Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The Miami Herald reports today Former Gov. Jeb Bush, Hispanic groups condemn Arizona immigration law – Miami-Dade Breaking News:
From former Gov. Jeb Bush to prominent Cuban exiles, their objections were focused on the new law which they view as an expression of frustration about the lack of momentum on comprehensive immigration reform that would legalize millions of undocumented immigrants.
The day's main comments were expected to come directly from Bush, whose wife, Columba, is from Mexico.
But Bush had a scheduling conflict and could not appear on a telelephone news conference hosted by a group of conservatives who support immigration reform.
Juan Hernández, who hosted the teleconference, read a statement from Bush in which he criticized the Arizona law.
“I think it creates unintended consequences,'' said Bush. “It's difficult for me to imagine how you're going to enforce this law. It places a significant burden on local law enforcement and you have civil liberties issues that are significant as well.''
Hernández said the group hoped to gain influence in the immigration debate to dispel the notion conservatives oppose immigration reform.
Earlier Thursday, members of the exile-led Spanish American League Against Discrimination also lashed out against the Arizona law during a news conference at La Carreta restaurant on Calle Ocho in Little Havana.
“SALAD condems the law… of the state of Arizona,'' said Osvaldo Soto, head of organization.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I hope this is just poorly done satire.
hate it or love it u all are going home(mexico) soon. I am immigrant(legal) my self and I don’t care if ur ass get kicked out of this country b/c u guys are living a life of a third world in the first.u guys are a murders,rapist,child molesters,cruel, bank robbers and drive by shooters. stop Whining and get the fuck out. Let the country get a break from writing a food stump check for ur lazy criminal ass. tell Jeniffer Lopez to kiss George Lopez’s ass. she is not the one whose house is being robbed. she is not the one who lost her husband and family dog for undocumented immigrant. today I went to drop envelop to the post office box and saw a drunk Latino man peeing on the side of the road. c? that kind of stupidity is the cause for the new Arizona law. instead of protesting and throwing a water bottle on officer whose job is to protect ur undocumented ass, u should b busy taking a shower and getting read to leave the country. one more thing………fuck you for making all of us(immigrants)look stupid bon voyage
Are you associated with the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)?
Your citation to John Tanton’s “Social Contract” is a red flag. I have told readers here about John Tanton and his web of white supremacy and anti-immigrant associations. http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2010/04/racist-roots-of-russell-pearces-regressive-antiimmigrant-laws.html
“It was Tanton who founded the anti-immigration movement’s most powerful institution, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). A retired ophthalmologist once active on environmental issues, his interest in immigration was marked in the beginning by an explicitly racial argument. “To govern is to populate,” Tanton wrote in 1986. “Will the present majority peaceably hand over its political power to a group that is simply more fertile? … As Whites see their power and control over their lives declining, will they simply go quietly into the night? Or will there be an explosion?””
Rachel Maddow Fact Checks Dan Stein of FAIR whom she interviewed on Thursday, and provides her research sources on her web site. http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/
California was not undermined by “illegal immigrants” – California’s agriculture empire is entirely dependent upon migrant labor and has been for many years. No, California was undermined by Howard Jarvis and Paul Gann who pushed through Proposition 13 in California in 1978. This undermined California’s property tax system, but more importantly, imposed a two-thirds super-majority requirement on the legislature for tax matters. This created a structural revenue deficit over time.
Arizona foolishly enacted Proposition 108 in 1992 also imposing a two-thirds super-majority requirement on the legislature for tax matters, which also has created a structural revenue deficit over time.
Demonizing and scapegoating immigrants for failed conservative economic policies is so typical.
Again, the cautionary example of California:
“In short, we are witnessing a highly advanced and prosperous state, long endowed with superior human capital, turning into the exact opposite in just one generation. What can be done to stop this race to the bottom? The answer is simple: California and Washington need to enforce existing immigration law. Unfortunately, it is difficult to convince the public that this is necessary, so deeply entrenched are myths about illegal immigration.
One myth is that because America is a country of immigrants and has successfully absorbed waves of immigration in the past, it can absorb this wave. But the argument neglects two key differences between past waves and the current influx. First, the immigrant population is more than double today what it was following the most massive previous immigration wave (that of the late 19th century). Second, and much more important, as scholars from the Manhattan Institute have shown, earlier immigrants were much more likely to bring with them useful skills. Some Hispanic immigrants certainly do integrate, but most do not. Research has shown that even after 20 years in the country, most illegal aliens (the overwhelming majority of whom are Hispanic) and their children remain poor, unskilled, and culturally isolated they constitute a new permanent underclass.
Perhaps the most disingenuous myth about illegal immigrants is that they do not impose any cost on society. The reality is that even those who work and half do not, according to the Pew Hispanic Center cannot subsist on the wages they receive and depend on public assistance to a large degree. Research on Los Angeles immigrants by Harvard University scholar George J. Borjas shows that 40.1 percent of immigrant families with non-citizen heads of household receive welfare, compared with 12.7 percent of households with native-born heads. Illegal immigrants also increase public expenditures on health care, education, and prisons. In California today, illegal immigrants’ cost to the taxpayer is estimated to be $13 billion half the state’s budget deficit.
The state should stop providing welfare and other social services to illegal aliens as existing statutes demand and severely punish employers who break the law by hiring illegal immigrants. This would immediately remove powerful economic incentives for illegal immigration, and millions of illegal aliens would return to their countries. Instead, with President Obama in the White House and the Democrats controlling Congress, an amnesty for the country’s 13 million illegal immigrants may be soon to come.
Milton Friedman once said that unrestrained immigration and the welfare state do not mix. Must we wait until California catches up with Mexico to realize how right he was?”
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112167023
Don’t let them bankrupt the State like has happened in California:
“Regardless of the uncertainties, the 1994 study found a substantial negative net fiscal impact. Illegal immigrants were estimated to pay between $465 million [ $609 million] (low estimate) and $1.07 billon [ $1.4 billion] (high estimate) in state taxes, versus $4.3 billion [ $5.6 billion] in program costs (including citizen children). Even using the study authors’ upper bound estimate of potential taxes paid—which implied that illegal immigrants paid taxes at the same rate as the average Californian, a highly unlikely condition—illegal immigrants consumed roughly $5 in services for every dollar they paid in taxes.
Notwithstanding the claims of immigrant advocates, this should come as no surprise. Illegal immigrants’ household incomes are low,[13] which makes them eligible for a wide range of antipoverty government programs. A highly progressive tax structure (California has one of the most progressive state income taxes in the nation) means that low-income households pay the lowest tax rates. Furthermore, many illegal immigrants’ employers do not comply with all tax requirements. The 1994 study found that, contrary to the advocates’ glib assertions, the average illegal immigrant household would need to earn over $100,000 per year ( $131,000) to cover the cost of their state services. This amount was in the top 5 percent of all state households, which was manifestly impossible. These immigrants alone were estimated to be 5 percent of the state population. They would have to monopolize the top of the income distribution, which they clearly did not.
Although the study became caught in the crossfire between pro- and anti-immigrant advocates, its findings were validated in two independent reports by the Urban Institute in 1994[14] and the National Research Council in 1998.[15] In 1995 the Rand Corporation surveyed this study and each of the other major studies of fiscal impact and drew some methodological lessons,[16] which have been incorporated into this chapter.”
http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc_17_4/tsc_17_4_romero.shtml