Cross-Posted at California Progress Report and America’s Voice Education Fund.

By Frank Sharry, Executive Director, America’s Voice Education Fund:

Years ago, California tried to take the punitive and xenophobic approach to immigration with Prop 187 — a 1994 ballot initiative whose stated goal was to keep undocumented immigrants from receiving public benefits, but would have essentially turned California into a police state for immigrants. Fortunately, Proposition 187 was invalidated by the courts.  But instead of learning from California, states like Arizona, Alabama, and a handful of others are repeating the same mistakes and passing similar laws designed to turn anyone who looks or sounds “like an immigrant” into a suspect and make them feel unwelcome in their own homes.

But last week, the California State Senate showed just how far the state has come-by passing Assemblyman Tom Ammiano’s (D-San Francisco) TRUST Act, the antithesis of Arizona’s anti-immigrant SB 1070 law.

Arizona’s law attacks immigrants by making local cops turn them over to the federal government for deportation-destroying the trust between immigrants and local police. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration is also pushing for local-federal cooperation on immigration through its so-called “Secure Communities” program, which turns routine police work into an immigration status check, and has led to record deportations of immigrants who have never committed a crime.  Under “Secure Communities,” undocumented persons are often detained for very minor violations, such as driving without a license, and end up on the path to deportation.  In California alone, more than 75,000 immigrants have been deported since Secure Communities began there in 2009, and more than half of those immigrants were either convicted of no crime or convicted only of minor offenses.

The TRUST Act, which has the support of over 100 immigrant rights groups, police chiefs, and mayors, seeks to restore the public trust police need for community safety. The TRUST Act would address some of the problems with Secure Communities by telling police to only send immigrants who have serious convictions to ICE for deportation.  It would allow hardworking immigrant mothers and fathers to go to work and live their lives with less fear of harassment and deportation, and would mend the rift between immigrant communities and the police that is vital to the success of community policing.  This makes the TRUST Act essentially the opposite of Arizona’s SB 1070: while SB 1070 treats every immigrant as a priority for deportation, the TRUST Act lifts up legitimate threats and zeroes in on true public-safety priorities.

The bill has moved on from the California Senate to the Assembly, which is highly likely to pass it.  Next, it will move to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk, and Latino and community leaders are expecting the Governor to sign it and show the rest of the country what smart and fair immigration policy looks like.

The TRUST Act is simply a common-sense policy-in a world of limited resources and police power, law enforcement should target dangerous criminals for deportation, not hardworking mothers and college students.  And when criminals at large threaten all of us, those with information must be encouraged to come forward-not scared away from doing so. Opponents of the bill are simply relying on their tired talking point that anything short of deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants is “amnesty.” They’ve got nothing else to offer.

We hope that Governor Brown is ready to lead California full-circle, rejecting its Proposition 187 past and sending a message to states like Arizona and Alabama that mass deportation is not the answer.  Immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants is.

Yesterday, California took a key step in positioning itself as the “anti-Arizona” on immigration enforcement, with the state Senate passing a bill that would restore common sense to states’ approach on immigration. Ironically, California was the first state to embrace an extremist approach to immigration with the passage of Proposition 187 in 1994. Fortunately, the state has now come full circle and is breaking new ground by passing what we see as the “anti”- Prop 187 and “anti”-SB 1070: the TRUST Act.

The TRUST Act passed the California Senate with a 21-13 vote, moving the bill to the State Assembly, where it is also expected to pass. As the Los Angeles Times explains, the TRUST Act would:

prohibit police and sheriff’s officials from detaining arrestees for possible deportation unless the suspects have previous convictions for a serious or violent felony. The measure is aimed at blunting federal immigration enforcement, in particular the Secure Communities program, under which fingerprints of arrestees are shared with immigration officials who issue hold orders.

The federal “Secure Communities” program was created to target serious criminal offenders, but has been widely criticized by elected officials, law enforcement and others for sweeping up tens of thousands of immigrants without criminal records and destroying immigrants’ relationship with the police. That is why the California legislature-and, hopefully, soon the Governor-is taking concrete steps to address this with the TRUST Act.

