|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
News :: Civil & Human Rights |
|
April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
Current rating: 0 |
by Ricky Baldwin
Email: baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified!)
Phone: 217-328-3037 |
31 Mar 2006
|
|
On Monday April 10 Latino/a students from UIUC and area high schools will march with supporters in support of important immigration reforms pending in the US Congress as part of a National Day of Action. Locally the march begins at the mini-park on Neil and Green at 11 AM and ends at the UIUC Quad for a noontime rally. For more info call Diana at 773-727-2580. |
Click on image for a larger version  |
(Champaign) Demonstrations in Chicago, LA, and elsewhere, perhaps the largest ever in US history, have taken cities by surprise over the few weeks. Local news outlets have covered these, but as Democracy Now! reported recently, there has been an almost total news blackout in the national media.
But the most surprising part is how many leftists and progressives didn't even know these were coming. Still don't.
A group of area students aims to change that with a massive walkout, march and rally on Monday April 10th, part of a national day of action coordinated with many other cities. The march begins in Champaign at the mini-park on the corner of Neil and Green Streets, continues along Green St. to campus, where a noontime rally on the Quad will spread the word about this growing movement.
The issue is immigration reform, an idea that is unfortunately not yet on the radar screen for even many progressive or left organizations made up of non-Latino people. It's no surprise to the United Farm Workers, Coalition of Immokalee Workers, Service Employees, Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees and a few other unions whose membership includes many Latino workers. But for most other groups the upcoming National Day of Action for Immigration Reform represents new ideas.
Anti-immigrant legislation currently making the rounds in the US House of Representatives -- and supported by our own Rep. Tim Johnson -- is part of a startlingly draconian trend. Proposals to build a Berlin-type wall between the US and Mexico, once so ridiculous that few took them seriously, are now on the table and not yet meeting stiff resistance.
Meanwhile humane problem-solving legislation, such as that promoted by immigration reform Freedom Rides many months ago, languish in committee in the Senate.
But walkouts, marches and rallies in cities across the country hope to change that, too, by demonstrating the massive numbers and strength of immigrants in the US, who are integral -- have always been integral -- to US society and economy. After all, the US began as a nation of immigrants.
To get involved, contact Diana at 773-727-2580. |
Related stories on this site:
Today's Immigration Battle - Corporatists vs. Racists (and Labor is Left Behind)
Photos from April 10 Immigration Rally
| 
This work is in the public domain. |
Comments
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by kevin
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
02 Apr 2006
|
I believe most unions are not participating in these protests.
Well, we certainly need to control our borders. If it's relatively easy for everyone get into this country, it's relatively easy for terrorists to get in.
Leftists don't like to talk about this, but here's one way to think about it: just imagine what another terrorist attack would do to our civil liberties. Another 9/11 and everyone left of John McCain risks being placed in a concentration camp.
On the other hand, these harsh penalties being proposed, without expanded legal means of getting here to work, are no real solution. It's a stick with no carrot. Bush's guest worker program ain't enough. Supply and demand dictates that people WILL come into the US to work. |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by kevin
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
02 Apr 2006
|
These measures are too harsh, but it is important to secure our borders. We need both a way for people to come here legally, and also a way to keep out people who might cause trouble (you know, "trouble" such as flying airplanes into buildings).
The Left cannot afford to ignore security issues. People who come here to work are not criminals- but we really do need a more orderly way of letting them in. |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by random thoughts
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
02 Apr 2006
|
You might want to reread the article, as it plainly states that a number of unions have supported popular mobilizations against the legislation (HR 4437) these protests target. Likewise, Google "unions HR4437" and you'll find that even unions that don't support the mobilizations themselves are likewise opposed to HR 4437 itself (ironically, along with the US Chamber of Commerce). They certainly don't support the legislation.
As a progressive, I certainly don't let the still overwhelmingly white, male American union leadership dictate what I will support or oppose, even as I try to support vigorous fighting unions through active solidarity.
Your obsession with the need to "control our borders" makes me very uncomfortable, given the politics of those who tend to use such discourse. Most significantly, your statement that "Supply and demand dictates that people WILL come into the US to work..." seems to imply that there is some truth to the statements by many free market boosters that there are jobs that Americans just won't stoop to do. The fact of the matter is that there is no job that an American will refuse, if given adequate pay. The problem is that many employers are not willing to pay a living wage.
