Arizona Republicans help kill immigration law

[Michael Hardner]

In a stunning turnaround, Arizona Republicans killed 5 of the state's notorious immigration bills. Terry Greene Sterling obtains a report showing deportations pummeling the local economy.

In a surprise St. Patrick’s Day coup, conservative Republican senators in Arizona slapped down five harsh immigration bills that aimed to deny state birth certificates to babies born to unauthorized immigrants, turn school teachers and hospital workers into immigration enforcers, prohibit undocumented immigrants from attending college, and criminalize them for driving.

Fox News

Daily Beast

and... the Tea Party doesn't like it...

As expected, those on the far fringe of the Republican Party are after the 11 GOP senators who had the nerve (I would call it courage and good common sense) to vote against at least one of a series of illegal immigration bills on Thursday.

Apparently, if the bill contains the words "illegal immigration" and you're a Republican, you're supposed to march in lockstep with the right wing or get out of line at your peril.

The right wing blog Sonoran Alliance is calling them "Turncoat Republicans"and asking people to contact them and demand they change their votes when the bills come up for reconsideration next week. And if not, we are told that the Tea Party will consider recalls.

AZ Central

The fact of the matter seems to be that the hard line is actually bad for business, and the Tea Party has run out of runway upon which to land the anger plane. So, I'm pleased - how about you ?

[Shady]

This could all be avoided if the Federal Government did its job and controlled the border.I'm looking forward to what comes of the lawsuit Arizona has filed against them.

As for the other stuff, it seems fine to me. The only thing I would object to is illegal immigrants being able to attend college and or drive. If you break the law, you don't have a right to any of that.

(Reuters) - Arizona filed a lawsuit against the federal government on Thursday, alleging that it had failed to provide security along the state's porous border with Mexico.

AP

[ToadBrother]

This could all be avoided if the Federal Government did its job and controlled the border.I'm looking forward to what comes of the lawsuit Arizona has filed against them.

But then who will pick our fruits and vegetables. Those illegal immigrants make up an entire underground economy. Why do you think even GWB wasn't exactly eager to stop the flow entirely.

[Shady]

But then who will pick our fruits and vegetables. Those illegal immigrants make up an entire underground economy. Why do you think even GWB wasn't exactly eager to stop the flow entirely.

Some have discussed a guest-worker program. But regardless. The Federal Government has completely failed the border states on this issue.

[punked]

Some have discussed a guest-worker program. But regardless. The Federal Government has completely failed the border states on this issue.

Starting with good old Ronnie eh?

[Shady]

Starting with good old Ronnie eh?

Pretty much. He accepted amnesty for million of people in exchange for border security. Unfortunately the security never came. And for the next several decades, nothings been done to correct an ever growing problem. That's why Arizona's lawsuit should be very interesting.

[Bitsy]

Many people tried to caution Arizona about the law of unintended consequence but it took the silence of cash registers before the message was heard.

[ToadBrother]

Some have discussed a guest-worker program. But regardless. The Federal Government has completely failed the border states on this issue.

The Federal Government hasn't failed at anything. It's doing exactly what the US economy requires of it. Arizon's rhetoric is just the latest iteration of "We don't want fast-breeding Catholics from x Catholic country" that has been going on since the Irish began flooding in during the Potato Famine. In fact, a lot of the rhetoric looks pretty much dusted off from the days when Italians and the Irish were viewed as the plague by good God-fearing Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

Edited March 21, 2011 by ToadBrother

[Scotty]

The Federal Government hasn't failed at anything. It's doing exactly what the US economy requires of it. Arizon's rhetoric is just the latest iteration of "We don't want fast-breeding Catholics from x Catholic country" that has been going on since the Irish began flooding in during the Potato Famine. In fact, a lot of the rhetoric looks pretty much dusted off from the days when Italians and the Irish were viewed as the plague by good God-fearing Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

Why is it people don't have the right to fear for their culture, or to want to protect it, unless they're from some sort of colourful ethnic minority group?

There are now more Hispanics in California schools than any other grouping. Hispanic numbers are rising rapidly throughout a number of states. And where their numbers rise they're demanding acknowledgment and power, and that includes language rights. Now I have nothing particular against Hispanics but they are a different culture. And their numbers are expected to rise to 30% of the US population by 2050. Why should Americans not have the right to be concerned about that? Mexico might have lost the war but it looks like they're taking back the US bit by bit.

