Rabbi Jonathan Gerard has served Temple Covenant of Peace in Easton, PA since 1995. He is a 1976 graduate of HUC in New York and earned his DMin from Andover Newton Theological School in 1990.

At the base of the Statue of Liberty is a plaque that contains a poem written by a woman whose family traced its roots to the earliest settlement of Europeans in America. It is called “The New Collosus” and begins “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” When she wrote these words, Emma Lazarus captured an important aspect of American identity. From the day we leave our family to enter public school our teachers impress upon us the vision that we are a nation of immigrants. All of us came from somewhere else. This openness to newcomers, and the diversity it fosters, is part of what makes America distinct among the nations. (Only Israel can claim a similar foundation.) Even the French acknowledged this when they gave us this great green lady to welcome shiploads of immigrants into New York Harbor.

Yet Americans have never agreed on the issue of immigration. Benjamin Franklin sought to exclude from this country any immigrant who did not speak English—in other words, anyone not from Britain. Alexander Hamilton, on the other hand, sought to encourage immigrants to come and work the new nation’s factories. Let us agree on one thing here. When it comes to moral authority regarding immigration policy, the only Americans who deserve to be on the Committee are Native Americans. It is unseemly for anyone else to argue that it is right and just to close our doors to those who seek entry into this country. As Andrew Carnegie said, in a slightly different context, the rich should help build “the ladders upon which the aspiring can rise.”

Between Benjamin Franklin and Andrew Carnegie, I’ll take the latter as my beacon here. Why? Because America, this nation of immigrants, is also the strongest, richest, most moral (that’s not sayin’ much…) nation on earth. From a practical point of view, immigration has given us a large labor force and a diversity—of viewpoints and ideas—that has enabled capitalism to flourish in a manner less exploitative and more embracing than anywhere else (and that’s not sayin’ much…)

So who we are as Americans is inextricably bound up in our notion of being an immigrant nation. We have a right to be proud of this.

And yet today, as in the past, there are those who portray immigrants as bad people—people who don’t speak our language, who don’t share our values, who don’t follow our laws. Such thinking is unworthy of our forebears and is a betrayal of our highest ideals.

Take the most publicized cases—those who cross our southern border illegally. Because they are, by everyone’s agreement, “illegal,” some consider these people “criminal.” But the two terms are not synonymous. Those who come across our borders do not do so to rob our banks or kill our children or steal our social security numbers. They do not come to do insider trading or give false reports about weapons of mass destruction or even to speed on our highways. They come here to earn a living and to give their children a better education—the same reason our own grandparents came here—in pursuit of greater human dignity.

It is wrong to demonize them. So if these “illegals” are not “criminals,” how properly should we think of them? It is more accurate, more helpful, to think of them as “prisoners of war.”

They are seeking to escape the prison of poverty, the prison of ignorance, and, in some cases, the prison of persecution. It is a challenge, even a duty, of a prisoner of war to “escape.” And that is just what these people seek to do—at great personal risk. We should not be outraged that they seek to come here. We should be honored. And we should do everything we can to accommodate as many as we can.

How many? And how accommodate? Truly patriotic Americans can work together to figure this out. If regulating immigration has no moral legitimacy, surely it does have economic and political legitimacy. So different concerns will have to be addressed. Let me suggest four things as we proceed.

First, acknowledge that America is built upon a foundation of ideas, values, and labor brought here by immigrants. And our future will continue to depend upon this truth.

Second, with a birthrate that barely allows for “replacement,” we should reexamine our immigration quotas and increase them as much as is appropriate.

Third, we should establish criteria by which we would welcome those who come to our gates. I have already suggested three—those who are politically, economically, or racially “persecuted,” that is, prevented from achieving their reasonable human potential. If this sounds like it applies to everyone approaching our borders, then let’s realize the truth of this and view all who seek to come here with a new sympathy.

Fourthly, our country is huge and—between the coasts—our population is sparse. Countless cities and towns are depressed because people have left for the sunbelt and industry has left for cheaper labor markets.

We might, on the Israeli model, establish immigrant “development towns” and cities, like Sderot east of Gaza, where new Americans would agree to live for, say, a minimum of three years—enough time to learn English, get settled, join the local economy, and evolve a sense of  “home.” An influx of immigrants would be a boon to declining regions of the country that need more people and more industry in order to thrive.

Such development areas might attract those jobs and those industries that are now being outsourced to other countries. Suddenly, that labor force will be right here within our own borders. Fair labor practices must accompany such development, but this would engender high morale and a motivated work force and thus benefit both management and stockholders as well.

