Sunday
Mar202005
Colorado Haters Push Immigration Initiative; Legislation to deny most public services could be put before voters in 2006
Sunday, March 20, 2005 at 01:17PM - Originally published in the Los Angeles Times March 13, 2005
By David Kelly, Times Staff Writer
Colorado activists seeking to curb illegal immigration hope to put a ballot measure before voters next year barring all but emergency services to undocumented immigrants.
The initiative is similar to Arizona's Proposition 200, passed in November, which requires proof of citizenship for those seeking to vote or apply for state benefits.
"We are working 24/7 on this," said William Herron, president of Defend Colorado Now, which is leading the effort. "We need 70,000 signatures but we will aim for 100,000. If it gets on the ballot it will pass by a wide margin."
Similar legislation stumbled in the state assembly recently, failing to get out of committee.
"A survey of my district showed 86% of the people are behind this," said state Rep. David Schultheis, the Republican who introduced the legislation. "This is what the people of Colorado want and the Legislature should be in line with it."
Democrats, who do not support the plan, dominate the Colorado assembly.
"It's a very bad idea that places blame where blame doesn't belong," said state Rep. Terrence Carroll, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. "If we look at what happened in California and Arizona, you see people playing to the worst fears and instincts of people. If they do that here, it has a very good chance of passing."
Colorado has an estimated 144,000 illegal immigrants though Herron says the number is as high as 250,000. Many work at jobs in Denver, at ski resorts or at meat packing plants in cities like Greeley.
Critics of the initiative call it racist, dangerous and impractical. They say banning illegal immigrants from most public services would harm everyone.
"It would endanger all Colorado kids if you deny vaccinations to illegal immigrants," said Polly Baca, executive chairman of the Latin American Research and Service Agency in Denver. "We need reform of our immigration laws, this will do nothing to stop illegal immigration. There are angry, negative and hate-filled people behind this."
The American Civil Liberties Union said if the measure passed, people could be required to show identification to enter a state park, ride a city bus or use other state services.
"I think even those concerned with illegal immigration would resent this invasion of privacy," said Mark Silverstein, legal director for the Colorado ACLU.
Opponents of the measure note that Arizona and Colorado are very different places.
"We proved that in the last election when the Democrats took over the legislature and we elected a Latino to the Senate and his brother to the House," said Manolo Gonzalez-Estay, chairman of Keep Colorado Safe, which is fighting the initiative. "Colorado is a very smart state and we don't do things just because other states do them."
Arizona has many more illegal immigrants than Colorado, with more than 500,000 arrests last year -- more than California, Texas and New Mexico combined. The Department of Homeland Security has added 200 agents, surveillance drones and $10 million in funds in an effort to combat the problem.
The situation led Kathy McKee to launch Protect Arizona Now, the group behind Proposition 200.
That measure requires proof of immigration status to receive some state benefits, including general assistance, short-term crisis aid and child care assistance. Federally mandated programs, such as emergency healthcare, are not affected. Illegal immigrants already are banned from services such as welfare and food stamps.
After the Arizona measure passed, a federal judge in Tucson blocked its implementation until he heard arguments from critics who said it was unconstitutional. In December, the judge lifted the restraining order and the measure became law. That decision is being appealed.
Although the measure was approved by 56% of voters, McKee said the state was not enforcing it properly and she might sue. McKee said welfare workers were allowing people to say they were citizens rather than show identification as mandated.
"They are allowing self-affirmation to serve as proof of citizenship, which we oppose," she said. "That's a slap in the face because that is not what people voted on."
But the Arizona Department of Economic Security, which runs most state benefit programs, said employees were asking for a variety of documents to verify a person's identification and citizenship. After reviewing them, applicants are asked for a signature certifying the information they provided was true.
"I have not heard of any major issues with the implementation of this," said Liz Barker, department spokeswoman.
Meanwhile, McKee has launched Protect America Now, and at least 15 other states -- including Colorado -- are forming committees with the goal of controlling illegal immigration.
State Rep. Tom Tancredo, an advocate of immigration reform, said such grass-roots efforts showed the disconnect between citizens and politicians.
"I think it's the widest gap I have ever seen between what the people of the country want and what elected representatives are willing to give them," said the Republican.
But Proposition 200 is changing that, Tancredo said.
"It sent shockwaves through this place," he said. "I can't think of anything with the exception of 9/11 that had a greater effect on members of this body. Every member of the Arizona delegation opposed it. The two major papers opposed it. The governor opposed it. And it won with 47% of Hispanics voting for it."
Tamar Jacoby, an immigration expert at the Manhattan Institute, a public policy think tank, said much of the anger she had seen was not directed so much at the immigrants, but the flagrant illegality.
"The public dissatisfaction with the status quo is very legitimate but these local initiatives are not the answer, they won't stop anyone from coming," she said. "People come here to work, not for healthcare or schools. We need to create ways for them to come legally."