The New Under Ground Church-THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

State Lawmakers Seek to Stop New York City From Destroying ID Records

A New York City program supported by Mayor Bill de Blasio provides identification to those who lack Social Security cards or driver’s licenses, including illegal immigrants and the homeless. (Photo: Albin Lohr-Jones/ZUMA Press/Newscom)

A judge is expected to rule soon on whether New York City can destroy records associated with an identification program commonly used by illegal immigrants who lack Social Security cards or driver’s licenses.

Earlier this month, Ron Castorina Jr. and Nicole Malliotakis, Republican members of the New York State Assembly from Long Island, filed a lawsuit contesting a provision of the identification program that says the city as of Dec. 31 can destroy records, including the personal information of applicants.

City Council member Carlos Menchaca, a Democrat representing Brooklyn, co-sponsored legislation creating the city’s identification program nearly two years ago. Menchaca said the measure calling for destroying data was intended to protect illegal immigrant applicants in case a future Republican president tried to access their personal information for immigration enforcement.

Menchaca told the New York Post the clause was included “in case a Tea Party Republican comes into office and says, ‘We want all of the data from all of the municipal ID programs in the country,’ we’re going to take the data.”

Dear reader:

With today’s liberal media influence, there are few publications that Americans can rely on to learn the “other” side of the issues.

The Daily Signal is a dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts solely funded by the financial support of the general public.

We are a non-profit organization
We serve more than 2 million readers a month
We do not accept government funds
We do not run any advertising

Please donate by December 31 to ensure we can continue to provide The Daily Signal for free. Your support is needed now more than ever.

Time Left Until December 31st

If you rely on The Daily Signal for news and analysis on key issues, please make a tax-deductible contribution by the end of the year. Thank you.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

Since Donald Trump’s election as president, immigration advocacy groups and the city’s Democratic leadership have expressed concern that the new administration could try to pursue information from the ID program to fulfill its goal to increase deportations.

“The fear is that the Trump administration has made a lot of threats [about] deporting immigrants and they could use this data against immigrant communities,” Thanu Yakupitiyage, senior communications manager of the New York Immigration Coalition, a group that promotes policies that benefit immigrants, said in an interview with The Daily Signal.

Castorina and Malliotakis, in interviews with The Daily Signal, said security issues drive their concern about the prospect that the city will destroy documents associated with the identification program, known as IDNYC.

“Our lawsuit has nothing to do with immigration,” said Malliotakis, who is a daughter of Cuban and Greek immigrants.

Castorina and Malliotakis, the only two Republican members of the New York State Assembly who represent the city, did not vote on the IDNYC program because the City Council created it.

But the two lawmakers represent 300,000 New York City constituents between them, and they said they followed the program’s implementation closely. They became alarmed in September when New York state’s banking superintendent issued a directive encouraging all state-licensed banks and credit unions to accept identification administered through IDNYC.

Malliotakis said she worries that someone with “nefarious intent” could use the municipal identification, which is easy to qualify for, to open a bank account to “finance terror or engage in fraud.”

If the city destroys records associated with the program, she says, it would make it more difficult for law enforcement to investigate potential criminal cases.

“This lawsuit is about the safety and security of the people of New York City and our nation, and maintaining transparency and the rule of law in government,” Malliotakis told The Daily Signal. “That’s what it’s about. Everything else is a side issue that is not directly related to why we are seeking to preserve the documents.”

Earlier this month, in the first arguments of the lawsuit, Justice Philip G. Minardo of State Supreme Court on Staten Island delayed the impending Dec. 31 destruction of documents until a full hearing is convened in the first week of January.

Minardo requested that Mayor Bill de Blasio or City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito—both Democrats—be present at the hearing.

“I don’t want to order the mayor or the council speaker to be here, but it would be helpful,” Minardo said, issuing an unusual request that reflects the weight of the challenge before him.

In January 2015, New York City introduced IDNYC as the country’s largest municipal identification program to help those who struggle to obtain government-issued identification, including illegal immigrants, the homeless, and victims of domestic violence.

Applicants must provide their name, address, and proof that they live in the city’s five boroughs, among other personal data.

The program does not ask applicants to reveal immigration status.

“IDNYC was advertised to New Yorkers as a badge of being a New Yorker, that you could get it regardless of immigration status,” Yakupitiyage, of the immigration coalition, said. “We were told this card is safe and the program ensures confidentiality.”

To obtain a card, an applicant can use a valid foreign passport or consular identification, along with a utility bill that verifies a city address. An expired foreign passport is acceptable for up to three years, in some cases.

Proof of residency in a homeless shelter for 15 days also can be a form of identification.

The New York Police Department accepts the municipal cards as a means of identification. They also can be used to enter public schools and libraries, and to get free admission to the city’s zoos and museums.

Roughly 1 million people have applied for the IDs. It’s unknown how many beneficiaries are immigrants living in the city illegally.

