Posts Tagged ‘ alabama ’

Mónica García: Hey Alabama, Take A Hint From California

October 12, 2011

While Alabama and other states are putting barriers to the education of immigrant children, California celebrates Latino Heritage Month by passing the California Dream Act, which will ensure that all deserving students get the opportunity to pursue higher education and be productive members of society. Alabama’s recent court ruling to uphold significant portions of Alabama’s immigration law seems shamelessly un-American. In light of reports that Latino students are vanishing from public schools in the wake of the ruling, we think it is timely to remind people why we celebrate Latino Heritage Month. Also, as Board members of the Los Angeles Unified School District, we care deeply about the education of all children and feel compelled to remind people why, as Americans, it is our responsibility to educate all children, regardless of immigration status, and why anti-immigrant state laws are un-American. We must educate all children, regardless of immigration status, because it is the law of the land. In the Plyer case nearly 30 years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that every undocumented child must be provided a public education. The Supreme Court said that the state law in question, which denied funding for K-12 education to undocumented children, was “directed against children, and impose[d] its discriminatory burden on the basis of a legal characteristic over which children can have little control.” While proponents of current anti-immigrant state laws claim the measures do not prohibit undocumented children from attending school, the effect is that it does keep them at home. It does, in effect, deny them their right to a public education. Education officials in Alabama say that scores of immigrant families have withdrawn their children or kept them home after the court ruling. And several districts with large immigrant enrollments reported a sudden exodus of children of Latino parents. Anti-immigrant state laws cannot do indirectly what they are forbidden to do directly: deny undocumented children, many of whom are Latino, a public education. Moreover, any suggestion by state officials in Alabama that their state is only trying to compile immigrant status statistics for benign purposes is naïve at best, disingenuous at worst. Such informational gathering cannot be benign when the law’s findings start by stating that “The State of Alabama finds that illegal immigration is causing economic hardship and lawlessness in this state…” The findings go onto say that “because the costs incurred by school districts for the public… education” of undocumented children “adversely affect the availability of public education resources” to non-undocumented students, “the State of Alabama determines that there is a compelling need for the State Board of Education to accurately measure and assess the population of students who are aliens not lawfully present in the United States….” Immigration status statistics are not simply being collected for the sake of being collected. The students’ information is being taken because, as the legislation’s findings indicate, there is a presumption that these children are guilty of draining state resources. Thus, the Alabama law is un-American on several levels. It is based on a premise that illegal immigrant students are guilty, until proven innocent, of being a drag on state resources. In America, you are innocent until proven otherwise. In America, all children have a right to public education. The Latino students in Alabama are therefore guilty with little chance of proving their innocence because, while their “costs” are immediate (and their guilt immediately apparent), their benefits do not materialize until long into the future. With the law that just took effect, the chance of these children’s benefits materializing and becoming apparent – and the chance of these students proving their innocence – has just diminished substantially. In fact, the benefits may have turned to costs because, as the Plyer decision stated, denying the undocumented children a proper education would likely contribute to “the creation and perpetuation of a subclass of illiterates within our boundaries, surely adding to the problems and costs of unemployment, welfare, and crime.” The Alabama law is also un-American because it is contrary to what then-Senator Obama said in his July 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention: America is the “Beacon of freedom and opportunity for those that have come here.” For thousands of undocumented Latino immigrant students, the Alabama law does away with the America that made President Obama’s story possible – an America where no children’s dream is impossible and where every child has an opportunity. State anti-immigrant laws make impossible human stories of self-determination, dignity and respect. They make impossible the stories that are only possible in America, such as that of leading U.S. neurosurgeon Dr. Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, who made it from being an undocumented California farm worker child to Harvard Medical School and who now directs and leads preeminent brain surgery and research programs at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, a leading hospital in the world. Just as President Obama said that “in no other country on Earth is my story even possible,” so, too, only in America would Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa’s story, and those of other Latino immigrant students, be possible. We celebrate Latino Heritage Month to acknowledge opportunity in this country and remind ourselves of our American traits: self-determination, dignity and respect. Celebrate with us Latino Heritage Month by expressing your support for an America where all children have a right to education. We must oppose any attempt to limit or deny children a chance to be productive members of this society. We call on Congress and President Obama to address issues related to the Federal Dream Act immediately. In the spirit of hope. Daughters of Immigrants, Mónica García Board President Los Angeles Unified School District Nury Martinez Board Member Los Angeles Unified School District The Los Angeles Unified School District is the second largest school district in the country, with about 665,000 students, 73% of whom are Latino. See the article here: Mónica García: Hey Alabama, Take A Hint From California

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Local News | Comments Off on Mónica García: Hey Alabama, Take A Hint From California

