New York Times
By Maggie Haberman
October 19, 2015
Since
he began his campaign for the presidency, Senator Bernie Sanders has
sought to build his base of support beyond the overwhelmingly white
supporters he has in his
home state of Vermont, whose backgrounds hew closely to some voters in
the first two voting states, Iowa and New Hampshire. He has met with
activists from the Black Lives Matter group and has appeared at a
question-and-answer session with the Hispanic Chamber
of Commerce.
But
Mr. Sanders could face continuing questions about his vote against a
comprehensive immigration overhaul bill in 2007, as he did during the
first Democratic presidential
debate last week. And while he has recently presented that vote in
humanitarian terms, his language at the time was starkly economic about
guest-worker visas, which were viewed skeptically by organized labor.
“Why
should Latino voters trust you now when you left them at the altar at
the moment when reform was very close?” Juan Carlos López, a panelist
and an anchor on CNN en
Español asked in the debate last week about the senator’s vote against
that bill.
“I
didn’t leave anybody at the altar,” Mr. Sanders replied. “I voted
against that piece of legislation because it had guest-worker provisions
in it, which the Southern
Poverty Law Center talked about being semi-slavery. Guest workers are
coming in, they’re working under terrible conditions, but if they stand
up for their rights, they’re thrown out of the country. I was not the
only progressive to vote against that legislation
for that reason. Tom Harkin, a very good friend of Hillary Clinton’s
and mine, one of the leading labor advocates, also voted against that.”
He
added, “Progressives did vote against that for that reason. My view
right now — and always has been — is that when you have 11 million
undocumented people in this country,
we need comprehensive immigration reform, we need a path toward
citizenship, we need to take people out of the shadows.”
But
Mr. Sanders was part of an effort by liberal Democrats to kill the bill
that year. His language at the time often related not to the concerns
of the workers receiving
the visas, but to the bill’s impact on American wage-earners. And those
words are at odds with how much of the Democratic Party currently
discusses immigration overhaul, all but guaranteeing he will continue to
be asked to clarify his views.
“What
this legislation is not about is addressing the real needs of American
workers,” Mr. Sanders said in a speech on the floor of the Senate in
2007. “It is not about
raising wages or improving benefits. What it is about is bringing into
this country over a period of years millions of low-wage temporary
workers with the result that wages and benefits in this country, which
are already going down, will go down even further.”
He
made a similar comment at another point that year, saying that the bill
would “end up lowering wages for American workers right now.” It was,
he said at yet another
point, a “bad piece of legislation” for laborers.
That
year, Mr. Sanders co-sponsored an amendment with Senator Charles E.
Grassley, the Iowa Republican who has called for an independent
investigation into Hillary Rodham
Clinton’s email use and was a top critic of the 2013 comprehensive
immigration overhaul effort, which would have prohibited, among other
things, the banks that received federal bail-out funds from hiring
workers on guest visas. The 2007 bill failed, though
Mrs. Clinton and Joseph R. Biden Jr., then both senators, voted for it.
Six
years later, Mr. Sanders again had concerns about a comprehensive
immigration bill, in part for the same reason — concern that immigration
would keep down wages of
American workers. But he voted for it after helping secure a key
provision for a $1.5 billion training program for younger workers.
Warren
Gunnels, the policy director for Mr. Sanders, insisted that Mr.
Sanders’s concerns were multifaceted in 2007. He pointed out that Mr.
Sanders had brought attention
in the Senate to the exploitation of immigrant workers in fields in
Florida, and insisted his concerns have always been humanitarian-based.
“He
has always supported a pathway to citizenship,” as well as the Dream
Act, Mr. Gunnels said. “Yes, he’s very focused that workers in this
country and everybody in this
country has the ability to go out and get a decent-paying job.”
But, he added, “if you really study his record,” the support for helping immigrants is established.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment