No More Arizonas - For Now

State Legislatures Slow on Immigration Measures

By JULIA PRESTON - New York Times

Published: March 13, 2011

Under newly fortified Republican control, many state governments started the year pledging forceful action to crack down on illegal immigration, saying they would fill a void left by the stalemate in Washington over the issue.

Gov. Susana Martinez of New Mexico says she will continue to push for a repeal of a state law that grants driver’s li- censes to illegal immigrants. The State Senate de- feated a bill she supported.

Related

• Times Topics: Immigration and Emigration | Arizona Immigration Law (SB 1070)

Now, with some legislatures winding down their sessions, the lack of consensus that has immobilized Congress has shown up in the legislatures as well, and has slowed — but not stopped — the advance of bills to penalize illegal immigrants.


No state has passed a law that replicates the one adopted last April in Arizona, which greatly expanded the powers of police officers ...more

Arizona's HB1108 would censor books and ethnic studies courses

The Arizona Republic published an editorial against HB1108. But as we know in Houston, a newspaper's opinion generally doesn't influence public policy (remember when the Houston Chronicle and just about all the major U.S. papers endorsed the DREAM ACT?)

Some supporters of Arizona's HB 1108 have been using the word "sedition." Of course they didn't see themselves as committing an act of sedition - that would be placed on the immigrants and their teachers who encourage diversity, which is a bad word these days.


[The Arizona]" legislature is considering a bill that would ban public-school classes that "overtly encourage dissent." As a throw-in, the bill would also ban university organizations that appeal to memberships "based in whole or in part on race-based criteria."

-

------
Editorial, 04/20: Politics in classroom
The Arizona Republic



The board of the Tucson Unified School District - on a bender of indulging its taste for political activism - has invited the wrath of the state Legislature. One does reap what one sows, it seems.

Led by Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, the Legislature is considering a bill that would ban public-school classes that "overtly encourage dissent." As a throw-in, the bill would also ban university organizations that appeal to memberships "based in whole or in part on race-based criteria."

House Bill 1108 is a response to a controversy earlier this year about elements of the Tucson district's ethnic-studies program that celebrates Marxist revolutionaries and characterizes the U.S. as an oppressive nation.

It is, on the whole, a lousy piece of legislation that intrudes, foremost, on the principle of local control of education. Yes, a much-abused notion in these days of the federal No Child Left Behind act. But it remains one that must be defended. Even on behalf of revolution-spouting activist "educators."

If Tucson voters are happy with embittering some of their best students with race-based grievance-mongering and with raising up Che Guevara and Fidel Castro as role models, then it is their choice. It is an expression of their values.

The district's $2.6 million program, especially its "raza studies" component, oozes anti-U.S. bitterness, celebrates Marxist politics and raises up perceived ethnic slights as intentional acts of oppression.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne has done a terrific job of bringing the program's materials to light, including texts such as Occupied America. And numerous TUSD teachers and staff have stepped forward, telling of the bullying and intimidation with which the program's staff appear quite comfortable.

According to the program's director, Augustine Romero, the instructors are all acknowledged "progressives" who perceive virtually all interpretations of American history other than their own to be the handiwork of "ultra-conservatives."

"The concern (of critics) is that it's not their political orientation being taught," Romero said. "To sit here and say teachers don't walk into a classroom with a political orientation, well, that's the furthest thing from the truth."

Romero and his instructors ascribe, religiously, to practices espoused by Marxist- education theorist Paolo Friere, author of The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which decries traditional education methods as a dehumanizing conspiracy of evil capitalists bent on subjugating the masses.

But responding to such political cant with a state law prohibiting curricula that "overtly encourage dissent" - as HB 1108 would - simply layers politics upon politics. It is likely to smother all history and social-studies instruction with subjective mandates.

TUSD parents certainly can - and should - question their school board about the program. And they may have questions about the constitutionality of such an overtly political program.

The Arizona Constitution, in Article 11, Section 7, forbids a "political test or qualification" for hiring instructors as well as for enrolling students. Romero's raza-studies program - taught by "progressive" teachers - might have some issues with that provision.