And frankly, the economics are all messed up, bringing in millions of barely literate and uneducated people every year only ensures that the wages for lower level jobs will be so low that American born people won't touch them. This creates a self-fulfilling prophecy, whereby people say Americans won't take certain jobs, and thus America needs the Hispanics to do them.

But the Republican party only cars about big business interests which want that continued flow of cheap labour. And the Democrats only see a rising block of voters who tend to vote Democrat. Both parties are looking out for their own interests rather than considering what's best for the country.

Edited March 21, 2011 by Scotty

[Pliny]

The Federal Government hasn't failed at anything. It's doing exactly what the US economy requires of it. Arizon's rhetoric is just the latest iteration of "We don't want fast-breeding Catholics from x Catholic country" that has been going on since the Irish began flooding in during the Potato Famine. In fact, a lot of the rhetoric looks pretty much dusted off from the days when Italians and the Irish were viewed as the plague by good God-fearing Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

Yes. that's it exactly.

The problem isn't about immigration. It is about illegal immigration. I don't think there is anyone begrudging legal immigrants of their right to access the social benefits of all legal citizens.

The Federal government by failing to deal with "illegal" immigration has created a problem for the economy. Correcting it will have a negative effect on the economy.

Granting amnesty, as Reagan did, will only encourage further illegal immigration. Showing the door to illegal immigrants will put a dent in the labour supply. It will raise wages because labour will be in short supply. Something the Democrats and Unions could support. There isn't much Union representation in Arizona but there is in California. Do Unions allow illegal immigrants to be members encouraging illegal immigration?

The economy is fragile right now and is attempting a recovery. No one wants' to be responsible for killing it and a crackdown on illegal immigration now will create a labour shortage resulting in higher labour costs -i.e. higher wages for labour - an intolerable concept to Democrats and unions or as it appears. When the economy turns sour and/or collapses then there won't be any concern about economic impact and something can and will be done about it at that time.

Whether republicans are willing to be the bad guy is the question. Democrats would prefer to do nothing and like to see republicans look like the meanies.

It appears the republicans in the Arizona Senate don't want to appear to be the meanies and are acting just like the Federal government who have the idea Illegal immigrants are low wage earners anyway so they wouldn't pay any income taxes, no worry of revenue losses there, so why act on it?

[Pliny]

But the Republican party only cars about big business interests which want that continued flow of cheap labour. And the Democrats only see a rising block of voters who tend to vote Democrat. Both parties are looking out for their own interests rather than considering what's best for the country.

Mexicans are in America for the benefits of the culture. If they change it then they might as well all go home.

But it seems some Republicans want to do something about the issue of illegal immigration by bringing these laws forward to vote on, despite what big business interests want and your claim they only cater to big business. The OP suggests that tea partiers are not happy that some republicans did not vote to pass the proposed legislation brought in by other republicans. Are you siding with the tea partiers?

[Shady]

The Federal Government hasn't failed at anything.

Actually it has. It's the Federal Government's responsiblity to provide for border security. In which they've completely failed at doing so, for several decades. They've failed all border states, not just Arizona. And now states are starting to take matters into their own hands.

But again, attending college and receiving drivers licenses aren't things people who break the law coming into the country are required to receive. The fact that it's at all controversal is pretty sad. It's just common sense.

[Shady]

Many people tried to caution Arizona about the law of unintended consequence but it took the silence of cash registers before the message was heard.

Complete nonsense. The silence of cash registers has nothing to do with it. Hence the illegal immigration from last year, and the lawsuit filed against the Federal Government this year.

[Michael Hardner]

Why is it people don't have the right to fear for their culture, or to want to protect it, unless they're from some sort of colourful ethnic minority group?

That's an interesting take on it, because many (including perhaps you) like to frame it as a "Muslim" problem when we're talking about certain groups. Here we're talking about people with an ostensibly European, Christian background but still not good enough, it seems.

National boundries don't keep corporations out, so why do they keep their employees out ? It seems unfair that some types of citizens can come and go, and others can't.

