On to the Louisiana State Senate

HB 25, HB 1357, and HB 1358 all passed the Louisiana House today by large margins. HB 25 passed by a vote of 84 Yeas, 10 Nays, 10 Absent. HB 1357 passed by a vote of 77 Yeas, 18 Nays, 9 Absent. And HB 1358 passed by a vote of 70 Yeas, 17 Nays, 17 Absent. In short, it is a disappointing day. But all is not lost. These bills move next to consideration in the Senate where those of us who oppose these bills can press our arguments again and more forcefully, and hope for a more receptive audience. If you want to see how your legislator voted on these measures, click here for HB 1357, here for HB 1358, and here for HB 25. On HB 1358, which was the first of the three to be debated on the Floor by the legislature, Rep. Damon Baldone, a Democrat from Houma, proposed an Amendment to the legislation that read as follows:

On page 2, after line 16, insert the following:
"(3) The person was transporting the alien in the course of rendering humanitarian in the form of food, shelter, clothing, medical aid, educational services, or religious services."

This amendment was defeated by a vote of 52 Nays, 43 Yeas, and 9 Absent.

My Representative, Walker Hines, I am pleased to report, voted against HB 1357 and HB 1358. Unfortunately, he also voted for HB 25, though that legislation was amended in such a way that gave local law enforcement a bit of a loophole to ignore it. I can't say that I'm pleased that Hines voted for HB 25, which amounts to ethnic profiling as I see it; but he deserves much credit for being one of the few to oppose the other two bits of legislation that were really the pieces of legislation that sought to criminalize charity.

In his defense of the bills, Rep. Geymann said that the language did not prohibit acts of kindness and good samaritan behavior; but the fact that he and others refused to back up that claim by supporting Baldone's Amendment specifying this for the record, is a testament to his deceptiveness and his lies on the subject.

And I have to admit to being stunned that, when questioned about it, Rep. Geymann said point blank that this legislation did not carry any punitive action against the migrants themselves, as if that somehow salvaged the integrity of the measure, but that it sought specifically to target citizens!!!!!. In essence, he was implying that illegal immigrants caught being transported or sheletered by a citizen neighbor would be treated courteously and left to go freely about their business, but that the citizen doing the transporting and sheltering would be the ones subject to criminal consequences. What kind of bass-ackwards rationale is that?!?!

Other legislators who are in my good book for opposing HB 1357 and HB 1358 include:
Walt Leger, III from District 91 (Uptown New Orleans). A good Social Justice Catholic and Jesuit Graduate. A true man for others.
Juan LaFonta from District 96 (Gentilly), who actually opposed all three measures.
Charmaine Marchand from District 99 (Bywater/9th Ward), who also opposed all three bills.
Karen Carter Peterson from District 93 (CBD/French Quarter/Marigny/Treme), who also voted against all three bills.

Legislators in the dog house for supporting all three bills and for voting against Baldone's Amendment:
Nick Lorusso from District 94 (Lakeview). And he's a Jesuit Graduate, too. Very disappointing that he would vote to criminalize basic Christian charity, to dismiss the Catholic Church's clear position against these measures on moral grounds, and to not even support an Amendment that protects humanitarian good deeds.
Kirk Talbot from District 78 in the River Ridge/Harahan region of Jefferson Parish.

Looks Like We've Got Another One

An anti-illegal immigrant bill that seeks to criminalize the renting of an apartment or house (but not a hotel room!) to migrants. This bill, HB 1365, sponsored by Rep. Tim Burns, a Mandeville Republican. Let's write our legislators opposing this bill on humanitarian grounds.

Where's the NOLA Blogosphere on the Immigration Bills?

I have to say that I have been a bit surprised that the NOLA blogosphere has been very quiet about the immigration bills working their way through the Louisiana legislature. It's no secret that it has been my own little personal crusade to kill HB 25, HB 1357, and HB 1358, and so perhaps I am a bit over-excited about the issue. Maybe others just don't get all that worked up about it like I do. But it seems so clear to me that these bills are such an egregious affront to basic human decency that I cannot fathom that the NOLA blogosphere, as progressive as it tends to be, would be dispassionately apathetic on the issue. And though I probably am over-reacting, it has caused me to wonder if there is more implicit and unspoken support for these bills, even among progressives, than I would have imagined. I haven't had the time to check the status on these bills, but I plan to do so right after I make this posting. And if there has been any movement up at the Capitol, I'll post an update accordingly.

But, please, NOLA blogger progressives, can someone tell me that I'm not tilting at windmills here?

UPDATE: Monday, May 12, 2008, 9:27PM: I just checked the status of the bills on the Louisiana House of Representatives website, and it appears that HB 1357 and HB 1358 are still awaiting debate on the House Floor, which is scheduled for tomorrow. HB 25, which requires local law enforcement to verify immigration status upon arrest, apparently was considered on the House Floor today and the result was the following: "Read by title, rules suspended, action deferred." I have no idea what this means, but I'll take the fact that it hasn't passed yet as a good sign and consider that "action deferred" is a positive development.

A Letter to Louisiana Legislators on the Immigration Bills

Here's a version of a letter that I've been sending around to Louisiana legislators whom I think can be persuaded to oppose HB 25, HB 1357, and HB 1358. These three bills seek to force an unfunded mandate on local law enforcement officers to become immigration authorities and to criminalize charity. The following letter comes at the subject from the perspective of a Christian, so it might not be best suited for your own point of view; but there is a secular humanitarian argument along similar lines that can be made as well. If you find it helpful, please feel free to use my letter as a guide to writing your own letter to your Louisiana legislators.

Dear Rep. _____________ :

I am writing to you not only as a constituent, but also as a person committed to humanitarian and just solutions to problems, as someone who is a Catholic Christian, and as a concerned fellow citizen of Louisiana. So, I am making a personal appeal to you. I urge you to oppose in strong and unequivocal terms the poorly-crafted, mean-spirited, and dehumanizing legislation (HB 25, HB 1357, and HB 1358) proposed by Rep. Brett Geymann against undocumented migrants and those who would be kind to them and seek to serve them. In fact, I urge you to be a vocal and outspoken leader in opposing these measures. As I see it, these legislative bills as they are written are an affront to basic human decency. Not only do they dehumanize other people for no reason other than crossing an imaginary line drawn on God's earth in order to survive and provide for their families, but, worse, they also criminalize individual acts of charity by those who would be good samaritans and servants to the marginalized and unwanted. And it goes without saying that they impose an unfunded mandate on local law enforcement to carry out what is essentially a federal reponsibility.

The Times-Picayune editorialized that these legislative initiatives seek to "codify bigotry." I agree with the Times-Picayune. The Catholic Church strongly opposes such kinds of measures to deal with the issue of illegal immigration as inconsistent with God's call to care and serve others, especially the marginalized among us. I agree with the Catholic Church. After reviewing these pieces of legislation, I can find nothing to explain the motivation for them as they are written beyond a pure, mean-spirited, and dehumanizing bigotry. Rep. Geymann should be ashamed of these pieces of legislation; and any decent human being should be willing to address the concerns surrounding the illegal immigration issue without resorting to such draconian and unenforceable and morally wrong measures.

As a lay affiliate of the Catholic Maryknoll Religious Order, I am a strong advocate and practitioner of Catholic Social Justice teaching. And, I am committed to being a Christian servant to others without preconditions on who those "others" are. Everything that I am and believe screams out against these reprehensible pieces of legislation sponsored by Rep. Geymann.

I agree that a country has a right to police its borders, but it can be done in a humane way that is consistent with the best values of our society, and which does not interject the meanspirited and (as I see it) hateful attitudes so often levied against some of the hardest-working and nicest people in the world. Furthermore, what's even more distressing to me is that these pieces of legislation seek not only to curb illegal immigration, but also to criminalize individual acts of charity.

We Christians are told that individual acts of kindness and mercy towards the less fortunate, regardless of their circumstances or immigration status, are acts that help get us into heaven. Yet the irony is that this legislation as written intentionally threatens people who engage in such acts with time in prison. Think of it this way: God promises us a heavenly reward for acts of kindness and mercy towards our neighbors, and yet Rep. Geymann promises us prison time for it. How does any Christian square that? How can anybody with a conscience, no matter what his or her opinions are on the illegal immigration question, square that?

I trust you to do what is morally right here, even if you find it to be politically unpopular. We who are advocates of the Social Justice Mission of the Catholic faith are watching this issue very closely. Please don't let us down. Step up and fight against criminalizing kindness!

Sincerely,

If you are unsure who your legislator is, you can go to this website and type in your home address, which will pull up your legislator and his/her contact information. Please don't delay in writing your legislator. According to my reading of the Louisiana Legislature's schedule, these bills are headed for a vote this coming Tuesday, May 13. So, there's no time to lose.

I wrote to my legislator, Walker Hines, some time last week asking him to oppose these bills. He wrote a very nice reply back to me almost immediately that was very encouraging. He made no explicit promises, but I really think he will oppose these bills unless they are amended. We shall see. However, Rep. Hines also informed me that he has received a number of calls/emails from constituents in support of these bills. And he says that other legislators have as well. He suspects that they're likely going to pass in the House rather easily. But it's still not too late to derail this legislation. The key is to try to convince legislators that what is flawed about these bills is that they seek to address the problem of undocumented migrants by targeting us citizens with punitive action for nothing more than being good neighbors. This is a wrong-headed way to address the problem. One can be very much in favor of stricter enforcement of immigration laws and for securing the border and still be opposed to these bills on moral grounds. We citizens, by being good samaritans, are NOT the problem here. We shouldn't be targeted as potential criminals for being good neighbors, which is what these bills do. If you want tougher border security and stricter enforcement of immigration laws, tell your legislators that, but tell them also that the three bills currently being considered are not the right and moral way of going about solving the problem.

Criminalizing Charity, Part 2.

On what the hateful immigration bills before the Louisiana legislature mean, Kate Comiskey writes in a letter to the editors of the Times-Picayune:

How can giving another human being shelter become a crime? That is reminiscent of another country, not so long ago, that made laws against harboring or sheltering an ethnic group they wanted to be rid of. They ended up killing over 6 million Jews.

These bills are completely lacking in forethought, humanity or logic. They ask the local citizenry to become de facto immigration officers and threaten them with arrest if they do not comply.

These proposed laws will make racial profiling and discrimination legal for police and citizens. Immigrants, legal and illegal, have rebuilt New Orleans. Is this how we repay them? By kicking them out of apartments, refusing a ride to the store, and expecting the police to waste time attempting to understand things like I-20's, AOS, pending I-130s, removal paperwork and DS-2019s?

Don't we have a highly funded federal agency that was created to deal with this issue? I seem to remember it's called the Department of Homeland Security.

Shame on lawmakers for a hot-headed, childish response to a complicated issue.

Amen, sister!

Happy Mother's Day GOP-Style

When I first read this, I thought it was a joke. But it wasn't:

On Wednesday afternoon, the House had just voted, 412 to 0, to pass H. Res. 1113, "Celebrating the role of mothers in the United States and supporting the goals and ideals of Mother's Day," when Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), rose in protest.

"Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote," he announced.

Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who has two young daughters, moved to table Tiahrt's request, setting up a revote. This time, 178 Republicans cast their votes against mothers.

How sad and pathetic. Apparently, the GOP did this as a stalling tactic to prevent meaningful legislation on housing foreclosure relief from being considered. It's shameless what the GOP will do to try to score some cheap political points. And they wonder why they're now in the minority and are likely to stay there for a good, long while. Phooey on those grinches. Happy Mother's Day anyway!

Laughing at Limbaugh

Clinton in cahoots with Rush Limbaugh. Operation Chaos. That struck me as one of the most absurd things ever to happen. And the fact that Clinton did nothing to counter it also was absurd, albeit depressing. Now that Operation Chaos failed to produce what Limbaugh hoped, Limbaugh's flip-flopping:

"I now believe he would be the weakest of the Democrat nominees," Limbaugh, among the most powerful voices in conservative radio, said on his program. "I now urge the Democrat supereldegates to make your mind up and publicly go for Obama."

"Barack Obama has shown he cannot get the votes Democrats need to win – blue-collar, working class people," Limbaugh also said. "He can get effete snobs, he can get wealthy academics, he can get the young, and he can get the black vote, but Democrats do not win with that."

