UAFA links on Thomas are up!
Thomas, the Library of Congress’ online legislation portal, finally has stable links to UAFA.
The bill numbers in the 111th Congress are H.R. 1024 in the House and S. 424 in the Senate.
Now it’s even easier to check if your members of Congress are co-sponsoring the bill, and to write to them if they’re not!
a)…how many “total” are needed ?……..
b)and where can we find a list or find out who to hit write, call, send e-mail even if they are not our district……I still wanna call them etc even if they are not my district..they need to know “were” watching!
if there’s a spot where “ALL” are listed so I can see who isn’t on board yet regardless of district…then I wanna …..call/contact them….myself to let them know we the people are watching!..iv’e sent faxes before to their relevant office….Im happy to go through a list and see who hasn’t yet.
I just need to know where to get a list.thanx
Comment by derek — February 25, 2009 @ 2:14 pm
Let’s do the math.
House of Representatives: 435 members (248 are Democrats) (California only has 53 members, NY 28?, MA 10, WA 9, OR 5, PA 19, OH 18, NJ 13, NH 2, MI 15, ME 2, IL 19, ID 2, CT 5) Even if we get all of them to sponsor and vote yes to it, we have 200.
That means we must target the red states. Well, FL has 24…
Senate: 100 members
Right now we have 84/435 in the House, 14/100 in the Senate. That’s about 35% and 25% of the votes needed to pass the bill.
We need to work much much harder.
Click for the list of the members by state for
House:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW_by_State.shtml
Senate:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state&Sort=ASC
Comment by Will — February 25, 2009 @ 5:16 pm
@derek regarding your questions
a)basically the more the better – i believe the last time the bill was introduced, it had 119 co-sponsors in the Congress. So this time we are going to aim for more since there are a lot more Democrats in the House now.
b)unfortunately, I don’t think there’s a list of the members of Congress who are not on board yet but you can definitely find the list of those who are. If you give me some time, I can probably get the full list of members of Congress and make a list of those who we need to call/email/fax/write and ask for their support!
Comment by Simon M — February 25, 2009 @ 5:42 pm
What excellent ideas!!
Comment by Joe — February 26, 2009 @ 1:01 am
Actually, one can list all friends, family and relatives by state and offer to each one, especially those from states not yet co-sponsoring the bill, to call on their behalf. Often people just don’t have the time or wherewithall to do the actual calling. I believe all one would need aside from the time and a phone is the ZIP code. The best way to ask our friends, family and relatives may be, by email. Even the way the question is asked needs to be proactive so that it would be assumed you have their permission unless they specifically respond not to do it: “Bob, I’m going ahead to do this for you, okay? Pls advise me if you specifically don’t want me to take this initiative, okay, thanks”
Comment by Joe — February 26, 2009 @ 1:13 am
…..Hey Simon…..yes,.I was also/actually coming from a place of “as many as poss”…..I wanted to know if there is a list of “ALL” senators etc ….since I don’t know who or what state they are “ALL FROM AND WHERE” etc etc ……(obviosly I’m gona not contact the ones that are already sponsoring)…..I wanna go after anyone and everyone myself from anywhere “republican” or not…..I just wanna raise more awarness…..Im not gonna get every republican, …but I’m gonna “guilt” them into unfairness”……..for those ones on the fence so to speak….
who are not as hard line and religeous as some of them.
remember…….we, the average “person”..dosn’t know ALL the members/or congress members..that’s why I wanted to be directed somewhere where there
is a list of ALL that that I can download print out and go through “Line by Line”……and direct my letters , faxes etc to those who haven’t signed on yet…….I/we the average person would’nt know where to look
thanx…Derek
Comment by derek — February 26, 2009 @ 12:45 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_Senate_in_the_111th_United_States_Congress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_House_of_Representatives_in_the_111th_United_States_Congress
It’s wikipedia, but seems pretty complete. I’m also wondering about the “how many” question. It seems like the goal this year is to increase numbers over last year – is this it? Are we honestly still just hoping to build year after year so that we can maybe get this thing passed 10 years from now? What is IE’s goal this year? It seems like this is the best chance we have to get it passed and I don’t want to waste it hoping to get 120 cosponsors this time so we can say next year that we can try for 121. Most of us are in desperate situations and can’t wait forever for this. It seems like we’re getting more support, but I want to hear from IE if there is a push to actually get this passed or if this is yet another symbolic introduction of the UAFA without any expectation that it will get to a vote this year. I know from my perspective I’m feeling impatient and angry and just sick of all this. I also know that IE knows a million times more about this than I do and I want to know what the strategy/plan/expectations are for this year.
