February 11, 2008
Is Hillary 'frauding' us on UAFA again?
Posted by: Andoni
As someone who has a vested interest in seeing the Uniting American Families Act passed, I am in constant communication with the various gay and Hispanic organizations who wish to see immigration reform. I was shocked to read in the Washington Blade today that Senator Hillary Clinton said the following about UAFA:
“I’m supportive of it and the strategy was to do it as part of comprehensive immigration reform,” she said. “We still need to do comprehensive immigration reform … that is my preference.”
Chris asked earlier today whether Hillary knew that UAFA was not part of the comprehensive immigration reform legislation that failed last year -- this would be really bad if she didn't know -- or whether she is tipping her hand about a new strategy going forward.
In her Human Rights Campaign, questionnaire, Senator Clinton said she supports UAFA but has concerns over the possible fraud in same sex immigration. Since that survey was published I know that dozens of people have contacted her office and presented her with evidence that fraud will not be a problem.
Has she changed her mind now? If she has, why doesn't she simply say that she now supports UAFA without reservation and sign on as a co-sponsor instead of opening up a new option and say she wants it part of comprehensive immigration reform? Adding UAFA to CIR does make the most sense, but there is a problem -- the Hispanic organizations don't want it there. And it is the Hispanic lobby that controls the CIR legislation in Congress.
So here we have Senator Clinton seemingly removing one obstacle (fraud) from fully embracing UAFA, but sticking UAFA somewhere else where there are more obstacles from the Hispanic community.
Could it be that we are being played? Once again she'll get credit for saying she supports UAFA, just as she did in the HRC questionnaire, but at that time she didn't co-sponsor because of her concerns about fraud. Those concerns have apparently been sufficiently countered since she didn't raise them again. Now she supports UAFA but as part of CIR, which she should know is resisted by the lobby that controls CIR. Is her stating that she prefers to put UAFA in CIR the new "fraud?" That is, is that going to be the excuse for why she doesn't co-sponsor?
Reasonable people can disagree on what Senator Clinton's motives are for this switch. But there is one true way to find out if indeed she does support our community on this issue as she says she does. The way we find out is to put a pen in her hand and ask her sign as a co-sponsor.
If she signs, she's sincere. If she doesn't we should realize that we are once again being de-"frauded."
TrackBack URL for this entry:
The comments to this entry are closed.