President Barack Obama is thanking senators for acting to restore unemployment benefits to 2.5 million people

WASHINGTON  President Barack Obama is thanking senators for acting to restore unemployment benefits to 2.5 million people who began losing their checks weeks ago.Senators voted 60-40 to overcome Republican delaying tactics and clear the way for a final vote later Tuesday.

Three earlier votes to move the bill had stalled. Republicans want the spending to be offset by cuts elsewhere in the budget and Obama wants to continue treating the extension as emergency spending, meaning it will increase the deficit.Tuesday’s vote came after Carte Goodwin was sworn in to the Senate to succeed West Virginia Democrat Robert Byrd, who died last month.Obama had accused Republicans of holding the unemployed hostage through obstruction and game playing.(AP)

Obama administration poised to challenge Arizona immigration law

The White House is expected to file a lawsuit next week. Arizona has raised more than $120,000 in private donations to defend the legislation.Reporting from Washington  A White House showdown with the state of Arizona over its tough new immigration law is likely to unfold next week, when the Obama administration is expected to file a lawsuit aimed at blocking the state’s bid to curb illegal immigration on its own, according to people familiar with the administration’s plans.

Arizona officials are girding for the legal challenge. The state has raised $123,000 in private donations to defend the law, according to Gov. Jan Brewer’s office. Money has come in from all 50 states, in donations as little as $1.Obama administration officials declined to reveal the basis for the suit. But legal experts say the challenge is likely to include the argument that in passing the law, Arizona violated the Constitution by intruding on the federal government’s authority to regulate immigration.To date, the state has been hit with five lawsuits. The law, SB 1070, was signed in April and is scheduled to go into effect July 29.

By confronting Arizona, the Obama administration would be making a political statement as much as a legal one. Obama has already criticized the Arizona law as “misdirected.” Criminal action against illegal immigrants is not, by itself, a satisfactory solution to the nation’s dysfunctional immigration system, the White House says.Obama has said that part of the remedy must include a path to legal status for the estimated 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally. But with mid-term elections approaching, the president has not made the politically explosive issue a legislative priority for 2010.

Brewer and other Republican officials have recoiled at the prospect of a federal suit.”Perhaps the administration should focus on getting the assets they promised to the border region rather than wasting time and taxpayer dollars on suing the state of Arizona,” said Brooke Buchanan, a spokeswoman for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).

The Obama administration tipped its hand on its plans earlier this month when Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in an Ecuadoran television interview that a lawsuit was coming. Outraged, Brewer said the administration should “inform us before it informs the citizens of another nation.”

The Arizona law empowers police, after making a lawful stop, to verify the immigration status of people they reasonably suspect are in the country illegally.

Opponents warn that the law could be easily abused — enforced in a fashion that unfairly targets Latinos.Lucas Guttentag, director of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project and an attorney who is part of a group of civil rights organizations contesting the law, said: “A legal challenge by the Justice Department would help ensure that Arizona’s renegade state law, which will cause racial profiling and undermine effective law enforcement, does not actually go into effect.”

General Stanley McChrystal threatened withdrawn from duty because of insulting President Barack Obama

Washington, Force Commander United States (U.S.) in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal threatened withdrawn after he and his assistants “making fun” President Barack Obama and his senior advisers. The White House criticism of the commander of U.S. forces and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is displayed after the statement quoted a magazine article “Rolling Stone” which will be published Friday. A spokesman for the White House, Tuesday, said the general who was also architect of President Obama’s war strategy has also been called to Washington DC to explain the “big mistake in his assessment was” directly to the president.

Would President Obama would consider withdrawal of the general, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said all options are open. McChrystal himself had apologized for the article to be published in the magazine. Citing aides McChrystal, the magazine said an aide to President Obama as a “clown” and another as a “wounded animal”. General McChrystal own disparaging statement which also revealed the Vice President Joe Biden and U.S. Government Special Envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke.