Fernando Espuelas: The Mormon in the Room

October 9, 2011

Why is Mitt Romney so unloved by the Republican base? Even after Rick Perry’s meteoric rise and fall in the polls, the main beneficiary of the Texas governor’s stumbles has been Herman Cain, not Romney. In a series of polls over the last few days, Cain, a man who has never held elective office, a virtually unknown person in the national political scene until his appearance on the multiple debate stages, has surged. In the latest CBS News poll , Cain actually ties with Romney, 17% to 17%, even as Rick Perry falls from 23% to 12% compared to the same poll 2 weeks earlier. So where’s the love for Mitt, the presumptive GOP frontrunner? Shouldn’t the GOP’s vaunted “coronation” process, where the perceived best candidate is pushed forward by the establishment and base of the party towards the nomination, much like George W. Bush was in 2000, be creating a similar momentum for Romney? The conventional answer goes something like this: Romney has changed so many of his core positions after his governorship of Massachusetts, and his subsequent multiple runs for president, that voters are suspicious of what he really believes. Is Romney pro-choice? He was, but not anymore. Did he support the end of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military? Yes, that is, until he was against it. Gun laws, same. Immigration reform, he was for it until he discovered that you can’t be nominated in today’s post-Reagan GOP unless you advocate ever harsher anti-immigrant measures that, as in the case of Arizona and Alabama, amount to lightly disguised ethnic cleansing strategies. And Social Security? When Perry first zoomed up the GOP preference polls — and his nonstrategic insistence that the federal program that nearly wiped out poverty among senior citizens over the last 7 decades is nothing more than a gigantic Bernie Madoff-style scam — Romney abandoned his Social Security privatization views for the more Florida-friendly new role as the Social Security champion. While an evolution of your views over time is a sign of a learning brain, incorporating new facts as they are discovered, Romney’s whole-cloth shift in so many fundamental issues of deep ideological import to Republicans is inherently suspect. But this may not be Romney’s biggest problem in creating an emotional bond with the base of the GOP. While the former Massachusetts Governor has morphed into a Southern-strategy friendly Conservative, he can’t fully escape who he is. There are some factors that are beyond the power of focus-group driven repositioning. Romney, of course, is a devout Mormon. His family is steeped in the Mormon tradition. And no one has remotely questioned Romney’s sincerity in this regard. And that is the problem. Romney is the Mormon in the room. His religion crashes directly into Evangelical Christian dogma. As CNN reported , Robert Jeffress, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, who has endorsed Rick Perry, has called the Mormon church a “cult.” In a recent speech before the conservative Values Voters Summit, Jeffress unloaded on the Mormon faith. Speaking to CNN after his appearance, Jeffress said, “I think Mitt Romney’s a good, moral man, but I think those of us who are born-again followers of Christ should always prefer a competent Christian to a competent non-Christian like Mitt Romney. So that’s why I’m enthusiastic about Rick Perry.” This is the ultimate dog whistle for Evangelicals. Jeffress is clearly making the case that Romney is a “non-Christian” and therefore not fit to be the President of the United States. In the same interview Jeffress asserted that Romney “doesn’t embrace the historical tenets of evangelical Christianity.” And this is not a new problem from Romney. Back in 2007 during Romney’s first run for the GOP nomination, the televangelist Bill Keller penned a missive to Evangelicals that is as clear as can be. It was titled “A vote for Romney is a vote for Satan.” Conservative firebrand and electoral marketing wiz Richard Viguerie published on his site in May an equally devastating claim: 55 percent of conservative activists and Tea Partiers polled by Richard Viguerie’s ConservativeHQ.com responded that they, ‘would vote for a third-party or independent candidate’ if Romney were the nominee. In simple terms, the most conservative Evangelical leaders are casting Romney as the “Other.” Not as bad as a Kenyan Muslim to be sure, but in the same genre of unacceptable candidates. Beyond the theological issues, the political implications of this line of thought are devastating for Romney. No Republican candidate since Ronald Reagan paid homage to the Rev. Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority in the 1980 election, has made it to the White House without carrying the Evangelical vote by dominant margins. The idea that in 21st century America a person can be disqualified for the presidency based on his religion is outrageous. Religious prejudice against Romney is as repulsive as the Tea Party’s frequent flirtations with anti-Obama racism. Romney by all accounts is a decent man. He should be given the chance to compete for the presidency on the merits of his ideas — his religion is not a legitimate criteria to evaluate his fitness for the presidency. And those who seek to create a theocratic test for presidential candidates should spend some time reading the U.S. Constitution. Article 6 clearly states: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States . From the very beginning of our Republic, the Founders’ worried about the kind of religious intolerance now being directed at Mitt Romney. As President George Washington wrote : If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution. Robert Jeffress’ anti-Mormon bigotry is exactly the kind of “spiritual tyranny” that George Washington warned us about. It has no place in American politics and GOP primary voters should reject it for what it is: un-American. See the original post here: Fernando Espuelas: The Mormon in the Room

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Local News | Comments Off on Fernando Espuelas: The Mormon in the Room

Raw Police Video