‘Political theater,’ ‘discrimination’

By Andrew Firestone

Rep. Carl Sciortino (D-Somerville) and Rep. Denise Provost (D-Somerville) vehemently derided and called into question the political veracity of a new bill this week.

“I think that at its core this is really political theater,” Sciortino said.

“We have huge pressing issues with the economy, and this is the same old, tired scapegoating of immigrants to distract from the bigger things that are going on,” said Sciortino.

The bill, which penalizes businesses for hiring illegal immigrants, forces Gov. Deval Patrick to sign onto the federal Secure Communities program, and bars any kind of in-state tuition, as proposed by the two representatives, was cast as a return to “nativism” by Provost, and as a “redundancy” by Sciortino, which he said was simply meant to distract the nation from more pressing issues.

The bill, which currently has no identification number, was presented at a press conference at the State House on September 26. When Sen. Richard Moore (D-Sutton) joined with a few democrats and over a dozen republicans to ask support for a new bill, saying that it was intended to decrease crime and make room at jobs for more Massachusetts residents.

Provost said it was very similar to language from articles that members of the Senate tried to put in the state budget last year. She also noted that, under the equal protection clause in the United States Constitution, the law itself might be considered illegal, and if it were to pass, it would most likely be fought against in the federal district court.

“I think this bill is an effort by some legislators to show that they’re not happy with federal immigration policy,” she said. “They think that federal immigration policy should be tougher and more consistently enforced.”

Sciortino said that the bill was just another attempt by state lawmakers to assume control over the immigration issue, which he said was meant to be a federal discussion anyway.

“What this proposal does is further exacerbate divisions in our own community where we have a diverse mix of people living in Somerville, many of whom are immigrants. They’re our neighbors, and we have to figure out how to have strong neighborhoods and a strong community while waiting for an inept U.S. Congress to actually give meaningful, actual immigration reform,” he said.

“We all know the immigration challenges this country faces are in the U.S. Congress, which has ignored the needs for comprehensive immigration reform and has left it to state and local government to fight amongst ourselves about how to address a problem that we can’t possibly solve,” he said.

Sciortino said that the business clauses in the law are redundant as there are already penalties for businesses that hire illegal immigrants. He also said that Secure Communities itself is redundant, as there is already a section under the Immigration and Nationality act, sec. 287 (g), which allows federal agents to deport convicts who are illegal immigrants.

“The Boston experience of Secure Communities has not been what proponents of the programs claim it is,” he said. Secure Communities cross-references biometric data of arrested criminals with federal databases and allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain and arrest those they claim have serious felonies on their records”

“They say it is going to deport violent criminals,” which Sciortino said he supported.

“The Boston experience shows that the majority of people that were brought in by Secure Communities were people with absolutely no convictions whatsoever, and deporting people that are not committing crimes, that are simply trying to live their lives while we have a broken immigration system is not the stated goal of Secure Communities, but is what’s happening,” he said.

The law, if passed, would also negate any chance for Provost’s in-state tuition bill, which Sciortino supports. There is currently no program that offers in-state tuition to children of illegal aliens, so there is no reason to create a law banning it, he said.

Provost added that the bill is a continuation on the themes expressed in the 1982 Supreme Court case, which stated that children of illegal immigrants must receive public education. Presidential hopeful Rick Perry, while Governor of Texas, passed a similar law that provided in-state tuition.

Provost reiterated, “it is absolutely in our economic interest to make sure that all the kids that we are obliged to educate get as much education as they need to be productive in our economy and in our society.”

She was supported by Sen. Sal DiDomenico (D-Everett) who also saw similar reasons for supporting in-state tuition, saying that for children to work hard to get higher education, regardless of immigration status,  “allows them to become more productive citizens in our society, allows them to give back to our community. Folks that are educated, obviously, have a better chance to succeed, and that’s what we should be striving for, for young folks to make a better impact on our community.”