The Pentagon criticized the general’s statement and lost confidence in his ability to continue the leadership of U.S. and multinational forces in the Afghan War that had lasted nearly nine years. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, General McChrystal “already made keselahan big and bad assessment.” Admiral Mike Mullen who headed the joint chiefs also expressed “deep disappointment.” “General McChrystal has apologized to me or to people whose names are mentioned in the article,” he said.

In the midst of controversy over the general, President Hamid Karzai even defend him. President Karzai supports full-General McChrystal is believed to be the “commander of U.S. forces the best ever sent to Afghanistan over the last nine years.” About six months ago, President Obama will meet the demand for General McChrystal additional amount of U.S. troops to support the war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Until mid-June 2010, the number of foreign soldiers who have died since the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001 reached 1831 people.

Rahm Emanuel would resign from the position of White House Chief of Staff

Some foreign media reported that Rahm Emanuel would resign from the position of White House Chief of Staff because he was tired with the idealism of the people inside the circle of the government of President Barack Obama.

UK newspaper, Telegraph, citing unnamed sources from Washington, launched that Emanuel will withdraw in six to eight months. A number of media such as New York Times, the Daily Telegraph; Israeli newspaper Haartez; and New York Magazine, then follow the preaching of the Telegraph. They called Emanuel would resign out of frustration will officials stubbornly difficult to unite opinion in order to pass the government’s policies the United States (U.S.).

However, so far no official statement from the White House about it. Emanuel, 55 years old, really enjoyed working relationship with Obama. However, as media reported that, Emanuel and Obama are equally understand that the difference in style between them will result in Emanuel – are known to talk frankly and this aggressive – only to be served during the half period of a four-year tenure .

Emanuel friends also says that followers of the Jewish and fluent in Hebrew is worried that he would be “annihilated” if still maintaining his position. He also felt it would be farther away from his family because of the pressures of work to be received as a holder of one of the key positions in U.S. government.

It has become an old story in Washington that the arguments and differences of opinion occurred between Emanuel minded pragmatist and a very senior member of Congress who are known to compromise.

A U.S. government official from the era of Bill Clinton’s claim would not be surprised if Emanuel will be back around November when the Democratic Party is struggling to maintain its majority in the House and Senate. If I were to resign from the White House, Emanuel is rumored to be running for mayor of Chicago, his birthplace.

Arizona lawmaker takes aim at automatic citizenship

PHOENIX  Emboldened by passage of the nation’s toughest law against illegal immigration, the Arizona politician who sponsored the measure now wants to deny U.S. citizenship to children born in this country to undocumented parents.Legal scholars laugh out loud at Republican state Sen. Russell Pearce’s proposal and warn that it would be blatantly unconstitutional, since the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the U.S.

But Pearce brushes aside such concerns. And given the charged political atmosphere in Arizona, and public anger over what many regard as a failure by the federal government to secure the border, some politicians think the idea has a chance of passage.”I think the time is right,” said state Rep. John Kavanagh, a Republican from suburban Phoenix who is chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee. “Federal inaction is unacceptable, so the states have to start the process.”

Earlier this year, the Legislature set off a storm of protests around the country when it passed a law that directs police to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect is in the country illegally. The law also makes it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant. The measure, which takes effect July 29 unless blocked in court, has inflamed the national debate over immigration and led to boycotts against the state.

An estimated 10.8 million illegal immigrants were living in the U.S. as of January 2009, according to the Homeland Security Department. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that as of 2008, there were 3.8 million illegal immigrants in this country whose children are U.S. citizens.

Pearce, who has yet to draft the legislation, proposes that the state of Arizona no longer issue birth certificates unless at least one parent can prove legal status. He contends that the practice of granting citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. encourages illegal immigrants to come to this country to give birth and secure full rights for their children.”We create the greatest inducement for breaking our laws,” he said.

The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War, reads: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” But Pearce argues that the amendment was meant to protect black people.”It’s been hijacked and abused,” he said. “There is no provision in the 14th Amendment for the declaration of citizenship to children born here to illegal aliens.”

