Content deleted Content added
→Further reading: cite |
No edit summary |
||
| (21 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown) | |||
Line 3:
{{Infobox referendum
| name = Proposition 187
| country = California
| date = {{Start date|1994|11|08}}
| title = '''Illegal Aliens. Ineligibility for Public Services. Verification and Reporting. Initiative Statue.'''
| yes = 5,063,537
| no = 3,529,432
| total = 8,900,
| electorate = 14,723,784
| map = 1994 California Proposition 187
| mapdivision =
| map_caption =
| notes = Source: [http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/1994-general/1994-general-sov.pdf 1994 Statement of Vote]▼
{{col-begin}}
{{col-2}}
'''Yes'''
{{legend|#47729E|70–80% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#7D9CBB|60–70% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#B6C8D9|50–60% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{col-2}}
'''No'''
{{legend|#8B8B54|70–80% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{legend|#DEDEBD|50–60% |border=1px #AAAAAA solid}}
{{col-end}}
▲| notes = Source: [
}}
{{ElectionsCA}}
Line 17 ⟶ 31:
Passage of Proposition 187 reflected state residents' concerns about [[illegal immigration into the United States]]. Opponents believed the law was motivated by bigotry against illegal immigrants of [[Hispanic]] or [[Asian people|Asian]] origin; supporters maintained that their concerns were economic: that the state could not afford to provide social services for so many people who had entered the country illegally or overstayed their visas.<ref>{{cite news|title=Jewish Coalition Opposes Prop. 187|first=SAM|last=ENRIQUEZ|work=Los Angeles Times|date=October 19, 1994|page=2}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Sorting through facts and fiction of immigration|first=Alan W.|last=Bock|work=[[Orange County Register]]|location=Santa Ana, Calif.|date=October 2, 1994|page=J.01}}</ref>
The [[California Legislative Analyst's Office]] later said that the cost of verification would be greater than any fiscal benefits of the ballot measure.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://articles.latimes.com/1994-11-02/local/me-57542_1_border-states|title=Why California Should Vote 'No' on Proposition 187 : This great state is bigger and better and wiser than this|date=1994-11-02|work=Los Angeles Times|access-date=2019-03-05|language=en-US|issn=0458-3035}}</ref> As the state's demographics have shifted to include more immigrants,
==Background and passage==
Line 26 ⟶ 40:
Governor [[Pete Wilson]], a [[Republican Party (US)|Republican]], was a prominent supporter of Proposition 187, which ultimately became a key issue during his 1994 re-election campaign against [[Democratic Party (US)|Democratic]] opponent [[Kathleen Brown]]. After facing record low approval ratings during his first term, Wilson trailed Brown in opinion polls by more than 20% early during the gubernatorial campaign. Commentators considered his aggressive support of the Proposition 187 as crucial to his re-election.<ref name=Decker>{{cite news|title=Wilson Savors Win; Democrats Assess Damage|first1=CATHLEEN|last1=DECKER|first2=DANIEL M.|last2=WEINTRAUB|work=Los Angeles Times|date=November 10, 1994|page=1}}</ref>
In the days leading up to the election, Wilson said that he would require all state and local government employees to report suspected illegal immigrants to the Attorney General's Office if Proposition 187 passed. State Attorney General [[Dan Lungren]], also running for re-election, agreed to enforce emergency regulations to implement the law immediately after the election.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Bailey |first1=Eric |title=CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS / PROPOSITION 187 : Lungren Backs Prop. 187; Late Stance Assailed : Though citing concerns, attorney general calls measure the right vehicle for constitutional test. Election rival Tom Umberg accuses him of caving in to supporters of the measure. |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-08-mn-60292-story.html |access-date=30 May 2023 |work=Los Angeles Times |date=8 November 1994}}</ref>
During the [[United States Senate election in California, 1994]] campaign, the incumbent Senator [[Dianne Feinstein]] and Republican challenger [[Michael Huffington]] both adopted tough policies against illegal immigration. The candidates each revealed that they had previously hired illegal immigrants for housekeeping and childcare. Unlike Feinstein, Huffington had hired a housekeeper who was an illegal immigrant after the [[Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986]], which made it illegal to knowingly hire illegal immigrants. Feinstein was narrowly re-elected.<ref name="Martin">{{cite journal |last1=Martin
President [[Bill Clinton]] urged Californians to reject Proposition 187 as an impediment to federal policy on immigration. After stating that "it is not wrong for you [Californians] to want to reduce illegal immigration," Clinton asked voters to allow the federal government to "keep working on what we're doing."<ref name="Martin"/> In November 1994, Clinton publicly criticized the ballot measure, stating that it “is not the answer” to the issues stemming from illegal immigration.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://articles.latimes.com/1994-11-05/news/mn-58756_1_city-hall|title=Clinton Attacks Prop. 187 at City Hall Rally|last1=LAUTER|first1=DAVID|date=1994-11-05|work=Los Angeles Times|access-date=2019-03-05|last2=BRODER|first2=JOHN M.|language=en-US|issn=0458-3035}}</ref>
Line 54 ⟶ 68:
# People shall not receive any public social services until verified as a United States citizen or as a lawfully admitted alien.
