Apartheid in Arizona

[Watcher]

The U.S. does have a National ID called the REAL ID. The law was passed in 2005 and every state promptly proclaimed they weren't going to follow it. Google REAL ID Act to see how unpopular this ideal is, hint both the ACLU and the Cato institution hate it.

[CloudFlare]

This is the goddamned truth.

Damn straight. If we can't agree on anything else in this thread, we can agree on this.

[horangi]

The U.S. does have a National ID called the REAL ID. The law was passed in 2005 and every state promptly proclaimed they weren't going to follow it. Google REAL ID Act to see how unpopular this ideal is, hint both the ACLU and the Cato institution hate it.

Yup, I remember it though I was living out of country at the time. Yet, I long ago reconciled myself with the fact that my own pragmatic political views don't totally line up with the generally more idealistic public at large- especially, as you noted with CATO and the ACLU, with those on the disparate extremes.

[一方通行]

oh yeah, lets fire the brown teachers too

The Arizona Department of Education recently began telling school districts that teachers whose spoken English it deems to be heavily accented or ungrammatical must be removed from classes for students still learning English.

State education officials say the move is intended to ensure that students with limited English have teachers who speak the language flawlessly. But some school principals and administrators say the department is imposing arbitrary fluency standards that could undermine students by thinning the ranks of experienced educators.

bastards.

[Annelise]

When Arizona refused to recognize Martin Luther King Day in the 1990's, the NFL pulled the superbowl from Phoenix to California. Folks are already calling for the All-Star game to go.

It seems some folks want a broader economic boycott, as well.

Grijalva’s boycott call has been joined by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (D), and several city legislatures are considering resolutions supporting economic sanctions, including L.A., San Francisco, New York and the District of Columbia.

“We need to explore all of our opportunities and avenues” to fight the law, said Christine Quinn (D), the speaker of the New York City Council. She said she would support a boycott of Arizona if it could fix a law that she called “unacceptable and un-American.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/95421-calls-to-boycott-arizona-divide-democrats

Whether or not Washington is up to it, this really may be the catalyst that causes them to tackle the issue after finance reform. Cities considering economic sanctions against states, even if it only ever amounts to political soapboxing and soundbytes, indicates (to me) a ridiculous level of chaos on this issue.

Now here's an opportunist:

A spokesman for Sen. Jeff Bingaman of neighboring New Mexico said the senator believed a boycott decision was up to others, but “welcomes” the tourists and businesses that “no longer feel comfortable going to Arizona.”

The president of U of A said this of the new law:

We have already begun to feel an impact from SB1070. The families of a number of out-of-state students (to date all of them honors students) have told us that they are changing their plans and will be sending their children to universities in other states. This should sadden anyone who cares about attracting the best and brightest students to Arizona.

Additionally, large numbers of UA students, faculty, staff and appointed professionals have expressed concerns that they or members of their families or their friends may now be subject to unwarranted detainment by police. Many of these individuals are from families that have been residents of Arizona for generations. While I am completely confident that no one need fear the way that UAPD will approach the application of this law, I nevertheless appreciate the anxiety that friends and colleagues are feeling. It is a concern and fear that no one should have to harbor.

ETA: More about possible economic impact..

Hard-scrabble Arizonans are happy to endure a bit of condemnation, particularly from the political Left; but they are less willing to be hurt in the pocket. And that is exactly how opponents of the illegal immigration law are now hoping to overturn it. On Monday, San Francisco's Mayor, Gavin Newsom, suspended all travel to the State by city employees. LA's city council is considering a formal boycott of Arizona businesses. Mexico has advised its affluent citizens not to holiday there.

These are ominous moves, because hotels and conference centres are Arizona's biggest single economic engine, providing jobs for 200,000 people. The Hotel and Lodging Association said yesterday that most of the state's upmarket golfing venues and spa resorts are now reporting a small, but growing trickle of cancellations. In Phoenix alone, at least six planned business conferences have been axed.

"Our members are getting a lot of feedback about this," said a HLA spokesman. "It couldn't have come at a worse time, to be honest. We really suffered during the recession, and were starting to see some green shoots of recovery. Now this. The irony is that a boycott particularly hurts the Hispanic community. General managers of hotels aren't going to lose their jobs, their hourly workers are. They're the ones whose shifts are going to be cut. Our industry is one of the biggest employers of minorities and by boycotting us, you hurt them.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-law-that-turned-arizona-into-a-pariah-state-1957311.html

[ztemhead]

by the way, WRT the Canadian Menace flooding our border from the North, I wonder if they'll be stopped and frisked every time one of them says "eh?"

Also, not that the legislature recognizes this, but well to do Cannucks purchasing vacation homes are one of the supporting factors of the local real estate market. Things would be a lot worse should they decide other parts of the Southwest are more inviting.

