by Julian Aguilar, Justin Dehn and Thanh Tan | Texas Tribune
February 22, 2011
Hundreds of Texans descended on the state Capitol on Tuesday to draw attention to what they say are dozens of bills that, if passed, would hinder economic development, stymie education and — above all — encourage racial profiling in the Lone Star State.
Some marched and waved signs supporting the United Farm Workers. Others, cloaked in Texas and U.S. flags, proclaimed that “Texas Can Do Better Than Arizona.” The immigrants’ rights advocates, former military personnel, lawmakers and students — from seemingly every rural and urban sector of the state — rallied and proclaimed that bills like HB 17 and HB 22 would serve only to increase insecurity and distrust within immigrant communities, hinder Texas’ future workforce from being competitive and lead to an increase in crime. The bills, by state Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, would make it a Class B misdemeanor to be in the country without proper documentation and mandate that school districts report the immigration status of their students. Riddle has also filed HB 1202, which would make it a state jail felony to knowingly and “recklessly” hire an unauthorized worker.
Immigration-related legislation faces its best chance of passing in decades after a Nov. 2 election that tilted the balance of power to the Republican Party in Texas. Republicans now control the Texas House, 101 to 49. Despite the shift, however, Democratic lawmakers are pushing their own legislation. State Sen. José Rodríguez, D-El Paso, touted his SB 600, which would prevent law enforcement from asking the immigration status of victims of or witnesses to crimes. Rodríguez said the cooperation of the immigrant community has made El Paso one of the safest cities of its size.
State Rep. Armando Walle, D-Houston, told protesters on Tuesday that he was once asked by a reporter why the immigration rallies didn’t draw crowds the sizes of other movements. “It’s because they are all out there working,” he told the crowd, which took up its “Sí Se Puede” chant in response to the lawmaker's comments. “They are out in the fields, in the restaurants.”
Added state Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth: “You are here to say ‘no' to the most racist session of the Texas Legislature in a quarter of a century."
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Bill Would Prevent Immigration Inquiry by Officer
by Julian Aguilar | Texas Tribune
February 11, 2011
Freshman state Sen. José Rodríguez, D-El Paso, filed SB 600 on Friday, which would prevent law enforcement from asking the immigration status or nationality of a witness to or victim of a crime “except as necessary to investigate the offense.”
Rodríguez is one one of several outspoken Democrats who believe Gov. Rick Perry’s call to abolish “sanctuary city” policies in Texas would discourage potential witnesses from cooperating with law enforcement.
“Cooperation by witnesses and victims with law enforcement is essential for El Paso and communities across the state to remain safe,” a Rodríguez aide said in a statement. “If they fear they may be jailed, however, witnesses and victims will be less likely to work with law enforcement.”
During a news conference in the district last month, Rodríguez said police officers would focus more on a person's immigration status than fighting crime if they were required to enforce federal immigration laws. It’s especially not needed in his district, he added, citing the border city’s recent ranking as one of the safest of its size.
In response to the senator’s claim that Perry’s request would hinder law enforcement, aides to the governor said his intent has been misunderstood. The governor opposes policies that prevent law enforcement from asking the immigration status of a person detained by an officer, aides say. But Perry would also oppose legislation that requires peace officers to do it, as the proposed legislation in Arizona, SB 1070, would do. The issue is about giving law enforcement discretion, the governor’s aides have said. Despite the governor's clarification, several Republican lawmakers have filed bills that would, in fact, require a Texas peace officer to inquire about a person's immigration status if detained. Ending "sanctuary cities" is one of Perry's emergency items.
February 11, 2011
Freshman state Sen. José Rodríguez, D-El Paso, filed SB 600 on Friday, which would prevent law enforcement from asking the immigration status or nationality of a witness to or victim of a crime “except as necessary to investigate the offense.”
Rodríguez is one one of several outspoken Democrats who believe Gov. Rick Perry’s call to abolish “sanctuary city” policies in Texas would discourage potential witnesses from cooperating with law enforcement.
“Cooperation by witnesses and victims with law enforcement is essential for El Paso and communities across the state to remain safe,” a Rodríguez aide said in a statement. “If they fear they may be jailed, however, witnesses and victims will be less likely to work with law enforcement.”
During a news conference in the district last month, Rodríguez said police officers would focus more on a person's immigration status than fighting crime if they were required to enforce federal immigration laws. It’s especially not needed in his district, he added, citing the border city’s recent ranking as one of the safest of its size.
In response to the senator’s claim that Perry’s request would hinder law enforcement, aides to the governor said his intent has been misunderstood. The governor opposes policies that prevent law enforcement from asking the immigration status of a person detained by an officer, aides say. But Perry would also oppose legislation that requires peace officers to do it, as the proposed legislation in Arizona, SB 1070, would do. The issue is about giving law enforcement discretion, the governor’s aides have said. Despite the governor's clarification, several Republican lawmakers have filed bills that would, in fact, require a Texas peace officer to inquire about a person's immigration status if detained. Ending "sanctuary cities" is one of Perry's emergency items.
Texas Redistricting Lawsuit: Count Citizens Only
by Ross Ramsey | Texas Tribune
February 11, 2011
Redistricting doesn't start until next week, but the first lawsuit has already been filed.
Attorney Michael Hull of Austin, representing three North Texas voters, sued the state and a bunch of others, alleging that counting undocumented immigrants in political districts has an unfair and illegal effect on voters in districts with smaller numbers of non-citizens.
The logic goes this way: If two districts have the same populations and one has more non-citizens than the other, it takes fewer voters in that district to swing an election. Fewer citizens means fewer voters means a smaller number makes a majority. Each vote is, compared to the district with more citizens, worth more.
That's interesting, but it's probably not the main point of the lawsuit. This appears to be (insert an asterisk for uncertainty here) the first lawsuit filed on redistricting, and if the courts don't burp it back up, it means the redistricting cases in Texas could go through a bunch of judges in and around Sherman. Hull asked for a three-judge panel — that's normal in redistricting. This is also pro forma: The suit pulls in redistricting for Congress, the Legislature and the State Board of Education. A copy of the lawsuit is attached.
Lawmakers haven't seriously started drawing lines. The Census Bureau won't drop the required population numbers on which those lines will be based until next week. But if that suit sticks, it'll could be the platform for the legal fights sure to follow the Legislature's map-making efforts.
February 11, 2011
Redistricting doesn't start until next week, but the first lawsuit has already been filed.
Attorney Michael Hull of Austin, representing three North Texas voters, sued the state and a bunch of others, alleging that counting undocumented immigrants in political districts has an unfair and illegal effect on voters in districts with smaller numbers of non-citizens.
The logic goes this way: If two districts have the same populations and one has more non-citizens than the other, it takes fewer voters in that district to swing an election. Fewer citizens means fewer voters means a smaller number makes a majority. Each vote is, compared to the district with more citizens, worth more.
That's interesting, but it's probably not the main point of the lawsuit. This appears to be (insert an asterisk for uncertainty here) the first lawsuit filed on redistricting, and if the courts don't burp it back up, it means the redistricting cases in Texas could go through a bunch of judges in and around Sherman. Hull asked for a three-judge panel — that's normal in redistricting. This is also pro forma: The suit pulls in redistricting for Congress, the Legislature and the State Board of Education. A copy of the lawsuit is attached.
Lawmakers haven't seriously started drawing lines. The Census Bureau won't drop the required population numbers on which those lines will be based until next week. But if that suit sticks, it'll could be the platform for the legal fights sure to follow the Legislature's map-making efforts.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
More Debate, Same Result: House Passes Sanctuary Cities
by Julian Aguilar | Texas Tribune
May 10, 2011
In a last-ditch effort to tweak one of their most despised bills of the session, House Democrats tried — and failed — to adopt several amendments today to the “sanctuary cities” bill initially passed by the House late Monday.
During third and final reading — usually a simple procedure for most major bills — Democrats filed more than 15 amendments to House Bill 12. In its current form, the bill, by state Rep. Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, would prohibit cities, counties and other governmental entities or special districts from adopting a policy that prevents law enforcement from asking persons lawfully detained or arrested if they are in the country legally. Entities not in compliance could risk losing state funds.
Though they failed to change the bill, they managed to draw the ire of GOP lawmakers who were forced to practice a tactic used by their counterparts during the previous three days of debate over the bill: calling points of order to bring amendments down. Democrats this session have successfully stalled a handful of controversial bills with the tactic, only to see them resurrected by Republicans.
At one point, state Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman, asked to be recognized to make a motion to suspend further debate on the bill after he said lawmakers had 12 pages of bills to consider on the calendar. The deadline to consider House bills on the floor is Thursday. Despite the deadline, House Speaker Joe Straus denied Phillips’ request.
In an effort to highlight what he said was the inherent hypocrisy in the state’s businesses hiring practices, state Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio, filed an amendment that would punish employers who hire illegal immigrants.
“[Immigrants] are not here just hanging out, they are here working. But we have a state and a nation that can’t be honest with itself,” Castro told lawmakers. The amendment was deemed “not germane,” however, and was pulled. It didn’t stop the minority party from keeping at it and testing the mood in the lower chamber. The amendments filed would have excluded the word “detained” from the bill, would have required the state to reimburse cities for costs incurred in implementing the bill, and would have required the state to pay court fees if it lost an HB 12 related case. Another would have excluded witnesses or victims of crimes from being asked about their immigration status. They all failed on party-line votes.
Through a procedure known as “calling the previous question,” Republicans on Saturday successfully halted debate on a contentious bill that would require losers in certain lawsuits to pay all legal fees incurred by both parties. Late Monday they used the same tactic to cease additional dialogue and debate on HB 12. It looked as if they would consider the same move after more than two hours of debate today. Though obviously frustrated, however, Republicans did not invoke the rule. Instead they listened as Hispanic Democrats, in a last salvo, fought back tears and anger in their final attempts to sway their colleagues from across the aisle. In her challenge to lawmakers to vote their conscience instead of along party lines, state Rep. Veronica Gonzales, R-McAllen, repeated the famous words spoken by Mexican Revolutionary hero Emiliano Zapata: "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." State Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, taking issue with Republicans who accused opponents of the measure of grandstanding, had one last shot for Gov. Rick Perry, who declared HB 12 an emergency item.
"I will tell you what grandstanding is. A governor who declares 'sanctuary cities' an emergency item," he said. State Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, took a moment to take a swipe at Straus and criticize his leadership for not allowing debate on the issue. He read to Straus the speaker's own words from his 2009 speech on unity. Then, facing Straus, he said. "This is a man I can no longer recognize."
But Republicans had their own thoughts at the end of the day. State Rep. Dennis Bonnen, R-Angleton, who said he has never spoken during closing remarks on a bill, told members about Rick Salter, a Houston police officer confined to a wheelchair after being shot in the face by an illegal immigrant.
"I respect everyone on this issue," he said. "But it is vital that we understand there are two sides to this discussion."
In the end the bill passed 100 to 47. It now moves to the Texas Senate.
May 10, 2011
In a last-ditch effort to tweak one of their most despised bills of the session, House Democrats tried — and failed — to adopt several amendments today to the “sanctuary cities” bill initially passed by the House late Monday.
During third and final reading — usually a simple procedure for most major bills — Democrats filed more than 15 amendments to House Bill 12. In its current form, the bill, by state Rep. Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, would prohibit cities, counties and other governmental entities or special districts from adopting a policy that prevents law enforcement from asking persons lawfully detained or arrested if they are in the country legally. Entities not in compliance could risk losing state funds.
Though they failed to change the bill, they managed to draw the ire of GOP lawmakers who were forced to practice a tactic used by their counterparts during the previous three days of debate over the bill: calling points of order to bring amendments down. Democrats this session have successfully stalled a handful of controversial bills with the tactic, only to see them resurrected by Republicans.
At one point, state Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman, asked to be recognized to make a motion to suspend further debate on the bill after he said lawmakers had 12 pages of bills to consider on the calendar. The deadline to consider House bills on the floor is Thursday. Despite the deadline, House Speaker Joe Straus denied Phillips’ request.
In an effort to highlight what he said was the inherent hypocrisy in the state’s businesses hiring practices, state Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio, filed an amendment that would punish employers who hire illegal immigrants.
“[Immigrants] are not here just hanging out, they are here working. But we have a state and a nation that can’t be honest with itself,” Castro told lawmakers. The amendment was deemed “not germane,” however, and was pulled. It didn’t stop the minority party from keeping at it and testing the mood in the lower chamber. The amendments filed would have excluded the word “detained” from the bill, would have required the state to reimburse cities for costs incurred in implementing the bill, and would have required the state to pay court fees if it lost an HB 12 related case. Another would have excluded witnesses or victims of crimes from being asked about their immigration status. They all failed on party-line votes.
Through a procedure known as “calling the previous question,” Republicans on Saturday successfully halted debate on a contentious bill that would require losers in certain lawsuits to pay all legal fees incurred by both parties. Late Monday they used the same tactic to cease additional dialogue and debate on HB 12. It looked as if they would consider the same move after more than two hours of debate today. Though obviously frustrated, however, Republicans did not invoke the rule. Instead they listened as Hispanic Democrats, in a last salvo, fought back tears and anger in their final attempts to sway their colleagues from across the aisle. In her challenge to lawmakers to vote their conscience instead of along party lines, state Rep. Veronica Gonzales, R-McAllen, repeated the famous words spoken by Mexican Revolutionary hero Emiliano Zapata: "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." State Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, taking issue with Republicans who accused opponents of the measure of grandstanding, had one last shot for Gov. Rick Perry, who declared HB 12 an emergency item.