Comment by tyler — February 26, 2009 @ 1:06 pm
Congress member Corrine Brown of Florida’s third district has cosponsored UAFA for the past years, but has not done so yet. If you are in her district please EMAIL OR CALL HER and ask her to become a cosponsor of the bill.
Comment by Rob — February 26, 2009 @ 2:09 pm
The current numbers are actually very good when you consider that it is 1) only two weeks since the bill was re-introduced in the House and Senate, and 2) when you compare it to the final tally from the previous years. Let’s look at some figures from Wikipedia: the highest result achieved to date in the Senate was 18 back in 2007. With 14 cosponsors currently on board, we already have the second-highest numbers, ONLY TWO WEEKS after the bill was re-introduced. As for the House, I could see us equalling and surpassing 2003’s numbers of 129 when it comes to the final results. There’ve got to be some moderate Republicans and if the UAFA bill is part of a larger immigration reform package, chances are that some Democrats who don’t really care about UAFA either way will still vote for it. The momentum certainly seems to be with us but I still think we’ll be lucky if it comes to a vote as early as this summer.
Comment by Tim — February 26, 2009 @ 3:27 pm
Thank you for the information. But it seems if there’s not enough number of supports. It’s hard to be passed this year. It still a long way ……
Comment by Dennis — February 26, 2009 @ 6:44 pm
Stay positive please and gather our effortssss on reaching out the support from every possible aspect. That’s how American Dreams work out.
Comment by Kim — February 26, 2009 @ 8:45 pm
A well-connected immigration attorney I consulted with 2 days ago told me that the UAFA is a very long term prospect to help gay couples – she said its certainly not going to happen within the next two years (our personal timeline). The reality she said is that there aren’t enough sponsors to overcome the fact that most states still don’t recognize gay couples – so, how could there be support at the federal level? Unfortunately, this makes a lot of sense. Prop 8 anyone? And that was our most progressive state in the union. This isn’t about “staying positive” or giving false hope – its about making the best decisions in time-sensitive family matters given an unfortunate political and social reality in the USA. The Civil Rights Act came to fruition only when an experienced legislative hand (LBJ) took over after Kennedy was assassinated right after Howard Smith a Democrat said he was going to keep the bill in the rules committee (after it did make it out of the judiciary) forever. LBJ had a war in Vietnam and didn’t need the distraction of riots, mass protests, etc. to continue, so he wanted the CRA of ‘64 passed ASAP. We have no such momentum in the midst of a recession, despite whatever calls have been made by me and friends.
Chairman Leahy in the Senate might be more pro-active, if he doesn’t get his truth commission on the Bush administration maybe the Dems will give him some other prize to attack. But, I’m guessing Chairman Conyers in the House (14th District of Michigan – Big 3 auto country) is primarily concerned about getting appropriations out to his consituents. I’d like to see Immigration Equality update us on any political chips that are being used in the backroom deals to get the various bills (apart from stimulus blank checks) passed this year. People on this blog are presuming that mere communication to a Congressman is enough of a squeak to get the wheel greased – I don’t think so; immigration law is reactive and we alone aren’t enough of a catalyst (40 to 50,000 gay couples tops?? probably much, much less). I think finding some kind of leverage point for the 2010 elections that the entire gay community could agree on moves the dial more for the next 5-10 years, for example, like the ideas mentioned in the NY Times article mentioned by another blogger. If even half the gay community insists on the word “marriage” instead of some phraseology akin to civil pact – how can we expect to be granted anything close to what we need and want on federal issues like immigration when we don’t agree internally. It’s DOA.
American Dreams work out when your strategy, organization, and powerfully, aligned connections are more cohesive and best the forces arrayed against you.
Comment by Cathy — February 27, 2009 @ 1:13 pm
86 co-sponsors in the House now.
Comment by Tim — February 27, 2009 @ 1:31 pm
CATHY, YOU are so right.
