Immigrants in New York City have a lower unemployment rate and participate in the labor force at a higher rate than native

Immigrants in New York City have a lower unemployment rate and participate in the labor force at a higher rate than native-born Americans, a divergence from the national trends that may reflect optimism about the recovery.The economic recession didn’t hit New York City as badly as other parts of the country. The city lost proportionally fewer payroll jobs than the nation as a whole.

A report by the Fiscal Policy Institute, a think tank, shows that in the first five months of 2010 the unemployment rate for immigrants in New York City was 8.8 percent while the rate for native-born residents was 10.9 percent. The city average was 9.9 percent.”When employers see the light at the beginning of the recovery, when they begin hiring again, the first kind of worker they seek will likely be expendable,” said Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Migration Policy Center in Washington.

“New York has always relied on immigrants, and new immigrants, to drive its economy,” he said.Labor participation rates of U.S.-born New Yorkers declined from 59.2 percent in 2008 to 57.1 percent in 2010, while that of immigrant residents rose from 60 percent to 64.1 percent in the same period, the study said.

Labor participation is defined by those employed plus those actively looking for work.”Immigrant labor force participation in New York goes up during the recession, underscoring the notion that as the economy worsens, immigrants are more increasingly looking for work to cover their needs,” said David Dyssegaard Kallick, senior fellow at the Fiscal Policy Institute who authored the report.

Kallick measured immigrants’ employment, regardless of their legal status, using five months of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau.Immigrants laborers are more likely to relocate in pursuit of work, and without access to unemployment insurance many more quickly accept undesirable and temporary jobs.

“We see people coming from towns in Michigan, from Wisconsin, from North Carolina,” said Cirilo Gonzalez, 50, who works on indoor construction, primarily installing drywall.Oscar Hernandez, 39, moved to the United States 12 years ago from the central Mexican state of Morelos, and said labor conditions in New York push some immigrant workers to New Jersey or Philadelphia.”Seven dollars an hour is bad but it’s better than nothing,” Hernandez said. “My family is waiting for food.”(Reuters)

Mexican migrants head for Arizona despite crackdown

NOGALES, Mexico Kidnapped by bandits, and caught and repatriated three times by the U.S. Border Patrol,  migrant Roberto Santos says Arizona’s tough new immigration law is the least of his worries.”I don’t care if they tell me they’re going to give me life in jail. I’m still going to keep on trying,” Santos, 30, said as he sat on a bench outside a migrant welfare project in this bustling city just south of the border from Arizona.”There’s no other option, Mexico’s dead — I just don’t want to be here anymore. I don’t have a life here anymore,” added Santos, who spent more than a decade in Los Angeles, before being recently deported.

Last month, Arizona passed a tough new law to drive 460,000 illegal immigrants out of the desert state, which straddles one of the principal corridors for human and drug smugglers heading up from Mexico.But despite the looming crackdown which will require state and local police to check the immigration status of anyone they reasonably suspect is in the country illegally when it comes into effect in late July — migrants remain undeterred, authorities on both sides of the border say.

The U.S. Border Patrol’s Tucson sector said they had arrested 148,000 people in southern Arizona between October and April, around 8,000 more than in the same period last year.In Mexico, migrant welfare agency Grupo Beta says staff have continued to attend to some 150 to 200 migrants a day, either headed north from some of Mexico’s poorest states in search of work stateside, or sent packing over the border by U.S. authorities who have stepped up deportations.

“People are leaving, others are being repatriated, so I don’t see any change,” said Enrique Enriquez, the director of Grupo Beta’s center, which stands a few blocks south of the rusted border fence in Nogales.The controversial new law is supported by almost two thirds of Arizona voters, and a majority of American adults.

‘NO FOOD IN THE HOUSE’

Opponents charge the measure is unconstitutional and a mandate for racial profiling, and have launched legal challenges and an economic boycott to try to derail it.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon is expected to protest it when he meets with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington on Wednesday for a state dinner.

In an interview last week he slammed the state measure as “frankly discriminatory, terribly backward.” His government issued a warning to Mexicans living in or traveling to Arizona, and asked its consulates there to offer Mexicans legal protection.