"I will tell you what grandstanding is. A governor who declares 'sanctuary cities' an emergency item," he said. State Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, took a moment to take a swipe at Straus and criticize his leadership for not allowing debate on the issue. He read to Straus the speaker's own words from his 2009 speech on unity. Then, facing Straus, he said. "This is a man I can no longer recognize."
But Republicans had their own thoughts at the end of the day. State Rep. Dennis Bonnen, R-Angleton, who said he has never spoken during closing remarks on a bill, told members about Rick Salter, a Houston police officer confined to a wheelchair after being shot in the face by an illegal immigrant.
"I respect everyone on this issue," he said. "But it is vital that we understand there are two sides to this discussion."
In the end the bill passed 100 to 47. It now moves to the Texas Senate.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Families along U.S.-Mexico border face tough school choices
A glimpse at the harsh realities that families live with everyday. Something everyone should watch and be mindful of as we prepare for this morning's continued debate on HB 12, of one Texas' anti-immigrant legislation.
Here's the link to watch the House chamber stream.
-Patricia
By Kevin Sieff | Washington Post
May 8, 2011
MATAMOROS, Mexico — When Princess Martinez saw her husband for the first time after he was deported, two thoughts crossed her mind: that she loved this man, and that she might have to leave him.
The only other option appeared to be moving with their six daughters — who, like Martinez, are all U.S. citizens — across the border to her husband’s new home in Mexico, with its mounting violence and troubled schools.
“Everyone is coming to America, to the land of opportunity,” Martinez, 31, recalled thinking. “And here I am, thinking about taking my family in the opposite direction.”
There are more mixed-status families living in the United States than ever before — non-citizens and citizens under the same roof. Many of those families will be affected by the Obama administration’s aggressive deportation plans, with a record 400,000 immigrants expected to be returned to their home countries this year. It’s likely that more than 20,000 of those deportees have children who are U.S. citizens, according to experts who have analyzed federal data.
Parents are left to choose between dividing the family between two countries, to keep children who are U.S. citizens in U.S. schools, or moving together to Mexico or Central America, where the education is inferior and the language is often foreign to U.S.-born children.
But in the border region, there’s a third option, little known elsewhere, and now facing mounting opposition: living in Mexico but crossing the border each day for American schooling.
As the immigration debate has intensified and school budgets have tightened, some districts have sent photographers to the border to identify students crossing from Mexico. In Arizona, officials last year sued a district for not adequately vetting the residency of students.
Problems began for Martinez and her family when her husband, Marcos Perdomo, 34, was arrested for drunken driving in 2009. After a four-month prison sentence, he was deported to Mexico. On the day the family was reunited here in this border city, Martinez said she watched him scoop up their six daughters one at a time, letting them cry on his shoulder before wiping away his tears.
Martinez and Perdomo mulled their dilemma for days. Friends and relatives told Martinez she would be crazy to willingly move her family to Mexico, where violence was spreading amid an intensifying drug war. Perdomo said he didn’t know what he would do without the girls, now ages 4 through 13. Two of them had been diagnosed with learning disabilities — something U.S. schools, which on average spend five times as much as Mexican ones, typically manage better.
Martinez finally decided to move the family to Matamoros in early 2010 and make the daily journey across the Rio Grande with her daughters so that they could remain in the sleepy Texas school district of Port Isabel, where Martinez worked as a cashier at a grocery store. To evade residency requirements, Martinez registered her daughters for school using a relative’s address.
For months, the strategy appeared to be working.
No easy compromises
Martinez and Perdomo had met 15 years earlier at a Tex-Mex concert just north of the Rio Grande. Perdomo was a short, sturdy teenager then, a man Martinez’s family respected. They danced as accordions blared. He held her close, falling instantly for her smile.
That she was a U.S. citizen and he wasn’t meant little that night. And it meant little for much of their marriage. Perdomo had no problem getting construction jobs and paying rent on a little house in Port Isabel, where Martinez gave birth to six girls in 10 years. At school, each of them pledged allegiance to American and Texas flags.
After the move to Mexico, Martinez got accustomed to rousing the girls at 4:30 a.m. from the living room floor, where they slept shoulder to shoulder.
One winter morning, she tucked seven U.S. birth certificates into a handbag as she neared the crossing. Her six girls swarmed around her — pony tails and backpacks illuminated by the lights of the international bridge to Brownsville — slowing as they approached a U.S. customs agent.
Nearly all the agents recognized them — a blast of energy in this dreary checkpoint, with its waiting rooms full of tired men. “Did you bring your homework?” some agents asked. The girls nodded in unison.
Behind them were dozens of students who made the same journey to attend public schools in Texas. Many left behind parents like Perdomo, who watched his wife and daughters disappear over the Rio Grande — the beginning of their 15-hour day — through the windshield of his pickup.
“I was convicted, but the girls are serving the sentence,” Perdomo said.
The routine lasted for about a year. Then, in February, the superintendent called Martinez into her office. The district had learned of her daily cross-border journey.
“I pointed out to her how that was not permissible. And that we were in a position that we had to adhere to the law,’’ Port Isabel Superintendent Estella Pineda said. “I explained to her that she needed to make a choice.’’
This time there was no easy compromise for Martinez. If she wanted her daughters to attend U.S. schools, the girls would have to leave their father and move to the United States full time.
The girls complained. “Why can’t we stay here? Why do we have to move?” Brigette, 10, asked her mother over and over again.
“We’re still trying to figure it out,” Martinez responded each time. But she didn’t see any way around the move.
Amid another round of chastisements from friends and family, Martinez decided in February to stay in Mexico with her husband. Their daughters would move to Texas with an aunt and grandmother, returning only on weekends.
At their new home in Port Isabel, the girls spread their homework on a kitchen table, sounding out words and polishing basic arithmetic. Their aunt, Ida Martinez, darted between them to help, the way their mother once did.
Officials at the school district, with just 2,500 students, were by now familiar with Martinez’s saga and were glad to hear the girls had moved back across the border. But some thought their mother should be in Port Isabel, too.
“She should make the choice to stay here full time,’’ said Nancy Gonzalez, the principal of Garriga Elementary, which two of the girls attend. “The girls need her. Her children need her. And she needs to see that.’’
But three months after Martinez made the change, she still sees no other viable options, even though the current arrangement hardly feels sustainable.
The house is too quiet when she returns home now, she says. Sometimes she listens to the television’s soft chatter, half-expecting the interruption of a little girl’s voice. But there’s nothing.
Normally well behaved, the girls are getting in trouble in school. In Mexico, Perdomo is struggling to find a job in a city awash with drug-related violence.
Martinez crosses the border each morning by herself now, still working at the same grocery store, still trying to craft a plan that won’t make her feel like a failed mother or wife. She never comes up with one.
“If only I was smarter,” she said.
But that sentiment is quickly overwhelmed by anger — at her husband for committing the crime that led to his deportation, at the school district for threatening to expel her daughters, at a system that punishes immigrants without considering the impact on young U.S. citizens.
“Every time we think we’ve figured things out, there’s another setback,” Martinez said. “Something else happens, and we have to start all over again.”
Staff photographer Alexandra Garcia contributed to this report.
Here's the link to watch the House chamber stream.
-Patricia
By Kevin Sieff | Washington Post
May 8, 2011
MATAMOROS, Mexico — When Princess Martinez saw her husband for the first time after he was deported, two thoughts crossed her mind: that she loved this man, and that she might have to leave him.
The only other option appeared to be moving with their six daughters — who, like Martinez, are all U.S. citizens — across the border to her husband’s new home in Mexico, with its mounting violence and troubled schools.
“Everyone is coming to America, to the land of opportunity,” Martinez, 31, recalled thinking. “And here I am, thinking about taking my family in the opposite direction.”
There are more mixed-status families living in the United States than ever before — non-citizens and citizens under the same roof. Many of those families will be affected by the Obama administration’s aggressive deportation plans, with a record 400,000 immigrants expected to be returned to their home countries this year. It’s likely that more than 20,000 of those deportees have children who are U.S. citizens, according to experts who have analyzed federal data.
Parents are left to choose between dividing the family between two countries, to keep children who are U.S. citizens in U.S. schools, or moving together to Mexico or Central America, where the education is inferior and the language is often foreign to U.S.-born children.
But in the border region, there’s a third option, little known elsewhere, and now facing mounting opposition: living in Mexico but crossing the border each day for American schooling.
As the immigration debate has intensified and school budgets have tightened, some districts have sent photographers to the border to identify students crossing from Mexico. In Arizona, officials last year sued a district for not adequately vetting the residency of students.
Problems began for Martinez and her family when her husband, Marcos Perdomo, 34, was arrested for drunken driving in 2009. After a four-month prison sentence, he was deported to Mexico. On the day the family was reunited here in this border city, Martinez said she watched him scoop up their six daughters one at a time, letting them cry on his shoulder before wiping away his tears.
Martinez and Perdomo mulled their dilemma for days. Friends and relatives told Martinez she would be crazy to willingly move her family to Mexico, where violence was spreading amid an intensifying drug war. Perdomo said he didn’t know what he would do without the girls, now ages 4 through 13. Two of them had been diagnosed with learning disabilities — something U.S. schools, which on average spend five times as much as Mexican ones, typically manage better.
Martinez finally decided to move the family to Matamoros in early 2010 and make the daily journey across the Rio Grande with her daughters so that they could remain in the sleepy Texas school district of Port Isabel, where Martinez worked as a cashier at a grocery store. To evade residency requirements, Martinez registered her daughters for school using a relative’s address.
For months, the strategy appeared to be working.
No easy compromises
Martinez and Perdomo had met 15 years earlier at a Tex-Mex concert just north of the Rio Grande. Perdomo was a short, sturdy teenager then, a man Martinez’s family respected. They danced as accordions blared. He held her close, falling instantly for her smile.
That she was a U.S. citizen and he wasn’t meant little that night. And it meant little for much of their marriage. Perdomo had no problem getting construction jobs and paying rent on a little house in Port Isabel, where Martinez gave birth to six girls in 10 years. At school, each of them pledged allegiance to American and Texas flags.
After the move to Mexico, Martinez got accustomed to rousing the girls at 4:30 a.m. from the living room floor, where they slept shoulder to shoulder.
One winter morning, she tucked seven U.S. birth certificates into a handbag as she neared the crossing. Her six girls swarmed around her — pony tails and backpacks illuminated by the lights of the international bridge to Brownsville — slowing as they approached a U.S. customs agent.
Nearly all the agents recognized them — a blast of energy in this dreary checkpoint, with its waiting rooms full of tired men. “Did you bring your homework?” some agents asked. The girls nodded in unison.
Behind them were dozens of students who made the same journey to attend public schools in Texas. Many left behind parents like Perdomo, who watched his wife and daughters disappear over the Rio Grande — the beginning of their 15-hour day — through the windshield of his pickup.
“I was convicted, but the girls are serving the sentence,” Perdomo said.
The routine lasted for about a year. Then, in February, the superintendent called Martinez into her office. The district had learned of her daily cross-border journey.
“I pointed out to her how that was not permissible. And that we were in a position that we had to adhere to the law,’’ Port Isabel Superintendent Estella Pineda said. “I explained to her that she needed to make a choice.’’
This time there was no easy compromise for Martinez. If she wanted her daughters to attend U.S. schools, the girls would have to leave their father and move to the United States full time.
The girls complained. “Why can’t we stay here? Why do we have to move?” Brigette, 10, asked her mother over and over again.
“We’re still trying to figure it out,” Martinez responded each time. But she didn’t see any way around the move.
Amid another round of chastisements from friends and family, Martinez decided in February to stay in Mexico with her husband. Their daughters would move to Texas with an aunt and grandmother, returning only on weekends.
At their new home in Port Isabel, the girls spread their homework on a kitchen table, sounding out words and polishing basic arithmetic. Their aunt, Ida Martinez, darted between them to help, the way their mother once did.
Officials at the school district, with just 2,500 students, were by now familiar with Martinez’s saga and were glad to hear the girls had moved back across the border. But some thought their mother should be in Port Isabel, too.
“She should make the choice to stay here full time,’’ said Nancy Gonzalez, the principal of Garriga Elementary, which two of the girls attend. “The girls need her. Her children need her. And she needs to see that.’’
But three months after Martinez made the change, she still sees no other viable options, even though the current arrangement hardly feels sustainable.
The house is too quiet when she returns home now, she says. Sometimes she listens to the television’s soft chatter, half-expecting the interruption of a little girl’s voice. But there’s nothing.
Normally well behaved, the girls are getting in trouble in school. In Mexico, Perdomo is struggling to find a job in a city awash with drug-related violence.
Martinez crosses the border each morning by herself now, still working at the same grocery store, still trying to craft a plan that won’t make her feel like a failed mother or wife. She never comes up with one.
“If only I was smarter,” she said.
But that sentiment is quickly overwhelmed by anger — at her husband for committing the crime that led to his deportation, at the school district for threatening to expel her daughters, at a system that punishes immigrants without considering the impact on young U.S. citizens.
“Every time we think we’ve figured things out, there’s another setback,” Martinez said. “Something else happens, and we have to start all over again.”
Staff photographer Alexandra Garcia contributed to this report.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Texas Republicans Take Harder Line On Immigration
Good grief! Listen to the full story here.
-Patricia
In 2006, Houston was among many cities participating in the nationwide National Day of Action for Immigration Justice rallies. When George W. Bush was governor, he adopted a Hispanic-friendly strategy that helped propel him to the White House. Now, some Texas Republicans are taking a harder stance. "I believe the Republican Party is throwing away their future," says one state Republican.
