Follow-Up Letter Faxed to Senator Coats on Immigration Reform

11 June 2013

Dear Senator Coats:

A delegation of Indiana citizens met [Coats staffers] Erin Houchin and Matt Row to discuss immigration reform on May 30, 2013, in Bloomington. The eleven-member delegation included representatives from: Bloomington Commission on Hispanic and Latino Affairs;  Call to Action; La Casa Latino Culture Center; City of Bloomington, Latino Programs & Outreach;  El Centro Comunal Latino; St. Paul Catholic Center, Peace & Justice Task Force; South-Central Indiana Jobs with Justice; White River Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO; and Workers Rights Board of South-Central Indiana.

Ms. Houchin and Mr. Row recommended that we document the conversation in the form of a letter to you. What follows are some of the main points that came up in the discussion. Please consult Ms. Houchin and Mr. Row for a fuller account of the conversation.

  1. GREATER TRANSPARENCY and LEADERSHIP ON YOUR PART. Your staffers did not know your positions on the various facets of immigration reform, nor was “Immigration” a topic to be found on your Congressional Web site. We want to know your position on the various facets of the immigration reform issue well ahead of any vote on the floor of the Senate—as well as whatever personal principles you bring to the issue. We noted, in addition, that your office apparently lacks a Latino outreach director, comparable to the one Senator Donnelly employs. One staffer was unaware of any Latino employee on your staff.
  2. BORDER SECURITY. A staffer suggested that border security was probably one of your main concerns. While we do not dismiss this issue, strengthening what is already a very strong border operation should not—in our opinions—slow down or obstruct other much-needed reforms. Surveys show that a large percentage of undocumented Mexican immigrants would prefer to live and work in Mexico, if satisfactory opportunities existed. Accordingly, it makes more sense to invest in foreign aid to strengthen the Mexican economy (e.g. micro-loans) than to spend additional money on an already vigorous border operation—with ever-diminishing returns. The use of drones is a particularly disturbing proposal for “border security.”
  3. SENATE BILL. Given that most commentators see the Senate immigration bill as the best compromise that’s possible at this time, we urge you to support the bill in the form that passed out of the Judiciary Committee, without “poison pill” amendments or any watering-down of worker protections. (The bill would be better, we think, if it contained stronger worker protections for all categories of guestworkers and if the pathway to citizenship were less drawn-out and punitive.)
  4. STRONG WORKER PROTECTIONS. Several participants point out that undocumented workers need strong protections because they’re often threatened with deportation if they blow the whistle on unsafe working conditions and incidents of wage theft. We believe strong worker protections for undocumented workers and guestworkers are part and parcel of the need for strong protections for all workers in the U.S. Providing protections in the immigration reform bill should be independent of any decision about border security or a pathway to citizenship.

Several participants urged you to resist the Republican caucus’s attempt to block President Obama’s nominees to the National Labor Relations Board. Worker protections are useless if there are not agencies, adequately staffed, to enforce those protections. As for the lack of protections for H-2B workers in the current Senate bill, several participants urged you to consider the Blumenthal amendment 17 (“Whistleblower protections”) as a partial “fix” to the Senate bill’s lack of guestworker protections. Meanwhile, the increased cap and lack of protections for H-1B workers is guaranteed to result in unfair competition for American applicants for high-tech jobs.

  1. PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP. The pathway to citizenship in the current bill is too drawn-out and punitive. In particular, one participant urged the elimination of monetary penalties, given that most undocumented immigrants already pay—and have paid for many years—a significant amount of tax, thereby having supported the social programs and standard of living we citizens currently enjoy.
  2. PRESSURES ON IMMIGRANT FAMILIES. Participants who work with local undocumented immigrants and their employers report that uncertainty about their safety and status every hour of every day is highly stressful , undermining the strength of those families. The uncertainty is also stressful for employers.

Thank you, Senator Coats, for your consideration.

Respectfully,

John Clower

Tags: