Colorado to replace immigrant workers with prison labor

Last summer the Colorado legislature passed some of the strictest anti-immigration laws on the books. It turns out the laws have not only cost the state $2mil dollars to enforce rather than saving millions as originally intended, there is now such a shortage of farm labor due the new restrictions, the state is considering using work gangs from local prisons to bring in the crops.

Immigrant farm workers who were claimed to be driving down the wages of native workers when they worked the fields for $8.50 an hour are now to be replaced with "low security risk" prisoners who will be receiving 60cents a day to take their place according to Department of Corrections officials.

A pilot program, which will be launched this month, will have the inmates working at more than a dozen farms picking melons, onions and peppers

Crops were left to spoil in the fields after the passage of legislation that required state identification to get government services and allowed police to check suspects' immigration status.

"The reason this [program] started is to make sure the agricultural industry wouldn't go out of business," state Rep. Dorothy Butcher said. Her district includes Pueblo, near the farmland where the inmates will work.

Prisoners who are a low security risk may choose to work in the fields, earning 60 cents a day. They also are eligible for small bonuses.

The inmates will be watched by prison guards, who will be paid by the farms. The cost is subject to negotiation, but farmers say they expect to pay more for the inmate labor and its associated costs than for their traditional workers.

…snip…

Farmers said they weren't happy with the solution, but their livelihoods are on the verge of collapse.

"This prison labor is not a cure for the immigration problem; it's just a Band-Aid," farmer Joe Pisciotta said.

He said he needed to be sure he would have enough workers for the harvest this fall before he planted watermelons, onions and pumpkins on his 700-acre farm in Avondale. But he's not thrilled with the idea of criminals working his fields.

"I've got young kids," he said. "It's something I've got to think about."

Pisciotta said he hoped the program highlighted what he viewed as the absurdity of Colorado's position — dependent on immigrant labor but trying to chase migrants away. He said the people leaving were not just those who entered the country illegally.
La Times

Corrections is asking the farmers to pay $9.60 an hour per prisoner to cover guards, transportation to the fields and food, Pisciotta said.

That's a bit more than the cost of minimum wage plus benefits such as workers compensation insurance, the farmer said. He's negotiating for a lower fee.

A new state law took effect Jan. 1 requiring employers to verify Social Security numbers and save proof that workers are legal. Some migrant workers have heard about the law and are choosing to work elsewhere.

Pisciotta said he started looking for alternatives after his winter onion packers said they might not be back to Colorado - fearing harassment, even if they are legal.

To enforce the new law, the state will perform random audits and fine employers $5,000 for the first offense and up to $25,000 for the second.

"If it is $25,000, can you take that chance?" Pisciotta said.

He said he checks his workers' identification papers.

"They look fine. But whether they're legit or not, I don't know," he said.
Rocky Mountain News

Advocates on both sides of the immigration debate said they were stunned by the proposal.

"If they can't get slaves from Mexico, they want them from the jails," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, which favors restrictions on immigration.

Ricardo Martinez of the Denver immigrant rights group Padres Unidos asked: "Are we going to pull in inmates to work in the service industry too? You won't have enough inmates — unless you start importing them from Texas."
LA Times

In addition to the laws requiring employers to verify worker status, Colorado passed legislation that made it harder to get a driver license and created tougher guidelines for those applying to receive all but emergency services. In addition to costing the state $2mil to enforce, the new laws have led to an exodus of Latinos, both undocumented and legal.

David Kranz, a spokesman for the California Farm Bureau, whose state is also suffering from a shortage of farm labor, doesn't view the use of prisoners as farm laborers as very practical, saying, "The idea has been floated before, but these are not unskilled jobs. They're jobs that require a lot of training and supervision."

Perhaps the Colorado Legislature could just work out a deal with the Dept. of Homeland Security, The Corrections Corporation of America and Halliburton to just return all the undocumented workers they've already imprisoned and send them to the fields for 60 cents a day – while charging farmers $9.00 and change an hour

It's would mean a nice profit for the prison keepers and the farmers could get back some skilled workers …. That seems to be just the kind of plan that would appeal to the greedy corporate crowd... Dick Cheney would be so proud. Maybe they could get the same deal for service and construction workers also….America ain't it grand?

tags: immigration, labor shortage , convict labor, anti immigration laws

Read More...

Summary only...

Report Finds Colorado Anti-Immigration Law Cost State over $2mil.

Last summer when Colorado passed one of the toughest anti-immigration laws in the country, Governor Bill Owens claimed it would save the state millions of dollars and remove more than fifty thousand people from the welfare rolls.

Creating tougher guidelines for those applying to receive all but emergency services, the law was intended to prevent those in the country illegally, even those with fake documents, from receiving public benefits.

According to NPR, after numerous reports of citizens and legal residents having difficulty receiving public benefits, Colorado lawmakers asked all state agencies a few weeks ago to tally up the costs and savings of the new law.

In all, the state has spent over two million dollars to implement it. And the savings from kicking migrants here illegally off the welfare rolls? Nada.

NPR

The panel's report that undocumented immigrants really didn't use state services, and that the new laws are costing more to implement than they're saving, came as no surprise to State Senator Dave Schultheis, yet he said it didn't matter since the law was never about saving money

Maybe there's not thirty thousand illegal aliens that are utilizing this system. That's not the issue. The issue is if there are ten, that's too many; and if there are five, that's too many. No one that is here in this country illegally should be using hard earned taxpayer dollars. It's not right.

NPR

I wonder if the people of Colorado knew that rather than saving all that money they were told that immigrants were in effect "stealing" from them, they would instead have to spend $2mil to try to make life miserable for them as a matter of "principle", they would have backed the idea in the first place.

Despite overwhelming evidence that shows that undocumented migrants don't come here to collect free social benefits, but rather come to work, anti-immigration hawks consistently try to sell the public on programs like those implemented in Colorado.

Even Schultheis admitted that he wouldn't be surprised if the costs of the program would remain high and the benefits low.

He agrees with the dominant theory among immigration researchers that people don't risk their lives crossing the border to tap into our welfare system. They come here to work. Researchers say migration within the U.S. backs up this contention too. Instead of moving to states with relatively generous welfare programs like California, immigrants are choosing states in the Rockies, the Midwest, and the Southeast where there are plenty of jobs. And for the few who do want benefits, a 1996 welfare reform law made that illegal.

NPR

At the end of the day, the kinds of laws passed in Colorado have far more to do with stirring up ant-immigration sentiments than saving any government money. It's no small wonder that the state that brought us Tom Tancredo is willing to spend $2mil dollars of its taxpayer's money just to make an anti-immigration statement.

to hear the complete NPR report: click here


tags: immigration, CO , immigration laws, welfare

Read More...

Summary only...

Why Tancredo stepped down as Immigration Caucus leader

Eight years after founding the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus as the vanguard of his anti-immigration movement, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) has stepped down as chairman, passing the reins to former Federation for American Immigration Reform lobbyist Brian Bilbray (R-CA). Tancredo, who has set his sights on the White House, appears to be shifting tactics in his quest to move his nativist agenda forward.

In a statement released from Bilbray's office Tancredo said, “Congressman Bilbray was asked to lead the IRC because of his pragmatic approach to the illegal immigration issue. Brian has held the line against amnesty, fought for border security and will be a terrific leader of the Immigration Reform Caucus.”

But the change of leadership might say more about Tancredo's future ambitions than Bilbray's ability to lead the caucus.

In the shakeup that followed the November defeat of the Republican majority, it's been a mixed bag for the anti-immigration crowd.

In January, immigration hardliners managed to score a victory when they stripped comprehensive reform sponsor, Arizona Republican Representative Jeff Flake of his coveted seat on the Judiciary Committee.

Flake says it's because of his stand against party lines on immigration reform.

Flake says committee members know there's an immigration package coming with his name on it, and they don't like what it says.

Flake says the official party line will be that House Republicans are losing committee seats because of the GOP's loss of the majority in the fall elections.

But, he says six Republicans with less seniority than Flake remain on the committee, including Arizona Representative Trent Franks.
KOLD-13

Yet, a few days later, despite their best efforts they couldn't keep Bush ally and comprehensive reform advocate, Mel Martinez (R-FL), from taking over leadership of the RNC.

For Tancredo this new political landscape has presented some challenges.

Immediately after the election he announced that "We will now be looking at the strong potential for some sort of guest worker-amnesty program that cannot be stopped." Although he said he would fight to "gin up as much opposition" to it.

He also shunned any idea at running for a leadership position stating that he wasn't interested.