John McGinnis, a conservative law professor at Northwestern University, said Pearce’s interpretation is “just completely wrong.” The “plain meaning” of the amendment is clear, he said.Senate candidate Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican and darling of the tea party movement, made headlines last month after he told a Russian TV station that he favors denying citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.

A similar bill was introduced at the federal level in 2009 by former Rep. Nathan Deal, a Georgia Republican, but it has gone nowhere.The Federation for American Immigration Reform, based in Washington, said Pearce’s idea would stop immigrants from traveling to the U.S. to give birth.

“Essentially we are talking about people who have absolutely no connection whatever with this country,” spokesman Ira Mehlman said. “The whole idea of citizenship means that you have some connection other than mere happenstance that you were born on U.S. soil.”Citizenship as a birthright is rare elsewhere in the world. Many countries require at least one parent to be a citizen or legal resident.

Adopting such a practice in the U.S. would be not only unconstitutional but also impractical and expensive, said Michele Waslin, a policy analyst with the pro-immigrant Immigration Policy Center in Washington.”Every single parent who has a child would have to go through this bureaucratic process of proving their own citizenship and therefore proving their child’s citizenship,” she said.

Araceli Viveros, 27, and her husband, Saul, 34, are illegal immigrants from the Mexican state of Guerrero. He has been in Phoenix for 20 years, she for 10, and their 2- and 9-year-old children are U.S. citizens.”I am so proud my children were born here. They can learn English and keep studying,” Viveros said in Spanish.

She said her husband has been working hard in Phoenix as a landscaper, and their children deserve to be citizens. The lawmaker’s proposal “is very bad,” she said. “It’s changing the Constitution, and some children won’t have the same rights as other children.”(AP)

BP say capturing more oil from blown is out well

Energy giant BP Plc said on Tuesday it had sharply increased the amount of oil it was capturing from its blown-out Gulf of Mexico well, but U.S. officials want to know exactly how much oil is still gushing out.The London-based company’s share price fell 6 percent in London trading after U.S. President Barack Obama said he wanted to know “whose ass to kick” over the massive spill.He told NBC News’ “Today” show that if BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward worked for him, he would have fired him by now over his response to the 50-day-old spill, the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history.

BP already faces a criminal investigation and lawsuits over the April 20 explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that killed 11 workers and triggered the massive spill. Some 120 miles of U.S. coastline have been soiled in the disaster that threatens the Gulf Coast’s lucrative fishing industry.

The company said on Tuesday it had collected 14,800 barrels of oil on Monday, 33 percent higher than the amount collected on Sunday and the highest capture rate since it installed a new system to contain the oil spill last week.The latest attempt involves a containment cap placed on top of the gushing pipe on the ocean floor. The total amount of oil collected over four days was about 42,500 barrels, BP said.

“We continue to optimize production and make sure we can take much oil out of that stream as we can,” said Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen, the top U.S. official overseeing the cleanup effort, speaking at a briefing in Washington.Allen said on Monday neither BP nor the government knew just how much oil was gushing out of the well in the first place. “That’s the big unknown right now,” he told a White House briefing on Monday.

BP has given conservative estimates of the oil flow that have been ridiculed by scientists and U.S. lawmakers. Even the government’s much higher estimates of 12,000-19,000 barrels a day seemed on the low side after Allen said the company planned to double its collection of oil from the well to 20,000 bpd (840,000 gallons/3.18 million liters).BP and government officials have said a definitive solution will not come until August when a relief well is drilled.

OBAMA HITS BACK AT CRITICS

The spill has fouled wildlife refuges in Louisiana and barrier islands in Mississippi and Alabama and also sent tar balls ashore on northwest beaches of Florida, where the $60 billion-a-year tourism industry accounts for nearly 1 million jobs.One-third of the Gulf’s federal waters, or 78,000 square miles (200,000 square km), remains closed to fishing, and the toll of dead and injured birds and marine animals is climbing.U.S. weather forecasters gave their first confirmation that some of the oil leaking from BP’s well has lingered beneath the surface rather than rising to the surface. Undersea oil depletes the water’s oxygen content and threatens marine life like mussels, clams, crabs, eels, jellyfish and shrimp.