# People shall not receive any health care services from a publicly funded health care facility until verified as a United States citizen or as a lawfully admitted alien.
# A public elementary or secondary school shall not admit or permit the attendance of any child
# By 1996, each school district shall verify the legal status of each child enrolled within the district and the legal status of each parent or guardian of each child.
# A child who is in violation of the requirements above shall not continue to attend the school 90 days from the date of notice to the attorney general and INS.
Line 62 ⟶ 76:
==Opposition==
[[File:March Against Prop 187 in Fresno California 1994 (35357476831).jpg|thumb|right|200px|Protesters of Proposition 187 in [[Fresno]], California in 1994]]
Activists on campuses, churches, and ethnic communities in California and across the country rallied to express opposition to Proposition 187. Critics argued that the measure was xenophobic and discriminated against ethnic minorities, especially those of Latino origin. Others were fearful that the costs of a state-run citizenship screening system and the potential loss of federal funds would off-set any savings of denying public benefits to unlawful residents.<ref>
In the weeks leading up to the election, opponents of Proposition 187 led a series of demonstrations. These events gathered several thousands of people. One of the largest protests of the proposition, as well as one of the largest protests in Los Angeles history, was held on October 16, 1994, when an estimated 70,000 people marched through the downtown area.<ref name="Rumbaut2">{{cite web |author=McDonnell |first1=Patrick J. |last2=Lopez |first2=Robert J. |date=October 17, 1994 |title=L.A. March Against Prop. 187 Draws 70,000: Protestors condemn Wilson for backing initiative that they say promotes 'racism, scapegoating' |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-10-17-mn-51339-story.html |work=Los Angeles Times}}</ref> The line of demonstrators stretched at least a mile long.<ref name="Rumbaut2" /> Two weeks later, 7,000 people participated in another rally against Proposition 187 that took the form of a concert in which dozens of musicians and speakers performed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lopez |first=Robert J. |date=October 31, 1994 |title=7,000 Attend Protest Denouncing Proposition 187 |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-10-31-mn-56989-story.html |access-date= |website=Los Angeles Times}}</ref>
Young people, particularly Hispanic students, organized their own protests. Most often, these involved campus walkouts. Students as young as middle schoolers participated.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Alvarez |first=Fred |date=November 9, 1994 |title=Last-Minute Rallies Held by Students |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-09-me-60485-story.html |access-date= |website=Los Angeles Times |language=}}</ref> In one of the largest student-led demonstrations against Proposition 187, more than 10,000 young people walked out from more than 30 campuses in the Los Angeles Unified School District.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last1=Pyle |first1=Amy |last2=Shuster |first2=Beth |date=November 3, 1994 |title=10,000 Students Protest Prop. 187: Walkouts around Los Angeles are largest yet showing campus opposition to initiative. The teen-agers are mostly peaceful, with only 12 arrests reported |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-03-mn-58295-story.html |access-date= |website=Los Angeles Times |language=}}</ref> The protest was held without endorsement by any official groups; instead, students had been encouraged to stay in school and stage sit-ins as an alternative.<ref name=":0" />
Due to Proposition 187's statutes requiring children and their parents or legal guardians to prove their legal status, the California State [[Parent-Teacher Association]] joined in opposing the bill.<ref>Suarez-Orozco, p. 161.</ref> The Democratic gubernatorial candidate, [[Gray Davis]], who succeeded Wilson, campaigned against Proposition 187.