Tucson's ethnic-studies programs clearly turn the well-intended social balms of multiculturalism and diversity on their heads. But laws passed down Tucson's way from Phoenix are not about to set them right.

URGENT - Please help stop HR. 4088

4088  IS A DEPORT-ONLY BILL


The Republicans have pushed this bill to vote even though it has not been evaluated in committee. It is urgent that everyone contact their representative.


On November 6, 2007, Rep. Shuler (D-NC) introduced H.R. 4088, the Secure America Through Verification and Enforcement Act of 2007 (the "SAVE Act"). The Shuler bill, which now has over 139 co-sponsors takes a deportation-only approach to immigration reform. Anti-immigrant Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) is a co-sponsor of H.R. 4088, along with a who's who of the least immigrant-friendly members of Congress.

The bill will:

Target minor children and families for detention and mandate the creation of a new family detention center modeled after the infamous T. Don Hutto Facility;

Confiscate private land of citizens through eminent domain for building more fences which have already proven ineffective at curbing immigration;

Increase militarization of the border through additional body armor and firearms for agents; and
Impose a mandatory electronic employer verification program known as the Basic Pilot Program (re-branded as E-verify) on the entire American workforce. This highly controversial program lacks necessary safeguards to protect American workers from wrongful termination and improperly identify at least 2.5 million workers as ineligible for employment. The program would also destabilize the economy by immediately removing at least 7 million undocumented employees from the entire U.S. workforce at one time.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE AND SAY:

PLEASE DECLINE TO SIGN THE PETITION TO DISCHARGE

H.R. 4088 THE SHULER-TANCREDO BILL

(ALSO KNOWN AS THE "SAVE" ACT)

AND, IF YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IS A CO-SPONSOR OF H.R. 4088

PLEASE WITHDRAW YOUR NAME AS A CO-SPONSOR OF

H.R. 4088, THE SHULER-TANCREDO BILL

See if your Rep. is a Sponsor Here:

http://clerk.house.gov/110/lrc/pd/petitions/Dis5.htm

Your Representatives' phone number is online here:

http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/mcapdir.html

OR

CALL THE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD AT:

202-225-3121

While we were sleeping

This came up by way of AP- I knew about it, but had not taken it as seriously as I should have. Apparently the GOP hasn't learned that this type of anti-immigrant baiting will cause them very serious problems at the polls.

At the same time, it just shows that we can't stop watching for a minute. The GOP is trying to pass something that could be even worse than was presented before...

-----

GOP Moves to Force Immigration Vote

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS – 17 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans are trying to force action on a Democratic-written immigration enforcement measure, the latest GOP attempt to elevate the volatile issue into an election-year wedge.

Republican leaders hope that by pushing the bill — endorsed by 48 centrist Democrats and 94 Republicans — they can drive Democrats into a politically painful choice: Backing a tough immigration measure that could alienate their base, including Hispanic voters, or being painted as soft on border security in conservative-leaning districts.

The plan is fraught with political risks for both parties. A full-blown immigration debate could call attention to Republicans' divisions at a time when their expected presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain, is fighting to gain the trust of the GOP base...

for complete AP - Google article click the title of this post

Left and Right Immigration Caucuses in Maryland

Two caucuses have formed in Maryland. One is the New Americans Caucus (pro-immigrant) and the other is the Citizen's Rights and Immigration Caucus (anti-immigrant)... It is expected that the Citizen's Right's group will lose because of not enough Republican representation in the Maryland Legislature.

The WP:

"Citizens' Rights and Immigration Caucus next week.

The caucus will reflect the goals of a "citizens' rights" movement that McDonough said will focus less on those here illegally than on politicians and policies that offer services to the immigrants. In the absence of federal action to secure the country's borders, "we're attacking the [state] politicians for violating federal immigration laws," McDonough said. He cited as a prime example a Democratic-sponsored measure to award in-state college tuition to children of illegal immigrants, which enjoyed broad support in the House last year but stalled in the Senate."

----

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Blocs Form on Both Sides of Immigration Fight

By Lisa Rein

Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 30, 2008; Page B06

Maryland lawmakers on both sides of the potent immigration issue are forming new coalitions to push their agendas, emboldened by Gov. Martin O'Malley's rejection this month of the state's long-standing policy allowing undocumented immigrants to drive...

