILLION CONTRACT??

IT’S NOT ABOUT VIOLATING FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

EVEN IF YOU DON’T LIKE TRUMP, HE IS STILL THE ELECTED U.S. PRESIDENT JUST AS OBAMA WAS.

THINK SMARTER BLACK YOUNG PEOPLE.

IF YOU WANT TO BE AN ACTIVIST, SAVE MONEY AND THEN LEAVE YOUR JOB AMICABLY FIRST.

YOU CAN NOT BE AN POLITICAL ACTIVIST AT WORK IN CORPORATE AMERICA UNLESS YOU WERE HIRED UPFRONT TO BE A PAID POLITICAL COMMENTATOR.

PERIOD.


Post Sources: NY Daily Post, Bleacher Report, ESPN, Fox News, Sports Illustrated, Your Black World, Youtube


***** Jemele Hill is out at ESPN


Jemele Hill needed to be out at ESPN. Hill knew it. ESPN president Jimmy Pitaro knew it. And, now, Jemele Hill is out at ESPN.

The marriage between ESPN and Hill — the controversial sports commentator who waded into politics and sparred with President Donald Trump — has long been stuck in irreconcilable differences. Since leaving “SportsCenter” earlier this year, she has barely worked, making a divorce the obvious conclusion.

A buyout of her reported $2.5 million per year contract has been completed and her last day will be Friday, according to sources.

On Saturday night, the author James Miller, who wrote a book about ESPN, first tweeted the newsof the breakup, calling it “amicable.” The timing, on a Saturday evening, was fortunate for Hill and ESPN in an attempt to lessen the news coverage of what had been a huge national story, both in politics and in sports. There had been rumblings last week of buyout talks between the two sides.

It is quite simple as to why the buyout happened: Hill wants to continue her involvement in politics, and ESPN wants out of politics.

Pitaro has made it clear ESPN is a sports network and does not want to be associated with politics, so he agreed to a buyout with Hill, according to sources. ESPN had no use for Hill on any of its programs after her ill-fated 6 p.m. “SportsCenter”with her former partner, Michael Smith, failed to deliver ratings. She first left Smith behind by quitting the show before the executive in charge of the program, Norby Williamson, had a chance to replace her. She would have been removed.

Nearly one year ago, on Sept. 11, 2017, Hill called Trump “a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself [with] other white supremacists.” Though it broke ESPN’s social media rules about commenting on politics unrelated to sports, then-network president John Skipper failed to suspend Hill. The White House called for Hill to be fired.

A little more than a month later, Skipper decided to suspend Hill after she criticized Cowboys owner Jerry Jones’ anthem stance by tweeting, “Change happens when advertisers are impacted. If you feel strongly about JJ’s statement, boycott his advertisers.” She was off television for two weeks. ESPN called it a second offense. Hill said she regretted that she had “painted ESPN in an unfair light.”

Pitaro recently said he thinks the biggest misperception of ESPN is that it is political, and now he is putting action behind his words. Though the network’s on-air programming is mostly apolitical, it is hard to ask viewers to disassociate stances they read on social media when ESPN personalities are on TV, radio or writing for its website.

Nearly one year ago, on Sept. 11, 2017, Hill called Trump “a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself [with] other white supremacists.” Though it broke ESPN’s social media rules about commenting on politics unrelated to sports, then-network president John Skipper failed to suspend Hill. The White House called for Hill to be fired.

A little more than a month later, Skipper decided to suspend Hill after she criticized Cowboys owner Jerry Jones’ anthem stance by tweeting, “Change happens when advertisers are impacted. If you feel strongly about JJ’s statement, boycott his advertisers.” She was off television for two weeks. ESPN called it a second offense. Hill said she regretted that she had “painted ESPN in an unfair light.”

Pitaro recently said he thinks the biggest misperception of ESPN is that it is political, and now he is putting action behind his words. Though the network’s on-air programming is mostly apolitical, it is hard to ask viewers to disassociate stances they read on social media when ESPN personalities are on TV, radio or writing for its website.

JAMIE DIMON APPROVES TRUMP’S BOOMING ECONOMY (MORE JOBS, MORE MILITARY)

JAMIE DIMON APPROVES OF TRUMP’S BOOMING ECONOMY (MORE JOBS, MORE MILITARY):

U.S. ECONOMY STRONGEST SINCE 2014.

TRUMP’S TRADE WAR YIELDS POSITIVE RESULTS FOR U.S. ECONOMY.

TRUMP KNOWS BUSINESS & BLOWS OFF TRADITIONAL, COUNTERPRODUCTIVE POLITICS.

MEDIA NEEDS TO FAIRLY GIVE THE PRESIDENT CREDIT WHEN IT’S DUE HIM, REGARDLESS OF PARTY.

GOD BLESS AMERICA


Post Sources: CNN, Fox News, 4-Traders, Youtube


***** US economy grows at fastest pace since 2014


The US economy roared into high gear in the spring, growing at the fastest pace in almost four years.
Second-quarter economic growth came in at an annual rate of 4.1%, the government said Friday. That was the best showing since the third quarter of 2014.

By many metrics, the United States economy is in excellent shape: Unemployment is near an 18-year low, factories are seeing more orders, and exports are surging.

Economists are generally predicting slower growth in the second half of the year, as the effects of the tax cut wear off and rising interest rates depress consumer spending.

Already announced tariffs are forecast to be only a slight drag on economic growth, unless more are imposed. And it seems that corporate executives are treading carefully, as surveys of business confidence and hiring expectations begin to flag.

The strong second-quarter growth reflectedlarge increases in orders of durable goods, investment in non-residential construction, exports, intellectual property, and government defense spending.
Weak home construction and increased imports, which subtract from economic growth, took it down a notch.
Growth in the first quarter was revised up slightly, from 2% to 2.2%.

Personal consumption expenditures, a key metric that the Federal Reserve uses to decide whether to raise interest rates, also came in at a very strong 4%, although that may reflect a bounceback from last quarter's 0.5%.

CHARLOTTE, NC WINS 2020 RNC CONVENTION BID (NON-PARTISAN DEMOCRAT MAYOR)

CHARLOTTE, NC WINS 2020 RNC CONVENTION BID (NON-PARTISAN DEMOCRAT MAYOR):

CHARLOTTE MAYOR VI LYLES (DEMOCRAT) WISELY CHOSE BUSINESS & JOBS OVER FOOLISH PARTISAN POLITICS.

CHARLOTTE VOTERS NEED TO FIRE ALL CLOSE-MINDED PARTISAN POLITICIANS SO THE CITY’S ECONOMY CAN FINALLY REBOUND.

NOW IT’S TIME FOR CHARLOTTE TO DEVELOP A ZOO & OTHER TOURIST ATTRACTIONS THAT WILL ENTERTAIN LARGE CROWDS FOR AN ENTIRE WEEK.

VI LYLES WOULD SOMEDAY MAKE A GREAT PROGRESSIVE 21st CENTURY GOVERNOR FOR NORTH CAROLINA.

CONGRATS


Post Sources: Charlotte Observer, Youtube


****** GOP picks Charlotte for 2020 convention. Now, the fundraising and organizing begin


Charlotte won its second national political convention in a decade Friday, kicking off two years of planning, fundraising and anticipation.

The Republican National Committee on Friday formally awarded Charlotte the 2020 party event, pushing Charlotte into a small group of cities that will have held both major party conventions.

The vote capped a dramatic week in which the Charlotte City Council agreed to host the convention Monday by a single vote. Four Democrats joined two Republicans in support. Five Democrats voted no.


“We could not be more excited,” North Carolina GOP Chair Robin Hayes said in a statement. “Today’s announcement is a testament to the strong leadership in Charlotte that has followed a long North Carolina tradition of putting the needs and opportunities of our people before politics.”

But politics was behind the contentiousness surrounding the council decision.

More than 100 people debated the convention publicly and passionately before Monday’s council vote. Through it all, Democratic Mayor Vi Lyles championed the event and urged people to put partisanship aside.

Asked Friday if she would have started the bidding process had she known the opposition it would spark, she said she would have. She said the city would have had the same debate, even if the outcome may have been different.

“I think we would have done exactly what we did,” she told reporters. “The outcome I can’t project.”

Friday’s RNC vote means Charlotte will host its second national political convention eight years after finding itself the site of Democrat Barack Obama’s nomination for a second term.

Lyles and council members who joined her in Austin said they’re confident that law enforcement officials can provide security for the convention and the city.

