did they mention that Mr. Gonzales is hispanic?

[sisyphusshrugged]

So what is Proposition 200?

As written, Proposition 200 would require proof of citizenship when registering to vote and applying for public benefits, though it does not define which services would be affected. Arizona law does not define what a "public benefit" is. Attorney General Terry Goddard is expected to release his opinion today on the definition of public benefits.

But Goddard might not have the ultimate say. Supporters of the measure intend to ask the courts to apply the federal definition of the term, which could broaden its application to include retirement and disability benefits, government-issued contracts, hunting licenses, food assistance, college education, loans, grants and more.

The bill also criminalizes failure on the part of government employees who fail to ascertain immigration status, which in practice means that if you don't racially profile anyone who comes for government services, you can be fined or lose your job.

So what's the point here?

But no matter which group you fall into, Proposition 200 was the wrong way to go. It usurps the authority of the federal government to control the nation's borders. It trivializes what law enforcement officers do by advancing the notion that you can deputize others to do it. It sets the stage for racial profiling because in these times, dark-skinned Latinos will most likely be asked for proof of citizenship. And it glosses over the fact that this is about denying benefits to people who have -- even if here illegally -- paid their share of property, municipal and sales taxes.

It's true that illegal immigrants can't vote, but it's silly to think they'd want to. You can't get them to step out of the shadows to open a bank account or report a crime to police. Does anyone really think they're going to come out to stand in line at the polls? Forty percent of eligible voters won't even do that.

Anyway, this initiative was never about voting -- or benefits. It's about shaping U.S. immigration policy. It's not that Arizonans want the federal government to control the borders; it's that Arizonans want to do the federal government's job in controlling the borders.

The idea is to try to get rid of illegal immigrants by making their surroundings uncomfortable. Of course, if Arizonans really want to get rid of illegal immigrants, they could do it in six months -- but only at the cost of making their own lives uncomfortable.

Forget the clerks and social workers. Start locking up employers. Illegal immigrants would figure out they're not wanted and move on. Among the side effects: Homebuilders would cut back on production; some restaurants and small businesses would close; soccer moms would have to find replacement nannies.

Perish the thought. The folks in Arizona might be angry, but they're not crazy. They say they've had it with illegal immigration. But they're just getting used to the convenience, freedom and economic benefit that the phenomenon provides.

I've seen the benefit up close. I lived in Arizona for two years in the late 1990s, and even then it was obvious that so much of the state's growth, prosperity and optimism was tied to the increase in illegal immigrants. I once interviewed day laborers waiting for work on street corners in the booming suburbs around Phoenix. I had to move quickly because, every few minutes, another Arizonan would screech to the curb and snatch up more workers.

So much for being fed up with illegal immigrants.

Shame on you, Arizona. Rather than accept your share of responsibility for the problem, you simply lashed out at the vulnerable. You're afraid of your changing surroundings, and yet you're unwilling to go back to what life was like before you discovered the intoxicant of cheap and dependable labor.

It's not that complicated. We get the message.

and how is the Republican base responding to this "success"?

Meanwhile, efforts are under way elsewhere to duplicate the Arizona success, including in:

• California, where a grass-roots organization known as the California Republican Assembly hopes to gain enough signatures to qualify an anti-immigrant initiative for the March 2006 ballot. The group wants to restore portions of Proposition 187 that prohibited benefits to illegal immigrants not mandated by federal law.

• Georgia, where a group known as Georgians for Immigration Reduction said it was "very energized" by the Arizona vote and, says spokesman Jimmy Herchek, is watching "closely" what happens in that state's court challenges. Mr. Herchek said draft legislation will be presented to legislators in the near future.

• Colorado, where Defend Colorado Now is drafting a constitutional amendment to prevent illegal aliens from receiving "public services" other than those involving public safety or life-threatening emergencies. A petition drive is to begin in January 2006, with 70,000 signatures needed to put it before voters.

•Texas, where Texans for Fair Immigration hope to draft legislation similar to the Arizona initiative and lobby state officials to pass it. State laws bars the placement of initiatives on the ballot.

But boy, Bush would punch Fidel Castro in the nose right this minute if he could get hold of him and did they mention that Mr. Gonzales is hispanic?

Comments

Prop 200

[dvitol.livejournal.com]

I live in Arizona. Prop 200 passing was the third harshest blow on election day. (The top two spots belonging to Kerry's loss and the passage of 11 gay-bashing amendments)

[texaslawchick.livejournal.com]

Texas, at least in practice if not legislation, seems to have always been fairly reasonable in dealing with immigration. I think it's because we don't have a state income tax, so everyone who works pretty much is paying the same amount into the government. We pay for our government through property taxes and sales taxes. Everyone pays sales tax, regardless of immigration status, and property taxes get paid by the owner and usually are subsidized by the lessor.

Everyone knows that agriculture and service industry would fall apart without undocumented labor. There isn't a restaurant in town that doesn't operate on the labor of Hispanic workers. It's always interesting to go to one of those huge dim sung palaces and hear the waiters yell out orders in Mandarin to the Mexican cooks/busboys, and there's absolutely no need for translation.

My grandmother never bothered to get her US citizenship, and she lived here most of her life. There are thousands more like here here, and this is their home. I'm 11th generation here. WE were here first. There are thousands more like me here and this is our home. (The census form is always a challenge for me. I check of "Hispanic" and then they want to know what latin American country my ancestors come from, but they don't have Texas as an option. I check off "Mexico" usually, because my grandmother was born there, and my grandfather was born only a few miles north of the border)

In Houston, the board of our Hospital District dared the state to throw them in jail in 2001 because they refused to refuse non-emergency care to undocumented aliens. The state backed down. I might be hopelessly optimistic, but I think that in Texas we've always had a better approach to immigration than places like California and Arizona.

[jmhm.livejournal.com]

There was another story on the rash of copycat propositions where our own New York nativist assholes allowed as there was no point in trying it here, since one in five residents of our state is an immigrant or the child of one.

I live in Queens, for crying out loud.

[jmhm.livejournal.com]

Oh, dear.

Whoever left the lovely nativist comment, I really don't think so.

I'm sure there's a case to be made for your argument, but abuse, inaccuracy and unsubstantiated claims aren't going to do it.

They're not going to do anything here.