by Steve Reinbrecht

Wow! So far in 2017, about 20 counties have joined the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] agency’s “287(g)” program to cooperate with federal immigration agents.

Although Berks County Sheriff Eric Weaknecht said in March that he wanted to join, our county is not on the latest list.

Berks is home to tens of thousands of Latinos, immigrants of all sorts, and Trump supporters – plus a world-infamous ICE child-detention center -- so you would think our community newspaper, the Reading Eagle, would follow the story.

The idea behind 287(g) is that if people don’t have documents, local deputies would keep them in jail, after they would normally be released, until ICE can show up. 

Although that seems reasonable to some, others criticize the idea. They argue that having local police involved in immigration enforcement will discourage vulnerable people, such as beaten wives and other crime victims, from seeking police help. Others say it violates the Constitution by detaining people without cause.

And some say they are breaking the law and should have their lives torn apart, forgetting that the United States has a proud history of overturning such unreasonable but steadfast laws – like those permitting slavery, or prohibiting women from owning property, or men from having sex with men, or white men from marrying black women, or lately, smoking pot. 

It should be easier to find out about ICE detentions in Berks County

by Steve Reinbrecht

A young man told me that federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers grabbed a friend of his off the street in Reading on Monday and took him to a facility in York.

My friend knows his two brothers as well. The detainee, an undocumented immigrant from Mexico, has a baby born here, and has no criminal history, according to my source.

I could not find him on the ICE “detainee tracker” website.

I sent an e-mail to ICE spokesman Adrian Smith, providing the details – the detainee's name, his country and when and where he was nabbed.

Smith called me Thursday. He helped me confirm that I was looking at the proper tracking page. But he said he could not provide information about the incident I was asking about.

He said to make sure I had the proper spelling for the man’s name.

I asked, what if an ICE agent had entered it improperly?

I told him it’s very important for the public to be able to quickly find out about anybody detained or arrested by the government, at any level.

We don’t want people disappearing. That would have been laughable to consider a couple of years ago, but anything seems possible now.

Smith told me he would check and call me back. I didn’t here back by Thursday night.

I also requested, under the federal Freedom of Information Act, a list of everybody ICE has detained in Berks so far.

On the phone, he said he couldn’t give that to me. I hope he sends me a more-formal response to my formal request. 

I find the whole method of getting public information from a government agency shockingly difficult.

I think Smith is trying to do his job within its restraints – he always calls me in response to my queries, in just that doing way more than many public servants have for me on this issue of recent federal immigration activities in Berks [District Attorney John Adams, Reading Mayor Wally Scott, Reading Police Chief Andres Dominguez Jr., and City Council President Jeff Waltman haven't got back to me, if my calls and e-mails are reaching them.]

Berks, Reading officials should say: Sanctuary or not?

by Steve Reinbrecht

Is Reading a sanctuary city? Do police in Berks County ever ask people about their residency or immigration status? I've been calling City Hall and the courthouse, but have not heard from the mayor or district attorney. I think it would be good for the community if they went on the record.

The federal government estimates that about 28,000 people in Berks were born in one of dozens of foreign countries.

I’d bet thousands of undocumented immigrants live here.

The idea of sanctuary cities, where local crimefighters do not ask about immigration or hold people for federal immigration agents, has gained attention after President Trump vowed to stop sending federal funds to them.

Supporters of sanctuary cities say that when local police cooperate with immigration officials or ask about residency status, it discourages people from reporting crime or testifying.

Reading is NOT a sanctuary city, City Clerk Linda Kelleher told me in an e-mail, without elaborating.

Mayor Wally Scott and Reading Police Chief Andres Dominguez Jr. did not return my calls.

The Berks Jail does not hold people for federal immigration agents if they have a “detainer,” Warden Janine Quigley told me in an e-mail.

“We do not hold individuals solely for this reason. Sometimes an incarcerated individual with a Berks sentence or Berks charges also has an ICE detainer; however, once the person is released on the local issue, we begin the discharge process.”

County Commissioner Kevin Barnhardt said the county jail hasn’t honored federal immigration detainers for about eight years, under a policy started by former Warden George Wagner.

District Attorney John Adams did not respond to my inquiries.

