Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Message to Fellow Latinos and Humanitarians: Republican Congress Planning ANTI Latino / Racial Profiling Bills in 2011!

Fellow Latinos and Humanitarians,
We may be upset by the Dream Act not passing and no movement with Comprehensive Immigration Reform, but if even half of the rhetoric I've been reading on the ANTI blogs comes to fruition, we are in for very tough times in 2011. The ANTI blogs are giddy with anticipation as their Tea Party Republican thugs are taking over the reins of Congress. These ANTI-Latino zealots are rubbing their hands together, making plans to propose racial profiling bills that make Arizona's racial profiling sb1070 look like a "tea party."
What bills are they planning on proposing in 2011?
1. Changing the 14th Amendment, ending Birthright Citizenship
2. Mandatory e-Verify
3. Official English
4. End to Sanctuary Cities

If you look at each of these proposed bills, something immediately jumps out at you. Each will blatantly and outrightly racially profile Latinos. It will be a witchhunt. Bad times for Latinos are clearly in the forecast ahead, especially with extreme right wing Tea Party Republicans like Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who is expected to chair the committee's immigration subcommittee, leading the charge!
Guest Voz Suzanne Gamboa provides additional insights:
The end of the year means a turnover of House control from Democratic to Republican and, with it, Congress' approach to immigration. In a matter of weeks, Congress will go from trying to help young, illegal immigrants become legal to debating whether children born to parents who are in the country illegally should continue to enjoy automatic U.S. citizenship. Such a hardened approach -- and the rhetoric certain to accompany it -- should resonate with the GOP faithful who helped swing the House in Republicans' favor. But it also could further hurt the GOP in its endeavor to grab a large enough share of the growing Latino vote to win the White House and the Senate majority in 2012.

Legislation to test interpretations of the 14th Amendment as granting citizenship to children of illegal immigrants will emerge early next session. That is likely to be followed by attempts to force employers to use a still-developing web system, dubbed E-Verify, to check that all of their employees are in the U.S. legally. There could be proposed curbs on federal spending in (Sanctuary) cities that don't do enough to identify people who are in the country illegally and attempts to reduce the numbers of legal immigrants. Democrats ended the year failing for a second time to win passage of the Dream Act, which would have given hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants a chance at legal status.

House Republicans will try to fill the immigration reform vacuum left by Democrats with legislation designed to send illegal immigrants packing and deter others from trying to come to the U.S. Democrats, who will still control the Senate, will be playing defense against harsh immigration enforcement measures, mindful of their need to keep on good footing with Hispanic voters. But a slimmer majority and an eye on 2012 may prevent Senate Democrats from bringing to the floor any sweeping immigration bill, or even a limited one that hints at providing legal status to people in the country illegally.

President Barack Obama could be a wild card. He'll have at his disposal his veto power should a bill denying citizenship to children of illegal immigrants make it to his desk. But Obama also has made cracking down on employers a key part of his administration's immigration enforcement tactics.

Hispanic voters and their allies will look for Obama to broker a deal on immigration as he did on tax cuts and health care. After the Dream Act failed in the Senate this month, Obama said his administration would not give up on the measure. "At a minimum we should be able to get Dream done. So I'm going to go back at it," he said.
The president has taken heavy hits in Spanish-language and ethnic media for failing to keep his promise to address immigration promptly and taking it off the agenda last summer. His administration's continued deportations of immigrants -- a record 393,000 in the 2010 fiscal year -- have also made tenuous his relationship with Hispanic voters.

John Morton, who oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in a recent conference call that there are no plans to change the agency's enforcement tactics, which are focused on immigrants who commit crimes but also have led to detaining and deporting many immigrants who have not committed crimes. The agency also will continue to expand Secure Communities, the program that allows immigration officials to check fingerprints of all people booked into jail to see if they are in the country illegally. Both illegal immigrants and residents can end up being deported under the program, which the Homeland Security Department hopes to expand nationwide by 2013.

Many of those attending a recent gathering of conservative Hispanics in Washington warned that another round of tough laws surrounded by ugly anti-immigrant discussions could doom the GOP's 2012 chances. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a possible 2012 candidate, cited Meg Whitman's failed gubernatorial bid in California despite her high spending. When 22 percent of the electorate is Latino, candidates can't win without a vigorous presence in the Hispanic community and a "message that is understandable and involves respect," Gingrich said. Even so, Gingrich was unwilling to call on his fellow Republican senators to drop their opposition to the Dream Act, saying the legislation should not have been considered without giving lawmakers a chance to amend it.

