Keeping Track: Anti-Immigrant Bill Vote Tracker

Washington D.C. — With critical votes coming up soon on some pretty blatant anti-immigrant bills, we felt it necessary to make sure we kept track of our California Delegation and their votes. Below you will find how our Members of Congress cast their votes. To see your Member of Congress’ vote, click on a bill below.

H.R. 2581 – “Verify First Act” 

H.R. 2581 would prohibit advance payments of premium tax credits to individuals  under current law and the AHCA,   unless the Secretary of the Treasury receives confirmation that the individual is a citizen or a national of the United States, or is lawfully present in the United States by way of a social security number.

Status: House of Representatives on June 13, 2017 . 231 Republicans and 7 Democrats voted “Aye”. 183 Democrats and 1 Republican voted “No”. 5 Republicans and 3 Democrats had “No Vote”.  Currently pending Senate Vote.

H.R. 3003 – “No Sanctuary for Criminals Act”

H.R. 3003 clarifies U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer authority – the tool used by federal immigration enforcement officers to request to hold immigrants at local jails – by established statutory probable cause standards to issue detainers. In addition, the bill withholds certain federal grants from jurisdictions that prohibit their officers from cooperating with ICE. Jurisdictions that comply with detainers are protected from being sued and victims of certain crimes are allowed to sue jurisdictions that refuse to comply and subsequently release criminal aliens onto the streets. Finally, the underlying bill includes Sarah and Grant’s Law, which ensures unlawful immigrants convicted of drunk driving or are arrested for other dangerous crimes are detained during their removal proceedings.

Status: House of Representatives on June 29, 2017 . 225 Republicans and 3 Democrats voted “Aye”. 188 Democrats and 7 Republicans voted “No”. 8 Republicans and 2 Democrats had “No Vote”.  Currently pending Senate Vote.

H.R. 3004 – “Kate’s Law”

H.R. 3004 would place mandatory enhanced punishment to immigrant offenders who re-enter into the United States.

Status: House of Representatives on June 29, 2017 . 233 Republicans and 24 Democrats voted “Aye”. 166 Democrats and 1 Republican voted “No”. 6 Republicans and 3 Democrats had “No Vote”.  Currently pending Senate Vote.

 

Keeping Track: H.R. 3004 “Kate’s Law”

H.R. 3004 – Kate’s Law

H.R. 3004 would place mandatory enhanced punishment to immigrant offenders who re-enter into the United States.

Status: House of Representatives on June 29, 2017 . 233 Republicans and 24 Democrats voted “Aye”. 166 Democrats and 1 Republican voted “No”. 6 Republicans and 3 Democrats had “No Vote”.  Currently pending Senate Vote.

  • Aye: 257
  • No: 167
  • No Vote: 9

Sponsor: Bob Goodlatte [R] (VA-6)

Text: H.R. 3004 – Kate’s Law

VOTED YES:

  • Calvert, Ken [R] (CA-42)
  • Cook, Paul [R] (CA-8)
  • Denham, Jeff [R] (CA-10)
  • Hunter, Duncan [R] (CA-50)
  • Issa, Darrell, [R] (CA-50)
  • Knight, Steve [R] (CA-25)
  • LaMalfa, Doug [R] (CA-1)
  • McCarthy, Kevin [R] (CA-23)
  • McClintock, Tom [R] (CA-4)
  • Rohrabacher, Dana [R] (CA-48)
  • Royce, Ed [R] (CA-39)
  • Speier, Jackie [D] (CA-14)
  • Swalwell, Eric [D] (CA-15)
  • Valadao, David [R] (CA-21)
  • Walters, Mimi [R] (CA-45)

VOTED NO:

  • Aguilar, Pete [D] (CA-31)
  • Barragan, Nanette [D] (CA-44)
  • Bass, Karen [D] (CA-37)
  • Bera, Ami [D] (CA-7)
  • Brownley, Julia [D] (CA-26)
  • Carbajal, Salud [D] (CA-24)
  • Cardenas, Tony [D] (CA-29)
  • Chu, Judy [D] (CA-27)
  • Correa, Luis [D] (CA-46)
  • Costa, Jim [D] (CA-16)
  • Davis, Susan [D] (CA-53)
  • DeSaulnier, Mark [D] (CA-11)
  • Eshoo, Anna [D] (CA-18)
  • Garamendi, John [D] (CA-3)
  • Huffman, Jared [D] (CA-2)
  • Khanna, Ro [D] (CA-17)
  • Lee, Barbara [D] (CA-13)
  • Lieu, Ted [D] (CA-33)
  • Lofgren, Zoe [D] (CA-19)
  • Lowenthal, Alan [D] (CA-47)
  • Matsui, Doris [D] (CA-6)
  • McNerney, Jerry [D] (CA-9)
  • Panetta, Jimmy [D] (CA-20)
  • Pelosi, Nancy [D] (CA-12)
  • Peters, Scott [D] (CA-52)
  • Roybal-Allard, Lucille (CA-40)
  • Ruiz, Raul [D] (CA-36)
  • Sanchez, Linda [D] (CA-38)
  • Schiff, Adam [D] (CA-28)
  • Takano, Mark [D] (CA-41)
  • Thompson, Mike [D] (CA-5)
  • Torres, Norma [D] (CA-35)
  • Vargas, Juan [D] (CA-51)
  • Waters, Maxine [D] (CA-43)

NO VOTE:

  • Napolitano, Grace [D] (CA-32)
  • Nunes, Devin [R] (CA-22)

Source: “H.R. 3004 — 115th Congress: Kate’s Law.” www.GovTrack.us. 2017. June 29, 2017 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr3004

Keeping Track: H.R. 3003 “No Sanctuary Bill”

H.R. 3003 – No Sanctuary for Criminals Act

H.R. 3003 clarifies U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer authority – the tool used by federal immigration enforcement officers to request to hold immigrants at local jails – by established statutory probable cause standards to issue detainers. In addition, the bill withholds certain federal grants from jurisdictions that prohibit their officers from cooperating with ICE. Jurisdictions that comply with detainers are protected from being sued and victims of certain crimes are allowed to sue jurisdictions that refuse to comply and subsequently release criminal aliens onto the streets. Finally, the underlying bill includes Sarah and Grant’s Law, which ensures unlawful immigrants convicted of drunk driving or are arrested for other dangerous crimes are detained during their removal proceedings.

Status: House of Representatives on June 29, 2017 . 225 Republicans and 3 Democrats voted “Aye”. 188 Democrats and 7 Republicans voted “No”. 8 Republicans and 2 Democrats had “No Vote”.  Currently pending Senate Vote.

  • Aye: 228
  • No: 195
  • No Vote: 10

Sponsor: Bob Goodlatte (VA-6)

Text: H.R. 3003 No Sanctuary for Criminals Act

VOTED YES:

  • Calvert, Ken (CA-42)
  • Cook, Paul (CA-8)
  • Denham, Jeff (CA-10)
  • Hunter, Duncan (CA-50)
  • Issa, Darrell, (CA-50)
  • Knight, Steve (CA-25)
  • LaMalfa, Doug (CA-1)
  • McCarthy, Kevin (CA-23)
  • McClintock, Tom (CA-4)
  • Rohrabacher, Dana (CA-48)
  • Royce, Ed (CA-39)
  • Valadao, David (CA-21)
  • Walters, Mimi (CA-45)

VOTED NO:

  • Aguilar, Pete (CA-31)
  • Barragan, Nanette (CA-44)
  • Bass, Karen (CA-37)
  • Bera, Ami (CA-7)
  • Brownley, Julia (CA-26)
  • Carbajal, Salud (CA-24)
  • Cardenas, Tony (CA-29)
  • Chu, Judy (CA-27)
  • Correa, Luis (CA-46)
  • Costa, Jim (CA-16)
  • Davis, Susan (CA-53)
  • DeSaulnier, Mark (CA-11)
  • Eshoo, Anna (CA-18)
  • Garamendi, John (CA-3)
  • Huffman, Jared (CA-2)
  • Khanna, Ro (CA-17)
  • Lee, Barbara (CA-13)
  • Lieu, Ted (CA-33)
  • Lofgren, Zoe (CA-19)
  • Lowenthal, Alan (CA-47)
  • Matsui, Doris (CA-6)
  • McNerney, Jerry (CA-9)
  • Panetta, Jimmy (CA-20)
  • Pelosi, Nancy (CA-12)
  • Peters, Scott (CA-52)
  • Roybal-Allard, Lucille (CA-40)
  • Ruiz, Raul (CA-36)
  • Sanchez, Linda (CA-38)
  • Schiff, Adam (CA-28)
  • Rep. Brad Sherman (CA-30)
  • Speier, Jackie (CA-14)
  • Swalwell, Eric (CA-15)
  • Takano, Mark (CA-41)
  • Thompson, Mike (CA-5)
  • Torres, Norma (CA-35)
  • Vargas, Juan (CA-51)
  • Waters, Maxine (CA-43)

NO VOTE:

  • Grace Napolitano, Grace (CA-32)
  • Nunes, Devin (CA-22)

Keeping Track: HR 2581 “Verify First Act”

H.R. 2581 – Verify First Act 

H.R. 2581 would prohibit advance payments of premium tax credits to individuals  under current law and the AHCA,   unless the Secretary of the Treasury receives confirmation that the individual is a citizen or a national of the United States, or is lawfully present in the United States by way of a social security number.