In 2010, Adams told bctv.org that being in America illegally does not violate local laws.

“Berks District Attorney John Adams said immigration issues are a federal issue and being in America illegally does not violate state law.

"There are actually provisions in the law to protect crime victims who are here illegally," he said.

“[Former] Reading Police Chief William Heim said illegal immigrants who are not wanted for other reasons should not fear reporting crimes to the police.

“The department does not check immigration status, even during traffic stops, because it considers that to be a responsibility of the federal government, he said."

State Sen. David Argall, who represents Southwestern Berks County, wants to punish communities that don’t cooperate with federal immigration agents.

Argall is a co-sponsor of Senate Bill [SB] 10, which would prevent municipalities from obstructing federal efforts to deport illegal immigrants.

“Under this bill, municipalities and counties would be prohibited from authorizing themselves as ‘sanctuary cities’ as a way to hinder federal efforts to prevent illegal immigration,” he wrote in a newsletter last month.

“Combating the issue of sanctuary cities is critical for the safety and welfare of our residents and communities.”

  

Berks County does have a contract with ICE to detain immigrant families.

Argall's article:

Addressing the issue of sanctuary cities

Immigration has certainly been an important issue that has taken the forefront of discussion at both the state and federal levels.

Over the years I have consistently supported legislation concerning illegal immigration and strict enforcement of provisions for employers and individuals who are found to be living and/or working in the United States illegally, and I will continue to do so. 

Senator Reschenthaler (R-Allegheny/Washington) introduced legislation, which I have co-sponsored, addressing the issue of sanctuary cities in Pennsylvania.  “Under this bill, municipalities and counties would be prohibited from authorizing themselves as “sanctuary cities” as a way to hinder federal efforts to prevent illegal immigration. 

Combatting the issue of sanctuary cities is critical for the safety and welfare of our residents and communities.

Reading Eagle story about new Berks GOP chief doesn’t mention Trump

by Steve Reinbrecht

Why did the Reading Eagle publish an interview with the new Berks County Republican Party chairman – but didn’t publish his comments on Donald Trump?

Donald Trump is the leader of the national Republican Party.

Media of all sorts have been writing about Trump.

You might think readers want to know: Does the new Berks GOP chairman, Joseph E. Rudderow III, support Trump?

Not all Republicans do. Maryland's Republican Gov. Larry Hogan said Wednesday that he will not vote for Trump.

Lancaster Online asked Dave Dumeyer about Trump after Dumeyer was elected chairman of that county’s GOP on June 3.

“This year, he [Dave Dumeyer] will lead the committee’s efforts to gather support for candidates in the heated November elections — including the controversial GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump and, in the highest-profile local race, state Sen. Lloyd Smucker in his bid for the county’s congressional seat.

“About a month after Trump’s last two GOP competitors dropped out, Dumeyer said he thinks local Republicans are warming to the idea of Trump’s candidacy and will see him as a better alternative to likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

““People are coming around, people who were supporting another candidate are saying, ‘Well, OK, he wasn't my preference but I can vote for him,'” Dumeyer said.”

So why did a string of Reading Eagle editors accept a story about the Berks GOP with no mention of the most recognizable man in the world?

The newspaper is fascinated with politics, right? It devotes a page every Monday to “The Briefing,” a “weekly report on government & politics.”

It routinely sends reporters to follow the herd in Harrisburg to cover state issues, like research for childhood cancer and time limits on prosecuting child-sex crimes.

On local politics, the reporter elicits this from Rudderow:

"Yes, it's exciting there's a national election going on, and sure, Berks County's going to be a part of it.”

Do the Reading Eagle newsroom leaders believe local politics doesn’t matter? That county parties are irrelevant? That no one cares how candidates for local positions are chosen and supported?

Maybe Rudderow didn’t want to comment about Trump. Who could blame him? But the Eagle should explain that it at least asked.

Is the media leadership trying to avoid embarrassing links between Trump and Berks County?

Is it because the Reading Eagle is scared or has no ability to cover sensitive, divisive and powerful events?

Report on Leinbach’s trip to Washington is worse than hot air

by Steve Reinbrecht

What kind of reporting is this, in this muddled Reading Eagle story about Republican Berks County Commissioner Christian Leinbach going to Washington?

