tag:newamericamedia.org,2009-04-06://19 2013-05-21T19:42:28Z New America Media is a nationwide association of over 3000 ethnic media organizations representing the development of a more inclusive journalism. Founded in 1996 by Pacific News Service, New America Media promotes ethnic media by strengthening the editorial and economic viability of this increasingly influential segment of America's communications industry. tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11466 2013-05-22T07:25:00Z 2013-05-21T19:42:28Z

Paul Nathanson ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 WASHINGTON, D.C.—As advocates for elders and people with disabilities anticipate President Obama’s choice of a new Social Security Commissioner, a group of us from the Strengthening Social Security Coalition presented our recommendations at a briefing on Capitol Hill last week calling for changes to improve the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) ability to serve large numbers of the program’s most vulnerable beneficiaries. That includes lower-income individuals, especially immigrants and those from ethnic groups.

The Social Security Coalition includes over 320 national and state organizations representing more than 50 million Americans. Our “Transition Report for a New Social Security Commissioner” covers a range of concerns from the agency’s overloaded staff to SSA’s need for enhanced research on retirement and disability.

Almost 2 Million Elders

One factor underlying all of these issues in our increasingly diverse population is the need for greater access to assistance for individuals with limited English proficiency. The organization I direct, the National Senior Citizens Law Center (NSCLC), whose staff helped coauthor the new report, has shown, that those struggling to understand English face serious obstacles in learning about and gaining access to government programs, such as Social Security.

The 2010 U.S. Census contains some startling statistics related to the number of older adults who are not proficient in English. More than one in seven (14.2 percent) of our nation’s 43 million adults 65-plus speak a language other than English at home. Among them, almost 2 million elders are considered Limited English Proficient (LEP), a term the federal government has standardized to refer to those who speak English less than “very well.”

The new report, developed with a range of organizations, such as the National Women’s Law Center, the Diverse Elders Coalition and Latinos for Secure Retirement, states, “It is essential that SSA communicate with individuals in a language in which they are proficient and that up-to-date informational material on benefits be provided in a variety of different languages.”

Among those applying for Supplemental Security Income (SSI)—people requesting a small boost in their benefits because they have extremely low-incomes, a third seek this additional income support based on old age. Previous analysis by SSA showed that almost four in 10 of those older adults asked the agency to receive assistance in a language other than English.

Early Language-Access Leader

Previously, SSA was an early leader in language access among federal government agencies. For example, after SSA installed point-of-entry kiosks in its local field offices some years ago, advocates pointed out that they were generally working in English only. SSA instructed local offices to make them available in several of the most commonly spoken languages.

In fact, SSA has a very good policy of providing interpreters. It requires its offices to provide an interpreter at no charge on request and prohibits the use of children as interpreters. And the agency requires the same policy for state agencies performing disability determinations (DDSs).

However, as our report states, “At present, implementation is spotty, with advocates reporting that in many SSA offices LEP individuals are still asked to bring their own interpreters.”

Simply put, it is crucial that SSA communicate with individuals in a language they understand. And it needs to do more to ensure that its offices apply these regulations uniformly.

That means the administration needs to require more resources for training SSA personnel on the interpreter policy—including the additional time necessary to interview an individual with an interpreter.

The report also calls on the new commissioner, when appointed, to implement a systems change to fully implement SSA’s interpreter policy. Currently, SSA asks people for their language preference when they apply for benefits. But if the person doesn’t answer or the reply isn’t clear, the program defaults to English. SSA needs to eliminate the English default option.

In addition, SSA has increasingly come to rely on the use of telephone interpreter services as a primary means of serving LEP individuals. Although these are useful for simpler requests, telephone interpreter services should not be permitted for handling more complex matters and certainly not for administrative hearings or conferences.

The report recommends, “The best and most economical means of serving LEP individuals is through the use of bilingual SSA employees.” We believe that before picking up the telephone to call a general interpreters’ service, agency offices should look for an interpretation-trained SSA employee, someone who knows the program, is more apt to be more sensitive to the person’s needs and understands the confidentiality requirements.

Serving Immigrant Communities

As we concluded in the report, “The new commissioner needs to make a concerted effort, as hiring opportunities arise, to hire more bilingual staff for assignment to field offices,” particularly where there is a high level of language access needs, such as newer immigrant communities.

Currently, SSA provides its notices in English. And it offers only some, but not all, in Spanish. The agency provides none of its notices in any other language. To address this, SSA needs to provide all notices in Spanish and in other major languages spoken by recipients of its programs. It also needs to do a better job of identifying the language spoken by each of the people it serves.

Even though SSA has a number of publications on its program benefits in 16 different languages, these are only available online and are no longer stocked in local Social Security offices. A majority of people over age 65, especially those with low-incomes and those with limited English proficient, still do not have consistent Internet access—in any language—including African-American households.

Clearly, SSA policy needs to be rethought and informational publications should be made available to those who visit local Social Security offices.

The ability for all those who receive Social Security or Supplemental Security Income benefits to understand their benefits and their rights is essential. With the appointment of a new Social Security commissioner, NSCLC and other advocates believe these and other fixes can and should happen.

Paul Nathanson directs the National Senior Citizens Law Center. He co-chairs the Strengthening Social Security Coalition’s Adequacy of Benefits Committee and NSCLC staff contributed to new report.



]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11439 2013-05-16T07:55:00Z 2013-05-15T23:01:23Z

Peter McDermott ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 Photo: Seniors and volunteers at the New York Irish Center in Long Island City. (Peter McDermott/Irish Echo)

Part 2. Read Part 1 here.

LONG ISLAND CITY, N.Y—In most conversations he has with casual acquaintances or strangers, Paul Finnegan asks the same question: “Do you know someone who might benefit from going to the New York Irish Center?”

It’s part of his personal outreach for the organization he heads up in Long Island City in Queens.

The center comes alive seven days a week with people from all age groups. But Finnegan has been so effective at recruiting those over 65 the center now involves 200-250 seniors in various activities. The center is so important to the lives of Irish elders that it was created in 2005 with partial funding from the Irish government, which continues providing financial support.

The Biggest Threat

“Isolation is the biggest threat facing seniors. They’re very, very vulnerable to going off the grid,” Finnegan said.

He explained, “Maybe your relationship wasn’t so good with your children, or they’ve moved away and you continue to live in the old neighborhood.” In some cases, he added, being widowed can cut a person off from a wider circle of friends and acquaintances.

The New York Irish Center itself is not off the grid: On a westbound No. 7 train it is just three minutes from Grand Central Station in the heart of Manhattan. “That’s our biggest selling point,” said Finnegan, a native of Galway City in Ireland.

Mary Wicelinski was among those who traveled over the Pulaski Bridge from Greenpoint, Brooklyn’s famously Polish community, for the weekly seniors’ lunch on a recent Wednesday.

“It’s a situation where you look forward to it,” she said. “It’s not easy for me to get out. I have a walker,” added Wicelinski, who was born a Fitzgerald to Irish immigrant parents.

“My son called me up. He said, ‘Where are you going?” I said, ‘Bridie is bringing me to the Irish Center.’ He loves to hear that I’m coming here.”

Sitting near her at that mid-morning hour -- 11 a.m. -- were Bridie Mitchell, Peggy Cooney and Carmel McCarthy, respectively from Counties Leitrim, Meath and Cavan. They’d come from Greenpoint, too.

All three have been visiting the center since it opened in 2005. Like many of the other seniors they help with the serving and the washing-up.

“Eight years? It doesn’t seem possible,” Cooney said.

“Our shoes are worn down now,” McCarthy said.

“It’s not just Irish,” said County Offaly native Julia Anastasio, who is married to an Italian American. “We have Italians, Spanish and a couple of black gentlemen are regulars on Wednesdays.”

The New York Irish Center was the brainchild of the Rev. Colm Campbell, who was sent by Irish church officials to act as a chaplain to young emigrants in the mid-1990s.

The three-story structure was acquired by a group of sympathetic Irish businessmen with Campbell’s project in mind. At the time, the neighborhood was beginning to take off after being talked up for years in the media. Eight years on, the high-rise apartment buildings that line the waterfront are just one visible sign of a rapid gentrification.

“He’s a remarkable man,” Finnegan said of Campbell, who now lives in an assisted living facility in England, close to his sister. “He had a vision.”

The priest amended that vision somewhat as he learned more of contributions to Irish American culture of his own older generation and began to understand more about their needs.

Irish Government Support

At the same time, the Irish government was becoming increasingly concerned about Ireland’s aging émigré population. “From the perspective of Dublin there’s a genuine appreciation of what immigrants have done, such as sending remittances home,” which helped their families and communities, Finnegan said.

The center’s board members typically want to give back to the World War II generation of immigrants, Finnegan said. One told him that he knew families in his community in rural Ireland who were greatly dependent on “the parcel” that arrived from England or America.

The Irish government, however, realized that quite a few of them were living abroad in less than comfortable conditions. In the mid-20th century, a large number of Irish males particularly sought work in England. Many became used to a transitory lifestyle, which put them at a much higher risk of isolation later in life.

The Irish community in the United States also found that it wasn’t immune to some of the same problems.

Irish officials in New York supported Campbell’s efforts. Now, half of the funding for the center’s operational costs comes from the Irish government, the City of New York and the American Ireland Fund.

