Below is a press statement from the Fair Immigration Reform Movement, about President Obama’s meeting with DREAMers and their families today:
Families part of the Fair Immigration Reform Movement Share Personal Stories of Broken Immigration System and the Impact on Their Lives
(WASHINGTON) – This morning, President Obama and Vice President Biden met with seven family members from the Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM) to hear stories about how their families have been impacted by our nation’s broken immigration system.
“The very fact that this meeting happened today is a testament to FIRM’s 15-year project of building the power of our movement and the power of family stories,” said Melissa McGuire-Maniau, one of the family members present in the meeting.
McGuire-Maniau is a veteran of the U.S. Air Force from Winter Park, Florida. Her family lived in constant fear because ICE repeatedly came to her front door, threatening to deport her husband.
“One simple knock on the door can tear our family apart. This feeling of powerlessness is common to all of us,” she told reporters in a press conference following the meeting. “By joining this movement to keep families together, we have been able to turn that fear into real power.”
“The President seemed visibly moved by our stories and pledged to keep working on immigration reform,” said McGuire-Maniau, affiliated with the Florida Immigrant Coalition, a FIRM member.
At the meeting, the President reiterated his commitment to passing a bipartisan, commonsense immigration reform bill this year. And he underscored that the stories he heard today are a good reminder that immigration isn’t just a policy issue, but it is about families and communities. The President encouraged the families to continue sharing their stories.
Diana Colin, an activist and graduate of Cal State Fullerton from Los Angeles, also spoke with the president, telling him her story of living as a Legal Permanent Resident with two undocumented parents.
“From the tragedy of families being ripped apart to the triumph of overcoming incredible obstacles, we told just a few of the millions of stories that are the real moral and political case for immigration reform,” said Colin, affiliated with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, a FIRM member.
The other people at the meeting were: Kevin Lee of Los Angeles, affiliated with the National Korean American Service & Education Consortium; Mehdi Mahraoui, affliated with the New York Immigrant Coalition; Angie Kim, also with the New York Immigrant Coalition; Miguel Leal with the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition; and Justino Mora with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles.
###
The Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM) is a national coalition of grassroots organizations in 30 states fighting for immigrant rights at the local, state and federal level. For more information, go to www.fairimmigration.org
A cross-post by DREAMer Eric Balderas, initially posted at the Hill:
I have much in common with my home state’s junior senator, Ted Cruz (R-Texas).
Like Cruz, I was not born in the U.S.
Like Cruz, I moved to Texas at the age of 4 and grew up pledging allegiance to the American flag.
Like Cruz, I graduated as valedictorian of my high school class and then attended college at an Ivy League university. As a law student, the senator undoubtedly walked the same Harvard Yard that I cross as a rising undergraduate senior. In fact, like Cruz, I hope to also embark on a career in public service.
Also like Cruz, I am in Washington, D.C., this week at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s markup of immigration reform legislation. Why am I choosing to miss Harvard’s senior week and celebrating my friends’ graduations in favor of a bill markup? Because of a major, troubling difference I have with Cruz.
Cruz was the sponsor of an amendment in the Judiciary Committee markup of the immigration bill that would have gutted the path to citizenship provision and blocked anyone who has ever been undocumented from ever becoming a U.S. citizen — including me. While his amendment failed by a 13-5 vote margin today, the committee markup is just the first legislative step for this bill. And because Cruz will have future chances to attempt to strip the path to citizenship provision, I hope to raise my voice and tell my story as a reminder of why citizenship matters.
There’s a reason that bipartisan groups in both the House of Representatives and the Senate have included eventual citizenship for undocumented immigrants in their agreements — this is the heart of any immigration reform solution.
A path to citizenship is popular, receiving the backing of two-thirds of the nation in a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. This provision is also essential: if we are to create modern immigration system, we need to acknowledge the presence of millions of immigrants without valid papers who go to school with our children and already contribute to our communities. No immigration reform bill that blocks, avoids or dismisses the undocumented will deliver the desired long-term fix of U.S. immigration system. Like Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said today, “reform won’t work without citizenship.”
So, if not citizenship, what is the alternative that Cruz proposes? What is his plan for me — for us — if he will continue to fight against a path to citizenship? Should I live in a permanent underclass? Should I join the underground, off-the-books economy? Should I skip out on my final year at Harvard, saying, “what’s the point?”
The fate of the immigration bill will help determine the opportunities available to thousands upon thousands of us who are Americans in all but our paperwork. This includes my fellow DREAMers as well our parents, whose sacrifices in pursuit of a better life for us mirror the American immigrant experience going back generations.
