National Immigration Forum: CLEAR Update

CLEAR advocacy update
Date: 1/31/2004 4:20:54 AM China Standard Time
From: ltramonte [at] immigrationforum.org

1) CLEAR Act and Homeland Security Enhancement Act: State of play
2) New advocacy materials on the Web
3) New contact for information and ideas


1) The CLEAR Act and Its Senate Companion: Where Do These Proposals Stand in
the 2nd Session of the 108th Congress?

We left off last year with co-sponsorship of the CLEAR Act (Clear Law
Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act, H.R. 2671) in the House holding steady at
112 members of Congress, and with a Senate version (Homeland Security
Enhancement Act, S. 1906) having just been introduced by Senators Jeff Sessions
(R-AL) and Zell Miller (D-GA). The House had already held a hearing on the
legislation in the Immigration Subcommittee of the Judiciary, and the Senate
Immigration Subcommittee had scheduled and postponed a hearing on this topic several
times (for reasons unrelated to the bill). Our advocacy was breaking through
in a major way in the House of Representatives, and Congressional staff were
increasingly able to articulate who (police, state/local governments,
faith-based organizations, civil rights groups, immigrants' rights groups, domestic
violence prevention advocates, and many others) oppose the legislation and why.
Now that the legislation is live in the Senate, we need to take these messages
to our senators, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Senate
leadership. We can prevent rapid co-sponsorship of the Senate bill by articulating
the dangerous consequences of this legislation.

Given President Bush's recent immigration proposal, the stakes have been
raised. On January 7th, the President spoke glowingly of the benefits of
immigration to this country and announced principles for a temporary worker program
for undocumented workers to obtain temporary work permits for three years,
renewable for a total of six years, but with no path to permanent residency. He
called on members of Congress to enact this proposal this year, but did not
indicate a plan for moving his principles forward and having legislation
introduced. Since the President's announcement, an immigration reform bill was
introduced by Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Tom Daschle (D-SD) and the House
Democrats have all endorsed principles of comprehensive immigration reform.

While there is significant bipartisan support for pro-immigrant proposals
like the DREAM Act/Student Adjustment Act and AgJOBS, some members of congress
may seek to "balance" themselves by supporting a proposal that is seen as
"pro-law enforcement" or tough on immigration law violators. This consideration was
illustrated in stark relief by Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) who, following the
President's announcement, said that he supports the President's principles,
AgJOBS, and the Homeland Security Enhancement Act (the Senate version of CLEAR).
Senator Craig said that "[the HSEA] is a common-sense concept supported by
local law enforcement in Idaho and across the nation, and effective enforcement
of our laws is critical to the success of any comprehensive immigration
reform in our country" (press release, 1/7/2004). Almost immediately after this
announcement, advocates in Idaho (lead by the National Immigration Law Center)
met with the senator's staff and were told that he had not yet made up his mind
about signing on to the bill. But the fact that Senator Craig points to HSEA
as his enforcement plan shows that we have to start educating senators about
the dangers of this bill before they label it a viable enforcement trade-off.


The irony of all of this is that when President Bush announced his principles
for immigration reform on January 7th, he clearly indicated that he
understands the problem with having a large group of immigrants fear contact with local
police. He said that by giving immigrant workers legal status, "Law
enforcement will face fewer problems with undocumented workers, and will be better
able to focus on the true threats to our nation from criminals and terrorists. .
. . Temporary workers will be able to establish their identities by obtaining
the legal documents we all take for granted. And they will be able to talk
openly to authorities, to report crimes when they are harmed, without the fear
of being deported" (White House policy announcement, January 7, 2004).

One would like to believe that members of Congress have heard these words and
understood that the CLEAR Act and the Homeland Security Enhancement Act are
counter to the President's goals, in addition to being counter-productive law
enforcement. However, the example of Senator Craig shows that this is not the
case. That's why it's even more important now that our arguments are heard in
both chambers of Congress, and that we feature the reasons why this proposal
is dangerous law enforcement. Even if we succeed in keeping senators off of
the bill itself, portions of the legislation could be carved up if it comes
time to make a deal on immigration reform. We have to make sure this legislation
is so "radio-active" that senators stay away from it entirely.

As far as next steps in Congress, the Senate Immigration Subcommittee remains
committed to holding a hearing on the legislation in the early part of 2004.
They will be distracted by hearings on immigration reform and temporary
workers, so it is impossible to say right now when the hearing may take place. We
encourage you to weigh in with your senators and others on the Immigration
Subcommittee now, organize coalitional advocacy, and ask your local police and
state/local government allies to make their views known to Congress. For those
with nationwide networks or who work across cities/states/regions, a "target"
list of senators and representatives has been developed to help you prioritize
your advocacy. See below for contact information of the subcommittee members
and for more on the target list.