In addition, social workers and language teachers would have many new opportunities for meaningful work. We don’t have enough of either right now, but new jobs would attract new students in college programs, also stimulating growth in the education sector of the economy.

When we think of illegal immigrants we think about underpaid farm workers or an urban underclass alienated from society. But given the chance, these people, on the lowest rung of the social ladder, would gladly rise to the opportunity to live a better, more productive life. After all, that’s exactly what they risked their lives to do.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 9:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Ordained in 2003 from the Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion in New York, Rabbi Craig Axler is a Rabbi at Congregation Beth Or in Maple Glen, PA.

First time blogger - does that come with a special Shehecheyanu?

Monday of this past week, I had the amazing blessing of participating in a day of lobbying and awareness-raising on behalf of a coalition of religious groups that have come together under the banner of "Clergy for Fairness." The single issue that brought us to Washington from locations as diverse as Baton Rouge, Atlanta, Boston and Philadelphia was the proposed "Federal Protection of Marriage Amendment" (S.J. Res 1) which has been passed through the Senate Judiciary committee for a likely vote on the Senate floor sometime in the next few weeks. For those unfamiliar with the FMA, you can read the resolution and find out about its history by going back to the home page of the RAC. The basic premise though, as I said at the press conference on Monday, is an attempt to enshrine within the Constitution discrimination against a single group in American society by prohibiting any rights or responsibilities attached to marriage from being granted by federal or state constitutions to anything but the union of a man and a woman.

At the press conference, I was struck by the courage of the many clergy who were there at great potential risk to their own positions, speaking up on this issue even as the role of homosexuality and gay marriage is an active and controversial debate within their denominations. I was also so proud to be able to stand up as a Reform Jew, acknowledging the position of the Reform movement at the forefront of seeking to protect the rights of all individuals, and specifically to see the inherent kedushah (sanctity) in same-sex relationships.

A number of news stories have been written in the past few days reporting on the efforts of those of us who lobbied on Monday. (see the NY Times and the Forward) In the span of this week, a number of bloggers have picked up on the story. On the supportive side, I was encouraged to see links to the article by individuals who were pleasantly surprised to see religious leaders standing (for once) on the side of protecting the rights of the LGBT community. On the other side, I was amused to see the analysis of the Federalist Society, where they correctly identified that I had mistakenly called this the first instance of discrimination enshrined in the Constitution. Of course, the examples they offer are the age-discrimination for things such as voting and serving in political office, and the restriction that the President can only be a citizen born in the United States. The absurdity of the juxtaposition I think only strengthens the case against the FMA.

One final, personal note. I am writing this blog entry on my 10th wedding anniversary. As I think about both the simcha of this date for my wife and I, and the many rights and responsibilities that have come to us over the past 10 years of legal and recognized marriage, I am struck even more so by the inequality posed by the FMA and the lack of any similar rights and responsibilities afforded to my friends who are in long-term same-sex unions. I am excited to join with others across the religious spectrum to defeat this discriminatory legislation and to hopefully see a day when our society and government recognize the equal rights of all of its citizens.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 9:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Mark J. Pelavin is the Associate Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. He is one of the Jewish community's leading legislative strategists, and one of its senior lobbyists.

There is a very interesting “forum” on Religion and State in Israel taking place on the New Israel Fund’s Blog. It is a three-way discussion between Steven Mazie, professor of political science at Bard High School Early College; Avi Shafran, director of public affairs for Agudath Israel of America; and our friend Anat Hoffman, executive director of The Israel Religious Action Center. The thrusts and parries between Anat and Avi are especially interesting. Well worth reading. For more on the issue of religion and state in Israel, check out the website of our sister organization – the Israel Religious Action Center.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Mark J. Pelavin is the Associate Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. He is one of the Jewish community's leading legislative strategists, and one of its senior lobbyists.

Israeli Prime Minster Ehud Olmert yesterday addressed a special Joint Meeting of Congress. (For the yeckis (sticklers) among you: no, it was not a “Joint Session.” Only a Head of State can address a Joint Session; Israel’s Head of State is her President, not the Prime Minister.)

Olmert spoke powerfully about the impact of terrorism in Israel, about the U.S./Israel partnership, and about this plans for the future. In perhaps the central section of his speech, he said:

Painfully, we the people of Israel have learned to change our perspective. We have to compromise in the name of peace, to give up parts of our promised land in which every hill and valley is saturated with Jewish history and in which our heroes are buried. We have to relinquish part of our dream to leave room for the dream of others, so that all of us can enjoy a better future. For this painful but necessary task my government was elected. And to this I am fully committed.