- Dave Einsel/Getty Images
by Wade Goodwyn | NPR
March 29, 2011
March 29, 2011
In Texas, the Republican Party is changing its tactics on illegal immigration.
The relatively welcoming, tolerant attitude embraced by George W. Bush when he was governor is waning. It has been overtaken by a flood of Arizona-style get-tough measures, with nearly 100 immigration bills written or filed.
And while legal challenges will surely follow if many of those measures pass, the debate in Texas is clearly shifting.
The Bush Strategy
The state is now more than ever in the nation's conservative vanguard. Among its most conservative leaders is state Rep. Leo Berman from northeast Texas. Though Berman's district is far from the Mexico border, he's leading the charge on immigration. One of his bills would "stop giving automatic citizenship to children born in Texas."
There's also a voter ID bill; a bill that would require elementary school children to prove their citizenship upon enrolling — data that would then be turned over to state and federal authorities; and another Berman bill that would make English the official state language.
"That will shut off the state printing anything in any language but English," he says, "and that's going to save millions of dollars right there."
This is a significant change in strategy for the Texas GOP. In the mid '90s, Texas Republicans watched as their counterparts in California went on an anti-illegal immigration crusade and lost control of the state.
But in Texas, the economy was booming; the suburbs of Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio were exploding; and thousands of illegal immigrants sat astride 2-by-4s, nail guns in hand, building those neighborhoods.
So, then-Gov. Bush and his man Karl Rove crafted a different strategy from their California colleagues: Hispanic-friendly.
The result? In 1998, George W. Bush crushed his Democratic opponent, getting nearly half the Hispanic vote — a triumph that placed him on the path to the presidency one year later.
The young governor learned his political style at his father's knee. Not only was George H.W. Bush a former president of the United States; he was a Texas oilman. And for generations, those independent oil producers, along with farmers and Texas ranchers, have employed inexpensive, hard-working Mexican laborers.
'Throwing Away Their Future'?
But in the halls of the Texas Capitol in 2011, Bush's approach is considered insufficiently conservative by most Republicans. The one powerful interest group that still thinks Bush had it right is the Texas Association of Business.
"If suddenly all the undocumented workers [in the state] were simply to go back to their home of origin, it would be disastrous for the Texas economy," says Bill Hammond, president of the group.
It is no exaggeration to say the membership of Hammond's group supplies the Texas Republican Party with a large measure of its fiscal lifeblood. On behalf of his clients, the thousands of big- and small-business owners in Texas, Hammond roams the state Capitol, trying to impart a bit of reality about the Lone Star State's economy.
"The impact on the Texas state economy of immigrant labor is about $17 billion a year," he says. "That's an enormous segment of our economy, and we simply would not be able to function without these people."
Until this year, Hammond and his Republican allies in the Texas Legislature have been able to kill most immigration bills in committee. Hammond would like to expand the immigration pipeline to allow more workers to legally enter the state. That proposal currently has zero chance.
"Today, 56 percent of Texans under the age of 25 are minorities. The growth in the population has been largely Hispanic over the last 10 years," he says. "I believe the Republican Party is throwing away their future."
A Plea To Tone Down The Rhetoric
Republican state Rep. Aaron Pena represents the border city of Hidalgo. "The tone of the debate is basically saying, 'We don't want you. ... This is a war over our culture. These people bring diseases into our country.' "
He says the six Hispanic Republicans in the Texas House have been trying to persuade some of their colleagues to tone down the anti-Hispanic rhetoric.
"Many times, you won't see our handiwork out in public," he says. "It's done behind the scenes."
Pena says there are plenty of Texas Republicans who quietly share his concerns about the tone of the debate and its long-term effect on Hispanic voters.
But now, there are plenty who don't, including Berman. "Most Hispanics right now do vote Democrat; there's no question about it," Berman says. "So what vote are we going after? We're going after a vote that doesn't vote Republican anyway."
It's too early to tell how many of the dozens of bills will become law. While the Texas House seems hot for immigration bills, the Senate seems less so. It's distracted by a $27 billion budget deficit that's threatening to gut the state.
-Patricia
In 2006, Houston was among many cities participating in the nationwide National Day of Action for Immigration Justice rallies. When George W. Bush was governor, he adopted a Hispanic-friendly strategy that helped propel him to the White House. Now, some Texas Republicans are taking a harder stance. "I believe the Republican Party is throwing away their future," says one state Republican.
- Dave Einsel/Getty Images
by Wade Goodwyn | NPR
March 29, 2011
March 29, 2011
In Texas, the Republican Party is changing its tactics on illegal immigration.
The relatively welcoming, tolerant attitude embraced by George W. Bush when he was governor is waning. It has been overtaken by a flood of Arizona-style get-tough measures, with nearly 100 immigration bills written or filed.
And while legal challenges will surely follow if many of those measures pass, the debate in Texas is clearly shifting.
The Bush Strategy
The state is now more than ever in the nation's conservative vanguard. Among its most conservative leaders is state Rep. Leo Berman from northeast Texas. Though Berman's district is far from the Mexico border, he's leading the charge on immigration. One of his bills would "stop giving automatic citizenship to children born in Texas."
Most Hispanics right now do vote Democrat; there's no question about it. So what vote are we going after? We're going after a vote that doesn't vote Republican anyway.
- Republican state Rep. Leo Berman
There's also a voter ID bill; a bill that would require elementary school children to prove their citizenship upon enrolling — data that would then be turned over to state and federal authorities; and another Berman bill that would make English the official state language.
"That will shut off the state printing anything in any language but English," he says, "and that's going to save millions of dollars right there."
This is a significant change in strategy for the Texas GOP. In the mid '90s, Texas Republicans watched as their counterparts in California went on an anti-illegal immigration crusade and lost control of the state.
But in Texas, the economy was booming; the suburbs of Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio were exploding; and thousands of illegal immigrants sat astride 2-by-4s, nail guns in hand, building those neighborhoods.
So, then-Gov. Bush and his man Karl Rove crafted a different strategy from their California colleagues: Hispanic-friendly.
The result? In 1998, George W. Bush crushed his Democratic opponent, getting nearly half the Hispanic vote — a triumph that placed him on the path to the presidency one year later.
The young governor learned his political style at his father's knee. Not only was George H.W. Bush a former president of the United States; he was a Texas oilman. And for generations, those independent oil producers, along with farmers and Texas ranchers, have employed inexpensive, hard-working Mexican laborers.
'Throwing Away Their Future'?
But in the halls of the Texas Capitol in 2011, Bush's approach is considered insufficiently conservative by most Republicans. The one powerful interest group that still thinks Bush had it right is the Texas Association of Business.
"If suddenly all the undocumented workers [in the state] were simply to go back to their home of origin, it would be disastrous for the Texas economy," says Bill Hammond, president of the group.
It is no exaggeration to say the membership of Hammond's group supplies the Texas Republican Party with a large measure of its fiscal lifeblood. On behalf of his clients, the thousands of big- and small-business owners in Texas, Hammond roams the state Capitol, trying to impart a bit of reality about the Lone Star State's economy.
"The impact on the Texas state economy of immigrant labor is about $17 billion a year," he says. "That's an enormous segment of our economy, and we simply would not be able to function without these people."
Until this year, Hammond and his Republican allies in the Texas Legislature have been able to kill most immigration bills in committee. Hammond would like to expand the immigration pipeline to allow more workers to legally enter the state. That proposal currently has zero chance.
"Today, 56 percent of Texans under the age of 25 are minorities. The growth in the population has been largely Hispanic over the last 10 years," he says. "I believe the Republican Party is throwing away their future."
The tone of the debate is basically saying, 'We don't want you. ... This is a war over our culture. These people bring diseases into our country.'
- Republican state Rep. Aaron Pena
A Plea To Tone Down The Rhetoric
Republican state Rep. Aaron Pena represents the border city of Hidalgo. "The tone of the debate is basically saying, 'We don't want you. ... This is a war over our culture. These people bring diseases into our country.' "
He says the six Hispanic Republicans in the Texas House have been trying to persuade some of their colleagues to tone down the anti-Hispanic rhetoric.
"Many times, you won't see our handiwork out in public," he says. "It's done behind the scenes."
Pena says there are plenty of Texas Republicans who quietly share his concerns about the tone of the debate and its long-term effect on Hispanic voters.
But now, there are plenty who don't, including Berman. "Most Hispanics right now do vote Democrat; there's no question about it," Berman says. "So what vote are we going after? We're going after a vote that doesn't vote Republican anyway."
It's too early to tell how many of the dozens of bills will become law. While the Texas House seems hot for immigration bills, the Senate seems less so. It's distracted by a $27 billion budget deficit that's threatening to gut the state.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Texas mulls Arizona-style illegal immigration law
By JAY ROOT | The Associated Press
March 2, 2011,
AUSTIN, Texas — State and local police officers would be allowed — but not required — to help enforce federal immigration laws under a compromise plan working its way through the Texas Legislature.
The bill is a far cry from some of the harsh crackdowns some lawmakers proposed, but it still sparked often emotional testimony in a House committee Wednesday night. Dozens of supporters and detractors packed a hearing room outside the Texas Capitol, eager for a chance to air their views despite the late hour.
Supporters generally said the legislation would help police identify illegal immigrants who commit crimes in Texas. Critics said it would lead to racial profiling, detract from real police work and give license to rogue agents who want to harass immigrants.
The bill's author, Republican Rep. Burt Solomons, said it would prohibit so-called "sanctuary cities" and law enforcement entities from adopting policies that keep police and criminal investigators from providing immigration enforcement assistance. Republican Gov. Rick Perry put the issue on the fast track at the Capitol after making it a major theme of his 2010 re-election campaign.
Unlike Arizona's new immigration law, parts of which are being challenged in court, the legislation known as House Bill 12 does not require police officers to inquire about immigration status or enforce federal laws when people are detained. But the bill would not allow any law enforcement agency from adopting policies that prohibit them from doing so. Solomons said his proposal would establish a "uniform consistent policy" across the state.
"There's nothing in this bill that requires a police officer to ask one question that they don't think they need to ask," Solomons said. "We're not mandating anything."
It would allow police to ask about immigration status, maintain records of it and work with federal agents on immigration matters when people are "lawfully detained for the investigation of a criminal offense or arrested." Other legislation similar to the Arizona law was also proposed, but Perry's office has been working with Solomons on the compromise bill. The legislation was left pending in a House committee Wednesday night, but other bills were being debated, including one that would make English the official language and create a state database of illegal immigrants arrested in Texas.
An estimated 1.6 million illegal immigrants are in Texas, according to the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington. Nationwide, their numbers declined between 2007 and 2009, from 12 million to 11.1 million, the first significant drop after two decades of growth. But their combined population in Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana went up by a statistically significant 240,000, the center reported last month.
Immigration curbs have caught fire nationwide. In 2010, a record number of laws and resolutions were passed by state legislatures, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which calculated that 46 states and the District of Columbia had passed 346 measures, with an additional 10 having fallen from gubernatorial vetoes.
Former Houston police officer Rick Salter, who was shot in the face by an illegal immigrant in 2009 and who now speaks through paralyzed vocal chords, was among those urging lawmakers to pass HB 12 Wednesday night. His wife, Sue Salter, broke down in tears when it was her turn to speak.
"We're not worried about the safety of our own citizens in our wonderful state of Texas," she said. "You won't know that until you're slapped in the face by something that happens to you by an illegal immigrant."
Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo, arguing against the legislation, said he sympathized with victims of crime by illegal immigrants. But he said local police already are helping federal officials prosecute and deport illegal immigrants without getting mandates from the state.
"We are leading through emotion and politics instead of good public policy," Acevedo said.
Other critics said the bill could allow local police agencies, including those run by school districts and college campuses, to become de-facto immigration enforcement agents. Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, said the legislation would let rank-and-file police officers spend all the time they want enforcing immigration laws even if their supervisors don't want them to.
"This officer ... is given the authority to say to the police chief, to the mayor, to the City Council: I don't care how much time it takes, you can't stop me from doing this," Turner said.
March 2, 2011,
AUSTIN, Texas — State and local police officers would be allowed — but not required — to help enforce federal immigration laws under a compromise plan working its way through the Texas Legislature.
The bill is a far cry from some of the harsh crackdowns some lawmakers proposed, but it still sparked often emotional testimony in a House committee Wednesday night. Dozens of supporters and detractors packed a hearing room outside the Texas Capitol, eager for a chance to air their views despite the late hour.
Supporters generally said the legislation would help police identify illegal immigrants who commit crimes in Texas. Critics said it would lead to racial profiling, detract from real police work and give license to rogue agents who want to harass immigrants.
The bill's author, Republican Rep. Burt Solomons, said it would prohibit so-called "sanctuary cities" and law enforcement entities from adopting policies that keep police and criminal investigators from providing immigration enforcement assistance. Republican Gov. Rick Perry put the issue on the fast track at the Capitol after making it a major theme of his 2010 re-election campaign.
Unlike Arizona's new immigration law, parts of which are being challenged in court, the legislation known as House Bill 12 does not require police officers to inquire about immigration status or enforce federal laws when people are detained. But the bill would not allow any law enforcement agency from adopting policies that prohibit them from doing so. Solomons said his proposal would establish a "uniform consistent policy" across the state.
"There's nothing in this bill that requires a police officer to ask one question that they don't think they need to ask," Solomons said. "We're not mandating anything."
