new america foundation

new america foundation: Page 1

Discussed in (click each link for the full post):

Even Washington Monthly (somewhat) admits the "challenges" of massive low-skilled immigration (Texas, Phillip Longman) - 03/03/14

A rare moment of clarity on mass immigration comes from Washington Monthly as senior editor Phillip Longman (also linked to the New America Foundation offers "Oops: The Texas Miracle That Isn’t" ( peekURL.com/zRPFqc5 ).

How "centrist" will No Labels be on immigration? - 11/26/10

There's a new "centrist" group called No Labels in town [1], but they actually appear to be just a vehicle for a presidential run by Michael Bloomberg. And, it looks like on immigration and trade they'll support policies that are establishment-friendly but which cause harm to everyone else.

One of the leaders of the group is former George W Bush advisor Mark McKinnon, and one of those who'll be appearing at their kickoff announcement is Antonio Villaraigosa. Another person involved is John Avlon. And, another person involved in some way is former Los Angeles Times editor Andres Martinez (currently with the New America Foundation).

If you've been following this site for a while (or clicked the links above), by now alarm bells are ringing in your ears: all those listed are bad on immigration. On that issue they're only centrists in the misleading establishment sense, supporting comprehensive immigration reform (aka amnesty), a truly radical plan. The amnesty they support would - among many other things - be a huge gift to the Democratic Party and would increase spending, lower the power of current U.S. citizens, and give the Mexican government a great deal of power inside the U.S.

And, all enable in their own ways illegal immigration, whether it's highlighting the importance of a ready supply of greenskeepers (Bloomberg), or sending all Mexico the message that he won't try to curb illegal immigration (Villaraigosa).

While there isn't much on their site about immigration, their true position is telegraphed by Avlon [2] and then driven home by Martinez [3].

I'll tweet @NoLabelsOrg and ask for an official statement with the details on their immigration position, but the chances of them supporting something like attrition are slim indeed.

12/13/10 UPDATE: I've never gotten a reply from @NoLabelsOrg, but here's another data point (link):

I tuned in to the webcast of the group’s kickoff to hear a woman saying, “You just have to look to Arizona to see extremists who are trying to divide us.” I guess I know how the group feels about the Arizona immigration enforcement law. Of course, I thought the point of the group was to stop labeling people; but I guess it’s okay to label the overwhelming majority of Arizonans “extremists.”

It would be obviously helpful to know who said that and how high in the organization they are, but it's certainly in line with the quotes below.

As a slight counterweight to everything else in this post, No Labels is certainly scaring or at least bothering a large number of GOP/Dem partisan hacks, so they've got that going for them. But, what we really need is a mainstream group that opposes things like Democratic race-baiting as strongly as they oppose giveaways to connected corporations and that, of course, also strongly opposes illegal and massive immigration. The chances of such a group forming are slim because the money is on the other side and most people who concern themselves with politics tend to be partisan.

--------------
[1] From this:

No Labels (www.nolabels.org) is led by Democratic fund-raiser Nancy Jacobson and Republican strategist Mark McKinnon, who were introduced to each other by Kevin Sheekey, Mr. Bloomberg's political adviser.

The group has raised more than $1 million to seed its effort against what it calls "hyper-partisanship." Backers include co-chairman of Loews Corp. Andrew Tisch, Panera Bread founder Ron Shaich and ex-Facebook executive Dave Morin. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, as well as U.S. senators (Joe Lieberman) of Connecticut and Michigan's Debbie Stabenow, will attend the New York launch [on December 13].

[2] nolabels.org/blog/americans-vote-divided-government-again

"From deficit reduction to energy independence and immigration reform, there are policy paths where the center can lead in proposing new solutions."

[3] nolabels.org/blog/hey-voter-rest-world-out-get-you

But let’s not kid ourselves: this manufactured xenophobia leaves a lasting legacy. It isn't good – for ourselves or the rest of the world – when the United States turns inward. Americans oscillate between seeing the rest of the world as a boundless opportunity or as an overwhelming threat, and the latter mindset erodes our national confidence and clouds our better policymaking judgment. Regardless of what one thinks a rational immigration policy looks like, it is hard to even have that discussion with the hyper-partisan and overwrought demagoguery around the issue. The constant China-bashing makes it hard for the administration to engage Beijing on any subject. America now runs the risk of running scared from any number of opportunities to grow our economy: a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll early this month found that 53% of those surveyed said free trade hurts the United States. Alarming, but hardly surprising given the narrative of our politics.