We hope and pray that our Palestinian neighbors will also awaken. We hope they will make the crucial distinction between implementing visions that can inspire us to build a better reality, and mirages that will only lead us further into the darkness. We hope and pray for this, because no peace is more stable than one reached out of mutual understanding not just for the past but for the future.

The entire speech is well worth reading. The text is available here.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 3:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Samantha Pohl is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of Brandeis University.

Yesterday, in a statement from United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, he recognized B’nai B’rith for its contributions to the UN and, due to its influence, asked for the organization’s assistance in both promoting a solution to the conflict occurring in the Middle East and preventing genocide and other crimes against humanity.

His address to the B’nai B’rith International Annual Mission to the United Nations in New York, delivered by Angela Kane, Assistant-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, demonstrates the strong relationship B’nai B’rith has forged with the UN. This is a remarkable accomplishment for any organization, but particularly for a Jewish organization.

The Religious Action Center staff and the Commission on Social Action recently had the great opportunity to hear from Sybil Kessler, the Director of United Nations Affairs with B’nai B’rith International at a meeting of our Israel and World Affairs Task Force. We heard firsthand about the important work Ms. Kessler and B’nai B’rith International do to make the interests of Israel and the Jewish people known in the UN, and were deeply impressed and appreciative of her work.

Kudos to Ms. Kessler and B’nai B’rith!

Posted by Religious Action Center at 7:47 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Donald Cohen-Cutler is a Legislative Assistant for the Commission on Social Action of Reform Judaism. He hails from the University of California, Davis.

On May 5, 2006 I was invited to speak to 3GNY and Makor about the situation after the Darfur rally.  I agreed without knowing what this presentation would do for me.

3GNY is a New York based group for grandchildren of Holocaust survivors.  They asked for a speaker to discuss the aftermath of the April 30 th Darfur rally in Washington DC; legislative objectives for the crisis; and updates regarding the situation on the ground in Sudan and Chad. More, they specifically requested this report from a fellow “3G-er.”

I had not thought of my work on Darfur to be directly connected with my grandparents’ survival of the Holocaust.  It may have something to do with the fact that I try to separate my personal feelings of connection to the Holocaust from my work in general.  It could also be because I believe the Holocaust has been over taught in the Jewish world.  Additionally, while thoughtful exposure to the most traumatic event in modern Jewish history is necessary sadly - most of the time - the Holocaust is not treated with requisite educational respect. For these reasons, I have kept this aspect of my family history away from my work.

However, I do identify as a grandchild of Holocaust survivors, and understand that I represent the last generation to know people who lived through the camps and fought against the Nazis.  It is upon my generation’s shoulders to ensure the longevity of their story.

Speaking with 3GNY forced me to think about these personal connections and how they relate to the Reform Movement’s (and my) work on Darfur. 

At the event we spoke about the politics and the humanitarian disaster and the killing.  We spoke about the advocacy and the fund raising that can be done to help.  But we also talked about how and why we are connected to genocide.  Should a group whose grandparents’ lived through a defining moment in global history be more connected to a similar even in the present?  I would argue no.

The Jewish community has called upon the rest of the world to state “Never Again” to genocide.  However our generation is far enough removed from the horrors of the Holocaust that “Never Again” is not a demand we place upon the rest of the world but an obligation we place upon ourselves; perhaps as a way to honor the memories of our grandparents and their families.  Perhaps by speaking out about this genocide, there will not be a “3G” Darfurian living far away from where his grandparents lived writing about the issues that still plague his community.

This event with 3GNY forced me to understand that while the Holocaust does not define me as a Jew and as an Advocate, the Holocaust is still a factor in my drive for social justice.  They say six million Jews were killed in the Holocaust.  Luckily it was not six million and two; for if just two more people were lost, I would not be here. 

The 3G community in New York does not have a deeper connection to genocide than any other human being, but we know the faces of those whose lives were saved from extermination.  These faces are not emaciated skeletal figures, but loving tender eyes of our Omas and Opas, of our Sabas and Saftas, of our Grandmas and Grandpas.

So we fight for our grandparents and for the grandchildren of all Darfurians.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 7:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Mark J. Pelavin is the Associate Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. He is one of the Jewish community's leading legislative strategists, and one of its senior lobbyists.

On the web, the challenge is not finding information; it’s finding good information. Some of the best websites mix presenting stories which appear elsewhere with pointed commentary. They direct you to information you may have otherwise missed, and provide analysis. Two of the sites I look at every day provide that type of treatment to the intersection of religion and politics.