In addition to a new focus on the Senate, we should refresh our strategy for
the House. Since the House Immigration Subcommittee already held a hearing on
this legislation, their next likely step would be to schedule a line-by-line
review and "mark-up" of the bill. At the mark-up, the subcommittee will vote
on whether to send this bill to the full Judiciary committee for consideration
or not. The House Immigration Subcommittee is not a friendly environment for
us on this issue, but we could conceivably win a vote there if all of our
allies are present. The goal is for it not to get this far. Again, weighing in
with your representatives, members of the subcommittee, and representatives on
the target list with whom you have a link is all crucial, as is encouraging
police and state/local government allies to do the same. See below for contact
information of the subcommittee members and for more about this target list.



2) New Materials to Help You Fight Against CLEAR and Support Strong Local
Policies
The Forum's web site features new and updated materials to help you advocate
against the CLEAR Act/Homeland Security Enhancement Act AND call for local
policies that prohibit police enforcement of immigration laws.

At http://www.immigrationforum.org/currentissues/clear.htm you will find the
materials below, along with many others:

(N.B. the materials are being uploaded today; check back on Monday if the
updates are not yet visible)

CLEAR Act and HSEA Information
· Updated talking points suitable for both the Senate and House bills
· Summaries of both bills (by National Immigration Law Center)
· Expanded talking points on the Senate ID provisions (by National
Council of La Raza and National Immigration Law Center)

Other Advocacy Tools
· ·Contact information for key members of Congress (in Washington, DC)
· A sample action alert you can adapt for your community (by Hate Free
Zone Campaign of Washington)
· An updated quotes page
· Lists of police departments, state/local governments, federal
policy-makers, and others opposed to police enforcement of immigration laws and/or
the two bills before Congress (H.R. 2671 and S. 1906)
· Documents for domestic violence prevention advocates (via National
Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild)

The Forum and National Immigration Law Center have also created some
documents that will help you advocate strategically against police enforcement of
immigration laws at the local, state, and federal levels. These documents, while
not visible from a public web site, are available through the links below.
They are:
· General advocacy guidance
(http://www.immigrationforum.org/CurrentIssues/articles/Advocacyideas.pdf)

· A list of key Congressional targets
(http://www.immigrationforum.org/CurrentIssues/articles/CLEAR-HSEAtargetlist.pdf)

· An updated list of localities that have passed resolutions or
ordinances against police enforcement of federal immigration laws (by
National Immigration Law Center)
(http://www.nilc.org/immlawpolicy/LocalLaw/Local_Law_Enforement_Chart_FINAL.pdf)

The advocacy "questions and answers" document gives you a starting point for
organized campaigns and constituent advocacy; contact the National Immigration
Forum (ltramonte [at] immigrationforum.org) for more information and ideas.

The target list includes members of Congress who are in leadership or
committee positions, who may have "something to lose" if the legislation passes (like
State Criminal Alien Assistance Program funds), who might be achievable
"unusual allies," or who otherwise need to hear from constituents before deciding
to support or oppose the legislation. We urge you to look at this target list
and think about your local networks. If you know people in these states and
districts who oppose the legislation, work with them to send letters, make
phone calls, and request meetings with these important members of Congress. If
you have a state-wide or regional scope as an organization, the target list
exists to help you prioritize your lobbying efforts. Again, contact the Forum
(ltramonte [at] immigrationforum.org) if you have any questions.

The list of places that have passed local resolutions or ordinances
demonstrates our power, and suggests how we can use local successes to defeat federal
proposals that would undermine these victories. This list is also invaluable
for advocates seeking to propose (or defend) local ordinances in their areas of
the country. More information on ordinances and resolutions can be obtained
from the National Immigration Law Center, which compiled this very
comprehensive listing. Email Anita Sinha of NILC (sinha [at] nilc.org) for more information
or with questions on ordinance/resolution content, strategy, or organizing.


3) New Contact for Information and Ideas
Anita Sinha recently joined the National Immigration Law Center and has
volunteered to be a resource for local advocates working on state or local
ordinances/resolutions. Feel free to contact Anita with questions about local
ordinance campaigns and related issues at sinha [at] nilc.org. To share information/ideas
or ask questions about anti-CLEAR advocacy, copycat local proposals, or other
topics, contact Lynn at the National Immigration Forum
(ltramonte [at] immigrationforum.org). And to subscribe to this email list (to receive future updates,
materials, and conference call announcements) email Lynn.

Lynn Tramonte
Senior Policy/Communications Associate
National Immigration Forum
50 F Street, NW
Suite 300
Washington, DC 20001
direct phone 202.383.5993
main phone 202.347.0040
fax 202.347.0058
http://www.immigrationforum.org