The next Congress will be populated with many newcomers elected on a platform of tougher immigration enforcement. They'll have ready ears in Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who will chair the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Steve King of Iowa, who is expected to chair the committee's immigration subcommittee. That's a recipe for more measures aimed at immigration enforcement, including requiring businesses to use E-Verify rather than eyeballing paper documents to check workers' citizenship and legal residency status.

"I've already told the business community it's going to happen," said Beto Cardenas, executive counsel to Americans for Immigration Reform, a coalition of business leaders who support overhauling immigration laws. Changes to immigration law contained in appropriations and authorization bills, where immigration enforcement hawks are likely to tuck some measures, would also be tough to reject. But more controversial measures such as attempts to deny citizenship to children of people who are in the U.S. without permission could be tempered by GOP leaders aware of the need to curry more favor with Hispanic voters.


Dee said...

About changing 14th Ammendment:
ANTIs have not defined HOW they would change the 14th amendment. What constitutes an "illeegal alien" birth?
1. Mother "illeegal?" (most ANTIs are targetting the mother. Isn't this discriminatory against women?)
2. Father "illeegal?" (what if mother is citizen, should child be impacted? what if mother declines to name father if this law is changed?)
3. One parent's Papers in progess?
4. Visa overstays?
5. What about tourists who are pregnant and have a baby here. Won't this bill change ruin tourism?
6. Will the bill be retroactive? Citizen children today, "illeegals" tomorrow? We know that's what (the evil) Russell Pearce wants. He doesn't want to give these children (especially Latino children) their birth certificates today.
7. If this bill is changed, will it be implemented on the Northern border equally? Father Canadian, mother American -- NO CITIZENSHIP FOR YOU!

There are so many unanswered questions that will surely racially profile Latinos, particularly in the southern states.

Dee said...

Regardless, ANTIs say they are for "RULE OF LAW." Well now it appears they are NOT for rule of law, only in favor of Rule of Law that they like.

Isn't that what our side is saying? The so called Rule of Law for Immigration is broken and needs to be reformed. That is clear.

Vicente Duque said...

Dee :

Thanks for excellent information and opportune articles.

I feel very safe, secure, happy, contented, being assured and knowing that President Obama will be reelected and that Republicans will be frustrated in their Evil and Wickedness.

I congratulate you ( a Texan ) for your new four seats in the U. S. House of Representatives and I kneel everyday at 5 A. M. and pray to God that one day Arizona and Texas become Blue ( Democratic Party ). Or that the coming gerrymandering in Texas fails, backfires and blowbacks covering the Republicans in RIDICULE.

If one of those two states fails the Republicans in 2012 then Republicans are condemned to 4 four more years weeping in the desert crying NO NO NO.

If the SouthEast ( Atlantic ) States vote for President Obama ( Florida, Georgia, South Carolina ) then Republicans will have more "wailing and gnashing of teeth"

Even if Obama keeps Virginia, Pennsylvania and North Carolina, then Republicans do not have an easy climb to the magic number to elect a President.

I am an optimist, but first a Realist, I know how difficult is to turn Arizona and Texas into blue states.

But my other paths to Obama Second Term are not so impossible or absurd.

Vicente Duque

ultima said...

How could any loyal American object to any of these:

1. Changing the 14th Amendment, ending Birthright Citizenship
2. Mandatory e-Verify
3. Official English
4. End to Sanctuary Cities

ultima said...

Dee wrote, "...Tea Party Republican thugs..."

I see you are into broad brush name-calling again!

ultima said...

It should be obvious to all that the citizenship of the child should be that of the parent or parents. You need to worry more about your country than you do about tourists or tourism. You would think that tourists come here only to have babies not to see the great wonders of America. There is no chance that tourism would be ruined.

I believe few will oppose the idea of assigning the child's citizenship based on the citizenship of one or both parents. If a child is delivered to an illegal alien mother who chooses not to name the father, that is her problem and should not govern our policies.

Any new law would be applied equally to all borders and visitors.

Many agree that we need reform, just not your and La Raza's brand of reform. We need to reduce legal immigration, end chain immigration except for the minor children and spouses of citizens, stabilize our population, and change the archaic birthright citizenship. The best and the brightest among Hispanic Americans will recognize that those reforms are in their own best interests. If they want to convert America into Mexico Norte, then they are our enemies.

ultima said...

The proposals of the Republican House could better be characterized as the anti-illegal alien, border security, and America protection bills.

Page Hits