EL PASO, Texas—President Barack Obama on Tuesday tried a new tack on immigration, saying that beefed-up security along the U.S.-Mexico border has proved effective enough that it should draw Republican support for an overhaul of the nation’s naturalization system.

Mr. Obama said his administration had met the concerns of Republicans by increasing law-enforcement manpower to record levels and installing new surveillance technology and fencing.

“We have strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible,” he said at the Chamizal National Memorial, as a giant Mexican flag waved across the Rio Grande river.

The president cited several statistics to back up his assertion of tightened borders, including a nearly 40% decrease in arrests at the border, to about 463,000 in 2010. The administration says that is a sign that fewer people are attempting to illegally cross from Mexico.

Mr. Obama didn’t mention that deportations hit record levels last year—a trend that has drawn fire from some Hispanic advocates.

The speech was aimed in part at reassuring voters who are worried about border security, and in part at renewing support among Hispanic voters he needs to boost his re-election campaign, particularly in Rocky Mountain states.

He offered no new policy proposals Tuesday, and set no timetable for legislation. Instead, he called for those who support his proposals to build pressure for congressional action from outside Washington.

The president said the new border-control measures will prevent another wave of illegal immigrants from flowing into the country if those already here are allowed to stay.

Some prominent unions including the AFL-CIO have opposed immigration legislation in the past, concerned that new arrivals would pose competition for their members. Senators trying to craft an overhaul have said one of the obstacles has been coming up with a guest-worker program unions and business can support.

Mr. Obama’s legislative goals haven’t changed since he spoke on immigration last summer, including a path to citizenship for the 10.8 million people already in the U.S. illegally, a program many Republicans oppose as a reward for lawbreaking. Mr. Obama also supports a guest-worker program and making it easier for foreign students educated in the U.S. to stay.

There is virtually no GOP support in Congress for the legislation Mr. Obama wants, though some Republicans have embraced these ideas in the past.

Mr. Obama predicted that no matter what he does, some Republican foes of his approach will demand more. “Maybe they’ll need a moat,” he said. “Maybe they’ll want alligators in the moat.”

Arizona Republican Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl have crafted a $4 billion, 10-point plan that calls for double fencing where there is now single fencing and another 5,000 Border Patrol agents, on top of the 20,700 now in place.

“We hear from our constituents on a daily basis, and, while some progress has been made in some areas, they do not believe the border is secure,” Messrs. McCain and Kyl said in a statement Tuesday.

They also pointed to a Government Accountability Office report that found the U.S. has “operational control” of 44% of the Southwest border with Mexico, meaning it has the ability to detect, respond and interdict illegal activity.The administration says that isn’t a good measure and officials are working on a better one.

Republicans face pressure within their party to keep the focus on tougher immigration enforcement. But some GOP leaders say the party also needs to improve its standing with Hispanics, the fastest-growing voter group in the U.S.

But the president faces skepticism even from supporters heading into this latest push.

“The moment to use pressure is gone. You missed it. The train left the station,” said Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D., Ill.). “I want to be honest with my constituents and with the American people. I don’t want to rev them up for something that doesn’t have any possibilities of success.”

Washington (CNN) — President Barack Obama renewed his call for comprehensive immigration reform Tuesday, citing America’s legacy as a nation of immigrants and calling the need to find a solution for the millions of undocumented workers critical to the country’s common future.

“We define ourselves as a nation of immigrants — a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America’s precepts,” Obama said during a visit to El Paso, Texas.

“It doesn’t matter where you come from. What matters is that you believe in the ideals on which we were founded, that you believe all of us are equal. …. In embracing America, you can become American. That is what makes this country great.”

The president’s remarks were part of an administration attempt to seize the initiative on a hot-button issue that has largely been ceded to state government leaders in recent months.

The speech took place against a backdrop of intense political maneuvering on the part of both Democrats and Republicans seeking to use the issue to their own advantage in the 2012 election campaign.