Finally, our civil liberties are -- sadly and worrisomely -- in the hands of Mr. Bush and his erstwhile colleagues. If our civil rights are finally totally swept away, it won't be some nebulous, putative "terrorist" who is responsible for their death. bin Laden is not the one appointing people to the Supreme Court nor is he packing his staff with people who advance the corrupt and anti-Constitutional hubris of a "unitary executive" who would quite literally make the president into the 'king of America" whether there is war or peace.
I think it's bad logic, as well as an open invitation to such constitutional hanky-panky, to assert that our civil liberties are dependent on whether there will ever be another terrorist attack. If we are in such a position, then we might as well kiss our rights goodbye now. That's a little like depending on the sun not coming up in the morning to determine whether our rights will be preserved. I certainly don't appreciate anyone's assertion that such an eventuality should serve as a pretext for further shredding of our Bill of Rights. You're only encouraging both Bush and Osama to do their best to oppress Americans -- and I frankly worry a lot more about George as the main threat in that regard. He really doesn't need an excuse and you're standing there handing him one. |
|
Why You Should Endorse Binational Appeal for Amnesty for Undocumented Immigrants |
by via email
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
02 Apr 2006
|
OWC CAMPAIGN NEWS - distributed by the Open World Conference in
Defense of Trade Union Independence & Democratic Rights, c/o S.F. Labor
Council, 1188 Franklin St., #203, San Francisco, CA 94109.
To SUB/ UNSUBSCRIBE, contact the OWC at <ilcinfo (at) earthlink.net>.
Phone: (415) 641-8616 Fax: (415) 440-9297.
Visit our website at www.owcinfo.org - Notify if any change in email address.
(Please excuse duplicate postings, and please feel free to re-post.)
-------------------
Dear Sisters and Brothers:
Two days ago we sent you a copy of the Binational Appeal for Amnesty for All Undocumented Immigrants, which we issued in common with the Mexican chapter of the International Liaison Committee (ILC).
[Note: If you did not receive a copy of this appeal, please send us a note and we will re-send it to you.]
We urge you to endorse this appeal, gather other endorsements among the members of your unions and organizations, and join with us in promoting this campaign for amnesty within the broader pro-immigrant movement.
Please send in your individual endorsement to the OWC Continuations Committee [see endorsement coupon below] and please help gather more signatures. Your support is needed urgently!
Why is this campaign so important?
As you know, on March 27, a first step in defense of immigrants' rights was taken with the defeat in the Senate Judiciary Committee of HR 4437, the reactionary, anti-immigrant bill that would have criminalized all undocumented immigrants and their supporters. But the Senate Judiciary Committee's "compromise bill" still contains many unacceptable anti-immigrant provisions that were lifted from both the Specter and McCain-Kennedy bills.
For example, the bill includes provisions for 14,000 additional Border Patrol Agents, tightened border "security" (with part of the physical border wall in Arizona, according to various reports, and a "virtual wall" elsewhere), and much stiffer employer sanctions.
According to the National Immigrant Solidarity Network, the "compromise bill" also includes "expedited removal" (allowing the government to remove newly arrived immigrants without any court hearing); expansion of the term "aggravated felony" (expediting detentions and deportations of immigrants charged with misdemeanors); expansion of the definition of mandatory and indefinite detentions; and expansion of the purview of law enforcement in relation to immigrants.
On the other hand, the "compromise bill" does allow up to 12 million immigrants who were in the United States before 2004 to continue working legally for six years -- provided they pay a fine, submit to background checks, remain employed, pay taxes, learn English, and study American civics. Following an additional five years -- in other words after 11 years -- and after fulfilling another set of conditions, these immigrants could be eligible for permanent residency.
Tied to this path-to-citizenship provision is a measure that would allow up to 400,000 immigrants per year to have temporary work visas -- under a two-year "guestworker" program. Unlike Bush's guestworker program -- which would require the workers to be bound to one employer during their stay and then have to return permanently to their country of origin -- the guestworker plan in the "compromise bill" would allow the guestworkers a limited mobility: They can quit their job to find another guestworker job with a "willing employer" -- which is not easy -- but they face deportation if they don't find another job.
The "compromise bill" also would allow the guestworker to return to the United States to qualify for legal permanent residency after "getting to the back of the line."
Bush has said he supports the "compromise bill" even though its guestworker provisions are not identical to the ones he put forward two years ago. In fact, the March 28 issue of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote that "this bill [the Senate Judiciary Committee bill] marks a major victory -- rare in recent months -- for President Bush, who initiated the effort to expand legal avenues to immigration two years ago and in recent days has warned his party not to make scapegoats of immigrants."
As you can see, this bipartisan "compromise bill" contains both extremely repressive legislation (particularly in terms of "border security" and employer sanctions) and the carrot of possible legal working papers and residency for up to 12 million undocumented immigrants.
