By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON D.C., United States – Beginning in the fall of 2011, the United States federal government will use an experimental analysis in calculating the poverty level within the country.  The experimental analysis will be based on 1995 National Academy of Sciences recommendations on how to determine the poverty income level.  The recommendations will not replace the current policy of formulating income level.

The analysis by which the federal government calculates the poverty level was established in the 1960s.  It examines two factors to determine who is poor based on income in the U.S.  The formula took into consideration a family’s or person’s income level and the cost of food.  The formula was also based on a two parent, two children household. Currently, the income level of poverty in the United States is $22,050 for a family of four.  This formula also is the baseline for qualifying for entitlement programs, such as Medicaid and welfare.

The new formula, the Supplemental Poverty Measure, is designed to gauge the needs of the poor in today’s society by taking into consideration other services that are considered basic needs.  Under the new formula, health care costs, childcare expenses, utilities, geographic location, and little more money to provide greater security will be calculated into the poverty formulation.  It will also consider the receipt of entitlement, such as food stamps, in the formulation.

Commerce Department officials stated that the new analysis of the poverty income level will not replace the current formula.  They stated that the new way to examine poverty was an alternative to the current system. Rebecca Blank, Undersecretary for Economic Affairs at the Commerce Department, stated that the alternative formula gives the Department a new lens to examine the basic needs of Americans.

Many advocates for the poor are excited about the alternative formula.  They believe that the current way of calculating the poverty level is not realistic.  Vanessa Wight, a demographer at the National Center for Children in Poverty, stated “we’re going to see a more accurate measure, based on what it really takes to get by in America.”  She also stated that “it really costs about twice the poverty threshold for families to meet ends meet.”

For more information, please see:

Christian Science Monitor – Who’s poor in America? US tweaks how it defines poverty – 3 March 2010

Washington Post – New formula to give fresh look at U.S. poverty – 3 March 2010

NY Times – U.S. Plans New Measure for Poverty – 2 March 2010

By Brenda Lopez Romero
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, D.C., United States – Last week marked the start of a new movement of students that are promoting the Dream Act.  Most of the student organizers are unique because they are undocumented.  The students see a link with the civil rights movement of African Americans and decided to start taking action during African American History Month.

This is definitely a new bolder movement.  As Nancy, media relations coordinator, from DREAM Team LA said, undocumented students are “willing to take the risk of putting ourselves out there and putting ourselves in danger, because for us it’s more of a risk to remain silent and not to speak about our realities and the everyday obstacles that we go through. Right now we are not afraid to speak up and to come out, because that’s what we need to do in order to be heard, in order to create change.”

A national umbrella organization, United We DREAM, coordinates some of the movement’s efforts and is run by many undocumented students who are affected.  They also see the timing of the events as parallel to the civil rights movement of the 1960s.  One of the DREAM Activist stated we “are constantly being denied certain rights in the U.S. and within our school campuses. We are fighting for our own humanity. A lot of tactics that we’re using as undocumented students are borrowed frameworks that were established in the 60’s with the civil rights movement.”  Furthermore, undocumented students are also victims of discriminatory law, segregation as a second class, and have been victims of violence and targeted crime including beatings and murder.

Tolu, from the National Immigration Law Center noted that the DREAM Act is not a Democratic or Republication issue; instead “it’s about finding a just and humane way for people who are in an untenable situation. It’s amazing what the students have been able to achieve even with this obstacle, imagine what they can do without that drawback. These are very passionate, involved, devoted, active, intelligent individuals and it would be a great loss to the country to give up on them. I believe that we’re better as a people having DREAMers amongst us and we would be a better country if we passed the Dream Act. It would affect the lives of hundreds of thousands, and we’ve put everything on the line to get this done.”

Longitudinal studies conclude activist young adults during the civil rights movement were more likely to be in leadership positions at all levels 20 years later.  We should expect the same from the DREAMers.

For more information, please see:

Indiana Daily Student – Students ‘DREAM’ for Congress to pass act – 24 February 2010

The Huffington Post – A New Civil Rights Movement: Undocumented Students for Immigration Reform – 24 February 2010

WSHV News – DREAM Act Advocates Lobby Congressmen – 24 February 2010

By William Miller

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

TORONTO, Canada – Steve Ellis an immigration judge in Canada is on trial for offering to approve a refugee claimant’s application if she would have sex with him. Ji Hye Kim, the refugee claimant said Ellis told her he would only approve her application if she would have an intimate relationship with him at a coffee shop where Kim worked.

Ellis was the adjudicator who reviewed Kim’s application when she applied in 2006. She was seeking asylum to escape her abusive father and creditors who had threatened her in South Korea. While Ellis was adjudicating Kim’s case he approached her at the coffee shop where she worked and asked her if he could meet her privately to discuss her case.

Brad Tripp, now Kim’s husband was suspicious when she told him about the judge’s request. At Tripp’s suggestion, Kim agreed to carry a concealed digital recorder to the meeting. Tripp also filmed her encounter with Ellis from a distance. While testifying at Ellis’s trial, Tripp said “I felt that we needed to record this meeting to protect Ji Hye’s rights to a fair hearing.”