Among those particularly motivated to cross north despite the state crackdown are illegal immigrants who used to live in the United States and were swept up in deportations, which reached a record 387,790 last year, according to U.S. Department of Homeland Security figures.

Standing among a group of two dozen migrants in the Mexican border city, Miguel Lopez said he would risk arrest and deportation as many times as was needed to rejoin his wife and two young children in North Carolina.”We’ll just have to see who gets tired first,” said Lopez, 31, with a shrug.”I have to keep trying, because my family is over there. I have nothing in Mexico,” he added.

Despite the promise of greater vigilance under the law, some first-time migrants added that they were driven by poverty to seek a better life in the United States, and would push on through Arizona regardless.”We heard about Arizona’s new law on the news, but we need work,” said Gerardo Perez, 30, a farmer who said he earned 80 pesos a day   about $6  in his home state of Chiapas in southern Mexico.(Reuters)

Stormy Daniels said that she will not run for U.S. Senate in her home state

NEW ORLEANS Louisiana-born porn star Stormy Daniels announced Thursday that she will not run for U.S. Senate in her home state, ending a yearlong flirtation with politics that began as Republican incumbent Sen. David Vitter was working to overcome a sex scandal.In an e-mailed statement, Daniels said she cannot afford a run for the Senate and, comparing herself to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, complained that the media never took her interest in the race seriously.

“To begin with, like Governor Palin, I have become a target of the cynical stalwarts of the status quo,” Daniels said. “Simply because I did not fit in their mold of what an independent working woman should be, the media and political elite have sought to relegate my sense of civic responsibility to mere sideshow antics.”

Daniels recently declared herself a convert to the GOP with a press release making light of news that the Republican National Committee had picked up a nearly $2,000 tab at a sex-themed California nightclub. But her political publicity has been handled by Democratic operative Brian Welsh.

If nothing else, a Daniels campaign for the Republican nomination would have been a constant reminder of the 2007 scandal that broke when Vitter’s phone number appeared in the records of a Washington prostitution ring. Other than admitting a “serious sin,” he has steadfastly refused to discuss the matter.

Meanwhile, his political career seems to have survived intact. He has raised plenty of campaign money while bashing the policies of President Barack Obama, who is not popular in the state.

At the end of last year, Vitter had about $4.5 million in campaign cash, compared with about $2 million for his Democratic rival, U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon. Updated campaign finance reports for the first quarter of this year were due Thursday at the Federal Election Commission. The Vitter campaign released a summary of the latest report showing more than $5 million on hand as of March 31, with $1.1 million raised and more than $618,000 spent during the quarter.

Vitter may yet gain another well-known rival because former Republican state legislator James David Cain has said he may enter the race as an independent. Vitter so far has no major opposition in the GOP primary.

Daniels (real name Stephanie Clifford) said during a listening tour last spring that she decided to explore a possible campaign after fans tried to draft her in light of Vitter’s troubles.

“I completely ignored the whole thing for a while, and then I just got so much encouragement and feedback that I thought at the very least I owe it to myself and to the people to come out and see what they have to say,” Daniels said at the time.

An exploratory committee incorporated last year solicited funds through the Web site TeamStormy.com, but because Daniels never became a candidate, she was not required to report finances to the FEC.

The TeamStormy site has not been updated in months, nor have there been any posts on the TeamStormy Twitter account as of midday Thursday. On another Twitter site, Daniels has made no mention of the possible campaign, but has continued to promote her adult films and personal appearances – including one this week in Raleigh, N.C.

Her political story took a bizarre turn last summer when she was arrested on a domestic violence battery charge after she allegedly hit her husband at their home in Tampa, Fla., during a dispute about laundry and unpaid bills. Charges later were dropped.

Her arrest came two days after Welsh, the Democratic operative, said his parked 1996 Audi was damaged by fire outside his apartment in an upscale downtown area of New Orleans. She didn’t say much about her campaign after that until her announcement earlier this month that she was becoming a Republican.