Obama has held a series of meetings with key Latino officials and reform advocates in recent weeks. Despite an aggressive push for substantive policy changes from his political base, the president indicated he has ruled out acting on his own to implement provisions of a reform bill that failed to win congressional approval last year.

At the same time, however, the president also signaled a shift in federal priorities. While continuing to highlight tougher border enforcement measures to national audiences, Obama noted during a recent Univision appearance that he has “redesigned our enforcement practices under the law to make sure that we’re focusing primarily on criminals.”

The deportation of non-criminals is declining “because we want to focus our resources on those folks who are destructive to the community,” he said.

A number of states — most notably Arizona — are moving in the opposite direction, pushing legislation making it easier to deport people solely for being in the country illegally.

Broad immigration reform “remains a priority” for the administration, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Monday. There has been bipartisan support for reform in the past, he noted, and “we think we can build support for it again in the future.”

The issue requires “focus,” “education,” and “persistence,” Carney said. “The sooner it gets done, the better for the country.”

El Paso Mayor John Cook told CNN he hopes to see a stronger push for more agents at border crossing points.

Obama has “already done a lot of work” to put “additional boots on the ground” along the border, Cook said Tuesday. But the number of customs agents near El Paso has remained the same since 2005 while the overall volume of trade with Mexico has risen substantially, he noted.

In terms of more extensive immigration reform, Cook said there “doesn’t have to be a pathway to citizenship” for undocumented immigrants. There should, however, be at least “a pathway to legalization.”

Let’s “get these folks — (roughly) 12 million people — out of the shadows,” he said. “Get them to come out and have their place in the United States be legal.”

Republican leaders have indicated an unwillingness to consider broader changes — including a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants — until the Mexican border is brought under tighter control.

Conservative frustration has boiled over in recent months in the form of a rash of state-level proposals to apprehend and deport illegal immigrants. Key parts of an Arizona law requiring police officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other statutes were recently blocked by the federal courts.

The Justice Department sued Arizona, arguing that only the federal government has the authority to dictate immigration policy. Federal district and appellate judges have blocked that provision of the law, and the state asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take the case Monday.

Progressive reform advocates, meanwhile, have been frustrated by Congress’s inability to pass the DREAM Act, which would offer legal standing to immigrants who entered the United States illegally as children under the age of 16 and have lived in the country for at least five years.

Obama said Tuesday he would keep pushing for passage of the measure.

The bill would require, among other things, a high school or General Education Development diploma, two years of college or military service, and criminal background checks.

Advocates say the bill would give legal standing to young people brought to the United States by their parents who have bettered themselves and served their new country.

One Latino advocacy group — Presente.org — released a statement Tuesday blasting Obama for failing to issue an executive order stopping the deportation of young undocumented immigrants until legislation such as the DREAM Act is passed.

“All we have heard from President Obama are empty speeches,” the statement said.

Republican opponents equate the measure to amnesty, and have said it would signal to the world that the United States is not serious about enforcing its laws or its borders. They have also called the bill unfair to immigrants who, in many cases, waited years to come to the country legally.

“The president will have to present a plan that takes amnesty off the table and focuses, instead, on making a real commitment to border and interior security,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said Tuesday morning.

“If the president does these two things, he will find strong bipartisan support. If he doesn’t, he won’t.”

The DREAM Act was defeated by a Republican filibuster in the Senate last December after winning passage in the House of Representatives. Most analysts believe it has little chance of clearing the GOP-controlled House now.

Regardless, the immigration issue remains politically potent. Obama won several Western states in 2008 — including Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada — partly on the rising power of the Latino vote. Democrats believe Hispanic voters might put traditionally Republican Arizona in play next year.

In the long run, Democrats are also hoping to use their advantage among Hispanics to make inroads in core GOP states such as Texas.

