Usa, immigrazione, movimenti, LA Nyt 06-03-29
La divisione dei repubblicani
sull’immigrazione è il riflesso dello scontro a livello nazionale
RACHEL L. SWARNS
[seguono sitensi da altri articoli anche del WSWS]
I repubblicani al Senato si sono espressi a favore della
legalizzazione degli immigrati illegali: importante fonte di forza lavoro e di
potenziali elettori e futuri cittadini americani; possono essere integrati
nella società americana quelli che lavorano, pagano le tasse e imparano
l’inglese.
Alcuni repubblicani mettono in guardia dai contraccolpi
elettorali: nel 2004 gli ispanici nati all’estero hanno appoggiato Bush per il
40% più di quelli nati negli USA.
I repubblicani della Camera sono contrari (in dicembre hanno
approvato una legge che criminalizza la loro presenza negli USA): sono invasori
che violano la legge e mettono a rischio sicurezza nazionale, posti di lavoro e
cultura americani.
Correnti conservatrici parlano addirittura di erigere un
muro lungo il confine con il Messico.
La prossima settimana sarà votata dal Congresso una legge
complessiva…
Dati sull’immigrazione negli USA:
–
Oggi 33 mn. di residenti nati all’estero, nel 2003 pari
all’11,7% della popolazione americana, la maggior quota dal 1910.
–
Dal 1990 ondate di immigrati in zone del Sud e del
Midwest dove da generazioni non si erano avute.
–
1970: 9,6mn. di residenti in USA nati all’estero;
–
1980: 14,1 mn.;
–
1990: 19,8 mn.;
–
2000: 31,1 mn.
–
1970-2000 + 21,5mn, +223%
–
Negli ultimi anni vi è stato un forte aumento di leggi
contro l’immigrazione illegale; il 28 febbraio 2006 42 stati hanno introdotto
368 leggi su immigrazione e immigrati, molte delle quali finalizzate a limitare
o vietare l’immigrazione illegale.
Wsws 06-03-27
Più di un milione in marcia a
Los Angeles, e in altre città americane in difesa dei diritti degli immigrati
Ramon Valle e Rafael Azul
25 marzo 2006: più di ½ milione ha manifestato a Los Angeles
per protestare contro gli attacchi governativi contro gli immigrati, in
particolare quelli senza documenti. (Gli organizzatori parlano di 1 mn).
La manifestazione è stata sponsorizzata da CARECEN (Central
American Rescource center), dalla Mexican American Political Association, dalla
gerarchia della Chiesa cattolica e da gruppi locali di latino-americani e asiatico-americani.
Già l’11 marzo a Chicago avevano marciato 100 000
lavoratori e simpatizzanti.
Altre manifestazioni: Denver, Colorado, 50 000;
Phoenix, Arizona, 20 000; Charlotte, North Carolina, Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
Sacramento, California, migliaia.
La maggioranza dei manifestanti era di giovani lavoratori
ispanici e latino-americani, rappresentanti del proletariato del Sud
California.
–
La Camera dei rappresentanti ha approvato a dicembre una
nuova legislazione, la HR3447, nota come
Sensenbrenner-King Bill perché il principale fautore è stato il
repubblicano del Wisconsin James Sensenbrenner.
–
Essa trasforma in reato da codice penale l’immigrazione
illegale e il suo utilizzo come forza lavoro, e criminalizza tutti coloro che
aiutano gli immigrati illegali, compresi servizi sociali, associazioni
caritatevoli, etc.
–
Essa richiederebbe la costruzione di una barriera lunga
700 miglia lungo il confine tra USA e Messico.
Motivazioni dei senatori repubblicani contrari alla legge:
–
le imprese hanno bisogno che gli immigrati continuino a
lavorare;
–
contraccolpi elettorali da parte di elettori latino e
asiatici, soprattutto in Texas e Florida, che hanno una forte percentuale di
immigrati.
–
Una proposta di legge
bipartisan, presentata dal democratico Edward Kennedy, Massachusetts e dal
repubblicano John McCain, Arizona, ha l’approvazione della maggior parte dei
democratici e parte dei repubblicani;
l’amministrazione Bush è favorevole in particolare al suo programma per
i lavoratori ospiti temporanei: milioni di immigrati verrebbero trasformati in
forza lavoro a breve termine e facilmente sfruttabile.
I lavoratori sans papier potrebbero divenire cittadini
americani dopo alcuni anni, se pagano una multa, soddisfano a certe condizioni
di lavoro e imparano l’inglese.
–
Un’altra proposta, quella del repubblicano Arlen
Specter presidente della Commissione, più vicina alle posizioni della Casa Bianca, prevede il rientro in patria degli immigrati entrati
nel programma “lavoratori ospiti” dopo 6 anni e la riammissione negli USA dopo
un anno di permanenza nel proprio paese. Gli imprenditori temono però i danni derivanti
dal turn over sulla loro forza lavoro.
–
Altra proposta, della senatrice democratica
californiana Feinstein, denuncia la scarsa applicazione delle leggi
sull’immigrazione e chiede che la nuova legislazione faccia eccezione per i braccianti
agricoli, perché l’economia della California collasserebbe altrimenti.
Nessun rappresentante politico dei due partiti appoggia i
diritti degli immigrati, rivolti alla destra xenofoba tutti proclamano la
necessità di «difendere i nostri confini», mentre cercano di soddisfare le
esigenze dei grandi gruppi di forza lavoro a basso costo.
In diversi stati sono state di recente introdotte leggi che
permettono l’arresto di immigrati che entrano illegalmente, o che non consentono
a immigrati illegali l’acquisto di abitazioni, l’assistenza sanitaria e la frequenza
scolastica ai figli.