No matter how much we post our hope here, it’s not enough.
If even the gay community does not support this and try to push the marriage thing. (My local gay papers never mention anything about UAFA). Staying positive and keep feeding ourselves false hope are not going to do it.
Can we at least first mobilize the gay community to fight for this bill first? This is more fundamental. We need to ask our own people to support us first.
Comment by Will — February 27, 2009 @ 5:38 pm
Thanks everyone for the excellent postings and dialogue and especially your outreach to Congress, the media, family, friends and community. A few thoughts on the postings above:
1. My favorite site for contact information of members of Congress is http://www.congressmerge.com . You can find your members by entering your address; the members are listed by state; and you can get local and national contact information.
2. The lists of cosponsors from the last Congress are at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.02221: (House) and http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01328: (Senate). You can find your members of Congress on congressmerge.com, see if your member was on in the last Congress, and if they’re not back on yet, remind them to come on. We always need new members too!
3. If your member is on, don’t forget to thank him or her! They need the positive feedback too, to know that they have constituents they need to fight for.
4. You can use our Take Action page at http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5036/t/1978/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=215 to send an email to your member of Congress – don’t forget to customize it with your stories. It’s your stories that turn Members of Congress into champions.
5. On that latter point, stories are so powerful that I use them to open every meeting with Congressional staff and members – and I start with the emails, postings, and phone calls we get every week asking us when UAFA will pass because our families are in such critical situations. Don’t hesitate to tell your members you need relief NOW.
6. While cosponsor numbers are an indicator of Congressional support, they are just that – an indicator. The number of supporters (and ultimately, votes for any piece of legislation) in Congress is always much bigger than the number of cosponsors; members choose not to cosponsor for many reasons even while privately committing to support a bill. They may want to avoid an unnecessary showdown in their district, limit the number of bills they cosponsor to be a more sought-after vote, or avoid cosponsorship because of a leadership position. (The latter is very common, making it all the more powerful that Leahy is our lead sponsor in the Senate and Conyers is an original cosponsor in the House this year).
7. Several staff at today’s briefing (see blog) indicated that their boss will return to cosponsorship soon, but that with so many critical bills moving (stimulus, omnibus budget, etc.) it is hard to get cosponsorship to the top of the office to-do list. Keep the phone calls and emails coming in to boost the issue up their list!
7. Last session in the House we had 69 original cosponsors with a May introduction, so 80 original cosponsors with a February introduction shows increasing unhesitating support. (In the Senate, Leahy introduced alone last Congress; this time he did so with 14 others).
8. We DO want your feedback on your member of Congress’ position on UAFA, it will help us improve our own advocacy and “vote count.” Please email any feedback you’ve gotten from members of Congress to amerrill@immigrationequality.org
9. On the key subjects of strategy and timing: Cathy has great points; we need not only supporters but “powerful, aligned, cohesive connections” (to paraphrase), which is why Immigration Equality is working with leadership, key committee members, and powerful allies who will be at the table when immigration legislation is developed. We know that passage of UAFA cannot come soon enough for our families.
Immigration rights for lesbian and gay couples can come through several avenues: passage of a stand-alone UAFA, inclusion of our families in comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) (as Senator Leahy has called for in remarks on CIR on the Senate floor – see earlier blog), litigation (which we will contribute to when our cases and input would be helpful), and administrative advocacy. As Rachel has said ” we are always exploring new opportunities to change the law as quickly as possible.”
Including ending the statutory HIV travel and immigration ban as part of President Bush’s international AIDS relief legislation in Congress last summer is an example of an opportunity that arose and bore fruit much, much sooner than the pundits predicted – an opportunity Immigration Equality helped create, then jumped on, pressed, and mobilized many allies around. Similarly, we will respond with intensity, focus, and vigor on ANY opportunity for winning rights for lesbian and gay binational couples. I’ve always liked working for smaller, “niche” organizations that can turn on a dime, regroup, and focus all resources on opportunities that arise – it’s an organizational recipe for success.