When Cruz spoke on behalf of his failed amendment today, he offered excuses and talking points. But he never once explained to me why his own American immigrant success story should not be a model for my life.
Balderas is a Harvard University student, scheduled to graduate in 2014.
Today is the last day of markup in the Senate Judiciary Committee–and advocates from around the country have been pumped up waiting for the Senators to pass the immigration bill out of committee. Below is a picture of some of the advocates in the hearing room–DREAMers, moms, dads, union supporters, business interests, faith leaders, immigrants, and allies–all pushing for immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship. Check out the energy!
Meanwhile, in case you missed it (and like most rational people, you probably missed it) opponents of immigration and their tea party cohorts today held a national press day against the immigration reform bill. Despite its label as a national event, rallies and protests were not held in every state (or even states with a Senator currently sitting on the Judiciary Committee– opponents of immigration in Iowa, Utah, Vermont, Connecticut and Minnesota failed to register events with the organizing Remember 1986 coalition). In fact, from the coverage (or lack thereof) that we’ve seen, today’s national press day was barely an event at all.
Despite plenty of planning and instructions on how to invite press, it seems most events were small and not covered by reporters. Where journalists were present, they noted low turnout, like this rally in Washington state, which drew about five protesters. In February, we wrote about a similar ALIPAC protest that initially boasted of 20,000 people promising to attend events nationwide. On the day of, slightly fewer people than that showed up.
The anti-immigration reform “movement” seems to be operating under the assumption that one day–any day now–the groundswell of Americans who oppose immigration reform will show up and sink the bill. With 83% of Americans supporting immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship, they might be waiting for a long time.
Below, check out all four of the immigration reform opponents who turned out in Bucks County, Pennsylvania to express their displeasure with the Senate bill:
Update: Cruz 3 has just been rejected on a 5-13 vote. Senators supporting a permanent, second-class status: Sessions, Lee, Grassley, Cruz, Cornyn.
Right now the Senate Judiciary Committee (#CIRmarkup) is considering Sen. Ted Cruz’s amendment 3, one of the worst amendments that has been proposed to the Senate Gang of 8 immigration bill. Cruz seems to think that citizenship is a “poison pill” and that the only way the bill can pass through the House is without the pathway to citizenship. We ask him: what does he want to do with Eric?
Eric Balderas is a current undergraduate at Harvard College. Like Ted Cruz, he wasn’t born in this country. Like Ted Cruz, he came to the US at a young age and settled in Texas, where he grew up, went to school, and eventually became his high school valedictorian. Like Ted Cruz, he attends an Ivy League university. Like Ted Cruz, Eric wants to pursue a career in public service.
But unlike Ted Cruz, Eric does not have papers and is concerned about how much he will be allowed to contribute to this country, if he is not allowed to someday earn citizenship. If Sen. Cruz does not want immigrants like Eric to ever be able to attain citizenship, what is his proposed alternative? Does he want Eric to self-deport? Or to live forever as a second-class resident in the only country he’s ever called home? What kind of vision for the country is either option, for a potential 2016 presidential candidate?
Cruz’ speech in favor of Amendment 3 will haunt him in 2016 #cirmarkup @mittromeny
Here’s Sen. Chuck Schumer pushing back against Cruz’s damaging idea, which flies against the US’ entire history of immigration policy:
If there is no path to citizenship, there is no immigration reform. You cannot have an America where people come to work and never achieve citizenship.
To go to a European type citizenship, which has clearly not worked over there…creates a sense of disparity, a sense of alienation. [Citizenship] is the heart of the bill.
This won’t pass in the Senate. Won’t have my vote, you won’t have the vote of a lot of people.
As Fernando Garcia, Executive Director of the Border Network for Human Rights said today:
This shows how far removed Cruz is from Texans, immigrants and Latinos. He is out of touch with the realities that we know well — that our borders are hyper militarized and that families here want to be citizens and nothing less.
Having worked through a majority of its amendments, the Senate Judiciary Committee is in the final stages of marking up the bipartisan immigration reform bill. According to Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who led the process thoughtfully and fairly, the markup is likely to finish today.
The biggest takeaway? Although some call the path to citizenship the most controversial element in the bill, we know citizenship is actually a consensus issue that is the heart of immigration reform. It turns out that a majority of Senate Judiciary Committee members agree. Despite the best efforts of Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), John Cornyn (R-TX), Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Mike Lee (R-UT), the path to citizenship included in the “Gang of 8” bill has not only survived, it has thrived.
