U.S. Border

Yesterday, the Florida Catholic Conference issued an action alert urging all Catholics to contact their Congressional representatives and senators in order to prevent the expansion of the E-Verify system. The bishops are urging our elected officials to oppose the expansion of E-Verify because “it will hurt both U.S. workers and the country’s already weakened economy.” Below is the full text of the action alert from the Florida Catholic Conference:

BACKGROUND: In the past decade, Congress has spent $117 billion of taxpayer dollars on immigration enforcement initiatives, yet the number of unauthorized immigrants in the country has grown to 11.2 million and the demand for foreign-born, low-skilled labor continues. Approximately 70 percent of the unauthorized population is in the U.S. labor force, and each year another 300,000 to 400,000 unauthorized immigrants enter the country. Our bishops have been consistent in calling for comprehensive immigration reform.

Some in Congress are now supporting the mandatory use of E-Verify by all 6 million U.S. employers. E-Verify is a largely voluntary program which allows employers to electronically verify workers’ employment eligibility with government databases. Due to well-documented flaws in the databases upon which it relies, E-Verify does not detect over half of the undocumented workers in the system, yet results in false positives for thousands of American workers.

ISSUE: Unless E-Verify’s expansion is undertaken in the context of comprehensive immigration reform, it will hurt both U.S. workers and the country’s already weakened economy. Eight million unauthorized workers will be driven further into the underground economy, decreasing federal tax revenue, lowering labor standards and harming American families.

ACTION: Urge your U.S. Senators and Congressperson to oppose expansion and mandatory implementation of the E-Verify program unless it is improved and undertaken in the context of comprehensive immigration reform.

Source: Florida Catholic Conference

If you would like to take part in this Action Alert and live in Florida, visit the Florida Catholic Conference website: http://www.votervoice.net/core.aspx?aid=720&issueid=25520&atid=19627&siteid=0&app=GAC&isvisited=true

If you would like to take part in this Action Alert and live outside the State of Florida, visit the Justice for Immigrants website: http://www.capwiz.com/justiceforimmigrants/issues/alert/?alertid=50663526&type=CO

Participants Carry American Flag at Immigration Rally

This Thursday, July 29th, the controversial Arizona immigration law is set to take effect. While the majority of Americans agree with the passage and enactment of this law, the Church has opposed it from the beginning.

In the most recent show of opposition, Bishop Gerald Kicanas testified before the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law on July 14th. In his testimony, the bishop of Tuscon remarked on the Arizona law, calling it an example of the frustration the American people have with Congress for the legislature’s laxity in passing immigration reform…

To read the full post, click here.

Florida's 8th Congressional District | Source: National Atlas

Over the last several weeks, campaign ads for the upcoming November elections have begun to increase, especially in high priority, battleground districts. Florida’s 8th Congressional District is one such district. Jockeying for the seat in the House of Representatives are one outspoken, ultra-liberal Democrat, Alan Grayson, and a handful of conservative Republican hopefuls. Not to mention those running for the seat who have other or no party affiliations.

In November 2008, Democratic newcomer Alan Grayson was able to oust Republican Ric Keller who represented the district since 2001. Now, Grayson is up for re-election. After his vote on the health care bill and the stimulus, many of his constituents are beginning to question whether or not he is the right person to represent their district.

Before we can get to the November general election, however, we must first go through primary voting season, which takes place for this particular district on August 24th. While there are no Democrats running against Grayson in the Democratic primary, there are seven Republicans who will have to duke it out come August. However, there is only one that stands out to me.

Daniel Webster | Source: Palm Beach Post

Former State Senator Daniel Webster is running to secure the nomination in order to defeat Alan Grayson. Since his time in the Florida State Senate, Webster has repeatedly defended the rights of the most vulnerable among us, staunchly supporting multiple pro-life efforts.

According to Project Vote Smart, while in the Florida Legislature, Senator Webster voted yes on two key votes backed by members of the pro-life movement: SB 2400 and CS HB 1497. SB 2400 would have required women seeking an abortion to undergo an ultrasound; however, the bill did not go on to the Governor’s desk. CS HB 1497 determined that:

1. Third trimester abortions can only be performed if there is a certified statement of a medical emergency and if they are performed in a hospital;
2. An ultrasound be performed before an abortion;
3. Women seeking an abortion must be given the option to view the ultrasound;
4. A 24 hour waiting period for abortions, except in the case of a medical emergency;
5. A guardian must be appointed to act on behalf of a minor when a minor petitions a court for an exception to the parental notification requirements;
6. A civil cause of action for parents of a minor who has had an abortion for failure to provide actual or constructive notice against the physician who performed the abortion.

Over the last several days, I have been in communication with the Webster campaign seeking more information on the former State Senator’s viewpoint on immigration reform. In my communications I repeatedly wrote about the Catholic stance on immigration. After my initial email seeking Webster’s position, I received a reply from one of his aides:

Our country is a nation of immigrants. Those immigrants, however, came through the front door legally. America is a nation of laws, and must follow and enforce them in order to maintain justice and the fundamental freedom we hold dear.