“We’ve got two years to plan for protests we know will happen,” said Mayor Pro Tem Julie Eiselt, a Democrat.

Republican council member Ed Driggs agreed.

“We were very clear-headed about the political climate we’re in right now,” Driggs said. “We felt the benefits to the city outweigh the risks.”

Businessman Ned Curran co-chairs the host committee with Doug Lebda, the founder of Lending Tree, and attorney Walter Price. Former council member John Lassiter will be the host committee’s CEO and executive director.

Curran said the committee is “way ahead of schedule” in reaching its $70 million fundraising goal. In 2012 Democrats fell $10 million short of theirs. Duke shareholders footed about $6 million of that after the company was not repaid.

Lassiter told reporters the host committee already has raised “more than 10 percent” of what they need.

Other Republicans applauded the RNC’s selection.

“I think it’s going to be great,” said Saul Anunzis, Michigan’s former GOP chairman. “It’ll make sense politically for us.”

GOP National Chair Ronna McDaniel complimented not only Charlotte but Lyles.

“I love that it’s the Queen City and we have Mayor Vi Lyles — you are a queen,” McDaniel said. “We look forward to Charlotte being center stage when the Republican Party nominates Donald Trump and Mike Pence for a second term.”

“To be one of only a few American cities to host conventions from both political parties is a testament to the people of our state,” Pat McCrory, North Carolina’s former governor and Charlotte’s former mayor, said in a statement.

The convention is expected to involve not only uptown Charlotte but venues around the region.

“Every venue in the region is in play, and part of the attraction,” Curran said.

IMMIGRATION & EDUCATION - LET IN MORE AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS (BLOOMBERG OPINION COMMENTARY)

EDUCATION & IMMIGRATION - LET IN MORE AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS (OPINION COMMENTARY):

CURRENT RESEARCH SHOWS IMMIGRANTS FROM KENYA, NIGERIA, NEPAL, GHANA AND SAUDI ARABIA ARE OFTEN WELL-EDUCATED & HIGHLY SKILLED.

WHILE IMMIGRANTS FROM MEXICO, HONDURAS, GUATEMALA, CENTRAL AMERICA AND EL SALVADOR ARE OFTEN THE LEAST EDUCATED & LOW SKILLED.


Post Sources: Bloomberg, Youtube


******* Want Educated Immigrants? Let In More Africans


~ Highly skilled? Check. Hardworking? Check. English-speaking? Check. Ready to integrate? Check.

The uproar over White House Chief of Staff John Kelly’s comments about illegal immigration in an interview with National Public Radio last week still hasn’t entirely died down. I haven’t found the resulting discussion to be super-enlightening, so, as I did with an earlier Kelly comment about how nobody knows anybody in the military anymore, I decided to see if a few charts might clear things up.

To review, Kelly argued that most undocumented immigrants are “not people that would easily assimilate into the United States, into our modern society.” He went on:

They're overwhelmingly rural people in the countries they come from — fourth, fifth, sixth grade educations are kind of the norm. They don't speak English, obviously that's a big thing. They don't speak English. They don't integrate well, they don't have skills. They're not bad people. They're coming here for a reason. And I sympathize with the reason. But the laws are the laws.

So … let’s dig into the data. More than 70 percent of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. are from Mexico and Central America, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Mexico is by far the most common country of origin, but the population of Mexican immigrants in the U.S. (both documented and undocumented) actually fell 6 percent from 2007 to 2015, according to the Pew Research Center, while the numbers of Salvadorans, Hondurans and Guatemalans in the U.S. continued to grow.

So when we talk about illegal immigration into the U.S., we’re mainly talking about immigration from those four countries, with El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala playing a growing role and Mexico a huge but shrinking one.

And yes, most of those who have come to the U.S. from these countries are probably of rural origin, although (1) there’s not much good data on that and (2) there are indications that the rural share has been getting less “overwhelming” in recent years as Mexico and El Salvador, the two biggest sources of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S., have urbanized.

Much better data is available on the characteristics of foreign-born people here in the U.S., most of it from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, an annual survey of about 2 million households first conducted in 2005.

The ACS does not sort immigrants by whether they have permission to be in the U.S. or not. 1 (Estimates of the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S., in fact, are arrived at by taking the totals from the ACS and subtracting out the numbers of temporary and permanent lawful residents provided by the Department of Homeland Security.)

Still, it offers much insight into the characteristics of different immigrant groups. To get back to Kelly’s comment, here are the countries from which immigrants in the U.S. have the least formal education, according to the 2016 ACS:

So yes, the people who have come to the U.S. from Mexico and Central America tend not to have a lot of schooling.

The European nations of Portugal, Italy and Greece are also on this list, although most immigrants from those countries arrived in the U.S. a long time ago so there’s understandably not much grumbling about them.

Meanwhile, the countries from which the most-educated foreign-born U.S. residents hail make for quite a diverse bunch.

Next, let’s examine Kelly’s comments about non-English-speakers. He’s right that immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras struggle with the language, although this time around, they cede first place to Myanmar:

The list of countries from which immigrants in the U.S. are least likely to struggle with English are, unsurprisingly, all English-speaking countries, so I’m not going to bother with a chart. Extra credit, though, to the Netherlands and Germany for making the top 10 despite having their own languages, and to Trinidad & Tobago for beating out the U.K. for first place.

It’s important to remember, though, that immigrants from non-English-speaking countries have always struggled with the language. Many millions of immigrants from Germany, Italy and other European countries in the late 19th and early 20th centuries never did become fluent in English. But their children did!

The kids of today’s immigrants are learning English, too: Of people born in the U.S. who speak Spanish at home, reports the Census Bureau, 83 percent also speak English very well. The percentage is slightly higher — 87 percent — among those who speak other Indo-European languages at home, and is again 83 percent for those who speak Asian and Pacific languages at home.

Finally, there’s Kelly’s assertion that undocumented immigrants don’t integrate well. Language ability is one measure of integration. Employment is surely another one. When I ran a list of the countries from which immigrants in the U.S. have the highest employment-to-population ratio, some familiar names popped up:

The employment-population ratio for Mexican-born U.S. residents, by the way, is 65.5 percent, which ranks it 28th out of the 80 countries for which there’s data.

There are some caveats I should trot out here:

The immigrant populations from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras are younger and more male than the overall U.S. population, which skews employment ratios upward, and since this data covers everyone age 16 and up, college and even high school students count against the total — which brings the ratio down among groups likely to pursue higher education. Still, their strong employment performance isn't a fluke; the Cato Institute's David Bier offers up lots of other evidence that Central Americans are integrating pretty well.

The foreign-born residents with the lowest employment-population ratios hail mainly from countries (Hungary, Italy, Greece, Germany) from which most immigrants arrived decades ago and are now in their 60s or older. The very lowest employment-population ratio, though, is for those born in Saudi Arabia, most of whom are in the U.S. for college or graduate school.

And while no other country of origin has a majority of its U.S. residents currently enrolled in higher education, Kenya, Nigeria, Nepal and Ghana have the highest percentages after Saudi Arabia. So immigrants from Kenya, Nigeria and Ghana are near the top in both employment-population ratio and higher-education enrollment, and those from Nigeria are also near the top in educational attainment.

With that, let me offer my two cents on Kelly’s statement: It appears to be factually accurate in most of its characterizations of today’s undocumented immigrants, and I think the people decrying it as “racist” are for the most part just devaluing the term “racist.” His “they don’t integrate well” comment grates, though, given that Kelly and most other Americans are descended at least in part from rural people with limited education who didn’t speak any English when they got here.

And while there is a case to be made that education and English are far more important to success in the U.S. than they were a century ago, one certainly can’t depict Central Americans in particular as sitting around twiddling their thumbs wondering how they will ever integrate into U.S. society. They’re too busy working.

Also — and nothing Kelly said contradicted this, but some things his boss has reportedly said certainly have — what the charts above tell me is that if we want more high-skilled, hardworking, English-speaking, ready-to-integrate immigrants, it looks like the most obvious place to find them is in African countries where English is widely spoken.

The survey asks respondents whether they are citizens but does not ask the non-citizens to go into further detail.

These aren’t necessarily all immigrants who are planning to stay in the U.S. for good — a 25-year-old from India who is working on a doctorate at a U.S. university and planning to head home afterwards shows up, too. But close enough.

MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS vs AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS (DEMOCRATS DISCRIMINATE & DIVIDE)

MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS vs AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS (DEMOCRATS DISCRIMINATE & DIVIDE):

WE ARE ALL ONE BUT DEMOCRATS APPEAR TO FIGHT MORE FOR MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS THAN BLACKS.

IS IT BETTER TO SEPARATE BLACK CHILDREN FROM FAMILIES THAN MEXICAN CHILDREN FROM FAMILIES?

DEMOCRATS ALSO ENDORSE TAKING JOBS FROM YOUNG BLACK MEN TO GIVE TO MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS.

YET DURING EACH MAJOR ELECTION DEMOCRATS SEEK THE BLACK MAJORITY VOTE.

IF WE ARE ALL ONE, WHY CAN'T BOTH AFRICAN & MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS BENEFIT FROM FAIR, UNBIASED IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT??


Post Sources: Bloomberg, Daily Republic, Youtube


******** Liberals say immigration enforcement racist, but Black men most likely to benefit


Donald Trump’s election victory over Hillary Clinton seemed to herald a new era for border security and immigration enforcement. But his polarizing and occasionally ignorant comments about immigrants have handed his adversaries a convenient pretext for stymying compromise on immigration reform: racism.

Left-leaning advocacy groups and a host of Democrats all too often shy away from the specifics of the debate and instead lean on cries of bigotry, resorting to claims like that of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who has described Trump’s approach to immigration reform as an effort to “make America white again.”

Claims that immigration enforcement equals racism ignore the reality that the group most likely to benefit from a tougher approach to immigration enforcement is young black men, who often compete with recent immigrants for low-skill jobs.

This dynamic played out recently at a large bakery in Chicago that supplies buns to McDonald’s. Some 800 immigrant laborers, most of them from Mexico, lost their jobs last year after an audit by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The Cloverhill Bakery, owned by Aryzta, a big Swiss food conglomerate, had to hire new workers, 80 percent to 90 percent of whom are African-American. According to the Chicago Sun Times, the new workers are paid $14 per hour, or $4 per hour more than the (illegal) immigrant workers.

In this case, and in many others, the beneficiaries of immigration enforcement were working-class blacks, who are often passed over for jobs by unscrupulous employers.

The labor force participation rate for adult black men has declined steadily since the passage of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, which ushered in a new era of mass immigration. In 1973, the rate was 79 percent. It is now at 68 percent, and the Bureau of Labor projects that it will decline to 61 percent by 2026.

The Obama White House in 2016 produced a 48-page report acknowledging that immigration does not help the labor force participation rate of the native-born. It concluded, however, that “immigration reform would raise the overall participation rate by bringing in new workers of prime working age.”

Although the report used the term “new workers,” Democrats may also be tempted by the prospect of new voters. But they should be aware that in courting one group, they risk losing others.

African-Americans tend to be a reliable voting bloc for the Democratic Party, but they have repeatedly indicated in public opinion surveys that they want significantly less immigration.

A recent Harvard-Harris poll found that African-Americans favor reducing legal immigration more than any other demographic group: 85 percent want less than the million-plus we allow annually, and 54 percent opted for the most stringent choices offered – 250,000 immigrants per year or less, or none at all.

These attitudes are rational.

In a 2010 study on the social effects of immigration, the Cornell University professor Vernon Briggs concluded: “No racial or ethnic group has benefited less or been harmed more than the nation’s African-American community.”

The Harvard economist George Borjas has found that between 1980 and 2000, one-third of the decline in the employment among black male high school dropouts was attributable to immigration. He also reported “a strong correlation between immigration, black wages, black employment rates, and black incarceration rates.”

University of Notre Dame professor Stephen Steinberg argued in a 2014 paper on neoliberal immigration policies and their effects on African-Americans that thanks to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, “African-Americans found themselves in the proverbial position of being ‘last hired.’” Steinberg also noted that “immigrants have been cited as proof that African-Americans lack the pluck and determination that have allowed millions of immigrants from Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean to pursue the American dream.”

The struggles of black men obviously cannot all be linked to immigration, but it’s clear that the status quo does not benefit them.

As elected leaders consider changing our immigration laws, the interests of America’s most vulnerable citizens shouldn’t be overlooked. The first step toward honest reform is for the Democratic Party to admit that while liberal immigration enforcement might help them win new voters, it also harms and disenfranchises their most loyal constituency.

DC & MARYLAND'S YOUNG BLACK MEN REMAIN UNEMPLOYED & ARRESTED (EARLY VOTING 2018)

))

DC & MARYLAND'S YOUNG BLACK MEN REMAIN UNEMPLOYED & ARRESTED (EARLY VOTING 2018):

IT APPEAR AS IF DC & MARYLAND'S BLACK POLITICIANS HAVE FORGOTTEN YOUNG UNEMPLOYED BLACK MEN.

JOB NUMBERS AMONG BLACK MEN IN DC & MARYLAND STILL LAG.

WHERE ARE THE JOBS IN DC & MARYLAND FOR YOUNG BLACK MEN?

YOUNG BLACK MEN IN DC & MARYLAND BELONG ON JOBS NOT IN JAIL.

BUT HOW DO YOU EXPECT YOUNG BLACK MEN TO STAY OUT OF JAIL WITHOUT JOBS WHICH THEY NEED TO SURVIVE??


Post Sources: EPI, Baltimore Sun, WTOP, Youtube


****** In 14 states and DC, the African American unemployment rate is at least twice the white unemployment rate.


The highest African American unemployment rate is in the District of Columbia at 12.9 percent, while the highest white unemployment rate is in West Virginia at 5.2 percent.

In the first quarter of 2018, African American workers had the highest unemployment rate nationally, at 7.2 percent, followed by Hispanic (5.1 percent), white (3.3 percent), and Asian workers (3.0 percent).1

This report provides a state-by-state breakdown of unemployment rates by race and ethnicity and racial/ethnic unemployment rate gaps for the first quarter of 2018. It shows that while there have been state-by-state improvements in prospects for black and Hispanic workers, their unemployment rates remain high relative to those of white workers. Following are some key highlights of the report:

While the African American unemployment rate is at or below its pre-recession level in 17 states (of the 22 states and the District of Columbia for which these data are available), in 14 states and the District of Columbia, African American unemployment rates exceed white unemployment rates by a ratio of 2-to-1 or higher.

The District of Columbia has the highest black–white unemployment rate ratio overall, at 8.5-to-1, while South Carolina and Maryland have the highest ratios among states (3.2-to-1 and 2.8-to-1, respectively).

The highest African American unemployment rate is in the District of Columbia (12.9 percent), followed by Illinois (9.1 percent) and New Jersey (9.0 percent). The highest Hispanic state unemployment rate is in Connecticut (10.0 percent). In contrast, the highest white state unemployment rate is 5.2 percent, in West Virginia.

While the Hispanic unemployment rate is at or below its pre-recession level in 13 states (of the 16 states for which these data are available), there is no state where the Hispanic unemployment rate is lower than the white rate.

In five states and the District of Columbia, Hispanic unemployment rates exceed white unemployment rates by a ratio of 2-to-1 or higher (Connecticut, 3.4-to-1; Massachusetts, 2.1-to-1; Washington, 2.1-to-1; Colorado, 2.0-to-1; District of Columbia, 2.0-to-1, and Idaho, 2.0-to-1).

Background

In March 2018, the national unemployment rate was 4.1 percent, unchanged from at the end of the fourth quarter of 2017.2 State unemployment rates in March ranged from a low of 2.1 percent in Hawaii to 7.3 percent in Alaska.3 According to a previous EPI analysis of unemployment by state, from December to March 2018, 25 states and the District of Columbia saw their unemployment rates decline, 7 states saw unemployment rates rise, and 18 states saw no change.

State unemployment rates, by race and ethnicity

EPI analyzes state unemployment rates by race and ethnicity, and by racial/ethnic unemployment rate gaps, on a quarterly basis to generate a sample size large enough to create reliable estimates of unemployment rates by race and ethnicity at the state level. We only report estimates for states for which the sample size of these subgroups is large enough to create an accurate estimate. For this reason, the number of states included in our map and data tables varies based on the analysis performed (unemployment rate, change in unemployment rate since the fourth quarter of 2007, and ratio of African American or Hispanic unemployment rate to white unemployment rate).

Trends among white workers

In the first quarter of 2018, the white unemployment rate was lowest in the District of Columbia (1.5 percent) and highest in West Virginia (5.2 percent), as shown in the interactive map and underlying data, which present state unemployment rates by race and ethnicity. Among states, North Dakota had the lowest unemployment rate for white workers (1.9 percent).