[ztemhead]

It seems some folks want a broader economic boycott, as well.

ETA: More about possible economic impact..

http://www.independe...te-1957311.html

running tally is 19 business events and $6 million in lost revenue.

Link here

Adam Goldman, a video game developer, is also finding his business at odds with SB-1070. He says, “Project Blue Ghost is our biggest development title to date.”

Production is set for October. The plan was for the 30 cast members to come to Arizona but Goldman says, “They don't want to come to be harassed and they don't want to be associated with anything in Phoenix right now.” He adds, “I have to do what's best for my family and staff and move production to LA.”

Goldman is taking the $2 million budget he has with him. He says he just hopes someday his home state becomes desirable again and asks people to consider that, “The citizens of Arizona didn't do anything wrong, the hard-working men and women of Arizona aren't to blame for this.”

but hey, we still have call center and landscaping jobs which will be unaffected...

[The_BlauerDragon]

It seems some folks want a broader economic boycott, as well.

I'm hoping that the entire country of Mexico (and all of South America) will choose to boycott this state.

Seriously though, I think the entire issue with this new law that they have shoved through is that it is one more example of legislation aimed at slapping a patch on a symptom without even considering taking action against the root cause. It's racist B.S. and it's a major step backwards to be sure, but worse than that it is completely off target. Yes, the language of the new law does mimic the Federal Immigration laws on a great many points. That's not the point though. The problem stems from Federal Immigration policies. If it were simpler, easier, less expensive, and less restrictive for people to immigrate to the U.S. legally... THEN we might have a just cause to start looking at the people that choose to come here illegally as having purely criminal intentions. Until we've reformed our immigration system to open the way for those who wish to be a part of this great nation to come here freely, openly, and without unneeded bureaucracy… Until that root cause has been addressed, then we don’t need inflammatory and hurtful legislation that threatens to drag us backwards into the darker ages of human history.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Until we've reformed our immigration system to open the way for those who wish to be a part of this great nation to come here freely....

I think that's been the problem.

IRCA was passed in 86 to accomplish what you described. The problem is that while it addressed the people who already were here, the promise to control who crossed the border after passage was ignored.

I agree that we need to make legal immigration/guest worker programs better. But that has to come after we can effectively control who crosses the border so that the people crossing have to comply with whatever programs we set up.

[The_BlauerDragon]

Look, all that I am saying is that there is a right way and then there is a racist way... and the approach that is being taken currently doesn't look very much like the right way to me. Lashing out at a specific race or demographic (even if they are home to the majority of offenders), is not going to solve anything. It's only going to make tempers flare and drag all of our good intentions through the mud and muck.

[Shryke]

I think that's been the problem.

IRCA was passed in 86 to accomplish what you described. The problem is that while it addressed the people who already were here, the promise to control who crossed the border after passage was ignored.

I agree that we need to make legal immigration/guest worker programs better. But that has to come after we can effectively control who crosses the border so that the people crossing have to comply with whatever programs we set up.

That's a pipe dream. It ain't gonna happen.

The problem with IRCA was that it didn't address DEMAND for illegal labour (or it did and wasn't enforced).

If you want to stop illegal immigration, you need to deal with why they come in the first place.

[Annelise]

I'm hoping that the entire country of Mexico (and all of South America) will choose to boycott this state.

I did read Calderon was urging wealthy Mexicans to boycott vacationing there. Although why they'd vacation in AZ in the first place puzzles me. If I were a wealthy Mexican, I'd be chillin' at a Mexican 5 star. :love:

So this law also makes it a crime to hire day laborers off the street. Interesting. I better make sure my AZ kin is aware of that. They're great ones for bitching about the immigration problem and then doing exactly that.

[ztemhead]

also a curious question as to whether wealthy Mexican nationals will continue to keep the bulk of their savings in American banks in Nogales, El Paso, and Tucson. One bank branch I interviewed at in Tucson told me once that of $130million on deposit, $60million was owned by non-resident aliens. Like Ross Perot's "sucking sound of jobs moving south of the border" we might start to hear the sucking sound of money moving back south of the border.

[Annelise]

Update:

Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed a bill modifying Arizona's controversial new immigration law, saying it will "make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal."

The governor's signature on House Bill 2162 modifies a measure signed into law by Brewer last week that requires police to inquire about the immigration status of anyone they reasonably suspect to be in the country illegally. Barring a successful legal challenge, the law goes into effect July 29.

HB 2162 bars race from being considered when deciding whether to inquire about a person's status, "except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution."

The bill also clarifies that law-enforcement officers shall inquire about the immigration status only of those they "stop, detain or arrest." The earlier bill simply said "contact." The change is designed to allay fears that officers would have to examine the papers of anyone they spoke to, including crime victims and witnesses.