With that being said, while in the Legislature, Daniel Webster did move legislation forward that would speed up the process for immigrants currently in the country who were seeking citizenship. While we cannot excuse illegal entrance, we can direct them toward the front door, and provide incentives to moving in the right direction.

While it is a bit vague and does not go into too much detail, Webster’s views are similar to that of the Church. Mind you, the Catholic view on immigration reform is complex so a 100% compliance with our position is, in no way, likely for one lawmaker. However, it is something to strive for and I commend Mr. Webster for his viewpoint on the issue.

Since the passing of the Arizona Immigration Law, many people, including some of our lawmakers, have come out in support of the deportation of those undocumented individuals in our country. Many Americans believe that the “illegals” in this country are here to expand the drug trade, cause violence in our cities and take American jobs. In reality, this only describes a small percentage of the actual immigrants. They seem to forget that this country is a country founded by immigrants. They often criticize the Catholic Church for being accepting of “illegals.”

After Bishop Kicanas appeared before the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law on July 14th, one person even went to the lengths of calling the Church greedy, arguing that the only reason the Catholic Church is open to Hispanic immigrants is because the church would benefit. While many of the Hispanics are Catholic, the church seeks only to accept immigrants because we stand for the advancement of the rights and dignity of all individuals.

That being said, the Church respects the rights of countries to develop immigration statutes in order to protect their borders. However, in doing so, countries must also guarantee that all persons will be respected and given the dignity that was given to them by their Creator. The Church also believes that countries should work together to ease the causes for migration, which is easier said than done most of the time.

As a country founded on Christian principals, I think it fitting that we be reminded of the words of the Holy Scriptures:

• “So, you, too, must befriend the alien, for you were once aliens yourselves in the land of Egypt” (Deut. 10:17-19)
• “I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” (Mt. 25:35)

As a resident in Florida’s 8th Congressional District, this race is of interest to me. However, because I am not a registered Republican, I cannot vote in the primary because Florida is a closed primary state. Nonetheless, because of his stance on pro-life and immigration issues and his determination to bring fiscal responsibility to a Washington that has become broken, I will do everything I can to support Senator Webster’s candidacy. If he is fortunate enough to win the primary, I vow to throw my support behind him come November. He is our only chance to defeat Alan Grayson.

Supporters of SB1070 attend a rally at the Arizona Capitol | Source: AP

Over the last several weeks, the new Arizona immigration law has been making news across the country. There are those that completely agree with the new law and those that completely disagree with the new law. Immigration reform is such an important issue to the people of the United States and an important concern for the Catholic Church. It seems there hasn’t been too much said about this latest controversy by many mainstream Catholic bloggers. That needs to change; so, let’s take a look at the facts and the stance of the Church on this important concern of ours, shall we.

Before we get started, let’s examine what the Center for Immigration Studies says about immigration in Arizona. The center released the following information on the current situation in Arizona:

• The federal government estimated that Arizona had one of the fastest growing illegal immigrant populations in the country, increasing from 330,000 in 2000 to 560,000 by 2008.
• The federal government estimated that Arizona had one of the fastest growing illegal immigrant populations in the country, increasing from 330,000 in 2000 to 560,000 by 2008.
• Arizona has adopted other laws to deter the settlement of illegal immigrants in the state in recent years. The federal government estimates that the illegal immigrant population dropped by 18 percent in the state from 2008 to 2009, compared to a 7 percent drop for the nation as a whole. This may be evidence that the state enforcement efforts are having an impact.
• The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office has found that 22 percent of felonies in the county are committed by illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants are estimated to be 10 percent of the county’s adult population.
• Analysis of data from State Criminal Alien Assistance Program showed that illegal immigrants were 11 percent of the state’s prison population. Illegal immigrants were estimated to be 8 percent of state’s adult population at the time of the analysis.
• Approximately 17 percent of those arrested by the Border Patrol in its Tucson Sector have criminal records in the United States.
• The issue of illegal immigration and crime is very difficult to measure, and while in Arizona there is evidence that illegal immigrants are committing a disproportionate share of crime, it is not clear this is the case nationally.
• In 2007, the Center for Immigration Studies estimated that 12 percent of workers in Arizona are illegal immigrants.
• In 2007, the Center estimated that illegal immigrants and their U.S.-born children (under 18) comprise one-fifth of those in the state living in poverty, one-third of those without health insurance, and one out of six students in the state’s schools.
• In 2007, the Center estimated that one-third of households headed by illegal immigrants in Arizona used at least one major welfare program, primarily food-assistance programs or Medicaid. Benefits were typically received on behalf of U.S.-born children.
• The new law (SB 1070) is extremely popular among Arizona voters. A Rasmussen poll found that 70 percent of voters approve of the new bill, and just 23 percent oppose it.

