Immigration Policy: New immigration data portal launched puts govt statistics in one location


USA immigration data portal launched 2018

Launching of New Immigration Data Portal

Washington, D.C. (March 12, 2018) – The Center for Immigration Studies announces the creation of a new immigration data portal. The portal consolidates government agencies’ most recent immigration statistics in one location, allowing easy access to detailed information on a multitude of key topics in immigration such as crime, illegal immigration, and labor.

logo CIS

Visit the data portal at:

The Center’s goal is to lessen the challenge of finding important immigration statistics so that fact-based research can play a larger role in informing the national debate on immigration policy. Whether the user is searching for specific numbers on refugee arrivals by country of origin, E-verify statistics reports, or the jobsite location and wage data of requested foreign workers, this portal will make finding the data dramatically easier.

Mark Krikorian, the Center’s executive director, said “It is my hope that the immigration debate will benefit from the launching of this data portal. It is imperative that immigration policy be formed by accurate data; this initiative will make it easier for all parties to access crucial immigration statistics.”


Trump funny? Pelosi out of it? America more free in 2018? You decide

Freedoms Americans experience as of March, 2018

Trump funny? Pelosi out of it? America more free in 2018? You decide.

Where are American freedoms in 2018?
Thump  was supposed  be history by summer 2017.
The  Clinton/ Steele dossier, which   was used to get a FICA  warrant to spy on Trymp, continues to  unravel  as 2018 progresses.

Some of the freedoms  Americans experience as of March, 2018 include:

A ‘funny’ President who pokes fun at himself and ridicules his opponents.  Trump provides  better entertainment than Late Night TV. Catch Trunp’s rendition of how to be Presidential.
The tax cuts were heralded as ‘crumbs’ by Pelosi and the Democrats.   The 2018 Tax cut from 35% ti 21%  for large corporations means much more freedom for them  compete throughout the world.
  • Companies and corporations are  free to give employees  raises and bonuses.
  • And freeom  to hire — 300,000 in Feb 2018.
  • Freedoms which encourage more to participate in the work force.
  • Freedom to spend more personal income as less is taken away by federal government— for 80% othe f Americans.
How about freedom to think other thoughts?
Freedom to believe America is exceptional and  to  take back  to control our borders.
Freedom to leave CA which now has the lowest s quality of life in USA.
Freedom for US Steel to hire back 500 workers.  More coal workers are needed in the coal mines to produce electricity to make steel.
None of this would have happened  with Hilary and the Clinton Foundation in the White House and shaping economic polities.
Who lurks in the background?   Obama and  Michelle?
written by Cameron Jackson 3/12/18

Married white women are deplorable [do what men tell them says Hilary Clinton]

white women voted for Trump because men told them to do so —

Why white married women voted for Trump?

Hillary Clinton said that white women voted for President Trump during the 2016 presidential election because their husbands told them to, during a discussion at the India Today Conclave on Saturday.

The moderator asked Clinton why she thinks almost 52 percent of white women voted for Trump, despite them knowing about the controversial “Access Hollywood” tape.

“[Democrats] do not do well with white men and we don’t do well with married, white women,” Clinton explained. “And part of that is an identification with the Republican Party, and a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should.”


Firenze Sage:  Will this hag ever broom her way under the carpet?  


A TAX on TEA started the American Revolution. Freedom from Government.Now CALIF proposes TAX on WATER. Reasons NOT to tax water?


WATER TAX SB 623 – Speak Up!

A TAX on TEA started the American Revolution. Freedom from government.

Now the State of California proposes a TAX on WATER.

Why should  all California households pay roughly a  $12 WATER Tax per year?

Tell  Santa Cruz County Supervisors NO on SB 623.

Speak up! Write your representatives.

Speak back to  State Senator Bill Monning who started this nonsense!