Because of Ireland’s austerity budget, Finnegan said, Dublin is targeting its funding more to frontline services and less on capital building projects.

The center’s board raises the other half of its funding with events, such as “Night of Comedy and Music” scheduled for June 6, with former “Saturday Night Live” comedian Colin Quinn and other entertainers.

The center seeks to help maintain friendships through original social networks, such those that had built up around jobs -- men who worked together as baggage handlers at JFK airport, for example, and women who worked in school cafeterias – or in church parishes or those associated with individual county associations and their umbrella group, the United Irish Counties.

“Others know each other from the dancehall days,” added Finnegan, a married father of two children.

“You hear about people on the grapevine,” he said. “Someone might ask, ‘Where’s Joe?’ Someone else will say: ‘He’s not well but he’ll be in next week.’”

“When people don’t show, you miss them. And, yes, some pass away,” said Julia Anastasio. “Fr. Campbell always made sure there was a memorial Mass.”

From Lunches to Computer Classes

At that moment, Anastasio was readying herself to go to Mass at St. Mary’s Church across the street ahead of the lunch.

She spends much of her time caring for her husband and so nowadays goes to the center for the seniors’ lunch only.

But the center aims other kinds of activities at seniors, as well, notably the Saturday morning computer class. The staff also tends to involve other age groups as teachers, volunteers and participants.

“We mix the generations as much as possible, and we do it pretty successfully,” Finnegan said. It’s good, too, he suggested, for twentysomethings who miss the company of grandparents back home.

Generally, many of the oldest regulars are less inclined to venture out for such evening events as movie or trivia-quiz nights. “Seniors are routine orientated,” Finnegan said, adding, “They’re not looking for much excitement or intrusion in their lives.

“We’re welcoming to all, even those who have substance abuse problems,” Finnegan said. “After getting over the feelings of defensiveness about life, they feel accepted.

“We find a place for them. It never got so bad that we were out of our depth,” he said. “We would like next to hire a social worker, but it wouldn’t be someone upstairs that you made an appointment to see. It would be someone that everyone would know.”

The center’s only other full-time employee is Jane McCarter, the culture and heritage officer. It’s important for Finnegan that the volunteer-staff ratio be weighted considerably towards the former, something that helps it to be truly a community center.

“You don’t want the staff to be a self-perpetuating situation,” he said.

It’s important, too, that the seniors help keep the center ticking.
“This is my little space on a Wednesday. My therapy,” Anastasio said, adding with a laugh, “And I’m still cleaning.”

Peter McDermott this article for the Irish Echo through a MetLife Foundation Journalists in Aging Fellowship, a project of New America Media and the Gerontological Society of America. It is the second part of a series.


]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11308 2013-04-23T08:40:00Z 2013-04-23T16:23:22Z

Valeria Fernandez ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 PHOENIX, Ariz. -- Luz Ruiz Rascón is a determined woman, the kind who can hold back her tears while she talks about one of the most difficult choices she’s had to make: to stay in jail and fight for her innocence.

Her son’s leukemia diagnosis was one of the biggest challenges for her entire family, up until she was arrested eight months ago at her workplace and incarcerated.

The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office accused her of several counts of identity theft and forgery for allegedly working with false documents. But Rascón, an undocumented immigrant, claims she’s never provided false paperwork.

Her case exposes the situation of hundreds of undocumented workers in Arizona who could face charges that would deny them a path to citizenship under immigration reform.

Proposed Reforms and the ‘Gang of Eight’

Proposed reforms would force the deportation of those with a record showing a felony or three misdemeanors. Immigrant advocates believe authorities are inflating minor charges for otherwise law-abiding immigrants to unfairly drive them out of the United States.

In Washington, D.C., a bipartisan group of senators called the “Gang of Eight” introduced an immigration reform package that has renewed hope for many but according to immigration experts will leave people like Luz outside. Conservative members of the bipartisan group are now calling for even tougher restrictions in the wake of last week’s Boston bombing.

The proposed “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” would grant a work permit to undocumented immigrants provided that they don’t have a criminal record.

In most of these cases, undocumented immigrants such as Rascón, age 38, take a guilty plea for the felony identity theft charge so they can be released from jail. Many don’t know the dire consequences that decision will have for them.

But not Rascón. She decided to take her case all the way to trial, if necessary, and has already spent eight months in jail. Her trial is set to begin on May 3. By a state law, known as Proposition 100, undocumented immigrants with serious charges--in her case six felony counts--don’t have a right to bail.

“I had my moments of frustration, desperation,” said Rascón in an interview in Spanish at Estrella jail, the Maricopa County facility that houses women.

Prosecutors have offered her a guilty plea to a lower-level felony, but this is considered under immigration law a crime of “moral turpitude,” which would make her deportable.

Delia Salvatierra took on Rascón’s case almost eight months ago, and decided to defend her pro bono. She had a stake in her fight too.

In recent years she started getting more and more cases where immigrants had a specific type of identity theft felony charge on their record that would make them deportable in the eyes of an immigration judge.

When she met Rascón she advised her that taking the plea could not only mean her automatic deportation but also hurt her changes to be eligible for immigration reform.

Staying in jail since her arrest last Aug. 9 hasn’t been easy for Rascón. She and four co-workers were caught in an immigration raid of her employer by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, under Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In jail, she found, there is no privacy, and there are frequent lock ups that require her to spend the entire day in her bed.

Maricopa County Jails have been scrutinized by the federal government resulting from a recent lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ). The suit contends that some Latino inmates are discriminated against due to their inability to speak English.

DOJ also alleges that in some instances the Sheriff’s immigration raids have discriminated against Latino workers.

This is one reason Salvatierra believes the federal government could provide an exception to these Arizona workers if immigration reform passes.

‘My Children Are Above Everything’

Rascón has had her moments of doubt. “I say, ‘I’ll leave if they don’t want me in this country, nevermind,’” she admitted. “But at the same time, I say, ‘No, no, no.’ I can’t throw away 20 years of my life here.

She took a job at the GNC vitamin supply company 11 years ago, eventually being put in charge of packaging the product for shipping. She starting her shift at 5 a.m., and usually worked eight to 10 hours at the $14-an-hour job. “It was a heavy job, but I liked it,” she said.

Mainly, she said, “My children are above anything. They are the ones that move me to wait and keep fighting.”

Her children, Irving and Litzzy--both U.S. citizens--visit their mother in jail as much as twice a week.

Irving, 18, drives his younger sister to school every morning, after his dad is long gone to work as a day laborer. Irving goes to a community college in the evening to study computer science.

“I know I’m my mother’s son,” he said, alluding to her care when he was diagnosed with leukemia. He’s proud of her choice to fight the charges in jail.

Rascón is concerned about making sure that Irving takes care of his health.

“Sometimes I don’t want them to come and see me,” she said in Spanish. “It is sad to see them and watch them walk away, and then wait for another visit.”

County Attorney Won’t Change Plea Offers

Since 2008, Arpaio’s office has conducted worksite raids under a state civil law aimed at cracking down on unlawful employers. But the Sheriff focused on arresting workers on felony charges of identity theft.

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery asserts this charge is not immigration related but responds to an effort to fight the high volume of identity-theft crimes committed in the state.

Rascón’s attorney, Salvatierra, counters, “I don’t believe they’ve committed the kind of offense that requires nine or 10 months in pretrial incarceration.”

Montgomery said his agency won’t modify the type of pleas he offers to people arrested in the raids. “We’re going to handle these cases the way we handle every other case, and I’m not going to pick out one group of people for special treatment. I’m not supposed to do that. That’s actually unconstitutional,” he stated in an interview.

The county attorney has come under fire by several pro-immigrant groups for claiming to support comprehensive immigration reform while continuing to prosecute undocumented workers on charges of identity theft.

“I feel he’s really after our folks and to me it's not really a criminal act--although the state has made it that,” said Rosie Lopez, founder of the Hispanic Community Forum. “These people are hard working people, they’re honest. They’ve never done anything wrong, and this is simply because they wanted to feed their families.”

Montgomery joined the Real Arizona Coalition, a bipartisan group including businesses, religious leaders and others to craft a platform for immigration reform that was released last December.

The platform, called the Solution to Federal Immigration Reform (SANE), recommends that undocumented immigrants have a path to citizenship provided that they don’t have a criminal record “other than individual identity violations.”

During a public panel at Arizona State University (ASU) last week, civil rights attorney Daniel Ortega recognized people with this type of charge won’t be able to be part of immigration reform unless groups lobby on their behalf.

Montgomery, who was on the panel, said he has “already provided all the support that I can” by contributing ideas for the SANE platform as far as who should qualify.

He said that his stance on the platform was that you “may necessarily have to look at exempting employment-related offenses to encourage enough people to come forward and make it worthwhile.”

Salvatierra, Rascón’s attorney, said she was encouraged that there was more dialogue with the county attorney’s office and that he came out in support of comprehensive immigration reform.

She noted that prosecutors have a choice. For instance, they could offer a plea of solicitation of taking the identity of another, or solicitation to commit forgery.

“The Supreme Court is saying that you can take [immigration consequences] into consideration,” she said, when it comes to offering a plea.

She cited a 2010, U.S. Supreme Court decision, Padilla v. Kentucky, which determined that immigrants facing criminal charges have a right to be told of the immigration consequences if they decide to accept a plea.