The law that created the program states that the city would keep records for two years of the documents applicants used to apply, and make them available only through a judicial subpoena.

Malliotakis said only seven cardholders have had their records requested through a subpoena.

The New York Times reported that 92 applications for IDs have been flagged as highly likely to be fraudulent, and the city has denied 7,130 applications because of insufficient proof of identity.

Castorina and Malliotakis say applicants’ records should be kept for the five years that an IDNYC card is valid, and that data should be made accessible under the state’s freedom of information law.

Lawyers for the city argue that law does not cover the release of private data, such as the personal information used to obtain one of the city ID cards.

Before pursuing the lawsuit, Castorina and Malliotakis filed a freedom of information request in November to get the records for all IDNYC beneficiaries. The city denied the request.

“We were not looking to engage in litigation,” Castorina told The Daily Signal.

Castorina says he supports the IDNYC program, and contends that it “fulfills a worthy purpose” by giving opportunities to vulnerable people, including illegal immigrants.

In the interview with The Daily Signal, he acknowledged, unprompted, that he backs providing a path to citizenship for immigrants now living in the country illegally.

Yet, through the litigation process, Castorina says, he has grown frustrated with New York City’s Democratic leaders, including de Blasio and Mark-Viverito. He accuses them of politicizing the municipal identification program and its clause allowing for destruction of data.

“To say this is the list that the federal government wants and will use to deport people is just complete political hyperbole,” Castorina told The Daily Signal, adding:

This is just politicizing the unfortunate situation of undocumented people, and it’s being done at their expense by instilling fear in their hearts and minds. And it’s also creating the prospect of a major security risk.

ECONOMYNEWS Election Ushers in Batch of States Preparing for Right-to-Work Laws

At least three states are expected to pass right-to-work bills next year, which would bring the total number of right-to-work states to nearly 30. (Photo: Andy Katz/ZUMA Press/Newscom)

Not only did the 2016 election bring the country a new president, but Nov. 8 also ushered in the right political environment for a batch of states to pass right-to-work bills.

Twenty-six states have right-to-work laws on the books, and labor experts are expecting lawmakers in at least three more—Kentucky, Missouri, and New Hampshire—to pass bills giving workers the power to choose whether they want to join a union or pay union dues.

“2016 was sort of the tipping-point year for right to work,” Ben Wilterdink, director of the commerce, insurance, and economic development task force at the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, told The Daily Signal.

“We just got 26 states signed on, and that was the tipping point, and we’ve crossed that threshold,” he continued. “2017 is now going to be the year of right to work.”

Dear reader:

With today’s liberal media influence, there are few publications that Americans can rely on to learn the “other” side of the issues.

The Daily Signal is a dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts solely funded by the financial support of the general public.

We are a non-profit organization
We serve more than 2 million readers a month
We do not accept government funds
We do not run any advertising

Please donate by December 31 to ensure we can continue to provide The Daily Signal for free. Your support is needed now more than ever.

Time Left Until December 31st

If you rely on The Daily Signal for news and analysis on key issues, please make a tax-deductible contribution by the end of the year. Thank you.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

In Kentucky, Missouri, and New Hampshire, last month’s election resulted in a flip in party leadership in either governors’ mansions or state legislatures, which put previously defeated right-to-work legislation back on the table.

The issue pits the business community against labor unions, and has proved to be a contentious one for both parties.

Proponents of right-to-work laws argue that they force unions to become more accountable to their members and make states more attractive to companies looking to move.

But unions fiercely oppose right-to-work legislation and say that not only do such laws harm union membership, but they also lead to decreased wages and benefits.

Still, labor experts say they believe that the political landscapes in Kentucky, Missouri, and New Hampshire have created a prime opportunity for right-to-work laws to pass in each of those states.

“The world changed in November of 2016, and advocates of labor reform and for worker freedom are emboldened,” Vincent Vernuccio, director of labor policy at the Mackinac Center in Michigan, told The Daily Signal. “While you’ve seen the fire of worker freedom spreading brightly across the country, it’s now raging thanks to the November election.”

Kentucky

According to Dave Adkisson, president of the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce, right to work has been a priority of the business community in the Bluegrass State for at least 30 years.

Republicans in the state Senate have pursued right-to-work legislation in the past, but the bills died in the state House of Representatives, which was controlled by Democrats.

But last month, Kentucky voters gave Republicans control of the state House for the first time in more than 90 years.

Now, with a GOP trifecta in the state Senate, state House, and the governor’s mansion—Gov. Matt Bevin, a Republican, was elected to a four-year term in 2015—Adkisson said business leaders are “almost to the point of [being] giddy.”

“One of the key elements of the labor argument is that right to work doesn’t matter to business, that they choose locations for other reasons,” Adkisson told The Daily Signal. “I can assure you that business leaders consider right to work as a major signal about whether a state is pro-business or not.”

Adkisson said international firms will typically hire consultants to help determine where in the U.S. they should move, and many of those consultants will “start their search only considering right-to-work states.”