Here’s  reasons why it’s  important to speak up:

  1. The proposed rate can be INCREASED when the government  chooses. All taxes typically go up …
  2. Twenty-five percent (25%)  of money collected  can be — will be?–spent on administration.
  3.  Lower income families  will be overly  impacted. Why charge more for water than it costs?  Lower income persons  can  sign up for an exemption — but will they?   This tax is one more burden on those with lower incomes.  California already has the biggest disparity between RICH and POOR already.
  4.  Who will really pay? Consumers.   All costs of government are  passed on and the State of CA is not required  to pay back agencies for costs to collect.
  5. Polluters of ground water can continue to pollute and not affected by this law.  Makes no sense.  Polluters are off the hook until 2035.
  6. This law turns water providing agencies into tax collecting agencies. This is wrong.

Becky Steinbruner  says NO on proposed  Water Tax. 

Here’s Becky’s Letter to the  Santa Cruz Board of Supervisors:  

Dear Board of Supervisors and Clerk of the Board,
I was not able to register public comment using the Agenda Portal system on the Board of Supervisor website, so am writing you with my concerns regarding Consent Agenda Item #18.  I request that my letter be included for the Public Record as written correspondence regarding this issue and included with Board agenda communication available to the public at the mARCH 13, 2018 Board of Supervisor meeting.
I oppose Consent Agenda Item 18, a resolution to support SB 623 and ask that the Board NOT adopt a resolution, as recommended by Supervisor Zach Friend, for Santa Cruz County to endorse SB 623.  I request that Supervisor Friend publicly explain why the Board should  consider supporting it.
I have read the text of the proposed SB 623 legislation, re-introduced this year, and have the following objections:
1) While the water tax is currently proposed to be $.95 per month per household, the rate can be increased in the future if the State Board determines that the funding need is greater to assist communities with problematic water supplies.
Water is a basic requirement for life…should it be taxed even more than what it costs to produce it (Prop. 218 stipulates water sellers cannot charge more than the cost of supplying the water).  Any one who declares themselves impoverished (below 200% of the federal poverty limit which would be roughly $98,000/year for an individual) is exempt, but must file with their local water agency for exemption.  Will the poor all apply for exemption?
2)  Public water agencies would be mandated to collect and administer the tax monies to the State but on page 19 of the SB623 text, Section 6 says the State is not required to re-imburse local agencies unless the Commission on State Mandates determines it necessary.
SB 623 would ignore the California Constitutional mandate that local government be re-imbursed for collecting and administering state mandates.
3)  Polluters would “not be subject to enforcement undertaken or administered by State Board or regional boards under Chapter 5 (section 13330) for causing or contributing to an exceedance of a water quality objective of nitrate in groundwater” if the proposed Fertilizer Safe Drinking Water Fee or Dairy Safe Drinking Water Fee gets paid within 90 days of the contamination determination.  Why allow the polluters to continue contaminating the groundwater??? (see page 17 of the SB 623 text)
4)  Again, in Section 5, SB 623 would erase the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act that mandates the State and regional boards oversee and enforce pollution control regulations to protect groundwater drinking supply safety for the public.  This bill would PROHIBIT the State Board or a regional board, until January 1, 2035, from “subjecting an agricultural operation, as defined, to specified enforcment for causing or contributing to a condition of pollution or nuisance for nitrates in groundwater if that agricultural operation demonstrates that it has satisfied other requirements of the timely payment of the fertilzer safe drinking water fee or the dairy safe drinking water fee, as applicable, into the fund.”
5)  SB 623 states the money collected with all these new taxes must only be used for projects addressing problematic groundwater supplies, but COULD  be transferred to other uses with a 2/3 vote of the legislature (section 116771 (f) on page 13 of the text).  I do not trust legislators not to dip into this fund for other “public benefit projects”
6)  SB 623 would allow community water systems to apply for exemption from collection of the per-household water tax, based on the finding that the amount that would be required to be remitted to the Board to be minimus, but the water company cannot appeal if the State denies their application. (116771 (d) on page 13.  Under 116772 (a) a public water system can apply to use an alternate assessment method for charges imposed by SB 623, but that alternate method, if approved, could only be used for five years maximum.
7)  SB 623 would require County Environmental Health Agencies to submit a list of all small water systems to the State Board by
January 1, 2019.  Again, this is requiring local government to spend time on meeting the State requirements but not getting re-imnbursed.  Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Agency staff does not have a comprehensive list of all small water companies but is working to collect that information for another State mandated program, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan, required to be submitted  and approved by the State by January 1, 2020.
8) SB 623 would mandate all fertilizer manufacturers, handlers, transporters and sellers to allow State Board access to any and all accounting practices, facilities and related information.  It would also mandate all dairies allow State Board access to any and all buildings and facilities as well as accounting practices and information.   NONE of this information however, including the audits of Safe Drinking Water Fees by the polluters, would be public information. (section 116772 (d) and (e)).   I do not trust that big corporations that may be contaminating groundwater would be held accountable for money paid in order to continue polluting.  Under SB 623, members of the public would not be able to file a Public Records Act request to find out.
9)  How much of this new tax money would actually get spent on improving problematic groundwater drinking supplies?  SB 623 allows the State Board to spend 25% of the fee money on administration.
10)  How will the State determine who gets the money?  SB 623 requires reports of problems by all water agencies to be submitted for consideration.  The money can be spent for “settlements from parties responsible for contamination of drinking water supplies” (Section 116768(1c), and in Section 116768 (2) states :” funds shall be prioritized for CONSOLIDATIONS”.  SB 623 removes mutually-owned water companies from the list of eligible applicants for project money.  These systems should also benefit from the possibility of grant assistance to improve water quality for safe potable use.
 Why would the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors want to support SB 623???.
Thank you Becky Steinbruner for your above Letter.

