Yesterday, Presente.org, one of the country’s largest Latino advocacy groups, issued the following statement:
LARGEST ONLINE LATINO ADVOCACY GROUP
OPPOSES IMMIGRATION BILL
BILL WILL INCREASE DEATH AND DESTRUCTION IN IMMIGRANT LIFE
THROUGH INCREASED MILITARIZATION OF THE BORDER
June 24, 2013
In response to the very disturbing new proposals contained in the Corker-Hoeven Amendment to the Senate Bill S.744, Presente.org announces our opposition to the bill.
As advocates for immigrant rights, we cannot, in good conscience, lend our credibility and support to a bill that will not legalize 11 million people and leave millions out of a pathway to citizenship, a promise that has been the foundation for our support to begin with. At the same time, we cannot support a bill that is also guaranteed to increase death and destruction in immigrant life through increased militarization of the border.
Recent reports, including a study of the legislation by the Congressional Budget Office, make clear that, as designed, S. 744 will deny the possibility of securing citizenship and legal status to many. Millions of immigrants will be left vulnerable and in fear of deportation for the rest of their lives. At a time when FBI reports and other statistics affirm that the border has been and continues to be safe, legislation that will increase the number of Border Patrol agents by 20,000 further endangers our communities. And, when we consider that $40 billion for “border security” will be allocated over the next 10 years, when there has been no justice in cases involving Border Patrol agents known to have abused their authority and even kill with impunity, S. 744 will turn the southern border of the United States into a permanent war zone. Opinion polls and our common moral sense tell us that this is not the “Immigration reform” Latinos voted for.
In its current form, S. 744 also promises to continue mass racial profiling and deportations, institute controversial guest worker programs and do nothing to ameliorate the very causes that brought about our demands for immigration reform in the first place. Under such conditions, we cannot support immigration reform that includes the Corker-Hoeven amendments.