CIVIL RIGHTS LEADERS TO ARIZONA GOVERNOR: VETO SB 1070
Washington, DC—Today, leaders from the nation’s leading civil rights organizations sounded the alarm over the misguided immigration bill in Arizona. They pointed to the widespread use of racial profiling that will likely result, the overly broad license it gives police to stop citizens and non citizens, and the high costs for the state’s economy and taxpayers. SB 1070, a bill passed by the Arizona legislature in the name of helping law enforcement and making neighborhoods safer, currently sits on the desk of Governor Jan Brewer, who is being urged to veto it because it threatens community safety. The leaders called the Arizona law dangerous and unconstitutional, and it renews the urgency for Congress and the White House to move forward with comprehensive immigration reform.
“This bill throws the door wide open to the racial profiling of Arizona’s Latinos, the vast majority of whom are native-born U.S. citizens and legal residents, without doing a single thing to protect the people of Arizona” said Janet Murguía, President and CEO of NCLR (National Council of La Raza), the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States. “This bill is extreme and will have horrific consequences. The sponsors of this legislation know all too well that the solution to our nation's legitimate immigration woes lies in Washington, not Phoenix.”
The proposed law requires state, county, and municipal employees to ascertain the immigration status of a person if there is “reasonable suspicion” that the person is unlawfully present in the U.S. It also subjects local governments and their personnel to lawsuits by any citizen who feels that the new law is not being enforced sufficiently. The law would impose a $500 fine, other costs, and a misdemeanor charge leading to possible deportation for individuals who could not show proof of legal presence. (For a complete summary of the bill by the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, click here.)
“The passage of SB 1070 is a catastrophe in the making that would institutionalize racial profiling in a misguided attempt to fix our broken immigration system,” said Wade Henderson, President and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. “Racial profiling is a counterproductive law enforcement tactic that is also deeply offensive to our constitutional and American values. While immigration policy has often proved a challenge to our country, it should never be used to tarnish the fundamental ideal of equal justice. Governor Brewer should remain faithful to our shared values and veto this bill.”
Deborah Lauter of the Anti-Defamation League, which fights anti-Semitism and all forms of bigotry and protects civil rights for all, concurred. “Laws like this one and the immigration debate that surrounds them have become a flashpoint for racist and neo-Nazi extremist groups that foment bigotry and blame immigrants for all of our country’s problems. We in the Jewish community recall the ugly anti-immigrant backlash against our parents and grandparents. We do not want to see that history repeated for anyone and we cannot let the task of fighting it fall on the shoulders of its victims alone.”
“The Arizona law is overreaching and will result in racial profiling,” added Karen K. Narasaki, President and Executive Director of the Asian American Justice Center. “This law is divisive and unconstitutional.”
According to Thomas Saenz, President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), “The clearest implication of Governor Brewer signing SB 1070 is that there would be multiple legal challenges that would likely hold up implementation of the law and involve the state in an expensive and futile effort to defend a law that unconstitutionally invades the exclusively federal realm of immigration regulation. Added to the severe effects on Arizona's economy and public safety, the likelihood of extensive and successful legal challenges makes SB 1070 an extraordinarily costly exercise in political symbolism and racial demagoguery.”
Hilary Shelton of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) mentioned the added pressures that law enforcement will face if this is approved. Racial profiling practices have consistently created distrust between law enforcement and the communities they are sworn to protect and serve. “If signed into law this policy will create serious problems for law enforcement and the communities they protect. This policy will undercut the crucial trust and perception of integrity law enforcement must maintain to be effective at either preventing or solving crime.” |
Mayoría de inmigrantes mexicanos llegó a EUA después de 1990
Washington, (Notimex).- La mayoría de inmigrantes mexicanos, 63.4 por ciento, llegó a Estados Unidos después 1990 y dos de cada 10, 22 por ciento, son ciudadanos estadounidenses, reveló un informe del Centro Hispano Pew.