The Revealer’s“About Us” page announces that it is “a daily review of religion in the news and the news about religion.” That’s accurate enough, but it does not give a feel for the richness of the site, which often has stories I don’t see anywhere else. It is an especially good source for “think pieces.”

I also like Get Religion, which takes its name from ubiquitous CNN pundit William Schneider’s observation that “press just doesn’t get religion.” Get Religion focuses on analysis of media coverage of the religion. For example, today the site has an article “ The Alleged Rise of the Religious Left” which critiques a recent Washington Post front story on the political implications of new activity by progressive religious organizations. What “Get Religion” adds is an analysis which compares similar stories from the New York Times and the Washington Times.

Both sites have RSS feeds, which makes it very easy to scan their new postings. (More info on RSS)

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Mark J. Pelavin is the Associate Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. He is one of the Jewish community's leading legislative strategists, and one of its senior lobbyists.

Since we launched the RAC Blog I find that I spend more time reading other blogs.  Over the next few days, I thought I would point RAC Blog readers to a couple of the blogs I look at regularly. 

The Jewish FundS for Justice have recently launched their own blog – jspot.org

Much of the writing is done by JFJ staffers (and, full disclosure here, friends) Jeremy Burton, Mik Moore, and Rabbi Jill Jacobs.  All three are consistently interesting, thoughtful and provocative.  I always read, and learn from, Jill’s weekly post on the week’s Torah portion, and often shamelessly borrow from it in my own teaching.  There is almost always something new – and something worth reading – on Jspot, which provides a liberal, Jewish prism for looking at a wide array of issues, with a focus on labor and economic justice concerns. 

If there are Jewish (or other blogs) you find particularly interesting, I hope you’ll call them to our attention by leaving a comment below.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 12:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Rabbi Richard Address is the Director of Jewish Family Concerns for the Union for Reform Judaism.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 12:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Samantha Pohl is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of Brandeis University.

Congrats, ladies, you are now supposed to live your life to ensure the health of your uterus.

That was the headline of an email I received from a friend and colleague yesterday afternoon. I had to read on; to what could this possibly be referring? As it turns out, the federal government has just issued a series of guidelines that according to the Washington Post “ask all females capable of conceiving a baby to treat themselves -- and to be treated by the health care system -- as pre-pregnant, regardless of whether they plan to get pregnant anytime soon.” In an attempt to curb high rates of premature birth, low birth rates, and infant mortality, the groups involved with the creation of these guidelines (including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) hope to help women modify behaviors, health conditions and risk factors to ensure infant and maternal health.

So what does this mean for women of reproductive age? The guidelines call for all women between first menstrual period and menopause to take folic acid supplements, refrain from smoking, maintain a healthy weight and keep chronic conditions such as asthma and diabetes under control. While the guidelines’ suggestions are essentially part of good general health measures for any woman, or person, there is no reason to tie them to a woman’s potential to reproduce.

To read more on this topic, checkout one of the many articles from the Washington Post’s Health Section this week regarding pregnancy and teen sex. These articles discuss the mixed messages teens receive regarding sex and compare rates of unwanted pregnancies and STDs to Western European countries.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rabbi Rebecca Yaël Schorr is a rabbi at Congregation B'nai Tzedek in Fountain Valley, CA and is the incoming President of the Orange County Board of Rabbis.

This piece has been republished with the permission of the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles.

As I drove my children home after school, how many men, women, and children were fleeing from their homes this week in Darfur? As I tucked my children snuggly into their beds, how many mothers crept out of their refugee camps at night to gather firewood to keep their children warm this week in Darfur? As I flew to our nation’s capital in support of our government’s commitment to justice in Sudan, how many villages were burned to the ground by the government-backed militia (known as the Janjeweed) this week in Darfur?

In the shadow of the Jefferson Memorial and with the Washington Memorial just across the Basin, we ended Shabbat. Bimheira v’yameinu yavo eileinu, im mashiach ben David. Speedily in our days, may [Elijah the prophet] come with the messiah, son of David.

These words we sing as we usher in the new week. Hoping, praying that this will be the week that will see the coming of the messianic time. This week is different. We, who stand over two hundred strong, are thinking of a people thousands of miles away who truly need that peace and need it right now. The victims of the genocide in Darfur so very present in our hearts as we pray together.

A military helicopter flies directly over us and we pay no attention. If I were a woman in Darfur, that very same helicopter would strike fear within me. A military helicopter in Darfur signifies not safety but the beginning of a raid by the Janjeweed. How fortune I am, O God, to be a thousand worlds away. And how ashamed I feel to even utter those words.