Proposition 187 was widely supported by conservatives. However, some prominent conservatives, including former [[Congressman]] and [[Secretary of Housing and Urban Development]] [[Jack Kemp]], former [[Secretary of Education]] [[William Bennett]], and unsuccessful Republican gubernatorial candidate [[Ron Unz]], publicly opposed the initiative.<ref>{{cite web|
Line 71 ⟶ 91:
date=July 19, 1999|
publisher=New Republic}}</ref><ref>Martin, p. 260.</ref>
▲Due to Proposition 187's statutes requiring children and their parents or legal guardians to prove their legal status, the California State [[Parent-Teacher Association]] joined in opposing the bill.<ref>Suarez-Orozco, p. 161.</ref> The Democratic gubernatorial candidate, [[Gray Davis]], who succeeded Wilson, campaigned against Proposition 187. On October 16, 1994, three weeks before Proposition 187 was passed, more than 70,000 people marched in downtown [[Los Angeles, California|Los Angeles]] against the measure.<ref name=Rumbaut>{{cite web|url=http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1994-10-17/news/1994290125_1_proposition-187-illegal-protest|
The Mexican president, [[Carlos Salinas de Gortari]], decried the law as xenophobic and harmful to the human rights of migrant laborers. One week after the bill was approved, Salinas proposed cross-border discussions to develop a "[[guest worker]]" program that would permit non-resident Mexicans to work legally in the United States.<ref>Martin, p. 261.</ref> Such a program had been in place during [[World War II]].
==Ethnic minority reactions==
Reactions against the proposition varied between and within different ethnic minority groups. Latino communities are cited as having been the most active; Hispanic students in particular were marked as they marched in the streets with Mexican flags. Some sources claim that this reaction might have caused indecisive voters to vote in favor of the proposition.<ref name=PMartin>{{cite journal|last=Martin|first=Philip|year=1995|title=Proposition 187 in California |journal=The International Migration Review|volume=29|pages=258–259|doi=10.1177/019791839502900111|s2cid=143724092}}</ref> After the election, Harold Ezell, the former Immigration and Naturalization Service Director who helped author Proposition 187, maintained that the "biggest mistake the opposition made was waving those green and white flags with the snake on it. They should have been waving the American flag."<ref name=":1">{{cite news |last=Banks |first=Sandy |others= |date=November 10, 1994 |title=Unflagging Controversy: Why did some protesters against Proposition 187 carry the red, white and green instead of the red, white and blue? To Latinos, it was prideful. To many Americans, it was insulting |work=Los Angeles Times |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-10-me-60797-story.html |archive-date=}}</ref> When Hispanic students were criticized for waving Mexican flags during demonstrations in Los Angeles, community leaders responded to the controversy by saying that it was "a symbolic clinging to self-pride".<ref>{{cite news | url = https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-10-me-60797-story.html | title = CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS : Unflagging Controversy : Why did some protesters against Proposition 187 carry the red, white and green instead of the red, white and blue? To Latinos, it was prideful. To many Americans, it was insulting. | work = Los Angeles Times | date = 1994-11-10 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20210627052240/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-10-me-60797-story.html | archive-date = 2021-06-27 | first = Sandy | last = Banks | others = Simon Romero (contributor)}} [https://www.newspapers.com/clip/60883437/la-times-11101994 Alt URL]</ref> But some movement leaders did attempt to address these criticisms. As the election drew near, organizers sold thousands of American flags at their demonstrations against Proposition 187.<ref name=":12">{{cite news |last=Banks |first=Sandy |others= |date=November 10, 1994 |title=Unflagging Controversy: Why did some protesters against Proposition 187 carry the red, white and green instead of the red, white and blue? To Latinos, it was prideful. To many Americans, it was insulting |work=Los Angeles Times |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-11-10-me-60797-story.html |archive-date=}} [https://www.newspapers.com/clip/60883437/la-times-11101994 Alt URL]</ref>