Nyt 06-03-27
Passa in senato una legge che estende
la legge sulla immigrazione
RACHEL L. SWARNS
La
commissione giustizia del senato ha approvato una legge che legalizza gli
immigrati illegali (12 voti a favore: 4 repubblicani e tutti gli 8
democratici; 6 repubblicani contrari). La legge sarà sottoposta al voto
dell’intero senato. [Una sintesi delle proposte Kennedy-McCain, Feinstein e Arlen
Specter]
La commissione ha approvato anche un ampio programma per i
lavoratori temporanei che permetterebbe a circa 400 000 stranieri l’anno
di immigrare negli USA,
–
consentendo dopo 6 anni di richiedere la residenza
permanente, e dopo altri 5 anni di richiedere la cittadinanza;
–
se disoccupato per 60 giorni o più nei primi 6 anni,
l’immigrato deve tornare nel suo paese. I datori di lavoro possono chiedere un
permesso permanente per l’immigrato dopo 6 mesi
di adesione al programma.
–
La legge accoglie le norme sulla sicurezza dei confini
previsti dalla legge già approvata a dicembre 2005 dalla Camera controllata dai
repubblicani, e prevedendo allo scopo il quasi raddoppio degli agenti di
confine per i prossimi 5 anni, accelerando le pratiche per la deportazione di
immigrati illegali provenienti da paesi diversi dal Messico.
–
La nuova proposta di legge elimina la criminalizzazione
degli immigrati illegali e di chi li aiuta, presente nella legge di dicembre.
–
Se approvata sarà il più ampio programma per i
lavoratori ospiti dal programma “bracero” che portò 4,2 mn. di braccianti
messicani dal 1942 al 1960.
–
Il
progetto della commissione del senato è stato accolto favorevolmente dai
democratici, da un gruppo di repubblicani e leader del mondo economico, dalle
organizzazioni per gli immigrati e da gruppi religiosi.
–
Le
nutrite manifestazioni delle scorse settimane di lavoratori e studenti,
sponsorizzate anche da gruppi economici e associazioni religiose, hanno
favorito l’approvazione del progetto.
Il presidente Bush ha più volte chiesto un programma per i
lavoratori temporanei per legalizzare gli immigrati illegali, senza
un’amnistia.
Il senatore democratico Kennedy parlando delle persone che
trarrebbero beneficio dalla legge: sono «nostri vicini di casa […] Gente che va
in chiesa. Sono i negozianti del rione. Sono la gente che conosciamo.»
Wsws 06-03-29
Mentre continuano le
manifestazioni di massa, i repubblicani si dividono sulla legge
anti-immigrazione
Patrick Martin
La legge approvata dalla Commissione giustizia del senato
segue per lo più la proposta del democratico Kennedy e del repubblicano McCain,
con tacita approvazione della Casa Bianca:
–
la Commissione ha recepito un emendamento della
democratica californiana a favore degli agrari, che consente a 1,5 milione di
braccianti di lavorare nell’agricoltura ma non di vasara ad altri settori.
–
I 4 repubblicani che hanno votato a favore:
o
il presidente Arlen Specter e Lindsey Graham del
Sud Carolina, uno stato con grandi interessi agrari;
o
Sam Brownback del Kansas, la cui industria di
lavorazione della carne utilizza per lo più forza lavoro immigrata;
o
Michael DeWine dell’Ohio, uno dei più
vulnerabili candidati per la rielezione del prossimo novembre.
–
La legge approvata dalla Commissione giustizia non
garantisce diritti aggiuntivi agli immigrati e non è un’amnistia per gli immigrati
attuali illegali;
–
è di fatto una legge per i diritti del padronato per lo
sfruttamento dei lavoratori illegali mantenendoli in condizioni di sudditanza;
–
gli attuali lavoratori immigrati illegali devono pagare
una multa e far la coda per la green card, ma solo se sponsorizzati dal loro
datore di lavoro.
–
Il padrone ha così una forte leva contro qualsiasi loro
richiesta di miglioramento salariale o di condizioni di lavoro, o tentativo di
organizzazione sindacale assieme ai compagni di classe nati in USA.
Nei 5 anni in carica Bush ha vantato di avere fatto
arrestare e deportare 6 milioni di immigrati. La preoccupazione per
l’elettorato ispanico ha posto in conflitto la Casa Bianca con parte dei repubblicani
della Camera, capeggiati da Tom Tancredo del Colorado che progetta una campagna
elettorale per le presidenziali 2008 rivolta agli anti-immigrazione.
Wsws 06-03-30
Migliaia di studenti scioperano
nel Sud California per protesta contro la legislazione anti-immigrazione
Ramón Valle
Dopo la grande Marcia dei lavoratori a Los Angeles
40 000 studenti in sciopero, 25 000 solo a Los Angeles.
Le manifestazioni spontanee, organizzate dagli stessi studenti,
sono state più ampie di quelle del 1994 contro la proposta di legge 187, poi bloccata
dalla corte, istituita con un referendum che negava ai lavoratori illegali i
servizi sociali, le cure mediche e l’istruzione; più ampie anche di quelle per
i diritti dei Chicano e contro la guerra del Vietnam nel 1968.
In alcune scuole anche il personale scolastico ha aderito
alle manifestazioni; alcuni funzionari scolastici hanno annunciato la chiusura
dei cancelli scolastici dopo l’inizio delle elezioni per impedire l’adesione alle
manifestazioni sciopero; la polizia
intende iniziare ad arrestare gli studenti per assenteismo, applicare multe e
obbligare a prestare servizio comunitario fino a 20 giorni.
Nyt 06-03-31
Bush assicura il leader messicano
del suo appoggio agli immigrati
GINGER
THOMPSON e DAVID E. SANGER
Bush ha assicurato il presidente messicano Vincente Fox del
suo appoggio alle proposte di legalizzazione degli immigrati illegali, senza
però avvantaggiarli rispetto a quelli entrati legalmente.
La questione degli immigrati è sempre stata centrale per i
due presidenti; l’economia messicana dipende fortemente dalle commesse degli
immigrati, $16 MD. l’anno.
Alla sua entrata in carica 5 anni fa’ Fox invitò Bush a cooperare su proposte
di apertura delle frontiera; ora ritiene che la legge sull’immigrazione dipende
dal Congresso e non più dal presidente Bush il cui consenso è oggi ai minimi.
Nyt 06-03-29
Republican Split on Immigration Reflects Nation’s Struggle
By RACHEL L. SWARNS
WASHINGTON, March 28 — It is almost as
if they are looking at two different Americas.
–
The Senate Republicans who voted on Monday to legalize the nation’s
illegal immigrants look at the waves of immigration
reshaping this country and see
a powerful work force, millions of potential voters and future Americans.
–
The House Republicans who backed tough border security legislation in December look at the same group of people and see a flood of invaders and
lawbreakers who threaten national security and American jobs and culture.
But both wings of the deeply divided Republican Party are
responding to the same phenomenon: the demographic shift driven by
immigration in recent decades, a wave that is quietly transforming small
towns and cities across the country and underscoring pressures on many parts of
the economy.
– The United States
has always been a nation of immigrants, but today the country has more than 33 million foreign-born residents,
the largest number since the Census started keeping such statistics in 1850. In 2003, foreign-born residents made up 11.7 percent of the population, the
highest percentage since 1910. And over the past 16 years, the
newcomers, many of them illegal, have
poured into places in the South and Midwest
that have not seen sizeable numbers of
new immigrants in generations.
The question of how to cope with the 11
million illegal immigrants believed to be living here — whether to integrate
them, ignore them or try to send them home somehow — is a question gripping
many ordinary citizens, religious leaders, state legislators and policy makers
in the White House. And in their bitter, fractious debate, Republicans in
Congress are reflecting what some describe as the nation’s struggle to define
itself and, to some degree, politically align itself, during a period of social
change.
– The Senate Republicans on the Judiciary Committee who emerged victorious on Monday with help from Democrats argue that those illegal immigrants who work, pay taxes and learn English should
be fully incorporated into American society as citizens.
– The House Republicans who passed a far different bill in December
are pushing to criminalize their presence in the United States. (The full Senate is expected to vote on
immigration legislation next week. Any bill that passes the Senate will have to
be reconciled with the House legislation.)
As the party struggles to reconcile
these competing visions, frustrations over the stalemate are spilling onto the
airwaves and into the streets as some
conservatives on talk radio call for a wall to be built along the Mexican
border and tens of thousands
immigrants and their supporters march in favor of citizenship.
"Right now, we’re seeing to some
extent the political response to the demography," said Roberto Suro,
executive director of the Pew Hispanic
Center, a nonpartisan research group in Washington. "And even though the
legislative proposals are seemingly technical and narrow, they touch these
nerves about how we think of ourselves as a people."
"You end up, after a point, trying to balance our fundamental
traditions, the need for order, law and security with a need for
openness," he said. "Immigration policy, writ large, has always been
partly a matter of national identity. It becomes a values-laden debate.
Congress has a hard time with it."
That difficulty reflects, in part, the
swiftness and the
enormousness of the demographic shift.
– In 1970, there were 9.6 million foreign-born residents in the
country, census data show. By 1980, that figure had surged to 14.1 million.
Between 1990 and 2000, the number of foreign-born residents jumped to 31.1
million from 19.8 million.
Senator
Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, who voted for
the legalization of illegal immigrants on Monday, says he has seen and felt the
shift in his own state.
"Huge increase," he said of
the number of new immigrants. "It’s a big issue, and it’s one where
communities that have adapted to it are more accepting and others are more
questioning about the scale of what’s taking place."
But when he wrestled with the issue, Mr.
Brownback decided that he could not join the ranks of those who wanted
simply to push out illegal immigrants. "This is also about the
hallmark of a compassionate society,
what you do with the widows, the orphans and the foreigners among you," he
said.
Senator
Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina,
echoed those thoughts in his defense of the legalization program, which would ultimately grant immigrants
citizenship.
"Where is home?" Mr. Graham
asked his colleagues Monday. "Their home is where they’ve raised their
children. Their home is where they’ve lived their married lives."
"Whatever we do," he added,
"we have to recognize that for several generations people have made America
their home."
But to Representative Tom Tancredo, the Colorado
Republican who helped spearhead the border security bill in the House, illegal immigrants are far from welcome or
essential to this country.
He was not moved when he saw the tens of
thousands of immigrants, some illegal, and their supporters rallying against
his bill. He said he was outraged that people he viewed as lawbreakers felt
comfortable enough to stand without fear in front of the television cameras.
"For years, the government has
turned a blind eye to illegal immigrants who break into this country," Mr.
Tancredo said. "It isn’t any wonder that illegal aliens now act as if they
are entitled to the rights and privileges of citizenship."
Mr. Tancredo’s view of the illegal
immigrant as an unwanted outsider, an encroacher, is far from uncommon.
The National Conference of State Legislatures has reported a surge in
recent years in legislation intended to crack down on illegal immigrants. As of Feb. 28, state
legislators in 42 states had introduced 368 bills related to immigration or
immigrants, and many of those bills were intended to limit or restrict illegal
immigrants.
– But some Republicans
are warning now that tough anti-immigrant legislation may fuel a backlash and
threaten the party’s hard-won gains with Hispanics, whose numbers have surged
in recent years.
– Foreign-born Hispanics
voted for President Bush in 2004 at a 40 percent greater rate than Hispanics
born in the United States.
– Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and a strategist close to
the White House, warned that Republicans
could squander what the party had gained if lawmakers did not embrace a
more welcoming vision of America.
"There is a danger that if the face
of the Republican Party is Tancredo that we could be weaker with Hispanics for
generations," Mr. Norquist said. "If the face of the Republican Party
is George Bush or Ronald Reagan, we win. This is up for grabs."
New York Times
Wsws 06-03-27
More than a
million march in Los Angeles, other US cities in
defense of immigrant rights
By Ramon Valle
and Rafael Azul
In the largest demonstration in California’s history,
–
well over half a million people marched through downtown Los Angeles on Saturday,
March 25, in defense of immigrant rights and to protest the government attacks
on immigrants, especially undocumented workers.