Jane Lubchenco, administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said at the Washington briefing: “NOAA is confirming the presence of very low concentrations of subsurface oil.”Obama, who faces growing criticism that he has appeared detached from the economic and ecological catastrophe hitting four U.S. Gulf states, sharpened his criticism of BP in the NBC interview and hit back at his critics.”I was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the Gulf,” he said.

“And I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar; we talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick,” he added.Fadel Gheit, an analyst at Oppenheimer and Co, said it was “not a coincidence” that BP’s shares were down after Obama’s “kick ass” comment.

The European oils sector was down overall, however, on the back of lower oil prices due to economic worries. BP shares were trading down about 5 percent, against a drop of 2.13 percent in the STOXX Europe 600 Oil and Gas index at 1600 GMT.In New York, the company’s American depositary shares were down nearly 5 percent. BP shares have lost about a third of their value since the crisis erupted.

Away from the action in the Gulf, the political heat remained intense in Washington with yet another congressional hearing to bring BP and its peers under renewed scrutiny.The Senate Judiciary Committee was holding a hearing titled: “The Risky Business of Big Oil: Have Recent Court Decisions and Liability Caps Encouraged Irresponsible Corporate Behavior?”Democrats in Congress have been looking at lifting such caps.

The Senate hearing follows one in Chalmette, Louisiana, where two women who lost their husbands in the explosion that unleashed the crisis urged members of Congress to hold BP accountable.”I am asking you to please consider harsh punishments on companies who choose to ignore safety standards before other families are destroyed,” said Courtney Kemp, whose husband, Wyatt, was killed in the explosion.(Reuters)

immigration to be one factor that is very complicated problem for McCain in election

Reporting from Mesa, Arizona .As a candidate for president, Republican John McCain lamented his party’s tough talk on illegal immigration. “In the long term, if you alienate the Hispanics, you’ll pay a heavy price,” he told a group of Milwaukee businessmen in October 2006.Back then, some strongly favored walling off the U.S. Mexico border to address the problem, but not McCain. “I think the fence is least effective,” the Arizona senator said.

Lately, however, McCain has transformed himself from a champion of broadbased reform — who spoke of illegal immigrants as “God’s children,” deserving of love and compassion — into a fierce advocate for the kind of crackdown he once scorned.In a recent TV ad, McCain blamed illegal immigrants for all manner of problems facing his state: “smuggling, home invasions, murder.” It is time, he said, for Washington to “complete the danged fence.”Facing his toughest reelection fight in years, McCain’s future may hinge on whether voters see him as honest or opportunistic.

Old allies are dismayed. “Someone who was a visionary … has gone from being very large to very, very small,” said Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (DIll.), who worked with McCain and the late Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on a bipartisan immigration overhaul bill.Old foes are dismissive. Among them is former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, McCain’s main rival in the August primary and a longtime adversary. “An electionyear conversion,” Hayworth said.

The more important verdict, however, rests with voters like Linda StapleyWilliams, 60, a retired high school teacher and GOP activist in Mesa. She wonders: “Did he change his position as he was exposed to new information? Because that can be an admirable thing. Or did he change his opinion because the outcry was so overwhelming and there was no way he was going to get reelected if he didn’t?”

McCain — who holds a comfortable, if not overwhelming, lead in polls — declined to be interviewed. Last month he told the Arizona Republic it was “a political ploy” to say he changed his immigration stance.For years, McCain criticized Washington for failing to control the border, pushed for stiffer law enforcement and worked to pry federal dollars loose to help Arizona pay the costs of illegal immigration. But that was only part of the solution, he said many times.

“Congress cannot take a piecemeal approach to a national security crisis,” McCain said in a Senate floor speech in September 2006. “I believe the only way to truly secure our border and protect our nation is through the enactment of comprehensive immigration reform.”Working with Democrats, McCain introduced an enforcement bill in 2005 that included a guestworker program and a provision allowing citizenship for illegal immigrants who learned English, paid a fine, underwent background checks and waited several years before seeking permanent residence.