According to Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice: “The Gang of 8 found the sweet spot, crafting legislation that combines very tough enforcement with an achievable path to citizenship with legal immigration reforms. The bill has withstood attacks and will emerge from committee stronger than when it went in. We’re on our way to a modern immigration system that works.”
Throughout the amendment process, the path to citizenship not only survived, but thrived. The Judiciary Committee rejected all major amendments designed to weaken the path to citizenship, including triggers to further delay implementation (such as Grassley1, Grassley4, Cruz1); and reduce the number of people who qualify for legal status (Grassley11); or make the program simply unworkable (including but certainly not limited to Lee8, Lee10, Grassley11/17/43, Cornyn5).
Instead, the Committee added provisions to actually make the program more workable. An amendment from Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI), which is consistent with one also filed by Chairman Leahy, will allow immigrants who get on the path to citizenship to pay their fines in installments, rather than a lump sum. And an important amendment from Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) will allow newly legalized immigrants who serve in the U.S. armed forces to access citizenship through the same process as any other immigrant serving in the military.
Other additions enhance enforcement practices, due process, and worker rights. A number of amendments passed that will improve existing immigration law, such as Blumenthal2 (restricting use of solitary confinement) and Coons2 (limiting dangerous deportations); Franken7/Franken8/Feinstein6/Hirono22 (dealing with protections for children), Blumenthal8 (limiting enforcement actions at sensitive locations); and Coons 5/6 (providing access to records while in deportation proceedings/detention). Workers’ rights were also advanced through the addition of Schumer5 (W visa portability); Blumenthal4/5 (regulating foreign recruiters); Blumenthal18 (withholding of employment records); Coons1 (notifying people of E-Verify inquiries); and Franken2/4 (dealing with E-Verify and small businesses).
Pro-immigrant coalition lost on some amendments, but the center held on the vast majority. Notably, many of the amendments we supported passed on voice vote, indicating that they were in fact non-controversial. While some amendments the pro-immigrant coalition opposed ended up passing, on balance the positives far outweigh the negatives. But some people still haven’t gotten the message. This afternoon, Ted Cruz is expected to offer his amendment number 3, which would prohibit anyone who had been undocumented for any period of time from every becoming a United States citizen in the future. The amendment is clearly thought of as a “message amendment” to show how tough Senator Cruz wants to be on immigrants. But with the GOP’s political future hanging in the balance, is that really the message he wants to send?
Concluded Sharry: “The bill emerging from the Senate Judiciary Committee is an important step forward for immigration reform. It’s not a perfect bill — the enforcement is excessive and it does not include all families — but passage out of the Senate Judiciary Committee with strong bipartisan support will bring us closer to the promised land of victory.”
Here’s what happened today in the Senate Judiciary Committee markup, from the Senate Judiciary Committee majority staff:
Day Five Recap: Committee Concludes Consideration of Immigration Reform Bill
The Senate Judiciary Committee today completed consideration of S.744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. The immigration reform bill will make the first truly comprehensive reforms to the nation’s immigration system in a generation. The bill will strengthen border security and make billions of dollars in investments to protect the nation’s borders and ports of entry. The bill will make important strides in addressing the labor needs of American businesses, including the nation’s agricultural industries. Importantly, the bill provides reasonable reforms to support refugees and asylees, promotes family unification and reunification, and provides a hard-earned path to citizenship for millions of undocumented workers.
The Judiciary Committee has conducted an open and transparent markup of the bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill.
The Senate Judiciary Committee’s consideration of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act has been the most transparent consideration of legislation in the Committee’s history. The text of the legislation has been available online for over one month, and the text of every amendment considered in Committee, including the sponsors’ amendment, have been made available online.
The Committee has held five days of markups over the course of three weeks in consideration of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, encompassing nearly 30 hours of debate. Every minute of the Committee’s markup has been webcast live online, and played and replayed on CSPAN.
Over 300 first-degree amendments were filed to the bill, all of which have been posted on the Committee’s website since May 8. TheCommittee considered a total of 212 amendments, including first-degrees, second-degrees, and substitute amendments. More than half of the amendments considered were offered by Republican members of the Committee. Every amendment considered by the Committee is publicly available on the Committee’s website.
Of the 212 amendments considered by the Committee, 141 were adopted. Every member of the Committee who filed amendments to the legislation was afforded the opportunity to offer multiple amendments. Nearly every member of the Committee who offered an amendment had an amendment adopted.
The Committee reported the legislation by a bipartisan vote of 13-5.
Amendments Adopted Tuesday
*NOTE: Summaries reflect purpose statements included in the proposed amendment.