He was there to oppose a federal law forcing regions to cut ozone levels by 6.6 percent.

The first paragraph says Leinbach visited the U.S. Senate environment committee's oversight subcommittee “to discuss how important infrastructure projects have been impacted by federal regulations.”

The story never mentions any of these infrastructure projects.

The article degenerates into an uncredited complaint about over-regulation.

"In 2015, 3,140 rules that were issued by federal agencies,” the text continues [with the badly edited bumping numbers.] “Those unfunded mandates cost local governments between $57 billion and $85 billion a year, according to the White House Office of Management and Budget."

If the anonymous writer is going to insert these factoids into his or her news story about Leinbach, it would be SO easy for the Reading Eagle website to link to the sources, here in the digital age.

That way we could check for ourselves how many of the 3,140 rules that were issued by federal agencies had to do with the topic at hand [the environment].

We could check to see if it really was the White House Office of Management and Budget that called the rules “unfunded mandates,” or if not, attempt to surmise who really is using those words, like the reporter, or a Leinbach press release.

We could try to figure out why, speaking of 2015, there was confusion about “between of $57 billion and $85 billion a year.”

According to the article, Leinbach said county officials “are concerned that the rule-making process and the enforcement mechanisms fail to consider the capacity of local communities to absorb the costs.”

The award-winning newspaper seems to quote Leinbach’s officialese verbatim, but here’s the translation:

“County officials think the federal government doesn’t fairly make or enforce rules to force people to stop polluting water and air.”

I’d really like to know what our elected county leader is saying, but I have to wonder, are these sentences in the Reading Eagle supposed to make sense, or are they just things to fill in the wide white spaces between ads?

In any case, it seems healthy to reduce ozone, according to the state:

“Maintaining concentrations of ground-level ozone below the health-based ambient air quality standard is important because ozone is a serious human health threat, and also can cause damage to important food crops, forests, and wildlife.

“Repeated exposure to ozone pollution may cause a variety of adverse health effects for both healthy people and those with existing conditions including difficulty in breathing, chest pains, coughing, nausea, throat irritation, and congestion. It can exacerbate bronchitis, heart disease, emphysema, and asthma, and reduce lung capacity. Asthma is a significant and growing threat to children and adults.”

For the good of Berks, Reading Eagle should admit the GOP screwed up

by Steve Reinbrecht

The editorial board at the Reading Eagle needs to have its collected heads examined. It wrote, for all the world to see, that Berks and Beyond residents have a “tough choice” for president this fall.

What sort of moral compass do they use?

I’m not going to defend Hillary Clinton. But by even saying it’s a “tough choice,” by opining that Trump is a viable candidate, the editorial board is giving a quasi-endorsement to the anti-POTUS.

The truth is: Thoughtful people along the entire political spectrum agree on one thing: Trump is unfit for the job. That our local newspaper would not condemn Trump in its editorial – especially because of the makeup of our residents -- is disgraceful. For a long time after the election in November, researchers will be checking which U.S. counties voted for Trump, and I hope Berks is not counted among them.

The editorial board is not using its bully pulpit for the best of the community. The problems plaguing Berks and similar rust-belt regions will be better addressed by someone not so apparently a “hater” of Mexicans, immigrants and Muslims.

“Trump has not consistently shown the sort of temperament we expect in a president,” the newsroom opinion leaders write.

What mush-mouth weasel words are these, coming from an institution whose tradition demands cutting the bullshit and stating the truth clearly for the benefit of society?

Where does the editorial board get its information about Trump’s temperament? Liberal and conservative media have generally agreed on a description of Trump, more truthful than the Eagle’s: a vicious, cruel, remorseless con-man who has scammed many Americans into believing he will somehow make life better for them.

ICYMI, in the midst of his campaign, with all eyes watching, he has gleefully mocked a person with a physical disability, used facetious arguments to impugn federal judges, and promised to use torture and kill innocent people. 

The Reading Eagle editorialists say they “still have many questions about the specifics of his policy proposals.”

Again, what sources do they read? It’s clear to the world Trump has no policy. The man says anything to get a headline and cheers or jeers at a rally, and that seems to be fine with his supporters.