Obama won over two-thirds of the nationwide Hispanic vote in 2008. His approval rating among Hispanics hovered around 68 percent during the first three months of this year, according to the most recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation polls.

For their part, Republicans have depended on the immigration issue in the past to fire up conservative voters. Some analysts also believe that if Democrats push too hard, too fast on immigration, particularly in tough economic times, it could push swing voters toward the GOP.

It took a budget crisis of unprecedented proportions, but the U.S. Congress is finally starting to ask some tough questions about what it’s getting for the billions of dollars that have been spent on securing the borders against illegal entry.

The immigration enforcement budget has more than tripled over the past decade, but only recently have some in Congress finally begun to demand a better accounting of the results. In a series of hearings, both Republicans and Democrats who oversee homeland security have sharply criticized the administration over its failure to state clear objectives and measure the outcomes.

The effort is long overdue. Congress and the administration have never defined “border security,” have never spelled out how much immigration enforcement is “enough,” and have not tried to bring immigration laws into line with the resources available for enforcement and the needs of our economy.

Here’s a place to start. The U.S. government already has a rough idea what it would take to meet all the immigration mandates established by Congress, and the numbers are staggering. In 2002, one of us (Mr. Ziglar) initiated an unprecedented analysis of the massive, inconsistent patchwork of mandates imposed on the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) by Congress. Mr. Ziglar testified publicly on the conclusions of that study before the 9/11 Commission, but its findings have never been widely disseminated.

At the time of the study, total INS funding was approximately $6 billion. The study concluded that, by 2010, the INS budget would need to increase at least seven-fold, to more than $46 billion, to meet congressional mandates.

There was not the slightest chance then, nor is there now, that the U.S. will devote that much money to immigration enforcement. The enforcement budget is now more than $17 billion, and congressional immigration mandates have only increased since 2002. In just one of the key metrics is the government even close to reaching the targets suggested by the study — the number of Border Patrol agents, which is currently just under 21,000, double the level of five years ago.

Realistically, there will be little additional money for immigration enforcement. President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal freezes Department of Homeland Security expenditures. House Republicans, for whom rising deficits apparently pose a bigger threat than illegal immigration, have called for deep cuts to the DHS budget, a proposal that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano called “an experience in whiplash” after years of large budget increases.

Even if additional funds were somehow appropriated, the notion that current immigration laws could be fully enforced if only we had more money and determination is simply wrong-headed. It is not enough, as Sen. John McCain and some others keep insisting, that the border be “secured” before any other action is taken.

What is needed now is a more serious examination of priorities and trade-offs. The number of illegal crossings on the Mexican border is down at least 70% from its peak in 2000. Is this enough security? If not, how much more is needed, and what is Congress willing to pay for it? In terms of discouraging illegal immigration, how does a dollar in additional Border Patrol spending compare with an extra dollar on workplace enforcement? There has been little good research that would help members of Congress answer that question.

What’s needed is to reform our immigration system so that it doesn’t encourage illegal immigration. This requires reforming the laws on legal immigration rather than just the enforcement components. A realistic, flexible visa program that matched available workers to open jobs in both boom times and bust would reduce much of the pressure on limited enforcement resources at the border and in the workplace.

What about legalizing those here illegally? Using and misusing the loaded term “amnesty,” opponents have shut down consideration of any program that could deal with this question realistically. Such opposition has even blocked the Dream Act, which would have given legal status to about 800,000 children brought to this country by their parents, who few in Congress actually want to see deported.

The Obama administration has been pilloried for focusing on the deportation of illegal immigrants with criminal records rather than indiscriminately hunting down every immigration violator. But a sensible legalization program would bring enforcement resources more in line with reality and restore integrity to the laws by increasing the odds that law-breakers will be identified, apprehended and deported.

Few, if any, government agencies outside the immigration services have been allowed to operate for so long under legal mandates so utterly disconnected from their resources and capabilities.