"These changes specifically answer legal questions raised by some who expressed fears that the original law would somehow allow or lead to racial profiling," Brewer said in a statement.

To date, three lawsuits have been filed against the new immigration law, arguing that it is unconstitutional and will encourage racial profiling.

The changes came a week after Brewer signed Senate Bill 1070, a measure that has polarized residents and reignited the national debate over immigration policy. The law makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally.

HB 2162 also specifies that a law-enforcement officer would be required to determine the immigration status of a person involved in a municipal or county code violation. The change led to speculation that municipal code-enforcement officers might be required to inquire about residents' legal status, which the Governor's Office denied Friday.

"Police officers only," Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman said in an e-mail.

Kris Kobach, a Kansas law professor who helped craft the language in HB 2162, said in an e-mail that only law-enforcement officers certified by the Arizona Police Officer Standards and Training Board would be subject to the requirements.

Cities were still reviewing the new language Friday, and officials largely avoided comment. Ken Strobeck, executive director of the Arizona League of Cities and Towns, said that, in his view, HB 2162 does not represent an expansion or toughening of SB 1070.

Phoenix Police Chief Jack Harris blasted the immigration measures at a news conference Friday, saying they are unenforceable and will result in lawsuits against police officers no matter what they do. SB 1070 allows citizens to sue municipalities and law-enforcement agencies if they "limit or restrict" the enforcement of immigration laws.

Democrats in the state's House of Representatives criticized HB 2162 on Friday for what they called "an incredible broadening of the law," citing the language permitting immigration-status inquiries for city-code violations.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/05/01/20100501arizona-immigration-law-revised.html

[Old Nan]

If it were simpler, easier, less expensive, and less restrictive for people to immigrate to the U.S. legally... THEN we might have a just cause to start looking at the people that choose to come here illegally as having purely criminal intentions.

So, open borders?

How many countries in the world are easier to immigrate to than the United States?

[phoenix_rising]

Why is a State Law(with teeth) that mimics Fed Law(no teeth) immediatly branded as racist??? The Feds wont inforce immigration law unless it benefits the Fed. How many ILLEGAL aliens are receiving benefits from Az programs? They dont pay into the system, but drain it dry. The majority of ILLEGAL's in AZ are hispanic so naturally lets scream RACISM... ILLEGAL is from any country, not just Mexico...

AZ stands to lose money in the short term because of this bill passing. But they will save more in the long term. Social Security is broken as it is, ILLEGAL's can collect out of it also(without ever having paid in).

The front line police officer isn't as stupid as some people give them credit for. Metro Phoenix Police Depts are somewhere in the 30% latino range. Are the they going to let their fellow officers be draconian in checking for ILLEGAL aliens???

Time will if AZ was short sighted in passing this bill, or if they could see past the horizon to a much needed Fiesta....

oh and happy cinco de mayo....

[ztemhead]

I was going to address your post point by point, Phoenix, but I can't argue with someone who uses ALLCAPS as a means of emphasis with a straight face. :lmao:

Get rid of the apostrophe in "ILLEGAL's" too. Nothing belongs to them that you're talking about in that context.

[phoenix_rising]

I was going to address your post point by point, Phoenix, but I can't argue with someone who uses ALLCAPS as a means of emphasis with a straight face. :lmao:

Get rid of the apostrophe in "ILLEGAL's" too. Nothing belongs to them that you're talking about in that context.

sorry caby, did not mean to stress a point... . .. .. . . .

[Maltaran]

So, open borders?

How many countries in the world are easier to immigrate to than the United States?

Anywhere in the EU, provided you're a citizen of an EU member state.

[Jaime L]

Here's what I don't get about AZ's new law and illegal immigration hawks in general: Why are you always going after the illegal immigrants and not the businesses who employ illegal immigrants? They're not coming here for our awesome healthcare system or delightful weather. They're coming here for work. We know the industries that typically hire illegal immigrants: agriculture, food processing plants etc. Why play this elaborate game of sternly going after the immigrants and not the companies who induced them to come to this country in the first place. Unless you're going to argue that our economy depends on underpaid illegal immigrant labor in which case, why are you going after them at all? Arizona thinks it's taking a tough stand on immigration, but really all they did was create a law that's nearly impossible to enforce without racial profiling and all they succeeded in doing is 1) appearing racist nonetheless and 2) causing other communities and businesses to boycott the state. It's idiotic to me. Stop pretending only one side is playing this game. Illegal immigrants can't exist in this country without someone willing to a ) employ them and b ) pay them under the table. Until you go after the market that creates this situation, you're just attacking the symptoms not the cause of the problems. And worse than that, you're creating an embarrassing double standard.