This "compromise bill" -- of course -- may not be the version that clears the Senate. The bill now goes to the Senate floor, where it probably will be amended. Also, Senator Frist introduced his own, anti-immigrant, enforcement-only bill directly into the Senate, bypassing the Senate Judiciary Committee. So we do not know what bill will end up being passed by the full Senate.
After that, whatever bill the Senate passes goes into Conference Committee to be reconciled with HR 4437. At that point HR 4437's provisions could be added back into the final bill.
In our view, the powerful immigrants' rights movement that has emerged over the past month must remain vigilant and stay in the streets to prevent any re-introduction of the heinous provisions in HR 4437.
Also, as was noted in our initial presentation to the Binational Appeal, in the same way the mass protest actions in the streets compelled the Senate Judiciary Committee to drop the main planks in HR 4437, so too can further mobilizations force the Congress to drop all other anti-immigrant provisions in the bills under consideration. More border patrols, an extended "virtual wall," and more "employer sanctions" will only result in more deaths and heightened exploitation of immigrant workers.
One final point: A number of immigrants' rights activists have written to tell us that despite its severe limitations, the "compromise bill" calls for a path to legalization that could provide temporary relief, if not permanent relief, to up to 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. This is no small matter. The bill may include a tradeoff we don't like, they say, but who could oppose this legalization aspect of the "compromise bill"?
We believe it's a good thing that a path to legalization has been approved in the Senate Judiciary Committee bill. Though we are staunch advocates of amnesty, we are in favor of every step forward that enables immigrants to work legally, join a union, and ultimately obtain permanent residency.
But it is wrong, in our view, to call for support to a "compromise bill" that asks us to accept more deaths on the border, a virtual wall, more employer sanctions, and two-tiered guestworker programs. This is not an acceptable tradeoff.
That is why we urge you to support the Binational Appeal in defense of immigrants' rights that we issued together with the Mexican Committee of the ILC. We want this call for amnesty to be loud and clear -- and to be heard by all Members of Congress in the coming weeks.
Please send in your endorsement as soon as possible so that you can be listed among the first endorsers of the Appeal. Thanks in advance for your support.
In solidarity,
Alan Benjamin and Ed Rosario,
Co-Coordinator,
Open World Conference Continuations Committee
********************
BINATIONAL AMNESTY APPEAL ENDORSEMENT COUPON
[ ] Please add my name as an endorser of the Binal Appeal for Amnesty For All Undocumented Immigrants
NAME
UNION/ORG & TITLE (list if for id. only)
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
EMAIL
(please fill out and return to <ilcinfo (at) earthlink.net> and to <eltrabajo (at) gmail.com>.)
******************** |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by Can someone answer...
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
07 Apr 2006
|
|
I have yet to see what is 'anti' about the considered immigration bill before Congress. No spin please just show how it is 'anti'. Thanks. |
|
How HR 4437 is 'anti' |
by Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
07 Apr 2006
|
Simple. It's 'anti' because it's an attack - or if you'd call that 'spin' - because it makes immigrants' lives more difficult, directly and - by penalizing people who help them (prompting an American Catholic leader has instructed his priests to ignore and disobey the law if passed) - indirectly.
It makes it harder to stay in the country, harder to work in the country, harder to receive the Christian (or non-Christian) charity of compassionate individuals who see the plight of immigrants and want to help. If that's spin, well, just take out the adjectives. Same answer: it would put the squeeze on people who are already pretty squeezed. That's why it's 'anti'.
[from an article on Common Dreams...]
"Led by conservative Republican Representative James Sensenbrenner, Jr. of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary, the House passed a bill in January that would create a giant fence along the Mexican border, and increase criminal penalties for immigration violations -- including some mandatory minimum sentences -- for people who encourage illegal immigration and for immigrants who return to the United States after being deported. It would also broaden the range of deportable aliens so that, for example, repeat drunk drivers can be kicked out of the country.
"The House bill would also force employers to verify employees' Social Security numbers against a national database, reimburse sheriffs in the counties that border Mexico for the costs of holding illegal immigrants, and make both detention and deportation of illegal immigrants easier. The Bush administration, which earlier had proposed a “guest worker” program, supported the House the bill, which was passed 239 to 182. "
Now, a person could argue about whether such measures were necessary, or something to that effect. I think they'd be dead wrong and short-sighted to boot, but it's hard to see how anybody couldn't see these measures as PRO-immigrant, or neutral. They are 'anti'. |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by michelle
mmalakar (nospam) inbox.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
08 Apr 2006
|
Is there any organized protest and organized student walk out in Spartanburg South Carolina on that day?