Are the American people "obsolete"? Do the super-rich no longer need Americans? - 08/04/10

Michael Lind of the New America Foundation offers "Are the American people obsolete?" (link) which basically claims that the rich (or what I think would be more accurately called the superrich) no longer really need Americans to obtain money or to defend them.

Is Michael Cohen of the New America Foundation trustworthy? ("Live From the Campaign Trail") - 04/08/09

Can you trust Michael Cohen of the New America Foundation? Read on if you've ever heard of that author of "Live From the Campaign Trail: The Greatest Presidential Campaign Speeches of the 20th Century and How They Shaped Modern America" and want to see whether trusting him is a wise idea or not.

Joel Kotkin /Mark Schill promote a "North American Energy Community" (how the EU started) - 01/04/09

Joel Kotkin and Mark Schill offer "Go north young man", a globalist screed calling for the creation of a "North American Energy Community" (link):
...A U.S.-Canada energy consortium - with the eventual involvement of Mexico - provides us out from our fundamental geopolitical dilemma: how to grow our economy while reducing our dependence on imported energy and, over time, carbon-emitting fuels. This could take the form of something like a North American Energy Community, which would help coordinate research, development and environmental resources across the continent...
It goes on. I left the following comment, although more could be said:
What these two are proposing is obviously intended to go beyond simply an "energy consortium" and would involve some form of governmental structure of some kind. Bear in mind that the EU started out simply as an "energy consortium". Their "North American Energy Community" would eventually - over a period of decades - grow into some form of "North American Union", with the U.S. Constitution subjugated to a trilaterial agreement.

Obama's fans might want to note that he's already signaled which side he's on: almost a year ago, Obama came out in support of Bush's spp.gov. The SPP is a highly secretive scheme - conducted without Congressional oversight or with much of any media interest - that seeks to "harmonize" regulations between the three countries.

Perhaps Kotkin could come back with a more detailed disclaimer, this time indicating who's behind the various organizations with which he's associated.
If anyone has information regarding that last, please leave a comment. Kotkin is affiliated with Chapman University, the New America Foundation, and the Center for an Urban Future. Walter Russell Mead of the Council on Foreign Relations and other worthies serve on the board of the NAF, but where exactly they get their money from isn't clear.

Note also that their piece was linked to by Insty (pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/65240/), who says: "Read the whole thing. Especially if you’re Barack Obama." Obviously, Insty doesn't know where BHO stands, or is just misleading his readers.

San Francisco approves ID card; corruption in plain sight; Tom Ammiano? - 11/14/07

The San Francisco Supervisors have approved a city ID card for everyone, including illegal aliens (link). While this will be sold as either a wacky plan from the far-left or a common-sense solution, the more likely reason this was pushed through is hiding in plain sight:
[Bill author, supervisor Tom Ammiano] said banking institutions in San Francisco have signaled their willingness to accept the municipal ID card for the purpose of setting up accounts. He noted that people without bank accounts are frequently more vulnerable to theft and robbery.

Officials with the city's Bank on San Francisco program, which helps people obtain bank accounts, said institutions such as Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Washington Mutual and US Bank had expressed interest in accepting the ID cards.

Bank on San Francisco is a city partnership with the Federal Reserve Bank. Although criteria for opening bank accounts are set in part through the USA Patriot Act, "to our knowledge that law is not a bar to a municipal ID," said David Augustine, spokesman for the city treasurer's office, which oversees the program.
At least the first two banks listed as well as the Federal Reserve have in the past taken steps to profit from indirect illegal activity: the money that illegal aliens earn by working illegally. And, in fact, the Bush administration fought to allow banks to accept Mexico's ID card which is only of use to illegal aliens. And, from the Bank on San Francisco page (sfgov.org/site/bankonsf_index.asp?id=46628):
Accept alternative forms of identification, such as consular identification cards. For many immigrants, the barrier to opening an account is having the proper documentation.
The banks aren't going to earn that much off this; I'd imagine that due to the cost of living in Frisco they don't have a high illegal alien population (except for those living 20 to an apartment in shifts). However, this could be used as an entree to other cities, such as Los Angeles.

As for Ammiano, I'm not familiar with him and I don't know whether he's just a soft-brained far-leftie or whether he's trying to get a piece of the pie. However, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he's received donations from those banks or he has some sort of other link. Those who live in the area are strongly encouraged to follow the money. His fellow supervisor Gerardo Sandoval is a strong supporter of illegal immigration.