Status: House of Representatives on June 13, 2017 . 231 Republicans and 7 Democrats voted “Aye”. 183 Democrats and 1 Republican voted “No”. 5 Republicans and 3 Democrats had “No Vote”.  Currently pending Senate Vote.

  • Aye: 238
  • No: 184
  • No Vote: 8

Sponsor: Lou Barletta (PA-11)

Text: H.R. 2581 Verify First Act

VOTED YES:

  • Calvert, Ken (CA-42)
  • Cook, Paul (CA-8)
  • Denham, Jeff (CA-10)
  • Hunter, Duncan (CA-50)
  • Issa, Darrell, (CA-50)
  • Knight, Steve (CA-25)
  • LaMalfa, Doug (CA-1)
  • McCarthy, Kevin (CA-23)
  • McClintock, Tom (CA-4)
  • Nunes, Devin (CA-22)
  • Rohrabacher, Dana (CA-48)
  • Royce, Ed (CA-39)
  • Valadao, David (CA-21)
  • Walters, Mimi (CA-45)

VOTED NO:

  • Aguilar, Pete (CA-31)
  • Barragan, Nanette (CA-44)
  • Bass, Karen (CA-37)
  • Bera, Ami (CA-7)
  • Brownley, Julia (CA-26)
  • Carbajal, Salud (CA-24)
  • Cardenas, Tony (CA-29)
  • Chu, Judy (CA-27)
  • Correa, Luis (CA-46)
  • Costa, Jim (CA-16)
  • Davis, Susan (CA-53)
  • DeSaulnier, Mark (CA-11)
  • Eshoo, Anna (CA-18)
  • Garamendi, John (CA-3)
  • Huffman, Jared (CA-2)
  • Khanna, Ro (CA-17)
  • Lee, Barbara (CA-13)
  • Lieu, Ted (CA-33)
  • Lofgren, Zoe (CA-19)
  • Lowenthal, Alan (CA-47)
  • Matsui, Doris (CA-6)
  • McNerney, Jerry (CA-9)
  • Panetta, Jimmy (CA-20)
  • Pelosi, Nancy (CA-12)
  • Peters, Scott (CA-52)
  • Roybal-Allard, Lucille (CA-40)
  • Ruiz, Raul (CA-36)
  • Sanchez, Linda (CA-38)
  • Schiff, Adam (CA-28)
  • Speier, Jackie (CA-14)
  • Swalwell, Eric (CA-15)
  • Takano, Mark (CA-41)
  • Thompson, Mike (CA-5)
  • Torres, Norma (CA-35)
  • Vargas, Juan (CA-51)
  • Waters, Maxine (CA-43)

NO VOTE:

  • Rep. Grace Napolitano (CA-32)
  • Rep. Brad Sherman (CA-30)

Federal Budget: Who do we value in our society?

Washington D.C. – Budgets are a reflection of who and what we value in our community. This goes along with the thinking that if we truly believe in something or someone, we invest our resources into them to ensure a mutually beneficial success . What we are experiencing at the moment in Washington D.C., even with the ongoing theme of dysfunction looming in the background, is a strong push to pass a federal budget that puts hard working Americans and immigrants outside of the scope of investment, or value for that matter. Whether it is education, healthcare, immigration, housing, or basic human dignity, the federal budget falls short of ensuring our mutually beneficial success.

So what is on the chopping block in this budget and who reaps the benefits of tax dollar investment? It is safe to say that a huge portion of what sustains our democracy is about to be transplanted, like a mad scientist switching body parts, onto major tax cuts for the very wealthy. The investment transfer will translate into economic hardship and pain for the poorest among us. For immigrants, the switch from a movement towards reform has been transformed into an enforcement only policy approach with increased deportations in the near future. Below are just a few examples of what has been proposed by the President:

  • $300 million to recruit and hire additional U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) and ICE officers in the interior;
  • $1.5 billion to detain and deport immigrants, including funding for an unprecedented 51,379 detention beds;
  • $1.6 billion for an unnecessary, offensive, and costly wall;
  • 70 new U.S. Attorneys at the Department of Justice to prosecute people for immigration-related offenses;
  • New requirements for tax filers to provide a Social Security Number to apply for the Child Tax Credit, which will drive millions of American children into poverty; and
  • A drastic 30 percent cut in refugee resettlement services.

