Thread: COL Lawmakers Pass Strict Illegal Immigration Laws

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,202994,00.html


DENVER — State lawmakers adjourned their five-day special session late Monday after approving the last of a bipartisan package of bills Democrats called the toughest in the nation in dealing with illegal immigration, which would force 1 million people receiving state or federal aid in Colorado to verify their citizenship.

The cornerstone measure, supported by Republican Gov. Bill Owens, would deny most non-emergency state benefits to illegal immigrants 18 years old and older, forcing people to prove legal residency in Colorado when applying for benefits or renewing their eligibility.

Senators voted 22-13 on the bill, with four Democrats joining Republicans in voting no and eight Republicans joining Democrats in voting yes. Representatives voted 48-15 in favor.

"At the end of the day, everybody who serves in this building as senators or representatives knows we're making Colorado history," said the bill's sponsor, Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald, D-Golden. "We want to be able to look in the mirror and say we did legislation that is tough, enforceable and humane."

Opposing Republicans said the bill didn't go far enough, and left some glaring loopholes, including allowing benefits for minors and denying voters the chance to have a direct say on the issue, as they would have had under a proposed ballot initiative that the state Supreme Court disqualified last month.

It was that court ruling that prompted Owens to call lawmakers into the special session, which started Thursday. Some Republicans said was the best they could get while in the minority at the Capitol.
"This bill certainly does not go as far as my party would like it to go," said Sen. Steve Johnson, R-Fort Collins. "But this is the best deal we can get under the circumstances."

Owens said he would have preferred to put a measure on the November ballot, but the compromise had significant requirements and penalties that would apply to Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, energy assistance programs and aging and adult services. He said an estimated 50,000 illegal immigrants could be thrown out of those programs.
"It simply puts teeth into existing federal regulations," Owens said.

After Rep. Dave Schultheis, a Republican from Colorado Springs who spent two nights along the border with a citizens militia said he would vote for the measure, Democratic policy analyst Mary Alice Mandarich and Owens' policy analyst Henry Sobanet could be seen hugging outside the House chamber, congratulating each other on the compromise.
Sen. Dan Grossman, D-Denver, was one of the four Democrats to vote against the measure.

"While I think the bill was a more measured approach on benefits for illegal aliens, I can't get past the fact that we're going to be spending $1 million of taxpayer dollars for a problem that has not yet been established based on political exploitation from Republicans and political fear from Democrats," Grossman said. "I don't think the poor people of the state of Colorado or businesses of the state of Colorado should have to pay because we want to play politics with immigration."

The measure would require state and local government agencies to verify the immigration status of adults who apply for programs such as unemployment benefits, retirement benefits or public housing. Owens estimated about 1 million people in the state are receiving such benefits, and 20,000 to 50,000 of them are illegal immigrants.

The governor said he was disappointed that lawmakers did not pass a bill imposing deadlines on the state Supreme Court, which last month disqualified an initiative barring state services to illegal immigrants from the November ballot. The ruling came after a key deadline passed, in essence killing the initiative.

Owens declared the special session — which cost taxpayers an estimated $75,000 as of Monday night — a success.

Fred Elbel, director of Defend Colorado Now, the group that backed the ballot proposal, said he was satisfied and would also back the compromise.

"It looks very robust," he said.

Owens said the initiative and the proposed new law involved different issues — the initiative would have asked voters to bar state services to illegal immigrants and let the Legislature define those services, while the bill supported by Democrats would use a federal list of services that could be barred, ranging from Supplemental Security Income to adoption assistance.

Fitz-Gerald said she hoped other states would follow Colorado's lead with similar laws so the federal government would "get the message that this issue can be tackled even in this hot political atmosphere."

added to homepage.

Go Colorado! In know some of our activists have been working very hard on this.

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=N ... e&sid=1345

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4035126

Article Launched: 7/11/2006 01:00 AM

some aid banned
Immigration pact OK'd
1 million people in state must prove residency
By Mark P. Couch and Chris Frates
Denver Post Staff Writers
DenverPost.com

Democratic lawmakers and Republican Gov. Bill Owens reached a deal Monday on what both sides called the toughest immigration reform package in the country.

The compromise - which ended a cantankerous five-day special session - will force 1 million people to prove their residency before collecting taxpayer-funded benefits.

It will not, however, go to voters, prompting complaints from many Republicans that their governor had abandoned their bedrock position.

"Bill Owens turned his back not just on the members of his party but on the 50,000 people who wanted to vote on (immigration reform)," said Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield.

Democrats, meanwhile, touted the deal.

"I think we can be proud of the work we have done," said Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald, D-Jefferson County. "We did legislation that was tough, fair to the taxpayers, enforceable and humane."

