Arizona Immigration Law 2010 SB1070
Arizona, Papers Please?
Revised August 20, 2010
The Arizona Desert Near Tucson |
Papers please? That phrase incites images of Nazi Germany, but is that what Arizona’s new immigration law is all about? The critics and protesters have come out of the woodwork strongly opposing a law in which 70% of Arizonians approve of. It has been characterized as a “racist” law and a law which “could” lead to racial profiling, but is that really the case? Have the naysayers even read the law before opposing it? Let’s take a moment to look at the issue of Arizona’s Immigration Law rationally and answer some questions. One, why was the law enacted in the first place? Two, who are the critics, what are they saying? Three, what does the law actually say? And finally, is Arizona’s immigration law actually necessary?
One, why was Arizona’s Immigration law SB1070 enacted? The first and primary job of the government is to protect its citizens. Another responsibility of the government should be to balance the budget and to spend taxpayer dollars wisely. With that said, let’s take a look at some interesting facts and estimates for the state of Arizona.
- Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of the US
- Homeland Security estimates 560,000 illegals residing in Arizona in 2008. Another study suggest that the estimate is around 620,000.
- The Census Bureau estimates 10% of Maricopa County’s adult population are illegal immigrants.
- 22% of the felonies in Maricopa County are committed by illegal immigrants (kidnapping 35.8%, smuggling 96%, forgery or fraud 44.4%, & felony DUI 20.3%)
- In 2007, illegal immigrants accounted for 2,973 violent crimes with an estimated $59 million dollars of imposed financial hardship on the citizens of Maricopa County.
- In the Tucson sector, 17% of illegals arrested by the Border Patrol already have criminal records in the US.
- Estimated cost for incarcerating Mexican Nationals in Arizona is $114 million annually.
This list could go on and on, but I believe you get the point – illegal immigration is a serious problem in Arizona which affects the citizens of Arizona both financially and in terms of security. Therefore, since the federal government has failed to protect the citizens of Arizona by securing the border, the federal government has failed to protect the citizens of Arizona from undue financial hardship, and the federal government has failed to enforce its own immigration laws, the state legislature of Arizona was left with no choice but to act on its own.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer |
Even before Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB1070 on April 23, 2010, the critics were coming out in droves condemning the Arizona bill which became law. President Barack Obama categorized the bill as “irresponsible” and vowed that his administration would examine the bill to see whether or not it would violate civil rights. The man tasked by Obama to examine the law, US Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. who had also been critical of the law, admitted when being questioned by Rep. Ted Poe during a House Judiciary Committee meeting that he had not even read the law. Holder also stated during an interview on “Meet the Press” that the law “has the possibility of leading to racial profiling”. Among the critics is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who says the law will lead to racial profiling against Latinos and anyone who might appear to be an immigrant. On May 17 Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, also critical of the law, admitted while being questioned by Senator John McCain during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing, that she had not even read the law in “detail”. She further stated, “That’s not the kind of law I would have signed.” Mexican President Felipe Calderon also condemned Arizona’s new immigration law stating that the law “opens the door to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” There have been numerous rallies across the US protesting this law, and now cities and towns are jumping on the boycott bandwagon against Arizona. The question I have to ask here is how can you be for or against a law without knowing what it says? The critics who have read the law obviously did not grasp what they were reading or they are intentionally misrepresenting the facts.
The resounding cord among the critics is that the law “could lead to racial profiling.” Page 1, lines 20-24 specifically state, “FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON.” (Note the words “lawful contact”.) On page 6, Lines 28-29 the law states, “The attorney general or county attorney shall not investigate complaints that are based solely on race, color or national origin.” Read the Arizona Immigration Law SB1070 text for yourself and see what it says. Page 1 lines 3-5 state, “The legislature finds that there is a compelling interest in the cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of Arizona.” Of particular interest here is “cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws”. What is wrong with Arizona officials enforcing federal immigration laws? I'll tell you what the problem is – enforcing federal law would go against the leftist political agenda for “comprehensive” immigration reform which is nothing more than code words for amnesty.
US Border Patrol |
Should there be immigration reform? I would say yes, but I would say no to amnesty. Why? Amnesty has been tried before and failed. Former President Regan tried amnesty, but failed to secure the border and thus we have the same problem today. What do you say to the immigrants who took on the personal responsibility to do things the right way? Oops, sorry? How do you feel when someone purposefully cuts in front of you at a restaurant, the post office, or a bank? How much more upset would you be if you spent years in a line, spent countless hours studying to become a US citizen, learned the English language, and then someone illegally cuts in front of you? People scream today about equal rights; where are the equal rights in that? Should there be reform? Yes, but why not focus on the system and debate points such as a guest worker program, the number of work visas issued each year and the bureaucratic length of time it takes to obtain one, and the length of time and red tape it takes to become a US citizen? What is the motive for amnesty? The answer to that one is simple, your vote.
People have found out that they can elect into office the people that will give them the most. If you want amnesty for illegal immigrants and those elected to office give you amnesty, then they have effectively bought your vote. Do you really think the liberal machine cares anything about the plight of illegal immigrants? Granted, some may, but what they really care about is your vote.
Arizona, papers please? How about just “drivers license and proof of insurance please?” What’s the difference? If an officer pulls me over for a traffic violation, if I don’t have my papers (drivers license), that officer has the right to detain me until my identity can be established. Why should that officer not have the right to detain someone else for the same exact reason? Should illegal immigrants have special rights over US citizens? Remember, equal rights under the law, not special rights outside the law. To the feds I say this, do your job so Arizona doesn't have to.
Sources
The US Census Bureau
The Tucson Weekly
The Center for Immigration Studies
The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office
Comment
Tea Party Articles Directory