Tancredo, however, said he is once again mulling over a run for the presidency to push the immigration issue. He will wait for a few other questions to be resolved - including whether Allard runs again - before deciding to form an exploratory committee.

Denver Post

However, as it turned out Allard's decision played no role in Tancredo's decision to run for the White House. He had ruled out a Senate run long before Allard's announcement not to seek another term.

Tancredo claimed that if and when he was to make a Presidential bid it would be "for all the marbles"… but perhaps his plan is much more far reaching than it appears.

The conventional wisdom dictates that as an undeniable long-shot in the race, Tancredo's run is more about forcing his issue into the mainstream debate in hopes of moving his party further the right on immigration. Like his mentor, Pat Buchanan, he is hoping to replicate Buchanan's 1992 successes in the early primaries and garner enough clout to force immigration to the forefront of the election with talk about of new "war … for the soul of America."… A war against an "invading horde of immigrants" he believes are changing the very fabric of the nation.

But conventional wisdom may be wrong this time around. Perhaps it is a different Buchanan Presidential run that now interests Tancredo ... the 2000 third party run.

His lack of interest in vying Allard's Senate seat (which admittedly would be a long-shot for him to win given the current climate) coupled with his unwillingness to seek a greater leadership position, and even give up the power he already had in the House by passing his IRC leadership on to Bilbray, could be viewed as the acts of a man whose not making plans to run for his parties nomination but rather to jump ship.

Certainly his recent hires seem to reveal a willingness to go outside the usual party structure when looking for people to run his Presidential campaign .

U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., has hired a former Christian Coalition leader to run his New Hampshire presidential campaign.

The Littleton Republican announced today that Shelly Uscinski, the 2000 New Hampshire campaign director for Pat Buchanan, would head his operations in the Granite State. Uscinski also was a Buchanan delegate to the 1996 Republican convention and once headed the New Hampshire branch of the Christian Coalition.
Denver Post

Tancredo also tapped another ex-Buchananite, Ken C McAlpin to be his campaigns treasurer.

Rep. Tom Tancredo has tapped an official from the now-defunct Virginia Freedom Party to be treasurer of his presidential exploratory committee, but that does not mean he's pondering a third-party candidacy, a spokesman said Monday
….

McAlpin, also known as "K.C.," is prominent in the immigration-reform movement that has made Tancredo famous. He has served as a deputy director for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, and is executive director of the group ProEnglish, which advocates making English the official language of the U.S.
Rocky Mountian News

In both cases Tancredo spokesmen were quick to point out that he has no intention of launching a third party run.

"From the beginning, we've had no intention to run as a third-party candidate, ever, and we'll never consider that because he's a Republican, period," said T.Q. Houlton, spokesman for the newly formed Tancredo for a Secure America Exploratory Committee.
Rocky Mountian News

Yet, there is one more key player in Tancredo world that might have a different opinion on the whole third party issue ... Pat's sister and former campaign manager Bay.

As a founding member of Team America PAC along with Tancredo, Bay has been grooming the Colorado Congressman for quite some time to be a national candidate. "Tancredo for a Secure America", his current Presidential campaign committee is a direct spin off of "Secure America Now," the campaign launched by Buchanan and Tancredo's Team America PAC to support anti-immigration candidates during the last election cycle.

One of the main candidates "Secure America Now" worked with was Minuteman Randy Graf… who could be viewed as Franco's Spain in the Buchanan's coming campaign …a place to test the blitzkrieg before the real battle begins.

Michael D. Bryan at Blogs for Arizona pointed out a over year ago the power of the Buchanan campaign machine while first covering Graf's congressional run in Arizona's 8th district.

"Secure America Now" is the road show for Team America, a Political Action Committee dedicated to border issues founded by Tom and Bay. Only by understanding the significance of the SAN tour and the history of the Buchanans in American politics does the full significance of the tour's stop in Tucson really have a useful context. Randy Graf is only a small part of the story.

The SAN tour is not just mutual support by ideologically allied politicians. This is something much larger, and more crass. This is anti-immigrant sentiment becoming the new centerpiece of the extreme right agenda. This is Tom Tancredo's shake-down run for his Presidential campaign - one in which he may be positioning to take Buchanan's traditional place to right of everyone else, and Pat's campaign manager, Bay, as well.

The campaigns run by Bay are not traditional campaigns. Strategically they have a lot in common with Ralph Nader's campaigns - they seek to pressure the moderates to deal with ideas the fringes find compelling. Logistically they are pigeons to the Party nominee's Air Force One - lean and mean, they can keep going with minimal financial support. Monetarily they are as different from a major party campaign as could be. Where losing candidates often retire from the field with millions in debts to retire, Buchanan's campaigns end heavily in the black with millions in tax-payer dollars in the bank and valuable assets, such as supporter databases, which can be used to support a permanent state of campaigning. With Bay at the helm of Tancredo's tour two things are sure: it will be a very efficiently run campaign, and it will be a very profitable one, even more so now that grassroots organizing and fund raising via the Internet has come of age.

Bay Buchanan is an experienced and canny political organizer and a revolutionary fund-raiser. Many people looked at the Dean campaign's tremendous success in raising large amounts of funding from small donations as something Sui Generis in Presidential politics. It isn't. Pat Buchanan's campaigns have been doing the same thing from the early 90s using the direct mail wizardry of Bay Buchanan. The Buchanan's were able to raise millions in the campaigns from small dollar donors, and capture federal matching funds much more efficiently that their more electorally successful competitors. Bay and Pat have garnered as much as 40 million in federal matching funds this way. For a complete account of the political fund raising and media empire which Pat and Bay have built I strongly recommend a the very insightful and well-researched article by Monte Paulsen.

... snip ...

This campaign will be much like Pat Buchanan's prior runs, self-promotional, very remunerative, and influential among the far right. I will predict now that Pat's next book will be about immigration with a forward by Tancredo: or maybe the other way around. Bay and Tom, by founding a PAC have added a new ability to the Buchanan campaign template; the power to reward allies who give them credibility and to give credibility to allies who give them power

Blogs for Arizona"Graf, Tancredo, and Buchanan: Tres Banditos en Tucson", January 21, 2006

It looks like more predictions than the one about Pat Buchanan's next-book will end up to be on the mark before the 08 election cycle comes to a close.


tags: immigration, Tancredo 08 , third party

Read More...

Summary only...

Sometimes the media gets one right

His nightly histrionics have made him the poster-boy for the debate over immigration reform. With a roll of his eyes, or a well placed indignant sign, Lou Dobbs has managed to dominate the discussion of the issue in the media. His nightly "Broken Borders" segments with their mix of blatant editorializing and testimony from "experts" from various anti- immigration advocacy groups have become a definitive voice in the debate over immigration reform. Unfortunately, his ability to command the issue, at least from a cable news perspective, has left a void of responsible journalism on the topic.

Interestingly, it must be noted that Dobbs, who now fancies himself as the champion of the American working man, rarely finds time to talk with those who truly represent the working men and women of this country; representatives from organized labor. It is no coincidence that Dobbs favors his "experts" to come from Washington think tanks, or border vigilante groups rather than the unions, as many of the largest unions in the country hold views in direct opposition to Lou's hard-line philosophy. But that is an issue for another day. Today, the discussion's about a case where the media got one right.

Last night, NBC aired a one hour documentary titled, “In the Shadow of the American Dream,” hosted by veteran newsman, Tom Brokaw. Unlike the usual fare served up by the likes of CNN or FOX, NBC chose not to feature scenes of protesters from both sides of the debate screaming at one other from behind well positioned police barricades, or interviews with border vigilantes or spokesmen from immigrants rights groups. Instead Brokaw spent the hour simply talking with real people. People from communities in the Roaring Fork Valley near Aspen Co, an area at the epicenter of the growing immigration debate.

tags: immigration, documentary , Tom Brokaw , Roaring Fork Valley

He introduces us to Mark Gould, the owner of a local construction company with far too much work and far too few workers. We watch as Gould deals the newly arrived immigrants from Mexico whom increasing fill the ranks of his company's workforce. He explains the difficulties in finding workers to take the entry level jobs with his company, stating that it has become impossible for him to find young workers, just out of school who are willing to man the shovels and pick-axes necessary to keep his company running. Even the fourteen dollars an hour with full benefits he pays cannot attract new young workers.

The foreman and crew bosses, many of whom started as laborers themselves, back-up Gould's assertions. Although some of the rough hewed foreman resent the social changes taking place in their community due to the influx of immigrant workers, they all admit they couldn't do their jobs without them. In fact we watch as young men from the area apply for jobs with the company, only to quit after a week or so of ditch-digging and other tough jobs that must be done to before construction can begin. Gould puts it quite frankly when he says, “Americans don’t want this work.”

Over the hour we also follow the lives of the immigrants themselves as they try to maneuver their way through the underground world of the undocumented on the one hand while still trying to look towards a brighter future. We watch them at work and at home in four-bedroom house where one them lives with 17 other family members. We see them as they take their children to school, deal with illness without medical care, take English classes and try to obtain the documents needed to stay employed.

Brokaw also talks with those who are not comfortable with the changes taking place in their community. One of Gould's native-born laborers states that although the immigrants are in no way competing with him for work, he still feels that there should be legal consequences for those who he feels break the law by working and living here without documentation. For him it's just a matter of "respect for the law."

We also meet a local mother of a young child whose school is now made up of children, 80% of whose parents are newly arrived immigrants. Although she feels that the multicultural experience her child receives in school is an asset, she worries not only about the resources available to him, but also whether her child feels comfortable as a minority. She is clearly torn on the issue, and as any other mother, worries about what is ultimately best for her child. Ironically, she is also a vice president at Gould Construction, which Brokhaw notes is still trying to find workers to finish a school expansion project at her child's school needed due the increase of immigrant children.

It is in these gray areas that the true story of the immigration debate resides.

Unlike the black and white picture painted for us nightly by the likes of Lou Dobbs, Brokhaw and NBC have presented an image rich in texture and color. By focusing in on this small microcosm of the debate, the people involved with one company, in one small valley nestled in the mountains of Colorado, this documentary presented a much richer examination of the immigration question than all the red-faced rants and smug condescension Lou musters in a year.


View complete Transcript


From the MSNBC website:

Indisputable points in the immigration debate (Tom Brokaw, NBC News)


In our report on illegal immigration Tuesday night, December 26, at 8 p.m. on NBC, "Tom Brokaw Reports: In the Shadow of the American Dream," several points are indisputable:

1. In many parts of the country immigrants are doing the work Americans no longer want to do, especially the hard work of manual labor at construction sites.

2. In our reporting we discovered that most of them are paid a fair wage — $14.00 an hour for an entry level construction job, and that they are paying state and federal taxes through withholding. (Sure, some employers pay cash off the books but most we encountered are trying to play by the rules).

3. While local residents are conflicted about the spreading Hispanic culture - language and music - they agree the immigrants are very hard workers and in general have good family values.

4. But it is also clear the immigrants are straining the public and health systems without paying their fair share.

5. They live in overcrowded, often sub-standard housing in clear violation of local laws.

6. They're brazen about acquiring forged documents — from Social Security cards to driver's licenses — to get work.

7. And, most important, this complicated problem won't be solved until Mexico becomes a reliable partner in improving its own economy and enforcing the rules at its border.

We can build a high fence, send illegals back, crack down on employers and it won't end because it is about survival and a piece of the American dream, a powerful lure for immigrants from all over the world for 200 years.

It is a growing problem and it requires urgent action in Congress because in the meantime all the pressure is on local law enforcement, school and health administrators and employers.

A sovereign nation must have control of its borders and a great nation must have a systematic, legal way of filling its labor needs.

In an upcoming "Tom Brokaw Reports," airing Tues., Dec. 26 at 8 p.m., Brokaw travels to an unlikely place where the debate over illegal immigration is raging — the Colorado Rockies. NBC News spent eight months reporting on the myths and truths about illegal immigration in this pristine stretch between Aspen and Vail, a historically white population that has seen an influx of thousands of Hispanics, mostly from Mexico. The hour-long documentary follows a booming economy attracting illegal workers willing to do unskilled labor, questioning what happens to American culture and America's laws when hundreds of thousands of people enter the country illegally.

Link

Read More...

Summary only...

Radio Station Cancels Ad on Tancredo Ties to Racist Groups

NRC Broadcasting has refused to run the newest campaign ad by Bill Winter, Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress in CD-6. The ad, that began running earlier this week, highlights Congressman Tom Tancredo's personal and financial ties to a number of leaders and organizations in the "White Power" movement.

Winter's campaign manager, Berrick Abramson, was informed by the General Sales Manager at NRC that the ad was pulled on direct orders from NRC Broadcasting's CEO, Tim Brown, a major Republican donor who has given over twelve thousand dollars to various Republican candidates in 2006 including Marilyn Musgrave, Doug Lamborn, Scott Tipton, Rick O'Donnell, Rick Santorum and Winter opponent Tom Tancredo.

The Winter for Congress campaign began airing the radio ad titled "Dateline: South Carolina" earlier this week addressing Tom Tancredo's ties to a number of "right-wing hate groups" like the League of the South and Aryan Brotherhood.

On Tuesday, October 31, the campaign also issued a press release titled, "Winter Calls on Tancredo to Sever Racist Ties," in which the campaign provided more detail about the direct ties between Mr. Tancredo and these hate groups. Additionally they posted full documentation on their web site backing up all the claims made in both the radio add and the press released.

On Wednesday, November 1, shortly before noon, the Winter for Congress campaign received an e-mail from a sales representative of NRC Broadcasting, whose stations include Jack FM and KCUV, claiming that the stations were getting "lots of complaints" about the "Dateline: South Carolina" radio spot and suggesting, "Can we pull it?" After advising the representative of NRC to refer any complaints to the campaign and providing them with both the statement issued by the campaign as well as significant documentation supporting the claims made in the spot, a representative of NRC wrote to the campaign stating, "wish it was that simple. Management has given me no other choice put (sic) to pull this spot."


tags: immigration, Tom Tancredo , League of the South , CO-6, white supremacists, Bill Winter


At the time of the last e-mail message from the NRC message, the Winter campaign had not received any complaints from other stations, despite the ad being in heavy rotation on nearly every station in the market. When campaign manager Berrick Abramson spoke with the General Sales Manager at NRC, the campaign was told that "the CEO heard the spot and wants it off the air," according to Abramson.

When Abramson asked if there were any claims or assertions that anything in the ad was false, Abramson was told "No, the CEO just doesn't like it," and that "you have to admit, it's pretty harsh on Tancredo." After pointing out that there were no complaints from other networks, the General Manager conceded that the "complaint" had come from "down the hall" in Mr. Brown's office. In spite of the acknowledgement that the ad contained no factual errors, the Winter campaign was advised that CEO Tim Brown "had made his decision" to have the ad pulled.

Winter campaign manager Berrick Abramson, noted "Mr. Brown is entitled to his political views, but when he crosses the line by censoring what messages go out over the public airwaves, he has crossed the line from expressing his opinion and is now suppressing free speech."

"It's difficult enough to understand the apathy surrounding Mr. Tancredo's indisputable ties to a network of hate groups," remarked Abramson, "but it's even more difficult to fathom that somebody allegedly serving as trustee of the public airwaves, would abuse that position in order to prevent the public from knowing about Mr. Tancredo's disgraceful record."

[Update 11-02-2006,1:40PM EST:] It looks like Tim Brown is trying to now backpedal on the ad cancellation. From today's Rocky Mountain News

The executive, Tim Brown, chief operating officer for NRC Broadcasting, said he does not consider the ad titled "Dateline: South Carolina" offensive, and it continues to run on the air.

But Berrick Abramson, Winter's campaign manager, said he was called by a station representative early Wednesday and told the ads had to be pulled.

An e-mail message forwarded to the Rocky Mountain News by Abramson seems to confirm that.

"Management has given me no choice but to pull this spot. As I said, we will be happy to run your other spots, but we cannot run the South Carolina spot," the e-mail, apparently from NRC's Neil Conway, said.

Read More...

Summary only...

Did Dobson endorse O'Donnell in CO-07 ?

Despite his claims that "here at Focus on the Family, we're not political" , the Reverend James Dobson appears to have endorsed Republican Rick O'Donnell over his Democratic opponent Ed Perlmutter in the congressional race for Colorado's 7th District.

In e-mail sent Friday to all it's members in CD-07, Dobson accused Perlmutter of being a "die-hard supporter of abortion" and hiring "homosexual youth to work on his behalf." He went on to say that "Fortunately, the other 7th District candidate, Rick O'Donnell, has a very different track record, particularly on the sanctity of human life and marriage."

Dobson went on to urge his followers to "encourage Rick O'Donnell to continue his strong support for life and marriage" and forward the e-mail to friends and family. He ended his letter with a message to "(not) let the abortion industry and advocates of homosexual marriage have their way in Colorado. Make your voice heard!"

