Immigration bill blasted by L.A. council...

Immigration bill blasted by L.A. council



POLITICS: Members vote 11-1 to oppose bill requiring proof of a legal right to work.



By Rick Orlov, Kerry Cavanaugh and Harrision Sheppard, Staff Writers Article Launched: 03/26/2008 10:50:29 PM PDT



Tapping the hot-button issue of immigration in the region, the Los Angeles City Council and a group of community leaders on Wednesday denounced a federal measure that would require employers to verify their workers are in the country legally.

Calling it mean-spirited and intentionally divisive, the council voted 11-1 to oppose the measure proposed by Rep. Heath Shuler, R-N.C., which would beef up border patrols and use a computerized system to verify the legal status of job candidates.

"We have something more compassionate and humane from the National League of Cities that we would like to see implemented," Councilman Dennis Zine said.

"We deal with the issue of immigration, but in a way that recognizes the realities of the problem and just doesn't say we will ship 12 million people out of the country."

Zine, who chairs the immigration task force for the organization, said many of the people who are now considered illegal immigrants came to the U.S. legally on student or work permits and have subsequently been caught up in changes in the law.

"We all recognize the need for immigration reform, but this act goes too far," council President Eric Garcetti said.

"It will make it a crime for millions of workers whose only offense is they want to work and support their family."

The only council member voting to support the measure was Councilman Greig Smith. He did not say why he supported it.

Shuler and his representatives did not return telephone calls.

But the vote reignited heated debate as Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform disputed the council's arguments.

"This is a sensible bill," Mehlman said. "We've had employer sanctions for 22 years and this is the first measure that tries to come up with a system of enforcement."

While there have been concerns over the database used to verify citizenship, Mehlman said efforts should be made to improve the information.

"No system is 100 percent foolproof and, if we wait for perfection, we will never have anything put in place," Mehlman said.

But representatives from a number of groups - including the American Jewish Committee and the Committee for Humane Immigration Rights in Los Angeles - have joined in opposition to the measure.

Seth Brysk, executive director of the American Jewish Committee, said he believes the measure is designed to divide the country.

"American Jewish Committee has long supported fair and generous immigration policies because we understand the struggle many immigrants face to pursue the American dream," Brysk said.

"This legislation erodes the very values on which our nation was built."

The council's vote came even as California Republican lawmakers reopened the statewide debate over immigration this week by unveiling a wide-ranging anti-illegal-immigration package they said could save money and preserve citizens' jobs.

While the bills were pitched as a "border security legislative package," they had less to do with tightening the borders than with regulating how undocumented immigrants are treated once they are living in California - from denying benefits such as tuition breaks to punishing employers who fail to screen for citizenship.

They also want to crack down on cities that do not aggressively enforce all aspects of federal immigration law.

"We have a lot of unemployed pipefitters, carpenters, domestic workers that are here legally," Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, the Republican caucus chairman, said in unveiling the measures.

"Those are the people we feel an obligation to help employ, rather than those that came in through the back door because we left it unattended."

Still, Democrats who control the Legislature are expected to resist most of the measures. Several Democratic lawmakers have proposed countering bills that would offer additional benefits to both legal and illegal immigrants.

And Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Assembly Speaker Fabian Nu ez, D-Los Angeles, dismissed the Republican proposals as a political stunt in a presidential election year.

"Even Republican presidential nominee John McCain and President Bush would blush at this election-year drill solely designed to score political points," Maviglio said.

But the group of a dozen Republican lawmakers suggested their proposal could save the state billions of dollars at a time when it is facing a projected $8 billion deficit for 2008-09.

"No one wants to cut services to foster kids. No one wants to cut education or reduce the number of police officers and firefighters on our streets," said Assemblywoman Audra Strickland, R-Westlake Village, who proposed a bill to cut nearly all state services to illegal immigrants.

"We need to take care of legal residents first as a way to look at balancing the budget."

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not taken a position on the Republican measures. His focus on immigration has been to demand more federal funding to help with the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants and providing California National Guard troops to help patrol the border.

He has also asked for more federal border agents.

"The governor has been clear that the status quo is unacceptable," said Sabrina Lockhart, a spokeswoman for the governor. "The federal government needs to step up and secure our borders."

It costs California about $800 million to imprison illegal immigrants, Lockhart said.

This year, the state expects to receive about $111 million from the federal government for that purpose, a small increase from the $74 million the state received when Schwarzenegger first took office, she said.

Schwarzenegger has also vetoed or sought to repeal measures to grant drivers' licenses and tuition breaks to illegal immigrants.

One of the newly proposed bills would crack down on so-called sanctuary cities that provide restrictions on how far city employees can go in enforcing federal immigration law.

Los Angeles, for example, has had Special Order 40 in place since 1979. The order prohibits Los Angeles police officers from checking the immigration status of suspects or witnesses.

Supporters say the measure is to encourage witnesses to crimes to come forward without fear of deportation. But critics say it has denied the police an important crime-fighting tool and enforces the image of Los Angeles as a haven for illegal immigrants.



http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_8711344