The legislation was strongly backed by President George W. Bush and passed the Senate with bipartisan support. But the measure drew fierce criticism from grassroots Republicans angry at what they considered amnesty. The bill was killed in the House.Even so, McCain’s coauthorship continues to antagonize many back home.

On a recent hot afternoon, a group of seven GOP women gathered in Mesa over cold drinks to talk about McCain. All were pleased with his harder line, including support for Arizona’s stringent new law against illegal immigration — though some found him more believable than others. None would consider voting for McCain had he not repudiated the 2005 immigration bill.”That’s a dealbreaker,” said Sharon Giese, 63, one of two Arizona representatives on the Republican National Committee. Others nodded.

Mesa typifies the changes in Arizona over the last decade or so, with its explosive growth and influx of Latinos. Once a faroff satellite of Phoenix, Mesa has become the state’s thirdmost populous city, with about 460,000 residents. (That’s more than Cleveland or Miami.)Much of the community has the feel of an upscale oasis. Broad streets, laid out in the grid pattern favored by Mesa’s Mormon founders, are lined with tidy subdivisions and earthtoned shopping centers, a cool mist drifting from the redtile rooftops.

But the heavily Latino neighborhoods near downtown show all the signs of incipient urban decay: empty homes, slashes of graffiti, bars on windows, weeds poking through cracked sidewalks.Since taking a harder line on illegal immigration, the Arizona senator’s future may hinge on whether voters see him as honest or opportunistic.Mesa’s Latino population soared over the last decade, three times faster than the total population, to more than 115,000 residents. Today, 1 in 4 people living in Mesa is Latino, up from 1 in 5 in 2000, according to Tony Sissons, a Phoenix demographics expert.But the Republican women were adamant their support for tough border enforcement has nothing to do with race. Rather, they said, it has everything to do with following the law.

“I feel for the people in Mexico because I know they want the best for the families,” said Heather Sandstrom, 52, a retired TV newscaster. “I think it’s great if they want to immigrate here…. We’d love to have you. But do it legally.”McCain used to say the same thing. In recent months, however, he has made the kind of provocative statements he once condemned. Instead of lamenting the “human tragedy” of illegal bordercrossers dying in the desert, as he did in 2008, he accuses undocumented foreigners of deliberately crashing into other cars — apparently so they can flee when pursuing officers stop to tend accident victims.

“Arizona is under siege in many respects,” McCain said in a recent Fox News appearance. “We have broken borders. We have people flooding across. We have drug cartels inflicting incredible damage.”In fact, statistics suggest that Arizona is safer than it was in the 1990s, when the tide of illegal immigration began to surge. New FBI figures rate Phoenix as one of the four safest big cities in America. From 2008 to 2009, data show, violent and property crimes fell nearly 9% in Mesa and surrounding suburbs.

For many, however, the numbers don’t compute; the news is filled with crime stories linked to suspected illegal immigration or drug trafficking: the killing of a cattle rancher near the Mexico border, the shooting of a sheriff’s deputy in Pinal County.

The Republican women lamented the changes they have seen over the last few years: more day laborers hustling on more street corners, schools increasingly burdened by children who can’t speak English, hospitals filled with illegal immigrants receiving free medical care.”It’s just not fair,” said retiree Carol Jacobsen, 71, who moved to Arizona from the Midwest in 2001. “They’re getting a free ride.”

In 2007, McCain and Kennedy tried to reach agreement on a new immigration bill. By then, McCain was seeking the GOP presidential nomination and being pummeled for his immigration stance; his campaign nearly collapsed that summer, about the same time overhaul efforts died on Capitol Hill.Although McCain rallied to win the nomination, the outcry convinced him that border security had to be addressed before other steps could be considered.

Some who worked with McCain on comprehensive legislation hope he will resume talks once the election is past. (Assuming he wins.) “I don’t think this has staying power with him, mentally or in his heart,” Gutierrez said of McCain’s current position.