Focus on the Family is officially listed as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization, which is prohibited by law from engaging in any political activity whatsoever. Dobson does have a spin–off group, Focus Action, that is listed as a 501(c)(4) organization, and by law may engage in "some" political activity, but it cannot be its primary mission.

I'm sure Dobson and his attorneys would be able to argue exactly how this letter does not constitute a formal endorsement…. But you be the judge:



tags: immigration, CO-7 , Rick O'Donnell , Ed Perlemutter, James Dobson, Focus on the Family

An Important Message from Dr. James Dobson

Dear Colorado Friend,

I hope you'll take a few moments to read this important and very timely update ... and then forward it to friends, family and fellow church members.

In just a few days, Colorado voters will be going to the polls to elect new leaders, and I have reason to be both very concerned and very hopeful about where your candidates for U.S. House stand on the biggest moral issues of our day – life and marriage.

Let me be specific: The evidence clearly indicates that one of the candidates for our state's 7th Congressional District seat—state Sen. Ed Perlmutter—is a die-hard supporter of abortion. In fact, he has made his pro-abortion position a centerpiece of his campaign.

But that's not surprising, considering he garnered a nearly 100-percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado during his years in the state Legislature. Now, as a candidate for the U.S. House, he proudly boasts of that pro-abortion record, declaring on his Web site that he will be a "strong voice" for pro-abortion policies.

And what about his stance on marriage? Unfortunately, Ed Perlmutter stands squarely with those who would overturn the natural order of marriage as between one man and one woman. Not only does he support "domestic partnerships" for homosexual couples, but he has gone a step further in openly supporting same-sex marriage.

As a result of these stands and his championing of homosexual causes in the Colorado Legislature, Sen. Perlmutter has become a favorite of gay-rights organizations around the country. They have given him significant financial support and have even hired homosexual youth to work on his behalf. The nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy organization, the Human Rights Campaign, has made Perlmutter's campaign one of 23 targets for assistance from its Youth College.

Fortunately, the other 7th District candidate, Rick O'Donnell, has a very different track record, particularly on the sanctity of human life and marriage.

When it comes to life, there's no guessing where he stands. Rick O'Donnell has emphatically and repeatedly stated his across-the-board commitment to pro-life policies on abortion. Equally important, Mr. O'Donnell's commitment to defending marriage from redefinition is strong. He unequivocally supports the federal marriage-protection amendment that would keep liberal courts and radical gay activists from hijacking the institution of marriage.

With this information in mind, what can you do?

First, please contact both candidates and let them know how you feel about the sanctity of life and the protection of traditional marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Specifically, encourage Rick O'Donnell to continue his strong support for life and marriage. And please urge Ed Perlmutter to renounce his pro-abortion and pro-homosexual marriage positions.

Second, if you have friends, family or fellow church members who feel as you do and who may benefit from this information, please forward this e-mail to them.

Don't let the abortion industry and advocates of homosexual marriage have their way in Colorado. Make your voice heard!

Sincerely,

James C. Dobson, Ph.D.
Founder and Chairman

ColoradoPols.com

For more information on the activities of Focus on the Family and their playing loose with government restrictions on churches engaging in electioneering see:
Focus on the Family and Tax Form Hanky-Panky? and More info on Focus on the Family tax hanky-panky

Perlmutter has been maintaining a strong lead in this race and obviously Dobson is hoping to change that. O'Donnell is probably best know nationally for his bizarre proposal to draft all male high school seniors for service as border guards along the southern border. He then later confounded everyone by defending his position by claiming he got the idea from the Democrats

Read More...

Summary only...

Tancredo opposes kindergarteners learning English (CO-06)

In April of 2005, Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo introduced a Constitutional Amendment that would have declared English the official language of the United States. HJ Res. 43 stated that "As the official language, the English language shall be used for all public acts including every order, resolution, vote, and election, and for all records and judicial proceedings of the Government of the United States and the governments of the several States."

Perhaps it's schizophrenia or a mild form of dementia that has led Tancredo to now reverse his previous stand on bilingualism after spending years decrying what he called the "balkanizing and 'bilingualizing' America." Apparently Mad Tom now sees no need for Spanish speaking children to learn what he would make the official language of the nation.


tags: immigration, Tom Tancredo , English Only , CO-6, ESL

Colorado schools have long offered in-class and after-school programs for children with various special needs, one being English as a Second Language (ESL) classes for those unable to speak English.

Recently Tancredo put out a press release stating that he had sent a letter to Colorado State Board of Education Commissioner William J. Moloney "questioning the school districts choice to offer all day education to Elementary Spanish speaking students while offering only a half day to English speakers."

Using the kind of convoluted logic he has become famous for, Tancredo went on to say:

“Parents of English-speaking students have been told they are not eligible for all-day kindergarten because their children do not need the English-language instruction provided to Spanish-language students,” said Tancredo, Chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus. “I want to know if such programs are legal under federal and state non-discrimination laws. Can children be denied an equal education just because their native language is English?”
Tancredo.house.gov

It would probably be safe to assume that Mr. Tancredo has not actually set foot in a school in years given the nature of his statement. If he had, he would have seen numerous examples of the kind of "discrimination" he's complaining of. Students with all sorts of physical and learning disabilities are routinely given "special education" not afforded other students. These programs vary from personal tutors for the learning disabled to speech therapy for children with impediments. Likewise, those who are gifted take part in programs that provide extra challenges and opportunities not available to all students. All these programs are based upon the needs of the individual child and what best serves their educational development.

The Douglas County School District (DCSD) stated that, "We base our decisions as a district on the needs of our students." The DCSD statement continued, "This program is added on to the typical kindergarten school day," describing the program as "no different from other programs our district offers to provide early intervention to students with unique needs."…

According to the Board of Education, the English as a Second Language (ESL) and related programs exist for forty-five different languages as well as sign-language. In Douglas County alone, the programs serve the needs of over 1,000 students at more than fifty schools from kindergarten through high school.
link

Perhaps just to make things "fair" for Mr. Tancredo, the schools could offer after-school programs to teach Spanish to those students who are linguistically challenged and speak only English. But somehow I don't think that's what Tom had in mind.

Obviously Mr. Tancredo isn't fazed by the fact that many of the five year olds to whom he would deny ESL classes, are US citizens born in this country.

One can only wonder how the majority of Mr. Tancredo's followers feel about the idea of a new generation of children being left behind by the educational system, simply to appease his political ambition. Given the ignorance and stupidity we've seen from Tancredo, it's obvious he holds little value for education or learning, hopefully his small-mindedness is not indicative of the majority.

Read More...

Summary only...

It’s time for change in Colorado (CO-6)

The nation has watched on over the last few years as a little bully of a man from Colorado has dragged our country to depths of intolerance and ignorance not seen since the days of nightriders and Jim Crow. In attempts to fulfill his insatiable appetite for power, tiny Tom Tancredo has chosen the preferred weapon of the small minded to further his cause; the politics of division and bigotry.

Leading what was originally a one-man crusade against immigrants and people of foreign extraction, this diminutive demagogue from south Denver has managed to turn a personal obsession into a national issue. Using a mixture of misinformation, exaggeration and untruths, he has attracted a national audience to his cause. Like-minded followers from all over the country have been drawn to Tiny Tom’s message of division. From California white supremacists and Michigan Militiamen to Arizona Minutemen, Tancredo’s message has received a hearty welcome from some of the most extreme fringe elements in American society.

While this little Napoleon spends most of his time campaigning around the nation for what he hopes to be his next job at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., or chasing all over the Arizona desert with groups of grown men playing army, a challenger has come up to contest Tancredo’s seat in Congress. A man who doesn’t need to dress in camouflage or wear night-vision goggles while stalking women and children as they make the life threatening journey through the desert to find a better life, just prove he’s a real man.

But I’ll let Bill Winter's words speak for themselves:


tags: immigration, Tom Tancredo , Bill Winter , CO-6

Yesterday morning I had the honor of having Senator Max Cleland speak on behalf of my campaign against Tom Tancredo. I want to share with you what I had to say after he spoke:

It's a real honor to be introduced today by somebody like Senator Max Cleland, who has given so much to his Country over and over and over again. And to me Senator Cleland stands out as an example of both what is good--and in some senses, what is wrong--about our Country right now.

Senator Cleland has given so much in service to his Country, and yet when he tried to serve his home state of Georgia, what did they come out and do? They accused him of not being patriotic. And I think that speaks to what is wrong with America today. We have more people trying to divide us than trying to unite us, and we need to get back to where we're trying to be united as a Nation again.

It's a real honor to have Max Cleland here, who is such a role model for a young man--although I'm not so young anymore--and there are many things he brought up that I want to speak to today.

I had an interview with Charley Able here from the Rocky Mountain News yesterday, and he asked me what is the craziest thing I've ever done, and the dumbest thing I've ever done. Senator Cleland's remarks today remind me that everywhere I go, I get folks from the Marines who tell me the dumbest thing I ever did was join the Navy, and folks from the Navy who say the dumbest thing I ever did was join the Marines.

What I know is that serving ten years in the military taught me things I never expected to learn going in. I had the opportunity to get to know people from all over the Country. I met people of different ethnic backgrounds, and skin colors, and genders, and I got the opportunity to grow from a young man who just knew the kind of people I went to high school with in Littleton to someone who knew people from all over the world. And I gained a whole lot of respect for all kinds of folks and that alone makes the ten years of service worthwhile.

Senator Cleland also talked about the VA, and there are two things I want to talk about there. First of all, we have seen cut after cut over the last five years in money made available to our veterans at the very same time we have them over there in harm's way in Iraq and Afghanistan. I get people coming up to me and they say, "I am so proud of you", and "you are so brave for what you're doing", and I have to tell you, it doesn't feel right to me.

I've said to a couple people, "You know, it's not brave running for public office. It's brave to get up in the morning and put on the body armor and go out in 100 degree heat and walk patrol in Fallujah and Najaf, and drive a truck down the road and not know if any given Coke can or any piece of garbage on the road might be a bomb that will blow you up. And you don't even have to be serving to be brave. You can be a single mother trying to raise kids in today's workplace and in today's economy and that takes great courage. Or to be a parent trying to send your kids to college when all they do in Washington is cut student loans and student grants.

These are things that are courageous, far more so than running for office.

Now when I look at veterans, I think to myself: I'm running against Tom Tancredo. And here's a guy, who at the same time he voted for his own pay raise--and these guys were already making, I believe, around $165,000 a year, and they had to vote themselves a pay raise. That's significantly more than I ever made in my whole life, and significantly more than anyone in the military makes, I'm guessing, short of the Joint Chiefs level. And now they're making $167,000 and this guy voted for it at the same time he voted down a pay raise for our troops and voted down increases in spending for our veterans, and didn't do anything--anything--to get a new VA hospital here in Denver.

And I think the upgraded VA hospital that is supposed to be across the street is just the beginning.

We have a great big huge state here. What about all the veterans who served who live over on the western slope or out on the plains? I think they ought to have one out in Grand Junction, too, so they don't have to drive 300 miles every time they need care.

My father was a Navy doctor. He got the Navy to pay for medical school and in return he served for six years on active duty. They were going to put him in a MASH hospital in Vietnam or Great Lakes Naval Hospital, and in their infinite wisdom, they decided to put him in Great Lakes Naval Hospital, putting folks back together when they came back from Vietnam. He was an orthopedic surgeon and they decided that was where he could do the most good.

After he did his six years of service with the Navy, my father, as an orthopedic surgeon, had all kinds of offers to go and work for these groups that fix up athletes' knees and shoulders and make seven figure salaries. But my father chose instead to teach at medical school and do his medical surgery at the Denver VA.

I asked him why one time when I got a little older, because that whole idea of making seven figures, that didn't seem so bad to me as a kid. But my dad told me, "I teach at that medical school because a whole generation of doctors will go out from here and will have influence that I gave them, that will carry on long after I'm gone."

And he was right. My dad died back in 1998. He was 59 years old. And as I go around on this campaign, I have met countless doctors who said, "Your dad trained me." In fact, I spoke to the Board of Directors of the Colorado Medical Society, and the president, Rick May, an orthopedist, told me "your dad is the reason I'm in orthopedic surgery." That's very powerful to me.

And my dad also told me, "I do my surgery at the VA because they need me so much there." And that was a real revelation to me and really had an impact on my life. And not just on me, but on my brother as well.

My older brother got his medical training paid for by the Air Force. My brother was an Air Force doctor, and he's a psychiatrist. And after he got out of the Air Force, he said, "I'm going to be like my dad." And instead of going out into private practice where there's a lot of money, my brother practices up at the Denver VA, and he's been practicing quite a few years now. And he does it for the same reason my father did, because they need him so much there.

And while I'm talking about my father and my brother, I should mention my mother, who worked her way through college and medical school in the late 1950's and early 1960's as a single mother from a poor family. She's the one who saw me as an orphan in a hospital when I was a toddler and thought "I can give him a better life." So she adopted me and she did.

That's what service is really all about, and that's the legacy I have to live up to in my family. And if you want to know why I'm running for Congress, that's a very big reason right there.

But my brother gives me a lot of insight on what it's like to work at the VA and particularly the Denver VA hospital. Now I said he works at the VA for the same reason my dad did, because they need him so much. And I'll tell you what, in his field of psychiatry, they need him more than probably anything else they have.

I asked my brother--and this is a year or so ago--what's really happening with the soldiers coming back from Iraq and the PTSD and emotional issues? And he said, "You don't even want to know." He said, "We'll have jobs there for the rest of our lives if we live to be 150 years old."

And I said, "What's the plan to deal with it?" And he said, "There is no plan. There's no money, there are no people looking forward."

I think we've had over a million people serve in the Iraqi theatre already, and there's no plan for what we're going to do with them for the next 30 or 40 years. I've seen these people at Walter Reed, and I'm sure you have, too, Senator. And some of these folks that we've kept alive, some of these injuries you can't believe. I saw a young man who has no face anymore, and is blind and deaf. We've gotten to the point in medical technology where we can keep people alive, but we can't give them their lives back. And because of their injuries, they may need care for 50, 60 years and we don't have any kind of plan or any money set aside to do that.

So when we talk about the Denver VA and funding for healthcare for veterans, this is a very personal issue to me, and I think it ought to be a personal issue to everyone in America.

We did polling in my district back in May and asked about 15 different issues, and every one of them came back over 50% positive, but the single biggest response came from restoring cuts to benefits for veterans. So Americans want to support the people who are over there fighting for us, but our elected "leaders" in Congress don't seem to agree.

That has to change!

And while I'm talking about the war, I think we also need to stand up and say to our President, "We need leadership, sir." And when I go around and say this, some people say to me, "stay the course." And I say, "'stay the course' is not a plan; `stay the course' is madness.

We've been there 3½ years and we're no closer to victory today than we were when we started. In fact, we still don't even have a definition of what victory in Iraq is.

`Stay the course' says to me that we're going to send our sons and daughters over there indefinitely to be killed for no benefit!

So give me a plan!

Do you want to put more troops in?

Do you want to put fewer troops in?

Tell us what you want to do, Mr. President, but don't tell us `stay the course'!

Then, of course, when John Murtha says, "Let's redeploy. Let's get other Countries in there to help us do this." they say "that's cut and run".

And you know what I say?

I carry around a set of dog tags from a young man who was killed over there, and his mother asked me to be his voice, because he doesn't have a voice anymore. And I'm darned tired of going to people with a dead man's dog tags and all I get in response are slogans like "stay the course" and "cut and run".

We have to ask better than that of our government. We have to ask better than that from our leadership.

And I'll tell you why. Because when I was in the military--and I'm sure this is true of all of you veterans in here too--everyone I knew in the Marine Corps and the Navy was willing to make that ultimate sacrifice. And all we asked for in return was that our Country take care of us when we came home, and that our sacrifice mean something.

I think right now we're failing on both counts and letting our troops down. If we really want to support the troops, we need to stand up and ask for a real plan for victory, and stand up and ask our government as part of our sacrifice to our veterans to make sure we provide the money to take care of them when they come home. As Abraham Lincoln said, "to care for him who shall have born the battle and for his widow, and his orphan." And I think that's a debt of honor we darn well better pay.

Before I wrap up, I want to talk about this race. Because the single biggest problem we have in this district is that they say, "You can't win. You're a heck of a candidate, but you can't win, and therefore we're not going to help you." And they are wrong!

Let me tell you what's going on. I went back to Washington D.C. last week, and it turns out there's polling out there--and I got this from three different sources--that has us dead even in this thing. I haven't seen the poll and we didn't run it, but let me tell you why I think it's true.

Some people in Washington may not believe it, but I'll tell you who does: Tom Tancredo. Because he has cancelled his entire schedule for the next three weeks, and all of a sudden he's back in Colorado and he's on the radio and running ads, and we have nailed him down to a debate on October 24th.