Trends among African American workers

African American unemployment rate estimates are available for 23 states and the District of Columbia.

During the first quarter of 2018, among states, the African American unemployment rate was lowest in Indiana (4.8 percent) and highest in Illinois (9.1 percent); in the District of Columbia, it was 12.9 percent. The District of Columbia also had the highest black unemployment rate during the previous six quarters.

In the first quarter of 2018, of the 23 states with African American unemployment rate estimates, all had black unemployment rates below 10 percent; in 14 of these states, the rate was at or below the first quarter national average for African American workers (7.2 percent).

The black unemployment rate in the first quarter of 2018 was at or below its pre-recession level in 17 states: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.

(Data on the change in black unemployment over this period are available for 22 states and the District of Columbia).

However, all states except for Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas have black labor force participation rates that were lower in the first quarter of 2018 than at the end of 2007, indicating that the return to pre-recession levels of unemployment in these states was not a full recovery for African American workers because not all discouraged job seekers have returned to the market.5

Trends among Hispanic workers

Hispanic unemployment rate estimates are available for 23 states and the District of Columbia, and data on changes in Hispanic unemployment rates since the fourth quarter of 2007 are available for 16 states. In the first quarter of 2018, among states, the Hispanic unemployment rate was highest in Connecticut (10.0 percent) and lowest in Arkansas and Virginia (both at 3.3 percent).

The Hispanic unemployment rate was 3.1 percent in the District of Columbia. Connecticut and Washington were the only states with Hispanic unemployment rates above 8.0 percent in the first quarter.

The Hispanic unemployment rate is at or below its pre-recession level in 13 states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. The Hispanic unemployment rate was most elevated above its pre-recession level in Washington (by 2.3 percentage points).

In no state was the Hispanic unemployment rate lower than the white unemployment rate. In Arkansas, the Hispanic unemployment rate and white unemployment rate were exactly the same (3.3 percent). The ratio of Hispanic unemployment to white unemployment was highest in Connecticut (3.4-to-1), Massachusetts (2.1-to-1), and Washington (2.1-to-1).

Trends among Asian workers

Asian unemployment rate estimates are available for 10 states, and data on the change in Asian unemployment rates since the fourth quarter of 2007 are available for seven states. For the third consecutive quarter, the Asian unemployment rate was lowest in Hawaii (1.6 percent). The highest Asian unemployment rate was in Massachusetts (6.2 percent).

The Asian unemployment rate was at or below its pre-recession level in California, Hawaii, Illinois, New York, Texas, and Washington. In only one state—New Jersey—was the Asian unemployment rate was more than 2 percentage points above its pre-recession level (at 2.6 percentage points higher).
Methodology

The unemployment rate estimates in this report are based on the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) and the Current Population Survey (CPS) from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The overall state unemployment rate is taken directly from the LAUS. CPS six-month ratios are applied to LAUS data to calculate the rates by race and ethnicity.

For each state subgroup, we calculate the unemployment rate using the past six months of CPS data. We then find the ratio of this subgroup rate to the state unemployment rate using the same period of CPS data. This gives us an estimate of how the subgroup compares with the state overall.

While this methodology allows us to calculate unemployment-rate estimates at the state level by race and ethnicity by quarter, it is less precise at the national level than simply using the CPS. Thus, the national-level estimates may differ from direct CPS estimates.

In many states, the sample sizes of particular subgroups are not large enough to create accurate estimates of their unemployment rates. We report data only for groups that had, on average, a sample size of at least 700 in the labor force for each six-month period.

HONDURANS LOSE PROTECTED STATUS TO REMAIN IN UNITED STATES (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION)

HONDURANS LOSE PROTECTED STATUS TO REMAIN IN UNITED STATES (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION):

MOST HONDURANS HAVE LIVED IN U.S. SINCE 1999 YET THEY DID NOT APPLY FOR LEGAL CITIZEN.

HOW IS IT THEY WERE ALLOWED TO LIVE AND WORK IN ANOTHER COUNTRY ILLEGALLY FOR 19 YEARS??

WHAT ABOUT THE MS-13 GANGS?


Post Sources: Fox News, Daily Mail, PBS News, Washington Post, Youtube


***** Trump administration ends protections for 50,000 Hondurans living in U.S. since 1999


More than 50,000 Hondurans who have been allowed to live and work in the United States since 1999 will have 20 months to leave the country or face deportation, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen announced Friday, the latest in a series of DHS measures aimed at tightening U.S. immigration controls.

The Hondurans were granted temporary protected status (TPS) in 1999, shielding them from deportation, after Hurricane Mitch slammed their country and left 10,000 dead across Central America.

Under President Trump, DHS has been eliminating TPS programs one by one, arguing they were never designed to grant long-term residency to foreigners who may have arrived illegally or overstayed their visas.

In the past six months, DHS has ended TPS for nearly 200,000 Salvadorans, 50,000 Haitians and 9,000 Nepalis, giving those groups 12 to 18 months to prepare a departure or secure some other form of legal status.

According to a DHS statement, Nielsen “carefully considered conditions on the ground” before making the Honduras decision.

“The Secretary determined that the disruption of living conditions in Honduras from Hurricane Mitch that served as the basis for its TPS designation has decreased to a degree that it should no longer be regarded as substantial,” the DHS statement read.

“Since 1999, conditions in Honduras that resulted from the hurricane have notably improved,” the statement continued, adding that the country has made “substantial progress in post-hurricane recovery.”

It was not clear from the DHS statement which improvements Nielsen was referring to.

Honduras remains one of the most violent countries in the world and has been roiled by political instability since presidential elections last year whose legitimacy was rejected by the Organization of American States and other international observers.

Congress established TPS as a humanitarian program in 1990 to avoid deporting foreigners to countries that have been destabilized by natural disasters or civil strife.

The Trump administration hasn’t ended the protections for every eligible nation; in January, Nielsen extended TPS for nearly 7,000 immigrants from war-torn Syria.

More than 86,000 Hondurans received TPS protections after the hurricane, and the latest government estimates show that about 50,000 still depend on the designation to remain in the United States.

Last November, DHS ended TPS for 2,500 Nicaraguans who were also allowed to stay after Hurricane Mitch.

Hondurans were the second-largest group of TPS recipients after Salvadorans, and many have lived most of their adult lives in the United States, running businesses, purchasing homes and raising American-born children.

Critics of the Trump administration say forcing otherwise law-abiding immigrants out of the United States is shortsighted and heartless, particularly at a time when Honduras and some other nations are teetering from gang warfare and political unrest.

“There is little doubt that the White House has been driving these TPS decisions based on ideology, not based upon what is best for our foreign policy interests and for the region,” said Kevin Appleby, senior director of international migration policy at the Center for Migration Studies, a nonpartisan think tank.

“It makes the situation in Honduras and Central America worse and will assuredly come back to haunt us in time,” ¬Appleby said.

Honduras is a significant source of illegal immigration to the United States, and many of the families who joined the migrant caravan through Mexico that captured the attention of President Trump last month said they fled their country in fear for their lives.

They joined thousands of other Central Americans who arrive every month at the U.S. border with Mexico to request asylum, many of them families or women with children.

TRUMP'S 2018 STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH - 9pm EST (LIVE VIDEO); MILESTONES FOR THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION

TRUMP'S 2018 STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH - 9pm EST:

EXPECTED TOPICS -

MILESTONES FOR THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION

HOW TO UNIFY OUR NATION

MORE TRAINING FOR U.S. TROOPS

UPDATES ON IMMIGRATION REFORM

GOP TAX PLAN

MORE FUNDING FOR SMALL BUSINESSES

WALL STREET & THE STOCK MARKET

AFFORDABLE EDUCATION & HEALTH CARE

SANCTIONS ON NORTH KOREA & RUSSIA

SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE

ETC.,


Sources: NY Times, Youtube


******* State of the Union: Trump to Declare a ‘New American Moment’


• President Trump will deliver his first State of the Union address tonight at 9 p.m. Eastern, and The New York Times will be streaming it live on our website and on our app. Follow our coverage for the latest updates and analysis.

• The White House has released excerpts from the speech.

• The president will arrive at the Capitol amid remarkable tumult: Anger that he has declined to impose sanctions on Russia and worry over a Republican memo on the origins of the Russia investigation.