10. It would be difficult to “mobilize the gay community to fight for [UAFA] first.” I think that is too bad that LGBT organizations and media often focus on civil rights legislation in a heirarchical order, while all of us live much more integrated lives with employment, partnership benefits, family rights, tax discrimination, and many other issues affecting us simultaneously. The immigration rights community has a lot to offer us with its vision and constant press for “comprehensive” reform. I think we should mobilize the LGBT community to support LGBT immigration rights along with all other rights. Urge your local LGBT organizations to endorse UAFA and actively support it, and to insist that any immigration reform MUST include our families!
11. Many of you have emailed suggestions for winning success more quickly, and I want you to be assured that we are exploring all of these options very seriously – and leveraging allies and pro bono assistance to speed that exploration. Please keep the strategy suggestions coming (email is best for very specific suggestions, so we don’t point our opposition to the detailed pathways we’re seeking).
Thanks again for all your great comments – there are very few LGBT organizations with blogs with so many active, passionate voices – a sign that this issue is really brewing and moving.
Comment by Julie Kruse — February 27, 2009 @ 8:24 pm
Hi folks. Keep the info and thoughts coming. Cathy, you are not only so knowledgeable, but in my POV (point of view) also so right. But that does not mean we don’t keep up all efforts, and most importantly, all spirits. For example, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT AS OF TODAY, NY STATE HAS ONLY I SENATOR CO-SPONSORING THE BILL?? Folks….we have lots of work to do…. phone brigade: call baby call!!! Let’s make it a project to get the 2nd senator from NY state (at least, and not to start mentioning more of the house represenatative) in the “co-sponsor” list by “Ides of March”
Comment by Joe — February 28, 2009 @ 12:23 pm
Thanks everyone for the excellent postings and dialogue and especially your outreach to Congress, the media, family, friends and community. A few thoughts on the postings above:
1. My favorite site for contact information of members of Congress is congressmerge.com . You can find your members by entering your address; the members are listed by state; and you can get local and national contact information.
2. The lists of cosponsors from the last Congress are at thomas.loc.gov – previous Congresses – 110th – Uniting American Families Act (sorry, the computer is not letting me post actual links!). You can find your members of Congress on congressmerge.com, see if your member was on in the last Congress, and if they’re not back on yet, remind them to come on. We always need new members too!
3. If your member is on, don’t forget to thank him or her! They need the positive feedback too, to know that they have constituents they need to fight for.
4. You can use our Take Action page (click from Take Action Box on Home Page) to send an email to your member of Congress – don’t forget to customize it with your stories. It’s your stories that turn Members of Congress into champions.
5. On that latter point, stories are so powerful that I use them to open every meeting with Congressional staff and members – and I start with the emails, postings, and phone calls we get every week asking us when UAFA will pass because our families are in such critical situations. Don’t hesitate to tell your members you need relief NOW.
6. While cosponsor numbers are an indicator of Congressional support, they are just that – an indicator. The number of supporters (and ultimately, votes for any piece of legislation) in Congress is always much bigger than the number of cosponsors; members choose not to cosponsor for many reasons even while privately committing to support a bill. They may want to avoid an unnecessary showdown in their district, limit the number of bills they cosponsor to be a more sought-after vote, or avoid cosponsorship because of a leadership position. (The latter is very common, making it all the more powerful that Leahy is our lead sponsor in the Senate and Conyers is an original cosponsor in the House this year).
7. Several staff at today’s briefing (see blog) indicated that their boss will return to cosponsorship soon, but that with so many critical bills moving (stimulus, omnibus budget, etc.) it is hard to get cosponsorship to the top of the office to-do list. Keep the phone calls and emails coming in to boost the issue up their list!
8. Last session in the House we had 69 original cosponsors with a May introduction, so 80 original cosponsors with a February introduction shows increasing unhesitating support. (In the Senate, Leahy introduced alone last Congress; this time he did so with 14 others).
9. We DO want your feedback on your member of Congress’ position on UAFA, it will help us improve our own advocacy and “vote count.” Please email any feedback you’ve gotten from members of Congress to amerrill@immigrationequality.org
10. On the key subjects of strategy and timing: Cathy has great points; we need not only supporters but “powerful, aligned, cohesive connections” (to paraphrase), which is why Immigration Equality is working with leadership, key committee members, and powerful allies who will be at the table when immigration legislation is developed. We know that passage of UAFA cannot come soon enough for our families.