The decision also says, “… informed consideration of possible deportation can only benefit both the State and noncitizen defendants during the plea-bargaining process. By bringing deportation consequences into this process, the defense and prosecution may well be able to reach agreements that better satisfy the interests of both parties.”

A Narrow Chance

Nationally groups like the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) have the joined CAMBIO campaign – to lobby for comprehensive immigration reform that would include, among many issues, due process for undocumented immigrants.

They advocate for immigration judges to be allowed to take into consideration different factors before deporting someone who has a crime on his or her record.

But the current proposal from the congressional “Gang of Eight” offers little flexibility when it comes to being inclusive of people who might not have spent a day in jail, said Kamal Essaheb, an immigration attorney at NILC.

“DREAMers” (undocumented youth brought to the U.S. in childhood) would have a faster path to a green card under the current proposal. But they also would be subject to the same type of criminal barriers, Essaheb added.

“We’re going to fight to make sure as many people as possible are included,” he said.

Essaheb said it was true that the eight senators included provisions to exclude barring people with a crime on their record in connection with state immigration laws, such as Arizona’s SB 1070.

But he said it is likely that wouldn’t extend to other enforcement, such as the case of people charged with identity theft.

Essaheb said that the lack of federal immigration reform has led to a proliferation of state laws that would exclude people depending on where they live.

“We don’t want Sheriff Arpaio deciding who should get legalized or who shouldn’t,” he said. “We want to make legalization accessible regardless of where you are or whether you live in a state that heavily criminalizes undocumented immigrants because of discriminatory policies.”



]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11273 2013-04-16T08:05:00Z 2013-04-16T00:30:39Z

Andrew Lam ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=8 Vân, Cúc, Trúc, and Trang; Dũng, Dai, Thanh and Phát. In my mother tongue these names carry music, cadence, poetry. They evoke for the listener images of clouds, peonies, bamboo, jade; acts of bravery or wishes for prosperity. In English, alas, they lose all meaning as the inflexible American tongue turns them into a grunt, a bark, a funny diphthong.

“I wonder what’ll become of MY name when I go in? I shouldn’t like to lose it at all…” declared Alice, in Louis Carroll’s “Through the Looking Glass,” upon entering a strange woods, “because they would have to give me another, and it would almost certainly be an ugly one.”

Such is the case for so many immigrants to America. We find quickly that our names are distorted in the new forest of concrete, glassy high-rises, double deck freeways and high-tech wizardry. Our names mispronounced, the magic snuffed out of them. My Vietnamese first name, Dũng (pronounced something close to Zoo-young), is alas but animal excrement in English. Kids in junior high used to tease me, since my last name is Lam. “Lamb Dung,” they would say then laugh hysterically.

Vân, Trúc, and Trang – meaning Cloud, Bamboo, and Elegance – the three pretty girls who often walked together down their high school hallway suffered constant pestering from classmates who would yell: “Look out! Here comes a Train, a Truck, and a Van!”

The two brothers, Hiệp and Hùng suffered similar fate. At a college party some years ago in Berkeley, Hiệp introduced himself and his brother to some pretty young lady. “I’m Hiep and this is my brother, Hung.” The young lady, not missing a beat, said, “You, OK. Your brother, on the other hand, remains to be seen.”

By the time I graduated from high school, I’d changed my name to Andrew, based on André - a name that my French teacher back in Saigon gave me since he refused to speak a Vietnamese word. When visiting France, I am still André to my Parisian relatives.

For generations, it has been a rite of passage for newcomers to America’s shore to change our names. We add on new sobriquets in hope for better acceptance, less discrimination, and to help ease our assimilation process into American life. We want to be seen, more often than not, as your Average Joe.

So one summer, Vân, Trúc, and Trang wandered into “Vogue” and “Mademoiselle” magazines and emerged Yvonne, Theresa, and Tania. They even looked different, wearing more fashionable clothes and make-up. And there’s Nhung (Vietnamese for “Velvet”), who was dubbed Nancy when her landlord, after having tried in vain to pronounce her name, threw up his hairy arms and said: “Let’s call you Nancy, as in Nancy Wong, the actress.” Then there’s my high school friend Khoa who turned into Kevin. How? When he was filling out his application for US citizenship his mother saw an image of a boy on a milk carton named Kevin on the dining table and said, “Why don’t you take his name?” And so Kevin he became.

Like street urchins in a strange land, we gather our new identities from anything deemed worthy: milk cartons, lazy landlords and teachers and of course, fashion magazines.

And in some ways, immigrants live with multiple senses of our selves. The old names are not lost in the modern world, after all, with so much travel and modes of communication with our homelands. In Vietnam, where I visit often enough, no one calls me Andrew.

So we immigrants manage our various names the way we navigate going back and forth from one culture to the next. We often view the world through multiple lenses, and as multilingual speakers, we see different shades of personalities emerge when we enter each of these spheres. My parents still call me by my Vietnamese name at home, where I am in many ways still a child in a conservative family setting, bound in an intimate world of clanship, and memories; a private world. Only when they speak in English and to non-Vietnamese do my parents refer to me by my American name, as in when guests visit and they show my journalism and literary awards on their mantel: “These are Andrew Lam’s awards,” father would say.

Dũng is the Vietnamese who is expected to perform certain familial duties, who suppresses his individualism for the sake of familial harmony -- but it is Andrew who claims credit for this essay. In some way, Dũng and Andrew are opposing ideas of myself, but over time I’ve learned to navigate and live comfortably with these names and sobriquets, crossing back and forth over the hyphen that connects dissimilar spheres, different sensibilities and languages, senses of the self.

For immigrants to the US, however, the need to change one’s name has become less pressing in the 21st century, according to the New York Times. It quoted sociologist, Douglas S. Massey, at Princeton University, as saying the pressure to change surnames has lessened, since “during the 1970s and 1980s, as immigration became more a part of American life and the civil rights movement legitimated in-group pride as something to be cultivated.”

That is, as diversity is becoming increasingly the norm, as Asians recently passed Hispanics as the largest group of new immigrants to the United States, and as immigration reform influences immigrants’ ideas about identity and pride in keeping their original names, perhaps the American tongue will have to be more flexible in calling out the names of the entire world.

But for me at least, I like the management of different names; the challenge of mental agility – I see this navigation as part of the modern condition. F. Scott Fitzgerald once noted that, “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.” Pluralism, after all, isn’t just a modern social condition – the individual, too, has become pluralized with so many affiliations and allegiances. Without abandoning one’s names but adding on, one’s life is richer for it, a kind of multilayer Technicolor coat, as it were.

I am Dũng, Andy, André, Andrew… And who knows, I might just add another as I enter a strange woods.


New America Media editor, Andrew Lam is the author of "Perfume Dreams: Reflections on the Vietnamese Diaspora" (Heyday Books, 2005), which won a Pen American "Beyond the Margins" award, and "East Eats West: Writing in Two Hemispheres" where the above essay was excerpted. His latest book, "Birds of Paradise Lost" published March 2013. He has lectured and read his work widely at many universities.
]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11270 2013-04-15T20:13:05Z 2013-04-15T20:20:50Z

La Opinión ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 This time around, immigration reform is getting important support from African-American leaders, who recognize that the regularization of 11 million people who are living in the shadows is a modern-day civil rights struggle, according to an editorial in La Opinión.

This support came to light in recent days because of the amount of African-American speakers who expressed their support for the overhaul during the rally in front of Congress. At the same time, in a less public way, people ranging from lawmakers to activists and black organizations are uniting to communicate how important immigration reform is for the African-American community.

The point of view that legalizing undocumented immigrants will create more competition for jobs and decrease those salaries no longer prevails.

This change of perspective is due in large part to the transformation of the wave of immigration, which now includes more blacks. Estimates show that black emigrants from Africa make up one of the migration groups with the highest growth. Blacks also are more than 90% of immigrants coming from the British and French Caribbean, in addition to Dominican Republic.

In general, when there is talk of immigration, people think about Latinos, but that universe goes way beyond just them.

Meanwhile, concerns about the overhaul's impact on employment have been eased by deals between the business sector and labor unions to protect American workers.

Lastly, African-American support of immigration reform is another point of agreement between two communities that—depending on political circumstances—have been rivals despite having more things in common than differences that distance them.

Treating individuals fairly and respecting their human condition, central themes of the reform, are values that unite Latinos and African-Americans in their path to a fairer country.

Read more

]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11257 2013-04-13T08:55:00Z 2013-04-12T23:21:06Z

Christie Thompson ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 In several men’s prisons across California, colored signs hang above cell doors: blue for black inmates, white for white, red, green or pink for Hispanic, yellow for everyone else.

Although it’s not an official policy, at least five California state prisons have a color-coding system.

On any given day, the color of a sign could mean the difference between inmates exercising in the prison yard or being confined to their cell. When prisoners attack guards or other inmates, California allows its corrections officers to restrict all prisoners of that same race or ethnicity to prevent further violence.

Prison officials have said such moves can be necessary in a system plagued by some of the worst race-based gang violence in the country. On April 1, at least four inmates were taken to the hospital after a fight broke out between over 60 black and Hispanic inmates in a Los Angeles jail.

Lawsuits

The labels “provide visual cues that allow prison officials to prevent race-based victimization, reduce race-based violence, and prevent thefts and assaults,” wrote the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, in response to a lawsuit.