New Americans Caucus. The members, who represent some of the most diverse parts of Montgomery and Prince George's counties, say they are determined to push back against a national anti-immigration mood they see seeping into the legislature...

...a "citizens' rights" movement that McDonough said will focus less on those here illegally than on politicians and policies that offer services to the immigrants. In the absence of federal action to secure the country's borders, "we're attacking the [state] politicians for violating federal immigration laws,"..

The Republican bills have little chance of passage because the GOP has so few assembly members...

At the center of the debate is O'Malley, who two weeks ago rejected a recommendation from his top transportation officials to comply with a federal security law by devising two tiers of driver's licenses. One would have maintained driving privileges for undocumented immigrants, who can get licenses now...

for complete WP article click the title of this post

Indiana passes law that targets employers of undocumented immigrants

Press Release

(INDIANA STATEHOUSE) Indiana Senators voted 37-11 today to pass legislation to crackdown on businesses that profit from the hiring of illegal immigrants. Senate Bill 335, authored by Sen. Mike Delph (R-Carmel), focuses on those who harbor, transport or employ illegal immigrants.

Today the Senate voted to uphold and enforce the rule of law in our state,� Delph said. This is the next step in the legislative process and I am encouraged by the growing support for this bill. I committed to working with members of the House of Representatives to pass this legislation that upholds one of the basic and fundamental pillars of democracy, the respect for the rule of law.�

SB 335 targets employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants in Indiana by allowing the attorney general�s office and local prosecutors to investigate written complaints of such practices. An employer is who is found to have violated the law would be punished based on a three-tier system:

1. the employers first offense would be a warning;

2. if they have a second offense in a ten-year span, the court could suspend their license to do business in Indiana for ten days; and

3. if they then have a third offense in a ten-year span, the court could revoke their license to do business in Indiana.

Delph's bill includes language that provides immunity for businesses in Indiana who verify the status of their employees through the federal employment verification pilot program, E-Verify.

The Department of Homeland Security stands foursquare behind the E-Verify program and supports state efforts to expand its use,� said Stewart Baker, Assistant Secretary for Policy, Department of Homeland Security. �The program represents a major step forward in enabling compliance with the immigration employment laws of the United States. We have substantially improved its accuracy and effectiveness in recent years and are committed to future improvements as well.�

SB 335 also makes it a Class A misdemeanor for anyone who is found guilty of transporting, shielding from detection, concealing or harboring an illegal alien for commercial or financial gain. The bill provides exemptions for medical services, religious organizations, attorneys and the parent, spouse or children of the illegal immigrants.

SB 335 now moves to the Indiana House of Representatives for further consideration.

Source: Indiana Senate Republican Caucus

for link to article click the title of this post

9-11, Immigration, and the Rule of Law

For those businesses that may be fined for employing illegal workers, is it reasonable to call them illegal businesses?


-----

January 28, 2008

Hispanics discuss illegal-worker bill
by Francesca Jarosz
Indystar.com
francesca.jarosz@indystar.com

The debate over how to deal with the state's illegal immigrant population heated up Sunday as the Hispanic community addressed legislation aimed at cracking down on businesses that employ illegal workers.

A bill authored by Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, calls for punishing employers who hire illegal immigrants. It is scheduled to go before the Indiana Senate by Wednesday.

The issue has been aired at Senate hearings, but Sunday was the first time a group of Hispanics discussed it with the senator. They met with Delph at the Statehouse.

Some warned that because the bill would force businesses to police immigration status, anyone who speaks Spanish or has a Hispanic surname could face discrimination.

"I don't feel safe just because so much discussion is going into what we have to hide and fear," said Carmen DeRusha, 45, Carmel, who is a U.S. citizen. "I would propose that we could make people legal."

Delph said an anti-discrimination amendment will be discussed Tuesday.

"Nations cannot survive in a post-9/11 world without responding to the rule of law," he said.

Some of his constituents agreed.

Wayne Township resident Diane Osborn, who was not at Sunday's meeting, said she has been fighting for more than a year for legislation to reduce the number of illegal immigrants.

"Employment is the draw," Osborn said. "If they shut that down, they won't come."

