Happy New Year and Thanks for Your Support: Summary of Accomplishments

Happy New Year!  Today is my (Joanne Tosti-Vasey’s) last day as President of the Pennsylvania NOW, Inc.; the Pennsylvania NOW Education Fund; and the Pennsylvania NOW PAC.   I really have appreciated your support over the 18 years of my tenure as both President and Treasurer of NOW here in PA. 

As part of passing the torch to our new President, Julia Ramsey, I’d first like to summarize the past  six years.  I will post the new leadership information in a second post.

We have done some awesome, successful work over the last few years. 

1.       We pressured Penn State University to change their policies towards all forms of campus violence.  In 2006, as a result of this pressure, PSU did create a zero-tolerance policy towards all forms of domestic and relationship violence, sexual assault, and stalking on campus.  However this policy hit some rather bumpy spots, particularly within the Athletics department.  As of result of the allegations of child sexual abuse against former PSU football coach Jerry Sandusky in November 2011, we have once again weighed in on calling for the University to fully investigate these allegations, to review policies and reporting methods of campus violence, and to include all forms of campus violence in both the investigation and upgrading of policies and reporting.  You can read the most recent joint National NOW/PA NOW statement here as well as a copy of the letter to the PSU Board of Trustees detailing both the history of our involvement in this issue and our call for a broader, full investigation into all forms of campus violence. It is time to make sure that NO form of campus violence – sexual assault, relationship violence, or stalking – is ever again tolerated. Against any child. Against any adult. Anywhere, including at Penn State.

2.       After a high school senior posted an online tabloid in 2006 discussing the breast and hip sizes, sexual proclivities, and sexual diseases of 26 female students, Pennsylvania NOW worked with a parent of one of these young women and with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission to force the Mt. Lebanon School District to conduct sexual harassment training, to set up meetings with the parents of the girls that were harassed to provide input on how to change the policies surrounding sexual harassment, and we worked with the college where the boy matriculated (along with six of the women who were harassed) that resulted in a 4-year stay-away order.  The superintendent and high school principal also lost their jobs as a result of their failure to properly handle this case of sexual harassment.

3.       In collaboration with many women’s organization, we worked with the City of Pittsburgh to craft a zero-tolerance, police-perpetrated domestic violence ordinance in 2007.  This ordinance was created after three police officers who had current or prior histories of domestic violence were promoted.Su

4.       We worked with Philadelphia NOW, the PA Prison Society, and Senator Daylin Leach to pass the 2010 state law that prohibits shackling of incarcerated pregnant women in their 2^nd and 3^rd trimesters who are incarcerated in prisons and jails throughout the state.  And in Centre County, I advocated for even stronger protections in the Centre County Correctional Facility than are provided in the state law. As a result of this advocacy, any pregnant woman incarcerated in Centre County at any point in her pregnancy will not only not be shackled, but she also will not be tasered.  For details on what this 2010 law and Centre County Prison Board policy do, read a summary in one of our earlier blogs. 

5.       We provided testimony to the PA’s Independent Regulatory Review Board on the 2007 proposed regulations for sexual assault services in emergency rooms.  As a result of this testimony as well as testimony from the Women’s Law Project, Planned Parenthood, and the PA Commission for Women, hospitals must post signs if they refuse to provide emergency contraception to rape victims and must provide them with transportation to another facility where they can receive EC if they want it.  If a hospital refuses to provide EC, they are placed on a PA Deptartment of Health online list of hospitals denying full sexual assault services.  Prior to the new regulations going into effect, about two-thirds of hospitals in PA did NOT provide EC in the ER.  Now only 11 hospitals in the state refuse to provide EC in the ER.

6.       We worked with State College Borough in 2007 and 2011 to create one of the most comprehensive sets of anti-discrimination ordinances in the country.  The employment ordinance includes marital status, familial status, family responsibilities (protections for people who need to take care of or are assumed to be taking care of another adult family member), gender identity, and sexual orientation in addition to the state-level protections.  The fair housing and public accommodations ordinance includes marital status, familial status, gender identity, sexual orientation, and legal sources of income in addition to the state-level protections.  Also in 2011, we helped to fine-tune State College’s proposed inclusionary (affordable) housing ordinance to reduce the number of forms of identification from 5 to 2 for lower income people to apply for inclusionary housing units.  This ordinance also provides the ability for domestic partners to apply for this housing if they have registered with the borough’s Domestic Partnership Registration that was also initiated this year.

7.       We worked with Allegheny County Council in 2009 to pass a county-wide anti-discrimination ordinance that includes marital status, familial status, gender identity, and sexual orientation (but no family responsibilities protections) in addition to the state-level protections in employment, housing and public accommodations.  Also got them to include source of income in housing.

8.       In Spring 2009, we protested the make-up of Governor Rendell’s Stimulus Oversight Committee. Initially, this committee only had 1 woman, 1 person of color, and only people who lived in Allegheny County and southeastern PA.  A coalition of women’s organizations and people of color organizations asked to have the committee expanded to add women, people of color and people from other sections of the state.  We were only partially successful; 1 more woman and 1 more person of color were added to the committee.

9.       We gave written testimony on August 30, 2011 to the House State Government Committee opposing Rep. Daryl Metcalfe’s “National Security Begins at Home” anti-immigration bills.  PA NOW focused on the effects of these bills on children in low-income families and on victims of domestic violence and sexual assault (including women who have been trafficked).  As a result, there are some decent amendments being proposed to these really bad bills that we will continue to oppose.

10.   I co-authored through the National NOW Foundation and the NOW Disability Rights ad-hoc Committee an article entitled “Reproductive Health Justice for Women with Disabilities” in the 2011 Center for Women’s Policy Studies Barbara Faye Waxman Fiduccia Papers on Women and Girls with Disabilities.  I also co-authored the Pennsylvania Commission for Women’s “Status of Women in Pennsylvania” reports in 2004 and 2009 that were distributed to the Pennsylvania General Assembly, Governor Rendell, and to the public. Unfortunately, since Governor Tom Corbett shut down the all four advocacy commissions (the Pennsylvania Commission for Women, Governor’s Advisory Commission on African American Affairs, Governor’s Advisory Commission on Asian American Affairs, and the Governor’s Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs) on July 1, 2011 and the Commission’s website was taken offline. As a result, none of their reports or publications are available for public access.

11.   We monitored and lobbied in Harrisburg on all forms of legislation dealing with women’s economic justice, budget and taxation, education, health care, immigration, human trafficking and ending racism, lesbian rights, reproductive justice, shackling of incarcerated women and children, violence against women, and voting rights. Summaries of some, but not all of these bills can be found in our Legislative Reports that appear in our semi-annual Pennsylvania NOW Times. Copies of these newsletters for 2010 and 2011 can be seen by clicking on each of the PNT links at this blog on the upper left side of the page.  We have done this advocacy as a single organization as well as in coalition with

a.       Pennsylvanians for Choice on issues related to reproductive justice, fighting the new PA TRAP law, and opposing restrictions on abortion access in general and in the new health care law);

b.      Value All Families, led by Equality Advocates  and the PA ACLU, to support  expanded statewide hate crimes and anti-discrimination laws that would add gender identity and sexual orientation to both laws and to oppose multiple attempts to create discrimination in the PA Constitution by defining marriage as “the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized;”

c.       Pennsylvanians Opposed to Vouchers to oppose legislation that would unconstitutionally give public funds to private and parochial schools though giving vouchers to parents to pay for their children’s private education;

d.      Health Care for All PA to advocate for passage of single-payer health care.

e.      Better Choices for PA to advocate, in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center, that lawmakers close tax loopholes and end special interest tax breaks before making deep cuts to schools and literacy programs, colleges, the environment, health care, and services for women; and

f.        Pennsylvania Immigrant and Citizenship Coalition to oppose anti-immigrant bills that threaten the lives of anyone, especially women and children, who look like they might be undocumented.

12.   We also attended and participated in monitoring tension, acts of bias, and potential hate crimes as a member of the Pennsylvania Tension Task Force.  The Task Force is headed by the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office, and the Pennsylvania State Police.  In both 2003 and in 2009 we also made presentations before the Task Force on Pennsylvania NOW’s history and on gender-based hate crimes.

We also have had some setbacks.  The most recent one was last week’s passage and signing into law Pennsylvania’s new TRAP – Targeted Regulations of Abortion Providers law. We will work in coalition with Pennsylvanians for Choice to stop this undue burden law from going into effect.  We are still fighting more potential attacks on marriage equality, school vouchers, immigration, voting rights and access, reproductive justice and healthcare.

We will continue educating the public about women’s rights and equality through the Pennsylvania NOW Education Fund.  We will continue our advocacy through Pennsylvania NOW, Inc.  And we will work to replace enough members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly to once again have a legislature that is concerned about and works for the betterment of all people’s lives and not just that of corporations.

It’s been a great six years.  Thank you all and

Happy New Year!

NOW Urges Penn State to Allow Former FBI Director to Lead a Broader, "Fully Independent" Investigation

Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill and Pennsylvania NOW President Joanne Tosti-Vasey

Last week, in the wake of the recent appalling Penn State University child sexual assault allegations, the leaders of the National Organization for Women and Pennsylvania NOW called on Penn State University to expand the composition and goals of the committee tasked with investigating these allegations. We specifically called for an independent committee to investigate these allegations, to review policies and reporting methods across the board at Penn State and to include all forms of campus violence within its scope.