The two parties have been at odds since the Colorado Supreme Court threw out a ballot proposal that would have asked voters to curtail services to illegal immigrants beyond those mandated by the federal government.

Republicans said their measure was stronger. Democrats said Republicans were just trying to drive Republican-minded voters to the polls and help their candidates in the election.

Owens, who said he would prefer to give voters a choice but would accept a "substantive" proposal, on Saturday had denounced the Democratic plan as too weak.

The Senate strengthened the bill Sunday by adding photo-ID requirements, multiplying the penalties for false applicants and mandating that local governments use standards "no less stringent" than the state.

On Monday, after a day of exhausting, behind-the-scenes negotiating with legislative leaders, Owens accepted the deal. Democrats agreed to restore a background-checking system used by the federal government to verify that applicants for public assistance are legal residents.

"House Bill 1023 is arguably one of the strongest measures of its kind in the country," Owens said. "In some respects, we're now able to see in both parties who's in favor of immigration reform."

The Senate voted 22-13 to pass the bill. Four Democrats joined nine Republicans in voting against the measure. The House voted 48-15 in favor of the bill. Sixteen Republicans voted yes, and three Democrats voted no.

Owens estimated that the identification process could remove as many as 50,000 illegal immigrants from the rolls of those getting public benefits. There are an estimated 250,000 illegal immigrants in Colorado's population of 4 million.

When Owens threw his support behind the amended bill, he dashed the hopes of many Republican lawmakers who wanted to force the issue onto the ballot.

Owens said Republican lawmakers discarded the proposal to add a declaration to another that lets voters decide whether to direct the attorney general to sue the federal government to enforce immigration laws. Democrats agreed to amend the bill to declare that Colorado's public policy would be to provide proof they are legal residents.

Legislative Republicans rejected that amendment as a worthless statement.

"It is a letter to Santa Claus," May said. "I can't vote for that and express very strongly that I can't be a participant in letting the citizens think they're voting for something of value when they're not."

The governor placed the blame squarely on the legislative Republicans for changing their positions throughout the day.

"I thought my party wanted to put something on the ballot," Owens said, "and I got permission to do that, and then they decided it wasn't precisely what they wanted, and so, if they don't want it on the ballot, that's fine with me."

Following Monday's negotiations, Democrats also said Owens agreed to sign House Bill 1017, which would require employers to attest that they have verified the legal status of their employees.

Both sides agreed the state would have to prove businesses showed "reckless disregard" for the law before they could be fined.

The standard was a compromise between the lower standard that businesses should know and the tougher-to-prove standard of "knowingly."

The Owens-backed House Bill 1018 was killed in committee. It would have required employers to ask prospective employees for Colorado identification. Fitz-Gerald called the bill "a stumbling block to Colorado's economic development."

The ski and agriculture industries lobbied against the bill because they depend on out-of- state workers to fill their seasonal jobs.

"I've gone to the wall for it, and I think if you talk to any of the legislators, they'll tell you that," Owens said. "I talked very specifically with every businessperson who has discussed it with me and told them I'm strongly in favor of it."

But Republican Rep. Al White, the sponsor of House Bill 1018, told his Republican colleagues that Owens was supportive of the bill until business leaders told him that the price of a house might go up by 5 percent because some homebuilders could lose illegal-immigrant labor.

"That tells me that business in Colorado is really not serious about doing away with illegal immigration in this state," White said. "And if that is the case, this whole special session is nothing but bull."

Rep. Lynn Hefley, R-Colorado Springs, said it bothered her "when businesspeople come and talk to the governor and tell him what needs to be done."

She was referring to homebuilder Larry Mizel, who talked with Owens on Sunday.

"We know, and names were named here, who came and who gives big bucks to the party. It's my party too, and I came here for us to do a job, and I'm ashamed of us," Hefley said.

So far in the 2006 election cycle, Mizel has donated $29,150 to Republican political action committees and candidates and another $25,000 to the Republican National Committee.

Denver Post staff writer Karen E. Crummy contributed to this report.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Provisions of House Bill 1023
How would an applicant get public assistance?

Applicants for taxpayer-funded benefits would be required to show they are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. They would also be required to sign an affidavit attesting to their legal status.

Applicants would be required to produce one of the following:

A valid Colorado driver's license or a Colorado identification card

A U.S. military card or military dependent's identification card

A U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Mariner card

A Native American tribal document

What is the penalty?

If an applicant falsely signs an affidavit, he or she would face a misdemeanor charge of perjury in the second degree.

Each offense would carry a maximum penalty of 18 months in jail, a $5,000 fine, or both, and a minimum penalty of six months in jail, a $500 fine, or both.