Now, he won't do a debate in front of a live audience. He won't let people in the room. This fellow doesn't want to actually face constituents. But we'll get him in there. We'll do a debate, and it will be on TV the next day.

But he's come back and he's actively campaigning. He's got his surrogates out there trying to dig up nasty stuff on me. We've seen what's happened with Bill Ritter and Angie Paccione and Ed Perlmutter, and they want to try to do that to me. But you all have looked me in the eye and you know the content of my character. You know what I'm about. When I've done something wrong, I'll stand up and say it and apologize. I'm not a perfect person, but I am a good person, and the whole point of this campaign is to make a difference and make people's lives better.

We can absolutely win this thing.

We're making a great radio buy now for next week. We've got some great stuff, and we're going to spend everything we have every Friday, then we'll go back and re-earn it and spend it again the next Friday.

So if you can make a donation over here, we need it. If you know people who can make a donation, ask them to do it. We need it. If we can get the money to stay up on radio and keep our direct mail going--maybe do a little TV--we will win this.

I guarantee we will win this. Because as I go around the district and I talk to Republicans and Unaffiliateds, they almost universally tell me, "we really like what you have to say." I was at a candidates' forum the other night, and Victor Mitchell is a Republican running for the State House down there, and darn near everybody in the room with a Victor Mitchell sticker on came up to me afterwards and said, "You're great; we really like what you have to say." Because they're looking for unity, and they believe in America the way I believe in America.

I'll finish up by talking about the Statue of Liberty, and the poem across the base of it. Emma Lazarus wrote this, and it goes like this:

`Send us your tired, your poor,
your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.
The wretched refuse of your teeming shores.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me.
I lift my lamp beside the Golden Door.'

I love that poem for the last line, if nothing else: "I raise my lamp beside the Golden Door". Because I'll tell you what, that's the America I learned about in school; that's the America I believe in.

That's the America that understands that all these people who come from around the world can be a strength to us, and that we are a strong nation, and we can fold them in and make them part of our society.

And more importantly, the Golden Door. We used to call America the land of opportunity and we have to get that back. We have to give every child born in this country the opportunity to find that Golden Door and to achieve the American Dream.

And that's what this campaign is all about, taking back America the way we used to know it. We have had six years of folks trying to make America be just for the top 2%. And doggone it, it's time for the other 98% of us to stand up and fight back, and that's what we're going to do.

Thank you all....

Bill Winter
http://winterforcongress.com

It’s time for a change in Colorado and a time for a change in this country.

We’ve seen enough from leaders whose goal appears to be to divide us in order to maintain power. Leaders who have no regard for truth and honesty. Leaders whose loyalties are not to those who have elected them, but rather to self-interest and special interests. Leaders who refuse to see mistakes and make efforts to correct them. Leaders who refuse to do the hard work, and work together to make the hard decisions and choices that need to be made to move our nation forward. We’ve seen enough in the last six years… it’s time for a change.

Read More...

Summary only...

We should ask Colorado Republicans about new immigration poll findings

An interesting poll was published Monday in the Rocky Mountain News, not particularly surprising, but none the less interesting. It reflected the usual mix of feelings about the contentious immigration issue. 61% of Coloradans support an earned citizenship approach for undocumented immigrants, allowing them to stay in the country and eventually become citizens if they meet certain requirements like paying taxes and learning English. Only 15% favored deportation. Yet half said that immigration hurts the state more than it helps and a majority of respondents said that immigration was one of their top concerns along with the economy.

Nothing strange there. This poll generally reflects what similar polls show throughout the country. Respondents prefer a mix of "get tough" policies going forward and pragmatic compassion when it comes to the undocumented already living and working in the country.

But there was one interesting little fact buried down around paragraph twenty: "The typical voter who listed illegal immigration as the top issue this election is a suburban, white, Republican man without a college degree."

Who are these white suburban males who see immigrants as such a threat?



tags: immigration, Tom Tancredo , Rick O'Donnell , CO-6, CO-7, immigration poll


Perhaps Rick O'Donnell, running for a House seat in Colorado's seventh district might have the answer.

A couple of weeks ago a story came to light about a strange proposal the candidate made requiring all male high school seniors to forgo their last semester at school to do community service along the border helping deter the flow of undocumented immigrants. The former head of the Colorado Department of Higher Education's idea was roundly criticized in the press and by his opponent, but it did bring to light some glaring problems in the educational system Mr.O'Donnell was previously in charge of.

According to Mr. O'Donnell's own figures, less than half of Colorado's sixth- grade boys pass the writing CSAP compared to 62% of girls, in the tenth-grade close to forty percent of boys fail the reading CSAP, and the state has a staggering drop-out rate of 25%. Obviously under Mr. O'Donnell, who also "designed Colorado's nationally top-ranked accountability system for K-12 schools. (and) developed 'Read to Achieve' to ensure that no student leaves fourth grade without basic literacy skills" many of the states children, particularly boys, have been left behind by their educational system.

Mr. O'Donnell cited these failures as the reason his program of mandatory service program was necessary - to build character and foster self esteem in Colorado's lost boys.

But what does this have to do with the Rocky Mountain News' poll on immigration? Or the fact that "The typical voter who listed illegal immigration as the top issue this election is a suburban, white, Republican man without a college degree?"

These white Republican males without college degrees are Colorado's lost boys - now all grown up - they are the boys whom the education system failed.

Left with the limited job prospects available to those with only a high school education or less, these men now fear an influx of immigrant workers as a direct threat to their livelihoods. When a state fails so badly educating its children that one in four children don't even get a high school diploma, leaving them to compete for a decreasing number of low-skilled, low paying jobs, it's no small wonder that they would see immigrants as a threat, and immigration as a top priority.

Ironically if Mr. O'Donnell or his predecessors had done their job correctly, he wouldn't have the "immigration issue" now to base his campaign on.

The same could be said for his anti-immigration cohort, Tom Tancredo (CO-6). Perhaps if Tommy spent more time administering to the business of his state rather than strutting around the Mexican border hobnobbing with minutemen or singing "Dixie" with South Carolinian white separatists, more children would be properly educated in his state and wouldn't have to compete for jobs at MacDonalds or Walmart and fear that newly arrived immigrants will only add to that competition.


(A big hat-tip to alma mia for finding this story and catching the "white Republican male" reference buried deep in the story…Kudos)

Read More...

Summary only...

Tancredo ain’t just whistling Dixie

This past Saturday, as the nation prepared to commemorate Monday’s anniversary of the tragedy of 9/11, 700 miles from ground zero, Colorado Representative, Tom Tancredo, stood behind a flag draped podium in Columbia S. Carolina and spoke to a group of followers also looking to commemorate the past. But the flag was not the Stars and Stripes, but rather a Confederate battle flag, and their commemoration was not of 9-11… but instead of a time when “the White-European race” ruled the South with an iron fist.

According to a report filed by an under-cover reporter from the Southern Poverty Law Center, the congressman was welcomed with open arms by a white supremacist group who invited all their members to hear “their guest,”Tom Tancredo speak about immigration and closing the borders. The League of the South, which now claims over 9000 members, was founded in 1994 by J. Michael Hill, who has called slavery a "God-ordained" institution and stated that “non-whites” should bow to “the cultural dominance of the Anglo-Celtic people and their institutions.”


tags: immigration, Tom Tancredo , League of the South , CO-6, white supremacists, neo-confederates

On the ground floor, a United States Army brass band commemorated the victims of 9/11. One level up, not far from the museum's permanent Confederate Army exhibit, the state chapter of the League of the South (LOS), a neo-Confederate hate group, hosted a barbeque in honor of Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, head of the House Immigration Reform Caucus and likely contestant in the 2008 GOP presidential primary. Proceeds from the $15 per-plate fundraiser went to Americans Have Had Enough!, a South Carolina-based non-profit coalition for which Tancredo serves as honorary chairman.

While Tancredo's hard-line "deport 'em all" stance on immigration has made him a favorite politician of white supremacists, this marked the first time the congressman has appeared at a hate group event.

Dressed casually in a yellow t-shirt, Tancredo addressed the standing-room audience of 200-250 from behind a podium draped in a Confederate battle flag. To the congressman's right, a portrait of Robert E. Lee peered out at the crowd of Minutemen activists, local politicians, and red-shirted members of LOS and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. The Confederate trappings of the event found a mismatch in Tancredo's standard nativist polemic, which stayed clear of references to Southern heritage or direct plaudits for the LOS, a Southern white nationalist organization dedicated to "Southern independence, complete, full, and total."

…

At the close of Tancredo's speech, several men in confederate-themed clothing stood up and bellowed the first notes of "Dixie," the Confederate anthem. They were soon joined by voices from throughout the large hall, which was now entirely on its feet. Tancredo, a second-generation Italian-American from Denver, appeared confused by the sudden burst of strange song. He quickly worked his way toward the exit with his staff.

Tancredo's encounter with the League of the South continued outside. On the steps of the museum, Tancredo held court with LOS officials and supporters in Confederate clothing. He held a batch of the materials being distributed at the barbeque, among them a copy of the The Citizen's Informer, the newspaper of the Conservative Citizens Council, the racist organization that grew out of the segregationist White Citizens Councils of the 1950s. When questioned about the newspaper, Tancredo responded that he did not know its history.

SPLC

Trancredo was quick to try to distance himself from his newfound friends once the story broke, claiming he was not aware of the LOS members in the audience.

According to his spokesman, Carlos Espinosa, Tancredo knew that the audience did included members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and Civil War re-enactors in Southern garb and when they began singing Dixie, the Colorado Congressman joined in. “These aren't racist people who spew out hate. These are just people remembering and cherishing their past,’ Espinosa said. "Tom thought it would be rude not to take part in it."

Claiming that the LOS had nothing to do with the event, Espinosa added that the group "is very racist and a horrible group that is desperately trying to seem relevant by attaching themselves to an event they had nothing to do with."

But this is not the first time Tancredo’s rabid the anti-immigrant rhetoric has attracted support from white supremacists, neo-nazis and southern separatists. Such groups have infiltrated the ranks of his pet Minuteman Project from the start, and he has been supported or formally endorsed by numerous hate groups such as American Renaissance and National Vanguard, and has not of yet refused their support, or declined an endorsement. … It’s all very “wink and nod” in the Tom’s strange world of “catch me if you can”

Tancredo, like his Minuteman friends and Team America PAC, has all along walked a very fine line between acceptable political discourse and sounding at times like a maniacal racist, trying to carefully craft his message as not to sound too extreme.

As he gains more power it’s only a matter of time before his natural allies and friends from the fringe elements of society obtain a greater voice and presence in his “movement.”

As much as Colorado’s little Napoleon wants to lead his crusade, claiming some sort of victory for “the common man,” increasingly like his mentor Pat Buchanan, it’s becoming evident that his vision for America is not one of tolerance, but rather one reserved for those who meet a certain racial criteria.

Read More...

Summary only...

Colorado candidate stands behind bizarre proposal

Last week when a strange proposal came to light made by Colorado congressional candidate, Rick O’Donnell, requiring all male high school seniors forgo their last semester of school to perform compulsory service guarding the US border with Mexico or patrolling vulnerable seaports, one would have thought the former head of the Colorado Department of Higher Education would try to put some positive spin on the debacle.

But that's not the case with O'Donnell. Using some peculiarly convoluted logic, the Conservative Republican running in the 7th CD is now defending his proposal claiming he somehow got the idea from Democrats like Bill and Hilary Clinton.


tags: immigration, CO-7 , Rick O'Donnell , Ed Perlemutter, draft, Border Patrol

First advocating his plan in a Jan. 3, 2004 Denver Post article titled, "A New Rite of Passage," O'Donnell proposed that "since more than 25 percent of Colorado men drop out before the 12th grade, and for those who remain it is a blow-off year," their time would be better spent if “after the first semester of 12th grade, all young men in America (did) six months of service. …Young men could have a choice of where to serve, such as homeland security, armed forces or community service. After a basic-training type orientation, they would be given various duties in sore need of attention: securing our border with Mexico; thinning our national forests to reduce fire risk; providing homeland security at ports and other vulnerable locations.”

His op-ed stated a litany of educational failures like the fact that less than half of Colorado's sixth- grade boys pass the writing CSAP compared to 62% of girls; that in the tenth-grade close to forty percent of boys fail the reading CSAP; and the staggering drop-out rate of 25% as reasons that a program was needed to ensure that "young men would do something productive for their country, rather than drop out of school or waste time in 12th grade."

Certainly this would seem a strange argument coming from the man who according to his campaign website, "designed Colorado's nationally top-ranked accountability system for K-12 schools. (and) developed 'Read to Achieve' to ensure that no student leaves fourth grade without basic literacy skills." One would think the former education chief wouldn't want to highlight such failures as a rationale for his proposal...but much of what O'Donnell says defies logic.

When O’Donnells’ opponent, Democrat Ed Perlemutter went to town on his proposal calling it dangerous, absurd and bizarre, the Republican fired back with a press release that was almost as peculiar as the first proposal.

His defense …. Democrats have long proposed national community service for young adults, and he's just following their lead.

But what Mr. O’Donnell failed to see in his defense of his outlandish proposal was that although some Democrats have in fact called for increased voluntary national service, their vision and his seem as different as night and day.

This fact could not escape even the most cursory reading of the quotes he chose to use in his press release.

Quoting from a book titled"The AmeriCorps Experiment and the Future of National Service" published by Washington think tank, The Progressive Policy Institute, O'Donnell bases his "Clinton would do it too" defense on statements like this:

The first and most compelling reason for expansion ( of Americorp) is to match the scale of America 's unmet needs. Our country's "social deficit" is as daunting as our fiscal deficit. Compared with other rich countries the United States has very high rates of poverty (especially among children), out-of-wedlock births, and youth violence, as well as a wide racial and ethnic gap in educational achievement. Add to these enduring social problems the new challenges presented by the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the baby boom's retirement, and you have a "to do" list that overwhelms government's current capacities. We need to mobilize the nation's civic resources more broadly to tackle such urgent priorities as:

Tutoring and mentoring disadvantaged children, especially those from broken families and those with parents in prison.

Providing long-term care and other help for the elderly to help America age successfully as the baby boomers retire.

Protecting our homeland against terrorist attacks.

Sharing the burden of military service to our country

Despite the fact that the book excerpt that O'Donnel chose to quote, clearly notes that only "One of the book's contributors, William A. Galston, even suggests making national service compulsory, like the wartime draft." And that "Marshall and Magee, in the chapter excerpted...argue for keeping the program voluntary, but using the Selective Service System as one of its recruiting devices." O'Donnell's spokesman uses the quote to claim that "the Democratic Leadership Council strongly advocates something very similar to what Rick proposed in his article."

Additionally, O'Donnell fails to see any difference between asking young people (including women) to serve their country by helping address "enduring social problems" like poverty, racial and ethnic inequities in education, helping un-wed mothers or providing care to the elderly and his plan requiring 17 and 18 year old kids to serve as guards along the Mexican border preventing economic refugees from entering the country to find work.

Clearly O'Donnell's strange defense of his bizarre proposal seems odd coming from the Club for Growth endorsed candidate. I'm sure this is one of the first times a candidate who's supposed to favor free market economics and smaller government is advocating for a huge government make-work program on the grounds that he believes that's what Bill Clinton would want him to do.

Since Mr.O'Donnell fails to post his press releases on-line at his website, it's reprinted in it's entirety below

------PRESS RELEASE --------

For Immediate Release

Tues, Aug 29, 2006


Perlmutter Makes Reckless and Baseless Accusation – Again!

Second Time in a Week Perlmutter is Reckless with the Truth

WHEAT RIDGE – For the second time in a week, bankruptcy attorney Ed Perlmutter levied a desperate attack against congressional candidate Rick O’Donnell that recklessly distorts the truth. Furthermore, in criticizing a “Colorado Voices” column Rick O’Donnell wrote for The Denver Post on January 3, 2004, Mr. Perlmutter shows how out of touch he is with new ideas to move America forward – even ideas promoted by his fellow Democrats.

In the article “A New Rite of Passage,” Rick describes the overwhelming evidence that America is failing to adequately prepare its boys for manhood, including: “Men commit suicide four times more than women. The federal prison population is 93 percent male. Only 47 percent of Colorado ’s sixth-grade boys pass the writing CSAP, compared to 62 percent of girls. For every 100 women who get a college degree, only 67 men do.”

Deeply concerned with these alarming facts, Rick proposed in his article that community service to their country could be one possible remedy for young men struggling to mature in an environment where “sex, sports and violence are all that is left as anchors of their souls, rather than family, faith and hard-work.”