It’s a good first step that members of Congress have begun sensible discussions over what types of enforcement measures may be most needed, and how much the country should be willing to spend. It’s time for all sides to work together to figure out what measures will yield effective and cost-efficient solutions both to our immigration problem and to our needs for high-skilled and low-skilled labor.

According to Secretary Napolitano, the Department’s federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement forces, governments all over the world, communities across the country, and non-profit and non-governmental organizations will share the responsibility of combating human trafficking. She is of the view that the DHS Blue Campaign will bring out the traffickers to justice and help the victims.

John Morton, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director, Alan Bersin, U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner, Alejandro Mayorkas, Director U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Ken Keene, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Deputy Director, and Alice Hill, Senior Counselor to Secretary Napolitano, jointly launched the Blue Campaign to help combat human trafficking and assist the victims.
A set of public outreach tools, including social media, public awareness campaigns, and a new website, www.dhs.gov/humantrafficking has been launched by the Department to aid citizens in recognizing and reporting the incidences of human trafficking.

Apart from the public outreach tools, the DHS Blue Campaign also incorporates initiatives to train law enforcement forces and DHS personnel, improved assistance for victims, and establishment of new partnerships and collaboration between agencies. Additionally, the campaign also includes placement of more victim assistance specialists for law enforcement personnel.

In view of fostering worldwide awareness about human trafficking, the Department has chosen the DHS Blue Campaign’s name and symbol. The symbol reminds us of the “thin blue line” of law enforcement. Further, the symbol combines global anti-human trafficking symbols, the Blue Blindfold and the Blue Heart. The Blue Blindfold symbol was created by the United Kingdom Human Trafficking Center and the Blue Heart, by the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime.

First of seven lawsuits against tough Arizona immigration law is heard Thursday in federal court in Phoenix. Money from private donors across the US has flowed into a defense fund for the statute.

By Lourdes Medrano, Contributor / July 15, 2010

Tucson, Ariz.

As Arizona heads to court Thursday to defend its tough new immigration law in the first of several legal challenges, it has the backing of many Americans who have opened their wallets to show support for the border state.

Contributions to Gov. Jan Brewer’s special legal defense fund now top $1 million, mostly in website donations of less than $100 pouring in from all over the country. Arizona, California, Texas, and Florida are the states with the most online donors.

As of Tuesday, website contributions totaled $1,104934.63 from 23,955 donors, according to the governor’s office. Additional mail-in donations totaled $93,084, with contributions still coming in, says Tasya Peterson, a Brewer spokeswoman. The average donation is about $46.

The Republican governor set up the fund by executive order in late May to help the state defend its right to enforce the law, which requires local and state authorities to determine the status of suspects they believe to be in the country illegally. The law, which the governor signed in April, has spawned economic boycotts and seven lawsuits – including one by the US Department of Justice filed July 6 – that seek to stop law, known locally as Senate Bill 1070, from going into effect July 29.

The financial contributions surged after the Obama administration its suit, reflecting opinion polls that show strong support for Arizona. In a Christian Science Monitor/TIPP poll released Monday, 51 percent of Americans favor the state’s immigration law. Thirty four percent support the federal government’s case against the state.

Phoenix resident Carlie Murphy, a retiree who has lived in Arizona for five years, says she contributed $20 because the state is trying to address what the federal government has neglected. “Our federal government has not fulfilled its responsibility for a long, long time when it comes to illegal immigration.”

Jeanne Kurucz and her husband, Andrew, of Garden Grove, Calif., donated $25 because they don’t think the federal government should be suing Arizona. “We stand behind Jan Brewer and we think that the government should close the borders,” Ms. Kurucz says.

Brewer and her backers say Arizona had to act because the federal government has failed to secure the border, but critics say the law will encourage racial profiling and is unconstitutional because enforcing immigration laws is a federal duty, not a state responsibility.