It would allow police to ask about immigration status, maintain records of it and work with federal agents on immigration matters when people are "lawfully detained for the investigation of a criminal offense or arrested." Other legislation similar to the Arizona law was also proposed, but Perry's office has been working with Solomons on the compromise bill. The legislation was left pending in a House committee Wednesday night, but other bills were being debated, including one that would make English the official language and create a state database of illegal immigrants arrested in Texas.
An estimated 1.6 million illegal immigrants are in Texas, according to the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington. Nationwide, their numbers declined between 2007 and 2009, from 12 million to 11.1 million, the first significant drop after two decades of growth. But their combined population in Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana went up by a statistically significant 240,000, the center reported last month.
Immigration curbs have caught fire nationwide. In 2010, a record number of laws and resolutions were passed by state legislatures, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which calculated that 46 states and the District of Columbia had passed 346 measures, with an additional 10 having fallen from gubernatorial vetoes.
Former Houston police officer Rick Salter, who was shot in the face by an illegal immigrant in 2009 and who now speaks through paralyzed vocal chords, was among those urging lawmakers to pass HB 12 Wednesday night. His wife, Sue Salter, broke down in tears when it was her turn to speak.
"We're not worried about the safety of our own citizens in our wonderful state of Texas," she said. "You won't know that until you're slapped in the face by something that happens to you by an illegal immigrant."
Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo, arguing against the legislation, said he sympathized with victims of crime by illegal immigrants. But he said local police already are helping federal officials prosecute and deport illegal immigrants without getting mandates from the state.
"We are leading through emotion and politics instead of good public policy," Acevedo said.
Other critics said the bill could allow local police agencies, including those run by school districts and college campuses, to become de-facto immigration enforcement agents. Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, said the legislation would let rank-and-file police officers spend all the time they want enforcing immigration laws even if their supervisors don't want them to.
"This officer ... is given the authority to say to the police chief, to the mayor, to the City Council: I don't care how much time it takes, you can't stop me from doing this," Turner said.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Political Battle on Illegal Immigration Shifts to States
By JULIA PRESTON | NY Times
Published: December 31, 2010
Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.
The efforts, led by Republicans, are part of a wave of state measures coming this year aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.
Legislators have also announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish employers who hire them.
Next week, at least five states plan to begin an unusual coordinated effort to cancel automatic United States citizenship for children born in this country to illegal immigrant parents.
Opponents say that effort would be unconstitutional, arguing that the power to grant citizenship resides with the federal government, not with the states. Still, the chances of passing many of these measures appear better than at any time since 2006, when many states, frustrated with inaction in Washington, began proposing initiatives to curb illegal immigration.
Republicans gained more than 690 seats in state legislatures nationwide in the November midterms, winning their strongest representation at the state level in more than 80 years.
Few people expect movement on immigration issues when Congress reconvenes next week in a divided Washington. Republicans, who will control the House of Representatives, do not support an overhaul of immigration laws that President Obama has promised to continue to push. State lawmakers say it has fallen to them to act.
“The federal government’s failure to enforce our border has functionally turned every state into a border state,” said Randy Terrill, a Republican representative in Oklahoma who has led the drive for anti-illegal immigration laws there. “This is federalism in action,” he said. “The states are stepping in and filling the void left by the federal government.”
But the proposals have already drawn opposition from some business groups. And they are forcing strategic soul-searching within the Republican Party nationwide, with a rising populist base on one side demanding tough immigration measures, and, on the other side, traditional Republican supporters in business and a fast-growing Latino electorate strongly opposing those measures.
In Utah, a state dominated by Republicans, leaders from business, law enforcement, several churches and the Latino community sought to bridge the divide by joining together in November in a compact urging moderation on immigration issues.
Some of the more contentious measures may not go into effect immediately, including Arizona-style bills and those intended to eliminate birthright citizenship for American-born children of illegal immigrants. Latino and immigrant advocate legal organizations are gearing up for a host of court challenges.
Among the states expected to introduce bills similar to Arizona’s are Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.
The Arizona law authorized the state and local police to ask about the immigration status of anyone they detained for other reasons, if they had a “reasonable suspicion” that the person was an illegal immigrant.
Acting on a lawsuit filed by the Obama administration, a federal judge stayed central provisions of the law. In November, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard arguments on an appeal of that stay by Arizona.
“States will push ahead regardless of the Ninth Circuit,” said Kris Kobach, a law professor and politician from Kansas who helped many states devise immigration laws — including Arizona’s. “A lot of people recognize that the district judge’s decision is very much open to dispute.”
In Oklahoma, where Republicans won big majorities in both houses of the Legislature and the governor’s office, Mr. Terrill said he would introduce a bill he called “Arizona plus.” In addition to the terms of Arizona’s law, it would allow for the seizure of vehicles and property used to transport or harbor illegal immigrants.
In Georgia, an all-Republican commission of legislators plans to propose measures to enhance enforcement of tough laws already on the books. Georgia will also consider a bill to bar illegal immigrant students from all public universities.
The newly elected governor, Nathan Deal, a Republican, is expected to sign those bills. But the Georgia Farm Bureau, which represents the state’s powerful growers, voted to oppose any measures that would affect immigrant farm workers, most of whom do not have legal status.
In Kansas, Republicans won big majorities in both legislative houses and Sam Brownback, who just retired as a United States senator, was elected governor. Mr. Kobach, the law professor, was elected secretary of state after a campaign in which he vowed to pass a law requiring proof of citizenship for voters.
But the Kansas Chamber of Commerce has voiced its opposition, and Mr. Brownback has said he will focus on reducing unemployment.
The newest initiative is a joint effort among lawmakers from states including Arizona, Oklahoma, Missouri and Pennsylvania to pass laws based on a single model that would deny American citizenship to children born in those states to illegal immigrants. The legislators were to announce the campaign in Washington on Wednesday.
A leader of that effort is Daryl Metcalfe, a Republican state representative from Pennsylvania. At a recent news conference, Mr. Metcalfe said his goal was to eliminate “an anchor baby status, in which an illegal alien invader comes into our country and has a child on our soil that is granted citizenship automatically.”
The campaign is certain to run into legal obstacles. Courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment as guaranteeing birthright citizenship. Even among those who seek its repeal, debate has hinged on whether that would require a constitutional amendment, an act of Congress or a decision by the Supreme Court.
Some Republicans argue that the party is risking losing its appeal to Latino voters, the fastest-growing minority voter bloc.
“The Republican Party is divided between those who see that Hispanics are an essential constituency going forward, and those who don’t see that,” said Tamar Jacoby, a Republican who is the president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a business coalition that supports legalization for illegal immigrants.
Latino and immigrant advocate groups are resigned to being on the defensive for the next two years. “These laws are creating resentment within the Latino community that is going to last for decades,” said Tony Yapias, director of Proyecto Latino de Utah in Salt Lake City, an immigrant advocacy group.
Published: December 31, 2010
Legislative leaders in at least half a dozen states say they will propose bills similar to a controversial law to fight illegal immigration that was adopted by Arizona last spring, even though a federal court has suspended central provisions of that statute.
The efforts, led by Republicans, are part of a wave of state measures coming this year aimed at cracking down on illegal immigration.
Legislators have also announced measures to limit access to public colleges and other benefits for illegal immigrants and to punish employers who hire them.
Next week, at least five states plan to begin an unusual coordinated effort to cancel automatic United States citizenship for children born in this country to illegal immigrant parents.
Opponents say that effort would be unconstitutional, arguing that the power to grant citizenship resides with the federal government, not with the states. Still, the chances of passing many of these measures appear better than at any time since 2006, when many states, frustrated with inaction in Washington, began proposing initiatives to curb illegal immigration.
Republicans gained more than 690 seats in state legislatures nationwide in the November midterms, winning their strongest representation at the state level in more than 80 years.
Few people expect movement on immigration issues when Congress reconvenes next week in a divided Washington. Republicans, who will control the House of Representatives, do not support an overhaul of immigration laws that President Obama has promised to continue to push. State lawmakers say it has fallen to them to act.
“The federal government’s failure to enforce our border has functionally turned every state into a border state,” said Randy Terrill, a Republican representative in Oklahoma who has led the drive for anti-illegal immigration laws there. “This is federalism in action,” he said. “The states are stepping in and filling the void left by the federal government.”
But the proposals have already drawn opposition from some business groups. And they are forcing strategic soul-searching within the Republican Party nationwide, with a rising populist base on one side demanding tough immigration measures, and, on the other side, traditional Republican supporters in business and a fast-growing Latino electorate strongly opposing those measures.
In Utah, a state dominated by Republicans, leaders from business, law enforcement, several churches and the Latino community sought to bridge the divide by joining together in November in a compact urging moderation on immigration issues.
Some of the more contentious measures may not go into effect immediately, including Arizona-style bills and those intended to eliminate birthright citizenship for American-born children of illegal immigrants. Latino and immigrant advocate legal organizations are gearing up for a host of court challenges.
Among the states expected to introduce bills similar to Arizona’s are Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and South Carolina.
The Arizona law authorized the state and local police to ask about the immigration status of anyone they detained for other reasons, if they had a “reasonable suspicion” that the person was an illegal immigrant.
Acting on a lawsuit filed by the Obama administration, a federal judge stayed central provisions of the law. In November, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard arguments on an appeal of that stay by Arizona.
“States will push ahead regardless of the Ninth Circuit,” said Kris Kobach, a law professor and politician from Kansas who helped many states devise immigration laws — including Arizona’s. “A lot of people recognize that the district judge’s decision is very much open to dispute.”
In Oklahoma, where Republicans won big majorities in both houses of the Legislature and the governor’s office, Mr. Terrill said he would introduce a bill he called “Arizona plus.” In addition to the terms of Arizona’s law, it would allow for the seizure of vehicles and property used to transport or harbor illegal immigrants.
In Georgia, an all-Republican commission of legislators plans to propose measures to enhance enforcement of tough laws already on the books. Georgia will also consider a bill to bar illegal immigrant students from all public universities.
The newly elected governor, Nathan Deal, a Republican, is expected to sign those bills. But the Georgia Farm Bureau, which represents the state’s powerful growers, voted to oppose any measures that would affect immigrant farm workers, most of whom do not have legal status.
In Kansas, Republicans won big majorities in both legislative houses and Sam Brownback, who just retired as a United States senator, was elected governor. Mr. Kobach, the law professor, was elected secretary of state after a campaign in which he vowed to pass a law requiring proof of citizenship for voters.
But the Kansas Chamber of Commerce has voiced its opposition, and Mr. Brownback has said he will focus on reducing unemployment.
The newest initiative is a joint effort among lawmakers from states including Arizona, Oklahoma, Missouri and Pennsylvania to pass laws based on a single model that would deny American citizenship to children born in those states to illegal immigrants. The legislators were to announce the campaign in Washington on Wednesday.
A leader of that effort is Daryl Metcalfe, a Republican state representative from Pennsylvania. At a recent news conference, Mr. Metcalfe said his goal was to eliminate “an anchor baby status, in which an illegal alien invader comes into our country and has a child on our soil that is granted citizenship automatically.”
The campaign is certain to run into legal obstacles. Courts have interpreted the 14th Amendment as guaranteeing birthright citizenship. Even among those who seek its repeal, debate has hinged on whether that would require a constitutional amendment, an act of Congress or a decision by the Supreme Court.
Some Republicans argue that the party is risking losing its appeal to Latino voters, the fastest-growing minority voter bloc.
“The Republican Party is divided between those who see that Hispanics are an essential constituency going forward, and those who don’t see that,” said Tamar Jacoby, a Republican who is the president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a business coalition that supports legalization for illegal immigrants.
Latino and immigrant advocate groups are resigned to being on the defensive for the next two years. “These laws are creating resentment within the Latino community that is going to last for decades,” said Tony Yapias, director of Proyecto Latino de Utah in Salt Lake City, an immigrant advocacy group.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Keeping Obama to His Word
Rep. Luis Gutierrez is a hero to many Hispanics. He says he won't change his methods, no matter who gets irritated.
by Arian Campo-Flores
Newsweek (November 29, 2010)
(November 29, 2010) Once you've made a promise to U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, it's a bad idea to break it. Because if you do, he'll call you on it, and then he'll broadcast your perfidy incessantly, with every megaphone he can get his hands on, to anyone who will listen. Just ask President Barack Obama, who failed to keep his word on tackling immigration reform in his first year in office. Though the two Chicago Democrats were once close, Gutierrez has spent much of the past two years badgering the president on the issue. "He was clear in his commitment to me," says Gutierrez. And yet "everything has been enforcement, enforcement, enforcement"-more deportations of undocumented immigrants, more troops |on the border.
"How," asks Gutierrez, "is this different from what George W. Bush did?" Gutierrez, 56, is the most passionate, tireless, and nettlesome voice in Congress on immigration matters. He's a constant presence at rallies and on TV, defending the undocumented and railing against xenophobia. It's no surprise that a recent Pew Hispanic Center survey ranked him the second-most-important Latino leader in the country, after Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. "He's as close as the Latino community has to a Martin Luther King figure," says Frank Sharry, founder of the pro-immigrant group America's Voice. Yet Gutierrez's tactics are controversial. While many admire his tenacity and credit him with keeping immigration reform alive, others, including members of the Obama administration, believe his confrontational style can be counterproductive. He sees things more simply. "I have only one loyalty," he says, "and that's to the immigrant community."
Gutierrez has now embarked on his latest campaign: to secure quick passage of the DREAM Act, which would legalize undocumented youths who attend college or serve in the military. With a Republican takeover of the House imminent, the lame-duck session of Congress offers the last chance (for a while, at least) to get it done. It won't be easy, given the noxious atmosphere in Washington. Yet Gutierrez has already launched a nationwide tour of churches to rally immigrants and their supporters, and has begun rounding up votes in the House. Two weeks ago, he and a few other lawmakers met with Obama at the White House. "We want you to put everything you can behind this," he says they told the president. Obama agreed to help-by, among other things, placing personal calls to wavering lawmakers.
