In a sign that perhaps Pete Wilson is still pulling the strings in her campaign, the following words came out of Meg Whitman’s own mouth: “I wouldn’t support a path to legalization”. Watch the video from the debate for yourself here.

The question that asked the candidates to state their positions on immigration was “do you see any positive impacts of immigration to California and would do you support a path to legalization?”

Interestingly, both candidates skipped the first part of the question: “do you see any positive impacts of immigration to California?” Instead, they both chose to focus on the usual “secure our borders, go after employers” mantras. It’s not surprising, being that politicians hardly ever stand up to talk about the actual positivies that immigration has in our economy like how undocumented immigrants basically subsidze our way of life because undocumented immigrants pay taxes, they do some of the hardest-labor jobs, save our Social Security from going into the hole, etc. etc.

Moreover, it was particulary interesting to see Meg Whitman say she opposes a path to legalization, which by definition would be included in any comprehensive immigration reform. This was of particular interest being that her position would be at odds with most Californians. Via this Public Policy Institute poll back in March 2010 which showed that:

Seventy percent of Californians believe undocumented immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for at least two years should be allowed to keep their jobs and eventually apply for legal status.

On the other hand, Jerry Brown bragged about how he signed on California to the so-called ”Secure Communities Program”. Too bad that the program actually makes our communities unsafe because it punishes the good guys and lets the bad ones go. Nevertheless, kudos to Jerry Brown for the reference he made to Eastern European authoritarian regimes of the past, reiterating that authoritarian laws that only focus on inhumanely rounding people up are just plain wrong. Also, kudos for not letting Meg Whitman off the hook for her inconsistencies on her stand on immigrant economic refugees. Jerry Brown’s Facebook page highlighted the following after the debate:

JUST THE FACTS #5: MEG WHITMAN FLIP-FLOPS ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

Meg Whitman’s position on how California should handle its undocumented immigrants is riddled with inconsistencies. She initially embraced the strict, anti-illegal immigrant rhetoric of her campaign chairman, former Gov. Pete Wilson, during the Republican primaries. However, in a transparent attempt to pander to moderate voters, she has muddled many of her positions saying that her past statements should be viewed in light of her unfamiliarity with the issue.

Whitman Names Prop. 187 Champion Pete Wilson Campaign Chair, Nowhere To Be Found After Primary

• “In the GOP primary…Whitman brought out her campaign manager, former Gov. Pete Wilson, a man celebrated by many conservatives and reviled by many Latinos because of his highly visible support of Proposition 187. Wilson appeared in a radio ad called ‘Tough as Nails,’ in which Whitman said, ‘Illegal immigrants should not expect benefits from the state of California.’” [Los Angeles Times, 7/14/10]

• “During the Republican gubernatorial primary, Meg Whitman responded to her rival, Steve Poizner, by enforcing her opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants. She even went so far as to enlist former Gov. Pete Wilson, who declared Whitman “tough as nails” on the issue. But that was then. Now, Whitman is on the air with two new Spanish-language ads, and Wilson is nowhere to be found. Instead, the ads discuss Whitman’s opposition to Arizona’s immigration law and to Proposition 187, the 1994 measure backed by, you guessed it, Pete Wilson.” [Los Angeles Times, 6/17/10]

Whitman Says She Would Let The Arizona Law Stand For Arizona

• “I would, you know I think, I understand that immigration is a federal issue, but I would say, you know, the states have got to be able to decide what is right for their state, so I would let the Arizona law stand for Arizona.” [Meg Whitman on Talk Radio Network's "America's Morning News," 7/28/10]

• “If the Arizona law is correct, are you [Meg Whitman] going to be an advocate to get a similar law passed in California? Oh, wait a second. California has different geography? Oh, I understand now. ” ["The John and Ken Show", KFI 640 AM, 8/2/10]

Whitman Supports Forced Reporting Of Undocumented Immigrants-Which Was Part Of Proposition 187