Agregó que 37 por ciento de las personas de origen mexicano en Estados Unidos nacieron en México, en comparación con 38.1 por ciento de los hispanos en general, indicó.
El índice de pobreza de la población mexicana en Estados Unidos fue de 22.3 por ciento, casi el doble de la población en general que se ubicó en 12.7 por ciento, y cercano al resto de los hispanos que alcanzó 20.7 por ciento.
El estudio señaló que casi dos terceras partes de los hispanos en Estados Unidos se identifican de origen mexicano, y nueve de los 10 grupos hispanos más grandes representan a la cuarta parte de la población latina.
Del total de 46.8 millones de hispanos en Estados Unidos en 2008, unos 30.7 millones son mexicanos, 4.1 millones puertorriqueños, 1.6 millones cubanos, 1.5 millones salvadoreños y 1.3 millones dominicanos.
Mientras que 986 mil son guatemaltecos, 882 mil colombianos, 608 mil hondureños, 591 mil ecuatorianos y 519 mil peruanos, detalló el Centro Pew, que basó su informe en datos del censo.
Existen diferencias entre esos 10 grupos respecto a la cifra de los nacidos en el extranjero, los ciudadanos –tanto nacidos en el país como los naturalizados– así como en cuanto a edad, lugar de residencia, educación, ingreso, pobreza y propiedad de vivienda.
Los peruanos encabezan la lista de ingresos familiares, seguidos de cerca por colombianos y ecuatorianos, mientras que los colombianos están en primer lugar en educación universitaria o superior, seguidos de los peruanos y los cubanos.
La población hispana o latina en Estados Unidos incluye a personas de origen latinoamericano o español.
Senate Approves Sample Drug Disclosure Bill
SACRAMENTO – With the rising cost of prescription drugs and the ongoing health care coverage crisis, the prevalent use of free sample prescription drugs has drawn increased scrutiny. The oversight of sample prescription drugs is often incomplete or non-existent, which has resulted in patients receiving drugs with inadequate information regarding dosing schedule, side effects, and potential drug interactions.
On a bipartisan 25-6 vote, the California State Senate today approved legislation authored by Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) that would require sample prescription drugs received at a doctor’s offices or medical clinic to be accompanied with the same written information regarding the drugs that would normally be received from a pharmacist.
“It is vital that consumers receive written information regarding dosage and potential side effects on sample drugs,” said Yee. “This bill will reduce lawsuits, illnesses, and deaths.”
A study conducted by the Journal of Family Practice found that instructions accompanied the dispensing of sample drugs only 47.8 percent of the time and were predominantly verbal in nature.
The study states, “Dosing appeared to be the main focus, and little to no attention was given to more detailed information, such as whether the medication should be taken with meals. Drug interactions were not routinely discussed.”
SB 1106 is supported by the Consumer Federation of California, CALPIRG, and the California Alliance for Retired Americans.
“As the use of sample prescription drugs continues to rise, the need for consumers to have basic health and safety information on those drugs has never been greater,” said Richard Holober, Executive Director of the Consumer Federation of California. “At the end of the day, there’s no reason why patients who get sample drugs at a doctor’s office should be less informed than if they filled a prescription at any licensed pharmacy.”
“The failure to provide basic warning information for sample prescription drugs is a huge loophole that must be corrected,” said Nan Brasmer, President of the California Alliance for Retired Americans. “This bill could potentially save lives since consumers will have the benefit of all relevant information at their disposal when they receive sample drugs from their doctors.”
“Sample prescription drugs carry all the same risks and potential side effects as traditional pharmacy-filled prescriptions,” said Pedro Morillas, CALPIRG Consumer Advocate. “With studies showing an increased reliance on sample drugs for treatment, consumers need the information that SB 1106 would require drug companies to provide.”
SB 1106 must be approved by the State Assembly before consideration by the Governor |