The truth of the matter is that the Federal Budget is not a done deal. The general consensus appears to be that it will be very hard to pass a budget with so many severe cuts that puts some Republicans at odds with their constituents, but that outcome is not guaranteed. On the Democratic side, the growing progressive movement is watching carefully whether or not Democrats will side with Republicans, or just as worse, push for detrimental cuts and easily cave on immigration enforcement during negotiations. These next three months will determine the fate of millions for years to come and the time to get involved has never been more important than right now.

CHIRLA Action Fund Endorsements for 2016 Election

CHIRLA Action Fund Endorsements for 2016 Election

Los Angeles, CA – The CHIRLA Action Fund, the political arm of the largest immigrant rights organization in California, has issued its final round of political endorsements for the 2016 Presidential Election. This election will be one for the history books and the sheer magnitude of new American immigrant voters will be deciding the future of our country.

Over the past year, the dialogue regarding immigrants has been one filled with hate. To fight this hate back, we are proud to have champions that will stand up for our immigrant community. These strong voices will ensure that our values are upheld and that we continue to find positive solutions to the issue of immigration. The CHIRLA Action Fund endorsement are as follows:

  • California Senate: Kamala Harris
  • Congressional District 25: Bryan Caforio
  • Congressional District 44: Isadore Hall
  • Congressional District 46: Lou Correa
  • State Senate District 21: Johnathon Ervin
  • State Senate District 35: Warren Furutani
  • State Assembly District 36: Steve Fox
  • State Assembly District 65: Sharon Quirk-Silva
  • Mayor of Palmdale: Xavier Flores
  • Garden Grove School District: Walter Muneton

The CHIRLA Action Fund endorsement process includes a face to face meeting with candidates, a rigorous questionnaire, background research, and a recommendation by the Staff which must be approved by the Board of Directors.

Immigration Platforms: Two Visions for America

Immigration Platforms: Two Visions for America

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Washington D.C. – With the Supreme Court of the United States tied at a 4-4 on President Obama’s DAPA and DACA Extension Programs, there is a renewed call for Immigration Reform. As the Democratic and Republican National Conventions have wrapped up, there are two distinct visions for how to address the issue of immigration in our country. Below you will find a comparison between the two party’s platforms which stand to impact the lives of millions of immigrants across the U.S.

On a Path to Citizenship:

  • DNC: Supports path to citizenship.
  • RNC: Opposes any type of legalization.

On DACA and DAPA Programs:

  • DNC: Supports DACA/DAPA.
  • RNC: Opposes DACA/DAPA.

On Enforcement and Due Process:

  • DNC: Supports “humane” immigration enforcement. Supports prioritizing enforcement against “those who pose a threat to [public] safety, not hardworking families who are contributing to their communities.” Also, supports government-funded counsel for unaccompanied children in immigration courts.
  • RNC: Supports denying undocumented immigrants who pay taxes access to tax credits and benefits they are legally entitled to. Supports requiring all employers nationwide to use E-verify. Supports limiting due process for certain immigrants in removal proceedings. Supports the widely-discredited 287g program. Supports cutting off funding to localities that limit their participation in federal programs that use local law enforcement officials to engage in immigration enforcement.

Helping Central American Refugees:

  • DNC: Commits to ending raids against children and families and supports efforts to uphold due process for those fleeing violence in Central America and to work with regional partners to address the root causes of violence in Central America.  “Would consider all available means” of protecting Central American families, including strengthening in-country and third-country processing, expanding the use of humanitarian parole, and granting Temporary Protected Status (TPS).
  • RNC: N/A

On Immigrant Integration:

  • DNC: Supports investment in immigrant integration services. Supports expanding access to English language education. Supports helping immigrants become citizens.
  • RNC: Supports English as the national language.

On the 3 and 10 Year Bar:

  • DNC: Supports ending the 3 and 10-year bars.
  • RNC: N/A

On Immigrant Detention:

  • DNC: Supports ending federal, state, and municipal contracts with for profit private prisons and private detention centers. Supports ending family detention. Supports expanded use of “humane” alternatives to detention.
  • RNC: Supports indefinite detention.

On Guest Workers:

  • DNC: N/A
  • RNC: Supports a guest worker program.