Is there are march I should know about ? If so where?
thanks,
Michelle |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by bon
kenirankin (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
08 Apr 2006
|
|
“We must support fair legislation and oppose legislation that tries to make immigrants criminals. They are here as workers, not felons and criminals.” |
|
Huge Crowd Marches in Dallas in Support of Immigrants |
by Laura Griffin
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
09 Apr 2006
|
DALLAS, April 9 — Hundreds of thousands of people, many waving American flags, marched through downtown Dallas today to protest tougher immigration restrictions proposed in Congress and to support legalizing undocumented workers.
The sea of people, who chanted "Si se puede" (yes, we can) and "U.S.A., all the way," wound through downtown streets for at least a mile, surpassing all estimates of how many would show up.
"We never anticipated it getting this big," said Lt. Rick Watson, a spokesman for the Dallas Police Department. "The estimates were anywhere from 20,000 to 200,000, but all of a sudden they started coming, and they kept coming and kept coming. We estimate that we have 350,000 to 500,000 people down here today."
They were young and old; some pushing strollers, some in wheelchairs or walking with canes. Many made their own placards that read "Fair legislation for all immigrants," "If I am illegal so are my taxes," "Latinos Unidos" and "Today we march. Tomorrow we vote."
"It's a good feeling that we are finally standing up for ourselves," said Robert Martinez, who is now an American citizen but said he crossed the Rio Grande illegally 22 years ago. "For years we never say nothing, we just work hard, follow the rules and pay taxes. And they try to make these laws. It's time people knew how we felt."
The megamarcha, as today's march was called, capped off a series of protests during the last week that was started by students marching at the Dallas City Hall. The police said there were only a handful of counterprotesters at today's march.
The march in Dallas was one of several held around the nation today in cities including Miami, San Diego and New York.
In Oregon's capital city of Salem, for example, the state police estimated that 3,000 to 4,000 demonstrators took part in the march.
Among them was David Guzman, 47, who arrived from Mexico as an undocumented immigrant decades ago and said he became a legal resident of the United States in the amnesty program of the 1980's. He said he turned up for today's protest because he has many friends who are still undocumented and are very frustrated.
"We are here because we want to be legalized," said Mr. Guzman, who has been a roofer in Salem for 20 years. "We just come to work."
Even larger demonstrations are expected on Monday that could draw a million or more people nationwide. Well over 100 rallies are planned, with big turnouts expected in New York, Washington and Phoenix. At least 20 rallies are expected to take place in California alone.
At the Dallas march today on a warm afternoon, the Trevino family wheeled a 10-foot by 8-foot oil painting that 22-year-old Alejandro Trevino had created depicting a mass of people trying to get into the United States, titled Estamos Unidos. Painted in black were the words "Give me your tired your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
"My grandparents came from Mexico, like all these people here," Mr. Trevino said. "I would hate to be in their position — to be scared they're going to send you back."
His mother, Francisca Trevino, also emigrated from Mexico.
"I crossed the river and everything when I was 8 years old," said the 58-year-old kindergarten teacher. "My father was a farm laborer. I've come a long way in this country. I want to show support for immigrants."
Johnny Carillo, 35, wearing his military combat cap and an American flag draped over his shoulder, came to support the immigrant soldiers he fought alongside in Iraq.
"We've got soldiers in Iraq from Mexico, South America, Africa, Russia," he said. "I'm marching for their families. I'm of Hispanic descent, but I've never even been to Mexico, but I think these people have a right to be here. But let's do it the right way."
The parade ended with a rally at the Dallas City Hall, where politicians encouraged people to register to vote. Patriotic songs like "God Bless America" and "This Land is Your Land" as well as Mexican music blared on the loud speakers.
Most of the crowd had some sort of patriotic message, from the flags they carried or wore to the messages on their T-shirts or posters.
A few also waved the Mexican flag, but the crowd was mostly awash in red, white and blue. Many of the demonstrators were originally from Central and South America as well as Mexico.
Juan Gomez, who came to Dallas from Peru to work 10 years ago and is the vice president of United Voices for Immigrants, carried a poster that read "I'm an immigrant AND a consumer," with pictures of cars, appliances, groceries and store signs.
"We are here to support American values; American was built with immigrants," said the 40-year-old Mr. Gomez, who teaches immigrant adults how to speak English. "We live the values of this country."
Some immigrants from other countries and some African-Americans also marched in support.