The center also released the following information on the actual bill:

• The new Arizona law mirrors federal law, which already requires aliens (non-citizens) to register and carry their documents with them (8 USC 1304(e) and 8 USC 1306(a)). The new Arizona law simply states that violating federal immigration law is now a state crime as well. Because illegal immigrants are by definition in violation of federal immigration laws, they can now be arrested by local law enforcement in Arizona.
• The law is designed to avoid the legal pitfall of “pre-emption,” which means a state can’t adopt laws that conflict with federal laws. By making what is a federal violation also a state violation, the Arizona law avoids this problem.
• The law only allows police to ask about immigration status in the normal course of “lawful contact” with a person, such as a traffic stop or if they have committed a crime.
• Estimates from the federal government indicate that more than 80 percent of illegal immigrants come from Latin America. Thus, there is concern that police may target only Hispanics for enforcement.
• Before asking a person about immigration status, law enforcement officials are required by the law to have “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal immigrant. The concept of “reasonable suspicion” is well established by court rulings. Since Arizona does not issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, having a valid license creates a presumption of legal status. Examples of reasonable suspicion include:
  • A driver stopped for a traffic violation has no license, or record of a driver’s license or other form of federal or state identification.
  • A police officer observes someone buying fraudulent identity documents or crossing the border illegally.
  • A police officer recognizes a gang member back on the street who he knows has been previously deported by the federal government.
• The law specifically states that police, “may not solely consider race, color or national origin” when implementing SB 1070.
• When Arizona’s governor signed the new law, she also issued an executive order requiring the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board to provide local police with additional training on what does and what does not constitute “reasonable suspicion.”

As we can see here, and according to the text of the bill, the intent of SB1070 is to “discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.” The only intent of the bill is to enforce federal law in the state of Arizona. Why, then, are members of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and others within the U.S. objecting to the Arizona law? Let’s examine the Catholic side of the immigration debate.

In a recent article published in the Miami Herald, Archbishop Thomas Wenski, archbishop of Miami, wrote:

Our immigration laws need to be changed: They are antiquated and inadequate for the promotion and regulation of social and economic relations of 21st-century America. On this point everyone seemingly agrees. However, the solutions proposed should not make the situation worse. Outdated laws, ill adapted to the increasing interdependence of our world and the globalization of labor, are bad laws. Proposed changes, however, must take into account both human dignity and the national interest.

Source: Justice for Immigrants

The newly installed Archbishop of Miami continued his explanation of the Catholic viewpoint by detailing how the Catholic bishops have called for comprehensive immigration reform for the past several years. Through the U.S. bench’s Justice for Immigrants, the bishops have consistently called for immigration “reform that, while addressing future needs for labor by providing for a legal guest-worker program, also offers an ‘earned’ path to legalization for those 10 million or so workers already in the country as well as fixing the unacceptable backlogs for family reunification visas that keep families separated for intolerable lengths of time.”

Archbishop Wenski wrote:

Illegal immigration should not be tolerated. It leads to abuse and exploitation of the migrants themselves; and, ultimately, businesses that rely on their labor — and, in doing so, help fuel the growth of the American economy — would prefer and benefit from a reliable, legal work force.

But, fixing illegal immigration does not require the “demonization’” if so-called “illegals.” America has always been a land of promise and opportunity for those willing to work hard. We can provide for our national security and secure borders without making America, a nation of immigrants, less a land of promise or opportunity for immigrants.

In the article, Wenski went on to say that the migrant of today is simply looking for “the opportunity to redeem themselves through honest work. Today, many take umbrage at the Catholic bishops’ advocacy on behalf of these “illegals” — but, in doing so, we stand in a proud moral tradition.”

As a result, the Catholic bishops in the U.S. are calling on Congress to “seize the opportunity for a comprehensive fix to our broken immigration system. To date, its failure to act has contributed to neo-nativist anti-immigrant sentiment and to ill-advised initiatives…that usurps what is the purview of the federal government.” He concluded by saying: “As Jesus reminded the embittered zealots of his day, laws are designed for the benefit — not the harm — of humankind.”

It is not my duty to tell you all what to think — I think you all are plenty capable of doing that yourselves. However, it is important for all of us, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, to examine both sides of the issue. When we examine bills up for consideration or laws that have been passed, we must also remember to be charitable. As Christians it is our responsibility to show compassion and mercy to all of our brothers and sisters. When it comes to this issue, I am instantly reminded of a very popular Catholic hymn:

One bread, one body, one Lord of all, one cup of blessing which we bless. And we, though many, throughout the earth, we are one body in this one Lord.

Gentil or Jew, servant or free, woman or man, no more.

In other words folks, we are all in this together. We all travel down the same journey of life. It doesn’t matter if we are legal or illegal; it doesn’t matter if we are White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc. We are all brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ, our Lord and we must live the way Jesus taught us to live.

Statistics Source: Center for Immigration Studies

Arbshp. Wenski Article Source: Miami Herald

One Bread, One Body Source: OCP