Monerey Bay Forum

127 Jewell Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
United States (US)
Phone: 831 688 6002
Fax: 831 688 7717

Santa Cruz CA traffic solutions: Greenway multi-modal roadway & walkway scores BIG on flexibility, takes people where they want to go, moves more people, provides choice

  Santa Cruz CA traffic solutions: Greenway multi-modal roadway & walkway scores BIG on flexibility, takes people where they want to go, moves more people, provides choice.

The East Bay got money from California to do a Greenway — let’s do likewise in Santa Cruz CA?

East Bay Greenway Awarded Active Transportation Program Grant

Sep 19, 2014 at 11:23am

$2.656 million state grant will help fulfill community vision to transform 15 miles under the BART tracks from Oakland to Hayward into a bicycle and pedestrian path.

The following is a comment from Rail Trail post written by Will 3/12/18  

“Westcliff  [Santa Cruz CA’s] multi-use path is not wide enough to function as a active transportation facility, period. At 10 feet wide it has built in conflicts for all user groups.

“This is why the Monterey coastal recreation trail is being widened to a width of 26 feet. 16 feet for the Bikeway allows for faster wheeled vehicles to pass in each direction. The separated 10 foot wide pedestrian sidewalk allows groups of two or more walkers walking side by side and pass each other.

“The plan is for the Greenway to use this same 16 + 10 formula wherever possible.

“The 26 feet needed for a proper active transportation facility does not fit over most of the rail corridor, particularly within the “Central Reach” of the system.

“From a Active Transportation perspective there is no comparison of the functionality of the bike and pedestrian facility embodied in the MBSST plan and what has been the proposed Greenway multi-modal roadway and walkway facility.

“As far as mass transit goes, the use of buses in a dedicated transit lane on Hwy 1 is three times faster than the headways predicted by the RTC for passenger rail between Santa Cruz and Watsonville (16 minutes vs ~42 minutes). Likewise for Santa Cruz and the Pajaro Station (20 vs ~60 minutes).

“There are over 220,000 trips daily on Hwy 1 today vs a prediction of 4,500 trips with the most ambitious plan described in the RTC’s rail feasibility study.
Do the math.

“The Greenway + a highway 1 based Bus Rapid Transit could serve 10 times the number of users and goes to where people are going to today: Cabrillo College, the greater Dominican Hospital complex, UCSC, Santa Cruz City and County government buildings, downtown Watsonville and Santa Cruz, etc.

“The existing freeway corridor is more central to the major employment and population centers than the rail corridor.

“From the standpoint of “social equity”, reductions of GHG emissions, active transportation users, health, sustainability and recreation all favor the Greenway and the democratization of the freeway to support and prioritized bus transit.   written by Will-


Aptos Psychologist: Consider traffic needs of our  most vulnerable  residents and build  solutions  into the overall transportation/  Greenway plan:  how mothers get two small children to school in AM, how the elderly get to medical appointments, how the very sick get to hospitals.

So far, I’ve not heard how to creatively use the frontage roads on either side of Highway #1 and integrate those roads in how better to allow people to move.

Consider ALL ways to move traffic NORTH in the AM and SOUTH in the PM.   For example, we could usse Soquel Avenue as done on the Golden Gate Bridge  — more lanes in AM versus PM.  We could use Traffic Persons rather than Lights to move the traffic on Soquel Avenue.

What say you?  How solve our traffic mess?

written by Cameron Jackson   

Monerey Bay Forum

127 Jewell Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
United States (US)
Phone: 831 688 6002
Fax: 831 688 7717


Santa Cruz CA Traffic mess –YES a Rail Trail, NO Train says Jack Brown

Cyclists on Otago Rail Trail – New Zealand

written by Jack Brown

“Unfortunately most of the other commenters are part of the trail advocacy groups that spread misinformation about the trail and  couldn’t care less if the trail is built at all.

“They are rail advocates plain and simple.

“For those of us that do ride know that the the trail design advocated by the rail group is substandard.

“A good percentage of the trail would be diverted back onto the road where the trail will not fit with a train. Their train (unfunded and not scalable) takes priority.

“Also note that all of us of that support a trail only on the rail corridor are not seeing it as an ‘end all’ solution.

“We know a trail by itself will not solve Santa Cruz County’s transportation crisis.

“A trail will not solve the problem, but a train definitely will not solve the problem.

“Those of us on the Trail only in the corridor would like to see Bus Rapid Transit along Soquel Avenue,


bus on shoulder of Highway #1 can reduce conjustion

Bus on Shoulder  on Highway 1 along with on ramp metering and other transportation technology improvements to improve flow between all parts of our county.

“A train that is unfunded will not be of the most expensive electric one noted by others on this thread. It will be a noisy, dirty diesel.

“Most of the rail advocates are now pushing for Progressive Rail to take over and to start moving frieght and hazardous materials through the corridor.

“A trail will best protect our environment and keep commuter and freight traffic where it is already allocated, but moving at a higher speed. This has a far greater impact than trying to place a commuter train where there simply is not the width, nor the population to support it.

“The cost for rail will be astronomical with no relief to current traffic. The current proposals run well over $100M to $600M and history of rail projects are massively overshooting their budgets.

“A simple example is the California High Speed Rail project where it was sold to the people as only costing $33B with the federal government paying a third and private business investment covering the rest. Today the cost if esitmated at $77 to $98B with the federal government only proviiding $3.5B in grants and no private investment.

Rail in Santa Cruz is a sham.

There are better, more efficient ways to solve the problem and it’s time we stop spending more good money on a bad idea for Santa Cruz.

written by Jack Brown March 11, 201

Aptos Psychologist:  What do the Rail Trail advocates suggest  for managing health and safety issues? Our hospitals are hard to get to  due to traffic issues.  What about   human feces, people  sleeping along the  Trail,  drug needles? For certain kinds of crimes   Santa Cruz County has some of the highest crime rates in CA.

Cameron Jackson, Ph.D. Licensed Psychologist PSY14762

Monerey Bay Forum

127 Jewell Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
United States (US)
Phone: 831 688 6002
Fax: 831 688 7717

Failing Health or Trump’s “button” bigger than North Korea

Trump’s “button” bigger or failing health of North Korea’s leader OR ….

Failing health or Trump’s comment that his red  “button” is bigger than North Korea….?

North Korea leader’s failing health: Some analysts speculate that another factor in North Korea’s diplomatic opening could be Kim Jong-un’s declining health due to anything from obesity, diabetes, and gout to mental issues or a sexually transmitted disease.

Intelligence experts caution that solid information about his health is difficult to come by, but the North Korean government has obliquely conceded health problems for the dictator on a few occasions.

Persistent speculation also exists that North Korea’s nuclear missile program has suffered setbacks or hit serious stumbling blocks, problems that would be exacerbated by tight sanctions with vigorous enforcement. There is also much speculation that China has grown exasperated with North Korea, accompanied by personal animosity between top Chinese and North Korean leaders, exacerbated by North Korean suspicions that Beijing tried to stage a coup against North Korea.