• “Whitman said…that schools, hospitals and law enforcement agencies should be required to report undocumented immigrants to federal authorities. She later backtracked on schools, saying, ‘I want to think about that a little bit.’” [Los Angeles Times, 2/11/09]

Whitman Wants To Ban Children Of Undocumented Immigrants From Public Universities

• “As governor, Meg will support policies that will not allow undocumented immigrants admission to state-funded institutions of higher education, such as UC, CSU and community colleges. [Meg Whitman, Meg 2010: Building A New California]

Whitman Says She Is Unfamiliar With Illegal Immigration Terminology

• “[Whitman] has struggled to explain her past and current positions on the issue. She said…her lack of familiarity with the issue and her newness to politics had caused the misunderstanding. ‘When you’re new to politics, sometimes you use words that have like a meaning to people who have been in politics for 20 years,’ she explained.” [The Washington Post, 5/31/10]

For other video clips from the debate, visit KABC’s site here.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

When you defend America’s freedom, it doesn’t matter about whether you are black, brown, white, yellow, Republican, Democrat, gay, straight, or whatever other label you might want to use. None of that matters; or at least it’s not supposed to matter. All that it matters is making sure that you got the back of your buddy next to you, your fellow soldier. Currently, the U.S. government bars youth that are undocumented from serving in the U.S. military, in a country that these kids have grown up in and is all that they have ever known and loved. Many of these young adults have been brave enough to come out of the shadows and make their voices heard. Via Citizen Orange:

Military Hopefuls Continue to Grow Outside McCain’s Office
Undocumented youth asking to join military grow in numbers in Phoenix

Phoenix, Arizona – Undocumented youth are now on their 4th day outside of Senator McCain’s Phoenix office. Michael, an undocumented aspiring serviceman, is leading a boot camp that has extended for four fays outside of the senator’s office with a simple ask, “let me be a soldier.”

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

Even though the blogosphere and twitter have been on fire the past few days since Harry Reid made the announcement and Keith Olbermann featured the news of the DREAM Act being voted on next week, to this day the Rachel Maddow Show has not done a segment on it. It would not be a stretch for her to cover the momentous vote on the DREAM as a first step towards comprehension reform, being that her team has been doing quite a lot of coverage this year on the topic of reforming our immigration system; just take a look at her MSNBC Blog archives. In fact, it would be a perfect follow up story for her.

So, following the queue from Citizen Orange’s petition to ask Keith Olbermann to have DREAM Act youth leaders on his show, I’m starting Project Economic Refugee’s own petition to ask Rachel Maddow to finally cover the DREAM Act. Actually, if Rachel Maddow features the DREAM Act youth activits before Keith Olberman does, she would not only make up for the snub she unwittingly made against hot immigration reform news but she would be outdoing her peer Mr. Olbermann all in one swoop. The twitter petition can be accessed here and asks the following:

petition @maddow to FINALLY cover #DREAMAct YouthActivists on her show #p2 #ri4a http://act.ly/2en RT to sign

So who are the DREAM youth activists? There’s lots of them … would you like to meet them? Well, for starters you could check out Citizen Orange’s Letters to Obama, DREAMActivist.org, or you can see them on video-DREAMpositive has lots of video featuring these inspiring courageous leaders.

For more updates on this, please visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee.

In case you missed it, the DREAM Act was featured on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, highlighting how it has the potential to be a first step towards comprehension immigration reform to solve our broken immigration system. Keith had Rep. Luis Gutierrez on to discuss how this momentous vote has the potential of impacting the “enthusiasm gap” for Democrats that the media keeps on obsessing about. Rep. Gutierrez talked about how President Obama clearly feels passionate about his support of passing the DREAM Act and about how the legislation would support our national security.

Keith also had Clarissa Martinez on from the National Council of la Raza to discuss how Republicans better be careful if they plan to block a vote on the DREAM Act because Latino voters, whether they are registered Democrats or registered Republicans, will not forgive a “no” vote on the DREAM and will remember that come this November at the voting booth.