Gutierrez's first stop on his church tour was St. Brigid's in Brooklyn a week ago. Joined by Rep. Nydia Velázquez, chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and other elected officials, he was received with adulation by the hundreds of people packed in the pews. His speeches at events like these-delivered in a stentorian voice, despite his slight physique-resemble revivalist sermons. He started off softly, then crescendoed to ear-splitting decibels, jabbing his index finger toward the heavens. "The other side is waiting for us to get tired!" Gutierrez thundered in Spanish. "Is anyone here tired?" "No!" the audience roared back.
The son of Puerto Rican parents, Gutierrez has long had a fiery streak. He was a student leader and community organizer before entering politics, first as an alderman and then a congressman representing a majority-Latino district. Though he's about to start his 10th term, Gutierrez's activist roots still show. Within weeks of Obama's taking office, he set off on a 30-city tour to highlight the stories of families split apart by deportations and to pressure the administration to take on immigration reform. One year later, with things at a standstill, Gutierrez turned more adversarial. He said Hispanics were becoming angry and disillusioned, and were losing patience with the president.
In May of this year, he was arrested at an immigration protest in front of the White House. The following month, he threatened to urge Latinos to sit out the midterm elections if Democrats didn't act on immigration reform. "In any movement, you need agitators," says Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network, which has pushed for reform. "I frankly admire him for having the courage to take on friends and allies." That sentiment isn't shared by many in the administration. Gutierrez clashed repeatedly with Rahm Emanuel, Obama's former chief of staff, whom he considered a prime impediment to an immigration overhaul.
Another administration official, who didn't want to be named to avoid exacerbating tensions, complains that Gutierrez "has contributed to the flawed impression that the president can do this by himself"-when, in fact, he depends on Congress to move legislation. "It saddens me ... that [the president] and I have had these very public differences," says Gutierrez. It's quite a turnaround for the two men. When Obama was a freshman U.S. senator, he used to call Gutierrez regularly for advice. When he decided to run for president, he sought Gutierrez's endorsement early on-and got it. "There was a time when I was the only elected Latino that was for him. They were all for Hillary [Clinton]," says Gutierrez. "I love him. I want him to do well ... But I have to be true to what I believe in." (Cecilia Muñoz, a White House point person on immigration, calls Gutierrez "an important moral voice" and says that he and the president "are on the same side of the issue.") Outside the administration, some backers of immigration reform also have misgivings about Gutierrez's approach. He "transformed what had been a narrow policy issue into a litmus-test identity issue for Hispanics, and that made the debate a whole different ball game," says
Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a coalition of business groups that rely on immigrant labor. Gutierrez is "incredibly effective at what he does ... [But] there's part of me that always gets a little worried about identity politics." Still, Gutierrez has a track record of pragmatism, too. He took flak from some advocates for including strict enforcement provisions in an immigration bill he crafted with Republican Rep. Jeff Flake in 2007 (it didn't pass). "He can go from being a bomb thrower to being a dealmaker," says Angela Kelley of the Center for American Progress. "That's a pretty important bilingual ability."
Gutierrez's promotion of the DREAM Act is itself a compromise. Pro-immigrant forces agonized over whether to abandon the fight for a comprehensive bill in favor of a narrower one that would benefit only a slice of the undocumented population. In the end, they concluded that only the DREAM Act had a real chance. Gutierrez thinks the measure can prevail in the House. The bigger challenge is in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid has pledged to bring the bill to the floor in the next few weeks.
Given the need for 60 votes to break a filibuster and the likely defection of a handful of Democrats, the measure's backers need to win over at least a half dozen Republicans-a tall order these days. But seven current Senate GOP members voted for the DREAM Act in 2007, and a few others who are retiring aren't considered hardliners. The immigrant movement will face a much more adverse climate in Congress next year. As a result, Gutierrez is trying to redirect its energy toward a different end: persuading Obama to use his executive powers to stop the deportation of law-abiding illegal immigrants.
To ratchet up the pressure, Gutierrez is encouraging acts of nonviolent civil disobedience. "We cannot be a slave to the legislative process," he says. "That's what we've done, and it hasn't served us very well." Given that some Republican lawmakers have made clear they plan to use their newfound power to crack down even more on illegal immigrants, "the next couple of years are going to be an extraordinary battle," says Rosenberg. Gutierrez's "voice will be needed more than ever." And you can be certain you'll hear it.
by Arian Campo-Flores
Newsweek (November 29, 2010)
(November 29, 2010) Once you've made a promise to U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, it's a bad idea to break it. Because if you do, he'll call you on it, and then he'll broadcast your perfidy incessantly, with every megaphone he can get his hands on, to anyone who will listen. Just ask President Barack Obama, who failed to keep his word on tackling immigration reform in his first year in office. Though the two Chicago Democrats were once close, Gutierrez has spent much of the past two years badgering the president on the issue. "He was clear in his commitment to me," says Gutierrez. And yet "everything has been enforcement, enforcement, enforcement"-more deportations of undocumented immigrants, more troops |on the border.
"How," asks Gutierrez, "is this different from what George W. Bush did?" Gutierrez, 56, is the most passionate, tireless, and nettlesome voice in Congress on immigration matters. He's a constant presence at rallies and on TV, defending the undocumented and railing against xenophobia. It's no surprise that a recent Pew Hispanic Center survey ranked him the second-most-important Latino leader in the country, after Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. "He's as close as the Latino community has to a Martin Luther King figure," says Frank Sharry, founder of the pro-immigrant group America's Voice. Yet Gutierrez's tactics are controversial. While many admire his tenacity and credit him with keeping immigration reform alive, others, including members of the Obama administration, believe his confrontational style can be counterproductive. He sees things more simply. "I have only one loyalty," he says, "and that's to the immigrant community."
Gutierrez has now embarked on his latest campaign: to secure quick passage of the DREAM Act, which would legalize undocumented youths who attend college or serve in the military. With a Republican takeover of the House imminent, the lame-duck session of Congress offers the last chance (for a while, at least) to get it done. It won't be easy, given the noxious atmosphere in Washington. Yet Gutierrez has already launched a nationwide tour of churches to rally immigrants and their supporters, and has begun rounding up votes in the House. Two weeks ago, he and a few other lawmakers met with Obama at the White House. "We want you to put everything you can behind this," he says they told the president. Obama agreed to help-by, among other things, placing personal calls to wavering lawmakers.
Gutierrez's first stop on his church tour was St. Brigid's in Brooklyn a week ago. Joined by Rep. Nydia Velázquez, chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and other elected officials, he was received with adulation by the hundreds of people packed in the pews. His speeches at events like these-delivered in a stentorian voice, despite his slight physique-resemble revivalist sermons. He started off softly, then crescendoed to ear-splitting decibels, jabbing his index finger toward the heavens. "The other side is waiting for us to get tired!" Gutierrez thundered in Spanish. "Is anyone here tired?" "No!" the audience roared back.
The son of Puerto Rican parents, Gutierrez has long had a fiery streak. He was a student leader and community organizer before entering politics, first as an alderman and then a congressman representing a majority-Latino district. Though he's about to start his 10th term, Gutierrez's activist roots still show. Within weeks of Obama's taking office, he set off on a 30-city tour to highlight the stories of families split apart by deportations and to pressure the administration to take on immigration reform. One year later, with things at a standstill, Gutierrez turned more adversarial. He said Hispanics were becoming angry and disillusioned, and were losing patience with the president.
In May of this year, he was arrested at an immigration protest in front of the White House. The following month, he threatened to urge Latinos to sit out the midterm elections if Democrats didn't act on immigration reform. "In any movement, you need agitators," says Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network, which has pushed for reform. "I frankly admire him for having the courage to take on friends and allies." That sentiment isn't shared by many in the administration. Gutierrez clashed repeatedly with Rahm Emanuel, Obama's former chief of staff, whom he considered a prime impediment to an immigration overhaul.
Another administration official, who didn't want to be named to avoid exacerbating tensions, complains that Gutierrez "has contributed to the flawed impression that the president can do this by himself"-when, in fact, he depends on Congress to move legislation. "It saddens me ... that [the president] and I have had these very public differences," says Gutierrez. It's quite a turnaround for the two men. When Obama was a freshman U.S. senator, he used to call Gutierrez regularly for advice. When he decided to run for president, he sought Gutierrez's endorsement early on-and got it. "There was a time when I was the only elected Latino that was for him. They were all for Hillary [Clinton]," says Gutierrez. "I love him. I want him to do well ... But I have to be true to what I believe in." (Cecilia Muñoz, a White House point person on immigration, calls Gutierrez "an important moral voice" and says that he and the president "are on the same side of the issue.") Outside the administration, some backers of immigration reform also have misgivings about Gutierrez's approach. He "transformed what had been a narrow policy issue into a litmus-test identity issue for Hispanics, and that made the debate a whole different ball game," says
Tamar Jacoby, president of ImmigrationWorks USA, a coalition of business groups that rely on immigrant labor. Gutierrez is "incredibly effective at what he does ... [But] there's part of me that always gets a little worried about identity politics." Still, Gutierrez has a track record of pragmatism, too. He took flak from some advocates for including strict enforcement provisions in an immigration bill he crafted with Republican Rep. Jeff Flake in 2007 (it didn't pass). "He can go from being a bomb thrower to being a dealmaker," says Angela Kelley of the Center for American Progress. "That's a pretty important bilingual ability."
Gutierrez's promotion of the DREAM Act is itself a compromise. Pro-immigrant forces agonized over whether to abandon the fight for a comprehensive bill in favor of a narrower one that would benefit only a slice of the undocumented population. In the end, they concluded that only the DREAM Act had a real chance. Gutierrez thinks the measure can prevail in the House. The bigger challenge is in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid has pledged to bring the bill to the floor in the next few weeks.
Given the need for 60 votes to break a filibuster and the likely defection of a handful of Democrats, the measure's backers need to win over at least a half dozen Republicans-a tall order these days. But seven current Senate GOP members voted for the DREAM Act in 2007, and a few others who are retiring aren't considered hardliners. The immigrant movement will face a much more adverse climate in Congress next year. As a result, Gutierrez is trying to redirect its energy toward a different end: persuading Obama to use his executive powers to stop the deportation of law-abiding illegal immigrants.
To ratchet up the pressure, Gutierrez is encouraging acts of nonviolent civil disobedience. "We cannot be a slave to the legislative process," he says. "That's what we've done, and it hasn't served us very well." Given that some Republican lawmakers have made clear they plan to use their newfound power to crack down even more on illegal immigrants, "the next couple of years are going to be an extraordinary battle," says Rosenberg. Gutierrez's "voice will be needed more than ever." And you can be certain you'll hear it.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Immigration, budget top Texas lawmakers' agendas
For those of you who are interested in staying connected with the pieces of legislation being filed, start by going to the Texas State Legislature MyTLO website and create an account.
I also encourage you to use Google Reader, or another RSS feed to receive updated news on pieces of legislation and committee hearings.
-Patricia
By APRIL CASTRO Associated Press | Houston Chronicle
Nov. 8, 2010,
AUSTIN, Texas — Cracking down on illegal immigrants in Texas — on the roads, at schools and in the work force — was the focus of many bills Texas lawmakers filed Monday, the first day for proposing legislation to be considered in the upcoming session.
With a bigger majority in the House, Republican lawmakers and lawmakers-elect also want to make it legal for concealed handgun license holders to carry handguns on college campuses, prohibit state money from going to facilities that perform abortions and keep Texas from enforcing new federal health care laws.
Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, spent Saturday and Sunday nights in front of the chief clerk's office in the Texas House to be the first in line to file her bills.
The first one she filed when the office opened Monday morning was a proposal to require voters to provide proof of eligibility with either one form of photo identification or two forms of non-photo ID.
"A visitor that walked by told me that I reminded them of the kids that camp out for Duke basketball tickets in Durham, North Carolina," Riddle said. "It was eye-opening to realize that people think it's normal to be passionate about something like college basketball, but odd to be passionate about your state's politics."
She also filed measures that would make it a violation of state law for illegal immigrants to be in Texas, allowing state and local police officers to arrest them, and requiring school districts to report the number of illegal immigrants enrolled.
Riddle's were among dozens of hardline bills on immigration filed on the first day.
Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, filed a similar bill that would allow suspicious law enforcement officers to inquire about a person's immigration status and make an arrest based on the answer. His measure also makes an officer, his agency and state and local officials immune from any resulting litigation.
Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, filed a measure that would require all state and local governments and their contractors to use E-Verify — a joint program of the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration used to verify workers' immigration status.
By midday, 338 bills had been filed in both the House and Senate. Last session, almost 7,500 bills were filed, but less than 20 percent of them became law.
Lawmakers have until March 11 to file bills.
The Legislature is set to convene for the biennial session on Jan. 11 and will adjourn May 30.
Monitoring immigration legislation will be a priority for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas during the session.
"On the first day of prefiling, it's pretty tough to know what's going to happen during a legislative session," ACLU lobbyist Matthew Simpson said. But, he called the focus on immigration a "solution in search of a problem."
"It's almost a red herring, at least a diversion or a move away from what I think are the critical issues facing the state," he said.
Some of the proposed legislation also reflects the dire situation lawmakers will face when writing the next two-year state budget. Texas has an expected shortfall of more than $20 billion. One bill would require all school districts to consolidate into countywide districts. Another proposal would eliminate the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and consolidate its duties with the Texas Education Agency.