That’s what worries Son Hee Williamson, who emigrated legally, she stresses from South Korea nearly 40 years ago. She likes the senator’s tougher approach to illegal immigration. “But I don’t know if he’s going to keep that promise” if reelected, the GOP activist said.She is still deciding who to support in August.

Gov. Jan Brewer has removed the state's attorney general from defending Arizona's new immigration-enforcement law

PHOENIX Gov. Jan Brewer has removed the state’s attorney general from defending Arizona’s new immigration-enforcement law, accusing him of colluding with the U.S. Justice Department as it weighs whether to challenge the law in court.Brewer, a Republican, said she took action after state Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat and her potential challenger for re-election, met Friday with Justice Department lawyers, who then met with her legal advisers.

Goddard, who has publicly stated he opposes the law but vowed to defend the state in court as its chief lawyer, said he told the Justice Department team “we need solutions from Washington, not more lawsuits.”Brewer expressed similar sentiments after her legal advisers met with the federal lawyers, vowing to defend the state to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

But she accused Goddard of a lack of resolve on immigration matters and called his meeting with the Justice Department team a “curious coordination.”The immigration law she signed gave her the power to coordinate the state’s legal defense because the Legislature saw a “lack of confidence” in Goddard’s willingness to defend the law, she said.

The U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder Jr., is nearing a decision on whether to challenge the law, which gives the state and local police broad authority to enforce federal immigration law. It allows the police to check the immigration status of people they suspect are illegal immigrants whom they have stopped for another reason.Holder has said he worries the law may intrude on federal immigration authority and lead to profiling. On Thursday he met with police chiefs who oppose the law as divisive and a detriment to getting immigrants to report crime and cooperate with criminal investigations.

Meanwhile, thousands from around the country marched to the state capital, Phoenix, on Saturday to protest the new law, set to become effective July 29.Opponents of the law suspended their boycott against Arizona and bused in protesters from around the country.Midtown Phoenix buzzed with protesters carrying signs and American flags. Dozens of police officers were on standby along the route of the five-mile march, and helicopters hovered overhead.

Supporters of the law expected to draw thousands to a rally of their own later Saturday at a baseball stadium in suburban Tempe, encouraging like-minded Americans to “buycott” Arizona by planning vacations in the state.Some opponents of the law have encouraged people to cancel conventions in the state and avoid doing business with Arizona-based companies, hoping the economic pressure forces lawmakers to repeal the law.But Alfredo Gutierrez, chairman of the boycott committee of Hispanic civil-rights group Somos America, said the boycott doesn’t apply to people coming to resist the law. Opponents said they secured warehouse space for people to sleep on cots instead of staying in hotels.

“The point was to be here for this march to show support for these folks, then we’re out,” said Jose Vargas, a union representative for New York City teachers. “We’re not spending a dime here.”Supporters of the law sought to counteract the economic damage of boycotts by bringing supporters into the state.

“Arizona, we feel, is America’s Alamo in the fight against illegal and dangerous entry into the United States,” said Gina Loudon of St. Louis, who is organizing the “buycott.””Our border guards and all of Arizona law enforcement are the undermanned, undergunned, taxed-to-the-limit front-line defenders trying to hold back the invasion,” she said.

President Barack Obama will deploy up to 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexican border and request $500 million

President Barack Obama will deploy up to 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexican border and request $500 million for enhanced border protection, an administration official said on Tuesday.The troops will provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support, intelligence analysis, immediate support to counternarcotics enforcement and training capacity until Customs and Border Patrol can recruit and train more officers and agents to serve along the frontier.The funds will be used to enhance technology at the border and share information and support between law enforcement agencies as they target illegal trafficking in people, drugs, weapons and money.