Yesterday, Ron Frazier, a member of the PSU Board of Trustees and Chair of the PSU Special Investigative Committee, announced that the committee has hired Louis J. Freeh, former FBI director, to lead the independent investigation. Mr. Freeh stated that he has been assured that his investigation will be "fully independent" and that it will focus on any incident that interacts with the university dealing with "these types" of incidents, including cases of adult sexual assault. Mr. Freeh also stated that he would be looking into the "governance, controls, procedures and leadership" at the university to improve the climate of safety at the university and that his team of investigators includes former FBI agents, assistant U.S. attorneys, pedophile investigators and compliance investigators.

NOW believes that this is a good start to our call for a broader, independent investigation if --and only if-- Mr. Freeh is "fully independent" as he stated.  However, questions have been raised about his independence and these questions must be completely answered. 

We call on Mr. Freeh to include in his investigation all forms of campus violence, including sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking. Unless PSU's systematic climate of indifference, particularly within Athletics, is comprehensively reviewed and changed, we believe that these types of appalling acts will continue to be hidden and will not end.  We also believe that, in addition to attorneys and law enforcement experts, the investigative team needs to include experts and survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence against both children and adults. Mr. Freeh and his committee must take their experiences and suggestions seriously.  

Mr. Freeh has set up a hotline to his risk management firm at 855-290-3382 and psuhelp@freehgroup.com for individuals with any knowledge about any incident or policy, or the PSU climate to contact him.

NOW activists will be closely monitoring the investigation in the hope that it will be truly independent, comprehensive in scope and aimed squarely at achieving -- at long last -- full enforcement of the school's 2006 zero-tolerance policy.

For further information, contact: Joanne Tosti-Vasey (Pennsylvania NOW) Phone: (814) 280-8571 OR Latoya Veal (National NOW)  w. 202-628-8669, ext. 116; c. 301-660-3447

Two News Reports Call for an Independent Investigation into PSU Sex Abuse Scandal

There were two articles in the news today about the lack of independence and transparency in the Penn State University Board of Trustees investigation into the allegations of child sexual assault. 

The first call for independence is in The Nation. It includes my full statement in response to Dave Zirin’s article of November 15, 2011 entitled “The World Joe Paterno Made."  In that article, Dave Zirin quoted something I said in 2006.  Here's what he wrote:

The signs of this malignancy did not emerge overnight. Looking backward, there are moments that speak of the scandals to come. In 2003, less than one year after Paterno was told that Sandusky was raping children, he allowed a player accused of rape to suit up and play in a bowl game. Widespread criticism of this move was ignored. In 2006, Penn State’s Orange Bowl opponent Florida State, sent home linebacker A.J. Nicholson, after accusations of sexual assault. Paterno’s response, in light of recent events, is jaw-dropping. He said, “There’s so many people gravitating to these kids. He may not have even known what he was getting into, Nicholson. They knock on the door; somebody may knock on the door; a cute girl knocks on the door. What do you do? Geez. I hope—thank God they don’t knock on my door because I’d refer them to a couple of other rooms.” Joanne Tosti-Vasey, president of Pennsylvania’s National Organization for Women in Pennsylvania, was not amused. With chilling unintentional prescience, Tosti-Vasey responded, “Allegations of sexual assault should never be taken lightly. Making light of sexual assault sends the message that rape is something to be expected and accepted.”

Mr. Zirin and I corresponded last night after this article was posted.  This morning, he posted my full statement regarding NOW's current call for an expanded, independent review as part of his blog.

The second call for independence is made by the editors of the Harrisburg (PA) Patriot-News.  They don’t ask for an expanded review, but do call for independence.  And one of the people they mention as a better leader for the committee (rather than a PSU Board of Trustee member) is Barbara Hafer, former Commonwealth of PA Treasurer and Auditor General as well as a former, long-time NOW member. 

Make the PSU Investigative Committee Independent; Broaden Scope to Include ALL Forms of Campus Violence

Pennsylvania NOW leaders and our membership, like the PSU Board of Trustees and the rest of the country, are “outraged by the horrifying details contained in the Grand Jury Report.” We too have felt betrayed by these acts.  However considering the long history of the Athletics Department, role models within Athletics, and the PSU Administration in minimizing reports of campus-related violence on adult women, we are not completely surprised that an alleged cover-up of child sexual assault has also occurred.

Since 1994, both the local NOW chapter in Centre County, PA and the state chapter of NOW have pressured the University to review to all forms of campus violence against women and to more specifically look at the ways to break down the wall of immunity that has historically and currently appears to exist between the Athletic Department and the rest of the University. 

These earlier incidences involved Joe Paterno making insensitive remarks about domestic violence and sexual assault that were shrugged off as jokes by individuals, the Athletic Department, and the PSU administration; allowing a football player to play in a bowl game AFTER he was suspended for two semesters for an alleged rape; and the PSU administration weighing in on a rape case to have the sentence of a former Penn State wrestler placed at a minimal 6-month stay in the county jail. 

Over these past 17 years—due partially to our initial involvement and concern about this wall of indifference—there have been some, but not enough, efforts to address this issue campus-wide. But other than ordering that no suspended player can play sports at Penn State, nothing as far as we can see has been done to break down this wall between Athletics and the rest of the University for acts of violence against another person.