White House releases excerpts — “the New American Moment.”
The White House released excerpts from the State of the Union address, a tradition that gives the president a few hours’ head start to highlight what he wants the audience to focus on.

Here are a few, as prepared for delivery:

“We want every American to know the dignity of a hard day’s work; we want every child to be safe in their home at night, and we want every citizen to be proud of this land that we love.”

“Since we passed tax cuts, roughly 3 million workers have already gotten tax cut bonuses — many of them thousands of dollars per worker.”

“This is our New American Moment. There has never been a better time to start living the American dream.”

“For the last year we have sought to restore the bonds of trust between our citizens and their government.”

“In our drive to make Washington accountable, we have eliminated more regulations in our first year than any administration in history.”

“America has also finally turned the page on decades of unfair trade deals that sacrificed our prosperity and shipped away our companies, our jobs and our nation’s wealth.”

“America is a nation of builders. We built the Empire State Building in just one year — isn’t it a disgrace that it can now take ten years just to get a permit approved for a simple road?”

“I am asking both parties to come together to give us the safe, fast, reliable, and modern infrastructure our economy needs and our people deserve.”

“Struggling communities, especially immigrant communities, will also be helped by immigration policies that focus on the best interests of American workers and American families.”

“As we rebuild America’s strength and confidence at home, we are also restoring our strength and standing abroad.”

“Last year I pledged that we would work with our allies to extinguish ISIS from the face of the earth. One year later, I’m proud to report that the coalition to defeat ISIS has liberated almost 100 percent of the territory once held by these killers in Iraq and Syria. But there is much more work to be done. We will continue our fight until ISIS is defeated.”

Sonny Perdue, agriculture secretary, designated survivor.
Yeah, there’s the first lady’s clothes or which big wig will fall asleep this year. But the State of the Union proceedings also have this bit of intrigue: Which cabinet official will earn the distinction of designated survivor?

The mystery this time was solved two hours before Mr. Trump was due to give his address on Tuesday, when the White House said that the honor would go to Mr. Perdue, the former governor of Georgia and the president’s agriculture secretary.

Glamorous in title but, thankfully, not so far in practice, the designated survivor does not attend the president’s address, and is poised to take over the commander-in-chief’s responsibilities in the event that catastrophe strikes the Capitol and wipes out most of the government. If tradition holds, Mr. Perdue will be watching from a distant and secure location while Mr. Trump speaks.

The short tenure of the designated survivor has an oversize presence in the public imagination: There is a TV series by the same title, about a low-profile cabinet member who suddenly assumes the presidency after a terror attack.

How might he measure up in the Oval Office? Mr. Perdue, a conservative Republican, shares something in common with Mr. Trump: As governor of Georgia, he faced ethical criticisms for not appearing to fully separate himself from his business interests. He once ran a grain and fertilizer business.

— Katie Rogers

“You’ve gotta have heart.”
Hours before his first State of the Union address, President Trump told a group of news anchors at a lunch in the White House that his first year in office has taught him that the biggest difference between excelling in business and performing his current job is that governing takes compassion.

“I’ve really learned a lot,” Mr. Trump told the reporters, according to a partial transcript of an off-the-record lunch released publicly by the White House. “In doing what I’m doing now, a lot of it is heart, a lot of it is compassion, a lot of it is far beyond money — such as immigration.”

Mr. Trump, who is expected to use Tuesday night’s speech to call for a bipartisan compromise that pairs legal status for a group of undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children with funding for a border wall, tougher enforcement and new restrictions on legal immigration, recently said he was hoping to sign a “bill of love.”

That tone is sharply at odds with the president’s approach on immigration thus far, which has included a travel ban against visitors from six countries, slashing refugee resettlement and revoking temporary protected status for people from El Salvador and Haiti. He has been more publicly conflicted about his decision last fall to rescind DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, the Obama-era program that has given legal status to certain people brought illegally to the United States as children.

“I’m telling you, the immigration is so easy to solve if it was purely a business matter, but it’s not,” Mr. Trump said. “And I think that’s something that I’ve learned maybe more than anything else: You have to — you govern with all of the instincts of a businessperson, but you have to add much more heart and soul into your decisions than you would ever have even thought of before.”

Dreamers head to the Capitol — despite the risk.
Democratic lawmakers have decided to put a face on the difficult negotiations happening in Congress over the fate of young, undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children. They are bringing scores of such “Dreamers” to the Capitol for Tuesday night’s State of the Union address.

Representative Nancy Pelosi’s guest, Melody Klingenfuss, is just one of them. Born in Guatemala, she was brought to Los Angeles when she was 9, earned a degree in communications and political science from California State University, Los Angeles, a master’s degree from the University of Southern California, then won protection under the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in 2015.

“Tonight, when President Trump looks into the gallery during his State of the Union, he will see the dignity, courage and patriotism of dozens of Dreamers,” said Ms. Pelosi, the House Democratic leader.

But there is a flip side. Representative Paul Gosar, Republican of Arizona, has called the cops.

So much for the warm welcome.

Mr. Gosar’s fellow Arizona Republican, Senator Jeff Flake, didn’t take kindly to his colleague’s citizen’s arrest.

Are we facing a “Constitutional crisis”?
The Trump administration’s announcement on Monday that it would not impose sanctions on countries that buy Russian military equipment sparked an angry response in Congress, where the Senate and House overwhelmingly approved the sanctions to punish Russia for interfering in the 2016 election.

Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri who faces a difficult re-election campaign this year, set the tone with a blast on Twitter.

That concern is bipartisan, at least in some quarters of the Republican Party. Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, was flummoxed by the administration’s decision:

“That bill passed with only two dissenting votes in the Senate. It was not partisan in the least,” she said on CNN. “The one thing we know for sure already is the Russians did attempt to meddle in our elections, and not only should there be a price to pay in terms of sanctions, but also we need to put safeguards in place right now for the elections for this year, because we know that the Russians have not given up on their disinformation campaign and their attempt to sow discord in this country and also to undermine faith in democratic institutions.”

Testifying before a Senate panel on Tuesday morning, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said his department had followed instructions under the sanctions law and drawn up a list of Russian targets for sanctions. An imposition of sanctions could still follow.

Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee and one of the authors of the sanctions legislation, declined to criticize the administration’s actions. He did say, “I look forward” to the implementation of the sanctions.

Speaker Ryan weighs in on Russia memo.

Speaker Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin spent part of the morning before Mr. Trump’s speech tamping down expectations about a secretive Republican memo that some House members have claimed contains evidence that could undercut the Russia investigation.

In a closed-door meeting of House Republicans this morning, Mr. Ryan “implored” his fellow lawmakers not to overstate the facts of the memo, which the House Intelligence Committee voted to release Monday night. And he urged them not to tie the contentious document — which Democrats call dangerously misleading — to the work of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, according to a person in the room.

Mr. Ryan reiterated some of those points during a public news conference an hour later, saying that he had faith in the F.B.I. and Justice Department’s broadly and that he thought Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, the man overseeing the Russia investigation, was “doing a fine job.” Still, Mr. Ryan defended the Republicans’ overall approach, saying that they were following proper processes and that only transparency would lead to accountability at the agencies.

That was not enough to quiet the most ardent proponents of the notion that federal law enforcement agents have conspired to bring down the Trump White House. Representative Matt Gaetz, Republican of Florida, called on the president to release the memo during the State of the Union.

JAY-Z vs DONALD TRUMP (RACISM & JOBS)

JAY-Z vs DONALD TRUMP (RACISM & JOBS):

TWO RICH NATIVE NEW YORKERS AT ODDS.

TWO DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES BASED ON RACE & ECONOMICS.


Sources: CNN, Yahoo News, Youtube


******* Trump hits back at Jay-Z after rapper dismissed his claims about black unemployment

In an interview with CNN’s Van Jones that aired Saturday night, Jay-Z — whose birth name is Shawn Carter — said that the numbers don’t matter.

“It’s not about money at the end of the day,” said Carter, whose net worth is estimated to be $810 million. “Money doesn’t equate to happiness. It doesn’t. That’s missing the whole point. You treat people like human beings then — that’s the main point.”

Carter also criticized the disparaging remarks Trump reportedly made about African countries during an Oval Office meeting on immigration this month.

“It is disappointing and it’s hurtful,” Carter said. “It really is hurtful, more than so … everyone feels anger. But after the anger, it’s real hurtful. It’s looking down at a whole population of people, and it’s so misinformed because these places have beautiful people and beautiful everything. This is the leader of the free world speaking like this.”