I sleep fitfully. What am I doing here? What real impact will this gathering really have? Several thousand people gathering on the Mall cannot end the suffering. Our Tradition gives us only two instances where we are actively commanded to seek out opportunities to fulfill a particular commandment. They are “Seek peace and pursue it” (Psalms 34:15) and “Justice, justice shall you pursue” (Deuteronomy 16:20). Rodef. To pursue. To be one who pursues peace. One who pursues justice. Pursue – it is such an active word. During the restless night, I realize that my presence here is not merely a symbolic act nor should I view it as an act of passivity. Rather, by being here and joining my voice with many others, I have become a rodefet. I have become one who pursues.

This is to be a family reunion of sorts. I am joined by my mother, my brothers, my sister, one of my sisters-in-law, and her cousin. Completing the Amado-Einstein-Schorr group is my young cousin whose mother had introduced me to activism by encouraging me to write letters on behalf of the Refusniks two decades ago. How proud I am to stand with over one hundred Jews from Los Angeles, an effort coordinated by Jewish World Watch and the Jewish Federation-Council of Greater Los Angeles.. And our group stands amongst groups from congregations, day schools, Hillel students, JCCs and other Jewish groups from all across North America. Over fifteen-thousand people. Young and old, we have come together with a unified purpose.

Jews marching for Jews. Self-explanatory. But Jews marching for African Muslims? Why? Why stand up for a group of people whose lives have no impact on mine?

Because my faith demands it of me. Because I cannot be angry at the world for allowing six million of my people to be slaughtered if I am not willing to raise my voice in protest for the Darfurians.

The association of Darfur with the Shoah is a natural one for us. When we hear phrases such as ‘ethnic cleansing’ and ‘relocation,’ we know all too well what these euphemisms are concealing; the organized destruction of a people.

Many of the signs reflect our natural instinct to draw connections between the realities of Darfur and the memories of our recent past. Signs bearing the slogans “Never Again,” “Never Forget,” and “Save Darfur” are in English and Hebrew. And there are others. A refugee from Liberia, with the Texas flag draped over his shoulders, carries a sign declaring “I saw it, I escaped it, stop it now!” Three co-eds from the University of Iowa drove all night to hold signs that say “to remain silent and indifferent is the greatest sin of all.” A high schooler from Boston wrote the words “Schindler’s List, The Killing Fields, Hotel Rwanda. Don’t wait for the movie.”

Now what? What do I do now that the March is over? I don’t have the international respect of Elie Wiesel whose mere presence is a constant reminder of what can happen when the world remains silent in the face of evil. I don’t have the political clout of Senator Barack Obama whose impassioned words elicited great cheers from the crowd. Nor do I have the popular attention of George Clooney whose recent visit to Darfur just last week will do more to forward this cause then a dozen marches. What I do have is the desire to see the genocide brought to an end. I can write to President Bush. I can make responsible choices in the voting booth. I can stand in front of the consulates of NATO and African Union nations, Russia, and China between now and June 2nd, a day that corresponds this year with the day we celebrate God’s revelation at Sinai. How fitting that these visits, as suggested by Rabbi David Saperstein of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, will “be taking place during the counting of the Omer, in which we move from the freedom given us at Passover to the responsibility that came with accepting God’s laws at Sinai.” I can receive regular email updates from the Save Darfur Coalition and American Jewish World Service. I can encourage my colleagues to join with the more than forty Southern Californian congregations who have already become active members of Jewish World Watch. And I can continue to talk about Darfur with my friends, congregants, and neighbours.

Speedily in our days, O God, speedily in our days may this nightmare end and may our brothers and sisters in Darfur know enduring peace. May this be Your Will.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 3:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Jennifer Gubitz is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of the Indiana University.

With only two weeks remaining before the expected June 5 th Senate vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment, two prominent women with very close connections to the current Administration are speaking out. Who are these high-ranking women who have the “President’s Ear?” First Lady Laura Bush and daughter of the second-in-command, Mary Cheney.

In an interview with “Fox News Sunday” the first lady discussing the Federal Marriage amendment said, "I don't think it should be used as a campaign tool, obviously." The issue “requires a lot of sensitivity to just talk about the issue — a lot of sensitivity," she said.

Mary Cheney, daughter of Vice-President Dick Cheney discussed the Federal Marriage Amendment with Fox News Anchorman Chris Wallace – allying herself with numerous civil rights and faith organizations who oppose the FMA:

“…amending the constitution with this amendment, this piece of legislation, is a bad piece of legislation. It is writing discrimination into the constitution, and, as I say, it is fundamentally wrong.

Now, I would certainly hope that, you know, and understand, this is an issue that Americans do disagree on and that we do need to debate and discuss. And I would certainly hope that those discussions would continue.”

To read the rest of this transcript: Mary Cheney on Fox News

To learn more about marriage equality and constitutional discrimination: Federal Marriage Amendment

Posted by Religious Action Center at 2:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Liz Kaplan is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of Williams College.

Wait a minute – did President Bush just use major network television time to address the nation on immigration? And the Senate has set aside lots of time this week to talk about immigration? What’s going on?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m pleased that this issue has made it to the forefront of national debate. Our nation’s immigration problems are overwhelming in scope and easy to sweep under the rug, as we have been doing for years. Furthermore, until last night, the President had consistently sidestepped taking a position on some of the most controversial immigration issues, with the one exception of announcing his support for a temporary worker proposal during the 2004 State of the Union.

Call me an idealist, but I was encouraged over the weekend by the announcement of the President’s Monday night speech. The President has made some positive statements about the contribution of immigrants to our nation’s culture and economy in the past, and has drawn criticism from some of the staunchest enforcement-only immigration reform advocates. Unfortunately, I was disappointed in the speech.

The use of 6,000 National Guard troops for this purpose is disheartening at best - these are troops who will not be helping to rebuild after hurricanes, floods, and other natural disasters, or whatever else comes around. It is true that we have hundreds of thousands of National Guard troops, but between the War in Iraq and Hurricane Katrina, can we afford these troops on the border? Not to mention the fact that chaos at the border hasn't suddenly increased in leaps and bounds - where were these troops during 2000-2005?

Worse, giving local law enforcement power to enforce immigration laws has terrible potential for abuse. In the aftermath of September 11 th, harassment against immigrants – and those perceived to be immigrants – has increased, and the danger of allowing members of local police forces to demand proof of legal residency and/or citizenship from people who look like they might be illegal immigrants has led the pro-immigration community to fight against these proposals in several immigration bills already. On the other hand, there are federal agencies that are supposed to be empowered, trained and equipped specifically to handle immigration issues. Why not just hire and train more federal agents? Is the real problem an unwillingness to spend the federal resources for this?

A temporary worker program is not necessarily a bad thing, but it would ensure that workers who participate don't actually get to move here seeking a better life, they just get to come here and work for low wages. This program might look good to some (though not all) businesses who rely on immigrant labor, but it doesn't do much good for our American-born low wage-earners that opponents of low-skilled immigration visas (such as New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristoff) would like to protect.

The most positive thing the President said was that he supports some kind of earned legalization in theory, and he did debunk the myth that such a program would be the same as an amnesty for people how have broken the law in his speech. However, this was the only part of the speech where he had no concrete proposals, not even outright support for the Hagel-Martinez bill (PDF) being debated this week in the Senate. So I guess comprehensive immigration reform advocates are still waiting to see what comes next.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 2:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sarah Burrows is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of George Washington University

As Jews in America, we understand the importance of separation of church and state, perhaps better than any other group. Here, we have been free to both pursue our faith and organize our communal lives without fear of government interference. And yet, in recent years we have seen increased efforts to corrode this ideal. With the rise of the so-called “faith-based initiatives,” some members of Congress and the Administration are looking to grant religious social service providers the right to discriminate on the basis of religion in hiring and firing practices. Imagine a job description for a teaching position for low income preschool students that includes the line, “People of the following faiths need not apply.” Furthermore, our experience teaches us that granting the right to discriminate based on religion would also permit religious groups to use government money to discriminate based on race, sexual orientation, and marital status

The truth is, the government can and does work collaboratively with faith-based organizations, many of whom should be commended for the important work they do providing necessary services to underprivileged Americans. Faith organizations that accept tax dollars do so with the understanding that they will not to engage in discrimination or proselytization, and that they will operate their social services in a secular manner. In fact, many faith organizations that accept government money to run social services understand that allowing such discrimination would undermine the vital work they do.

One way to fight these so-called “faith-based initiatives” is to show our elected officials that the religious community does not want or need such a change in policy. The Coalition Against Religious Discrimination (CARD) is a group of religious, civil rights, labor, education, health, and advocacy organizations, including the Union for Reform Judaism, who believe in defending the First Amendment and the religious liberty of all Americans. The coalition has created a sign on letter for clergy and social service providers opposed to such legislation. If you are a member of the clergy or a social service provider, I urge you to visit www.stopreligiondescrimination.com and join the efforts to oppose religious discrimination.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 1:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rabbi Richard Address is the Director of Jewish Family Concerns for the Union for Reform Judaism.