Nelson filed a handful of bills that would require state agencies to streamline operations.
Patrick also filed a bill that would make it illegal for former lawmakers to become registered lobbyists until two legislative sessions after they've left office. The measure would likely hamper the plans of many of the 21 Democrats who lost their re-election bids last week.
I also encourage you to use Google Reader, or another RSS feed to receive updated news on pieces of legislation and committee hearings.
-Patricia
By APRIL CASTRO Associated Press | Houston Chronicle
Nov. 8, 2010,
AUSTIN, Texas — Cracking down on illegal immigrants in Texas — on the roads, at schools and in the work force — was the focus of many bills Texas lawmakers filed Monday, the first day for proposing legislation to be considered in the upcoming session.
With a bigger majority in the House, Republican lawmakers and lawmakers-elect also want to make it legal for concealed handgun license holders to carry handguns on college campuses, prohibit state money from going to facilities that perform abortions and keep Texas from enforcing new federal health care laws.
Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, spent Saturday and Sunday nights in front of the chief clerk's office in the Texas House to be the first in line to file her bills.
The first one she filed when the office opened Monday morning was a proposal to require voters to provide proof of eligibility with either one form of photo identification or two forms of non-photo ID.
"A visitor that walked by told me that I reminded them of the kids that camp out for Duke basketball tickets in Durham, North Carolina," Riddle said. "It was eye-opening to realize that people think it's normal to be passionate about something like college basketball, but odd to be passionate about your state's politics."
She also filed measures that would make it a violation of state law for illegal immigrants to be in Texas, allowing state and local police officers to arrest them, and requiring school districts to report the number of illegal immigrants enrolled.
Riddle's were among dozens of hardline bills on immigration filed on the first day.
Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, filed a similar bill that would allow suspicious law enforcement officers to inquire about a person's immigration status and make an arrest based on the answer. His measure also makes an officer, his agency and state and local officials immune from any resulting litigation.
Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, filed a measure that would require all state and local governments and their contractors to use E-Verify — a joint program of the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration used to verify workers' immigration status.
By midday, 338 bills had been filed in both the House and Senate. Last session, almost 7,500 bills were filed, but less than 20 percent of them became law.
Lawmakers have until March 11 to file bills.
The Legislature is set to convene for the biennial session on Jan. 11 and will adjourn May 30.
Monitoring immigration legislation will be a priority for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas during the session.
"On the first day of prefiling, it's pretty tough to know what's going to happen during a legislative session," ACLU lobbyist Matthew Simpson said. But, he called the focus on immigration a "solution in search of a problem."
"It's almost a red herring, at least a diversion or a move away from what I think are the critical issues facing the state," he said.
Some of the proposed legislation also reflects the dire situation lawmakers will face when writing the next two-year state budget. Texas has an expected shortfall of more than $20 billion. One bill would require all school districts to consolidate into countywide districts. Another proposal would eliminate the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and consolidate its duties with the Texas Education Agency.
Nelson filed a handful of bills that would require state agencies to streamline operations.
Patrick also filed a bill that would make it illegal for former lawmakers to become registered lobbyists until two legislative sessions after they've left office. The measure would likely hamper the plans of many of the 21 Democrats who lost their re-election bids last week.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Immigration, budget top Texas lawmakers' agendas
By APRIL CASTRO | The Associated Press
Monday, Nov. 8, 2010
AUSTIN, Texas — Cracking down on illegal immigrants in Texas — on the roads, at schools and in the work force — was the focus of many bills Texas lawmakers filed Monday, the first day for proposing legislation to be considered in the upcoming session.
With a bigger majority in the House, Republican lawmakers and lawmakers-elect also want to make it legal for concealed handgun license holders to carry handguns on college campuses, prohibit state money from going to facilities that perform abortions and keep Texas from enforcing new federal health care laws.
Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, spent Saturday and Sunday nights in front of the chief clerk's office in the Texas House to be the first in line to file her bills.
The first one she filed when the office opened Monday morning was a proposal to require voters to provide proof of eligibility with either one form of photo identification or two forms of non-photo ID.
"A visitor that walked by told me that I reminded them of the kids that camp out for Duke basketball tickets in Durham, North Carolina," Riddle said. "It was eye-opening to realize that people think it's normal to be passionate about something like college basketball, but odd to be passionate about your state's politics."
She also filed measures that would make it a violation of state law for illegal immigrants to be in Texas, allowing state and local police officers to arrest them, and requiring school districts to report the number of illegal immigrants enrolled.
Riddle's were among dozens of hardline bills on immigration filed on the first day.
Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, filed a similar bill that would allow suspicious law enforcement officers to inquire about a person's immigration status and make an arrest based on the answer. His measure also makes an officer, his agency and state and local officials immune from any resulting litigation.
Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, filed a measure that would require all state and local governments and their contractors to use E-Verify — a joint program of the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration used to verify workers' immigration status.
By midday, 338 bills had been filed in both the House and Senate. Last session, almost 7,500 bills were filed, but less than 20 percent of them became law.
Lawmakers have until March 11 to file bills.
The Legislature is set to convene for the biennial session on Jan. 11 and will adjourn May 30.
Monitoring immigration legislation will be a priority for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas during the session.
"On the first day of prefiling, it's pretty tough to know what's going to happen during a legislative session," ACLU lobbyist Matthew Simpson said. But, he called the focus on immigration a "solution in search of a problem."
"It's almost a red herring, at least a diversion or a move away from what I think are the critical issues facing the state," he said.
Some of the proposed legislation also reflects the dire situation lawmakers will face when writing the next two-year state budget. Texas has an expected shortfall of more than $20 billion. One bill would require all school districts to consolidate into countywide districts. Another proposal would eliminate the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and consolidate its duties with the Texas Education Agency.
Nelson filed a handful of bills that would require state agencies to streamline operations.
Patrick also filed a bill that would make it illegal for former lawmakers to become registered lobbyists until two legislative sessions after they've left office. The measure would likely hamper the plans of many of the 21 Democrats who lost their re-election bids last week.
Monday, Nov. 8, 2010
AUSTIN, Texas — Cracking down on illegal immigrants in Texas — on the roads, at schools and in the work force — was the focus of many bills Texas lawmakers filed Monday, the first day for proposing legislation to be considered in the upcoming session.
With a bigger majority in the House, Republican lawmakers and lawmakers-elect also want to make it legal for concealed handgun license holders to carry handguns on college campuses, prohibit state money from going to facilities that perform abortions and keep Texas from enforcing new federal health care laws.
Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, spent Saturday and Sunday nights in front of the chief clerk's office in the Texas House to be the first in line to file her bills.
The first one she filed when the office opened Monday morning was a proposal to require voters to provide proof of eligibility with either one form of photo identification or two forms of non-photo ID.
"A visitor that walked by told me that I reminded them of the kids that camp out for Duke basketball tickets in Durham, North Carolina," Riddle said. "It was eye-opening to realize that people think it's normal to be passionate about something like college basketball, but odd to be passionate about your state's politics."
She also filed measures that would make it a violation of state law for illegal immigrants to be in Texas, allowing state and local police officers to arrest them, and requiring school districts to report the number of illegal immigrants enrolled.
Riddle's were among dozens of hardline bills on immigration filed on the first day.
Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, filed a similar bill that would allow suspicious law enforcement officers to inquire about a person's immigration status and make an arrest based on the answer. His measure also makes an officer, his agency and state and local officials immune from any resulting litigation.
Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, filed a measure that would require all state and local governments and their contractors to use E-Verify — a joint program of the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration used to verify workers' immigration status.
By midday, 338 bills had been filed in both the House and Senate. Last session, almost 7,500 bills were filed, but less than 20 percent of them became law.
Lawmakers have until March 11 to file bills.
The Legislature is set to convene for the biennial session on Jan. 11 and will adjourn May 30.
Monitoring immigration legislation will be a priority for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas during the session.
"On the first day of prefiling, it's pretty tough to know what's going to happen during a legislative session," ACLU lobbyist Matthew Simpson said. But, he called the focus on immigration a "solution in search of a problem."
"It's almost a red herring, at least a diversion or a move away from what I think are the critical issues facing the state," he said.
Some of the proposed legislation also reflects the dire situation lawmakers will face when writing the next two-year state budget. Texas has an expected shortfall of more than $20 billion. One bill would require all school districts to consolidate into countywide districts. Another proposal would eliminate the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and consolidate its duties with the Texas Education Agency.
Nelson filed a handful of bills that would require state agencies to streamline operations.
Patrick also filed a bill that would make it illegal for former lawmakers to become registered lobbyists until two legislative sessions after they've left office. The measure would likely hamper the plans of many of the 21 Democrats who lost their re-election bids last week.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Activists protest FBI raids
By Serena Maria Daniels and Andy Grimm, Tribune reporter
Story posted 2010.09.27 at 09:39 PM CDT
About 350 anti-war activists, clergy members and trade union members demonstrated Monday outside the FBI's Chicago headquarters and condemned federal authorities for their raids last week of the homes of activists in Chicago and Minneapolis.
Signs read "Freedom to Dissent" and "One Nation Under Surveillance."
Others chanted into bullhorns, "Freedom of speech under attack/What do we do?/Stand up, fight back!" "It's not just our family. It's not just those that got the knock on Friday.
It's not just the many, many movement activists that are here today," said Stephanie Weiner, whose home in Chicago's Logan Square neighborhood was the subject of a search warrant Friday.
Weiner and her husband, Joseph Iosbaker, were among several activists whose homes were searched in the two cities in an investigation into possible domestic links with alleged terrorist organizations.
Authorities also searched each of their sons' bedrooms, including the room of Tre Iosbaker, 17, who attended the rally in support of his parents.
The FBI also searched the Jefferson Park home of Hatem Abudayyeh, executive director of the Arab American Action Network.
Subpoenas issued to other activists sought records detailing their travel to countries in the Middle East and South America, as well as records of donations to Abudayyeh's group and two groups on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations.
Special Agent Ross Rice, a Chicago-based FBI spokesman, has declined to discuss details of the investigation.
But he has noted that judges reviewed the warrants and found probable cause.
Jim Fennerty, an attorney representing Abudayyeh, who is an American of Palestinian descent, said Monday that lawyers from the National Lawyers Guild will represent those who are being investigated.
Ahmed Rehab, executive director of the Chicago chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Monday that the investigation into Abudayyeh's organization was "a waste of taxpayer dollars." "Hatem is a longtime, respected leader in the community. It is unthinkable that he would have any connections to terrorism," Rehab said. "This is a new low. Š This is an example of FBI overreach when it comes to activism or commentary on the (Middle East) conflict."
The Arab American Action Network has received federal block grants for training programs offered at its 63rd Street headquarters, according to its Web site, and offers assistance with citizenship, English classes and after-school programs.
Several of the people whose homes were searched or who were issued subpoenas are members of the Chicago-based Freedom Road Socialist Organization.
Story posted 2010.09.27 at 09:39 PM CDT
About 350 anti-war activists, clergy members and trade union members demonstrated Monday outside the FBI's Chicago headquarters and condemned federal authorities for their raids last week of the homes of activists in Chicago and Minneapolis.
Signs read "Freedom to Dissent" and "One Nation Under Surveillance."
Others chanted into bullhorns, "Freedom of speech under attack/What do we do?/Stand up, fight back!" "It's not just our family. It's not just those that got the knock on Friday.
It's not just the many, many movement activists that are here today," said Stephanie Weiner, whose home in Chicago's Logan Square neighborhood was the subject of a search warrant Friday.
Weiner and her husband, Joseph Iosbaker, were among several activists whose homes were searched in the two cities in an investigation into possible domestic links with alleged terrorist organizations.
Authorities also searched each of their sons' bedrooms, including the room of Tre Iosbaker, 17, who attended the rally in support of his parents.
The FBI also searched the Jefferson Park home of Hatem Abudayyeh, executive director of the Arab American Action Network.
Subpoenas issued to other activists sought records detailing their travel to countries in the Middle East and South America, as well as records of donations to Abudayyeh's group and two groups on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations.
Special Agent Ross Rice, a Chicago-based FBI spokesman, has declined to discuss details of the investigation.
But he has noted that judges reviewed the warrants and found probable cause.
Jim Fennerty, an attorney representing Abudayyeh, who is an American of Palestinian descent, said Monday that lawyers from the National Lawyers Guild will represent those who are being investigated.
Ahmed Rehab, executive director of the Chicago chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Monday that the investigation into Abudayyeh's organization was "a waste of taxpayer dollars." "Hatem is a longtime, respected leader in the community. It is unthinkable that he would have any connections to terrorism," Rehab said. "This is a new low. Š This is an example of FBI overreach when it comes to activism or commentary on the (Middle East) conflict."
The Arab American Action Network has received federal block grants for training programs offered at its 63rd Street headquarters, according to its Web site, and offers assistance with citizenship, English classes and after-school programs.
Several of the people whose homes were searched or who were issued subpoenas are members of the Chicago-based Freedom Road Socialist Organization.
Friday, August 20, 2010
Early look at upcoming Texas immigration debate
By Tim Eaton | AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Wednesday, Aug. 18, 2010
Lawmakers talk about effects an Arizona-inspired law would have here.
A legislative committee hearing Wednesday offered a glimpse of the immigration debate that Texas lawmakers could have in the upcoming session with Republicans pushing to limit illegal immigration and Democrats questioning the wisdom of doing so, especially in a tight budget year.
Much of the House Committee on State Affairs' discussion was about Arizona's controversial law calling for law enforcement officers to ask people for documents showing citizenship and about E-Verify, the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services computer system that is supposed to make sure job applicants are in the U.S. legally.
The committee hearing was intended to educate lawmakers on immigration issues that might come up in the legislative session that begins in January, when lawmakers are expected to face an $18 billion budget shortfall.
Though the period to pre-file bills has not started, the committee's chairman, Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, said, "It's naive to think that the state isn't going to do something" to try to limit illegal immigration in Texas.
A handful of Republican lawmakers have signaled that they would introduce bills that would mandate E-Verify and enact a law like Arizona's.
Rep. Pete Gallego, D-Alpine, highlighted potential expenses for Texas if an Arizona-like law were enacted here. He also pointed to testimony from immigration lawyer Michael Golden indicating that E-Verify, which is free to employers and available in all 50 states, appeared to be unreliable. For example, it might be hard to verify a person who changed her name after marriage.
During the hearing, Gallego told fellow committee members and the small crowd in the hearing room that when making policy, "you always have to be aware of unintended consequences."
Gallego said there could be significant effects if law enforcement and other public agencies were asked to reallocate already-sparse resources to check citizenship of people in Texas, many of whom would not be here illegally.
Later in the hearing, Rep. José Menéndez, D-San Antonio, also said lawmakers should not pass laws that would inadvertently take resources and money away from law enforcement's ability to protect the border.
Wednesday, Aug. 18, 2010
Lawmakers talk about effects an Arizona-inspired law would have here.
A legislative committee hearing Wednesday offered a glimpse of the immigration debate that Texas lawmakers could have in the upcoming session with Republicans pushing to limit illegal immigration and Democrats questioning the wisdom of doing so, especially in a tight budget year.
Much of the House Committee on State Affairs' discussion was about Arizona's controversial law calling for law enforcement officers to ask people for documents showing citizenship and about E-Verify, the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services computer system that is supposed to make sure job applicants are in the U.S. legally.
The committee hearing was intended to educate lawmakers on immigration issues that might come up in the legislative session that begins in January, when lawmakers are expected to face an $18 billion budget shortfall.
Though the period to pre-file bills has not started, the committee's chairman, Burt Solomons, R-Carrollton, said, "It's naive to think that the state isn't going to do something" to try to limit illegal immigration in Texas.
A handful of Republican lawmakers have signaled that they would introduce bills that would mandate E-Verify and enact a law like Arizona's.
Rep. Pete Gallego, D-Alpine, highlighted potential expenses for Texas if an Arizona-like law were enacted here. He also pointed to testimony from immigration lawyer Michael Golden indicating that E-Verify, which is free to employers and available in all 50 states, appeared to be unreliable. For example, it might be hard to verify a person who changed her name after marriage.
During the hearing, Gallego told fellow committee members and the small crowd in the hearing room that when making policy, "you always have to be aware of unintended consequences."
Gallego said there could be significant effects if law enforcement and other public agencies were asked to reallocate already-sparse resources to check citizenship of people in Texas, many of whom would not be here illegally.
Later in the hearing, Rep. José Menéndez, D-San Antonio, also said lawmakers should not pass laws that would inadvertently take resources and money away from law enforcement's ability to protect the border.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Town Bolsters Security as Mexican Deaths Continue
by Brandi Grissom | Texas Tribune
July 15, 2010
[This is the second part in a series examining life in three pairs of sister cities along the Texas-Mexico border and how residents on both sides of the line are affected by the bloody drug war.]
They can’t keep burying the bodies here. Not just because the small cemetery in this remote desert town can’t handle the volume — because somebody could get killed.
On a still, sunny spring morning in Fort Hancock, about 60 miles east of El Paso, two elderly Hispanic men sit on the tailgate of a pickup, surrounded by graves. Francisco Estrada and Alberto Rosales munch on pieces of fruit, legs dangling above the dusty earth where many former residents of this rural outpost make their final repose. As caretakers for the Fort Hancock Cemetery, they put in about 20 hours a week. It's mostly quiet work, meant to occupy their aging minds and bodies. This spring, though, as the drug war enveloped Fort Hancock’s Mexican sister city, El Porvenir, their stress levels spiked. “What they’re starting over there, they’re going to finish here,” Estrada frets.
Estrada and Rosales point to white and yellow silk flowers that adorn one of the most recent additions to the cemetery: the resting place of Manuel Morales Lerma, who was shot at his home in El Porvenir. Fearing cartel leaders would next target his family, Morales Lerma’s relatives moved his funeral to Fort Hancock’s tiny cemetery. People here describe the ceremony like a scene out of a spaghetti western. Sheriffs’ deputies from all around came to stand guard. Some mourners hid in the bushes with guns, says Hudspeth County Judge Becky Dean Walker.
Fewer than 20,000 people live in the Valle de Juárez, a 60-mile stretch of small villages that line the highway from Juárez to El Porvenir. In what was once a peaceful if desperately poor farming community, more than 75 people have fallen victim to the raging drug war so far this year. It’s an astonishing death rate. If the pace of killings continues this year, the murder rate could reach 1,600 homicides for every 100,000 people (in New Orleans, the 2009 murder rate was 52 per 100,000, the highest in the nation, according to FBI data). Cartel leaders have told entire towns to vacate or be decimated. They’ve burned homes and churches and left in their wake residents paralyzed with fear. The aftershocks extend far from the epicenter of the violence, bringing fear and confusion — along with legions of armed guards, and refugees from the bloodbath — to Fort Hancock and other rural Texas border outposts.
Morales Lerma’s funeral passed without another murder; the slaughter to the south has yet to bleed across the border. Yet no one disputes the need to be prepared: As El Porvenir and the rest of the Juárez Valley have descended into chaos, law enforcement has crushed into the small towns of Hudspeth County. More officers — state, local and federal — work more hours with more firepower during every hour of the day. Though Hudspeth County residents fret for their southern neighbors — especially family members who cannot escape to the United States — many welcome the protection from the nightmare just across the Rio Grande.
The number of uniforms in the Juárez Valley has increased, too. Mexican military troops set up checkpoints on the highway and patrol the villages with automatic weapons at the ready. Mexican federal police are ever present. But petrified residents say their presence has done little to curb the killing. Some believe the soldiers are at least complicit in the cartels’ dirty work and may be actively doing drug lords’ bidding. “The population is fearful of the soldiers,” one El Porvenir resident says. “They are always beating people up for information.”
Valle de muerte
Death and terror rule Highway 2, or Carretera Porvenir-Ciudad Juárez — the stretch of road that links the small towns of the Juárez Valley. Just east of Juárez, the sign on the highway says “Colonia de Esperanza.” It means Colony of Hope. Less than a hundred yards away, the blistered black shell of a pink cinderblock home sits idle. The frame of what used to be a single dining room chair sits outside the home, as if someone once sat there and watched the traffic fly by.
A block past, a single porch light illuminates an abandoned home; whoever fled must have left it on. Next door, the burned frame of another pink cinderblock home sits empty, ashes still piled on the ground. Across the street, another charred house. Black scars surround barred windows where flames licked out from within.
A small military convoy passes on the highway. A pickup loaded with soldiers gripping automatic rifles follows a drab olive-green semi-truck with military gear. Two women walk along the shoulder with three small children toting backpacks. They hardly notice. A couple of miles down the road, cars maneuver around two loose horses trotting along the road.
In Guadalupe, one of the largest town in the Valle de Juárez with about 9,000 people, a group of young factory workers gathers at a bus stop, waiting for a ride into Juárez. Federal police sit on benches at the edge of a park plaza, where a few children shoot hoops and romp around on bright colored play equipment. The town’s mayor, Jesús Manuel Lara Rodríguez, was shot down in Juárez last month. Two members of the town council were killed in 2009, according to the El Paso Times.
For decades, residents in these tiny, poor towns have toiled either in the cotton and alfalfa fields or in the giant maquilas of Juárez. If they wanted more than the paupers’ wages of the farm and factory, they worked for the drug cartels. Yet these communities remained peaceful until early this year, when the Juárez drug war bled into the farmland.
The terror fell perhaps hardest on El Porvenir. Off the highway, the only paved street, stray dogs prowl dusty roads. Plywood covers the windows in modest houses, mostly stucco and cinderblock, painted in pastels. Drying clothes swing in the light breeze. A padlock shuts off the park. The closet-sized police station — dark and barred shut, with a foot-long hole in its side — houses no police. The church has been burned. Many here have seen family members perish at the hands of the cartels.
On a sunny May afternoon, two men sitting on a bench near the town square are among the few people out in the daylight. They agree, nervously, to talk with reporters. “No names,” they say over and over again, constantly scanning the area for suspicious vehicles or people. A young man with a scraggly beard and a bejeweled Playboy bunny necklace says he has lived here all his life. All the soldiers, he says, don’t make a difference. The killings continue; he believes the soldiers work with the murderers. “They don’t do anything; they’re just cruising,” he says. He’s married and he has a job here in El Porvenir, so he can’t leave.
No one here knows who can be trusted, the older man says. Some work for the Army or the cartels as informants. And if anyone talks to someone whose name appears on a hit list, they risk having their own name added. Everyone here knows who is on the list, he says. Someone — he doesn’t know who — writes up the names, copies them and distributes them on fliers strewn around town. “They say, we are going to kill you one by one,” the older man says.
It didn’t used to be this way. This used to be a happy place, the two men say. Music filled the streets every weekend. People drank and danced. Now, only fear remains.
Mayberry of yesteryear
When he was a little boy, Jose Franco would ride his bicycle across the border into El Porvenir to play with friends. Now, as superintendent of the 540-student Fort Hancock Independent School District, he sees young boys and girls who come from El Porvenir so traumatized they can’t stand being in the same room with other children. “Ah, these kids could tell you stories,” he says, shaking his head. One teenager saw his mother shot and his grandfather attacked with an ice pick. A young girl getting ready for her quinceañera watched her father get executed while her grandmother was strapped to a chair, Franco says. A disabled elementary student saw television footage of his mother’s beaten and suffocated corpse wrapped in plastic. “The violence,” he says. “These guys are ruthless.”
This year, the tiny school district has seen its student population grow more than 10 percent. Fifty-four of the 63 new students are from Mexico, Franco says. They come to his schools years behind academically, shredded emotionally from what they’ve seen, what they still see in their minds every day. The children imagine horrors befalling their uncles, their fathers, their sisters, those who can’t come join them on the other side, Franco says.
He met with state officials to coordinate social services for the new students, and he hired a special teacher to help immerse them in their new language and academic culture. The district has also hired its own security, a constable who patrols the small campus. “I have a very compassionate staff,” Franco says, “and they pretty much do whatever it takes to help these children.”
The students are among dozens who call Fort Hancock their new home — at least part of the time. When the sun sets, a steady stream of cars make their way across the two-lane international bridge that joins El Porvenir and Fort Hancock, says Hudspeth County Deputy Sheriff Keith Hughes. One of the many ramshackle mobile homes that line Fort Hancock’s unpaved streets becomes a haven for as many as 16 people each night. “It’s hard to find a vacant house, and there are a lot of Mexican plates,” Hughes says.
It’s hard to know which of the nightly residents are victims and which are running from their own involvement in the drug trade. The uncertainty has made Fort Hancock’s residents a vigilant bunch. Though the violence has not crossed, Hughes gets calls all the time from people worried about suspicious vehicles and activities.
Hughes is one of 17 Hudspeth County deputies — up from 12 five years ago — who are working 16-hour days seven days a week to patrol the massive border county. Sheriff Arvin West has received grants from Gov. Rick Perry totalling nearly $3.6 million to hire more deputies and pay them for overtime patrols, and he’s used those dollars to beef up security as the violence in El Porvenir gets ever closer. In May, a shootout erupted right on the river. One person died on the Mexican side; four others were injured. The wounded made it across the river and had to be transported, with a sheriff’s escort, to the hospital in El Paso. West has moved all the men and money he can to Fort Hancock, he says. He has told the cotton farmers whose fields line the Rio Grande to arm themselves — not that they needed the prodding. “This used to be Mayberry,” says West, his own pistol perched in a holster around his paunchy waist.
The U.S. Border Patrol has surged here, too. Hundreds more agents in green uniforms man highway checkpoints and patrol back roads. Doug Mosier, spokesman for the Border Patrol’s El Paso Sector, which encompasses most of Hudspeth County, would not disclose the total number of agents in the area, but West estimates about 400 agents patrol here, twice as many as a few years ago. The increased presence has made a difference, Mosier says. Drug busts have slowed to a trickle, and agents are apprehending only about five illegal crossers a day.
Unlike the feared police presence in El Porvenir, the infusion of law enforcement comforts most of the residents of Fort Hancock. But some of the officers go too far, says Bill Addington, whose family owns farmland in Sierra Blanca, another tiny Hudspeth County border town. “Everywhere we go, we’re stopped,” he says. County Commissioner Jim Ed Miller says agents have repeatedly torn up his farm property by driving through it. And though he’s lived here for decades, farming cotton and alfalfa in the now majority-Hispanic town, agents regularly pull him over and ask if he’s a citizen. “I was stopped for making a ‘suspicious turn,’” he says. “Seven units put the habeas grabbus on me.”
No room in the cemetery
Estrada and Rosales slide off the back of the pickup to resume weed-pulling and flower-tending duties at the cemetery. Estrada, only half-joking, tells Rosales in Spanish that they need to start getting the place ready for all the new residents. “They just spray bullets; they don’t care who’s around,” Estrada says of the cartels.