Daniels accused Vitter of financing his campaign with special interest money but said she still might support him if he goes along with her proposal to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and the federal income tax in favor of a “fair tax” plan that includes a national sales tax.(AP)

In the United States Civil War Begins

On April 12, 1861, the Civil War which broke out a sheet of dark history in the United States (U.S.). War that lasted four years was a site of a duel between Union forces (government) from the northern region with the Confederate troops from the South. The History Channel television station revealed that the Civil War began when Confederate forces launched an assault cannon fire into the fort through the Union troops at Fort Sumter, Charleston Bay, North Carolina. After a 34-hour firefight, the fort had been won of the Confederacy, but two days later, President Abraham Lincoln to announce the call to recruit 75,000 volunteers to help government forces to combat the rebellion of the southern region.

This war is motivated by a conflict between the government in the North region with the landowners in the South on the issue of slavery. At that time, Lincoln decided that it was time for the practice of slavery was abolished. The policy is opposed by the South.

South rulers and plans to secede from the U.S. government. In 1860, the majority of countries that still practice slavery openly would be separated from the U.S. if the Republican Party, known as anti-slavery party, win elections (elections). Lincoln, who brought the Republican party, ended up winning this election and to invite a strong reaction from the South. The state of South Carolina and then took the initiative passed legislation that states broke away from the U.S. government.

Within weeks, five countries in the region south to join the South Carolina – that is, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana. In February 1861, the representatives from the states that agreed to form the Confederate States America. The first president was chosen, which is Jefferson Davis. When Lincoln was inaugurated as president on March 4, 1861, a total of 7 states (including Texas) have declared themselves separate from the U.S.. Conflicts of two camps finally unbearable so that finally broke out firefight, which began with the Confederates attack Fort Sumter. The war ended in 1865 that killed at least 620,000 soldiers from both camps, but the number of civilian casualties from this war is incalculable, so is remembered as the bloodiest conflict in U.S. history.

Kathryn Grayson has died in Los Angeles aged 88.Born in 1922

Kathryn Grayson, the singer and movie star best known for her roles in such MGM musicals as Kiss Me Kate and Show Boat, has died in Los Angeles aged 88.Born in 1922, the classically trained soprano had planned a career in opera but was persuaded when she was 15 to sign a contract with MGM instead. Her male co-stars during her time at the studio included Howard Keel, Gene Kelly, Mario Lanza and Frank Sinatra. When her screen career began to wane, she switched from film to the stage. In 1962 she replaced Julie Andrews in the Broadway production of Camelot, going on to tour the show for over a year. She also toured with Keel in Man of La Mancha and appeared with him in Las Vegas. Born Zelma Kathryn Elisabeth Hedrick in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Grayson made her film debut in 1941 opposite Mickey Rooney in Andy Hardy’s Private Secretary.However, she remains best known for playing the temperamental Lilli Vanessi in 1953’s Kiss Me Kate, a musical adaptation of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew. Other films in which she appeared included Anchors Aweigh with Kelly and Sinatra, and The Desert Song opposite Gordon McRae. Her last film was 1956’s The Vagabond King, though she went on to appear in some TV shows including Baretta and Murder, She Wrote. Grayson died on Wednesday at her Los Angeles home, her long-time secretary and companion Sally Sherman announced. “She was a lady of class and quality, with the greatest sense of humour conceivable,” Sherman said.

Scanners force trade-off between privacy, security

the security gate at San Francisco International Airport in San Francisco

SAN FRANCISCO  As Ronak Ray hunted for his flight gate, he prepared for the prospect of a security guard peering through his clothes with a full body scanner. But Ray doesn’t mind: what he gives up in privacy he gets back in security.”I think it’s necessary,” said Ray, a 23-year-old graduate student who was at San Francisco International Airport to fly to India. “Our lives are far more important than how we’re being searched.”Despite controversy surrounding the scans, Ray’s position was typical of several travelers interviewed at various airports Wednesday by The Associated Press.Airports in five other U.S. cities are also using full body scanners at specific checkpoints instead of metal detectors. In addition, the scanners are used at 13 other airports for random checks and so-called secondary screenings of passengers who set off detectors.