But legal advocates say such practices are deeply problematic. “I haven’t seen anything like it since the days of segregation, when you had colored drinking fountains,” said Rebekah Evenson, an attorney with the nonprofit Prison Law Office.

A federal class-action lawsuit  filed in 2011 by the Prison Law Office says race-based restrictions are an ineffective and unjust way of keeping prisoners safe.

“Rather than targeting actual gang members, they assume every person is a gang member based on the color of their skin,” said Evenson, one of the lead lawyers in the case. According to the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Prison Project, California is the only state known to use race-based lockdowns.

State and federal courts have ruled against the practice multiple times. One state court judge concluded in 2002 that “managing inmates on the basis of ethnicity” was counterproductive, and instead increased hostilities among prisoners.

A recent review of corrections department reports, done for the Prison Law Office, suggests it’s still common practice. The analysis found that nearly half the 1,445 security-based lockdowns between January 2010 and November 2012 affected specific racial or ethnic groups. Inmates labeled as Hispanic were the most common targets, while inmates identified as “other,” (anyone not labeled black, white or Hispanic) were the least likely to be restricted.

Rejecting an inmate’s complaint in 2010, one prison’s inmate appeals reviewer noted that the department’s “policy is that when there is an incident involving any race, all inmates of that race are locked up.” Another review cited the same policy.

California’s corrections department spokesperson Terry Thornton said that's not department policy. Thornton said policy dictates that restrictions will not “target a specific racial or ethnic group unless there is a legitimate penological interest in doing so."

“A legitimate penological interest is safety, security,” Thornton said. “It’s protecting people’s lives.”

Prison Crowding Crisis

Prisoner advocates say race-based lockdowns may be yet another consequence of California’s crowding crisis. In 2011, the Supreme Court upheld a federal court ruling that crowding in the state’s prisons was severe enough to constitute cruel and unusual punishment, and required the state to cut its prison population.

Prison officials have blamed crowding for contributing to “an increase in riots and disturbances.” And the more inmates there are, the more likely it is that prison officials will respond to violence with broad-brush security measures, legal experts said.

The state prison’s population has dropped recently, though it’s still at nearly 150 percent of its designed capacity.

The state’s corrections officer union sided with plaintiffs in the Supreme Court case, claiming overcrowding compromised their ability to effectively run a prison. "Overcrowding in California’s prisons substantially increases the use of lockdowns," the organization wrote in a legal brief.

Certain security situations might require inmates to be kept from the prison yard, prohibited from receiving visitors, or blocked from classes and drug rehabilitation meetings — restrictions the department refers to as “modified programming." Analysis of corrections department reports found that nearly all of security lockdowns last year restricted outdoor exercise.

Hanif Abdullah is one of the inmates suing the state. Currently at California State Prison, Solano, Abdullah asserts he was placed on “modified programming” multiple times solely because he is black. A devout Muslim, he says he was kept from attending religious services as well as receiving adequate health care.

Another prisoner in the suit, Robert Mitchell, claims he was locked down “nearly continuously” for a year and a half at High Desert State Prison, because the sign outside his cell marked him as black. Mitchell testified that he suffered "muscular atrophy … and severe pain" when he was kept from exercising a leg injury.

The state denies that the lockdowns were race-based or unnecessarily long.

Identifying Gang ‘Enforcers’

Race-based lockdowns may end up being used simply because it’s not always clear-cut who’s in a gang and who’s not. Inmates may side with members of their own race or ethnicity for protection during a fight, without being a member of a race-based gang like the Aryan Brotherhood.

Law professor Sharon Dolovich, of the University of California, Los Angeles, who has testified against race-based lockdowns, said identifying the "enforcers" of such gangs would be a more effective deterrent to violence than locking down entire racial or ethnic groups.

Thornton, the prisons’ spokesperson, said the violence of a few inmates has a large impact on the entire prison. "A lot of inmates come to prison and they just want to do their time and go home," she said.

Identifying “enforcers” has challenges. A more targeted approach requires more trained personnel, which may be a tall order for California’s overburdened system. And another lawsuit brought on behalf of California prisoners claims that despite recent changes, prison officials still rely on questionable evidence, such as tattoos or certain books, to determine which inmates are gang members.

Beyond discrimination claims, the Prison Law Office lawsuit alleges lockdowns often last longer than necessary. Forty percent of security restrictions lasted less than a week, the analysis found, and more than 15 percent lasted more than a month. The complaint alleges some have lasted up to 10 years.

In a legal response filed last August, the state denied any lockdowns lasted longer than needed to secure the facility. Corrections spokeswoman Thornton said the department’s policy dictates restrictions “last no longer than necessary to restore institutional safety and security or to investigate the triggering event.”

“Prison administrators are not going to return a yard to regular programming until they know that people aren't going to try and kill each other again,” Thornton said.

Race-Based Punishment

After a state appeals court upheld a 2002 state ruling against raced-based punishment at maximum-security Pelican Bay prison in Northern California, officers took a different tack. They began assessing the risk posed by individual inmates to determine restrictions. A prison spokesperson at the time told the Sacramento Bee that violence had decreased as result of the new policy.

The decision was reinforced by a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that held any use of racial classifications must be “narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.” California prisons were ordered to stop segregating reception centers, where inmates stay for up to two months when they first arrive.

In the majority opinion, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote: “When government officials are permitted to use race as a proxy for gang membership and violence ... society as a whole suffers.”

But Pelican Bay returned to race-based restrictions in 2009, according to court testimony from two prison officials. Both testified an unnamed deputy director ordered them “to discontinue this [new] system, as it was ‘against Department policy.’”

The reinstated policy was struck down again in January when a state appeals court in Northern California upheld the trial court’s original ruling. “There are more narrowly tailored means of controlling violence than to restrict entire ethnic groups,” the trial judge wrote.

“Prison staff doesn’t have to impose race-based lockdowns in order to ensure security,” said the Prison Law Office’s Evenson. The group is pushing for an injunction to halt the practice across the state.
“They’ve gotten used to using it as a convenient shortcut, and prisoners continue to suffer just because of the color of their skin."




]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11250 2013-04-12T08:20:00Z 2013-04-11T22:25:48Z

OAKLAND, Calif.--We are at a pivotal moment for the future of juvenile justice in this country. Youth crime is at historic lows throughout the nation and juvenile incarceration rates are also down. Many states have begun implementing or are considering...

David Muhammad ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 OAKLAND, Calif.--We are at a pivotal moment for the future of juvenile justice in this country. Youth crime is at historic lows throughout the nation and juvenile incarceration rates are also down. Many states have begun implementing or are considering significant juvenile-justice reform initiatives that can further reduce juvenile incarceration and improve the level of support and services for youth in their neighborhoods.

Nowhere is this more critical than in California. Over the past 15 years, California has experienced an astronomical 92 percent reduction in incarceration of the state's juvenile facilities.

At the same time, juvenile crime rates have also plummeted. According to Department of Justice statistics, in the past 10 years there has been a 32 percent decline in juvenile crime in California.

Improved State Budget Creates Challenge

But youth justice in California is at a crossroads now that the state is shifting more responsibility for administering juvenile justice to counties. The state is also considering closing down its juvenile system.

In a series of interviews I conducted recently with juvenile-justice experts, I asked, “What are the greatest challenges facing youth in the state today?” One foremost leader in the field gave a surprising response: "The state's improving budget situation."

One would think that an improved state-government budget would be a good development. But this leader explained that by having more money, the state may just return to massive incarceration--because it may not need to cut corrections budgets further. Unfortunately he is right.

There has been a long-standing lack of creativity and a reliance on ineffective practices when it comes to juvenile justice. Thankfully, though, there is a huge opportunity to fundamentally transform the system, invest in communities, further reduce youth crime rates--all without expending any additional resources.

I’m among those who envision a new way (some may argue, a very old way) of administering juvenile justice. Traditionally, village councils or tribal commissions were responsible for overseeing justice. Not strangers in sterile downtown buildings handing out punishments that make the lives of youth and their families worse, not better.

Imagine a system that has established Neighborhood Opportunity and Accountability Boards in each city. These locally controlled and operated boards include neighborhood residents--youth and families, clergy, professionals—who represent the entire community.

Then resource these boards with the same amount of funds that the government currently spends on that community.

Smarter Use of Same Millions

Say there is such a board every 20-30 square blocks. What about public costs in the most impoverished areas? Say, conservatively, there are high-concentration neighborhoods with 50 youth in the system. Multiplying that number by the average current amount of $150,000 spent on each youth per year in the juvenile justice system comes to a $7.5 million bill for that neighborhood annually.

That $7.5 million a year per low-income neighborhood is money already being spent, but with what results? If we lived by the correct and effective principle that incarceration should only be used for young people who truly pose a legitimate risk to the public safety, then the vast majority of those millions could be used to develop the neighborhood, to provide vital services and supports to young people and their family.

With that approach we could create a system of justice that builds and supports community, not destabilizes it, as happens now.

There is much discussion and interest in “restorative justice” in many juvenile-justice circles. But instead of just having a restorative justice program, cities could actually implement a system that restores youth, victims, family and community.

The Neighborhood Opportunity and Accountability Board would be responsible for working with youth who have engaged in delinquency, having them engage with any victim of their acts and providing needed services and supports to the youth and their family. The board would determine and mandate that the young person perform some community service in their own neighborhood and engage in a restorative process with any victim.

We are a long way away from such a system. But with vision, leadership and courage -- and without any new money – American society can build a system that develops community, supports youth and family and reduces crime.

David Muhammad is the CEO of Solutions, Inc., which provides consultation to government agencies and philanthropic foundations. He was formally the Chief Probation Officer of Alameda County in California and before that served as Deputy Commission of Probation for New York City.




]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11249 2013-04-11T21:22:55Z 2013-04-11T23:00:01Z

Eva Dominguez ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 Photo: Courtesy USC Roybal Institute on Aging

Traducción al español

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The Social Security and Medicare cuts President Obama included in his proposed budget would disproportionately harm Latino Americans and are deeply unpopular in our community.

Rather than being part of a “Grand Bargain” offered to Republicans in exchange for possible tax increases, these cuts are a great betrayal of a group that proved essential to the president’s victory in the 2012 election.

President Obama won an unprecedented 71 percent of the Latino vote nationwide, allowing him to edge out Mitt Romney in the key swing states of Colorado, Florida, Nevada and New Mexico.

What many may not know is that like most Obama supporters, Latinos voted for the president in no small part, because they believed they could rely on him to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Latinos Depend More on Social Security

Latino voters believed President Obama in his 2011 State of the Union speech when he said we must “strengthen Social Security . . . without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.”

Social Security matters to Latinos, because we depend on it more than any other group. Three in four (77 percent) Latino households ages 65 or older rely on Social Security for a majority of their income, and over half (55 percent) rely on it for 90 percent of their income.

That means Latino seniors are 18 percent more likely than the overall U.S. population to rely on Social Security for a majority of their income and 52 percent more likely to rely on it for 90 percent of their income.

A major benefit cut in the president’s proposal would be to switch the formula for calculating annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in Social Security and other programs. This so-called chained-Consumer Price Index (chained-CPI), would allow inflation to erode program benefits over time—and would hit Latinos especially hard.

Because we are more likely to have lower career earnings, our Social Security benefits tend to be more modest to begin with—$12,491 each year for the average Latino senior and only and $10,438 per year for the average Latina senior.

After 20 years receiving benefits under the chained-CPI—when they would be in their 80s--the average older Latino would lose an accumulated $7,774 in benefits, and the average Latina elder would lose $6,307. After 30 years, the cuts would grow, resulting in total benefit cuts of $17,049 for average Latino seniors and $13,832 for average Latina seniors.

Change Would Increase Poverty

Worse still, the chained-CPI punishes Latinos for being blessed with higher-than-average life expectancy, often combined with greater levels of chronic illness. Because the chained-CPI cuts benefits more as beneficiaries age, it would hit long-living Latinos harder than most.

It’s no coincidence then that some experts fear that the chained-CPI will increase poverty among Latino seniors. More than one in four Latino seniors already lives in poverty—nearly twice the rate among white seniors.

The White House claims it will protect “the most vulnerable” chained-CPI, with a special “birthday bump” increase for those seniors at age 76. But in the past, such carve-outs have proven inadequate.

An analysis by Social Security Works showed that protecting all vulnerable groups from the chained-CPI would erase half of the budget savings from the measure.

Even if significant numbers of Latinos were shielded from the chained-CPI due to their lower incomes, this birthday bump might have unintended consequences. Carve-outs—special treatment--of any kind are likely to be misconstrued as handouts for ethnic groups. We already have to deal with enough nasty stereotypes portraying us as recipients of “welfare” or “government handouts.”

Proposed Medicare ‘Pain’

The Medicare benefit cuts President Obama proposes are also a step in the wrong direction that would cause Latino seniors real pain.

Rather than dealing with the high costs of health care, the budget shifts health costs to beneficiaries by increasing deductibles, premiums and co-payments. The president’s plan would also create a new surcharge.

The White House claims these cuts will make Medicare beneficiaries better health care consumers, but this is a flawed argument. Doctors--not beneficiaries—make medical decisions, so the idea that seniors can shop around for health care is ludicrous. As a result, Latino seniors who cannot afford the higher out-of-pocket costs are liable to forego needed care—until their conditions become more acute and costly to treat.

So-called means testing of Medicare will not only affect the rich—over time, it would increase premiums for Latino seniors making up to $47,000 a year.

Seniors already spend three times more of their incomes on their direct health care costs as the rest of the population. Under the president’s budget, the reduction in Latino seniors’ income would be two-fold: They would be hit by the chained-CPI, and their out-of-pocket health care costs would increase on top of that.

In addition, the president’s budget provision requiring a $100 co-payment per episode for home health care services could severely impact those who depend on home health aides to treat their diabetes and other chronic diseases. This would disproportionately affect Latino seniors who have higher rates of diabetes than the overall population.

For example, in Chicago, where diabetes is the most prevalent in the country, 25.8 percent of Latinos over 65 suffered from diabetes compared with 15 percent of non-Hispanic whites.

The White House has defended the proposed Social Security and Medicare reductions as “not ideal” measures needed to achieve a compromise with Republicans in Congress.

Not the Problem—But a Solution

There is no question that the president faces difficult choices as he navigates unprecedented Republican obstruction. But at times, President Obama appears to have adopted the Republican framing as well: That our budget problems are due to over-generous Social Security and Medicare benefits.

In fact, Social Security does not and legally cannot contribute one penny to the annual deficit and cumulative national debt. Medicare’s rising costs are due to skyrocketing private health care costs. In fact, Medicare has proven far more effective at controlling medical inflation than its counterparts in the private insurance market.

Latinos voted for a president bold enough to start a new conversation about the challenges of aging, health care and economic security, not someone beholden to the same old Republican talking points.

A real “adult” conversation on our aging boomer population would begin by acknowledging that America has a retirement security and health care crisis. Social Security and Medicare are the solutions to those crises, not the problem.

The Latino community appreciates President Obama’s leadership on immigration rights and health care reform. Now it is time for him to honor his promise to Latinos and other vulnerable elders to protect and strengthen Social Security and Medicare.

Eva Dominguez is the executive director of Latinos for a Secure Retirement, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C.



]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11240 2013-04-10T07:50:00Z 2013-04-10T21:24:32Z

Valeria Fernández ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 PHOENIX, Ariz.--Teresa Ramirez learned to live with the pain of ovarian cysts after she was diagnosed a year ago. As an undocumented immigrant, she doesn’t qualify for Medicaid, which would cover an operation, and she can’t afford private insurance.

“I’m waiting for immigration reform so I can go to Mexico to have an operation,” said
Ramirez, who is 45.

Undocumented immigrants like Ramirez make up one in seven medically uninsured people in the United States. And they are excluded from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that will take effect in 2014, expanding Medicaid and offering tax credits to help people buy insurance.

Although comprehensive immigration reform could create a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants, the current framework would keep Ramirez from ACA for 10 to 15 years, until she becomes a legal permanent resident. They would form a new category of residents--authorized to be in the U.S., but denied treatment coverage unless they could pay out of pocket.

Denying Care Could Be Costlier

The political argument to exclude this new category of aspiring citizens from ACA is framed in economic terms, but health care advocates argue that the long-term impact of leaving a segment of the population in health care limbo would be costlier.

A recent report from the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) says that by keeping this new category of immigrants –in many instances low-income- from accessing affordable healthcare, would shift the costs of their care to localities and states.

States with the largest unauthorized population will face the bigger challenges, once these immigrants gain legal status but are excluded from ACA. MPI’s report, just published in the prestigious journal, Health Affairs, identifies California, Texas, Florida, Arizona and Georgia.

“The states and localities will continue to pay a high share of the uninsured cost,” said Randy Capps, senior policy analyst at MPI and one of the authors of the study.

He explained that in this case, a new group of U.S.-approved immigrants would join the ranks of the uninsured in states that already have mandates to provide services to authorized immigrants.

“It will be particularly harder for those states, which in the past have been extending health benefits to immigrants, to look the other way,” Capps said.

Another challenge for localities, Capps said, would be that federal reimbursement for hospitals caring for the uninsured is expected to decrease after ACA is implemented, although health care reforms will increase funds for community health centers and clinics that provide primary health care.

Those changes would not answer the needs of Ramirez and her mixed-status family.
Her husband, for example, has checkups for his diabetes at a local charity clinic that provides free services. But he recently had to be hospitalized for two days, and the family is struggling to pay over $5,000 in bills.

The challenges Ramirez and her family face are no different than what uninsured, low-income U.S. citizens experience, but they are compounded by fear of seeking help.

The state provides Medicaid coverage to two of Ramirez’s grandchildren because they were born in the U.S., but Arizona won’t cover the other children because their father, an undocumented immigrant, makes slightly more than the earnings limit to qualify.

“He makes $40 more than you’re supposed to,” said Leticia Ramirez, whose husband brings home $500 a week. The threshold for a family that size is $1,963. (Amounts differ by state.)

National Advocates for Health Access

“The largest question is why are we keeping people from participating in a system that is fundamental to the American infrastructure in which we ultimately want them to be participating,” said Jen Ng’andu, director of health and civil rights policy for the National Council of La Raza (NCLR).

NCLR and other groups are pushing for any immigration reform package to include a way for the aspiring citizens to obtain affordable insurance by at least being able to receive tax credits for purchasing it in the market place, such as the subsidy under ACA.

Currently, not all immigrants-- even permanent legal residents -- have immediate access to all the components of ACA. Green card holders or legal permanent residents get some benefits but have to wait five years to participate of Medicaid.

Creating roadblocks to health care for a segment of the population has an overall impact on everyone’s access, said Sonal Ambegaokar, a health policy attorney at the National Immigration Law Center (NILC).

“If you don’t give them any options for affordable insurance then they have to wait until they get very sick. We’re not saving any money by excluding them now,” Ambegaokar said. “The question is what is the most efficient way to make sure people don’t get sick and we don’t pay unnecessary expenses.”

Whether the status quo changes or not, some local groups in Arizona are preparing to ramp up their primary health care services to fill the current void for undocumented immigrants, who are often fearful about seek affordable treatment.

Phoenix Allies for Community Health (PACH) has been functioning for two years as a mobile service with volunteer doctors and nurses taking house calls for undocumented families and organizing health fairs.

The group’s vice president, Jason Odhner, who is cofounding a health clinic in the heart of an immigrant neighborhood in Phoenix, has seen the value of offering people preventive care. He has also seen the worse case scenario.

Odhner remembered an undocumented man who couldn’t afford the care for his diabetes and eventually had a leg amputated.

“Regardless of what happens with immigration reform, we need to provide basic care,” said Odhner, who is also a registered nurse.

An advantage to having more immigrants become authorized U.S. residents is that more would be considered for jobs offering health insurance or enabling them to afford coverage. “If we had a better-paying job, you’ll pay for your own insurance,” said Ramirez.

On the other hand, undocumented immigrants who now have insurance may loose it, said Capps. That is because under ACA small employers won’t be mandated to provide health insurance so they might decide to drop it or give people a stipend to help them buy it privately.

Politics vs. Public Opinion

The frameworks of both President Obama’s and Congress’ so-called Gang of Eight (the bipartisan group negotiating a reform plan) exclude this new category of immigrants from ACA. That is consistent with the administration’s directive to exclude deferred action recipients from it as well, although if reform passes this group of young people may get on a fast track towards citizenship.

Although debate in Washington is apt to be contentious in the coming months, the issue might not be as polarized among the public. Opinion polls have shown support from Americans towards including a new category of provisional immigrants into ACA.

In a poll released this February by the Kaiser Family Foundation, 63 percent of respondents said they would support ACA coverage for provisional immigrants whose income is low enough to qualify for Medicaid.

If things don’t change, for immigrants like Ramirez, the choice maybe to continue to rely on the safety net of free clinics, emergency rooms and charities in Arizona, with the advantage of accessing less expensive care on the other side of the border.

“I think that if they’re going to do a legalization they should legalize healthcare too,” Ramirez said.




]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11223 2013-04-05T08:20:00Z 2013-04-05T16:52:53Z

Christine Takada ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103
Photo: Andrelina “Elna” Orbeta, 79, works helping seniors who phone a Seattle nonprofit. She is among the elders NAPCA has given employment training and job placed under the federal SCSEP program, which is facing deeper cuts.

SEATTLE, Wash.--Based on the 2010 U.S. Census, the population of Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) elders (age 65 and older), is projected to grow by more than 350 percent from 1.6 million to 7.3 million individuals by 2060, making AAPI older adults the fastest-growing population among this age range.

Eighty five percent of AAPI ages 65 or more are foreign-born, and in many AAPI subgroups, limited English proficiency rates are as high as 89 percent, posing very real risks of isolation and a challenge for accessing critical information.

Higher Poverty Rates

While poverty rates among older adults average 8 percent among whites, in certain AAPI subgroups, they range from 21 to 26 percent — well over two or three times the rate of white Americans. Also, in certain AAPI subgroups, rates for those without health insurance are as high as 19 percent, compared to 15 percent of the total population.

While these statistics did not exist when National Asian Pacific Center on Aging (NAPCA) was founded in 1979, community leaders were well aware of the access issues challenging AAPI elders, their families and the communities serving them.

To meet the need, those leaders designed NAPCA to serve as a bridge for AAPI elders, and the organization continues to help AAPI seniors in different communities across the country access important programs and benefits for which all Americans are eligible.

Millions of AAPI elders rely on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid payments to survive. Of those, NAPCA serves 10,000 limited English speaking seniors through the Cantonese, Mandarin, Korean and Vietnamese national, toll-free Asian language Helpline.

Many callers are eligible but need information and assistance in applying for benefits, either because they don’t know how or cannot access the system. Every year, NAPCA helps thousands of low-income AAPI elders navigate the Medicare Open Enrollment process and understand the eligibility requirements for Social Security, Medicare, Low Income Subsidy program and Medicaid.

NAPCA creates in-language tools to help limited English speakers understand Medicare and how to access affordable prescription drugs, and is always looking for opportunities to assist limited English speaking elders in accessing senior benefit programs they may be eligible for.

Forced to Choose Medicine or Food

With the federal budget sequester now in effect, automatic spending cuts will be applied to all non-entitlement programs, including those serving the most vulnerable people. For example, many seniors who are already in a dire situation will have to make untenable choices, such as between paying for medicine or other essential items like food or rent.

Although cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and veterans benefits are not being implemented, the reductions in other vital programs, such as senior employment, will take effect over a seven-month period. During that time a compromise must be reached in order for funds to be restored.

Cuts under the federal sequester will impact the health and well-being of AAPI elders and other low-income and ethnic elders most directly because these seniors are more heavily reliant on Social Security than other Americans. Few benefit from other investment tools or pensions.

Income security for many AAPI elders is fragile. In 2010, among AAPIs receiving Social Security, 31 percent of married couples and 53 percent of unmarried individuals relied on Social Security for 90 percent or more of their income. The average annual Social Security income received then by AAPI men ages 65 and older was $13,214. For women of this age, it was even less--$11,176.

NAPCA and other organizations serving the AAPI community will face significant challenges providing services given these cuts.

About 100 low-income AAPI elders will lose their minimum-wage training positions through NAPCA’s Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP). The only federal program designed to help low-income people 55 and older get on-the-job training, SCSEP has already seen sharp cuts and now only serves 77,000 seniors through nonprofits like NAPCA nationwide. (Our SCSEP programs serve 1,200 older workers from all cultures in nine cities around the U.S.)

Election Showed Potential AAPI Power

Without a resolution in Washington, D.C., to the sequestration cuts, for instance, NAPCA could see further reductions in its toll-free, Asian-language Helpline of up to a third of staff hours per language line. Meanwhile, the need for information will only increase due to changes resulting from the implementation of the Affordable Care Act.

As we’ve seen in the last presidential election, the power of the AAPI voice can have great impact on decisions affecting our country. It is critical that the community understands the impact of the sequester and the importance of communicating to all law- makers that a balanced approach to deficit reduction must not include further cuts to the vulnerable populations that we serve.

Christine Takada is the chief executive officer and president of National Asian Pacific Center on Aging (NAPCA). This article is adapted from a commentary in the International Examiner, a Seattle-based nonprofit pan-Asian newspaper. NAPCA partnered with the paper to produce a special issue dedicated to National Minority Health Month, which takes place in April.




]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11196 2013-03-29T08:05:00Z 2013-03-29T15:46:28Z

Anna Challet / Video: Silicon Valley Debug ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 SACRAMENTO -- Trina Meza lost her job almost a year ago, in April of last year. Her story is like that of so many others – along with her income, she abruptly lost her medical and dental coverage, as well as coverage for her son, Simon, who is 11.

Meza had applied for Medi-Cal for Simon, but the application status had been listed as “pending” for weeks, and when she called to ask about it, she couldn’t get any answers about the delay.

“I thought, ‘I need to talk to someone,’” she said.

Meza was one of thousands who lined up for the WeConnect Community Resource Fair and Highway to Health Festival at Hiram Johnson High School here on March 16. Sponsored by The California Endowment (TCE), a private health foundation that provides grants to community-based organizations in the state, the fair and others like it are meant to increase enrollment in health care programs under the Affordable Care Act.



At these events, uninsured Californians can be screened for eligibility for a variety of public health programs, and volunteers are available to help them enroll. The fairs also offer free tax preparation for lower-income individuals, as well as health and dental screenings with resources for finding low-cost providers. The day is punctuated with free entertainment, like a Zumba class and a performance by the Sacramento Kings Dancers.

Meza and her son live in Sacramento, and she learned about the event at the Teichert Branch of the Boys and Girls Club.

Meza, who formerly worked in records management, has been constantly applying for jobs since last April. With help from CalWORKs, California’s welfare-to-work program, she has been able to start going to school to become a pharmacy technician, but until Saturday her son still lacked medical coverage.

Volunteers at the fair screened her for eligibility and were ultimately able to enroll Simon in Medi-Cal.

“They filled out all the paperwork and got him signed up,” she said.

Thousands of low-income people filed through the high school gym throughout the day, demonstrating the widespread lack of medical coverage and the need for help finding the necessary information to access public health programs.

“People like me who used to be self-sustaining, it feels like we’re taking steps backward these days,” Meza says. “I’ve become very good at finding resources like this.”

TCE will be holding three more such events in the state over the next few months – in San Diego, Kern County and Oakland.