[Michael Hardner]

Complete nonsense. The silence of cash registers has nothing to do with it. Hence the illegal immigration from last year, and the lawsuit filed against the Federal Government this year.

An article I read in the Arizona Republic (I think) specifically mentioned the cancellation of conventions and trips as a reason that this was reversed.

Here's the Arizona Chamber of Commerce:

Arizona immigration bills bad for business

Tuscon Citizen

Yes, it is about the money, and silent cash registers.

[Shady]

National boundries don't keep corporations out, so why do they keep their employees out ? It seems unfair that some types of citizens can come and go, and others can't.

Actually, national boundries do keep corporations out, if the governments of those countries refuse to allow access. Anyways, I don't see anything wrong with citizenship, and legal immigration processes.

Yes, it is about the money, and silent cash registers.

Not really. It's not changing the Arizona legislation from last year, and it's not changing the Arizona lawsuit filed against the Federal Government.

[Bitsy]

Complete nonsense. The silence of cash registers has nothing to do with it. Hence the illegal immigration from last year, and the lawsuit filed against the Federal Government this year.

Yeah, Shady, tell these CEO's and their stockholders that story , I am sure they would like to hear that from you. I suspect that the counter suit filed by Brewer is nothing but a red herring to cover up the economic woes suffered by AZ after the passage of this law.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2011/03/16/ceos-legislature-back-off-immigration.html

[Shwa]

Why is it people don't have the right to fear for their culture, or to want to protect it, unless they're from some sort of colourful ethnic minority group?

There are now more Hispanics in California schools than any other grouping. Hispanic numbers are rising rapidly throughout a number of states. And where their numbers rise they're demanding acknowledgment and power, and that includes language rights. Now I have nothing particular against Hispanics but they are a different culture. And their numbers are expected to rise to 30% of the US population by 2050. Why should Americans not have the right to be concerned about that? Mexico might have lost the war but it looks like they're taking back the US bit by bit.

Because wars aren't the sole determinant of successful populations, breeding lots of babies is. As far as the "hispanics" are concerned, one angle is to look at them as people who as simply migrating back to their ancient and traditional homelands. And having lots and lots of babies while doing so.

It won't be long before that part of America is adapting since that is one of the greatest things about America. Think about that the next time you are eating your pizza pie or Chinese food. Or munching on a chimichanga.

[ToadBrother]

It appears the republicans in the Arizona Senate don't want to appear to be the meanies and are acting just like the Federal government who have the idea Illegal immigrants are low wage earners anyway so they wouldn't pay any income taxes, no worry of revenue losses there, so why act on it?

Here's the reality. Populist movements in the US since the 19th century have demanded curbs on any form of immigration. The populists didn't want the Irish coming in, they didn't want the Italians coming in, they didn't want Eastern Europeans coming in. The Tea Party hasn't invented these justifications, they've just dusted them off for the latest round of anti-immigrant sentiment.

At the end of the day, the economy rules all, and the economy requires, rightly or wrongly, a lot of cheap labor in a number of key industries. Politicians will espouse the populist line just so far before someone taps them on the shoulder and says "If you actually go through with building that wall, you are going to seriously f--- over some rather important industries."

Yes, the Democrats are making hay over it, of course they would, that's the nature of partisan politics. And the Republicans, by constantly pandering to those populists whose traditional dislike of these sorts of immigrants, legal or otherwise, put themselves in precisely that position. At the end of the day, the economy needs these laborers. There have been a long string of presidents from both parties who have recognized this, and while they'll make the appropriate cooing noises to the anti-immigrant lobby if necessary, there is no way in hell that any president is actually going to castrate these industries just because a bunch of of loud-mouthed populists with all the economic and fiscal grounding of a brain-dead Yorkshire terrier are making noise.

Edited March 21, 2011 by ToadBrother

[ToadBrother]

Because wars aren't the sole determinant of successful populations, breeding lots of babies is. As far as the "hispanics" are concerned, one angle is to look at them as people who as simply migrating back to their ancient and traditional homelands. And having lots and lots of babies while doing so.

It won't be long before that part of America is adapting since that is one of the greatest things about America. Think about that the next time you are eating your pizza pie or Chinese food. Or munching on a chimichanga.