But many more air travelers may have to get used to the idea soon. The Transportation Security Administration has ordered 150 more full body scanners to be installed in airports throughout the country in early 2010, agency spokeswoman Suzanne Trevino said.Dutch security officials have said they believe such scanners could have detected the explosive materials Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria is accused of trying to ignite aboard a Detroit-bound Northwest Airlines flight Christmas Day.Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport has 15 full body scanners, but none were used to scan Abdulmutallab when he boarded. In Europe and the U.S., privacy concerns over the scanners’ ability to see through clothing have kept them from widespread use.

The technology was first used about two years ago to make it easier for airport security to do body searches without making physical contact with passengers.The idea of an electronic strip search did not bother Judy Yeager, 62, of Sarasota, Fla., as she prepared to depart Las Vegas. She stood in the full-body scanner Wednesday afternoon and held her arms up as a security official guided her through the gray closet-sized booth.”If it’s going to protect a whole airplane of people, who gives a flying you-know-what if they see my boob whatever,” Yeager said. “That’s the way I feel, honest to God.”George Hyde, of Birmingham, Ala., who was flying out of Salt Lake City with his wife, Patsy, on Wednesday after visiting their children and grandchildren in Park City, Utah.”I’d rather be safe than be embarrassed,” Hyde said. Neither he nor his wife had been through a body scanner before.”We’re very modest people but we’d be willing to go through that for security.”

Trevino said the TSA has worked with privacy advocates and the scanners’ manufacturers to develop software that blurs the faces and genital areas of passengers being scanned. In all cases, passengers are not required to be scanned by the machine but can opt for a full body pat-down instead.At Salt Lake City International Airport, fewer than 1 percent of passengers subjected to the scanner chose the pat-down since the machine was installed in March, said Dwane Baird, a TSA spokesman in Salt Lake City.On Tuesday, some 1,900 people went through the scanner and just three chose not to, he said.Critics of the scanners said the option to opt out was not enough.”The question is should they be used indiscriminately on little children and grandmothers,” said Republican U.S. Rep. Tom McClintock of California. McClintock co-sponsored a bill approved by the House 310-118 in June prohibiting the use of full body scanners for primary screenings. The bill is pending in the Senate.

He said the devices raised serious concerns regarding constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.”There’s no practical distinction between a full body scan and being pulled into a side room and being ordered to strip your clothing.”To further protect passenger privacy, security officers looking at the images are in a different part of the airport and are not allowed to take any recording devices into the room with them, Trevino said. The images captured by the scanners cannot be stored, transmitted or printed in any way.But the TSA still has some public relations work ahead of it, judging by the reactions of passengers in Albuquerque, N.M., who were worried about what would happen to their images once they were scanned.”Are they going to be recorded or do they just scan them and that’s the end of them? How are these TSA people going to be using them? That’s a real concern for me,” said Courtney Best-Trujillo of Santa Fe, N.M., who was flying to Los Angeles on Wednesday.

The six airports where full body scanners are being used for what TSA calls “primary screenings” are: Albuquerque, N.M.; Las Vegas, Nev.; Miami, Fla.; San Francisco; Salt Lake City, Utah; and Tulsa, Okla.The remainder of the machines are being used for secondary screenings in Atlanta, Ga.; Baltimore/Washington; Denver, Colo.; Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas; Indianapolis, Ind.; Jacksonville and Tampa, Fla.; Los Angeles; Phoenix, Ariz.; Raleigh-Durham, N.C.; Richmond, Va.; Ronald Reagan Washington National; and Detroit, Mich.

Though most passengers interviewed by The Associated Press felt security trumped other concerns, Bruna Martina, 48, a physician from the coast of Venezuela, said the scanners still made her feel uncomfortable.”I think there has to be another way to control people, or to scan them, but not like this,” she said as she headed back home after a vacation in Miami with her husband and two sons. She also does not think the scanners will thwart another attack.”They’ll find another way,” Martina said. “There is always somebody cleverer than the rest.”(Ap)