Earlier this week the Penn State Board of Trustees announced that they would be appointing an “independent” committee that includes “counsel and investigative teams” to investigate these allegations of child sexual assault.  Yesterday, when the Board announced the members of this committee, they stated, ““The complete committee membership will be determined and announced in the near future and is expected to be composed of a majority of Board of Trustee members with representatives from each of the board's constituencies as well as representatives of the Penn State community including faculty, students and alumni.” 

This statement, in our opinion, shows that there is little if no independence in this review. All of the investigative committee members that are to be appointed are Trustee members, current members of the University community, or alumni.  There are no experts on sexual assault or domestic violence, or stalking.  There are no survivors. And there are no members of the larger community – whether that be local here in Centre County or more broadly across the communities in Pennsylvania where the other Penn State University Campuses are located.

On Monday after the news broke of the alleged child sexual assaults, Pennsylvania NOW contacted the University President and the Board of Trustees. Since the child sexual assault issue appears to be part of a broader problem of indifference to sexual assault, relationship violence, sexual harassment, and stalking, we have asked them to broaden their review to all forms of campus violence and to more specifically look at the ways to break down the wall of immunity that has historically and currently appears to exist between the Athletic Department and the rest of the University. 

After finding out that the committee is unlikely to truly be independent, we contacted Trustee members Kenneth Frazier, JD, President of Merck and Company and Ron Tomalis, Pennsylvania’s Secretary of Education. They have been appointed as Chair and Vice-Chair of the newly appointed investigative review committee; we have asked them to:

• Appoint people to this committee that will make it a truly independent investigative review board. An effective independent investigative committee must, at minimum, include experts in the field of sexual assault and domestic violence, survivors of abuse, and others not associated with Penn State.
• Broaden the review to include all forms of campus violence – sexual assault, domestic/relationship violence, and stalking – of both children and adults;
• Broaden the review to 1) include ways to break down the wall of immunity between the Athletic Department and the rest of the University, and 2) review policies, programs, and reporting mechanisms across the University and within the Athletic Department on all forms of sexual assault, domestic and dating violence and stalking.

Change.org|Start an Online Petition »

Press Release: PSU Must Immediately Address the Full Range of Sexual Assault Issues on Campus and in the Athletics Department

Earlier today, Pennsylvania NOW sent a letter of concern to Penn State University President Graham Spanier and Chair of the Board of Trustees Steve Garban. 

We are greatly concerned and appalled about the allegations of child sexual abuse against former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky and the apparent lack of appropriate follow-through to notify law enforcement in a timely manner as required by law, and the alleged perjury to the Grand Jury resulting from this lack of follow-through indicating a possible cover-up of what occurred. We are calling on Spanier and the Board of Trustees as the corporate stewards of PSU to take immediate and far-reaching actions to ensure that Penn State students, staff and the families in the surrounding community never have to see this kind of behavior and resulting exposé ever again. 

We are pleased that the Penn State Board of Trustees met last night and took appropriate action by accepting both Tim Curley’s and Gary Schultz’s request to step down from their current positions at the University. But we are concerned about Dr. Spanier’s statement of November 5 giving “unconditional support” for both of these men.

Our youth deserve better custodians of their lives while at the University.  Everyone attending, working at, or participating in programs and activities at Penn State also deserve an environment free of violence.  Therefore we are asking the Administration and the Board of Trustees to follow through on the Board’s plan to “conduct an independent review of the University’s policies and procedures related to the protection of children; review with administrators police reporting protocols; publicize the findings of the independent review; review with administrators police reporting protocols; and enhance educational programming around such topics.” As part of this process and to further advance the zero tolerance policy made in 2006, we have requested that the Board:

1. Broaden the review to include all policies surrounding sexual assault, domestic and dating violence,  and stalking of both children and adults;

2. Broaden the review to include ways to break down this wall of immunity between the Athletic Department and the rest of the University, and to review policies and programs across the University and within the Athletic Department on all forms of sexual assault, domestic and dating violence and stalking.

3. Consider, as part of “enhanced” educational programming, bringing in outside training from people within the sports field who are respected by Athletics who may be more accepted by athletic staff and coaches (we initially suggested this in 2006, but as far as we know, this has never happened);

4. Create a protocol or policy that ensures that individuals are not retaliated against when they report allegations of abuse to authorities as required by law or university policy.  As the New York Times reported, “The chronology of events laid out by the state attorney general’s office includes multiple episodes that seem to suggest a failure by a variety of Penn State officials or employees to act emphatically, whether out of fear, incompetence or, perhaps, self-interest.”  As with sexual harassment, fear often results in stifling someone from speaking out; and

5. Fully enforce the 2006 zero tolerance policy, up to and including, separation and/or permanent resignation of individuals from the University who participate in, condone, or cover up this form of behavior through either their action or inaction. 