MURIEL BOWSER TO ENACT "BAN THE BOX" IN DC TO REMOVE EMPLOYMENT BARRIER (ARREST RECORDS); ARRESTS DOESN'T EQUAL CONVICTIONS

MURIEL BOWSER TO ENACT "BAN THE BOX" IN DC TO REMOVE EMPLOYMENT BARRIER (ARREST RECORDS):

AN ARREST DOES NOT EQUAL CONVICTIONS AND MANY PEOPLE (ESPECIALLY BLACKS) CAN'T GET JOBS DUE TO VERY OLD ARREST RECORDS WITH NO CONVICTIONS.

WHITE JOB APPLICANTS WITH ARRESTS ARE STILL HIRED, NOT BLACKS.

REFUSING TO HIRE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ARRESTED WITHOUT CONVICTIONS IS A FORM OF DISCRIMINATION.

NOT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD EXPUNGEMENT.

IT'S TIME TO REMOVE SUCH BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT.


Sources: NBC News


****** DC Mayor Moves to Ease Process of Sealing Criminal Records



Mayor Muriel Bowser proposed legislation Thursday that could make it easier for D.C. residents to seal their criminal records.


DC Could Make It Easier to Seal Criminal Records


Mayor Muriel Bowser proposed legislation on Thursday that could make it easier for D.C. residents to seal criminal conviction records.


Bowser's plan proposes that arrest records that aren't prosecuted or end with a conviction be automatically sealed, wait times for record sealings be trimmed down and some convictions should be reviewed to be eligible for record sealing, according to a statement from her office.


"We know that when we remove barriers to housing, education and employment for some residents by giving them a clean slate, we are actually building a safer, stronger city for all residents," Bowser said in the statement."Through this legislation, we will give more individuals, more families, and more neighborhoods a fair shot at success."

Although sealed criminal records can't be accessed by potential employers during a background check, some employers, including those who work with children, law enforcement officials and courts can see them.Mayor Muriel Bowser proposed legislation Thursday that could make it easier for D.C. residents to seal criminal conviction records.

Bowser proposed that arrests that aren't prosecuted or don't end with a conviction automatically be sealed. The plan also calls for reduced wait times for record sealings, and a review of the types of convictions eligible for record sealing, according to a statement from her office.

"We know that when we remove barriers to housing, education and employment for some residents by giving them a clean slate, we are actually building a safer, stronger city for all residents," the mayor said in the statement."Through this legislation, we will give more individuals, more families, and more neighborhoods a fair shot at success."

Over 40,000 people are arrested every year in D.C., and only one-third of those people are prosecuted.

Brian Ferguson works in the mayor's office helping people who were released from prison assimilate back into regular life. He also was in prison for 11 years before having a conviction for homicide overturned. He said these laws could help people get back on their feet.

"Arrest records are holding them back from being able to potentially obtain employment, professional licensing, education or housing," Ferguson said.

Sealed criminal records can't be accessed by landlords, employers or other third parties during a background check. However, certain employers that serve vulnerable people, law enforcement officials and courts can see them.

Currently, under D.C. law, people must petition to have their records sealed by proving their innocence, which can take from six months to years.
According to Bowser's statement, more than 10,000 people annually ask for help to have their records sealed in D.C. Superior Court from the Public Defender Service.

CHAIN MIGRATION IS SUPPORTED BY DEMOCRATS WHO NEED ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO HELP WIN ELECTIONS; TRUMP SAYS NO DEAL (MEXICO)

CHAIN MIGRATION IS SUPPORTED BY DEMOCRATS WHO NEED ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO HELP WIN ELECTIONS:

CHAIN MIGRATION IS NOT ABOUT COMPASSION, ONLY ABOUT POLITICS AND ELECTIONS.

IMMIGRANTS WITH HB2 VISAS ARE BRINGING OVER THEIR ENTIRE FAMILIES.

CHAIN MIGRATION IS IN FACT BACK DOOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION WHICH IS STILL A CRIME.

TRUMP SAYS NO DACA DEAL WITH CHAIN MIGRATION.

MOST DACA DREAMERS ARE ADULTS (AGE 18-40) NOT CHILDREN.

AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO COMMIT IDENTITY THEFT ARE IMPRISONED BECAUSE IT IS INDEED A CRIME.

IN USA MEXICAN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WHO PURCHASE SOMEONE'S SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER ARE REWARDED WITH JOBS THEY AREN'T QUALIFIED FOR AND WELFARE AND FOOD STAMPS AND STUDENT AID.


~ MOST POOR MEXICAN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS:

MEXICO DOESN'T WANT THE POOR PEOPLE SO MEXICAN GOV'T SENDS THEM TO USA BORDERS,

MEXICO IS ALSO SENDING THEIR GANG MEMBERS TO USA BORDERS SO THAT MEXICO IS SAFER FOR TOURISTS,

CAN'T SPEAK ENGLISH,

DON'T WANT TO LEARN ENGLISH,

DON'T PAY TAXES,

DON'T WANT TO BECOME LEGAL CITIZENS,

ARE NOT WELL-EDUCATED,

ARE NOT FULLY VETTED VIA FULL BACKGROUND CHECKS OR MEDICAL EXAMS AND MANY ARE CRIMINALS FROM THEIR NATIVE COUNTRY,

DON'T POSSESS HIGH LEVEL SKILLS YET THEY ARE HIRED MORE OFTEN THAN AMERICAN CITIZENS TO WORK FOR LOWER WAGES,

MANY LOWER PAID MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS DO RECEIVE FOOD STAMPS,

DEMOCRAT LEADERS AND SOME GOP LEADERS ARE IN BED WITH BILLIONAIRE CEOS WHO WANT TO PAY LOW WAGES TO KEEP THEIR POCKETS FAT.



Sources: BBC News, Daily Mail, Breitbart, NPG, RT, Texas Tribune, Washington Examiner, Youtube



****** Now Trump says 'chain migration' of illegal immigrants' families can't be part of saving DACA as he moves toward immigration deal with Democrats


'Chain migration' is the legal ability of U.S. residents to sponsor their foreign relatives for immigrant visas, in a process that repeats itself over and over.

President Trump has already proposed a sweeping change to America's legal immigration system, limiting family visas in favor of a skills-based merit system.

As word spread that he might ink a deal with Democrats to save the DACA program, he insisted on Twitter that it won't enable more chain migration.

DACA is an Obama-era program that protects from deportation nearly 800,000 people who were brought to the U>S. illegally as children.

Conservatives fear giving them legal status would allow them to sponsor visas for the adults who broke the law by bringing them to the U.S. in the first place.

As he works toward a bargain with Democrats to resolve the status of nearly 800,000 illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children, Donald Trump said Friday that he wont't embrace a solution that enables so-called 'chain migration.'

Chain migration refers to the legal right of citizens and other legal U.S. residents to 'sponsor' relatives living outside the country, bringing them one by one in expanding circles until extended families have immigrated.

'CHAIN MIGRATION cannot be allowed to be part of any legislation on Immigration!' Trump tweeted Friday, putting the words in upper case letters.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters on Friday that the president will lay out his specific proposals and their limitations in between 7 and 10 days.

Under proposals favored by some Democrats, people benefiting from the Obama-era 'Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals' (DACA) program could gain legal status or citizenship, opening up the possibility that they could help overseas relatives obtain lawful residence.

The Trump administration fueled speculation on Thursday, with deputy press secretary Lindsay Walters telling reporters aboard Air Force One that a 'responsible path forward' for DACA recipients 'could include legal citizenship over a period of time.'

'But absolutely by no means will this White House discuss amnesty,' Walters added, confusing journalists on the plane.

The prospect of elevating DACA recipients to citizenship status is troublesome for conservative Republicans who point out that while they were brought into the United States, giving them the right to sponsor their parents for legal immigration status could reward the adults who snuck them across the border.

Chain migration was made part of federal immigration law in 1965 with the Hart-Celler Act, which gave relatives of legal U.S. residents preference over other potential immigrants with skills the government had prioritized.

The law has made family reunification a central plank of American immigration policy since 1924, when Congress allowed citizens' and residents' spouses and unmarried adult children up to age 21 to ignore per-country quotas and emigrate to the U.S.

In 1965 about 32,700 immigrants entered the United States on the basis of their existing family relationships.

By 2001 the annual number of family-sponsored immigration visas had grown to nearly 677,000.