It is difficult to accurately estimate how much legal costs will total, says Paul Senseman, Brewer’s communications director. “It depends on many variables including the outcome of the cases, possible appeals, if new cases are filed, if the federal government continues to sue the state, etc.”

Arizona’s defense rests in the hands of private lawyers. Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat who opposes the law, withdrew from representing the state in court after continuing clashes with Brewer, a Republican. Both are running for governor.

Brewer hired Snell & Wilmer LLC, a corporate law firm based in Phoenix, to defend the state. Chairman John Bouma says attorneys are working long hours on behalf of the state. Adjusted hourly rates for the state’s primary attorneys vary from $225 to $450 per hour, according to the firm’s contract with the state.

Thursday’s lawsuit before US District Judge Susan Bolton was filed by Tucson police officer Martin Escobar. Various organizations, including immigrant-advocacy groups and the ACLU, filed subsequent legal challenges. The Justice Department suit contends that the law interferes with federal authority, and attorneys for both sides will argue that case before Judge Bolton on July 22.

President Obama today called for a “practical, common sense” immigration system that will help the U.S. economy and maintain America’s immigrant tradition — and he put the pressure on Republicans to get it through Congress.

“Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes,” Obama said in his first major immigration speech as president . “That is the political and mathematical reality.”

Obama said his administration has already taken record-setting actions to strengthen the border, and he urged Congress to approve “a pathway to legal status” for the 11 million or so illegal immigrants who are already in the United States.

Immigration has become “a source of fresh contention” in recent days because of the new Arizona law that gives police greater authority to question people’s citizenship, Obama said. His administration is expected to file a lawsuit against Arizona, but the president did not discuss potential legal action.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the first step on the immigration issue should be “to secure the borders,” and that Obama’s pathway to citizenship amounts to “amnesty” for lawbreakers.

“The President can make progress on this issue, but it will take more than a speech,” the top Senate Republican said. “If he would take amnesty off the table and make a real commitment to border and interior security, he will find strong bipartisan support.”

Speaking to lawmakers, academics, and community leaders gathered at American University, Obama touted his plan by stressing the immeasurable contributions that immigrants have made to the United States, and the frequent discrimination they faced throughout history. “Immigrants have always helped to build and defend this country,” Obama said.

The chances for congressional passage don’t appear great. Like McConnell, congressional Republicans and some Democrats said the government should focus on better law enforcement better moving on to citizenship issues or guest worker programs. In the meantime, lawmakers who are already grappling with new Wall Street regulations and an energy bill must also deal with congressional elections only four months from tomorrow.

Obama said political posturing on an emotional issue has delayed congressional action in years and month past. “Into this breach,” he said, “states like Arizona have decided to take matters into their own hands.”

Arizona’s crackdown is understandable but “ill-conceived,” Obama said, arguing that an immigration system requires a national approach rather than a “patchwork” of state laws that puts too much of a burden on local law enforcement.

“These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents,” Obama said, “making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound.”

McConnell, the Senate GOP leader, criticized Obama for his stand on the Arizona law, saying that “attacks on states filling the breach created by the failure of the federal government won’t secure the border, grow jobs or create solutions for what we all agree is a broken immigration system.”

At points in his speech, Obama criticized both sides of the immigration debate.

Some rights groups all but encourage illegal immigration, Obama said, though at least 11 million people are in fact breaking the law by not going through the citizenship process, and they should be held accountable.

As for critics of “amnesty,” Obama said it’s simply impossible to deport 11 million people. Doing so would disrupt communities and break up families, he added, as many undocumented immigrants have children who are U.S. citizens because they were born here.

The president said he has already taken major steps to better protect the border, proclaiming — twice — that “we have more boots on the ground near the southwest border than at any time in our history.”

As for his pathway to citizenship plan, Obama said it will help create “a younger workforce and a faster growing economy than many of our competitors,” Obama said. “And in an increasingly interconnected world, the diversity of our country is a powerful advantage in global competition.”