Immigration rights for lesbian and gay couples can come through several avenues: passage of a stand-alone UAFA, inclusion of our families in comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) (as Senator Leahy has called for in remarks on CIR on the Senate floor – see earlier blog), litigation (which we will contribute to when our cases and input would be helpful), and administrative advocacy. As Rachel has said ” we are always exploring new opportunities to change the law as quickly as possible.”
Including ending the statutory HIV travel and immigration ban as part of President Bush’s international AIDS relief legislation in Congress last summer is an example of an opportunity that arose and bore fruit much, much sooner than the pundits predicted – an opportunity Immigration Equality helped create, then jumped on, pressed, and mobilized many allies around. Similarly, we will respond with intensity, focus, and vigor on ANY opportunity for winning rights for lesbian and gay binational couples. I’ve always liked working for smaller, “niche” organizations that can turn on a dime, regroup, and focus all resources on opportunities that arise – it’s an organizational recipe for success.
11. It would be difficult to “mobilize the gay community to fight for [UAFA] first.” I think that it is too bad that LGBT organizations and media often focus on civil rights legislation in a heirarchical order, while all of us live much more integrated lives with employment, partnership benefits, family rights, tax discrimination, and many other issues affecting us simultaneously. The immigration rights community has a lot to offer us with its vision and constant press for “comprehensive” reform. I think we should mobilize the LGBT community to support LGBT immigration rights along with all other rights. Urge your local LGBT organizations to endorse UAFA and actively support it, and to insist that any immigration reform MUST include our families!
12. Many of you have emailed suggestions for winning success more quickly, and I want you to be assured that we are exploring all of these options very seriously – and leveraging allies and pro bono assistance to speed that exploration. Please keep the strategy suggestions coming (email is best for very specific suggestions, so we don’t point our opposition to the detailed pathways we’re seeking).
Thanks again for all your great comments – there are very few LGBT organizations with blogs with so many active, passionate voices – a sign that this issue is really brewing and moving.
Comment by Julie Kruse — February 28, 2009 @ 9:31 pm
Julie – Thank you so much for taking the time to write all that up. You answered many, many questions that I had. I’ll send the e-mail my congressman sent to the email listed. Thanks again for all your work and for keeping us updated.
Comment by Tyler — February 28, 2009 @ 10:32 pm
Hi Julie. Thanks indeed. I see now much more clearly the substance behind your reputation. You’ve described well the “horse trading” and posturing that is so inherent in politics. Your readership is gaining more and more clarity as to what we needs to be done in a concrete manner. Keep it up….thanks….and we will keep doing our part.
Comment by Joe — March 1, 2009 @ 8:04 am
Thanks to Julie. I think we should not only wait and hope. It needs to works hard to make the dreams come true. So I wish everyone keep going to do something to help. More thanks for the works and efforts from Immigration Equality.
Comment by Dennis — March 2, 2009 @ 10:55 pm
I am checking this and getting people to sign up everyday.
My girlfriends leaves to go back to England in 2 wks and well we are freaking out emotionally , financially, and well you would think it puts not needed stress to our relationship.. I am a performer(singer) and am trying to spread the word this way.. I believe Creative Loafing would be a great outlet everyone reads through that paper.. As long as we work together and help people to see .. We are not able to just live in whatever we want to call our relationship PERIOD >> SOS is all I am saying ..
Comment by shannon Fortner — March 16, 2009 @ 8:08 am
I think someone has already posted this before but here’s a list of the House Reps who are members of LGBT Equality Caucus but have not co-sponsored the UAFA bill yet. If you are in his/her constituent, please contact them and let them know that you support this bill and hope that they can co-sponsor it a.s.a.p. We need all the help we can possibly get – Thanks! Now all we need to do is pick up the phone or pen and contact your House Reps!
Rob Andrews (D-NJ)
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)
Robert Brady (D-PA)
Kathy Castor (D-FL)
Charles Gonzalez (D-TX)
Patrick Kennedy (D-RI)
Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH)
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)
Jim McDermott (D-WA)
Patrick Murphy (D-PA)
Frank Pallone (D-NJ)
Joe Sestak (D-PA)
Edolphus Towns (D-NY)
Comment by Simon M — March 24, 2009 @ 1:26 pm