The immigration issue has been a subject of intense focus in Washington, with Obama calling for comprehensive reform, and speaking out against a tough new law in the border state of Arizona.The issue also was a focus of a state visit to Washington last week by Mexican President Felipe Calderon.(Reuters)

Arizona border businesses lose key Mexican clients / (Smash The Border)

Adalberto Lopez’ family-run musical instrument shop in the bustling Arizona border city of Nogales sells guitars and accordions to foot-stomping banda musicians and mariachis who cross up from Mexico to shop.But in mid-May, the music stopped in the store. Mexican customers who account for almost all its sales stayed away as part of a two-day boycott to repudiate Arizona’s tough new immigration law.”The street and my shop were empty,” said Lopez, of the “Day Without a Mexican” protest on May 14 and 15.The law may make life more difficult for border retailers already hobbled by the recession and long border crossing waits, and Arizona’s economy could take a hit from lost business.

But on a larger scale, experts believe the overall trade between the United States and Mexico, valued at around $1 billion a day, is unlikely to suffer from this latest wrinkle in the often strained U.S.-Mexico relations.Passed last month, the law requires state and local police to check the immigration status of those they reasonably suspect are in the country illegally. Opponents on both sides of the border say it is a mandate for racial profiling.

Mexico President Felipe Calderon sharply criticized it during a visit to Washington last week. Standing beside U.S. President Barack Obama, Calderon said Mexican immigrants make a “significant contribution to the economy and society of the United States” but many face discrimination “as in Arizona.”

The measure has triggered legal challenges, convention cancellations, and, most recently, snubs by some of the 65,000 Mexicans who cross into the desert state each day to work, visit family and shop, spending $7.4 million, according to a recent University of Arizona study.”The people in Mexico have been fairly insulted by this legislation, as have most Latinos in the state of Arizona,” said Bruce Bracker, president of the Downtown Merchants Association in Nogales, who said local shops’ sales fell 40 percent to 60 percent as Mexicans stayed home during the boycott.

NO TRADE SLOWDOWN

Obama has spoken out against the law, which is backed by a majority of Americans.The United States, Mexico and Canada created the world’s largest free trade block with the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994, although the U.S.-Mexico trade relationship has been jarred by job losses and charges of protectionism.Trade between the two neighbors is already ruffled by a trucking row. Mexico is waiting for the United States to let its trucks circulate again on U.S. roads, ending a spat that led it to slap duties on $2.4 billion in U.S. goods.

But analysts and customs brokers say the furor over the state law is unlikely to disrupt the $21 billion annual flow in goods over the Arizona-Mexico border, between clients scattered across northwest Mexico and the United States.”Once you work so hard to get a business enterprise up and operating, how much are you willing to reverse that based upon something that someone relatively remote from you does?” said Rick Van Schoik, director of the North American Center for Transborder Studies at Arizona State University in Phoenix.

“Life goes on regardless of the newsy political conversation that’s going on,” he added.Customs brokers in Nogales, meanwhile, who clear goods ranging from semi-conductor chips to fresh produce headed over the border by truck and freight train, said their clients were more concerned about the sputtering economic recovery than the migrant law, which is due to come into effect on July 29.

“The economy is one thing, but that’s an ongoing situation for everyone,” said Nogales customs broker Terry Shannon Jr.”But I have not had any dialogue with my clients at this point where they have called me up and point-blank (asked) ‘What do you think of the law? Where are we going with this?'”

‘ONE MORE OBSTACLE’

But in cross-border retail, where sentiment plays a role in shaping Mexican shoppers’ spending, the outlook is more vexed, business groups say.Informal Mexican boycotts in protest at the measure have taken hold in other cities bordering Arizona, among them San Luis Rio Colorado, south of Yuma, where some traders are opting to head to California and Nevada to buy appliances and cars.”They’re looking for other options,” said Juan Manuel Villarreal, president of the city’s chamber of commerce, adding that it is still too early to quantify the impact.Authorities in Nogales  the state’s principal trade gateway to Mexico  were unable to place a dollar value on the recent boycott by Mexican shoppers, whose spending accounts for nearly a quarter of all jobs in surrounding Santa Cruz County, and almost half of taxable sales.

But Olivia Ainza-Kramer, president of the Nogales-Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce said a backlash from the law piled pressure on local shops, restaurants and hotels already hurt by the recession and delays of up to two hours for customers crossing up from Mexico.”This is one more obstacle that’s getting in the way,” she said.(Reuters)