What would be curtailed?

Any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, post-secondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar payment.

The bill would also ban any grant, contract, loan, professional license or commercial license provided by an agency of state or local government.

What would be exempt?

Verification would not be required for:

Emergency medical care

Short-term, emergency disaster relief

Immunizations and treatment for communicable disease

Services delivered at the local level such as alcohol and drug treatment, mental health treatment, short-term housing, crisis counseling, and soup kitchens not conditional upon income or necessary for life or safety as determined by the U.S. attorney general

Prenatal care

When would it take effect?

Aug. 1

How does the proposal differ from the citizen-sponsored ballot measure, Initiative 55?

The initiative would not have listed the services that would be barred from illegal immigrants, nor would it have specified procedures for verifying a person's immigration status. Rather, it would have directed the legislature to detail those services and procedures during the next legislative session beginning in January.

The measure would have taken effect in June 2007.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... -headlines

Colo. Legislature Gets Tough on Illegal Immigrants
By Nicholas Riccardi
Times Staff Writer

8:40 PM PDT, July 11, 2006

Denver — The passage of 11 anti-illegal immigrant measures by a special session of the Colorado Legislature this week is just the latest sign that momentum in the volatile debate is on the side of hard-liners.

Earlier this year, immigrant-rights groups were encouraged when the Democrat-controlled Legislature rejected several bills that party leaders characterized as extremist. Spring featured the largest political rallies Colorado had ever seen, as 75,000 immigrants marched in front of the state Capitol demanding amnesty.

But late Monday, the Colorado Legislature approved a ban on non-emergency state services to adults who fail to prove they are in the country legally, a measure modeled on a broader law that Georgia adopted in April. Democrats here began boasting that their measure was now the toughest in the nation.

"We're helping set a precedent where states will step in and deal with a problem the federal government won't solve," said Fred Elbel, director of Defend Colorado Now, which backed a ballot measure to restrict benefits to illegal immigrants.

The Colorado legislation, along with tough anti-illegal immigration bills passed in other states, has unnerved activists.

"It's a sad day for Colorado when our Democratic majority Legislature brags about new laws that would lead to people being cut off from aid," said Bill Vandenberg of the Colorado Progressive Coalition.

"Every election year needs a scapegoat, and this year ... it's beating up on illegal immigrants," said Vandenberg, who helped organize the immigrant marches.

In Washington, Congress is split over immigration reform. The House of Representatives passed a border enforcement-only that includes a 700-mile fence along the U.S.-Mexico border. The Senate's bill includes enforcement measures, but also a guest worker program that would provide a path to citizenship for many of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the country. Polls have shown the population is similarly divided over illegal immigration, but that hard-liners are more motivated.

That appears to be borne out in statehouses, where more than 400 anti-illegal immigration measures were proposed this year. The vast majority failed, but at least a dozen states passed some sort of laws targeting illegal immigration. Louisiana approved a law stiffening penalties for businesses that hire illegals. Wyoming barred undocumented students from receiving some scholarships, while Missouri denied unemployment benefits to workers who aren't citizens. And states such as Pennsylvania and Maryland are considering benefit cuts modeled on those in Colorado and Georgia, which are the most far-reaching.

State lawmakers engage in largely symbolic actions when they pass those cuts because federal law already prohibits illegals from accessing public aid, said Tanya Bruder, an attorney at the National Immigration Law Center. "They're sending a message to constituents that they're doing something about illegal immigration," she said.

Bruder said the main effect of the new laws would be to discourage people, such as legal immigrants, from applying for government aid. Momentum is clearly building for such measures, Bruder added. "I'm getting more calls from people in other states saying there's more pressure, not only from Republicans but from Democrats," she said.

Indeed, Democratic State Senate President Joan FitzGerald smiled widely when a reporter said at a news conference Tuesday morning that "you're now the party of 'tough on immigration.' "

FitzGerald joked to the press corps: "Thank you, did you all get that?" She and the speaker of the Colorado Assembly, Democrat Andrew Romanoff, however, denied that they had compromised their party's beliefs.

"We were not railroaded into passing anything that betrayed our principles," Romanoff said, noting that Democrats killed a number of stiffer anti-illegal immigrant measures proposed by Republicans.

Democrats were forced into the special session by a confluence of political forces. The State Supreme Court last month struck from the November ballot the measure backed by Defend Colorado Now. Republican Gov. Bill Owens, who had a reputation as an immigration moderate, demanded that the Legislature convene and put the measure back on the ballot.