Last month Trump announced his backing for a broader plan that would limit legal immigration by placing an emphasis on a skills-based merit system instead of family connections.

Applicants from foreign countries would be rewarded if they can speak English, financially support themselves and bring skills that 'can contribute to our economy,' Trump said in early August.
House Speaker Paul Ryan told the Associated Press on Thursday that 'moving from what people describe as chain migration to a skills-based merit system makes a lot of sense, while keeping nuclear families intact.'

The president stunned many Republicans this week by entering into negotiations with top congressional Democrats over the DACA program.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced last week that the administration was terminating DACA itself, subject to a six-month delay intended to give Congress a window to decide recipients' fate.

The latest episode of the saga came amid Democrats' claims Wednesday night that Trump had promised to sign a bill formalizing DACA without including funding for the wall he has pledged to build between the U.S. and Mexico.

Trump himself tweeted Thursday that it wasn't true.

No deal was made last night on DACA. Massive border security would have to be agreed to in exchange for consent. Would be subject to vote,' he wrote.

But he has also offered a full-throated defense of DACA recipients, insisting that he intends to show 'great heart' in dealing with their situations.

'Does anybody really want to throw out good, educated and accomplished young people who have jobs, some serving in the military? Really!' he said Thursday morning on Twitter.

'They have been in our country for many years through no fault of their own – brought in by parents at young age.'
Trump added that he would insist on a 'BIG border security' component to any immigration deal with Congress.

DACA DREAMERS TRUE NUMBERS HIDDEN BY MEDIA - NOT 800,000......BUT MILLIONS; WHAT ABOUT BACKGROUND CHECKS??

#DREAMERS


DACA DREAMERS TRUE NUMBERS HIDDEN BY MAINSTREAM MEDIA - NOT 800,000......BUT MILLIONS:

MORE THAN 11 MILLION ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ARE LIVING IN USA ON TAXPAYER DOLLARS (MOSTLY MEXICANS).

MANY COMPANIES HIRE THEM FOR LOW WAGES INSTEAD OF HIRING MORE SKILLED AMERICAN WORKERS.

MANY COMPANIES DON'T CONDUCT FULL BACKGROUND CHECKS ON IMMIGRANTS AND STILL HIRE THEM WHILE NOT HIRING US WORKERS WITH MINIMAL CRIMINAL RECORDS.

MANY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS DON'T HAVE WORK SKILLS AND MANY CAN'T SPEAK ENGLISH YET THEY ARE BEING HIRED TO WORK INSTEAD OF US WORKERS FOR LOW WAGES.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS NEED TO BECOME LEGAL CITIZENS, PAY TAXES, COMPLETE FULL BACKGROUND CHECKS, LEARN ENGLISH AND NOT BE HIRED OVER AMERICAN WORKERS IF THEY'RE NOT TRULY QUALIFIED.


Sources: US INC., NY Times




***** What’s the Real Number of Illegal Aliens in the Country?



According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s population clock, the current population of the United States is approaching 325 million people.

One presumes that it includes the “official” current estimate of illegal aliens of 11 million.

Of course, that number is ridiculously low if you calculate the U.S. Border Patrol’s apprehension for the last 30 years, from 1985-2015.


Over that thirty year period, the Border Patrol apprehended 31,373,128 illegal aliens along the southern border, alone.

That does not include those apprehended on the East Coast coming from Cuba, the Bahamas, Haiti, Jamaica or the other Caribbean Islands.

It doesn’t include numbers from the northern border with Canada and it doesn’t include those who overstayed their visas, thereby becoming illegal aliens. (“Visa overstays” are often, incorrectly, referred to as 40% of all illegal aliens.

Nobody really knows, because the U.S. still doesn’t keep track of those who have entered legally on a visa. But, that percentage isn’t close.)

For years, the Border Patrol (BP) officially used to report the “gotaway” rate, those who “got away” from apprehension.

For decades, it was felt that on a “good day,” the Border Patrol caught one in five illegal aliens, on a “bad day,” the number was one in seven.

That means that if every single day since 1985 was a “good day,” then for every one they caught, four “got away.”

4 x 31,373,128 = 125,492,512 illegal border crossings in the past 30 years.
And, that’s just across the southern border. But now, no more “gotaway rate.”

Retired Congressman Tom Tancredo, a good friend and ally in our fight to get our immigration laws enforced during the last two years of the Clinton Administration and all of the Bush Administration, had a good piece on Breitbart, August 6, titled, “Border Patrol to Illegals: Don’t Get Caught.”

He reports:

“… Obama’s Border Patrol has officially abandoned the use of the “Gotaway” number in weekly and quarterly reports of apprehensions. For decades, the Border Patrol routinely compiled and reported the Gotaway number as a supplement to the number of actual apprehensions.

Border Patrol agents knew and openly admitted that the number of illegal border crossers apprehended was only a fraction of the number of border jumpers.

Veterans and CBP retirees remember when that Gotaway number was three to four times the official apprehension number.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service recently calculated the Gotaway number to be at least 1.5.

Translated, that means the number of successful illegal entries is at least 150 percent above the number apprehended by the Border Patrol.”

Now, there is absolutely no reason to believe any number coming out of the federal government.

The Congressional Research Service number of 1.5 gotaways is laughable.

And, the number of illegal aliens in the country isn’t 125 million. There were multiple crossings by many people for years. I’ve heard of Border Patrol agents catching the same guy 6 or 8 times back in the 80s and 90s.

They didn’t finger print the illegals they caught for many years. They didn’t have computers back then, and when they finally did get computers, they weren’t linked together for several more years.

The various sectors couldn’t share the names, pictures and descriptions of those caught.

After about half a dozen arrests, followed by detention time, the illegal would just shift to another sector where the agents wouldn’t know him by sight. If he was coming through at El Paso, Texas, or El Centro, California, he would just move over a couple hundred miles and come across in the Tucson sector.

While the number of illegal aliens in the country isn’t 125 million, it isn’t the laughable 11 million number, either. That estimate is absolutely not credible.

Retired sector chiefs have opined that it could be 40 million, or higher. One recently said it could be as high as 50 million. But, he added, “they” (the federal government) don’t know, and they don’t want to know.

And if the 40-50 million estimate is close to the real number, that makes the population of the United States closer to 360-370 million, without even adding in the “visa overstays” or those sneaking in from Canada or the Caribbean.

At the current rate of legal and illegal immigration into the United States, we will have a population of half a billion people by mid-century, just 34 years from now.

Think of what that means for your children and grandchildren.

The Border Patrol was apprehending over 1 million illegals a year on average right up to 2009.

Print out the page on Border Patrol apprehensions.

You might find the numbers and estimates useful in any current, or near future discussions with friends and acquaintances, or co-workers about border security, amnesty, border walls, that sort of thing.

Now you will be ready when the topic of illegal immigration comes up in casual conversation.

VETERANS WHO SERVED THEIR COUNTRY NOT BEING HIRED, ESPECIALLY MANY BLACK MALE VETS (AGE 50+), VET DISCRIMINATION

VETERANS WHO SERVED THEIR COUNTRY NOT BEING HIRED, ESPECIALLY MANY BLACK MALE VETS (AGE 50+):

VET DISCRIMINATION IS RAMPANT YET OFTEN IGNORED.

JOBLESS AND HOMELESS REMAINS THE PLIGHT OF MANY HONORABLE US MILITARY VETS........THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE.

NON-PROFIT AGENCIES ARE NOT USING FEDERAL MONEY TO ASSIST BLACK MALE US MILITARY HONORABLE VETS.

JOBS FOR HARDWORKING, RELIABLE VETS ARE GOING TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND UNSKILLED WORKERS.

YET COMPANIES ARE STILL RECEIVING FEDERAL MONEY TO HIRE VETS WHEN THEY ARE REALLY NOT HIRING VETS.

AND MANY COMPANIES WHO DO HIRE VETS PAY THEM VERY LOW WAGES.

WHERE ARE THE FEDERAL AUDITS FOR EMPLOYERS AND NON-PROFIT VETERANS' AGENCIES??


Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics



****** Employment Situation of Veterans Summary

For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT) Wednesday, March 22, 2017



~ EMPLOYMENT SITUATION OF VETERANS -- 2016

The unemployment rate for veterans who served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces at any time since September 2001--a group referred to as Gulf War-era II veterans--
edged down to 5.1 percent in 2016, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.

The jobless rate for all veterans also edged down over the year to 4.3 percent.

About 36 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans had a service-connected disability in August 2016, compared with 22 percent of all veterans.

This information was obtained from the Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly sample survey of about 60,000 households that provides data on employment and
unemployment in the United States.

Data about veterans are collected monthly in the CPS; these monthly data are the source of the 2016 annual averages presented in this
news release.

In August 2016, a supplement to the CPS collected additional information about veterans on topics such as service-connected disability and veterans' current or past Reserve or National Guard membership. Information from the supplement is also presented in this release.

The supplement was co-sponsored by the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs and by the U.S. Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service.

For more information, see the Technical Note, which provides definitions of terms used in this release.


Highlights from the 2016 data:

--The unemployment rate for male veterans overall was not statistically different from the rate for female veterans in 2016.

The unemployment rate for male veterans (4.2 percent) edged down over the year, and the rate for female veterans (5.0 percent) changed little.

--Among the 453,000 unemployed veterans in 2016, 60 percent were age 45 and over,
36 percent were age 25 to 44, and 4 percent were age 18 to 24.

--Veterans with a service-connected disability had an unemployment rate of 4.8 percent in August 2016, about the same as veterans with no disability (4.7 percent).

--Nearly 1 in 3 employed veterans with a service-connected disability worked in the public sector in August 2016, compared with about 1 in 5 veterans with no
disability.

--In 2016, the unemployment rate of veterans varied across the country, ranging from 1.8 percent in Indiana to 7.6 percent in the District of Columbia.


The Veteran Population:

In 2016, 20.9 million men and women were veterans, accounting for about 9 percent of the civilian noninstitutional population age 18 and over.

About 10 percent of all veterans were women. In the survey, veterans are defined as men and women who have previously
served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces and who were civilians at the time these data were collected.

Veterans are more likely to be men than nonveterans and also tend to be older.

In part, this reflects the characteristics of veterans who served during World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam era, all of whom are now over 55 years old.

Veterans who served during these wartime periods accounted for 41 percent (8.5 million) of the total veteran population in 2016. Just over one-third of veterans (7.3 million) served during Gulf War era I (August 1990 to August 2001) or Gulf War
era II (September 2001 forward). Another quarter (5.2 million) served outside the designated wartime periods.


Gulf War-era II Veterans:

In 2016, there were 3.9 million veterans who had served during Gulf War era II (September 2001 forward).

Eighteen percent of these veterans were women, compared
with about 4 percent of veterans from World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam era.

Seventy-one percent of all Gulf War-era II veterans were between the ages of 25
and 44.

Among Gulf War-era II veterans, the unemployment rate for men was not statistically different from the rate for women in 2016.

The unemployment rates for both men (5.0
percent) and women (5.6 percent) were little changed from the prior year.

The unemployment rate for male Gulf War-era II veterans (5.0 percent) was little different than the rate for male nonveterans (4.8 percent) in 2016.

Among men age 25 to 34, Gulf War-era II veterans had a higher unemployment rate (6.6 percent) than did nonveterans (4.9 percent).

For the other age groups, unemployment rates of male Gulf
War-era II veterans and nonveterans were not statistically different.

Among women, the unemployment rate for Gulf War-era II veterans (5.6 percent) was not statistically different from the rate for nonveterans (4.6 percent) in 2016.

By age, unemployment rates for female Gulf War-era II veterans and nonveterans were not statistically different.

Employed Gulf War-era II veterans were about twice as likely to work in the public sector in 2016 as employed nonveterans--28 percent and 13 percent, respectively.

Among the employed, 16 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans worked for the federal government, compared with 2 percent of nonveterans.

In August 2016, 48 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans reported serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, or both locations.

These veterans had an unemployment rate of 4.8
percent, not statistically different from Gulf War-era II veterans who served elsewhere (6.0 percent).

Gulf War-era I Veterans:

Of the 3.4 million veterans who served during Gulf War era I (August 1990 to August 2001), 15 percent were women. Nearly all (98 percent) Gulf War-era I veterans were
age 35 and over in 2016, compared with half of Gulf War-era II veterans.

In 2016, the unemployment rate for male Gulf War-era I veterans was 3.5 percent, lower
than the rate for their Gulf War-era II veteran counterparts (5.0 percent).

The difference in the unemployment rates reflects, at least in part, the older age profile
of veterans who served during Gulf War era I. Younger people--whether veterans or nonveterans--tend to have higher unemployment rates.

Among women, the rates for Gulf
War-era I veterans (4.2 percent) and Gulf War-era II veterans (5.6 percent) were not statistically different.


Veterans of Other Service Periods:

In 2016, 5.2 million veterans had served on active duty during "other service periods," mainly between the Korean War and the Vietnam era and between the Vietnam era and Gulf
War era I.

All veterans from this period of service were 40 years or older at the time of the survey.

Twenty-six percent of these veterans were age 45 to 54 in 2016, another 34 percent were age 55 to 64, and another 39 percent were age 65 and over.

In 2016, 1 in 10 veterans of other service periods were women. Among veterans of other service periods, the unemployment rate for men was 4.1 percent, little different than
the rate for women (4.9 percent).


Veterans with a Service-connected Disability:

In August 2016, about 4.6 million veterans, or 22 percent of the total, had a service- connected disability.

Veterans with a service-connected disability are assigned a
disability rating by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the U.S. Department of Defense.

Ratings range from 0 to 100 percent, in increments of 10 percentage points, depending on the severity of the condition.

The unemployment rate for veterans with a service-connected disability was 4.8 percent in August 2016, about the same as veterans with no disability (4.7 percent).

The labor force participation rate for veterans with a service-connected disability (46.4 percent)
was lower than the rate for veterans with no disability (50.7 percent).

Among veterans with a service-connected disability, 30 percent had a disability rating of less than 30 percent, while another 37 percent had a rating of 60 percent or higher.

In August 2016, veterans with a service-connected disability rating of less than 30 percent were much more likely to be in the labor force than those with a rating of 60
percent or higher (54.7 percent and 29.9 percent, respectively).

The unemployment rate For veterans with a disability rating of less than 30 percent was 4.4 percent, not
statistically different than for those with a disability rating of 60 percent or higher (3.8 percent).

Among veterans who served during Gulf War era II, 36 percent (1.4 million) had a service-connected disability.

Of these, 76.0 percent were in the labor force in August 2016, lower than the 86.6 percent for veterans from this period with no service- connected disability.

Among Gulf War-era II veterans, the unemployment rate for those with a service-connected disability was 5.4 percent, little different from those with no disability (5.7 percent).

In August 2016, about a quarter (901,000) of veterans who served during Gulf War era I had a service-connected disability. Their labor force participation rate (64.0 percent)
was lower than the rate for veterans from the era who did not have a disability (86.7
percent).

The unemployment rate for Gulf War-era I veterans with a service-connected disability (5.3 percent) was not statistically different than that for Gulf War-era I
veterans without a service-connected disability (4.2 percent).

Among the 1.6 million veterans with a service-connected disability from World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam era, 14.1 percent were in the labor force in August
2016 , lower than the 25.3 percent of veterans from these periods who did not have a
service-connected disability.

The unemployment rate of veterans with a disability from these wartime periods was 3.7 percent, about the same as their counterparts with no disability (3.8 percent).

About 669,000 or 13 percent of veterans who served during other service periods reported a service-connected disability in August 2016.

The labor force participation rate for these veterans (37.8 percent) was lower than their counterparts without a
service-connected disability (50.3 percent), while the unemployment rate was not statistically different for veterans with a service-connected disability (2.0 percent)
and those with no disability (4.8 percent).

Regardless of period of service, many veterans with a service-connected disability worked in the public sector. In August 2016, 31 percent of employed veterans with a
disability worked in federal, state, or local government, compared with 19 percent of
veterans with no disability and 13 percent of nonveterans. In particular, 20 percent of employed veterans with a disability worked for the federal government, compared
with 7 percent of veterans with no disability and 2 percent of nonveterans.


Reserve and National Guard Membership:

In August 2016, about one-third of Gulf War-era veterans (August 1990 to present) were current or past members of the Reserve or National Guard.

Labor force participation rates were higher for veterans who were current or past members of the Reserve or
National Guard (83.6 percent), compared with veterans who were never members (80.6
percent).
Among Gulf War-era veterans, those who were current or past members of the Reserve or National Guard had an unemployment rate (4.0 percent) that was not
statistically different than those who had never been members (5.6 percent).