Prop. 187: A Chorus of Views
Father Richard Estrada
Executive director, Jovenes Inc.
It’s a distraction from much bigger issues. Migration is a natural human process. People have been going back and forth since time began. We, as a civilized society, haven’t been able to grab hold of that. The powers that be, the wealthy, are the ones who take advantage of immigrants. People go where there are jobs. We are providers. There is something that they need here. We’re not looking at sanctions on employers. Workers are being exploited and we’re not looking at that. We have to look at immigration as responsible human beings. If people don’t get a proper education or proper health care, we’re going to have an all-out epidemic.
It’s in our own self-interest to provide services. The way to address immigration is by dialogue. The same with education. Who’s going to benefit from this? How does society as a whole benefit? How can we share resources so that we can all benefit?
* Bill Baum
Businessman; resident of South Gate for 53 years
I feel strongly about the fact that these people are here getting services. I don’t feel it’s fair to people who come here legally or were born here, like myself. I grew up in Corona, which used to be a small town that was largely Latino, and I have no racially motivated ill will against illegal immigrants. But I do feel they are a drain on our tax base, and I feel something should definitely be done.
* Joe Hicks
Southern Christian Leadership Conference
Our board took a very strong stand against Proposition 187. We don’t think it will work politically because it does not, in fact, aim its strength at illegal immigration at all. We do not think it will work fiscally--in fact, it will cost us money. Lots of money will come out of even the local school district. And, of course, health care money will also be lost from money the federal government sends into the state. Then morally, I think the decision was made to oppose Proposition 187 because it targets, we think, some of the most vulnerable people in our society--children, particularly--in terms of disallowing education and disallowing immunizations and health-care treatment.
* Mark Matsumura
Clergyman
I’m really sold on this bill. We have three major problems in California. One is education. Another is safety issues and another is business revitalization. I believe California collects enough taxes, but billions are funneled away to pay for illegal immigrants. This proposition will improve our education system, and I also believe this will bring more jobs to our state.
This is a responsible bill, a reasonable bill that will cut government waste--basically going to illegal aliens--and I think this will save taxpayers’ dollars to be used for the taxpayers and not non-taxpayers.
I’m third-generation Japanese and my mother is Korean. My parents were subject to concentration camps during World War II. I don’t think American history is going to revert back to such racist times. However, I think that’s the fear tactic that the proposition’s opponents are putting on. This has nothing to do with legal immigrants.
* Jesus Escandon
Teacher, Eastman Avenue School in East Los Angeles
I feel bad because as an educator, you want to shed knowledge and wisdom on all children regardless of legal status. There are no frontiers or boundaries to knowledge. I feel bad that because of legal status, you won’t be able to reach a particular individual. Had this proposition been proposed 15 years ago, I would have never made it to UCLA or become a teacher. (Escandon came to the United States as an undocumented immigrant and graduated from UCLA in 1992.) If this was around 15 years ago, I would have never made it out of the barrio here in East L.A. Personally, I would have to report myself before I reported a child to the INS, because it is like turning my back on myself and my community.
* Bobbi Murray
Coalition for Humane Immigrant
Rights of Los Angeles
Proposition 187 doesn’t really get at the issue. People come here for work. They leave their homelands not because they dislike their homelands but because they have no alternative. Proposition 187 is just really a cruel, coldhearted way to punish people who are already here and working very hard to survive and to make their contribution to society. Dealing with issues in 30-second sound bites relies on visceral, emotional arguments that don’t really get at the issue.
This proposition creates a climate of fear and suspicion. A lot of our work has to do with the rights of immigrants and a primary right is the right to work and to live without fear of harassment.
The economy has eroded, there’s no plan for conversion, jobs have left the state. All these fears about the economy and what’s going on focuses on a group of people who had nothing to do with it. They’re not responsible for the military-industrial complex closing down.
* Ezola Foster
Teacher, Bell High; member of Americans for Family Values
The reason I support Proposition 187 is that the federal government has refused to enforce its own laws in regard to immigration. So the people have come together to force changes. We have the most lenient immigration laws in the world. There are long lines of people waiting to come in legally. We can’t afford to pay for people who come here illegally. The most controversial component of 187 is the denial of benefits. And it’s understandable that that would be the most controversial because we are a compassionate and loving people. But we can’t afford to pay for people who have broken our laws. The opponents say that this is a racist law, but it’s not racist at all. It affects people of all colors who have come to this country illegally.
There are three main reasons why I’m in support of Proposition 187. One, illegal immigration violates the law that protects the sovereignty of our country. Two, the sole reason the Los Angeles Unified School District is overcrowded is due to illegal immigrants. And three, illegal immigration severely impacts our economy and increases the friction between citizens and non-citizens. One way it does that is by forcing citizens to compete with non-citizens for benefits.