Call Star reporter Francesca Jarosz at (317) 444-5527.



for link to article click title of this post

Immigrant Baiting in Indiana For the Rule of Law

State of Indiana in orange

Today a DREAMER sent me a communication from an Indiana state legislative assistant. A state senator named Delp has proposed an anti-immigration plan that would models some of the worst anti-immigration laws in the country. Delp represents Hamilton and Marion counties.

The first hearing on Indiana SB335l is scheduled for Wednesday, January 16 at 9:00 a.m.
in the Senate Committee on Pensions & ampLabor
-----

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE



Delph files legislation to rid Indiana of illegal immigration

Punishes those that profit from employing below- market cost labor



(STATEHOUSE) — Sen. Mike Delph (R-Carmel) filed one of the toughest illegal immigration measures in the country aimed at punishing those who harbor, transport or employ illegal immigrants. Senate Bill 335 is modeled after laws in Arizona, Georgia, Arkansas and Oklahoma.

"It's time we unite as Hoosiers to uphold and enforce the rule of law.  No longer should we tolerate the failure of the federal government to protect our borders and ensure our national security," Delph said. "We have a proud tradition in this country of being a nation of immigrants, the great melting pot. But we also have a proud tradition and respect for one of the basic and fundamental pillars of democracy, the respect for the rule of law. It is intolerable that the Federal government has allowed the erosion of that respect, and as a result, now states like Indiana must stand and offer assistance."



Highlights of Delph's bill include:

· Requiring the Superintendent of State Police to negotiate a
Memorandum of Understanding with the federal government to assist with
enforcement of federal immigration and customs law;

· Prohibiting a person from knowingly employing an unauthorized alien;

· Requiring the Attorney General to investigate complaints of
violation of the law and local prosecutors to file actions against
those who knowingly violate the law;

· Requiring a court to hold a hearing, make a determination and:

o Order the employer to terminate employment, sign an affidavit
with court, be placed on probation for three years, order the
suspension of all licenses to operate in the state of Indiana if
perpetrator fails to sign an affidavit with the court (first
violation);

o Revoke all licenses to operate in the State of Indiana if
second offense occurs during probationary period (second violation).

· Prohibiting any unit of government, state or local, from entering into or continuing a public contract with a firm that employs an illegal alien;

· Requiring all hospitals to report total costs of care of the illegal alien population to the Indiana State Department of Health;

· Requiring employers to verify employment eligibility through the federal pilot program after Dec. 31, 2008; and

· Makes it a Class A Misdemeanor against those found guilty of transporting, shielding from detection, concealing, or harboring an illegal alien. Subsequent offenses would be a class D or C felony.



SB 335 will be heard in the Senate Committee on Pensions & Labor on Wednesday, January 16 at 9:00 a.m.



"All citizens who are concerned about illegal immigration are
encouraged to come to the Statehouse next Wednesday and voice their
opinions during the hearing," Delph said.

Delph's second author on the legislation is Sen. Vi Simpson
(D-Bloomington). They are also joined by Senators Jim Arnold
(D-LaPorte), Richard Bray (R-Martinsville), Vaneta Becker
(R-Evansville), Phil Boots (R-Crawfordsville), Ed Charbonneau
(R-Valparaiso), Jeff Drozda (R-Westfield), Beverly Gard
(R-Greenfield), Dennis Kruse (R-Auburn), Brent Steele (R-Bedford),
Greg Walker (R-Columbus), Brent Waltz (R-Greenwood), John Waterman
(R-Shelburn) and Mike Young (R-Indianapolis).

Delph serves as a member of the Homeland Security Committee, is a Level 2 anti-terrorism trainer as an officer with the United States Army Reserve and has worked on issues of national security since 1996.  Delph represents portions of Hamilton and Marion counties.

image: http://www.medicaltravelers.net/maps/Indiana.gif

A Nation (almost) Lost in Xenophobia Part I

The Nation published an article titled "Divided States" - that basically covers the whole gamut regarding U.S. immigration policies and (their) problems. The piece is long, so I have divided it into 4 parts.