The two have lived in this area for decades. Estrada says he used to do his shopping just across the bridge in Mexico, where goods were cheaper and more plentiful. Now he travels to El Paso. Rosales used to live in El Porvenir. His son still lives there, and Rosales fears for his safety. Recently, when his son came to Fort Hancock for a visit, he returned to Mexico to find his home had been set on fire, though federal police doused the blaze before it engulfed the whole house. Rosales says his son can’t seek asylum in the United States, because he has a family, a job and a home he can’t sell in El Porvenir. “I’m scared for him, but what can I do?” he asks in Spanish. “Nobody’s going to buy that house.”
In a way, Estrada hopes the violence in Mexico continues, because he worries that the cartel leaders will bring their fight north. Already, he says, they have buried too many people from El Porvenir. “It’s hard over there, but poor people can’t come over here,” he says. Since the Morales Lerma funeral, Estrada and Rosales say the number of uniformed officers in the region has spiked. And the board that oversees the cemetery has for the most part stopped burials from Mexico. The two say they feel safer.
The cemetery board now enforces a longstanding rule that only people who lived in town, or had a relative there, could be buried in the Fort Hancock Cemetery, says Mary Miller, a member of the board. “It’s real sad, because I have friends over there who … encourage people from here not to come over there, because they’re shooting people at funerals,” Miller says.
No one’s real sure how many people are buried among the tall, skinny pine trees and sparse brush of the cemetery. In the 1950s or 1960s, Miller says, a flood exhumed many of the bodies, and they floated away. What they do know, she says, is that the cemetery is too small to accommodate the death toll across the border. “The way they’re killing ‘em in Juárez and El Porvenir,” she explains, “there wouldn’t be any room left.”
July 15, 2010
[This is the second part in a series examining life in three pairs of sister cities along the Texas-Mexico border and how residents on both sides of the line are affected by the bloody drug war.]
They can’t keep burying the bodies here. Not just because the small cemetery in this remote desert town can’t handle the volume — because somebody could get killed.
On a still, sunny spring morning in Fort Hancock, about 60 miles east of El Paso, two elderly Hispanic men sit on the tailgate of a pickup, surrounded by graves. Francisco Estrada and Alberto Rosales munch on pieces of fruit, legs dangling above the dusty earth where many former residents of this rural outpost make their final repose. As caretakers for the Fort Hancock Cemetery, they put in about 20 hours a week. It's mostly quiet work, meant to occupy their aging minds and bodies. This spring, though, as the drug war enveloped Fort Hancock’s Mexican sister city, El Porvenir, their stress levels spiked. “What they’re starting over there, they’re going to finish here,” Estrada frets.
Estrada and Rosales point to white and yellow silk flowers that adorn one of the most recent additions to the cemetery: the resting place of Manuel Morales Lerma, who was shot at his home in El Porvenir. Fearing cartel leaders would next target his family, Morales Lerma’s relatives moved his funeral to Fort Hancock’s tiny cemetery. People here describe the ceremony like a scene out of a spaghetti western. Sheriffs’ deputies from all around came to stand guard. Some mourners hid in the bushes with guns, says Hudspeth County Judge Becky Dean Walker.
Fewer than 20,000 people live in the Valle de Juárez, a 60-mile stretch of small villages that line the highway from Juárez to El Porvenir. In what was once a peaceful if desperately poor farming community, more than 75 people have fallen victim to the raging drug war so far this year. It’s an astonishing death rate. If the pace of killings continues this year, the murder rate could reach 1,600 homicides for every 100,000 people (in New Orleans, the 2009 murder rate was 52 per 100,000, the highest in the nation, according to FBI data). Cartel leaders have told entire towns to vacate or be decimated. They’ve burned homes and churches and left in their wake residents paralyzed with fear. The aftershocks extend far from the epicenter of the violence, bringing fear and confusion — along with legions of armed guards, and refugees from the bloodbath — to Fort Hancock and other rural Texas border outposts.
Morales Lerma’s funeral passed without another murder; the slaughter to the south has yet to bleed across the border. Yet no one disputes the need to be prepared: As El Porvenir and the rest of the Juárez Valley have descended into chaos, law enforcement has crushed into the small towns of Hudspeth County. More officers — state, local and federal — work more hours with more firepower during every hour of the day. Though Hudspeth County residents fret for their southern neighbors — especially family members who cannot escape to the United States — many welcome the protection from the nightmare just across the Rio Grande.
The number of uniforms in the Juárez Valley has increased, too. Mexican military troops set up checkpoints on the highway and patrol the villages with automatic weapons at the ready. Mexican federal police are ever present. But petrified residents say their presence has done little to curb the killing. Some believe the soldiers are at least complicit in the cartels’ dirty work and may be actively doing drug lords’ bidding. “The population is fearful of the soldiers,” one El Porvenir resident says. “They are always beating people up for information.”
Valle de muerte
Death and terror rule Highway 2, or Carretera Porvenir-Ciudad Juárez — the stretch of road that links the small towns of the Juárez Valley. Just east of Juárez, the sign on the highway says “Colonia de Esperanza.” It means Colony of Hope. Less than a hundred yards away, the blistered black shell of a pink cinderblock home sits idle. The frame of what used to be a single dining room chair sits outside the home, as if someone once sat there and watched the traffic fly by.
A block past, a single porch light illuminates an abandoned home; whoever fled must have left it on. Next door, the burned frame of another pink cinderblock home sits empty, ashes still piled on the ground. Across the street, another charred house. Black scars surround barred windows where flames licked out from within.
A small military convoy passes on the highway. A pickup loaded with soldiers gripping automatic rifles follows a drab olive-green semi-truck with military gear. Two women walk along the shoulder with three small children toting backpacks. They hardly notice. A couple of miles down the road, cars maneuver around two loose horses trotting along the road.
In Guadalupe, one of the largest town in the Valle de Juárez with about 9,000 people, a group of young factory workers gathers at a bus stop, waiting for a ride into Juárez. Federal police sit on benches at the edge of a park plaza, where a few children shoot hoops and romp around on bright colored play equipment. The town’s mayor, Jesús Manuel Lara Rodríguez, was shot down in Juárez last month. Two members of the town council were killed in 2009, according to the El Paso Times.
For decades, residents in these tiny, poor towns have toiled either in the cotton and alfalfa fields or in the giant maquilas of Juárez. If they wanted more than the paupers’ wages of the farm and factory, they worked for the drug cartels. Yet these communities remained peaceful until early this year, when the Juárez drug war bled into the farmland.
The terror fell perhaps hardest on El Porvenir. Off the highway, the only paved street, stray dogs prowl dusty roads. Plywood covers the windows in modest houses, mostly stucco and cinderblock, painted in pastels. Drying clothes swing in the light breeze. A padlock shuts off the park. The closet-sized police station — dark and barred shut, with a foot-long hole in its side — houses no police. The church has been burned. Many here have seen family members perish at the hands of the cartels.
On a sunny May afternoon, two men sitting on a bench near the town square are among the few people out in the daylight. They agree, nervously, to talk with reporters. “No names,” they say over and over again, constantly scanning the area for suspicious vehicles or people. A young man with a scraggly beard and a bejeweled Playboy bunny necklace says he has lived here all his life. All the soldiers, he says, don’t make a difference. The killings continue; he believes the soldiers work with the murderers. “They don’t do anything; they’re just cruising,” he says. He’s married and he has a job here in El Porvenir, so he can’t leave.
No one here knows who can be trusted, the older man says. Some work for the Army or the cartels as informants. And if anyone talks to someone whose name appears on a hit list, they risk having their own name added. Everyone here knows who is on the list, he says. Someone — he doesn’t know who — writes up the names, copies them and distributes them on fliers strewn around town. “They say, we are going to kill you one by one,” the older man says.
It didn’t used to be this way. This used to be a happy place, the two men say. Music filled the streets every weekend. People drank and danced. Now, only fear remains.
Mayberry of yesteryear
When he was a little boy, Jose Franco would ride his bicycle across the border into El Porvenir to play with friends. Now, as superintendent of the 540-student Fort Hancock Independent School District, he sees young boys and girls who come from El Porvenir so traumatized they can’t stand being in the same room with other children. “Ah, these kids could tell you stories,” he says, shaking his head. One teenager saw his mother shot and his grandfather attacked with an ice pick. A young girl getting ready for her quinceañera watched her father get executed while her grandmother was strapped to a chair, Franco says. A disabled elementary student saw television footage of his mother’s beaten and suffocated corpse wrapped in plastic. “The violence,” he says. “These guys are ruthless.”
This year, the tiny school district has seen its student population grow more than 10 percent. Fifty-four of the 63 new students are from Mexico, Franco says. They come to his schools years behind academically, shredded emotionally from what they’ve seen, what they still see in their minds every day. The children imagine horrors befalling their uncles, their fathers, their sisters, those who can’t come join them on the other side, Franco says.
He met with state officials to coordinate social services for the new students, and he hired a special teacher to help immerse them in their new language and academic culture. The district has also hired its own security, a constable who patrols the small campus. “I have a very compassionate staff,” Franco says, “and they pretty much do whatever it takes to help these children.”
The students are among dozens who call Fort Hancock their new home — at least part of the time. When the sun sets, a steady stream of cars make their way across the two-lane international bridge that joins El Porvenir and Fort Hancock, says Hudspeth County Deputy Sheriff Keith Hughes. One of the many ramshackle mobile homes that line Fort Hancock’s unpaved streets becomes a haven for as many as 16 people each night. “It’s hard to find a vacant house, and there are a lot of Mexican plates,” Hughes says.
It’s hard to know which of the nightly residents are victims and which are running from their own involvement in the drug trade. The uncertainty has made Fort Hancock’s residents a vigilant bunch. Though the violence has not crossed, Hughes gets calls all the time from people worried about suspicious vehicles and activities.
Hughes is one of 17 Hudspeth County deputies — up from 12 five years ago — who are working 16-hour days seven days a week to patrol the massive border county. Sheriff Arvin West has received grants from Gov. Rick Perry totalling nearly $3.6 million to hire more deputies and pay them for overtime patrols, and he’s used those dollars to beef up security as the violence in El Porvenir gets ever closer. In May, a shootout erupted right on the river. One person died on the Mexican side; four others were injured. The wounded made it across the river and had to be transported, with a sheriff’s escort, to the hospital in El Paso. West has moved all the men and money he can to Fort Hancock, he says. He has told the cotton farmers whose fields line the Rio Grande to arm themselves — not that they needed the prodding. “This used to be Mayberry,” says West, his own pistol perched in a holster around his paunchy waist.
The U.S. Border Patrol has surged here, too. Hundreds more agents in green uniforms man highway checkpoints and patrol back roads. Doug Mosier, spokesman for the Border Patrol’s El Paso Sector, which encompasses most of Hudspeth County, would not disclose the total number of agents in the area, but West estimates about 400 agents patrol here, twice as many as a few years ago. The increased presence has made a difference, Mosier says. Drug busts have slowed to a trickle, and agents are apprehending only about five illegal crossers a day.
Unlike the feared police presence in El Porvenir, the infusion of law enforcement comforts most of the residents of Fort Hancock. But some of the officers go too far, says Bill Addington, whose family owns farmland in Sierra Blanca, another tiny Hudspeth County border town. “Everywhere we go, we’re stopped,” he says. County Commissioner Jim Ed Miller says agents have repeatedly torn up his farm property by driving through it. And though he’s lived here for decades, farming cotton and alfalfa in the now majority-Hispanic town, agents regularly pull him over and ask if he’s a citizen. “I was stopped for making a ‘suspicious turn,’” he says. “Seven units put the habeas grabbus on me.”
No room in the cemetery
Estrada and Rosales slide off the back of the pickup to resume weed-pulling and flower-tending duties at the cemetery. Estrada, only half-joking, tells Rosales in Spanish that they need to start getting the place ready for all the new residents. “They just spray bullets; they don’t care who’s around,” Estrada says of the cartels.
The two have lived in this area for decades. Estrada says he used to do his shopping just across the bridge in Mexico, where goods were cheaper and more plentiful. Now he travels to El Paso. Rosales used to live in El Porvenir. His son still lives there, and Rosales fears for his safety. Recently, when his son came to Fort Hancock for a visit, he returned to Mexico to find his home had been set on fire, though federal police doused the blaze before it engulfed the whole house. Rosales says his son can’t seek asylum in the United States, because he has a family, a job and a home he can’t sell in El Porvenir. “I’m scared for him, but what can I do?” he asks in Spanish. “Nobody’s going to buy that house.”
In a way, Estrada hopes the violence in Mexico continues, because he worries that the cartel leaders will bring their fight north. Already, he says, they have buried too many people from El Porvenir. “It’s hard over there, but poor people can’t come over here,” he says. Since the Morales Lerma funeral, Estrada and Rosales say the number of uniformed officers in the region has spiked. And the board that oversees the cemetery has for the most part stopped burials from Mexico. The two say they feel safer.
The cemetery board now enforces a longstanding rule that only people who lived in town, or had a relative there, could be buried in the Fort Hancock Cemetery, says Mary Miller, a member of the board. “It’s real sad, because I have friends over there who … encourage people from here not to come over there, because they’re shooting people at funerals,” Miller says.
No one’s real sure how many people are buried among the tall, skinny pine trees and sparse brush of the cemetery. In the 1950s or 1960s, Miller says, a flood exhumed many of the bodies, and they floated away. What they do know, she says, is that the cemetery is too small to accommodate the death toll across the border. “The way they’re killing ‘em in Juárez and El Porvenir,” she explains, “there wouldn’t be any room left.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)