So, today is the day. The deadline of may 15 is upon us and hopefully
you, your mom and dad have made their choice from the myriad of options for the
Medicare "D" plan. Hopefully, your synagogue or communal organization
sponsored some sort of educational forum to try and de-code the "DaVinci"-esque
secrets of this new plan. If it was anything like the conversations I had with
my own mom, well, good luck.

The issue really is not the drug plan. There is the larger issue that so
far, our government has succeeded in ignoring. Another one of those"hot
button" issues no doubt that is politically sensitive in that it impacts most of
the population. Sooner or later, we, as a society need to address the
revolution in longevity that is now here. Sooner of later we need to pay very close
attention to what it will mean to grow older in the society. If the
statistics are anywhere near correct, and the baby boom generation, after 2010 (when
they begin to turn 65) will place unusual demands on entitlement programs,
then we continue to ignore this fact at our own peril as a society.

The implications for the Jewish community are staggering. Close to 20%
of our community is now 65 years of age and above, with the fastest segment
those over 75.Add the baby boom generation now coming into their sixties (one
person in the USA turns 60 every 7.5 seconds as of January 1st 2006) and mix
in a flat birthrate and you have an amazing recipe for demographic
restructuring. We all know people who are in this mix and who are in the process of
redefining what it means to work, retire, transition, and even what it may mean
to remain Jewish.

Yet, for the most part, our community is just as much in denial as is
the government. Maybe now is the time for synagogue and communal leaders to see
about developing discussions, strategies and creative responses to this new
revolution. It is past due to begin this dialogue. Please, before it is too
late!

Posted by Religious Action Center at 4:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

David Morrill Schlitt is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. He is a graduate of Columbia University in New York City.

In families where even a shtikl Yiddish is spoken, there is often a fixed ritual around sneezing.  In many households, a first sneeze elicits a “tsu gezunt (to [your] health)!” A second sneeze may be followed by a “tsu gezunt, tsu lebn (to health, to life)!” and a third sneeze will yield a “tsu gezunt, tsu lebn lange yorn (to health, to live a long life)!”*
Health, life and longevity—not bad things to invoke in response to a display of infirmity.  The White House, for its part, appears to have a slightly different reaction to infirmity, preferring instead to encourage… punctuality?

On May 9th, President Bush answered questions about Medicare Part-D, Medicare’s new prescription drug benefit, in the belly of the beast: a retirement community in Sun City, Florida.  The deadline to sign up for Part-D without a penalty comes this Monday, May 16th, and many (including the Religious Action Center have expressed concern about the rapidly approaching cut-off date, in light of the complications that have arisen around the program’s launch. 

A little background: Prescription drug coverage under Part-D is provided by a wide array of private plans, not by the Medicare program itself.  As a result, many seniors have cited difficulties in signing up for the program that was right for them—or even just signing up all.  According to a Kaiser Family Foundation poll released in February, when seniors were told that they had over 40 choices of drug plans in most regions of the country and asked if they thought this amount of choice was helpful, “two-thirds of seniors responded that having such a large number of choices makes it confusing and difficult to pick the best plan.” In a recent report from the House Committee on Government Reform, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Ca.) charged that private insurers have designed their plans to be deliberately unclear, limiting access to drugs through the use of prior authorization requirements and caps without disclosing these terms and qualifications to seniors. It should be no surprise, then, that fewer than one in four eligible low-income senior citizens have enrolled in Medicare Part-D and that, overall, Americans have enrolled in the program is numbers far smaller than projected. The disability rights community has expressed concern that large numbers of disabled Americans eligible for Part-D will be left behind as well.

But when seniors raised these issues with President Bush and suggested extending the period for which applicants might be eligible without being penalized, the President had this response: "Deadlines are important.  Deadlines help people understand there's finality, and people need to get after it, you know?"  The President’s response must have been a bracing wake-up call for all those slothful seniors, abusing their so-called “Golden Years” lolling about, listening to Chet Baker and not applying for prescription drug coverage.  Well, the jig is up, guys!

We’ve all been there:  It’s springtime, the weather’s warm, and you’re a senior.  You’ve got deadlines approaching, but you just don’t care… Because you’ve got a bad case of senioritis!  Who hasn’t wanted to slough off responsibility and be denied affordable health coverage for life-saving drugs every once in a while? I mean, isn’t that what Senior Slump is all about?

Despite calls from both sides of the aisle to extend the application period, the Administration is sticking to its guns in its apparent attempt to help retirees build character.  This week in Sun City, the President offered the aged a little dose of schoolmarmish tough love: You get your papers in on time, or else next year it won’t just be senioritis you’re suffering from… It could be congestive heart-failure!