Towards the beginning it mentions my last name - and later discusses the DREAM ACT and McCarthyism. If you are interested in immigration, it is well worth the time to read all four parts, even if you are not a progressive (i.e. liberal).

The idea that 46 states introduced 1,560 pieces of legislation is amazing and terrifying (for some), especially since most were anti-immigration bills. What is it that is driving state legislatures to spend so much time on these bills? As I have asked before, what is driving the xenophobia? Does seeing lots of brown faces and hearing Spanish really scare people that much?

Reading about the person named Hernandez who can't speak English and wouldn't report a crime because of fear of getting detained by ICE - makes me glad I can speak English, and I can't get deported because I was born here. But even though my mothers family has been here since before the American Revolution (but living in what is now south Texas) I come from a "mixed" family (as many are) - I have Hernandez cousins, who if they were here, might be in that difficult position.



----

This article can be found on the web at 
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080107/schrag

Divided States
by PETER SCHRAG
The Nation
[from the January 7, 2008 issue]

In the past year, we've become a nation of a thousand immigration laws and policies--a confusing mosaic of fear, anger and nativism, of generosity, reason and self-defeating silliness. Although some of those laws were enacted before the Senate failed to pass comprehensive immigration reform in June, that failure greatly expanded the vacuum that local efforts sought to fill. It has also nourished the demagoguery that helps drive them, made immigration a prime domestic issue in the 2008 presidential campaign and intensified the fears those laws in turn produce.

If your name is Hernandez and you speak little English, can you risk reporting a crime to the local cops without being turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement? If you have a contagious disease or you're a drug addict, how willing will you be to seek treatment, and how safe are other residents because of that fear? And what about those driver's licenses? What happens when a car driven by an American citizen collides with one driven by an undocumented--and uninsured--immigrant? As the anti-immigrant zealots fan a generalized hysteria, these unresolved questions, which provoke legitimate fears, get little airtime. And there are many more: what are the chances of being stopped on the highway by sheriff's deputies empowered to arrest illegal immigrants, or of legal residents being rousted at midnight by warrantless raids?

There are also important questions of social policy crying out for redress. What sort of future is facing an 18-year-old high school graduate who was brought here by her parents as a young child and knows no other country but can't go to college, get a driver's license or a legal job? Conversely, how large a price should local schools have to pay to teach English to the children of illegal immigrants? A nation struggling with such issues is in dire need of leadership from its central government.
In the first eleven months of 2007, forty-six state legislatures passed nearly 250 immigration laws--some 1,560 were introduced, nearly triple the number for the same period in 2006. Cities and counties have enacted hundreds more, ranging all over the philosophical and political map.

Begin with the action the city council of Hazleton, Pennsylvania, took in 2006 to prohibit landlords from renting to undocumented aliens. Hazleton's ordinance, which preceded the Senate vote, became a model for similar measures in the Southern California city of Escondido and in the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch. All three quickly faced constitutional challenges--the Escondido council reversed itself in the face of mounting legal costs; the Hazleton and Farmers Branch laws were blocked by federal courts. But the anxieties and rage that drove those acts weren't dampened by a couple of judges.
It's a long list. Last February Lake Havasu, Arizona, like a number of other cities, made an agreement with the feds under which local cops will be trained by federal agents to interrogate and detain all illegal immigrants for deportation. In June Green Bay, Wisconsin, voted to yank the licenses of businesses that hire undocumented immigrants. In October the supervisors in Prince William County, Virginia, voted to crack down on illegal immigrants by increasing police enforcement, creating a Criminal Alien Unit and denying virtually all services, including substance abuse counseling. In addition to a long list of sanctions, the Oklahoma Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act of 2007 makes it a felony to "conceal, harbor or shelter from detection any alien."

Similar state laws have been enacted in Arizona and Tennessee. Alabama has created a Joint Interim Patriotic Immigration Commission to figure out some comprehensive approach to undocumented immigrants (a group that was immediately attacked as being stacked with pro-business and pro-immigrant voices). In October Missouri Governor Matt Blunt issued a press release lavishly praising the arrest and delivery to immigration authorities of a vanload of illegal immigrants who were stopped on the pretext of following another vehicle too closely. He promised (in Churchillian cadences) to "make every effort, implement every tool and take every step to ensure the laws against illegal immigration are enforced." Virginia has prohibited the sale of automatic weapons to illegal aliens, and Rhode Island approved legislation that will issue ID cards to all residents over 21--excepting only undocumented immigrants--allowing them to drink alcohol.