The California approach stands in stark contrast to the SB 1070 law passed by neighboring Arizona, a law that continues to be mired in controversy and legal challenges. While the TRUST Act’s goal is to bring balance to immigration enforcement, SB 1070’s goal is to make every immigrant a law enforcement “priority.” Basically, it’s the difference between support for community policing and the creation of a police state.

Arizona is already ground zero for profiling and harassment of people “perceived to be immigrants,” and the federal government is certainly doing its part. The Border Patrol’s recent treatment of former Arizona Governor Raul Castro-who was stopped and held in 100 degree heat while traveling to celebrate his 96th birthday-is just the most recent example of how “checkpoint” culture has invaded the southwest and turned even the most patriotic of Americans into suspects. As Alessandra Soler, Executive Director of ACLU of Arizona stated:

This happens all the time in terms of these types of indiscriminate stops of individuals not suspected of any wrongdoing…I think most people would agree that subjecting a 96-year-old man to secondary screening does little to secure our borders and a man who had just informed them that he had undergone this medical procedure.

In fact, this wasn’t even the first time Governor Castro was subjected to harassment by the Border Patrol, and it’s a clear indication that Arizona remains the Wild West, while California is striking out on a decidedly different path.

According to Frank Sharry, Executive Director, America’s Voice Education Fund:

The rapid expansion of federal immigration enforcement capacity and authority has helped foster a climate of impunity and excess, as the detention of former Gov. Castro demonstrates. That’s why California’s TRUST Act is such a welcome and sensible step forward. By taking smart steps to restore immigration enforcement priorities, California’s TRUST Act is the antidote to Arizona immigration policy excesses. We hope and expect Governor Brown to sign the TRUST Act into law, sending a strong signal that California has learned from, and moved beyond, its Proposition 187 past.

This week, it’s the 104th anniversary of Ellis Island’s one-day peak – the day when more immigrants were welcomed than any other in American history. On April 17, 1907, 11,747 immigrants became Americans – and that was just at Ellis Island.

Today, 104 years later, America is stuck in the mud with a broken immigration system. Americans want reform that unites families, promotes fair employment practices, and restores America’s place as a nation that welcomes those seeking freedom from persecution and a better way of life.

This week, Immigrants’ List — a bipartisan political action committee dedicated to electing pro-immigration lawmakers – unveiled the 2011 inductees into the Immigration Hall of Shame. In the Hall of Shame are California’s own, Reps. Ed Royce (#3) and Brian Bilbray (#6), who have earned places alongside the likes of Michele Bachmann and Steve King.

Hall of Shame – April 2011 Inductees

1. Rep. Steve King (R-IA) – A man who cites the Bible in his opposition to immigration reform, King favors an electrified wire border fence, arguing “we do that with livestock all the time.” King believes that undocumented immigrants can be detected from their clothing and “the type of grooming they might have,” and labeled the DREAM Act “amnesty.” Alarmingly, King vice chairs the House Immigration Subcommittee – the first stop for every immigration bill.

2. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) – According to Lamar Smith, the guaranteed 14th Amendment right to birthright citizenship is a “misinterpretation,” which Smith plans to remedy with a ban on that right that can “get five votes” on the Supreme Court. Such a posture would be troubling enough from any member of Congress, but coming from the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, it’s downright dangerous.

3. Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA) – After calling for a national version of the Arizona SB 1070, Royce has announced new legislation to give local police Arizona-style powers over immigration. An active leader in the House’s leading anti-reform caucus, Royce supports forcing hospitals to gather information on possible undocumented immigrants, and opposes increasing visas for skilled workers.

4. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) – Always a lightning rod of controversy, Peter King has been in the headlines recently for scapegoating Muslim citizens. But we should remember that King has a long history of scapegoating and marginalizing all immigrants; he fought to ban the use of Spanish by government agencies and authored a bill to ban drivers’ licenses for undocumented workers because they are “potential terrorists.” King chairs the Homeland Security Committee, which has a major role in immigration reform legislation.

5. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) – The potential presidential candidate has a history of inflammatory statements which go along with her outlandish voting record. She’s spread the widely-debunked rumor that Phoenix is “the kidnap[ping] capital of the United States,” using that myth to justify her support for an armed presence on the border. She’s advocates Arizona SB 1070, and told Bill O’Reilly that all local law enforcement should be required to ask for proof of immigration status. Bachmann chairs the House Tea Party Caucus.

6. Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-CA) – Having built a career spreading fear about our broken border, Bilbray now helms the House’s anti-immigration reform caucus, where he’s leading the fight for an Arizona SB 1070-style bill. Discontent with mere anti-immigrant legislation, Bilbray has spread rumors that President Obama will issue amnesty by decree, and “the human smuggling, prostitution, murder and virtual enslavement of human beings” is happening because immigrants are “drawn to this nation by… taxpayer-funded jobs.”

7. Sen. John Boozman (R-AR) – While campaigning for Senate last year, Boozman wrote that “our schools, our hospitals and our jobs are being compromised by the influx of illegal immigrants.” His solution? Eliminating the Constitutional right to birthright citizenship, reducing overall legal immigration, and spreading rumors that President Obama “may grant amnesty through an Executive Order.”

8. Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC) – In word and deed, Shuler is eager to prove that obstructionism is bipartisan. The top Democrat in Congress’s largest anti-reform caucus, he worked with Tom Tancredo to author the SAVE Act, which would deport 12 million undocumented immigrants, was backed by NumbersUSA, and would’ve taken a large step towards militarizing America’s border.

9. Rep. Candice Miller (R-MI) – One of the leading proponents of the baseless rumor that the Obama administration is behind a “backdoor amnesty” program, Candice Miller chairs the Homeland Security Border Subcommittee. She co-sponsored the deportation-only SAVE Act, and won the support of Lou Dobbs for her fear-mongering that undocumented workers will gain political power due to the 2010 Census counting “persons,” not “citizens.”

10. Rep. Ben Quayle (R-AZ) – Heralded as a “true reformer” by the notoriously anti-immigration NumbersUSA, Ben Quayle exemplified the worst political impulses when it comes to immigration, exploiting fear and misinformation to ride into office. Quayle made election promises to reduce the overall number of immigrants allowed in America, erect a Pacific-to-the-Gulf electrified fence, and send the National Guard to patrol the border. These efforts may have won him the support of Chuck Norris, but here’s a fact for Chuck Norris and Ben Quayle: your scare tactics draw out the status quo – preventing meaningful reform, breaking up families, and putting America at risk.

Immigration is a fundamental part of America’s heritage and is essential to the growth and prosperity of our nation. That’s a fact. It’s central to our American character.

And it’s something these ten have forgotten.

View the Hall of Shame, share with friends, and sign-up for more information at our website.

The Bush Administration has released midnight regulation changes that make it easier for growers to slash the pay of domestic farm workers and hire imported foreign laborers instead of U.S. field workers. They will weaken government protections in an industry known for violating the minimum wage, housing requirements and other rules. We must do everything we can to avoid having these regulations implemented. Please help!

Today’s LA Times describes the situation well.

Los Angeles Times, 12/16/08:

Not content to leave office as the most unpopular president in recent history, Bush is cementing his legacy of hardheaded autocracy by pushing through a record number of last-minute and particularly noxious changes in federal regulations. Bypassing congressional debate and often receiving public comments through government websites, the administration has in recent months issued dozens of “midnight regulations” that in some cases could take years to reverse. This isn’t just leaving a stamp on the country, it’s more like inking a tattoo.

Please join the UFW in appealing to President-Elect Obama to act quickly to reverse these harmful regulatory changes once he is sworn in to office and protect farm workers from these callous regulations. Sign the online petition to his transition team today!

More excerpts from Today’s LA Times editorial:

Los  Angeles Times, 12/16/08:

Bush rewrites the rules-Last-minute changes being pushed through by the administration, such as altering H-2A visa rules, are creating disasters that Barack Obama will have to reverse beginning Jan. 20.