Testimony Opposing Anti-Immigration Bills

On Monday, August 22, 2011, I submitted written testimony to the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee and asked if I could speak at the hearing on August 30 before the committee when they hold hearings on the so-called “National Security Begins at Home” package of anti-immigrant bills.  I received an email from a Republican majority staff member telling me that my written testimony was accepted but that I would not be allowed to speak at all during the hearing.  As noted in my previous blog posting the Pennsylvania Immigrant and Citizenship Coalition's media advisory about a press conference to be held just before the hearings start on Tuesday, August 30,

"Unfortunately, the list of witnesses for the hearing has been limited, preventing many sound practical, legal, and moral arguments against this legislation from being heard."

 I was later told that this "limited" list of witnesses is only for people and organizations opposing this bill: only four witnesses selected by the Democratic side of the committee will be allowed to speak over the two days of hearings.

So after some thought, I decided to post my entire letter to the committee for you to read.  Please review.  Call and write your legislator.  Tell him/her to turn their attention away from divisive proposals that threaten to harm vulnerable Pennsylvanians - particularly women and children, waste taxpayer dollars and embroil our Commonwealth in burdensome lawsuits; instead, tell them to put the focus back on creating jobs and growing our economy.

Now, here's Pennsylvania NOW's testimony on these anti-immigration bills:

Pennsylvania NOW, Inc. PO Box 68 Bellefonte, PA 16823-0068  Email: panow@panow.org s website: http://www.panow.org Phone: 814-280-8571 Fax: 814-355-3057

8/22/2011

· · ·

Susan Boyle

Republican House Committee Legislative Staff
41B East Wing
Capital Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(sboyle@pahousegop.com)

Dear Ms. Boyle:

We are writing on behalf of the approximately 14,000 dues paying members and contributors to the National Organization for Women in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania NOW, Inc. is the statewide chapter that works to bring about full equal rights for all women. We are writing you to express our opposition to several of the anti-immigration bills before the House of Representatives that will be heard during this hearing on August 30.  We understand that the following bills are likely to be covered during this hearing  (listed by Name, Bill Number, Prime Sponsor, and the current status of each bill)

·         Identification of Lawful Presence Bills

o   SB 9 / Scarnati / Passed Senate and Referred to Committee on State Government

o   HB 41 / Marsico / Referred to Committee on State Government

o   Arizona Model Legislation/ HB 738/ Metcalfe/ Referred to Committee on State Government

·         Penalties and Duties of Agencies / HB 355 / Readshaw / Re-referred to State Government

·         License Revocation / HB 439 / Mustio / Re-referred to Committee on State Government

·         State Compact/ HB 474/ Cox/ Referred to Committee on State Government

·         Criminal Records / HB 798 / Creighton / Referred to Committee on State Government

·         Memorandum of Understanding / HB 799 / Creighton/ Referred to Committee on State Government

·         Power of Law Enforcement/ HB 801/ Creighton/ Referred to Committee on State Government

·         Sanctuary Bills

o   Sanctuary Cities Funding/ HB 810/ Perry/ Referred to Committee on State Government

o   Sanctuary Cities Victims / HB 865 / Knowles / Re-referred to State Government

·         Smuggling of Human Beings/ HB 856/ Kauffman/ Re-referred to Committee on State Government

·         “Commonwealth Citizenship Act” / HB 857/ Metcalfe/ Re-referred to Committee on State Government

·         E-verification / HB 858 / Metcalfe / Re-referred to Committee on State Government

We oppose all of these bills in general as they are an immigration-enforcement only form of legislation and do not take into account the disparate impact these laws would have on all residents – documented and undocumented.  They also impose new burdens on our workers, businesses, and the economy in general.  Women and children, in many of these bills, would also be even more harshly hit.  The following is a selective review of a few of these bills and why we believe that these particular bills would most harshly impact women and children here in Pennsylvania.

Identification Bills

There are two types of bills dealing with identification issues.  One deals with employment and obtaining forms of identification.  The other type deals with access to public benefits.

HB 858 requires all Pennsylvania employers to enroll in the federal E-Verify program to confirm employee Social Security numbers.  It also denies any form of registration (including driver’s licenses) to individuals who cannot prove that they are legal residents of the US.  This bill could cause serious problems for victims fleeing domestic violence situations without any identification.

Senate Bill 9 and House Bills 41 and 738 require individuals to produce a government-issued form of identification to prove their lawful presence in Pennsylvania in order to receive either public benefits or benefits from non-profit agencies who receive any funding from the state.  Senate Bill 9 is the furthest along in the legislative process; it has passed out of the Senate and is currently in the State House Government Committee.HB 738 is modeled on Arizona’s Anti-Immigration law.  All three will tie up government programs, cost the state millions of dollars, further hurt our fragile economy, and place the lives of women and children in danger. 

Both SB 9 and HB 41 require identification for “lawful presence” in the United States as a prerequisite to the receipt of public benefits.  Among the restrictions are denial of any benefit that the state or local government provides including, in the case of HB 41, access to any local food banks & “services provided to women, infants, & children through the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants & Children” (WIC).  (Let’s starve the kids!). Both also require that the identification be verified through the flawed federal Homeland Security’s “Systematic Alien Verification of Entitlement (SAVE)” database.

HB 738 is much broader then either SB 9 and HB 41 and as previously stated, mirrors much of Arizona’s anti-immigrant law SB 1070.  It has several sections.  First, like SB 9 and HB 41, it requires all agencies and municipalities to verify that applicants for public benefits are either US citizens or lawful immigrants. This applies to applicants for Federal, State, or local public benefits programs. All other applicants not exempt would have to sign an affidavit swearing lawful immigration status, subject to verification through the flawed Systematic Alien Verification of Entitlement Program.  Second, it fines officials, agencies, and municipalities for failure to enforce the law. Third, it makes it a crime to be undocumented. Forth, it penalizes employers who hire undocumented workers. And fifth, it allows police to seize any vehicle they suspect might be used for transporting undocumented workers. 

These bills all rely on the use of the flawed federal E-verify system

According to the National Immigration Law Center, there is an error rate of between 0.08 and 2.3 percent in verification of employment eligibility for documenting immigrants’ legal status in the US.  Nationally, that means that with an estimated 60,000,000 new hires each year, somewhere between 480,000 and 1,300,000 legal immigrants and US citizens will be flagged as undocumented[1].  According to the 2010 Census, 4.2 percent of the total adult US population reside in Pennsylvania.[2] Assume for a moment that 4.2 percent or 2,425,000 of these new hires occur in Pennsylvania each year. That means for employment searches alone, an estimated total of between 1,940 and 55,775 legal residents will likely be flagged as undocumented.  This number will be even higher if the E-verify system is used not only for employment but for access to public benefits.   And  this number will be higher once the state attempts to verify children as well as adults.

The lack of ids will tie up programs. 

Requiring an individual to either produce a government id and/or to be verified through the flawed E-verify system will tie up programs at great expense to the state and to individuals who need access to services.  On March 1, 2011, the Women’s Law Project and Community Legal Services along with 24 other organizations submitted testimony to the Pennsylvania Senate regarding the government identification requirements found in SB 9.  Their concerns, in our opinion, also apply to these other bills as well.

In that letter, they point out that a government issued photo id may be hard to obtain. That could be due to the need for having other forms of government id, such as a birth certificate.  For example, a birth certificate to prove birth in the United States can take time to obtain so that you can then obtain a picture id, such as a driver’s license or a passport.  People who have lost their original birth certificate or who have no access to their documentation—such as domestic violence victims who have fled their violent homes without any identification or for people who have lost all of their belongings in a disaster--could result in delays that they cannot wait for.  In addition, people without personal transport could be further delayed by not being able to travel to a photo id center to obtain a photo id.

Beside the complications in obtaining government issued photo ids proving a legal basis for being in the United States, there is the additional cost for setting up and maintaining these identification programs.  This can cause financial problems to the state in addition to delaying the distribution of needed benefits to documented individuals.  For example, Colorado reported that the state incurred over $2,000,000 in additional costs in the first year of full implementation of their photo-id law and Governor Rendell’s administration estimated that implementing the photo id requirements for the Unemployment Compensation program alone that is required by SB 9 would cost an additional $20,000,000. [3]

These bills will endanger lives.

According to the New York University’s Law School’s Brennen Center for Justice[4], about 11 percent of all US Citizens do not have a government-issued id.  That number rises to 15 percent for low-income families who would most likely need the public benefits covered under these bills.

Women are more likely than men to have problems providing proof of citizenship.  According to this same study, one-third of women 18 and older, one-quarter of African-Americans, and 16 percent of Latinas and Latinos do not have ready access to citizenship papers – passports, naturalization papers, and/or birth certificates.  And for those with some form of citizenship papers in their possession, 10 percent do not have the paperwork to show both their current name and current address. This number rises to 18 percent for adults ages 18-24; this younger cohort include lower-income individuals who are more likely to be parents with young children that need time-critical public benefits.

In Pennsylvania in 2007, nearly 1.4 million Pennsylvanians, or almost 12 percent, were living below poverty. It is estimated that over 806,000 (approximately 58 percent) of these individuals were female[5].  Given that females are more likely than males to live below the poverty line and are thus more likely to need access to public services, this requirement for identification could endanger their and their families’ lives.   

Additionally, women who have been made homeless (92 percent of homeless women have experienced physical and/or sexual violence at some point in their lives[6]) or who are fleeing domestic violence and leave without any documentation are particularly vulnerable.  Yet only SB 9 mentions an exemption to providing documentation for domestic violence victims if they sign an affidavit of domestic violence.  Homeless victims who have an even more desperate life and are in need of services may not have either the ability to or the knowledge of how to obtain either this needed identification or this limited exemption from having this form of identification.  And since they have no permanent domicile, obtaining a photo id with a current address is not likely to happen.