The same thing will happen to these immigrants as happened to other immigrant populations. The standard of living will go up, and the birth rates will fall. The US wasn't toppled by a bunch of fast-breeding dirty Irishmen or Italians, and at the end of the day, those folks sneaking across the border into Mexico are fleeing a dysfunctional country in search of prosperity for themselves and their children.

[Bitsy]

Here's the reality. Populist movements in the US since the 19th century have demanded curbs on any form of immigration. The populists didn't want the Irish coming in, they didn't want the Italians coming in, they didn't want Eastern Europeans coming in. The Tea Party hasn't invented these justifications, they've just dusted them off for the latest round of anti-immigrant sentiment.

So true........take the quiz........

http://reformimmigrationforamerica.org/blog/

[Michael Hardner]

So true........take the quiz........

http://reformimmigrationforamerica.org/blog/

That quiz is too easy... the Olde English gives away many of the answers...

[Bitsy]

That quiz is too easy... the Olde English gives away many of the answers...

I don’t think it was meant to be hard; I posted it to illustrate what Toad Brother (and others) have said, Americans did not want the Irish immigrants either.

[Pliny]

Here's the reality. Populist movements in the US since the 19th century have demanded curbs on any form of immigration. The populists didn't want the Irish coming in, they didn't want the Italians coming in, they didn't want Eastern Europeans coming in. The Tea Party hasn't invented these justifications, they've just dusted them off for the latest round of anti-immigrant sentiment.

Is it anti-immigrant sentiment? Many Mexicans are legal immigrants and no one is calling for them to go back to Mexico. I think legal immigrants and those trying to legally immigrate are also against illegal immigration. Illegal immigration has ties to drug cartels and other criminal activities as well.

The issue isn't just about cheap labour. Obama, by not addressing the employment problem is making it difficult for "illegal" immigrants to find "honest" work these days. So they aren't coming over as much for the jobs.

At the end of the day, the economy rules all, and the economy requires, rightly or wrongly, a lot of cheap labor in a number of key industries. Politicians will espouse the populist line just so far before someone taps them on the shoulder and says "If you actually go through with building that wall, you are going to seriously f--- over some rather important industries."

The economy requires labour. The criminal economy requires illegal immigrants as well.

Things will be more expensive if labour costs more. It's the same as raising taxes. It just makes things more expensive.

Industry will no doubt complain and competition will be stiffer with less efficient operations closing doors. That's the economy. The problem is the criminal element.

Yes, the Democrats are making hay over it, of course they would, that's the nature of partisan politics. And the Republicans, by constantly pandering to those populists whose traditional dislike of these sorts of immigrants, legal or otherwise, put themselves in precisely that position. At the end of the day, the economy needs these laborers. There have been a long string of presidents from both parties who have recognized this, and while they'll make the appropriate cooing noises to the anti-immigrant lobby if necessary, there is no way in hell that any president is actually going to castrate these industries just because a bunch of of loud-mouthed populists with all the economic and fiscal grounding of a brain-dead Yorkshire terrier are making noise.

I think that's why Russell Pearce is so unpopular. He is actually trying to do something about the problem of illegal immigration and the problems they are currently bringing to the State. Of course, let's mix in some prejudice - just to make sure that legal immigrants and those who may perhaps manage to be granted amnesty or otherwise gain a vote, do vote for the right party. Wink! Wink! Nudge! Nudge! Say no more! Say no more!

Edited March 23, 2011 by Pliny

[ToadBrother]

Things will be more expensive if labour costs more. It's the same as raising taxes. It just makes things more expensive.

Industry will no doubt complain and competition will be stiffer with less efficient operations closing doors. That's the economy. The problem is the criminal element.

And what, the criminal element wasn't there in the 19th and early 20th century? Ever heard of the Irish Mob, or even more spectacularly the Mafia, with its deep and still strong connections to the Sicilian and Italian criminal syndicates? These were in fact major factors in the anti-immigrant sentiments of that time, despite the fact that, as with legal and illegal Mexican immigrants today, the criminal element was only a small part of the whole.

Like I said, this has all been thrashed out before. There is nothing new under the sun here.