The demonstration was the culmination
of two weeks of protest demonstrations against new federal legislation,
passed by the House of Representatives and scheduled to be taken up Monday by
the US Senate, which would make illegal immigration a felony crime, as well
as criminalizing all those who help illegal immigrants—including social
service and charity workers who operate soup kitchens, homeless shelters and
emergency clinics.
The scale of the demonstrations has
staggered the political establishment in the United States, while going largely
unreported by the American media. Not until the mammoth turnout in Los Angeles Saturday did
the national television networks even report on the protests.
–
Another 50,000 people
marched on Saturday in Denver,
Colorado, in what was likely the largest demonstration in that city’s
history.
–
Twenty thousand marched in
Phoenix, Arizona, rallying outside the offices of
US Senator Jon Kyl, who has introduced his own version of the punitive
anti-immigrant legislation. It was the largest demonstration in the history of
the state.
–
Thousands more marched in
cities as far-flung as Charlotte, North Carolina; Milwaukee,
Wisconsin; and Sacramento, California.
–
In the biggest such protest
before Los Angeles, more than 100,000 immigrant
workers and their supporters rallied in downtown Chicago on March 11.
According to organizers, the total
number participating in the Los Angeles
march may have exceeded 1 million. Throughout the day, thousands of new protesters
joined the march, causing Spanish-language network UNIVISION to arrive at an
estimate of 2 million.
–
The demonstration was sponsored by CARECEN (Central American Resource
Center), the Mexican
American Political Association, the Catholic Church hierarchy and local groups
in the Latin American and Asian-American communities.
So large was the Los Angeles
demonstration that it took even the organizers by surprise, and the police, which had originally designated Broadway for the
march, had to open adjacent streets to accommodate the endless stream of
people, who then flooded adjacent Spring and Main Streets.
The spirited march, comprising in its overwhelming majority Hispanic
and Latin American young working men and women—auto mechanics, dry-wall
installers, assemblers, construction workers, nurses, garage attendants, street
cleaners, waiters, bus boys, parking lot attendants, maids, janitors; in fact
representatives of Southern California’s labor force—began at Olympic
Boulevard and ended at City Hall 20 blocks away.
Among the signs that were prominently
and repeatedly displayed by the marchers were, “Please, Let Us Be Part of
Your Dreams,” “We Are the Same, Ordinary People Like You,” “We Are Not
Criminals,” “Amnesty and Full Rights For All Immigrants,” “We are Not
Criminals; We Are Students, Parents, and Neighbors,” “I’m in My Homeland,” “We
Are Not the Enemy; We are Part of the Solution,” “The United States: Land of
Liberty, Land of Immigrants,” “We Are All Immigrants in This Country,” “Working
Is Not a Crime,” and “No to HR3447.”
Along the march, the WSWS interviewed
many workers.
Referring to HR3447, the
anti-immigrant law before Congress, R.D., a young drywall finisher from Riverside County, said, “I am an undocumented
worker. I came to this country to get a better life for myself and my family.
This is supposed to be the land of freedom. I work very hard and I pay my
taxes. I help the American economy. Why shouldn’t I work here? I am part of America.
Everybody at work lives in fear. Is that the way it’s supposed to be here? And
now, with this new law they are proposing it’s going to be worse. That’s why I
am here today. I never imagined I’d be marching for freedom in the United States.”
–
HR3447 was one of the main targets of the protest. It is
also known as the Sensenbrenner-King Bill, which the House of Representatives
passed last December under the main sponsorship of Wisconsin Republican James
Sensenbrenner.
–
Not only would it crack down
on employers and businesses that hire undocumented immigrants, but it would
also make anyone who assists them, or anyone who enters this country illegally,
a felon. It would also expand enforcement of the
law all along the border between the United and Mexico, which means erecting a
fence 700 miles long.
While the bill had the support of the
House Republican leadership, both the Senate Republican leadership and the Bush administration
have expressed reservations, based on two concerns:
–
objections from business
interests that need immigrant workers to keep operating;
–
and fears of a backlash at
the polls from Latino and Asian voters, especially in states like California, Texas and Florida, which have
large immigrant populations.
–
A bipartisan bill sponsored by Democrat Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Republican John McCain of Arizona has attracted
the most Democratic Party support, as well as some
Republicans, and it has features favored by the Bush administration,
including a temporary guest worker program, which would turn millions of
immigrants into a short-term, easily exploited labor force.
No big-business politician in either
party supports the democratic right of immigrant
workers to live and work in the country of their choice. All of them proclaim
the need to “defend our borders,” as though the United States were being invaded by
a hostile army, in order to appeal to right-wing anti-immigrant sentiment.
At the same time, they seek to reconcile such appeals with the need of big
business to maintain access to cheap labor.
The disputes among the Republicans
and Democrats, which do not break clearly along
party lines, involve different estimates of how far it is practical to
go in harassing and deporting undocumented workers. The McCain-Kennedy bill
would allow employers to sponsor workers for permanent immigrant status.
Those undocumented workers already in the country would be able to become
immigrants and citizens after an undetermined number of years, provided they
pay a fine, meet certain work requirements and learn to speak English.
–
Senator Arlen Specter, chairman
of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is crafting a compromise bill that
would require participants in a guest worker program to leave the United States
after six years. They would have to remain in their country of origin
for one year before being allowed back into the United States. This is closer to
the position of the White House, but still evokes some opposition from employer
groups fearful of the disruptive effect of such a turnover in their labor
force.
– California’s senior Democrat, Senator
Dianne Feinstein, has sought to satisfy both the right-wing law-and-order
demagogues and the agribusiness interests. She denounced allegedly lax
enforcement of immigration laws, saying, “We have tens of thousands of criminal
aliens freely walking the streets of our communities because instead of being
deported to their communities after serving time, they are simply released back
into their communities to commit more crimes.”
– At the same time she
insisted that any new legislation include an exception for farm workers because
California’s
economy, the world’s sixth largest, “would collapse” without such an exception.
Sections of the Republican right wing
see immigrant bashing as the next “wedge issue” to be exploited in the 2006
elections. One Republican congressman, Tom Tancredo of Colorado, is exploring a possible
presidential campaign on that basis.
