Oregon's 2008 Anti-Immigrant Ballot Measures - #19 and #112

#19: Prohibits Teaching Public School Student In Language Other Than English For More Than Two Years

Filed By: Alan Grosso, Bill Sizemore, and Russell Walker

Summary of Initiative

* Non-English speaking students who enter the public school system will be limited to not more than two years of English Immersion classes.
* The amount of time for ESL classes depends on the grade of non-English speaking student enter the public school system.

“Yes” statement: “Yes” vote prohibits teaching public school student in language other than English for more than two years (exception for teaching foreign language to English speakers).

“No” statement: “No” vote retains requiring English courses for students unable to profit from classes taught in English, permitting Multilanguage instruction to assist transition to English.

Significant Impact/Concerns

* This initiative does not consider individual learning levels or students with special needs.
* What are the consequences for non-English speaking students who are prematurely forced into English only classes?
* How will this affect refugee children who have come directly from refugee camps with little formal education?
* How will this affect ESL funding, school funding, and curriculum?

#112: Allows state cooperation with Immigration Enforcement; Requires “Legal Presence”/Citizenship for Specified States Rights/Privileges

Filed By: Mehran Smith and Shahriyar Smith

Summary of Initiative

* No Statute, regulation, or agency/instrumentality of the state can prohibit public employees from cooperating with federal agencies in the enforcement of federal immigration law.
* First time Oregon voters must provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote.
* Proof of legal residence is required for driver license applicants.

“Yes” Statement: “Yes” vote allow state/local cooperation and resources for immigration enforcement; requires certain documentation of citizenship for voter registration, “legal presence” for driver/identification documents.

“No” Statement: “No” vote retains current state/local limits on cooperation and resources to enforce immigration laws, current requirements for voter registration, and grant of driver/identification documents.

Significant Concerns/Impacts

* Would state and local police have the ability to arrest undocumented immigrants on a regular basis? Would state and local police receive proper training, funding and support to carry out federal immigration enforcement?
* Would this initiative require all government workers (hospitals, schools, etc.) to report undocumented immigrants? Would this initiative promote racial profiling?
* Would this eliminate the ability to hold street-side voter registration drives?
* How long will it take to verify a voter’s status under the new system?