Although other presidents have crafted rules the next administration might not, none has been so aggressive or destructive as Bush. His administration has attacked environmental safeguards, reproductive rights and public safety. It has acted to permit uranium mining near the Grand Canyon, curtail women’s access to birth control, allow visitors to carry loaded guns in national parks — which are among the safest public places in the country — and open millions of acres of unspoiled land to mining.

Last week, the Department of Labor weakenedthe nation’s already flawed agricultural guest worker program. The new H-2A visa rules, which take effect in January, revise the way wages are calculated and will lower them substantially. In California, farmworker advocates say, the current $9.72 hourly wage would drop by 18%. The new rules also reduce requirements for growers to prove they have made a good-faith effort to recruit U.S. workers and limit how much they have to reimburse workers for their trips home. This is precisely what opponents of immigration reform feared: policies that disadvantage citizens and encourage the easy exploitation of migrants…

The LA Times is not the only newspaper that has spoken out. The following excerpts comes from yesterday’s Miami Herald editorial.

Miami Herald, 12/15/08

Rule changes target vulnerable workers.

OUR OPINION: Don’t allow last-minute regulations to erode standards

The torrent of new rules being issued by the Bush administration as it heads out the door is turning into a regulatory fiasco. The changes have lowered the bar on environmental review across the board, from limiting worker exposure to toxins to ignoring provisions of the Clean Water Act and softening, if not gutting, the Endangered Species Act. Late last week, new rules targeted vulnerable members of the labor force — farmworkers.

…Rules that are to be published this week and which would take effect just days before President Bush leaves office would: make it easier to hire foreign ”guest workers” — to the detriment of Americans willing to work in the fields; lower wage standards; and weaken oversight of farm hiring. This revision will hurt those who can least afford any cuts in pay or erosion of job protections…

Yesterday’s New York Times editorial said:

New York Times, 12/15/08

A Cheap Shot at Workers

The Bush administration is doing a last-minute overhaul of the visa program for temporary farmworkers to make it easier to hire foreigners over Americans, to lower workers’ wages and to erode their rights. You would think that after failing for eight years to fix immigration, the administration would pack it in rather than make one last listless stab at a solution. But this plan isn’t even that – it’s just midnight meanness, right in time for the holidays…

There are many more newspaper articles and editorials on this subject, but the bottom line is the same. These regulations are horrific for farm workers and we need the Obama administration to do everything it can to make sure they are not enacted.  

That is why we are asking you to please join the UFW in appealing to President-Elect Obama to act quickly to protect farm workers by reversing these harmful regulatory changes once he is sworn in to office . Sign the UFW’s online petition to his transition team today!

* For more specific information on these regulations click here to see Farm Worker Justice’s 2 page Summary of H-2A Regulations, entitled “The Bush Administration’s Shameful Legacy for Farmworkers: Midnight Regulations on the H-2A Guestworker Program” & click here to see their White Paper, “Litany of Abuses: Why we need more–not fewer–labor protections in the H2A Guestworker Program and click here to go to the UFW’s guestworker page where we will be posting the latest information.

What would you do if your American dream had to be deferred? And how would you respond when you find out that your dream must be deferred because of nine digits? Yep, nine digits would be separating you from your plans, your hopes, your wishes, your future. Doesn’t that seem unfair?

Well, it is. It’s quite unfair for all the young people to work so hard to go to college, yet can’t access any financial aid because they are undocumented immigrants. And even if they can somehow make it through college, they can’t get a job because they don’t have those nine little digits. Even though they came here as children, and even though they only remember living here, they are punished for something they had no control over.

So what can be done about this injustice? Follow me after the flip for more…

A couple of days ago, I met this guy named Ricardo. He seemed like a nice guy, and like a typical young professional in Orange County who did everything he was supposed to do to succeed. Yet for some reason, he can’t.

Ricardo did everything he was supposed to do in high school. He excelled in his classes, and he went on to college. He now has a bachelor’s degree in molecular biology. He has a master’s in health policy. He wants to serve people in the medical profession. However, he can’t.