Watch the two segments here.

Overall, it’s very rewarding to see the DREAM Act rising to national attention like this. However, I’m a little puzzled as to why other MSNBC hosts have chosen to ignore the DREAM Act vote. I’m not surprised that Chris Matthews has not covered the DREAM Act on his show yet because he tends to be disconnected from how important the Latino vote is … but no coverage from the Rachel Maddow show? The DREAM Act has the potential of completely altering the dynamics of the November midterm elections and yet no mention of it? What is going on? Also, Ed Schultz’s show did not cover it either, which is also a bit disappointing because sometimes Ed can be a little bit edgier than his fellow MSNBC hosts.

For more on this, please visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee:

It’s official: poised to make a downpayment on immigration reform, Senator Reid announced that the DREAM Act, which would allow children of immigrant economic refugees to attend college, will be introduced as an amendment to the Defense Reauthorization bill. 

[...]

This is HUGE news, taking place after months of inaction and mere lip service by this Congress and President Obama on the matter of immigration reform and right on the heels of hearing word that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell would be also voted on next week in a similar congressional maneuver.   

[...] putting it into context-while all the attention in the media was on the uber-conservative Tea Party wins on primary night 09/14, it seems that the progressives bagged a few victories of their own this week-Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was declared unconstitutional by a federal judge and will now be put up for a vote next week, the DREAM Act was scheduled for a vote for next week as well, and finally they were capped by progressive candidate Ann McLane beating conservative Democrat Katrina Swett for the Democratic Party nomination for one of the New Hampshire seats on the House of Representatives.  Definitely interesting…

Updates on this are developing quickly; for the latest visit Project Economic Refugee.

The following originally appeared on Project Economic Refugee:

Excellent point that George Lakoff makes on this TruthOut OpEd piece titled Disaster Messaging that tackles what Project Economic Refugee has been covering on the [In]Secure Communities Program:

End a Bad Law: 287(g)

Bad laws, laws that hurt far more than they help, should be eliminated. Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is a bad law. Here’s why.

Almost all immigrants who entered the US without papers are honest, hard-working, decent people, who have often risked their lives to come the America. They do essential work, mostly for low wages, work that makes the lifestyles of most Americans possible: cleaning homes, caring for children and the elderly, gardening, cooking in restaurants, working on farms, doing odd jobs, working on construction. They deserve our gratitude. They are America’s mainstays, good guys. There are 12 million of them in America, helping us all live better every day.

A small number, as in any population, are bad guys: occasional murderers, human traffickers, drug dealers, gang members and thieves. They need to be captured and convicted.

But 287(g) mostly harasses, jails, harms and deports the good guys and, in doing so, mostly lets the bad guys escape.

The 287(g) program allows local police and jailers to act as deportation agents with ultimate power over the lives of the good guys, who are assumed to be guilty until proven innocent. Their very entry into the US without papers constitutes sufficient “guilt” to justify their mistreatment and deportation.

The 287(g) program promotes a form of racial profiling – 287(g) is immoral, an affront to the human rights that define what America is about.

The 287(g) program is also ineffective in getting the bad guys, partly because it uses so many resources on going after the good guys.

As Alex DiBranco reports, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found that 287(g) is poorly managed, ineffectively organized and arbitrarily implemented from place to place; ignores or actually provides false information to the public; fails to focus on noncitizens who pose a safety threat; gives shoddy training; lacks oversight; and has not terminated those local partners who have clearly violated the terms of the agreement – local law enforcement officials running amok in hunting down harmless undocumented immigrants. The 287(g) program also deters undocumented immigrants who witness a crime from coming forward and encourages racial profiling in which Latinos are “guilty until proven innocent.”

The 287(g) program should be ended and replaced by a law that protects the good guys and pays serious attention to catching the bad guys. It is not just ineffective; it is downright immoral.

To read more on this and for further updates, visit Project Economic Refugee.