HB 738 additionally relies on racial Profiling

In addition to the general concerns about all of these identification bills, we have an additional concern about HB 738.  In addition to the id requirements, it allows police officers to stop and seize any vehicle they suspect might be used for transporting undocumented workers.  Like with HB 856, this section of the bill relies on illegal racial profiling.

This bill allows police officers to stop any vehicle driven by someone they think might be transporting undocumented workers if “reasonable suspicion” exists. What determines  “reasonable suspicion?”  Since September 11, 2001, Arabs, Muslims, and Hispanics have most often been the targets of suspicion either due to the belief that all Arabs and Muslims are or could be terrorists OR the belief that the majority of undocumented people are of Hispanic origin[7].  This form of “reasonable suspicion” results in victimization of the innocent who are not involved in trafficking.  This profiling also fails to actually find and prosecute individuals themselves who do not fit the profile of undocumented foreigner.

Commonwealth Citizenship Act

HB 857 seeks to prevent automatic citizenship for children born in the US to undocumented aliens.  It denies citizenship rights within the border of Pennsylvania to any child born anywhere in the US whose parents are not either citizens of the US or who are not legal resident aliens that now reside in Pennsylvania.  This bill on its face is unconstitutional as it violates the 14^th amendment to the US Constitution.  The 14^th Amendment was ratified in 1868 and guarantees that all children born in the United States (with minor exceptions for children of foreign diplomats and invading forces) are citizens.  Since it is the US and not states that grant citizenship, Pennsylvania cannot deny benefits to citizens, even if they have undocumented parents.

The 14^th Amendment is a cornerstone of the movement for civil rights for all (it is partially the basis for the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act in addition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the American with Disabilities Act of 1992, etc.) and it has played a critical role in our country’s cultural diversity. 

Limiting the scope of the 14^th amendment by denying citizenship as defined in HB 857 will actually make things worse by increasing the number of undocumented immigrants and will create “significant bureaucratic and financial burdens” for all Americans. A panel at the Center for American Progress listed these burdens if the Citizenship Clause were revoked at the federal level or ignored via legislation at the state level.  They stated[8] that:

1. “A large, new and expensive federal bureaucracy [would be needed] to investigate the citizenship status of parents before birth certificates could be issued to their newborn children.”  Since birth certificates are issued by states, Pennsylvania would have to greatly increase funding for the Department of Health to work with the federal government to ensure that at least one parent is a US Citizen before issuing the birth certificate

2.      The departments of State and Homeland Security – which routinely charge fees for immigrant visas and related services – could charge parents up to $600 to verify the legal status of each birth. And the verification process itself could also take weeks, months or even years.  This long delay and high cost to low-income individuals could jeopardize the lives of these children/adults due to the delay in verification; and

3.      “Repealing or limiting the scope of the Citizenship Clause would blur the line between who is a citizen and who is not, creating a U.S. caste system that would forever relegate those deemed to be of lesser status from fully participating and contributing to our nation.” 

Smuggling of Human Beings (aka Human Trafficking)
HB 856 is an amendment to 18 Pa. C.S. (Statute on Trafficking of Human Beings) that creates a third degree felony for people who knowingly or recklessly transport undocumented workers for profit or commercial purpose.  It adds a clause similar to the one proposed in HB 738 that allows police officers to stop any driver of a vehicle that they have “reasonable suspicion” of transporting undocumented workers. 

Women coerced into sex work, domestic workers and agricultural workers who are forced into unpaid or underpaid labor, and commercially sexually-exploited children, are the most common victims of human trafficking.  According to the Polaris Project,  “Victims of human trafficking in the United States include U.S. citizens or foreign nationals, adults or minors, and men or women. Foreign-born victims in the U.S. may be either documented or undocumented.[9]”

This bill makes two assumptions about human trafficking.  The first false assumption is that human trafficking is another word for human smuggling.  In fact, they are two separate federal crimes.  Smuggling requires illegal border crossing.  Human trafficking is a crime against a person who has been induced or forced into commercial sex acts or labor whether or not transportation is involved.  The second false assumption is that foreign national trafficking victims are always undocumented and are here in this country illegally.  Foreign nationals can be here in the United States either legally or illegally. A significant percentage of trafficked victims, according to the Polaris Project, are here legally and are documented.  To quote the Polaris Project, “Human trafficking encompasses both transnational trafficking that crosses borders and domestic or internal trafficking that occurs within a country.[10]

The statistics on human trafficking are scare, particularly for domestic trafficking.  And what statistics are available are often contradictory due to the covert nature of the crime, the very high levels of underreporting, the invisibility of victims, inconsistent definitions (including assumptions that trafficking is only an international issue), and the lack of data collection and research on this issue, particularly for domestic adult trafficking.  Of the statistics available, 53 percent of adult victims and 66 percent of child victims of trafficking are female.  And it is estimated that between 100,000 and 300,000 children from within the borders of the US are victims of prostitution.[11]

These statistics indicate that focusing on human trafficking by creating a law that allows police officers to stop any vehicle driven by someone they think might be transporting undocumented workers does not really deal with the terrible problem of human trafficking. Rather it is another civil rights violation through the use of racial profiling. 