*There is some dispute about what to do when the individual sneezes in excess of three times.  Some authorities recommend that the one responding to the sneezer simply return to “tsu gezunt” and repeat the routine as necessary.  Others recommend cherem (excommunication).

Posted by Religious Action Center at 7:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Jennifer Gubitz is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of Indiana University.

In the past week’s Torah portion, K’doshim, among a long list of prohibitions and commandments, we are taught to “Honor your mother and your father” (Leviticus 19:3).

Mother’s Day and Father’s Day are rapidly approaching. While it is wonderful to honor our parents with cards or gifts, consider using these days to brighten the life of another.

For example, participate in the Jewish Women International Mother’s Day Flower Project as a wonderful way to honor your mother for Mother’s Day 2006.

“Jewish Women International, founded in 1897 as B'nai B'rith women, honors the concept of tikkun olam — repairing the world-through education, advocacy and action.

Each Mother's Day, JWI delivers flowers to over 150 battered women's shelters across the United States as a gesture of support and encouragement to the thousands of women and their families who will spend this special day in a shelter.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 6:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Samantha Pohl is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. She is a graduate of Brandeis University.

Today marks a momentous day in our people’s history. Fifty-eight years ago, as Shabbat approached, a group of courageous Zionists gathered to write and sign a declaration of independence proclaiming the birth of the modern state of Israel. It was no coincidence that the state would be called Yisrael, meaning “to struggle.” The struggle to win Israel’s independence fifty-eight years ago was hard fought, and the continued struggle to seek peace since has been no less arduous. Yet, it is precisely this struggle to which we recommit ourselves each year at this time.

Last night Israel celebrated Yom Hazikaron, a memorial day for those who died fighting for the State of Israel. Just as Israel transitions from a day of sadness to a day of celebration, from Yom Hazikaron to Yom HaAtzmaut, we too recall that despite the struggle Israel has endured, there is hope for peace in Israel. And to this we say, ken yehi ratzon, be this God’s will.

View Haaretz’s article, Israel Marks 58th Independence Day with Countrywide Celebrations

Posted by Religious Action Center at 12:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

David Morrill Schlitt is a Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism. He is a graduate of Columbia University in New York City.

If an episode of Family Feud were to feature the category “Boring Things to Feature in a Wide-Release Film,” one could imagine a high-ranking response being something like “Industrial-Grade Adhesives” or “A Slideshow.” But the top-ranked answer, naturally, would be “Al Gore.” As it happens, a movie starring both Al Gore and a slideshow will be coming to a theater near you in just a few months (Industrial-grade adhesives were conspicuously absent from the production). And amazingly, this film, An Inconvenient Truth, may be one of the most engaging movies to come out of Hollywood this year.

On Wednesday, April 26 th, I had the opportunity to see an advance screening of An Inconvenient Truth arranged for environmental policy wonks, followed by a question-and-answer period with Vice President Gore and Davis Guggenheim, the director. The former-Veep was witty and engaging during the Q&A—he had the demeanor of a man grateful to be freed from the neutered vocabulary of the campaigning politician. And the movie’s tone exhibited a similar sort of passion.

An Inconvenient Truth chronicles the former Vice President’s efforts to raise awareness about climate change by barnstorming the globe and delivering a presentation he modestly refers to as his slideshow. In reality, Gore’s “slideshow” is a sophisticated production (complete with an original Futurama short) that lays out the science behind climate change and makes the case for an urgent and dramatic response. In An Inconvenient Truth, we see a side of Al Gore that many of us may not be used to: He’s both inspiring and inspired, and even funny and cool (albeit in the same way that your father the podiatrist is funny and cool).

Oh, and also: An Inconvenient Truth is scare-off-your-pants-terrifying. I work on environmental issues at the RAC, I spend a lot of my time working on climate change, I figured I had this stuff pretty much down—but An Inconvenient Truth changed the way I looked at the problem. Thanks to the film’s power and clarity, I left the theater with a renewed sense of urgency regarding climate change. The film’s website is helpful enough to offer some very useful ways to act on that sense of mission. The site also has links to the trailer for An Inconvenient Truth, for those of you that like your movies two minutes long and tiny.

“Climate change,” said Gore in the Q&A, “is not a partisan issue: it’s a moral issue—the defining moral issue of our time.” And the Veep, now done with politics, now a full-time advocate, calls on us to meet this challenge as a whole new Greatest Generation. That’s an epic mission he is charging us with. Except, instead of fighting in deadly hand-to-hand combat on the beaches of the Marianas Islands, we get to start out by watching a really neat movie. An Inconvenient Truth will be coming to theaters on June 2 nd.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)