On State DREAM Acts “In-State Tuition”:

  • DNC: N/A
  • RNC: Supports denying federal funding to universities who provide in-state tuition rates to undocumented students.

On the Border:

  • DNC: N/A
  • RNC: Supports expanding the wall along the Southern border.
Fight Back the Hate, Become a CHIRLA Action Fund Member

Fight Back the Hate, Become a CHIRLA Action Fund Member

All across the country people are standing up against hate-speech. They are people like you and I who seek to create a better world that does not scapegoat, a world that provides an opportunity to reveal our own humanity to one another.

We are entering into very uncharted territory in this upcoming election. Who will win will depend on our turnout. We will either stand idly by and let hatred win, or we will arrive at the ballot box with our principles and ideals reflected in our vote. Our connection, our understanding of ourselves as one human being to another is what distinguishes us from those who stand upon a platform of hate.

Join the fight against bigotry and racism today. Become a CHIRLA Action Fund member and help us stand up against the hate. It’s time to do, or donate. Do your part today.

Turning Ignorance Around to Stop the Hate

Turning Ignorance Around to Stop the Hate

Los Angeles, CA – The CHIRLA Action Fund and Walton Isaacson worked together to present a different take on the anti-immigrant hate speech being spewed in this Presidential Election cycle. The #turnignorancearound advertisement takes hate speech and gives it a twist. As this type of negative speech  continues to be given center stage, it is time to take a stand and stop the hate. For more information and background on this advertisement, read the story below and click on http://www.turnignorancearound.com to watch the full video.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Latinos Admit to Being ‘Murderers,’ ‘Traffickers’ and ‘Thieves’ in Anti-Trump Ad

Spot Reframes Candidate’s Perjorative Characterizations

By Ann-Christine Diaz. Published on

Earlier this week, Republican group Our Principles PAC used presidential candidate Donald Trump’s own words against him in an ad featuring women reading his offensive quotes about the opposite sex. Now, the CHIRLA Action Fund has turned Mr. Trump’s statements about Latinos against him in another spot.

The ad features various Latinos “owning up” to thecharacterizations Mr. Trump had made of them as dealers, killers, murderers, attackers, traffickers and thieves, each wearing a t-shirt with those titles. “I am a dealer,” “I am a killer,” “I am a thief,” “I am an attacker,” they say.

But as each turns around, they reveal their true identities: the “trafficker” is actually a trafficker of stories — a film director; the “murderer” is a murderer of boredom, a comedian; and the dealers include a dealer of flavors (a chef), a dealer of care (a nanny) and a dealer of justice (an attorney) and so forth.

General and multicultural agency Walton Isaacson came up with the ad, whose production began at the end of last year. “We are very committed to minorities … and we believe that there’s an urgent need right now to speak the truth and confront negative racial stereotypes,” said GCD Martin Cerri. “So this idea came up organically, while we were discussing about different target audiences that we represent at the agency.”

The ad took about three months to pull together, from ideation through production. All those featured in the ad are real people — “It was a process kind of similar to what you do when you approach a focus group,” Mr. Cerri said. “It was not a normal casting, we didn’t look for the perfect delivery, we looked for a range of real people with a big range of different occupations in order to make our point.”

The ad directs viewers to an accompanying site,http://www.turnignorancearound.com/, where they can see the film and purchase their own t-shirts re-framing Trump’s pejorative characterizations.

SCOTUS To Hear Oral Arguments for DAPA/DACA+

Washington D.C. – The Supreme Court of the United States will move forward and prepare to hear oral arguments on the DAPA/DACA+ programs on April 18, 2016. This latest development comes as advocacy, community, and labor organizations have worked to collect signatures for Amicus Briefs from supporters of the DAPA/DACA+ program to be submitted to the Supreme Court next week. As the SCOTUS moves to hear these arguments, a groundswell of support for these legal and constitutional programs will continue. A ruling on the DAPA/DACA+ case is inching closer to a June 2016 decision.

The issue at hand for the SCOTUS to rule on is as follows:

Issue: (1) Whether a state that voluntarily provides a subsidy to all aliens with deferred action has Article III standing and a justiciable cause of action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to challenge the Secretary of Homeland Security’s guidance seeking to establish a process for considering deferred action for certain aliens because it will lead to more aliens having deferred action; (2) whether the guidance is arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law; (3) whether the guidance was subject to the APA’s notice-and-comment procedures; and (4) whether the guidance violates the Take Care Clause of the Constitution, Article II, section 3.

For more information visit: SCOTUS Blog