The Eagle has more praise for Trump than criticism: “Despite skepticism from so-called experts at every turn and attempts to derail his campaign by GOP leaders, Donald Trump became only the second businessman without political experience to earn a major party presidential nomination.

“Wendell Willkie, who ran against President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940, was the other.

“It's worth noting that Trump, if elected, would hardly be the first to gain the presidency without previous political experience. The most recent was Dwight D. Eisenhower.”

But I don’t really believe the Eagle thinkers are as deluded as a plurality of the Republican voters seem to be. There are explanations other than ignorance for why people support Trump, which may explain the Eagle’s editorial.

Some want to retain the privilege and deference that white men have enjoyed here for centuries but they see as slipping away.

Some politicians think their support for Trump will at least keep their jobs secure, so they are making deals with the devil, from those at the highest levels of government down to the local yokels. They are putting their own interests over those of the people they serve.

The other sort of people who support Trump, even though they know he would be a terrible president, are those who are bigots themselves but have been repressed to say the things Trump spouts, outside of their close circles.

The U.S. – and I hope Berks County -- will yield to a progressive history, a world in which understanding and embracing tolerance, inclusion, plurality, globalism, technology, education and reliable infrastructure will be the only paths to middle-class quality of life.

Does Donald Trump really represent Berks County’s values?

by Steve Reinbrecht

Trump has made me realize how conservative I am.

Conservatism as an ideology values traditions, laws and mores that pass down through generations. Conservatives recognize the importance of time-honored customs including self-reliance, the rule of law, fundamental religious edicts, maintaining strong family relationships, and standards of speech and commerce and behavior.

Promoting such values, as many conservative leaders do, serves to keep society stable and preserve its accomplishments. Conservative practices engender the stability and confidence that business and carefree consumption depend on.

I'm glad many thoughtful conservatives have played important roles in United States leadership.

On the other hand are progressives -- inventors, visionaries, experimenters, entrepreneurs, artists, explorers, complainers, critics and disruptors. If not for these sorts, we'd have been hard-pressed to ever learn to control fire.

Balancing these strong currents of thought has made the United States great.

Enter Trump, the anti-conservative AND anti-progressive. Because he doesn't formulate his ideas, there is no way to consider them to see if they would work – the antithesis of thoughtful conservatism. And if he’s a progressive – the sort who have also led the fight for human rights – why is he so roundly rejected by Democrats?

Hillary Clinton is much more conservative than Trump. Republicans and Democrats alike respect things on my list here, though they argue over degree. Trump has molested each of these ideals.

And -- these are ideals I see proclaimed and followed by most people in Berks County. I’ll be very disappointed if we vote to make a deal with the devil.

• Sincere faith
• Fiscal prudence
• Not harming people because of their religion
• Not sexualizing one’s young daughters
• Not boasting of having slept with other people’s spouses
• The value of science
• Ethical business behavior
• Separation of governmental powers
• Deference to judges
• Polite discourse
• Sophisticated diplomacy
• The importance of good will and consensus in decision making
• Teaching people to respect other people
• Protecting the weak and vulnerable
• Having a government too small to find, apprehend and deport millions of residents mixed throughout the general population
• Keeping an American presence across the world

Can the Reading Eagle dig up detention center compliance reports?

by Steve Reinbrecht

Here’s some investigative journalism for the Reading Eagle to do.

Berks County owns a detention center near Leesport that federal officials are using to lock up immigrants – including mothers and young children – waiting for legal decisions on their status.

A “bi-annual” report from February 2009 prepared for federal officials says the center was “non-compliant.” It has pages describing deficiencies and recommendations. Were any followed up?

A lot of the report was redacted. Did the blacked-out sections describe conditions too horrible for the public to know about?

The Reading Eagle should track down the reports from 2011, 2013 and 2015. I could find no stories about any reports in the Eagle archives.

I did find an editorial in the Reading Eagle on Aug. 31, 2009, urging the Berks County commissioners to keep the center open, to retain 50 jobs. No comment on the ethics or the morals of keeping innocent people locked up.

The newspaper had a wire-service story in February 2007 about reports of abuse in the place.