–
State legislatures in
several states have introduced bills that would allow immigrants to be arrested
for trespassing—making immigration a state rather
than a federal matter—or making it illegal for undocumented workers to buy
homes, receive health services or send their children to school.
The marchers in Los Angeles who spoke with the WSWS rejected
the perspective that immigrants should be treated as criminals. A 28-year-old
truck mechanic from San Bernardino
said that “the law is racist, especially directed against Mexicans more than
anyone else. It will criminalize the people that cross the border into the United States,
as well as the people who help them. It will also punish the employers with
jail. The law still hasn’t finalized the details, but generally it will punish
people who come here illegally.
“Right now at work there is an atmosphere
of fear begun to take place because of everything that is happening, because of
the anti-immigrant wave that’s happening in the United States.”
One 26-year-old immigrant, from Michoacán, Mexico,
has been in this country legally for six years. He told the WSWS, “I work at
a chemical plant. I am a machine operator, in charge of the maintenance of
the machines. In the summer I work up to 60 hours. I make 15 dollars an hour.
After six years, that’s nothing. The atmosphere at work is very good. My boss
is a good woman. She really appreciates the Hispanic community.
“We have had no immigration raids. We
are fine. But I am here today because I want to show my support to people.
Maybe I am a little bit better off, but we are all together in this. If we
don’t unite, we are not going to get anything. Some of us may be better off,
but if we don’t help the less fortunate, what’s going to happen to them? We
have to think about other people besides ourselves. That’s why I am here. I
look out for my own welfare, as well as the welfare of those around me.
“It’s difficult to say if the Democratic
Party will help us. Like with all politicians, on election eve, they show a
different face. They say so many things, that they are going to help you, but
when they reach power, they become totally different and they flee.
“I think that my message to the rest of
the American workers is: accept us, and to see us their brothers, because we
are all workers. We can do everything they can do. In fact, we are not afraid
to do the work they refuse to do. I think we are all equal. We have the same
aptitudes and abilities. All we need is an opportunity.”
The political perspective revealed by
the march organizers is to keep this massive response by immigrant workers to
attacks on their civil and political rights within the confines of the
Democratic Party and of protest politics. The list of speakers at City Hall
included LA Mayor Antonio Villarraigosa and other Latino Democrats.
Only the Socialist Equality Party,
however, unconditionally defends the rights of immigrant workers, regardless of
their legal status, and fights to unite American workers with their class
brothers and sisters in Latin America, Asia
and throughout the world in a common struggle against the profit system
Nyt 06-03-27
Bill to
Broaden Immigration Law Gains in Senate
By RACHEL L.
SWARNS
WASHINGTON, March
27 —
–
With Republicans deeply divided, the Senate Judiciary
Committee voted on Monday to legalize the nation’s 11 million illegal
immigrants and ultimately to grant them citizenship, provided that they hold
jobs, pass criminal background checks, learn English and pay fines and back
taxes.
–
The panel also voted to
create a vast temporary worker program that would allow roughly 400,000
foreigners to come to the United
States to work each year and would put them
on a path to citizenship as well.
The
legislation, which the committee sent to the full Senate on a 12-to-6 vote,
represents the most sweeping effort by Congress in decades to grant legal
status to illegal immigrants.
–
If passed, it would create the largest guest worker program
since the bracero program brought 4.6 million Mexican agricultural workers into
the country between 1942 and 1960.
–
Any legislation that passes the
Senate will have to be reconciled with the tough border security bill passed in
December by the Republican-controlled House, which defied President Bush’s call
for a temporary worker plan.
–
The Senate panel’s plan, which also includes provisions
to strengthen border security, was quickly hailed by Democrats, a handful of
Republicans and business leaders, as well as by the immigrant advocacy
organizations and church groups that have sent tens of thousands of supporters
of immigrant rights into the streets of a number of cities to push for such
legislation in recent days.
But even as hundreds of religious
leaders and others rallied on the grounds of the Capitol on Monday, chanting
"Let our people stay!," the
plan was fiercely attacked by conservative Republicans who called it
nothing more than an offer of amnesty for lawbreakers. It remained unclear Monday night whether Senator Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, would allow the bill to go for a vote this
week on the floor or would substitute his own bill, which focuses on border
security. His aides have said that Mr. Frist, who has said he wants a vote
on immigration this week, would be reluctant
to move forward with legislation that did not have the backing of a majority of
the Republicans on the committee.
Only 4 of the 10 Republicans on the committee supported the bill. They were the committee chairman, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, and Senators Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Mike DeWine of Ohio
and Sam Brownback of Kansas.
All eight Democrats on the
committee voted in favor of the legislation.
The rift among Republicans on the
committee reflects the deep divisions in
the party as business groups push to legalize their workers and
conservatives battle to stem the tide of illegal immigration. Mr. Specter
acknowledged the difficulties ahead, saying, "We are making the best of a
difficult situation." But he said he believed that the legislation would
ultimately pass the Senate and would encourage the millions of illegal
immigrants to come out of the shadows.
"We do not want to create a
fugitive class in America,"
Mr. Specter said after the vote. "We do not want to create an underclass
in America."
"I think this represents a
reasonable accommodation," he said, referring to the divergent views on
the panel. "It’s not a majority of the majority, but it’s a good number."
Scott McClellan, the White House
spokesman, said Monday night that President Bush was "pleased to see the Senate moving forward on
legislation." Mr. Bush
has repeatedly called for a temporary worker program that would legalize the
nation’s illegal immigrants, though he has said such a plan must not include amnesty.
"It is a difficult issue that will
require compromise and tough choices, but the important thing at this point is
that the process is moving forward," Mr. McClellan said.
Lawmakers
central to the immigration debate acknowledged that the televised images of tens of thousands of
demonstrators, waving flags and fliers, marching in opposition to tough
immigration legislation helped persuade
the panel to find a bipartisan compromise.