New America Media's ongoing coverage of the Affordable Care Act is supported by a grant from The California Endowment.]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11192 2013-03-27T17:20:22Z 2013-03-27T18:19:30Z

Earl Ofari Hutchinson ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 No matter which way the Supreme Court ultimately rules on gay marriage, pro or con, narrowly or expansively, gay rights organizations owe President Obama a debt of gratitude for pushing the nation’s opinion envelope forward in support of gay marriage. It’s true that gay rights groups waged a tireless decade’s long struggle against the wall of bigotry, ignorance, religious distortion and intolerance and the towering legal barriers to gay marriage. It’s equally true that one of those that stood fast behind one of those barriers was Obama. His self-admitted soul search journey from passive opponent of gay marriage to having profound conflicts about it, to finally full throated support of the right, is well known.

What’s less well known is that Obama’s final epiphany on gay marriage was not just one man’s conversion to a controversial cause. The politics of that conversion was profound in that it put the White House stamp of on it. It’s part myth that presidents simply are solely the bellwether of public opinion, and don’t make a move without first sticking their finger in the wind to see which way public opinion is blowing. Studies have shown that it cuts both ways. Presidents do have the awesome power to influence, sway, and even change public opinion on controversial issues.

There was Franklin Roosevelt’s slow whittle away at America’s isolationist resistance to the fight against fascism in the run up to World War II, Truman’s bold stand on integration of the armed forces, and Eisenhower’s grudging but eventually tough stance enforcing school integration in Little Rock. There was Kennedy’s public face down of the Soviets in the Cuban missile crisis, Johnson’s push on civil rights and poverty and Nixon’s opening to China. Then there was Carter’s Middle East peace initiative, Reagan’s public assault on government programs, Clinton’s revamp of welfare, and Bush’s sell of the Iraq war. These were pivotal issues where a president was able to sharply move the dial on public opinion.

Obama’s breakthrough stance nearly a year ago on gay marriage must be seen in the same light. Before the president’s announcement, support for same sex marriage had barely nudged toward the halfway mark among those who said they supported it. This was a significant jump from six years earlier when support for gay marriage stood at under 40 percent. Even more dramatic was the sharp turnaround in black attitudes toward gay marriage. Blacks had been one the staunchest opponents of gay marriage, and were the final trump card that Christian evangelicals and GOP ultraconservatives played hard to spearhead ballot initiatives in several states banning same sex marriage. On the eve of the president’s announcement of his support for gay marriage, black support for it had climbed to nearly 60 percent. Following the president’s announcement, all the major civil rights organizations, and even a number of religious leaders publicly declared their support of gay rights. Many Hispanic organizations also publicly endorsed same sex marriage too.

One key in just how a president’s view on a controversial issue ultimately matters is whether a president will back up his words of support (or opposition) with aggressive action. This means translating his support into public policy initiatives. Obama set the stage for that over the years even when he opposed or was ambivalent about gay marriage

He backed gay rights in speeches and legislation 18 times before he grabbed the White House. He showed the same support and sensitivity in his appointments. He was only the second president to speak at the annual dinner of the Human Rights Campaign. The fact is that the group thought enough of his gay rights advocacy to invite him. Obama pointedly lent his name to opponents of Proposition 8 to use in mailers that they circulated, and did the same in the case of other initiatives in other states.

Obama sent a subtle signal of his gay rights support on the issue on the Defense of Marriage Act. He could have kept hands off the issue by letting the legal challenge to it run its course. Other presidents had done that when they thought a law was unconstitutional or unjust. This argument though ignored what Obama had said about traditional marriage too, not to mention that he made it plain that he wanted the law repealed -- but repealed through legislation that he would push for.

One final tip of the decisive importance of Obama’s gay marriage support came during the 2012 presidential election. Polls found that the issue would not be a factor in voter support or opposition to him. Even more importantly, the same polls showed that Obama got a bump up in the number of voters who were more likely to back him or at least back him more enthusiastically because of his gay marriage support.

Presidents can and often do make a difference, a big difference, in pushing, cudgeling, and whipsawing the nation forward on an issue. Obama’s stance on gay marriage was proof of that, something gays, and indeed the nation, should be thankful for.


Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He is a weekly co-host of the Al Sharpton Show on American Urban Radio Network. He is the author of How Obama Governed: The Year of Crisis and Challenge. He is an associate editor of New America Media. He is the host of the weekly Hutchinson Report on KTYM 1460 AM Radio Los Angeles and KPFK-Radio and the Pacifica Network.

Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson
]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11190 2013-03-27T08:00:00Z 2013-03-27T07:07:37Z

Sofia Campos, Catherine Eusebio and Jorge Gutierrez ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 EDITOR’S NOTE: With the U.S. Supreme Court locked in arguments this week over the constitutionality of Proposition 8, California’s ban on gay marriage, young activists at the forefront of the DREAMer movement reflect on the historic intersection of the gay and immigrant rights movements, an alliance that has helped bring about concrete political victories.

The undocumented immigrant youth movement has gone through a powerful evolution since its genesis. In the beginning, the ever-present risk of deportation forced only the bravest of us to meet in secret as we sought to support each other in our pursuit of higher education. Others among us felt that the risk was too great to even whisper our immigration status outside of our homes.

Nearly 10 years later, we are no longer isolated or hiding. On the contrary, we now are highly visible. Dozens of undocumented youth have been featured on the cover of TIME magazine. Dulce Matuz of the Arizona Dream Act Coalition was named one of TIME's most influential people. Benita Veliz became the first undocumented person to address a national political convention. Today, the phrase “undocumented and unafraid” has become a rallying cry for many of us.

Together, we achieved the most significant change in immigration policy in over 20 years—Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals—winning a reprieve from deportation for more than one million undocumented immigrant youth. Together, we are proving that when affected individuals lead the way and proudly share our stories, we have the power to create positive change and make an impact on a national scale.

And we are not done. As our movement continues to blossom, we are also learning to give space to the diverse experiences within it. While many might attempt to depict our movement as uniform, in reality many of us who share the identity of “DREAMers” exist at the intersection of several movements. From LGBT youth, to women, to Asian Americans, we have resisted the status quo by highlighting our varied stories, weaving these different experiences into one colorful tapestry. Rather than overlooking the leadership of the historically underrepresented communities that exist within our movement, we have embraced them as a source of strength to empower our movement as a whole and advance our collective story.

Perhaps no one moment illustrates this approach better than the one that took place in Memphis, Tennessee, in the spring of 2011. We were gathered at the second United We Dream National Congress. At the time, we were still grappling with the pain and disillusionment of the failure of the federal DREAM Act. Although the momentum and power gained by immigrant youth could not, in the end, be broken by the failure of any legislation, the movement was shaken.

Then, a turning point occurred. Queer, undocumented immigrant youth, or UndocuQueers, stood in front of more than 200 immigrant youth—and “came out.” UndocuQueers undergo a double “coming out” experience, privately and publicly professing identities as queer and undocumented. Many could no longer bear the pain of negotiating, of having to take off their “queer” hat and putting on an “undocumented” one before walking into the immigrant youth movement. The stories of oppression, pain, and struggle of LGBTQ undocumented immigrant youth opened and ignited the hearts of everyone at the Congress, challenging the movement to expand its immigrant youth rights platform and reflect the identities and needs of UndocuQueers. We made a historic commitment to intentionally include and fight for the rights of the LGBTQ community within and outside the immigrant youth movement.

Now, the movement has embraced this “coming out” frame. Community and grassroots organizations such as California's Orange County Dream Team have been leading intersectional organizing work between the immigrant youth movement and the LGBTQ rights movement in California. UndocuQueers have gained national visibility and have begun to organize and mobilize through initiatives such as the Queer Undocumented Immigrant Project. Groups such as the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and United We Dream have included LGBTQ family inclusion in their immigration platforms. Moving forward, our LGBTQ-immigrant intersectional voices, experiences, and organizing work will continue to dismantle the homophobia and racism within both mainstream movements.

Ensuring identity-based safe spaces is critical to addressing the nuances of the undocumented experience. Of the 11 million undocumented people living in the U.S., 1.2 million are from Asia. Culture adds significant challenges for undocumented Asian Americans. In Asian American communities, unlawful immigration status is widely stigmatized. Given this need to “save face” in the community and the added fear of deportation, parents place pressure on their children to keep their status a secret. Thus, many undocumented Asians are invisible, isolated, and often unable to access resources.

Undocumented Asian youth who are advocating for immigration reform need the space to connect with one another, and to challenge the cultural attitude that encourages shaming and silences those who deviate from expectations. One pan-Asian DREAM youth organization, Asian Students Promoting Immigrant Rights through Education, headquartered in San Francisco, gives undocumented Asian youth the space to do just that. The power of our movement lies in our ability to break down silos and allow for intentional, collaborative, multiracial leadership development and organizing.

Similarly, our women members, who understand first hand the multiple layers that can constitute one identity, have led the immigrant youth movement on all levels, from ground-level organizing to national leadership. As organizers, many young undocumented immigrant women have experienced the subtle sexism in spaces of politics, business, and even activism. Consciously recognizing these realities and acknowledging the contributions of women, Asian Americans, and LGBT leaders within our growing movement has led to a cultivation of intersectional work and a commitment to transformative organizing. In turn, this has strengthened our base, grown our partnerships, and helped us expand our vision and understanding of true social justice.