What a joke! Limbaugh first tells Republicans to cross over, participate in Democratic Primaries, and vote for Clinton. Now, he's telling Democratic superdelegates to choose Obama! And he's using the same rationale that Clinton is using: Obama can't get the "blue-collar, working class people." Does Rush Limbaugh think we're that stupid? Does he think this is some kind of reverse psychology thing? Limbaugh is clinical. Anything that comes out of his mouth is intened to serve only one cause: vilifying liberals and keeping the Democrats out of power. So he wants Democrats to pick Obama because he thinks Obama is the weakest candidate? Well, if Limbaugh is trying to convince Democrats that Obama is the weakest candidate against the GOP, you can bank on Obama being the strongest candidate. Limbaugh is absolutely terrified of an Obama candidacy and is doing whatever he can, including advancing Hillary Clinton's arguments once again, to try to prevent Obama's nomination. He thinks that if he puts the Limbaugh kiss of death on Obama, he will frighten Democratic superdelegates into choosing Clinton, whom he has said repeatedly in the past would be the easiest to defeat. I laugh at Limbaugh. And I hope he gets what he now apparently wants: an Obama candidacy.

Did Hillary Just Slip Us A Hint About The End of Her Candidacy?

Was it just me, or did anyone else pick up on this, too? In her Indiana "victory" speech, Clinton declared that, no matter what happened in the primary, she would support the eventual Democratic candidate. Now my question is: what candidate ever talks in the third person about supporting him or herself? Sure, we all know what she meant to say; but it seemed to me that we witnessed a bit of an uncharacteristic rhetorical slip here that reveals some recognition in Hillary's deepest psyche of the writing on the wall auguring the end of her campaign. By my read, Hillary, in an unguarded moment, let recognition of the inevitability of an Obama nomination sneak out in her comment. Think about it: only candidates who recognize defeat speak in the third person of supporting the eventual nominee. In other words, about a nominee who is presumably not the person making such a promise of support.

Obama, by contrast, talks like a winner does. He speaks in general terms when he says that the Democratic Party will be united against McCain come November. His rhetoric is more that of one not only assuaging the fears of his followers about whether Hillary's supporters will get on board with his candidacy against McCain, but also trying to reach out to Hillary's supporters in such a was so as to make his campaign a welcoming place for them.

I think we're seeing a little bit of a crack in the Clinton armor here. Hillary Clinton may be obsessed with putting on the happy face and desperately trying not to admit the inescapable truth of the end of her candidacy, but any sentient and intelligent human being, even the clinically blinded-to-reality ones, can't keep up pretenses all the time. Sure, Hillary Clinton's exhaustion probably allowed for this unguarded comment to slip out, but it still shows nonetheless that she's positioning herself as the second place supporter of Barack Obama's certain nomination.

What Does One Get for An Act of Mercy or Kindness?

God promises us a heavenly reward for this behavior, and Louisiana Legislator Brett F. Geymann threatens us with prison time for it. Here's the relevant section of HB 1357:

D.(1) Whoever commits the crime of unlawfully harboring, concealing, or sheltering an alien on a first conviction shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars, or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.
(2) Whoever commits the crime of unlawfully harboring, concealing, or sheltering an alien on a second or subsequent conviction shall be fined not more than two thousand dollars, or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

Here's the relevant section of HB 1358:

D.(1) Whoever commits the crime of unlawfully transporting an alien on a first conviction shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars, or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.
(2) Whoever commits the crime of unlawfully transporting an alien on a second or subsequent conviction shall be fined not more than two thousand dollars, or imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than one year, or both.

And And Brett F. Geymann calls himself a Christian. Go figure.

Read the legislation as written. If you think individual acts of kindness towards your migrant neighbors are exempt from the sweeping provisions of this poorly-crafted legislation, you're sadly mistaken. The fact is that even giving your migrant neighbor a ride to Church on Sunday can land you in jail. What kind of legislation would potentially criminalize this kind of behavior? Bad legislation, that's what.

Regardless of where you stand on the question of illegal immigration, you must recognize these pieces of legislation are an affont to basic human decency, they criminalize simple acts of charity or neighborlihess, and they target citizens who are just trying to live good lives by their fellow human beings. There must be better ways to deal with the problem of illegal immigration than by criminalizing the charitable acts of mercy and simple kindness done by citizens.

Please, contact your Louisiana state legislators and demand that they stop this abomination by voting against these measures.