As evidence of his bi-partisan, reform-minded approach to governance, Rick O’Donnell suggested a possible solution in his 2004 article based on ideas from Democrats. From Bill and Hillary Clinton to Senator Evan Bayh, since the 1990’s many new Democrats have advocated national community service. In fact, the Democratic Leadership Council strongly advocates something very similar to what Rick proposed in his article, (quoting at length from http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253462&kaid=115&subid=145):

“National service ought to be more than a small demonstration project on the margins of big government. It must take a great leap forward or risk going the way of the Peace Corps and VISTA , noble endeavors that languished after an initial burst of inspiration and failed to reach critical mass.

Why is bigger better? The first and most compelling reason for expansion is to match the scale of America's unmet needs. Our country's "social deficit" is as daunting as our fiscal deficit. Compared with other rich countries the United States has very high rates of poverty (especially among children), out-of-wedlock births, and youth violence, as well as a wide racial and ethnic gap in educational achievement. Add to these enduring social problems the new challenges presented by the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the baby boom's retirement, and you have a "to do" list that overwhelms government's current capacities. We need to mobilize the nation's civic resources more broadly to tackle such urgent priorities as:

Tutoring and mentoring disadvantaged children, especially those from broken families and those with parents in prison.

Providing long-term care and other help for the elderly to help America age successfully as the baby boomers retire.

Protecting our homeland against terrorist attacks.

Sharing the burden of military service to our country.

…Scaling up AmeriCorps would transform national service from an exceptional to a fairly common experience for young Americans. And, like the draft of old, it would be one of the few institutions in our increasingly stratified and segmented society that throw together Americans from different social and economic backgrounds. The experience of working together across racial, ethnic, and class lines to solve common problems hones the basic skills of democratic citizenship -- the ability to see past stereotypes, to empathize with others, to negotiate and compromise, and to transcend our group identities. In political scientist Robert Putnam's term, it creates the "bridging" social capital essential to making a multiethnic democracy work.

Five Ways to Scale Up National Service. Our ultimate goal should be to make national service a common expectation -- a rite of civic passage -- for young Americans on their way to responsible and productive citizenship. Here are five ways we can reach the next plateau in the evolution of national service:

1. Replace selective service with national service.

2. Expand AmeriCorps

3. Recruit more citizen soldiers

4. Replace work study with serve study.

5. Link federal student aid and national service.”

(Underline and bold emphasis added.)


“Three years ago, before immigration and border security became the top priorities of the nation and before concerns about Dubai operating American ports shed further light on our unsecured ports, Rick proposed an idea that even the DLC’s website today echoes,” said O’Donnell campaign manager K.C. Jones. “This just goes to show you that Rick is the candidate of bipartisan ideas. It’s startling how unfamiliar Ed is with the centrist Democrats – I guess it is because he isn’t one.”

In his press release, Mr. Perlmutter stated that Rick wrote in his article that he wants to draft, “all teenage boys in their final semester of high school to serve as border patrol agents.” Rick O’Donnell’s article says nothing of the sort, and this statement – as well as Mr. Perlmutter’s entire press release – is a reckless distortion of the truth.

In fact, Rick O’Donnell wrote that “young men could have a choice of where to serve, such as homeland security, armed forces or community service. After a basic-training type orientation, they would be given various duties in sore need of attention: securing our border with Mexico ; thinning our national forests to reduce fire risk; providing homeland security at ports and other vulnerable locations.”

“The voters deserve better than Ed Perlmutter’s reckless distortions and fabrications,” said K.C. Jones. “But, as a candidate without any new ideas of his own, Ed can only baselessly attack his opponent.”

“We can only imagine how the nation could have responded to the aftermath of hurricanes Katrina and Rita if we had thousands of trained young men at the ready to offer support,” Rick O’Donnell said today. “We need new ideas in Washington , and that’s exactly what I will take to Congress: new blood and new leadership. We can not afford to have the same old blame-and-complain, truth distorting partisan politics that my opponent represents.”

“It’s startling that Mr. Perlmutter would oppose having young men serve their country and community,” said KC Jones. “Doesn’t Ed know that the Colorado National Guard, without carrying weapons, is providing support for the border patrol today? Doesn’t Ed know you can be 17 and still in high school to join the National Guard? What could be wrong with young men providing peaceful, unarmed support to keep our country secure? But when you consider that Ed is soft of crime, soft on immigration reform and soft on the war on terror, perhaps it’s not so surprising after all.”

# # #

Read More...

Summary only...

Colorado candidate wants draft for border patrol

Two years ago while working as executive director of the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies, Republican Rick O’Donnell, now running for Congress from the 7th district, penned an article for the Denver Post that has come back to haunt him. In the Jan. 3, 2004 article, “A New Rite of Passage,” O”Donnell called for compulsory service for all male high school seniors in their final semester of school, proposing that young men’s time would be better spent “securing our border with Mexico… (or) providing homeland security at ports and other vulnerable locations.” than “wasting time in 12th grade”

Stating that “since more than 25 percent of Colorado men drop out before the 12th grade, and for those who remain it is a blow-off year,” he questioned “why are we paying for it?” Instead he proposed “that after the first semester of 12th grade, all young men in America do six months of service… After a basic-training type orientation, they would be given various duties in sore need of attention (such as) securing our border with Mexico.” According to O’Donnell, his plan would ultimately provide a great savings to tax payers as “we spend more than $ 370 billion every year on K-12 public education in this country. By eliminating the last semester of senior year for men, we could devote billions of dollars toward establishing the service corps.”



tags: immigration, CO-7 , Rick O'Donnell , Ed Perlemutter, draft, Border Patrol


O’Donnell’s opponent, Democrat Ed Perlmutter, denounced the recently unearthed proposal.

In what can only be described as a bizarre and dangerous plan in 2004, O’Donnell pushed for a “new rite of passage” that would make it mandatory for all male high school students, many only 17 years old, to forgo their last semester of school, end their college preparation, leave their families and do active duty “securing our border with Mexico.” O’Donnell proposes that “instead of wasting time in 12th grade…..(teenage boys) would undergo a society-wide rite of passage into manhood, one that provides…..a sense of adventure and risk.” O’Donnell argues that this “bolder approach is needed to help boys successfully become men of character.” In addition, O’Donnell plan calls on those students who drop out of school before 12th grade, regardless of the reason, to serve additional years patrolling the border. O’Donnell proposes paying for the national service corps for boys with the “billions of dollars” that would come from eliminating the final semester of high school for all male students. O’Donnell’s initiative does not address female high school students, who presumably would be allowed to continue their last semester of high school and preparation for college or post-graduate opportunities.

Perlmutter stated, “First Rick O’Donnell wanted to abolish Social Security when he worked for Newt Gingrich, now his answer for illegal immigration is to draft high school boys in their final semester of school to patrol the Mexican border. Rick O’Donnell has said that illegal immigration is his #1 issue, but during his entire career with Governor Owens, his only solution to the problem was this ridiculous and dangerous idea that places high school boys at the borders to deal with the illegal immigrants, criminals and drug smugglers who too often enter our Country.” Perlmutter added, “This absurd idea is just another example of how out of touch Rick O’Donnell is with the hard working families in the 7th CD. My opponent needs to understand that parents don’t want their sons forced to patrol the border and they don’t need Rick O’Donnell to help them with any rites of passage into manhood.”

Link

When questioned about the article recently by the Rocky Mountian News, O'Donnell said that although he believes Perlmutter's slant of his article represented a "reckless distortion of the truth," his position on the national service corps is unchanged and he still stands by it.

Perhaps instead of looking for ways to "save" education dollars, or build boys into "men of character," O'Donnell should be asking why fully one quarter of his state's population don't complete even the minimum educational requirements to compete in today's competitive economy. Instead he sees those whom his state's educational system has failed, as fodder to be throw at the border in some sort of quixotic Children's Crusade to stop the flow of economic migrants.

In O'Donnell's worldview, that favors a constant race to the bottom for the American people, rather than educate his state's children so they can succeed in the workforce, he would have them patrolling the borders to prevent low-skilled workers from competing with them for the dead-end jobs left to those at the bottom of the educational scale.

Herein lies one of the great paradoxes in the anti-immigrant philosophy.

Instead of working to make sure that the American people are provided with a good educational system, access to healthcare, a stable job market or economic opportunity, the anti-immigrant cabal favors stripping working and middle-class Americans of all resources, than blaming their condition on increased numbers of immigrants.

In the short-run this plan might work, but over time even those whom Mr. O'Donnell has left behind without a high school education will eventually figure out they've been duped, bamboozled and played for suckers

Read More...

Summary only...