Even more exciting is the fact that this sense of shared strength is preparing us for the next step in our fight. Empowerment is contagious, and our collective empowerment is also having an impact on our families. More and more, our families are stepping out of the shadows and “coming out” as undocumented. Just recently, in Arizona, DREAMer Erika Andiola's mother, Maria, was released from ICE detention after we mobilized to stop her deportation. Now, Maria appears in a video with Erika, asking other families to share their stories of separation.

This movement began because we used our stories to create safe spaces for ourselves. As we connected across state borders and our urgency for change grew, we learned how to use our voices and our bodies, through actions of nonviolent civil disobedience, to motivate this country to listen and to change. Along the journey, we also learned to find the power in our differences, and to create democratic and transformational models of leadership development and organizing. Moving forward as strategic storytellers and skilled organizers, we will use these lessons learned to highlight the larger narrative about immigration in the U.S. and fight the unjust policies tearing our families apart every day.


Sofia Campos is the board chair of the United We Dream Network. Catherine Eusebio is a social justice fellow at Asian American/Pacific Islanders in Philanthropy. Jorge Gutierrez is a Queer Dream Summer coordinator, a co-founder of DeColores Queer Orange County, and project coordinator of the Queer Undocumented Immigrant Project.



]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11176 2013-03-25T08:35:00Z 2013-03-24T21:07:16Z

Cecilia Garcia and Bob Harootyan ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 Photo: Courtesy of Senior Service America

WASHINGTON, D.C.– A major national campaign was launched last week to bridge the digital divide. Everyone On is the public service arm of Connect2Compete (C2C), a national public-private partnership that hopes to provide Internet access, digital literacy training and refurbished computers to low-income consumers.

The three-year, multimillion-dollar campaign, which C2C is doing with the Ad Council, sounds like a great idea, given how essential digital communications have become in how Americans live and work in the 21st century.

There’s just one problem—as an efficient way of providing low-cost broadband access and computers to many low-income families, C2C is targeting those whose children are eligible for the federal free and reduced-cost lunch programs. To qualify, a family must be in a low-income area and have a child on the lunch program.

That means low-income seniors, a highly vulnerable segment of the population, are being left behind.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was a driving force behind the launch of C2C. The commission recognized the need for a strong collaborative partnership with industry, the nonprofit sector and government to make sure everyone in this nation, regardless of age or income, is able to reap the benefits from access to affordable broadband networks.

Many Benefits for Elders

Other nations such as the United Kingdom have recognized this and, as a result, higher percentages of their citizens are connected and trained to make full use of the technology.

According to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, online use by people age 65 or older jumped from 41 percent in 2010 to 54 percent in 2012.

That’s good news, but seniors remain far behind the 82 percent of all adult Internet users. EveryoneOn is essentially ignoring those who are the least connected digitally – seniors.

Digging a bit deeper, significant numbers of low-income seniors do not have computers or broadband access at home. Digital literacy, which is critical for meaningful use of the Internet, is least prevalent among seniors, especially those who are less educated, have lower incomes and are people of color.
The benefits for older adults are clear. For example, a 2009 report on Internet use and depression among seniors found that it can be a low-cost way to reduce depression by expanding elders’ social interactions, reduce their loneliness, and giving them access to health information and treatment.

As New America Media’s 2012 series “Ethnic Elders Online” showed, closing digital disparities can help older adults in positive ways, from greater involvement in their communities to starting a small business.

Moreover, like all nonusers, older adults often cite lack of relevance as a major reason for not using the Internet. Clearly, the United States needs some kind of intervention to help seniors get online, especially those with low income and limited education.

Digital Inclusion Initiative

While efforts like C2C essentially ignore this older segment of the population, organizations such as Senior Service America, Inc. (SSAI) recognize that older adults do not have to be stranded on the wrong side of the digital divide.

SSAI is one of several nonprofits that run the Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP), the only federally funded employment and training assistance program for low-income Americans who are 55 or older.

Because digital literacy is so important now to seniors’ income security and well being, SSAI launched its Digital Inclusion Initiative (DII) in 2010. Through the program, SCSEP participants have helped more than 25,000 seniors understand how (and why) to use the Internet.

SSAI mobilized its network of SCSEP grantees to create nearly 350 community-based public sites that provide free computer coaching sessions for seniors. The learners utilize the self-paced Generations on Line computer tutorial application and receive one-on-one assistance from SCSEP participants who are trained Peer Coaches.

SSAI learned a great deal from the DII. The Peer Coaches reported that the biggest challenges were helping older learners get past their lack of confidence in the ability to use a computer and their “computer anxiety.” One-on-one coaching in a highly supportive group setting was essential to help allay these fears.

It is also significant that the senior learners gained more than computer skills. SSAI’s survey data show that seniors who completed the DII program reported improved morale and attitudes about life.
Especially striking were the attitudinal changes among the learners who initially were the most pessimistic.

Two examples: Of those who were initially the most pessimistic about “feeling useful,” two-thirds of had a more positive response at the end of their DII experience. Also, of the learners who were initially the most pessimistic about “my life has a sense of purpose,” 69 percent had a more positive response after their final coaching session.

‘Everyone On’ Should Mean All Ages

We’ve repeatedly found that older Americans defy expectations that they “can’t learn new tricks” by proving highly capable of learning to use the Internet and feel better when they do so.
SSAI and other organizations that work with and on behalf of older Americans are helping us understand ways to address broadband adoption challenges for our most vulnerable populations.
This is a win-win for everyone, yet such efforts for elders do not get the same attention and support as C2C. Why not?

There are straightforward ways to target the most disadvantaged elders. Just as C2C is using the subsidized school-lunch program for outreach to low-income families, they could reach millions of low-income seniors who already qualify for government rental housing subsidies, Supplemental Security Income, food stamps and energy assistance programs—programs serving those of all ages.

Commendable as C2C’s Everyone On campaign is, we urge them to truly include everyone of any age.

Cecilia Garcia is the executive director of the Benton Foundation, and Bob Harootyan, is the research manager of Senior Service America, Inc.

]]> tag:newamericamedia.org,2013://19.11170 2013-03-23T07:40:00Z 2013-03-22T23:57:09Z

Photo: Pew Research Hispanic CenterSACRAMENTO, Calif.--As the state with the country's largest immigrant population, California has the most to gain--or the most to lose--in the immigration debate.That's why over 100 organizations based in the Golden State unveiled a bold statement...

Reshma Shamasunder ]]> http://publisher.namx.org/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=19&id=103 Photo: Pew Research Hispanic Center

SACRAMENTO, Calif.--As the state with the country's largest immigrant population, California has the most to gain--or the most to lose--in the immigration debate.

That's why over 100 organizations based in the Golden State unveiled a bold statement of values and policy recommendations this week, including organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union of California, the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the Black Alliance for Just Immigration and the California Dream Team Alliance.

The statement urges Congress to pass immigration reform that protects the principle of family unity for all, including families with diverse sexual orientations; creates a road to citizenship for 11 million aspiring citizens that is free of obstructions; ends unjust detentions and deportations; protects worker rights; and ensures a humane and efficient border.

California’s experience with immigration is especially pertinent now. The state used to be a lot like Arizona. But ugly policies that today are called "self-deportation" inspired a backlash from immigrant communities that forever changed the political equation in this state.

Since then, we've seen the positive impact of polices honoring the values of equality, family and hard work.

Just ask the student in San Jose, who, for the first time this year, applied for state financial aid to further her dreams. Or the cook in San Bernardino, still working hard after a state law busted a discriminatory local plan that would have forced restaurants to fire immigrant workers last year.

Broken Federal Policies

More than any other state, California has seen the immense suffering that broken federal policies cause.

Just ask the families of people like Anastasio Rojas, brutally tased to death by border patrol agents. Or the tens of thousands of people deported last year after arrests as minor as selling ice cream without a permit. (Here, California is also at fault.) 

The point is, the fine print matters. Just one paragraph buried among thousands of pages of legislation can transform the lives of all of California's 2.7 million aspiring citizens and their families.

That's why Congress must make sure reform sticks to this nation's founding principle--that all people are created equal.

Of course, the pathway to citizenship that's gaining acceptance on both sides of the political aisle must be for all 11 million undocumented Americans. It must be as broad as possible and can't contain roadblocks, especially the awful threat of detention and deportation that hangs over immigrant communities across the nation.

The United States also needs to scrap controversial programs, such as Secure Communities, eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement's constitutionally questionable "hold" requests (the driving force behind the deportation of over 92,000 Californians), and ensure fair treatment for those who are detained.

It is imperative that the U.S. protect the rights of all workers. As even Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky, noted on Wednesday, forcing employers to check workers' immigration status through web-based programs like E-Verify would essentially make "every business owner a policeman."

Were E-Verify forced on all California businesses, it would kill the jobs of some 90,000 authorized workers in the state, while pushing many others into the underground economy--including that San Bernardino restaurant worker.

Keep Border Agencies Accountable

Finally, to prevent tragedies, such as the fatal tasing of Anastasio Rojas, the U.S. needs to keep border agencies accountable and uphold basic civil and human rights protections.

Ultimately, border communities should be gateways for trade and relationships. If we're going to invest more at the border, let's improve the infrastructure at the ports-of-entry so people and goods can swiftly move through.

We hope that future generations will remember 2013 as the year America's immigration policies finally came into line with our values.

Reshma Shamasunder is the Executive Director of the California Immigrant Policy Center. CIPC coordinated the values statement in partnership with the National Immigration Law Center.




]]>