Teachers and health professionals are not being asked to serve as police officers under the proposition. The normal admission policies would not change at all. We would just be allowed to ask one more question.
* Robert Almanzan
Community affairs, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
It’s a bad law, clean and simple. It’s a badly written law that is going to bring a slew of problems to California. Economically, health-wise, law enforcement-wise. Proposition 187 is trying to attack immigrant communities for all the problems of California.
But this is not an immigration proposition. It does nothing about immigration. It does nothing for border enforcement. If you’re frustrated about immigration, then look for a solution that does something about immigration. Proposition 187 will not deter one single individual from coming into the United States.
Each segment of the proposition on its own is deadly. Going from the “suspect” clause that allows law enforcement to detain those that they “suspect” of being undocumented without any definition of what suspect means. Is it your skin? Is it your language? What defines suspect?
* Shawn Steele
Attorney, Koreatown
My wife is a Korean immigrant, as is most of her immediate family. I am pro-immigration, and was ambivalent about Proposition 187 until I read it. What I see is a prudent measure that would take public benefits away from people who are here illegally, some of whom cannot and do not produce something beneficial to society. Immigrants who have waited for years and have overcome economic and political obstacles to come here are being punished.
If we do not choose to take any action, it will be a signal to other people throughout the world who are sick or poor that if you can only drop in here, you will get great medical and educational services without any prohibition. As long as we make it unbelievably inviting, we’ll continue to get people coming in. It’s one of many reforms we need.
* Enrique Arevalo
President-elect, Mexican-American Bar Assn.
We stand against Proposition 187 for the simple reason that it’s unconstitutional on the basis of equal protection. It’s a matter that’s already been dealt with by the court. And we don’t believe the court will approve it. But we don’t want things to get that far. It will be a long and expensive legal battle.
We are not in favor of illegal immigration. We definitely feel we have a right to control our borders. But this will not control illegal immigration. It’s a national problem. It’s an international problem. When we have parity in wages between the United States and Mexico, there won’t be any reason for people to come here. Mexico basically uses the United States as a safety valve for its unemployed. When the United States can hold Mexico accountable for its practices, then we will have a chance at controlling immigration.
I don’t think people will go back to their homelands because their kids can’t get into school. The practical reality is that it’s going to create an underclass of Latino children who are not going to go to school, who are going to stay home and watch TV. And that’s not good for anybody.
* Alan White
Teacher working in South-Central
I don’t think that our borders, our welfare system or our school system should be there for the taking. This would maybe deter people from coming in over the border. They would realize that they would be under closer scrutiny. They would have second thoughts about so willingly coming into the country and getting jobs and false documents. Right now, they can just come in, get false identification, and no one asks them anything.
There would be fewer people competing for services. We have more than enough people in need.
* Tim Everett
El Rescate
Basically, we think it’s not only an unjust and mean proposition, it’s also not a very logical proposition as far as doing what it says it wants to do. But, of course, we wouldn’t be for it even if it did. We believe immigration is good for the economy, we think it’s a traditional part of California. It’s always been part of the culture and the economics. We think Proposition 187 is a political ploy that feeds upon fear and scapegoating of immigrants. My experience is that most people come here to work--99%. The ones that I talk to are quite proud that they are not on any kind of public assistance. That’s seen as a bad thing, so very few people take public assistance even if they do qualify. And most of them don’t qualify.
I think most of Proposition 187’s support is from people who are frightened of a change in their lifestyle or frightened of maybe losing their political power. Are people who are supporting 187 so ignorant, so naive that they don’t realize who cooks their food, who washes their clothes, who mows their lawn, who picks the crops up in the Central Valley, who works in the garment district, et cetera?
* Chandler Im
Social service worker, Koreatown
It’s just passing the buck. I feel this was just designed to scapegoat immigrants for the problems of this country, especially the problems of California. Too many politicians are using this as a steppingstone to higher office or just to maintain their position. I was born in Korea and I feel we have to do something about immigration. But not this way.
My mother doesn’t speak perfect English and because of her looks, because of the way she talks, if she was to need medical attention she would probably be “suspect.” She has a green card, she is a legal resident. But if she were to seek medical care, she would be subject to all kinds of questions. That violates her right to live here. Why does she have to go through that?
* Alfonso Nava
Professor, Cal State L.A.; former teacher at Roosevelt High
It’s not the jurisdiction of the schools to be policing the students as to their resident status. I’m a teacher trainer, and I don’t train my students to do these things. What am I going to tell my student teachers, “Now we have to take a class on how to identify illegal aliens”? It’s morally and ethically bankrupt for us to teach our future teachers to do this.