What determines  “reasonable suspicion?”  Since September 11, 2001, Arabs, Muslims, and Hispanics have most often been the targets of suspicion either due to the belief that all Arabs and Muslims are or could be terrorists OR the belief that the majority of undocumented people are of Hispanic origin[12].  This form of “reasonable suspicion” results in victimization of the innocent who are not involved in trafficking.  This profiling also fails to actually find and prosecute traffickers who do not fit the profile of undocumented foreigner.

The current state law on human trafficking combined with the federal laws will not be improved by this bill. Although it might catch some traffickers, it will harm others who are innocent of this crime and will not deal at all with domestic trafficking. 

Putting further emphasis on enforcing the current law—18 Pa. C.S. (Statute on Trafficking of Human Beings—as well as passing two other bills before the General Assembly would improve the lives of victims of human trafficking. We urge you to pass HB 235. It mandates the posting of the National Human Trafficking Resource Center hotline, in key locations throughout the state to provide assistance, tip reporting and training on human trafficking to victims, community members & law enforcement.  We also encourage you to have the Senate consider and pass SB 885 and send it to you for consideration and passage.  This bill amends Section 3002(a) of 18 Pa. C.S. to allow prostitution convictions to be vacated if the woman (or man) can show that the arrest occurred while being a victim of sex trafficking.  Both of these bills would give police access to information about real human traffickers rather than having them rely on inaccurate and illegal racial profiling.

Thank you for taking time to listen to our concerns on these bills.  We look forward to your response to our concerns. 

Sincerely,
Joanne L. Tosti-Vasey, Ph.D.
President

Pennsylvania NOW, Inc.

Cc: Amy Hockenberry (ahockenb@pahousegop.com);  Elizabeth Sickler (esickler@pahousegop.com); Cathy Wadding (cwadding@pahousegop.com), and Kim Hileman (khileman@pahouse.net

---

[1] Moran, Tyler (June 11, 2011).  Statement of Tyler Moran, Policy Director, National Immigration Law Center to the US House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement: Hearing on the Legal Workforce Act.  Retrieved August 21, 2011 from http://nilc.org/immsemplymnt/ircaempverif/Legal-Workforce-Act-imm-subcomm-testimony-2011-06-15.pdf.

[2] 2010 Census.  Retrieved August 21, 2011 from http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_10_SF1_QTP1&prodType=table and http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=DEC_10_NSRD_QTPL&prodType=table.

[3] Women’s Law Project (March 1, 2011).  Advocates letter to PA Senate Opposing SB9. Retrieved August 21, 2011 from http://www.womenslawproject.org/legislative/SB9_opposition.pdf.

[4] Brennen Center for Justice (November 2006). Citizens Without Proof. Retrieved August 22, 2011 from http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/d/download_file_39242.pdf.

[5] Pennsylvania Commission for Women (2009). The status of Pennsylvania women report 2009.  Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Commission for Women.

[6] Pennsylvania Commission for Women (2009). The status of Pennsylvania women report 2009.  Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Commission for Women

[7] Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund (no date). Wrong then, wrong now: Racial profiling before and after September 11, 2001. Retrieved August 22, 2011 from http://www.civilrights.org/publications/wrong-then/racial_profiling_report.pdf.

[8] Azcona, Sergio (May 12, 2011).  Repeal of Citizenship Clause Would Carry Heavy Consequences.  Retrieved August 22, 2011 from http://www.civilrights.org/archives/2011/05/1191-citizenship.html.

[9] Polaris Project (no date).  Human Trafficking.  Retrieved August 22, 2011 from http://www.polarisproject.org/human-trafficking/overview.

[10] Polaris Project (no date).  Common myths and misconceptions about human trafficking in the US.  Retrieved August 22, 2011 from https://na4.salesforce.com/sfc/play/index.jsp?oid=00D300000006E4S&v=06860000000Hqhh&d=0i1GKP5PVjb5g7wWmouadOJ20Kk%3D&viewId=05H60000000IwPe.

[11] Polaris Project (2011). Human trafficking statistics.  Retrieved August 22, 2011 from https://na4.salesforce.com/sfc/play/index.jsp?oid=00D300000006E4S&v=06860000000HqhN&d=0i1GKP5PVjb5g7wWmouadOJ20Kk%3D&viewId=05H60000000IwPe.

[12] Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund (no date). Wrong then, wrong now: Racial profiling before and after September 11, 2001. Retrieved August 22, 2011 from http://www.civilrights.org/publications/wrong-then/racial_profiling_report.pdf.