Aptos Psychologist:  Neither Obama or Bush “pushed” back.  Trump has.


Clean up time! Sanctuary State of CA sued by US govt for violation of Supremacy Clause of Constitution


Clean up time for CA’s ‘sanctuary state’ laws with CA sued by the  U.S. government

Clean up time for California’s ‘sanctuary state’ laws.

Attorney General Sessions sues  the State of California for violation of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The federal government reins supreme over state laws concerning immigration. Attorney General Sessions came to California to deliver the message. 

The ‘sanctuary state’  laws targeted by the federal government are:

SB 54  — the California Values Act — prevents state and local authorities from reporting illegal aliens who were arrested for other crimes to ICE.

AB 450 — Gov. Brown’s law threatens business owners with persecution if  they cooperate with ICE without first seeing whether ICE has a warrant/ correct documents.

AB 103 — gives oversight to California over ICE as the law allows the State of CA to inspect illegal aliens held by federal authorities.

At his  press conference Wednesday, Gov. Brown did not defend Oakland Mayor’s actions alerting the community of soon-to-occur ICE arrests. ICE says that the Mayor’s actions put ICE personnel in danger and 800 persons were not detained.

The governor offered the following points in rebuttal to Sessions’s clear and cogent case that the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause forbade California from blocking the enforcement of federal immigration law:

1. Sessions is a liar. “The Trump administration is full of liars. They [sic] pled guilty already to the Special Counsel.”

2. Sessions is from Alabama — “a fellow from Alabama coming to talk to us about secession and protecting human and civil rights.

3. Sessions is a Nazi. “We don’t need a Gestapo kind of tactic with vitriol spewing out of Jeff Sessions’s mouth. “

4. Sessions is … a French revolutionary. “The attorney general is basically initiating a reign of terror.”

5. Sessions is sucking up to President Trump. “Jeff thinks that Donald will be happier with him and I’m sure Donald will be tweeting his joy at this particular performance.” (Trump has not tweeted about it.)

California Attorney General Becerra’s line of attack was simple denial.


Aptos Psychologist:  Yes, it’s ‘clean up’ time here in CA.  About time.  Maybe fixing the ‘sanctuary state’ laws will impact California’s quality of life rating —  currently at the bottom.

Monerey Bay Forum

127 Jewell Street
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
United States (US)
Phone: 831 688 6002
Fax: 831 688 7717

ICE arrests woman smuggler here in USA illegally

The  ICE arrest of a woman smuggler  on the streets of National City, CA   —  she was in U.S. illegally — separated the woman  from her children.

A teacher aide of one of the children  videotaped the arrest. What the woman and smuggling organization were smuggling is not known.

The Border Patrol says Perla Morales-Luna was identified as an organizer for a transnational criminal smuggling organization and was arrested for being in the country illegally.

Aptos Psychologist:  One hears some say, “Why arrest undocumented persons just because they are here illegally?” Answer:  mothers should ‘mother’ mot smuggle.



Justice denied for 30 years [female genital mutilation in Britain]

   The latest Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) case to make it to court has been dismissed, with the judge claiming the child had denied harm and medical evidence was inconclusive.

The Somali origin father, who lives in Bristol, had allegedly admitted to allowing his seven-year-old daughter to be cut on the clitoris, telling a charity worker it would stop her “feeling sexy all the time”.

However, Judge Julian Lambert described the prosecution’s case against 29-year-old former Uber driver as “deeply troubling” and slammed witnesses as “inconsistent”, the Daily Mail reports.

He also stressed that the child had denied being harmed and dismissed the medical evidence as “wholly inconclusive at its highest”.

Not a single person has been found guilty of FGM offences in Britain, despite the practice being illegal for 30 years, thousands of cases being logged annually, and there being hundreds of successful prosecutions in France.


Firenze Sage:   “The child denied harm.”  It is up to you dear judge to protect children from themselves and scheming adults who greatly influence the child’s opinion. Do you expect the child to denounce the father who permitted her to be attacked   with a razor and who she will go home with  — you idiot!!


Next Page »

Translate »