"All of those people who were demonstrating were not
necessarily here illegally," said Senator John McCain, Republican of
Arizona, who sponsored the legalization measures with Senator Edward M.
Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts. Mr. Kennedy described the people who would benefit from the bill as
"our neighbors," adding: "They’re churchgoers. They’re the shop
owners down the street. They’re the people we know."
The protesters were rallying in
opposition to the security bill passed by the House. The House bill would, among other things, make it a
federal crime to live in this country illegally, turning the millions of
illegal immigrants here into felons, ineligible to win any legal status.
(Currently, living in this country without authorization is a violation of
civil immigration law, not criminal law.)
The legislation
passed by the Judiciary Committee on Monday also emphasized border security and
would nearly double the number of Border Patrol agents over the next five years,
criminalize the construction of tunnels
into the United States from
another country and speed the deportation of illegal immigrants from countries
other than Mexico.
But it also softened some of the tougher elements in the House legislation.
Addressing one of the most contentious
issues, the panel voted to
eliminate the provisions that would criminalize immigrants for living here
illegally and made an amendment to protect groups and individuals from being
prosecuted for offering humanitarian assistance to illegal immigrants.
Conservatives
on the committee warned that the plan would
generate a groundswell of opposition among ordinary Americans who had been
demanding tighter controls at the border and an end to the waves of illegal
immigration.
Senator
Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, said the
Judiciary panel "let the American people down by passing out a blanket amnesty bill."
Senator
Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, said the foreign workers would take American jobs
during a recession. "Get ready for a real tough time," Mr. Kyl
said, "when American workers come to your office and say, ‘How did you let
this happen?’ "
–
Under the proposal, participants in the temporary worker
program would have to work for six years before they could apply for a green
card.
–
Any worker who remained unemployed for 60 days or longer
during those six years would be forced to leave the country. (Employers could petition
for permanent residency on behalf of their employees six months after the
worker entered into the program.)
–
The legalization plan for the nation’s illegal immigrants
would require those without documents to work in the United States for six years before
they could apply for permanent residency. They could apply for citizenship five years
after that. Immigrants would have to pay a fine, back taxes and learn
English.
Mr. Graham called it an 11-year journey to citizenship.
"To me that’s not amnesty," he
said. "That is working for the right over an 11-year period to become a
citizen. It is not a blanket pardon."
"The president believes and most of us here believe that the 11 million
undocumented people are also workers," Mr. Graham said. "We couldn’t get by as a
nation without those workers and without those people."
The New York Times
Wsws 06-03-29
As mass
demonstrations continue, Republicans split over anti-immigration bill
By Patrick
Martin
Demonstrations in defense of the rights of immigrants continued in cities
from coast to coast Monday, as the Senate Judiciary Committee agreed to an
immigration bill that would remove many of the most draconian provisions
demanded by the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives.
The
biggest single protest action Monday came in Detroit, where a crowd numbering in the thousands—as many as 50,000, by one police estimate—marched from
a Catholic Church in the Mexicantown area and rallied near the McNamara
Federal Building downtown.
–
The huge crowd carried flags
from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras,
and El Salvador as well as
the United States,
and signs with slogans like “We are not criminals.” An estimated half-million
Latinos, US-born and immigrant, live in the state of Michigan.
–
The rally attracted sympathetic coverage in the local media. Father Russ Kohler, a Roman
Catholic priest in a Hispanic parish, told the Detroit News he was appalled
that under the proposed HR 4437, he could be considered a felon for helping a
needy immigrant. Referring to the indigenous peoples of Mexico and Central America,
he said, “They have been here for 12,000
years and ‘Americans’ have only been here for a few hundred years. Who’s
the invader here?”
Similar rallies took place Sunday and Monday in Boston, where 2,500 supporters of immigrant rights
marched to the Boston Common; Columbus,
Ohio; Oakland and San Francisco, California; and other cities. Boston’s rally was one of the most
variegated, with the crowd including workers from Haiti, El Salvador, Brazil
and Ireland, singing songs, chanting slogans and waving flags. In Washington, DC, some 1,500 immigrants
demonstrated outside the US Capitol, many of them wearing symbolic handcuffs
to denounce the legislation for redefining immigration violations—now
considered civil infractions—as felony crimes.
–
In Los Angeles, scene of one of the
largest demonstrations in US history Saturday, when more than half a million people marched through downtown to
denounce the anti-immigrant legislation, the popular mobilization continued Monday with a series of mass walkouts by
high school students.
An
estimated 40,000 students left classes, blocking
traffic on streets like Sunset Boulevard and Melrose Avenue, and on the
Hollywood, Harbor, Riverside and Santa Ana freeways. The protests spread
through Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Ventura
counties—the whole of urban southern California.
Smaller high school protests were
reported in Dallas, Phoenix
and the suburbs of Washington,
DC.
The mass protests have had an impact in the US capital, reflected in the 12-6
vote on the Senate Judiciary Committee, rejecting the
harshest aspects of the House bill, such as the transformation of immigrant
violations into felonies, and the criminalization of schoolteachers and workers
at social service agencies and healthcare facilities who help undocumented
workers.
–
The bill generally follows the line of the legislation
offered by Democrat Edward Kennedy and Republican John McCain, with the tacit
backing of the Bush White House, providing billions to intensify the
repression of border crossers, including the hiring of thousands of new Border
Patrol and INS agents, as well as a guest worker program that would bring up to
400,000 new immigrant workers into the US each year on a temporary basis.
Despite claims in the media and by some
of the more hysterical anti-immigrant demagogues,
–
the Senate bill is
not an amnesty for undocumented workers and does not grant them any new rights.
–
It is, instead, a virtual bill of rights for employers
who seek to exploit undocumented workers and maintain them in conditions of
subservience.
–
Those workers now in
the United States illegally would be allowed to pay a fine and get in the queue
for a green card, but only if they
were sponsored by their employer.
–
This gives the
employers an enormous club to use against any effort by these cruelly exploited workers to demand higher
wages and benefits, unionize, or otherwise join with US-born workers to
assert their common class interests.
