Taking a short detour off the education beat to note this disturbing news item. The media has recently been reporting that 10th District Councilman Brian O'Neill is planning to introduce an ordinance calling for Philly police to run immigration checks on all felony suspects -- an echo of a recent order issued by the New Jersey attorney general.
Despite other issues with the Philly police, I would say the immigrant community generally notes that the cops, with a few exceptions, pretty much separate local policing from fed work around immigration. A lot of it has to do with the sensible fact that there's plenty of other things for the Philly police to do than try to figure out, in a complicated and botched immigration system, if someone is legal or not.
Something like this requires training and additional work. If we figure that ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) gets it wrong plenty of times, how are the Philly police supposed to make this a part of their regular practice? And if we invest in training police, is trying to navigate the immigration morass really something we want them to spend time doing?
The other reason that police generally don't want to run immigration checks is because they recognize the importance of talking to people and gathering information. When cops start asking about immigration status, people walk away. In a felony situation, is that what we want here? Are police supposed to be trying to solve a case or are we expecting them to do the feds' job?
Finally, once an unwritten rule (keep the immigration status out of police work) gets bent, then there is lots of room for abuse. For example, even though NJ's order only applies to felony suspects, on Sept. 18, the Star Ledger reported the story of a local journalist reporting a homicide who was immediately asked about his status and detained when found his visa had expired. When his editor who ran the Brazilian newspaper came to protest he was cuffed to a bench and detained as well. Bad policy = bad police work.
So I'm baffled, not to mention disappointed, by Councilman O'Neill's ordinance, especially given the high number of immigrants in his district and especially considering the urgent issues confronting our communities re: crime and violence. As someone who still gets asked "where I'm from" it's also rather threatening and silencing for a local elected official to be arguing this line.
I'm not sure if the Councilman is responding to a direct need in his community, or whether he's just another stooge on the bandwagon of scapegoating immigrants in order to feel like you're taking action.
O'Neill's resolution failed 12-4
O'Neill offered a non-binding resolution (not a bill to become an ordinance) and it failed 12-4 shortly after introduction and debate.
I voted against it, of course.
Even though it was non-binding, the overwhelmingly Democratic City Council soundly rejected the anti-immigration stance within the resolution. The Republicans voted for it.
Kenney did a great job in the debate.
On November 6, vote DEMOCRATIC!
WWGjr
Nov. 6th: McAleer Vs. O'Neill
Thanks Councilman! I do appreciate our Dems strong stand to oppose blatant anti-immigrant stuff. Whether or not Philadelphia does "enough" for immigrants, I don't feel it's been a situation where a significant percentage has gone after them. But what's up with the partisan divide on this bozo issue? Especially if it seems that Philly police have said this is not exactly what they want to be doing.
Sean McAleer is the Dem running against O'Neill in the 10th. Check him out here:
http://www.mcaleer07.net/
His Host Committee
Seems like a true progressive?
This is his Host Committee
http://www.mcaleer07.net/campaigntrail.htm
The Friends of Sean McAleer
and the Host Committee
Congressman Robert Brady
Jonathan Saidel, Chairman
Harry Citrino, Treasurer
Senator Michael Stack, III
Representative Mike McGeehan
Representative John Sabatina, Jr.
Councilwoman Joan Krajewski
Councilman James Kenney
William Dolbow, Ward Leader 35th Ward
Christine Soloman, Ward Leader 53rd Ward
John Sabatina, Sr., Ward Leader 56th Ward
Francis Conway, Ward Leader 57th Ward
Michael Stack, Jr., Ward Leader 58th Ward
Christopher Drumm, Ward Leader 63rd Ward
Shawn Dillon, Ward Leader 66A Ward
Michael McAleer, Ward Leader 66B Ward
Marita Crawford
Eugene McAleer
Thanks for this post. Even
Thanks for this post. Even if it failed, it is good to see, as a reminder that sometimes in Philly, the national GOP really does shine through in its local members.
First of all, it is dumb to try and give the PPD additional responsibilities. They have enough on their plate.
Second of all, as you say, we are not Hazleton. And, even if this non binding resolution would be fine constitutionally (unlike Hazletons), I would be ashamed to live in a City that passed something like this.
And third, both the DA and PPD currently have do have good, explicit policies (at least in theory, not sure how they work in practice) about this, stating as policy that they will not ask immigration status. It is not just about collecting information- it is about making sure victims of crime are willing to come forward. Would a battered woman give information to police if it mean her immigration status was being called into question? Would an immigrant being ripped off by an employer- not being paid the minimum wage etc- if that meant being deported?
(I know this is just about felony suspects or whatever. But, the point is that the police and DA have the no check policy for very real reasons.)