Asian communities in particular were divided, with a slight tendency towards supporting the proposition with 57 percent voting in favor.<ref name="PMartin"/> However, as the bill became more visible, Asian communities came to be known as a group that took increasingly more visceral actions. Over time, general populist support for the bill dropped from 49% to 38%, a drop that is credited to the "massive organizing among California's communities of color, particularly the Latino and Asian communities".<ref name=hnet>{{cite web |url=https://www.h-net.org/gateways/migration/threads/political/disc-prop187E94.html |title=Californians Protest Anti Immigrant Measure |access-date=March 4, 2018 |author=Josef Barton |year=1994 |publisher=Financial Times |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110622213315/http://h-net.org/gateways/migration/threads/political/disc-prop187E94.html |archive-date=June 22, 2011 }}</ref> In fact, the largest organized group in support of Proposition 187 at the time of October 1994 was the Asian Americans for Border Control in Sylmar, which had only ten members. On the other hand, Chinese, Japanese, Cambodian, Thai and Korean alliances and coalitions banded to form the Asian Pacific Islanders Against Proposition 187 which consisted of hundreds of members.<ref name=ckang>{{cite web |url=http://articles.latimes.com/1994-10-09/local/me-48317_1_asian-american-organizations |title=Proposition 187: Asian American Groups Organize to Fight Measure |access-date=March 4, 2019 |author=K. Connie Kang |year=1994 |work=Los Angeles Times |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120206101657/http://articles.latimes.com/1994-10-09/local/me-48317_1_asian-american-organizations |archive-date=February 6, 2012 }}</ref> Significantly, many consider the strong reactions against Proposition 187 as the first time such numbers of Asian Americans have come together, with around 60 organizations joining forces.<ref name="ckang"/>
Line 126 ⟶ 139:
Conservative group [[Eagle Forum]] instead argues that immigration, whether legal or not, made California's electorate more liberal.<ref>{{cite web|access-date=September 16, 2014 |url=http://www.eagleforum.org/immigration.html|title=How Mass (Legal) Immigration Dooms a Conservative Republican Party|author=Eagle Forum|date=2014-12-06}}</ref> Fred Bauer of ''[[National Review]]'' concurs, adding that Democrats have usually controlled both branches of the California state legislature since the 1960s and that the Democratic Party has had consistently strong support among both white and Hispanic voters in California.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430032/immigration-republicans-hispanic-vote-california-pete-wilson|title=Pete Wilson Did Not Make California Turn Blue: Unraveling a Myth|newspaper=National Review|language=en|access-date=2017-01-28}}</ref> Bill Whalen, a former aide to Wilson, in an article for ''[[Forbes]]'', noted that Proposition 187 was popular among voters and that Republican struggles in California are partly due to women gradually moving away from the party for other reasons, particularly [[reproductive rights]].<ref name="Whalen">{{Cite news |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/billwhalen/2016/01/07/blaming-the-california-gops-woes-on-pete-wilson-nice-tale-but-not-the-whole-story/#7d7f982214c3|title=Blaming The California GOP's Woes On Pete Wilson? Nice Tale, But Not The Whole Story|last=Whalen|first=Bill|newspaper=Forbes|access-date=2017-01-28}}</ref> Whalen also cited Schwarzenegger's reelection as governor in 2006, in which he won 39% of the votes cast by Latinos, as evidence that Proposition 187 did not harm Republicans' chances of being elected in California.<ref name="Whalen" /> Writing after Schwarzenegger's 2003 recall election victory, Debra J. Saunders of ''[[The Weekly Standard]]'' noted that he won the election despite voting for Proposition 187, which other publications had claimed would seriously jeopardize his bid.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.weeklystandard.com/article/4484|title=Pete Wilson's Vindication|last=Saunders|first=Debra J.|date=2003-10-20|newspaper=Weekly Standard|access-date=2017-01-28|archive-date=February 28, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170228074325/http://www.weeklystandard.com/article/4484|url-status=dead}}</ref>