At the meeting Ellis told her that he was going to reject her application but would be willing to reconsider if Kim agreed to have a casual intimate relationship with him. He also told her that he was married and did not want any commitment from her.

Speaking through an interpreter Kim said “Mr. Ellis had the power to decide about my application of refugee claim. I had to kind of decide between the status of my refugee claim and the relationship between Mr. Ellis and me.”

Ellis was a Toronto City Councilor before being appointed to the Immigration and Refugee Board in 2000.  He is also a non-practicing attorney. He is currently out on bail and has been suspended from his job at the Immigration and Refugee Board

For more information, please see:

Toronto Star – Boyfriend Devised Plan to Film Refugee Judge – 25 February 2010

AFP – Canadian Judge Accused of Seeking Sex From Refugee – 23 February 2010

Canadian Press – Adjudicator Accused of Sex Bribery Seen on Video Meeting With Refugee Claimant – 23 February 2010

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON D.C., United States-The United States Senate failed to pass an extension in unemployment benefits which are set to expire today. This failure has the potential to impact many United States citizens that depend on the benefits while they are trying to find jobs. 

The United States government offers unemployment benefits of money as well as health insurance to those who lose their jobs and meet certain criteria.  A person can receive up to ninety-nine weeks of unemployment benefits during their lifetime.  There are three tiers to the program.  The tier affected by the Senate’s failure was the final tier of unemployment benefits, the extended benefits protection program.  Those who qualify for extended benefits receive cash and health insurance for thirteen to twenty weeks after they have exhausted the other two tiers of insurance.  The failure of the Senate to appropriate funds for the program can impact thousands of people that depend on the program to survive.  According to the Department of Labor, approximately four-hundred thousand people will be affected in the first two weeks of March if funding is not passed.  If funding is not passed until May, three million people would be affected. The unemployment extension program costs approximately ten billion dollars.

The program’s funding was held up by Senator Jim Bunning.  Senator Bunning’s main contention for halting debate on funding for the program and not allowing it to go forward to vote is the cost of the program.  He believed that Congress should not add to the federal deficit by funding the program but find a way to pay for the program before funding is approved.  Senator Bunning believes that if the program is critical to the well-being of unemployed Americans, legislators could find a way to pay for the program. 

Supporters of the program believe Congress does not have to find a way to pay for the program before funding is appropriated because it is an emergency program.  They argued that the program is necessary while the United States is fighting out of an economic recession.  According to Senator Barbara Boxer, “Unemployment insurance is a lifeline to the long-term unemployed whose families have been hit very hard by the recession.” 

Many Senators hope to pass the funding next week.  They will try to pass funding retroactively to account for the days that are missed by not extending the program on Friday. 

For more information, please see:

CNN-Lone Senator blocks unemployment benefit extensions-27 February 2010

NY TIMES-Conflict in Senate Could Get Messier-27 February 2010

Christian Science Monitor-Jim Bunning killed the unemployment benefits extension. What now?-26 February 2010

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON D.C., United States– In the midst of its expiration date, Congress renewed the United States Patriot Act this week without the proposed changes that passed the House Judiciary Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee.  The Patriot Act was set to expire on Sunday.  It was originally passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush after the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Since its passage the Patriot Act has been a source of controversy between groups that support greater privacy protections and groups that contend it is an important tool in protecting the citizens of the United States.  In debates prior to passage of the legislation, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed greater privacy protections.  It limited the F.B.I.’s use of national security letters as well as provided greater scrutiny of law enforcement agencies when they examined individual’s library records.  The House Judiciary Committee passed similar provisions and also eliminated law enforcement authority to spy on the “lone wolf.”

Despite the greater privacy protections that were passed at the committee level, both the House and Senate voted to extend the Patriot Act for one year without the protections.  Three provisions that were a source of contention and dismay for privacy rights advocates were renewed.  Those provisions were the government’s ability to engage in court approved roving wiretaps, seizure property and assets, and the ability to spy on the “lone wolf.”  Under the “lone wolf” provision, the government is allowed to track non-United States citizens that are not formerly affiliated with a terrorist organization. 

The renewal of the Act without greater privacy protections comes after the shooting at Fort Hood and the attempted Christmas Day bombing.  Many members of Congress believed that its renewal without greater privacy protections was needed in the wake of those incidents.  However, not all members of Congress believe that greater privacy protections would weaken law enforcements ability to track and prevent terrorist acts.  They believed the protections are needed after the alleged abuses by Bush Administration.  According to Representative Jane Harman; “While I strongly support using the most robust tools possible to go after terrorists, Congress must revise and narrow, not extend, Bush-era policies.”

Congress renewed the Patriot Act as the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument on a provision of the Act that made it a crime to provide “material support” to terrorist organizations.  The Court will examine whether the provision violates the free speech and freedom of association protections of the Constitution.

For more information, please see:

Washington Post-Congress extends Patriot Act, no new protections-25 February 2010

MSNBC-Senate votes to extend Patriot Act-24 February 2010

Christian Science Monitor-Supreme Court: Does part of Patriot Act violate citizens’ rights-22 February 2010