So why can’t Ricardo get a job? He doesn’t have those nine digits. His parents brought him here with them some nineteen years ago, and they all came here undocumented. He was only eight years old. He hardly even remembers Mexico. He’s spent the vast majority of his life in the US, and this nation is the nation he calls home.

Ricardo never sought to break the law. He doesn’t gang-bang. He doesn’t deal drugs. He’s not some “criminal alien”. He’s just a smart guy who did everything right and went to school and planned to do something good with his life. So why must he be “punished” for something that he had no control over.

Unfortunately, Ricardo had no opportunity to receive any financial aid. He started school before AB 540 became the law of the land in California in 2003. And since he didn’t have those nine digits, he had to struggle just to afford his college tuition.

But even now that he’s finished school, Ricardo still has to struggle. He can’t get a job. He still doesn’t have those nine digits. He’s at his wit’s end. Without the nine digits, all his dreams must be put on hold indefinitely.

So what can be done? Ricardo’s just one person who’s been unfairly “punished” because of his immigration status. These young people didn’t make a “choice to come here illegally”. They didn’t just decide to “break the law”. They came here as kids, yet they’re being punished like adult criminals. What can be done to fix this?

Obviously, AB 540 isn’t enough. This only helps immigrant students in California, and it only helps these students go to school. However, it doesn’t help them get jobs after school. That’s why we need the DREAM Act.

So what would the DREAM Act do? Basically, it would give a path to legalization for people who brought to the US undocumented as children by their parents. In order to qualify, they need proof of having arrived in the United States before reaching 16 years of age ,as well as proof of residence in the US for a least five consecutive years since their date of arrival. Oh yes, and they must have graduated from an American High School, or obtained a GED.  Oh, and they must also demonstrate “good moral character,” which is defined as the absence of a significant criminal record (or any drug charges whatsoever).

So what exactly would be done? Here’s a quick rundown from the Wiki entry:

Immigrants who meet the above requirements would be eligible to apply for a temporary six (6) year “conditional” residence permit which would allow them to live legally in the United States, obtain driver’s licenses, attend college as in-state residents, work legally (including obtaining a social security number), and apply for special travel documents which would allow for travel outside of the country for limited amounts of time.

During the six years of conditional status, the eligible immmigrant would be required to either (1) graduate from a two-year community college, (2) complete at least two years towards a 4-year degree, or (3) serve two years in the U.S. military. After the six year period, an immigrant who meets at least one of these three conditions would be eligible to apply for legal permanent resident (green card) status. During their temporary time, immigrants would not be eligible for federal higher education grants such as Pell grants, though they would be able to apply for student loans and work study.

There, now doesn’t that sound fair? Doesn’t this do justice for people like Ricardo who never sought to “break the law”, but just want a chance to do something good with their lives? Don’t they have a right to pursue their dreams? Oh yes, and shouldn’t they finally just have a chance to get those darn nine digits so that they can move on with their lives? Isn’t it only in the best interest of the greater society that they can be productive forces in our society?

So would you like to find out more about the stories of these immigrant students, the story behind the DREAM Act, and why we shouldn’t stereotype immigrants? If you’re in Orange County, you can watch a special play, “9ine Digits Away from My Dream”. You can hear more about Ricardo’s story, as well as stories from other immigrant students in Orange County who are struggling because of an unfair system. And yes, you can gain some more understanding, and find out what you can do to change this.

And no matter where you live, you can urge House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) to get the DREAM Act passed in the House. Isn’t it time that we stop deferring these young people’s dreams? Should we allow nine digits to get in the way of these people’s dreams of better lives?

(Cross-posted at Ditch Crazy Dana)

There’s something wrong with the immigration bill in the US Senate. We already know that. But what’s the problem? Is it this? (From Daily Pilot)

“The president insists on defining amnesty in a way that is contrary to the way everybody else defines that word,” he said. “Every time he does, he loses credibility.”