"I'm from Iran but this is not just for them," said Saeed Tavakkol, a 48-year-old with a moving company that employees both legal and illegal immigrants.
"I'm here for my employees," he said. "I told them to come to. This is a cause for humanity. You can't say 'go back.' They are here, part of the society. Their children are citizens. They are very valuable to us."
An hour and a half after the parade started, people at the back of the line were still marching and people were still arriving by train to join the crowd.
There were 774 officers working the route of the march and the police reported that it was a peaceful, family crowd and that they had made only one arrest so far, for public intoxication.
"It's been a very good day here," Lieutenant Watson said. "Of course, we still have to get everyone back out of downtown."
Andrea Zarate contributed reporting from Salem, Ore., for this article.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
http://www.nytimes.com |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by Eliza
claudetama (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
09 Apr 2006
|
Today I saw on Tv some white man burning a mexican flag in arizona. It made me feel very mad and embarrased that in this century that we live we still find ourselves with racism. I hope that every hispanic out there that re-elected George bush regrets voting for him because its because of him that all this is going on. I would like to add tha my grandparents immigrated to texas from mexico and we are nothing but a hard working families . So just give us a chane to to become American Citizens! WE ARE GOOD PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PS Can anyone come to Laredo Texas and host a rally? We are 100% ready to attend one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by Altazor
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
10 Apr 2006
|
So? Do you think that the pilgrims and puritans had green cards? A contract with Dutch East or other euro corps do not count. Hmm... an alliance between religious fanatics and big buisiness? Sounds familiar.
For that matter, I wonder how many of the so called 'founding fathers,' a misnomer by the way, had green cards?
So is our whole 'country' illegal? Some might say yes. Especially since it was 'founded' by illegals without the participation or consent of the vast majority of those who were living here. Remember that for a large part of this country's so called 'Democracy' only white males of 'property' were allowed to participate. (Basically the same folks who currently run our democracy!)
And, borders? 'Borders' established by conquest and genocide? Is that 'legal?' Adolph would think so.
Either we are all illegal, or no one is illegal. |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by Jesus Gonzanolozses
toosexy (nospam) aol.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
27 Apr 2006
|
|
PRO-ILLEGAL IMMIGATION PRO-LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Re: April 10 March for Immigration Reform |
by AmericanMe
s-exxi (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
28 Apr 2006
|
|
"by kevin
(No verified email address) Current rating: 0
02 Apr 2006
I believe most unions are not participating in these protests.
Well, we certainly need to control our borders. If it's relatively easy for everyone get into this country, it's relatively easy for terrorists to get in. ..."
(another post by same author)
"These measures are too harsh, but it is important to secure our borders. We need both a way for people to come here legally, and also a way to keep out people who might cause trouble (you know, "trouble" such as flying airplanes into buildings)."
DUH!!!!
1) The 9/11 terrorist, came in either through
the northern border (where illegal white
aliens ---Oh, oh---I mean--caucasians
called CANADIANS enter without "legal
papers" --visas or passports,etc... or
going throught the strict searches
common at the southern border) or
they entered straight through a U.S. port of
entry ON U.S. soil
2)The 9/11 terrorists were GIVEN visas or
passports (LEGAL permission) by our U.S.
GOVERNMENT to be here legally, and to
boot---
3) The 9/11 terrorists petitioned AND
received their "legal papers" in a very
timely fashion (months as opposed to the
years Americans--persons from
the "AMERICAS" have to wait {take a
geography class if you don't know where
the "AMERICAS" are}
4)The 9/11 terrorists LEARNED to fly
HERE in the U.S.A--NOT Mexico, NOT
Asia, NOT Guatamala, etc...but here, in the
grand ol' U.S.A.!!!
5)Some of the 9/11 terrorists paid for
their "education" by means of U.S./federal
monies--meaning the U.S. paid for it,
their "education"
6)Take notice ---ALL of the "terrorists" attacks
on U.S.A soil have been carried out by
NON-LATINO peoples...............................
and in some cases, by the hands of the
U.S.A's own: Unabomber, Terry Nichols
and Tim McVeigh, etc...
7) Indigenous people have a LEGAL right to
cross EVERY border in the "AMERICAS"
without the burden of proving "legal status"
--so, what the government needs to do is STOP giving visas , passports, etc.... to the highest bidder and START giving them to the hardest worker!!!
Just my 2-cents .......=)
-AmericanMe |
|
Want a little more of it |
by Qween Lorry
Want a little more of it (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
14 Sep 2006
|
|
I would like to wish you much luck. And a lot of money. Thank you. |
|
