CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS / PROPOSITION 187 : Opponents of Measure Vow to Sue if It Passes

Charging that Proposition 187 is immoral, unhealthful and unworkable, leaders of California’s medical establishment and the civil rights community Monday urged voters to reject the ballot measure on illegal immigration and asked the federal government to take steps to prevent it from being implemented if it is approved on Election Day.

In a letter to the federal Department of Health and Human Services, the California Medical Assn. requested federal officials to “act quickly to prevent the state from implementing” Proposition 187 by making clear that California would lose $9 billion a year in federal matching health funds if the measure, which appears to conflict with federal laws, takes effect.

The medical association also said it would file an immediate lawsuit to block implementation of Proposition 187 if it is approved by California voters Nov. 8.

Meanwhile, Dr. Robert M. Karns, president of the Los Angeles County Medical Assn., declared he is prepared to ignore the measure--which would eliminate all educational and non-emergency health services for illegal immigrants and require local health, education and law enforcement officials to turn in the names of suspected illegal immigrants to federal authorities--rather than ask patients for proof of their legal status.

“This is a law that I will have to break because I’m not going to stop giving care to anybody,” the Beverly Hills heart specialist said at a morning news conference outside Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center. “This thing is nuts, you’ve got to be crazy to vote for this.”

Karns, who also quoted the medical ethics code precept “first, do no harm” in explaining why he would engage in civil disobedience, spoke alongside various civil rights leaders, including the Rev. Jesse Jackson and United Farm Workers co-founder Dolores Huerta.

In pre-election polls, Proposition 187 has shown strong across-the-board support among registered voters, including many African Americans concerned that illegal immigrants take blue-collar jobs from U.S. citizens and help create a labor glut that drives down wages.

But Jackson and other African American community leaders, including John Mack, Los Angeles Urban League president, and Joe Hicks, executive director of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Greater Los Angeles, said that for civil rights reasons alone, it is imperative that minority groups work together to repel Proposition 187.

“This is anti-Latino, anti-vulnerable people,” said Mack. “If you talk about closing the borders to Latinos, the same rule applies to closing the border to Haitians.

“Let’s solve real social issues.”

Jackson called Proposition 187 “inhumane” and “racist,” comparing it to the interning of Japanese American residents in detention camps during World War II.

“Today we’re celebrating Columbus Day,” said Jackson. “Let’s not forget when Columbus landed in America he was considered to be an illegal alien and an undocumented worker. But welcome.”

“The character of America is at stake,” Jackson said. “Let us celebrate all immigrants.”

*

Even on economic grounds, Proposition 187 does not make sense, Jackson continued. For one thing, he said, the jobs of many minority government employees would be in peril if services to illegal immigrants were slashed.

Also, California risks losing up to $15 billion a year in federal health, educational and social service funds if the measure is approved by voters because it conflicts with federal statutes and confidentiality requirements.

The comments by Jackson and others were quickly lambasted by Harold Ezell, Proposition 187 co-author and former Immigration and Naturalization Service regional director.

“It isn’t a civil rights issue, it’s a legal issue,” Ezell said. “What about the rights of American-born kids?”

“It’s obvious that Jesse Jackson has not talked to the African American people who live in California who have been majorly impacted by illegal aliens. All he has to do is tour schools that used to be in what was referred to as South-Central and see American kids--whether black, white or yellow--who were born here, being taught in Spanish.”

In July, federal Education Secretary Richard W. Riley wrote that passage of Proposition 187 could jeopardize federal education funding to California because it appears to violate federal confidentiality requirements. The federal government now grants about $2.3 billion in annual aid to California schools.

The California Medical Assn., in its letter to the Department of Health and Human Services, asks that the federal government make clear that another $9 billion a year in matching Medicaid funds would be jeopardized if Proposition 187 takes effect.

*

Although the federal government cannot expressly forbid the measure from taking effect, the threat of a funding cutoff might lead to second thoughts among voters favoring Proposition 187, said association vice president of government relations Steven Thompson. If the measure is approved, a swift post-election funding cutoff would lead to a quicker resolution of a medical association lawsuit, he added.

“If citizens realized all they were doing was spending taxpayers’ money on lawyers to litigate their action, that might have an impact on how they vote,” Thompson said.

In its letter, the CMA, a leading member of the statewide coalition of health, education and law enforcement organizations opposing the ballot measure, contends that because of its wording, Proposition 187 would ban health care for people applying for refugee status and other individuals who have not been granted lawful status but still qualify for such services as Medicaid.

Contrary to federal law, the CMA writes, Proposition 187 also requires doctors to withhold services from Medicaid patients unless they can verify their legal status at the time of service.

Moreover, the ballot measure makes no provision for medical screening exams to determine whether an emergency exists when a patient arrives at a hospital, the CMA charges. Under the measure’s provisions, illegal immigrants qualify only for emergency medical care, as is required by federal law.

Proponents of Proposition 187 contend there is little political likelihood that the federal government would slash funding that amounts to about 25% of the state’s annual budget if Proposition 187 was approved.

“If anybody believes Bill Clinton would take a dime out of California between now and 1996, they’d have to be on some other kind of wavelength,” said Ezell.

CMA legal counsel Astrid G. Meghrigian said that federal health officials occasionally take action to help quash state health regulations that conflict with federal requirements, including a case earlier this year when California proposed deferring authorization for “elective” health services under Medi-Cal for up to 90 days. In a strongly worded letter, the HHS told the state the policy “is not permissible under the . . . Medicaid requirements.”

HHS Regional Director Grantland Johnson, to whom the CMA’s letter was addressed, was unavailable for comment. His assistant, Emory Lee, said that while department officials have yet to study the letter, “we do oftentimes respond to inquiries like this.”