Calling himself a strong supporter of Bush throughout his administration, Rohrabacher said that this time he was personally offended by Bush’s suggestions that the bill was good for America. He repeatedly referred to it as the “Bush-Kennedy” bill, linking Bush to Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy, and he blamed the bill on an “unholy coalition between the big-business element of the Republican Party and the liberal left.”

Amnesty? “Bush-Kennedy”? Huh? Maybe Dana Rohrabacher is taking the right position on this bill, but he’s doing it for the completely wrong reason. So why is Dana wrong, even when he’s right? Follow me after the flip for more…

So why again does Dana Rohrabacher oppose this bill? Oh yes, that’s right…

The bill has no teeth in its enforcement provisions and would only embolden people to sneak across borders to get government benefits, Rohrabacher said.

“Wake up America,” he said. “Our country is being stolen from us. Our country is being invaded. The Senate legislation will only accelerate this invasion.”

Dana then went on to denounce the “Z-visa” provision in this bill, which would charge the undocumented immigrants already here $1,000 for some legal status. He called that “amnesty that would give millions of lawbreakers access to government programs like Social Security”, and he just had to condemn the “illegal immigrants cutting the line in front of legal immigrants”. And of course, he attacked a proposed guest worker program and a points system as this would give these workers a chance to come here legally.

And you know what? Crazy Dana’s actually doing the right thing in opposing this legislation. He’s just doing it for the wrong reason.

Dana doesn’t want to give these “lawbreakers” access to programs like Social Security, even once they become legal. But doesn’t this undermine the whole goal of comprehensive immigration reform? This would take away an incentive for people to come out of the shadows, and get back in line to come here legally. And wait, don’t they already pay into Social Security? Why can’t they receive the Social Security that they’ve already paid into, especially once they receive legal status?

And amnesty? How does this bill provide “amnesty”? Where is the “amnesty” in this bill? These immigrant workers would have to pay fines. They would have to be split from their families in many instances. They would have to leave after eight years to their nation of origin, and go through a long and complicated process to try to return. Now I understand that these people should have to go to back into line and pay some fine in order to earn legal status. However, do they really need to be kicked out after eight years? And how the heck is that even enforceable? And do they need to be split from their families, and from their communities? Is this really “amnesty”?

Now Dana’s right about the guest worker program being a raw deal. Remember what I said yesterday?

This bill would also create a new underclass of immigrant workers. Under the new guest worker program, immigrant workers can only stay here temporarily, and then just return home. Meanwhile under this new “merit based” system of immigration, people would be admitted into this nation based on how “economically valuable” they would be. This really only serves the American corporations that want continued cheap labor. Under the new law, they can get their “disposable labor force” that can be discarded and replaced every few years.

Now maybe a guest worker program would work. However, the NILC has it right when they say “that temporary workers who establish ties here must have a realistic path to permanent residence and true job portability that allows them to change employers freely if they are mistreated”. This proposed guest worker program in the bill does not have this, but only provides for a temporary labor force that American corporations can dispose of and replace at their will. Barbara Boxer was right when she said this would hurt American workers. But you know what? It would hurt these immigrant workers, too.

But anyways, back to Crazy Dana. He’s doing the right thing, but it’s really for the wrong reason. He’s opposing this sham that’s supposedly “comprehensive immigration reform”, but he’s opposing it because he wants a more cumbersome, punitive, and downright impractical like that disastrous HR 4437 that the US House passed in 2005. We don’t need that. We need comprehensive immigration reform. We just need comprehensive immigration reform that actually works for these immigrants, and works for American workers. It’s just too bad that Dana Rohrabacher isn’t interested in real reform that’s actually practical.

Oh my! I just noticed this on Total Buzz:

Attorney Jim Lacy rang to report that Judge Randell Wilkinson has turned down Minuteman Project co-founder Jim Gilchrist‘s request to have three more months before the court will consider putting the organization into the hands of a third-party receivership.

Ah, so Mr. Minuteman Gilchrist can’t reclaim the group that he created… And caused havoc upon. Now why don’t I fell sorry for him? Oh yeah, this is why. Yes, I kinda sense poetic justice here.