The
Senate bill has a naked class character. It presumes that all immigrants who
will seek legalization under its terms will be wage workers and will remain
wage workers throughout the 11-year period leading to citizenship (6 years to
obtain legal resident status, followed by 5 years to becoming a citizen). If
these immigrants lose their jobs and are unemployed for more than 60 days, they
are subject to immediate deportation.
–
In a special bow to the agribusiness bosses, the committee
adopted an amendment sponsored by California Democrat Diane Feinstein, to
permit 1.5 million agricultural workers to receive special “blue card”
treatment that would allow them to pick fruit and perform other agricultural
labor, but not move on to other jobs.
The 12-6 vote on the Judiciary Committee
was the product of a split in the Republican majority. All 8 Democrats on the
committee voted for the bill, along with 4 Republicans, while 6 Republicans
voted against. This is one of a handful of occasions in the past five years
where the Republican congressional leadership has lost control on an important
issue.
–
The four Republicans on the Judiciary Committee who voted
with the Democrats include the chairman, Arlen Specter, as well as Lindsey
Graham of South Carolina (a state with large agribusiness interests), Sam Brownback
of Kansas (whose meatpacking industry employs a largely immigrant workforce)
and Michael DeWine of Ohio, one of the must vulnerable Republican incumbents in
the Senate, who is up for reelection in November.
–
The split is driven largely by
two factors: the demand by
sections of big business, particularly agribusiness and construction, for a
continued supply of cheap labor; and the fear of an explosive political backlash against the
Republican Party among Hispanic voters, which could wipe out the narrow Republican majorities in both the House and
Senate in the upcoming November
elections.
Both these concerns were reflected in
the comments Monday by President Bush,
who spoke before a group of immigrants receiving their citizenship papers,
mildly criticizing the racist invective of the most vociferous immigrant
bashers among the House Republicans.
While reiterating his determination to
build up the Border Patrol and other repressive agencies, and boasting that 6 million
immigrants had been arrested and deported since he took office five years ago,
Bush added, “The immigration debate should be conducted in a civil and
dignified way. No one should play on people’s fears, or try to pit neighbors
against each other. No one should pretend that immigrants are threats to America’s identity, because immigrants have
shaped America’s
identity. No one should claim that immigrants are a burden on our economy,
because the work and enterprise of immigrants helps sustain our economy.”
These words are remarkably hypocritical,
since the Bush administration has sustained itself politically ever since
September 11 by “playing on people’s fears,” while vilifying political opponents,
particularly critics of the war in Iraq, as dupes or even allies of terrorism.
–
Bush’s key political aides, including Karl Rove, are
particularly concerned that a sharp swing against the Republicans among
Hispanic voters in states like Florida, Texas and California
could cost them control of the House and Senate.
In a speech to the ultra-right Federalist Society last week, former Republican National
Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie called anti-immigration rhetoric “a political
siren song” and warned that “our majority will crash on its shoals.” He added, “The Republican majority already rests too
heavily on white voters.”
This has brought the White House into conflict with a section of House
Republicans, spearheaded by Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado, who is planning a presidential
campaign in 2008 based on appeals to anti-immigrant bigotry. Tancredo denounced the mass protests against his bill, saying,
“Illegal aliens now act as if they are entitled to the rights and privileges of
citizenship.”
The Senate Republican leadership is
itself split, with Specter aligning himself with the White House, while Senate
Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee—bypassing
the Judiciary Committee—has threatened to introduce his own immigration bill
that would not include a guest worker program and would incorporate many of the
repressive provisions of the legislation passed by the House.
Wsws 06-03-30
Thousands
of students walk out of schools in Southern California
to protest anti-immigration legislation
By Ramón Valle
On the heels of the massive march in Los
Angeles last Saturday to defend the rights of immigrants, some 40,000 high school students
walked out of classes throughout southern California Monday to protest legislation
pending in Congress that would criminalize undocumented workers and those who
aid them. The walkout continued on Tuesday.
–
In the Los Angeles school district alone, 52 middle
and high schools were affected by the walkout of almost 25,000 students. According to several
news sources, the protests and marches that began in Los Angeles’s mammoth school district, second
largest in the nation, spread quickly to other nearby counties, including Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino.
Though the marches were mostly peaceful,
traffic came to a brief halt on some of Los Angeles’s
main arteries, such as the Hollywood
and Harbor Freeways that cut through downtown. The student marches that
followed the spontaneous walkouts also disrupted traffic along well-known
streets such as Sunset Boulevard, Melrose
Avenue and Laurel Canyon Boulevard.
A 4,000-strong march and demonstration
in the San Fernando Valley section of the city began at the government
headquarters in the Van Nuys district and marched for about a mile and a half
to the Panorama City mall.
On Tuesday in Los Angeles,
despite heavy rains, approximately 8,800 high school students left their
classrooms to protest. At a meeting with student leaders and
demonstrators, Antonio Villaraigosa, the Hispanic mayor of LA, was booed when
he called upon students to return to school.
According to participants, the reception
the marches and demonstrations received along the way was overwhelming, with
most motorists honking their support. The protests even included Pacific
Palisades, one of the wealthiest and most exclusive enclaves in Los Angeles.
–
The spontaneous demonstrations, loosely organized
as they were, were far larger than those that took place in 1994
against Proposition 187, the state law (later overturned by the courts)
established by referendum, which denied undocumented workers social services,
healthcare and public education, and even the famous student walkout for Chicano
rights and against the Vietnam War in 1968.
City Hall in downtown—the same place
that had served as the culmination of the 1,000,000-strong march two days
before—saw the gathering at noon of thousands of young people.
Though the demonstrations were mostly
peaceful, there were a few arrests. In the city of Escondido,
in San Diego County, police arrested about 25 people
when they refused to disperse. Riot-equipped police in Riverside arrested six young people and one
adult after scuffles. And in Van Nuys, in Los Angeles County,
four people were arrested.
