July 10th 2009 Edition

Capitol Connection

FAIR's GR Team Keeps House Appropriators Honest

The House Appropriations Committee is one of the Congressional committees charged with setting spending levels for the U.S. government. As such, it is considered one of the most powerful committees in Congress, and its members are seen as among the most influential people in all of Washington. Two weeks ago, FAIR's members had the opportunity to hold several of these members accountable after the House Appropriations Committee defeated an amendment that would have helped combat illegal immigration and protect American jobs.

On the morning of Friday, June 12th, the Appropriations Committee met to consider (or "mark up") the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Homeland Security spending bill. The bill included a short, two-year reauthorization of the highly valuable, accurate and successful E-Verify program - the free, voluntary, online tool that protects American jobs by allowing employers to quickly and easily check the work authorization status of their new hires.

Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman David Price (D-NC) had, earlier in the week, noted that he wouldn't seek a longer E-Verify reauthorization because E-Verify would "be part of the debate…on comprehensive immigration reform." Price's statement raised concern among true immigration reformers that the two-year reauthorization would mean that the program would expire in time to allow Congressional Leadership to use E-Verify as a bargaining chip to pass a massive immigration "reform" bill that would provide amnesty for more than 12 million illegal aliens residing in the United States and which would dramatically increase levels of future immigration.

During the June 12th mark up, Representative Ken Calvert (R-CA) offered an amendment to make E-Verify's reauthorization permanent. This amendment would have taken E-Verify off the table so that amnesty supporters and open border advocates could not leverage an extension of E-Verify for amnesty. After Calvert spoke in support of his amendment, Congressman Price urged the entire committee to vote against the measure. FAIR's Government Relations team responded almost immediately by sending an Action Alert to our members, urging them to call Rep. Price, and other committee members who opposed this and other amendments. We asked our members to tell Rep. Price and his colleagues how unhappy the American people were with their decision to oppose the Calvert Amendment.

FAIR's Action Alert accurately conveyed Rep. Price's opposition to this amendment. Our characterization was also shared by the media and organizations that support amnesty. For example, Congress Daily, one of the regular Capitol Hill publications that reported on the hearing, stated that "Price led opposition to the amendment" and that Mr. Price linked any extension of E-Verify to an "immigration reform" (amnesty) bill. In addition, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), a group notorious for its support of amnesty, wrote on their blog that "Rep. Calvart's [sic] amendment. . . received resistance from, most notably, Rep. David Price who argued that the E-Verify will be addressed during a larger immigration reform debate."

After FAIR sent out our alert, many of our members called us to report back what Congressional offices were saying. They reported that Congressman Price's office had told them that the Congressman supported E-Verify, despite his clear record to the contrary. While the Homeland Security spending bill did contain a short, two-year E-Verify reauthorization, Congressman Price stood before the entire House Appropriations Committee and "led the opposition" against an amendment to permanently reauthorize E-Verify. FAIR's hard work - coupled with the dedication of our members - clearly caught opponents of E-Verify off-guard. Last week, we reminded them that true immigration reformers won't accept Washington double-speak - saying one thing while doing another - or holding E-Verify hostage for a massive amnesty bill.

FAIR in Your Community

Robert Najmulski, FAIR's Field Representative, testified on June 24th in front of the State of Ohio, Senate Judiciary Committee in support of HB 184 / Bill sponsor: Rep. Courtney Combs. The bill contains E-verify requirements for all employers in Ohio, no "sanctuary" political subdivisions and stricter bail considerations for illegal aliens. Bob testified to the effectiveness and need for E-verify, the harm of sanctuary cities in Ohio, and the role local law enforcement can play in enforcing immigration laws.

Susan Tully, Field Director at FAIR, successfully staved off an inclusion in the Wisconsin state budget for in-state tuition and driver's certificates for illegal aliens. The state budget was passed in the state house which included provisions for in-state tuition and driver's certificates for illegal aliens. With the help of FAIR's legal affiliate, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), Susan quickly sent out emails to every Wisconsin state Senator and all of their staffers with detailed information about the cons of in-state tuition for illegal aliens. The next day, the Senate voted for the state budget but removed the two provisions. It then went to conference committee.

Kudos

Success in Missouri! FAIR’s legal affiliate (IRLI), working in conjunction with local attorneys, was successful in further defending an ordinance aimed at restricting employment of illegal aliens in Valley Park, MO. The law forbids business license holders from hiring illegal aliens, but makes enrollment in the E-Verify program a ‘safe harbor’ for employers concerned about inadvertently hiring unauthorized workers. The ordinance requires city contractors to enroll in E-Verify. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected arguments by the ACLU and MALDEF who wanted the Court to throw out the lower court’s verdict in favor of the City, also represented by IRLI. The recent state employment authorization verification law passed in Missouri was based directly on of the Valley Park Ordinance. As such, it should now withstand any attacks lodged by open-border groups. IRLI has now successfully defended such laws in both the Ninth Circuit and the Eighth Circuit and are prepared to defend them in the Supreme Court if open-border groups appeal further.