The detention center and associated protests and legal procedures make up a major story at the center of a national issue, right here in Berks County.

It reflects on the national debates about whether we welcome people fleeing horrible conditions, and whether locking people up for victimless crimes is the best way to solve problems.

Why won’t the Berks County commissioners comment on why they continue to abet the detention of innocent people?

The Reading Eagle has dropped the ball covering this place, failing to find sources and press local officials about their stands on keeping the detention center open.

Compliance report from February 2009

Report from 2007

Wire story in the Reading Eagle from February 2007

Reading Eagle editorial Aug. 1, 2009

Most Berks state reps scold Obama over transgender bathroom letter

by Steve Reinbrecht

Five of the nine state representatives who represent Berks County signed a letter directly to President Obama opposing his administration’s directive to public schools to accommodate transgender students. 

Why do conservative lawmakers get so wigged out about anything to do with sex?

The letter, signed by 96 of the 203 Pennsylvania state representatives, plays to fear in a way that reminds me of the Republican push to require identification cards to vote. Just as voter fraud is practically non-existent, attacks by creeps posing as transgender people in public bathrooms are unlikely.

The lawmakers are pandering to fear of sexual deviancy to target a tiny, vulnerable population, perhaps 3 people out of 1,000, or maybe 1,200 Berks County residents – but certainly some students in every school district.

The White House can be accused of overreach for its letter, because most school districts are quietly and appropriately accommodating transgender students, defined in Obama’s letter as individuals whose gender identity is different from the sex they were assigned at birth.

In a Reading Eagle article, local school officials appear to be working on the issue with the best interests of the students in mind.

"This is a real concern about real people," Reading School Board President Robin Costenbader-Jacobson said. "We have more than 17,000 students, and we want what's best for every single one of them. We want to be sensitive to every person and not sitting in a seat of judgment."

As she notes, the issue is truly one of compassion. Any parent can imagine the struggles of a young person who realizes ze is gay or feels like ze is in the wrong body.

But the tone of the lawmakers’ letter is one of persecution, linking transgender people to perverts.

“We are writing to express our extreme outrage at the legally spurious ‘Dear Colleague’ letter issued jointly by the Department of Education and the Department of Justice on Friday, May 13, 2016 regarding the use of bathrooms by transgender students in public schools,” says the lawmakers' letter.

“Plainly, this directive will allow men to go into legally sex-separated bathrooms with young girls. The parents of these young girls are rightly concerned about your policy and its implications for their daughters’ safety.”

I don’t see that happening in any properly run public school.

And believe me, America is the most uptight country I’ve ever visited about bathroom purity. These letter signers probably wouldn't be able to go in some of the public restrooms I've used in Japan, Brazil, Paris, the Bahamas.... 

Why doesn't the Reading Eagle write about politics in BERKS?

by Steve Reinbrecht

Reading Eagle reporter Karen Shuey wrote an 800-word front-page story that ran Monday about the upcoming state Senate race in Pennsylvania between Katie McGinty and Pat Toomey.

That’s bound to be an important race. But we can get that news and analysis from many sources.

And then we get almost a page’s worth again of state politics on Page B3, more political words – “10 takeaways from the Pennsylvania primary” -- from News Editor Ron Southwick, who provides insights such as this:

“The Reading Eagle interviewed voters at polling places across Berks County on Tuesday. They have different ideas about who would be best to lead the nation. But voters expressed a shared sense that things need to change.”

Instead of writing stuff we can read in many other places, why not write something valuable, that no one else knows? 

Why doesn’t the Eagle publish some big, long stories about politics in Berks?

Especially, why did no Democrats oppose any of the Republican state representative incumbents in this primary? There are more registered Democratic that Republican voters in Berks.

Some people are not happy with how our state government is working. But nobody ran against these incumbent Berks GOP state politicians:

David G. Argall

Barry J. Jozwiak

John C. Rafferty Jr.

Jerry Knowles

Mark Gillen

Jim Cox

David Maloney

Ryan E. Mackenzie

Gary Day

Of course, no one ran against the incumbent Democrats, either:

Judy Schwank

Tom Caltagirone

Mark Rozzi

Isn’t that a big story? That, on the state level, democracy has ceased in Berks County?

Maybe exploring this issue would demand original thinking and cultivating new sources. But it would be news worth reporting. News-gathering resources are too short these days to waste them following the herd.

I'd also be happy if I heard Harry Deitz say, just once, "You're right, Reinbrecht. We're just playing at being journalists, for the easy jobs and status, and because we do what we're told."

Pissed off by Berks lawmakers’ anti-abortion putsch? You can’t get rid of them

by Steve Reinbrecht

Berks County’s state representatives split 7-2 on party lines this week to advance a bill that would further restrict abortions in Pennsylvania.

All seven Republicans who represent part of Berks voted against a motion to hold hearings on the bill:

Barry J. Jozwiak          Jerry Knowles           Gary Day

Mark Gillen                   Jim Cox

David Maloney             Ryan E. Mackenzie

Berks Democrats Mark Rozzi and Thomas R. Caltagirone voted to delay the bill and hold a public hearing.

Republicans Cox and Day are on the Health Committee and joined the 16 members who successfully voted Monday to move the bill – introduced four days earlier, on Friday, April 1 – out of the committee.

Gov. Tom Wolf is likely to veto it if it reaches his desk.

If you oppose this Tea Partyish activity by your Republican state representative, tough luck. 

All of those who represent Berks are running unopposed in the primary and general elections.

On the abortion bill, critics wonder why there is such a hurry and warn that this fast-tracked bill reflects nationwide efforts to chip away at women’s right to abort their fetuses.

According to Pennlive, the bill, if adopted, would make some of the biggest changes to abortion policy in Pennsylvania in the last 20 years.

Opponents including Planned Parenthood said it would “mark the biggest attack on abortion rights in Pennsylvania since the current Abortion Control Act took effect in 1994,” Pennlive wrote.

The ever-squeamish Reading Eagle had a wire story about the repellent subject, which included no Berks elected officials.

For their comment, Berks voters could go to Pennlive.

"One Republican member, Rep. Jim Cox of Berks County, told about he and his wife's rejections of ‘options’ doctors presented them with after a diagnosis at 20 weeks of severe health problems with one of their five children.

“Cox said they did not abort, and his family has been made the richer for it.

“ ‘To me, it's as simple as right and wrong,’ " Cox said. " ‘We should be in a position, as a legislature of creating policy that defends life, and if there's any question as to viability that should be left in God's hands.’ "

Always with the God thing – for eons, a comforting message from the powerful to the powerless – if you do what I say, the supernatural force will come to our rescue.

The Berks Democratic Party is wasted not to have anybody to oppose Republicans – they must see this opportunity – coattails are flapping.

And who’s happy with state government as it stands? What other remedy but to vote the bums out?

Tom Caltagirone challenges 238 of Mallory Scott's signatures

by Steve Reinbrecht

State Rep. Tom Caltagirone has represented most of Reading in Harrisburg since Nixon was in office.

He’s not often challenged, but Mallory Scott, the brother of Reading Mayor Wally Scott, has filed to run against him in the primary April 26.

Caltagirone has been elected to the 127th District, which also includes Kenhorst, every other year since 1971.

On March 1, Caltagirone filed an objection to Mallory Scott’s nominating petition in Commonwealth Court.

Scott needs 300 valid signatures to get on the ballot. He submitted 427 signatures, according to William Andring, Caltagirone’s attorney.

Caltagirone is challenging 238 of them, Andring said.

"It [the nominating petition] is loaded with bad signatures."

These sorts of challenges are typical in many elections, Andring said.

The city is strongly Democratic. Nobody has challenged Caltagirone in a primary or general election since 2004.

In 2004, Caltagirone beat Green Party candidate Stefan Kosikowski 13,300 to 1,300 in the general election.

He beat Republican Francis Acosta 7,000 to 2,400 in the 2002 general election. Acosta later was elected president of City Council. He started a federal jail sentence earlier this month for his part in a bribery scheme.

Caltagirone beat Republican Ann B. Chapin 9,300 to 3,100 in the 2000 general election.

The seat may be unopposed in November general election. The one Republican candidate, Evelyn Morrison, dropped out in February.