Between 1995 and 2004 the following states passed similar ballot initiatives or laws: [[Arizona]], [[Colorado]], [[Florida]], [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[Illinois]], [[Nevada]], [[New Mexico]], [[New York (state)|New York]], [[Oklahoma]] and [[Texas]].<ref name=Lacayo>{{cite
During [[Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016|Donald Trump's 2016 U.S. presidential campaign]], his use of "anti-immigrant tactics" drew comparisons from media members to Wilson and California Proposition 187.<ref name=Mehta>{{Cite web |url=http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-latino-republicans-20160530-snap-story.html|title=California Latino Republicans see Prop. 187's ghost in Trump's campaign|last=Mehta |first=Seema|website=Los Angeles Times|access-date=2017-01-28}}</ref> Seema Mehta of the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'' wrote, "Many have had a visceral reaction to Trump's proposals that include deporting 11 million people and building an enormous border wall. Protests greet Trump whenever he holds rallies in California."<ref name=Mehta />
Line 142 ⟶ 155:
* Alvarez, R. Michael, and Tara L. Butterfield. "The resurgence of nativism in California? The case of Proposition 187 and illegal immigration." ''Social Science Quarterly'' (2000): 167-179. [https://authors.library.caltech.edu/80331/1/sswp1020.pdf online]
*Balin, Bryan J. [https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/32826/State%20Immigration%20Legislation%20and%20Immigrant%20Flows%20032008.pdf?sequence=4 "State Immigration Legislation and Immigrant Flows: An Analysis:]
* Bosniak, Linda S. "Opposing Prop. 187: Undocumented immigrants and the national imagination." ''Connecticut Law Review'' 28 (1995): 555+ [https://scholarship.libraries.rutgers.edu/esploro/fulltext/journalArticle/Opposing-Prop-187-undocumented-immigrants-and/991031735150904646?repId=12680073620004646&mId=13680073610004646&institution=01RUT_INST online].
*Garcia, Ruben J. "Critical race theory and Proposition 187: The racial politics of immigration law." ''ChiCano-
* Jacobson, Robin Dale. ''The new nativism: Proposition 187 and the debate over immigration'' (U of Minnesota Press, 2008) [https://books.google.com/books?id=Baar5UR_XcMC&dq=proposition+187&pg=PR5 online].
* Lee, Yueh-Ting, Victor Ottati, and Imtiaz Hussain. "Attitudes toward “illegal” immigration into the United States: California Proposition 187." ''Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences'' 23.4 (2001): 430-443. [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Arthur-Murphy-3/publication/247721933_Postdisaster_Social_Support_in_the_United_States_and_Mexico_Conceptual_and_Contextual_Considerations/links/0046353b2dae93a069000000/Postdisaster-Social-Support-in-the-United-States-and-Mexico-Conceptual-and-Contextual-Considerations.pdf#page=87 online]
* Mailman, Stanley. [http://www.ssbb.com/article1.html "California's Proposition 187 and Its Lessons"]. ''[[New York Law Journal]]'', January 3, 1995. Accessed December 17, 2008.▼
▲* Mailman, Stanley. [http://www.ssbb.com/article1.html "California's Proposition 187 and Its Lessons"]. ''[[New York Law Journal]]'',
* Martin, Philip. "Proposition 187 in California." ''International Migration Review'' 29.1 (1995): 255-263.
* Ono, Kent A., and John M. Sloop. ''Shifting borders: Rhetoric, immigration, and California's Proposition 187'' (Temple University Press, 2002) [https://books.google.com/books?id=odzDuI5hv0cC&dq=proposition+187&pg=PP9 online].
*[https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9780230600539 Wroe, Andrew. 2008. ''The Republican Party and Immigration Politics: From Proposition 187 to George W. Bush''. Palgrave.]▼
▲*[https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9780230600539 Wroe, Andrew.
==External links==
Line 162 ⟶ 179:
[[Category:United States immigration law]]
[[Category:Initiatives in the United States]]
[[Category:Hispanic and Latino American history of California]]
| |||