Note that New Haven, CT has their own municipal ID. Their mayor John DeStefano has a possible financial interest and the person in his office who pushed the ID (Kica Matos) previously headed a group (Junta for Progressive Action) that is/was collaborating with the Mexican government.

UPDATE: The "Case Study" PDF at the sfgov link above has some interesting nuggets on the Bank on San Francisco program. First, they've got a section for those "thinking about starting something similar to Bank on San Francisco in your community", and I'm sure some are. As for how it all started:
Anne Stuhldreher, a Fellow at the New America Foundation, approached staff of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and City Treasurer Jose Cisneros with the initial concept. The Treasurer’s Office convened a working group of the staff of the Mayor and Treasurer, the Mayors Office of Community Development, New America Foundation, and EARN, a citywide nonprofit that helps low-income residents build assets. The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco joined the group soon after hearing about the program.
To participate in the program, banks have to accept those foreign IDs which are of use only to illegal aliens. And:
From further research, the working group learned that Latinos who are un-banked often don't realize that you do not need a social security number to open an account and that they can open accounts with Mexican or Guatemalan Identification cards.
In other words, you don't have to be here legally to have a U.S. bank account.

As for government corruption at the federal level:
[at a meeting] Michael Frias, of the Federal Depository Insurance Corporation [sic], discussed how the New Alliance Task Force is helping banks learn about how they can accept the Matricula Consular Card and develop products and services to help Latino immigrants, save, send money to their home countries, and buy homes... The New Alliance Task Force is a partnership between the FDIC, the Mexican Consulate, banks, community-based organizations, federal regulators, the secondary market, and private mortgage insurance companies. The partnership has opened 50,000 new bank accounts totaling $100 million.
In other words, something akin to a federal agency is collaborating with a foreign government to help nationals of that government who are here illegally get home loans, and is assisting banks to profit from money that was earned illegally.

Related:
Pro-illegal immigration performance art (funding by Bank of America and Wells Fargo)
Wells Fargo and illegal activity
remesamex.gob.mx features Bank of "America", Wells Fargo, and Western Union
Citibank "recruiting" illegal aliens for home loans

Douglas McGray's uniquely anti-American DREAM - 09/19/07

Douglas McGray (douglasmcgray.com, dmcgray *at* comcast.net) of the New America Foundation offers "A uniquely American DREAM" (link), a guest editorial supporting the anti-American DREAM Act. In addition to being a massive and nearly unlimited amnesty, that bill - currently attached to a defense bill - would allow illegal aliens to take college discounts from U.S. citizens. Please contact your Senators and let them know you oppose it or just go here to send a free FAX.

The editorial is highly similar to the "news" reports in this genre; if you aren't familiar with them read a few of those then compare them to McGray's spiel. This is truly propaganda by the numbers:

...[Congress] might start by considering young people like Lucia... By seventh grade, she made it from remedial English classes to the gifted-and-talented program. She joined the California Cadet Corps, a kind of junior ROTC. She was voted queen of her high school prom and named valedictorian of her graduating class. She had a plan. She wanted to enlist in the Marines, go to college and apply to work for the CIA -- she liked spy movies... ...[Her parents] told her they had come to the United States illegally all those years ago. That meant she was an illegal immigrant too... ...She graduated two years ago. But she couldn't apply for a paying, professional job and start returning America's investment in her...

Supporters of illegal immigration are really cranking up the pressure: just yesterday another propaganda piece featured an illegal alien who wanted to be an FBI agent. Could this be a sign of some form of coordination between those who produce or who push these articles?

Note also that this is a bit of a retread for McGray. In April he offered an "This American Life" (NPR/Chicago Public Radio) segment "Just One Thing Missing" (newamerica.net/publications/articles/2007/this_american_life_5124). You know what's coming!

Martha doesn't like to talk about her future anymore. She'd wanted to go to med school, become an OB-gyn...

Etc., etc. No word on whether she also wants to join the NSA.

Darrell Steinberg, Bob Dutton: give every child born in California $500 (anchor babies, bank boondoggle) - 02/28/07

California Senators Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) and Bob Dutton (R-Rancho Cucamonga) have introduced a bill that would given every child born in California from 2008 on a savings account with an initial deposit of $500 (AP link). The two Senators are either very high or very corrupt, perhaps both.