Democrats resisted, pointing out that they had passed bills on illegal immigration in the regular session, such as stiffer penalties for human traffickers. But they gave in after political pressure escalated: Republicans hammered them for being soft on illegal immigration. Some political analysts warned they could lose their legislative majority over the issue. And the party's candidate for governor, Attorney General Bill Ritter, received a barrage of attack ads from his GOP rival.

The attacks continued during the special session when an anti-illegal immigrant group made recorded calls bashing Democrats on the issue.

Most Republicans wanted to place the benefits cut on the fall ballot where they thought it could help them retake the statehouse. Instead, some joined with Democrats to pass the bill denying non-emergency benefits, such as Medicare and unemployment insurance, to adults who can't prove they are in Colorado legally. It creates a maximum 18-month jail term for falsifying documents and, like the Georgia legislation, exempts treatment for communicable diseases from the benefits ban.

During the five-day session, which began Thursday, the Legislature also passed a bill requiring employers to demonstrate their workers are in the country legally. Legislators passed a law making it a felony to knowingly vote illegally. They placed on the November ballot two measures, one that would bar employers from receiving state tax breaks if they hire illegals, and another to sue the federal government to force compliance with immigration laws.

State officials say about 1 million Coloradans will be required to prove their legal residence to get benefits when the law takes effect Aug. 1. Though some Democrats insisted that the benefit cut is mainly symbolic, immigrant advocates said it will increase fear in the community. "More people are going to be staying away from (medical) clinics, staying away from calling police when they really need to," said Kristen Sharp, an organizer with Padres Unidos, a group of immigrant parents of school children.

That has already happened in Georgia, where the benefit cut, coupled with stiff employment sanctions do not take place until July of 2007. Some real estate agents report that Latino interest in home-buying has dipped -- undocumented immigrants are wary of making the commitments because they fear losing their jobs.

The Republican politician most identified with harsher immigration reform, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, said the move by local Democrats shows how politicians must take hard stands on illegal immigration to win elections. "They're all trying to out-Tancredo Tancredo," he said.

Times staff writer Richard Fausset in Atlanta contributed to this report.

http://today.reuters.com

Colorado headed toward tougher laws for immigrants
Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:22 PM ET

By Jim Christie

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Colorado is heading toward enacting some of the toughest U.S. state laws limiting the rights of illegal immigrants as it struggles to accommodate a large Latino labor force and calls from conservatives for a crackdown, top state lawmakers said on Tuesday.

Colorado's Democrat-led legislature passed a package of bills late on Monday night in hopes of ending a months-long legislative tussle ahead of November elections. Republican Gov. Bill Owens is expected to sign most of the bills, spokesman Nate Strauch said.

One bill seeks to limit state services to undocumented immigrants, a move state lawmakers believe will appease voters who believe immigrants are drain on state coffers.

Two of the bills authorized ballot measures for the November election. One would bar firms in Colorado that hire undocumented workers from receiving state tax credits and the other would require the state attorney general to sue the federal government to enforce immigration laws.

"There are undoubtedly political motivations afoot but there is a real policy problem at the heart of the debate," Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff said in a telephone interview, noting his state is home to an estimated 250,000 illegal immigrants.

Their presence has been a long-standing concern for Republicans in the legislature's minority, who have clamored for a tough line mirroring policies urged by Colorado U.S. House Rep. Tom Tancredo.

Tancredo has taken a strong stance against illegal immigration, clashing with fellow Republican and President George W. Bush, who is urging tougher policing of the U.S. border with Mexico while offering a path to citizenship for the more than 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.

Many state Republican lawmakers had hoped to pass Tancredo-inspired bills. Democrats who did not want Republicans to steer the special session on illegal immigration but who were under fire from Latino activists toned down bills.

"In the end it was a bipartisan solution," state Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald said in a phone interview. "We'll be able to look back and say we passed good legislation."

Fitz-Gerald noted the session's centerpiece bill would require applicants for public benefits to prove they are legal residents of Colorado. Children, however, would be exempted.

Tancredo offered qualified praise but urged a harder line against firms hiring illegal aliens.

"Going after social service benefits is a first step but does not complete the march to a Colorado free of illegal entries," he said in a statement. "Without employer sanctions, Colorado certainly does not have the toughest law against illegal aliens in the country, as its proponents claim."

I live in Colorado, this bill sounds good at first, but it dosen't do harm to root cause from Illegal immigration which is punnishing employers who hire them. Too many of my fellow Coloradoans fell for Referendum C and without D this gave the state a blank check of 5 billion dollars to spend at will. I fear there are too many holes in this existing bill to cut any aid to any illegals. Nothing changes.

I hope most would agree with my motto:

Stop the MOB Deny the JOB