At Fairfax High School, near
the Hollywood district of Los Angeles, the atmosphere was decidedly
different and more ominous, as hundreds of students protesting HR 4437, the
anti-immigration bill passed by the House of Representatives, confronted dozens
of police in riot gear who kept the trunks of their cars open, apparently
to have easy access to their weapons. Police cars blocked access to the
area, and three helicopters circled above.
A group of about 200 students gathered
away from the police, jumped over a fence and began a walking demonstration
along Melrose Avenue
going east.
According the students who spoke to the
WSWS, the spontaneous
demonstration took place to express their indignation at the anti-immigration
measure. It was organized by the students themselves through emails, fliers,
instant messages, cell phones, beepers and postings on myspace.com web pages.
In many instances, school staff also abandoned the schools and joined the
students in the demonstrations.
When the WSWS asked one of the students
if the demonstration was mostly Latino, he said, “We’re getting support from
non-Latinos. It is Hispanic-based, but non-Hispanic students have not
objected.”
On Tuesday, the WSWS went back to the
school and asked one of the students about the changes in the immigration
law that had taken place on Monday, apparently because Congress had retreated
in the face of the demonstrations that had taken place throughout the
country.
“Well, now it’s supposed not to
criminalize people who help people who enter the country illegally, but from
what I understand, it
still punishes those who are here illegally. And that’s not fair. Let me ask
you this: did anybody ask the United States
to go into Iraq
and kill thousands of people? Isn’t the United States government an illegal
alien force in that country? Who the hell asked the United
States to go into Iraq? Who asked Bush?
“Do you see illegal aliens from Latin America
killing thousands of people in this country? No, most of them kill themselves
working for this country, like my parents, who came
from Jalisco [Mexico]
20 years ago. They are good working people who respect the law.
“Besides, let me tell you one thing.
It’s just an accident, a geographical accident that they were born south of the
border. What difference does it make where they were born?”
More student protests and walkouts have
been announced, but some school officials, who stand to see their
budgets cut due to student absenteeism, have announced that schools will be
“on lockdown” over the next few days. That means that once students enter
schools, they will not be allowed to leave.
In addition, LA Police Chief William
Bratton has announced that the police will begin detaining students for
truancy, with punishments in the form of large fines and up to 20 days of
community service.
For some officials, however, converting
the schools into prisons is apparently not enough. Students will not even be
permitted to move from class to class, and will be punished with enforced
attendance and Saturday school.
Nyt 06-03-31
Bush
Reassures Mexico
Leader of His Backing for Immigrants
By GINGER THOMPSON and DAVID E. SANGER
CANCÚN, Mexico, March 30 — President Bush, in an effort to
reassure Mexicans and to defuse an intense debate in the United States, told President Vicente Fox of Mexico on
Thursday that he supported proposals to legalize undocumented workers as long
as they were not given any advantages over immigrants who entered the United
States legally.
"I explained to the president my
vision of the citizenship issue," Mr. Bush said, as Mr. Fox sat next to
him during their summit meeting here. "If they want to become a citizen,
they can get in line, but not the head of the line."
–
In another comment aimed at
critics within his Republican Party, Mr. Bush also talked about his support for guest-worker programs as part
of an effort to open safe, legal and orderly channels for migrant workers into
the United States.
Opponents of the plans say they amount to opening floodgates to hundreds of
thousands of workers who will cross the border from Mexico each year.
Mr. Bush said he told Mr. Fox that he was committed to signing a
"comprehensive immigration bill."
"And by ‘comprehensive,’ I mean not only a bill that has border security in
it," Mr. Bush said, "but a
bill that has a worker permit program in it. That’s an important part of
having a border that works.
"We don’t want people sneaking into
our country that are going to do jobs Americans won’t do. We want them coming in an orderly
way, which will take pressure off of both our borders."
Changes in immigration law have been
more fiercely debated in Congress since Monday, when
–
the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill that would
provide legal status to an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants and allow
400,000 foreigners a year to enter the United States as guest workers.
The proposals have bitterly divided the Republican Party between those who see
immigrant labor as a pillar of the American economy, and those who view it as a
burden, even a threat.
The
issue has dominated talks between Mr. Bush and Mr. Fox for most of their
presidencies. Though the content of Thursday’s
talks was no different, the ambitions of the two leaders — with Mr. Bush
burdened by the lowest approval ratings of his presidency, and Mr. Fox deep
into his final term— was sharply diminished.
Five
years ago, a newly elected Mr. Fox, buoyed by his
standing as the man who peacefully ended seven decades of authoritarian rule, stood on the White House lawn and
challenged the United States
to work with his government on proposals that would open the border to a freer
flow of workers from Mexico.
On Thursday, speaking to reporters, Mr. Fox acknowledged that the fate of immigration
law was out of his and President Bush’s hands.
"It is not here, in these meetings,
where a migration agreement is made," he said. "It is now an issue
for the Congress of the United
States, and there, they will make the
decision. It is no longer between President Bush and President Fox."
Mr. Fox addressed American critics who
have accused Mexico
of encouraging its people to migrate illegally. Mexico’s economy depends heavily on the
estimated $16 billion that the migrants send home annually.
Mr. Fox said that if Congress
reorganized immigration, "Mexico
assumes its responsibilities to work with passion, with commitment, diligently,
to develop opportunities for our people."
Earlier in the day, Mr. Bush visited the
1,500-year-old Mayan ruins at Chichén Itzá, a rare moment of tourism for a
president who usually has little patience for sightseeing. White House
officials added the stop as a show of respect for Mexico’s heritage.
Back in Cancún, Mr. Bush’s motorcade
sped past the ruined carcasses of hotels wiped out last year in Hurricane
Wilma. He stayed at a small, luxurious resort protected by Navy vessels that
bobbed offshore.
Mr.
Bush also met separately with Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada to discuss a long-running dispute over
American imports of softwood lumber, which has
grown more bitter as industries on both sides of the border have sought rulings
in different international settings, starting in the Clinton administration.
Mr. Bush said of Mr. Harper, "I
appreciate his steely resolve to get something done." But he gave no
indication of any change in American policy.
New York Times