Blumenthal15 – To shift the date of presence requirement for qualification for registered provisional immigrant status from December 31, 2011, to April 17, 2013 – Withdrawn Sessions30 – To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify eligibility for the child tax credit – Vote: 8-10 (Not Agreed To) Hirono20 (As Amended) – To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to collect certain information, which shall be kept confidential, from applicants for registered provisional immigrant status for the purpose of understanding immigration trends - Adopted by Voice Vote Grassley17 – To limit judicial review of decisions on applications under section 245B, 245C, 245D, or 245F of the Immigration and Nationality Act or section 2211 - Vote: 6-12 (Not Agreed To) Feinstein13 (As Amended) – To expand the scope of the grant program authorized under section 2106 to include assistance for applicants for blue card status - Adopted by Voice Vote Cornyn4 (As Amended) – To protect the rights of crime victims - Adopted by Voice Vote Cornyn5 – To preserve the ability of law enforcement to access critical national security and public safety information and to authorize the Secretary of State to share limited information with a foreign government, while protecting legitimate privacy interests - Vote: 9-9 (Not Agreed To) Lee10 - To enhance the requirements on payment of taxes to be satisfied by applicants for registered provisional immigrant status - Not Adopted by Voice Vote Lee8 – To prohibit aliens who have absconded or have attempted to reenter the United States after receiving a deportation order from receiving registered provisional immigrant status - Not Adopted by Voice Vote Lee12 – To prohibit the use of sworn affidavits or other unspecified documents to verify the employment or education of registered provisional immigrants applying for permanent residence- Not Adopted by Voice Vote Cruz3 (As Amended) – To provide that no person who has previously been willfully present in the United States while not in lawful status shall be eligible for United States citizenship - Vote: 5-13 (Not Agreed To) Cruz2 – To provide that aliens who have entered or remained present in the United States while not in lawful status shall not be eligible for means-tested benefits - Vote: 6-12 (Not Agreed To) Flake4 – To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct regular audits to ensure that registered provisional immigrants are not receiving Federal means-tested public benefits - Adopted by Voice Vote Flake3 (As Amended) – To require registered provisional immigrants to undergo national security and law enforcement background checks before such status is renewed - Adopted by Voice Vote Hatch10 (As Amended) – To modify the method for calculating annual H–1B visa limits - Adopted by Voice Vote Whitehouse4 – To facilitate and admission and naturalization of aliens who are current or potential employees of certain Federal national security facilities - Adopted by Voice Vote Grassley16 - To provide for the adjustment for inflation of all fees and penalties imposed in connection with immigrant visas - Not Adopted by Voice Vote Franken9 - To permit battered immigrants to be eligible to receive certain public and assisted housing - Adopted by Voice Vote Sessions2 - To impose a numerical limitation on the number of aliens that may be admitted as lawful permanent residents or receive adjustments of status to that of aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence, to require the Secretary to issue employment authorization documents to all nonimmigrants authorized to work in the United States, and to impose a numerical limitation on the issuance of such documents – Withdrawn Coons3 - To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for special immigrant status for certain spouses and children of employees of the United States Government abroad killed in the line of duty - Adopted by Voice Vote Cornyn8 (As Amended) - To ensure that our immigration system encourages investment in communities which have made sacrifices for our men and women in uniform – Adopted by Voice Vote Hirono1 - To exempt children of certain Filipino World War II veterans from the numerical limitations on immigrant visas – Adopted by Voice Vote Cruz4 – To amend the provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act relating to the numerical limitations for permanent residents – Vote: 6-12 (Not Agreed To) Coons9 (As Amended) – To modify the requirements for cancellation of removal of an alien – Adopted by Voice Vote Grassley19 (As Modified) – To provide for programs to ensure benefits integration – Adopted by Voice Vote Hirono10 – To allocate a certain percentage of visas for family-sponsored immigrants to address separations that result in extreme hardship – Vote: 7-11 (Not Agreed To) Sessions15 – To clarify the authority to refuse or revoke visas of the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State – Not Adopted by Voice Vote Hirono11 – To require the Comptroller General to conduct a study of the merit-based immigration system established under section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended by section 2301 of the bill – Adopted by Voice Vote Klobuchar (As Amended) – To allow doctors more time to find employment in an underserved area – Adopted by Voice Vote Leahy7 – To recognize, for purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act, any marriage entered into in full compliance with the laws of the State or foreign country within which such marriage was performed – Withdrawn
Next Stop for Immigration Reform: Senate Floor Act
After five days of markup over the course of three weeks, the Committee has concluded consideration of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. Senate Majority Leader Reid has stated that he intends to schedule Senate Floor consideration of the comprehensive immigration reform bill during the June work period.