For Kentucky, that ultimately meant losing out on economic development opportunities.

“Companies are not going to relocate to a place where they don’t think they can get a workforce, but invariably in that top list of factors is right to work,” Adkisson said. “You want to at least make the long list to be considered.”

Until recently, business leaders, particularly those in Louisville, were more “fatalistic” about right to work not passing Kentucky’s state Legislature.

But when Indiana—Kentucky’s neighbor to the north—passed a right-to-work law in 2012, “that suddenly got the attention of Louisville,” Adkisson said, in part because Indiana appeared “more pro-business.”

“It’s just a general issue of competitiveness,” he said.

Kentucky state legislators will meet for a shortened session, just 30 days, in January, so they have a tight timeline to pass right-to-work legislation.

Bevin said in September he wanted to see the state Legislature tackle right to work next year, but in an interviewwith the Paducah Sun earlier this month, he said he would allow the Legislature to decide how to address a bevy of issues they’ll face next year.

“I know people want to see right to work addressed, they want prevailing wage addressed, they want school choice addressed, they want tort reform addressed, they want tax reform addressed, they want pension reform addressed,” he said.

Still, labor experts say they are hopeful.

“Kentucky has demonstrated that the state is ready,” Jonathan Williams, vice president of the Center for State Fiscal Reform at ALEC, told The Daily Signal. “I’d expect it within the first half of the year.”

Missouri

While the success of right to work in Kentucky hinged on the makeup of the state Legislature, it was the election of Republican gubernatorial candidate Eric Greitens in Missouri that bolstered Republicans’ attempts to pass right-to-work laws in the Show-Me State.

Greitens, who defeated Democratic nominee Chris Koster last month, has stressed his support for right-to-work laws.

“I support it because it would stop companies and union bosses from taking a cut of your paycheck to support their political organization,” Greitens said of right to work on his campaign website. “It’s just common sense. That money is your money—and you should decide how you want to spend it.”

Republicans have a supermajority in the state House of Representatives and the state Senate, and already, GOP state lawmakers in both chambers have prefiled right-to-work bills for the 2017 legislative session.

“It’s going to be a race to see who is state 27, 28, and 29,” Vernuccio said.

New Hampshire

Williams, of ALEC, said Kentucky and Missouri are the “low-hanging fruit” for right-to-work proponents.

Though he and other labor experts are hopeful New Hampshire will join their ranks next year, New Hampshire is “somewhat on the bubble,” he said.

Republicans will control the state Legislature and the governor’s mansion in the Granite State after voters elected Republican Chris Sununu governor in November.

Sununu supports right to work and said earlier this month he’s “fairly” confident state lawmakers will pass right-to-work legislation next year.

“I’ve talked to businesses outside of this state that have clearly brought it up to me, so there’s no doubt by passing right to work, it will open up new economic opportunities for the state of New Hampshire,” he said in aninterview with the New Hampshire Union Leader.

Still, the governor-elect encouraged state lawmakers to “be good listeners on both sides of the aisle.”

State lawmakers in the New Hampshire House passed a right-to-work bill last year, but it didn’t make it out of the Senate.

Though Republicans control the state government, Williams said there has been resistance among the GOP’s ranks.

Additionally, Democratic state Sen. Lou D’Allesandro of Manchester told the Union Leader opponents of right to work “have a good chance to stop it.”

Also at issue in New Hampshire is the dearth of other right-to-work states in the New England region.

Kentucky and Missouri are surrounded by states with right-to-work laws on the books, so they compete with others for business opportunities.

For New Hampshire, which would be the first in the region to become right to work, that competition doesn’t exist.

“There’s less pressure on them to get this across the finish line,” Wilterdink said.

Still, Williams said success in New Hampshire would be a “symbolic victory for conservatives.”

“If you saw the first state in New England become a right-to-work state—it’s been a tough region for conservatives to crack,” he said. “It would embolden right-of-center officials to push harder.”

Growing Momentum

Labor experts are confident that by the end of 2017, the number of right-to-work states will hover around 30.

Though they’re certain Kentucky and Missouri, at a minimum, will pass right-to-work laws, Wilterdink said lawmakers in three more states—Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico—will at least consider bills to make right to work a reality.

“We’re seeing a lot of movement and a lot of pressure, especially as businesses look at other states, especially as more and more states become right to work,” Wilterdink said. “States and their citizens are realizing they’re missing out.”

Republicans in Pennsylvania introduced right-to-work bills in the past, without success.

Earlier this year, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez committed to including right to work on her agenda for the 2016 legislative session.

Right-to-work bills have also been introduced in the Delaware General Assembly, but they were ultimately blocked by Democrats who control both chambers.

“This is a jobs bill in the states,” Williams said. “As more and more legislators are elected and looking for ways to make their states more competitive in growing jobs, we’ve continued to see businesses move from one state to another with better climates. This is one of the best things states can do.”