Anyway, thanks for this post, Mansei.
forum on U.S. Immigration Policy at CCP on October 16
Good posts Dan and Mansei. Also, I appreciate the work of Councilman Kenney, Councilman Goode and others on defeating O’Neill’s resolution.
I hope some of you can join us for a forum at Community College of Philadelphia on “U.S. Immigration Policy: the Impact on Women and Families" on October 16 at 12:30 p.m. C2-28, the Lecture Hall in the Center for Business and Industry Building.
Maria Quinones Sánchez, Democratic nominee for City Council, and Olga Vives, Vice-President of the National Organization for Women will speak on "U.S. Immigration Policy: the Impact on Women and Families" on October 16 at 12:30 p.m. C2-28, the Lecture Hall in the CBI Building, 18th and Callowhill.
Olga Vives, who has worked with immigration rights activists around the country, will give us the national perspective and Maria Quinones Sánchez, who has worked with Philadelphia area groups on this issue, will give us the local perspective.
The event will be open to the public.
Illegal immigration
Let me tell you some other immigration stories.
There was a group of people working in construction. They worked as carpenters, cement masons, carpet layers and assorted other construction trades. They were both Union and non-union. They paid taxes and were paid good, but not great. They received time and a half for overtime and if hurt received workers compensation benefits. If they were cheated by their boss they could go to court and sue. They received some level of health insurance.
There were employers in the construction industry who paid their employees moderately well, deducted taxes, paid for unemployment, workers compensation and health benefits. They paid their employees time and a half for hours worked over forty and paid them for all hours worked.
Then there is a group of employers who hired illegal aliens. They did not give them benefits, deduct taxes, pay overtime or workers compensation. When their employees get hurt they are treated at the emergency room without paying. They are paid less than the employees above and do not receive health or other benefits.
The employees in the first paragraph lost their jobs because they insisted on their employer obeying the law. The employers in the second paragraph could not compete with the employers who hired illegal aliens. I hear heart wrenching stories all the time about the travails about illegal immigrants. What is missing is what the effect is on hard working Americans. As long as they are illegal they are at the mercy of unscrupulous employers. To that extent they lower wages for hardworking Americans.
I know this will raise some hackles, but illegal immigration is not stealing lawyer’s teachers and social worker’s jobs. It s stealing jobs and lowering wages of blue collar workers and those on the lowest rung of the economic ladder.
But a policy where the PPD
But a policy where the PPD runs immigration checks on felony suspects doesn't stop the employers hiring illegal aliens from undercutting groups 1 and 2. It just gives those already shady employers greater power over the immigrants that they hire.
If someone causes problems or asks for more money, the boss calls the police and says they think their employee stole equipment worth a few thousand dollars from the job site. Even if the crime turns out to be bogus, the cops would have to run an immigration check. That keeps wages down and makes hiring undocumented workers more attractive, not less. And if you had a statute that gave a stiff fine to the employer of an undocumented worker who was suspected of a felony, GOP support would dry up right quick. The only way a bill like this goes through is pro-employer and anti-worker
Believe it or not, but a lot of lawyers, teachers, and social workers really are concerned with the wages, safety, and well-being of "blue-collar workers and those on the lowest rung of the economic ladder." But I hate to tell you -- the people who fit that description increasingly are undocumented workers, in addition to U.S. citizens and legal immigrants. If you really care about workers, you don't check ID first.
--Tim
Missed my point
First of all it is the illegal part, not the immigrant part, that lets employers exploit them. I certainly do not want the PD to be in the business of being immigration police. There should be more ways for people to become legal. On the other hand the ICE does nothing to crack down on illegal immigration in the construction industry. The lowering of employment standards is more of a threat to our way of life than terrorism.
The U.S. Dept. of Labor has a policy that they do not share information with ICE/INS about people that come to them. This is the best way to protect immigrants from unscrupulous employers.\
Finally, my point regarding "lawyers, teachers, and social workers " not being concerned about the lowering wage standards is meant to illuminate the point that their jobs are not at risk. I am sure if they were being displaced or their wages lowered they would see things differently
With all due respect, I
With all due respect, I don't think I missed your point at all. You may have missed mine, which is that many people care equally about the concerns of both legal and illegal workers, who face many of the same problems -- lowering wages, poor work conditions, attacks on unionization and other unfair practices, poor health care and other benefits, etc.
But we don't want to throw up a wall to try to help one subset of the group of workers at the expense of another. Not to hum a socialist anthem or anything, but blue-collar natives have more in common with their undocumented counterparts than they do with the people inclined to exploit them both. If it weren't immigrant labor, it would be prison or some other conscripted labor.
To my mind, the way you make wages more competitive is to 1) allow undocumented workers the chance to become documented workers and 2) try to eliminate anything that makes it easier for employers to be exploited. If undocumented workers had the same labor protections, there wouldn't be wage disparity -- there'd just be one common labor market.
--Tim