Civil & Human Rights

Rep. Steve ‘Secession’ Smith revives English Only – seriously?

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

This guy, again. As I previously posted, "Rep. Steve "Secession" Smith (R-Maricopa) is determined to win the title of biggest asshole in the Arizona legislature. Dude, the title is yours! Now knock it off!" Rep. Steve 'Secession' Smith carries Russell Pearce's anti-immigrant bills.

The latest bit of assholery from Little Stevie is his revival of the age-old fight over "English Only." Seriously? It's like the movie "Groundhog Day" in Arizona — it's the same damn thing over and over again. Arizona ‘English only’ document plan touted:

The debate over providing government documents only in English is re-emerging at the Arizona Legislature, a controversial topic many thought had been resolved seven years ago with a successful ballot measure.

The House Government Committee on Tuesday passed House Bill 2283, which would forbid state agencies from mailing out certain documents in any language but English. It still needs a vote of the full House before moving on. But critics already warn it could violate the federal Civil Rights Act.

How many gun shows is too many?

by

 

AZ-pl-2-nolayers-sm72by Pamela Powers Hannley

Gun Show Trader boasts the "largest gun show list" in the US. According to this website, there are 1137 gun shows currently scheduled. 

Given the recent Tucson City Council decision to require background checks of any gun show conducted on city property, I looked up the number of gun shows coming up in Arizona. As of today, February 6, 2013, Gun Show Trader shows 30 gun shows scheduled for Arizona in 2013 and 2 so far for 2014.

For 2013, there are 7 gun shows scheduled for Tucson, 6 for Mesa, 5 for Phoenix, 3 for Glendale, and the other 9 are everywhere else in Arizona. To put this into perspective, one must compare the number of gun shows scheduled for Arizona with other states. Which state has the most upcoming gun shows? Texas, of course, with 103. (That was too easy.) The spread of scheduled gun shows nationwide is 0 to 103. Check out the data by state after the jump.

Tucson City Council advances gun background check resolution: Voice your opinion at Feb 5 meeting (video)

by

Gun-buttonby Pamela Powers Hannley

During today's study session, Tucson's City Council voted unanimously to advance a resolution which would require background checks on every gun purchase that occurs on city-owned or city-managed property. The resolution further states that there will be "no permits for gun shows on City owned or managed property until the provisions of the above are enacted." 

City attornies said that since this is a resolution and not an ordinance it does not conflict with state law.

Today's vote paves the way for a council vote on the resolution on February 20, but citizens can use the February 5 (tonight) City Council meeting call to the audience to voice their opinions on this matter. Here is the link to the proposal brought forward by Council members Steve Kozachik and Karin Uhlich. More background and a video of local leaders talking about gun control after the jump.

Voting should be a fundamental right, not a privilege

by

Posted  by AzBlueMeanie:

Several bills have been introduced in Congress to amend the Constitution to overturn Citizens United v. FEC, and to give Congress the express authority to regulate campaign financing in elections.

If we are going to amend the Constitution regarding elections, then we should amend the Constitution to grant a fundamental right to vote. Unlike citizens in every other advanced democracy, Americans do not have a "right" to vote, it is a privilege. Popular perception
notwithstanding, the Constitution provides no explicit guarantee of
voting rights. Jamelle Boiue explains in Making Voting Constitutional:

[The Constitution] outlines a few broad parameters. Article 1, Section 2,
stipulates that the House of Representatives “shall be composed of
Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States,”
while Article 1, Section 4, reserves the conduct of elections to the
states. The Constitution does, however, detail the ways in which groups
of people cannot be denied the vote. The 15th Amendment says you can’t
prevent African American men from voting. The 19th Amendment says you
can’t keep women from voting. Nor can you keep citizens of Washington,
D.C., (23rd Amendment) or 18-year-olds (26th Amendment) from exercising
the franchise. If you can vote for the most “numerous” branch of your
state legislature, then you can also vote for U.S. Senate (17th
Amendment).

Asymmetrical opposition: Anti-immigrant GOP to engage in gay bashing to kill reforms

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The nativist and racist base of the GOP that is anti-immigrant and opposed to any immigration reforms that would create a pathway to citizenship has settled upon asymmetrical opposition: it will engage in gay bashing to kill any immigration reform legislation. "We're not against immigrants based upon their nationality or race — but no gays!"

This is a strategy to divide the religious community between those who support humane treatment for immigrants, and those who are fundamentally opposed to marriage equality based upon religious doctrine. These are often one and the same groups, e.g., the Catholic Church, so this asymmetrical strategy forces religious groups to choose between competing values.

Tea-Publicans are on the wrong side of public polling on both issues with majorities of Americans favoring both marriage equality and immigration reforms with a pathway to citizenship.

It remains to be seen whether the U.S. Supreme Court will derail this asymmetrical opposition with a landmark decision on marriage equality this year before the immigration reforms come up for a final vote in Congress.

The Washington Post reports, In immigration debate, same-sex marriage comes to the fore:

President Obama is aiming to grant same-sex couples. . . equal immigration rights as their
heterosexual counterparts.

But the measure has inspired fierce pushback from congressional
Republicans and some religious groups, who say it could sink hopes for a
comprehensive agreement aimed at providing a path to citizenship for 11
million undocumented immigrants.