In other places, the response has been more positive. Last summer, the city council of New Haven, Connecticut, enacted a measure to issue what it calls Elm City Resident Cards--ID cards that also serve as small-balance debit cards--to all local residents, legal and illegal. In November San Francisco adopted a virtually identical program. Also last summer, the Illinois legislature prohibited employers from participating in the mandatory federal employee verification system until the feds get their data systems in order; the Department of Homeland Security promptly filed suit to overturn the law. (A few weeks later, US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco, citing the high likelihood of error and jeopardy to legal workers, upheld a challenge filed by the ACLU and a coalition of labor and business groups to implementation of the employee "no-match" verification system.) The DHS has since asked for more time to revise the system.

Arizona's Irrational Obsession

Why is Arizona's obsession about controlling undocumented immigrants letting it destroy it's economy? Where will all the workers go when their employers have to lay them off due to new Arizona immigration laws that take effect with the new year?

Maybe Texas and New Mexico will be lucky enough to receive these employees who have a better work ethic than most of us U.S. born Americans.

_____

December 18, 2007
EDITORIAL
Blazing Arizona
New York Times

On Jan. 1, Arizona intends to become the first state to try to muscle its way out of its immigration problems on its own. That is when, barring a last-minute setback in court, it is to begin enforcing a new state law that harshly punishes businesses that knowingly hire undocumented immigrants. It is a two-strike law, suspending a business’s license on the first offense and revoking it on the second. It is the strictest workplace-enforcement law in the country.

We have always said that workplace laws should be enforced vigorously — as part of a comprehensive, nationwide immigration system that doesn’t just punish, but tries to actually solve the problems that foster and sustain the breaking of immigration laws. The boosters of the Arizona law, including the Minutemen border vigilantes who have made “January First!” an anti-immigrant rallying cry, have a much narrower goal: the biggest purge of illegal immigrants in the Southwest since the federal government’s Operation Wetback in 1954.

If that happens, the immigrants will take a big chunk of Arizona’s growth and economic vitality with them — and not necessarily back across the international border. The collateral damage will be severe as citizens and legal immigrants are also thrown out of work, as businesses struggle to find workers in a state with a 3.3 percent unemployment rate and as sleazy employers move more workers off the books, the better to abuse and exploit them. And the national problem of undocumented immigration will be no closer to a solution.

There are many compassion-and-common-sense criticisms of Arizona’s Fair and Legal Employment Act: stories about families torn apart, breadwinners deported and citizen children on public assistance. They make little headway with the law-and-order crowd. Nor does the fact that many hard-line defenders of workplace enforcement show a lopsided devotion to federal laws; they seldom complain when employers abuse undocumented immigrants and steal their wages, even though those violations worsen job conditions and pay for American workers, too.

For now, let’s just point out that Arizona’s plunge into enforcement-only immigration policy highlights the folly and inadequacy of that approach, particularly when it is left to a crazy quilt of state laws. America is a country where millions of illegal immigrants have entered for years all but invited and mostly not pursued. They have become integral to our economy, although now — thanks to harsher enforcement and the defeat of comprehensive immigration reform in Congress — most have no way to become legal, no options except slipping back into destitution on the other side of the border.

There is no way for Arizona or any other state to get businesses back on a legal footing without exacting a great economic and human toll.

It could be that Arizona’s enforcement of the law will be calm and measured. But we worry about Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix and two-thirds of the state’s population. Maricopa’s county attorney, Andrew Thomas, and county sheriff, Joe Arpaio, are prone to media-driven stunts. Sheriff Arpaio makes a show of his meanness, hounding and humiliating prisoners and forming his deputies into squads that check people’s clothes and accents before demanding their papers.

Arizona is home to many moderate politicians, like Gov. Janet Napolitano, who were all too aware of the bill’s problems, and yet it became law. Many say the Minutemen and their allies had offered an ultimatum: approve this bill or face a citizen’s initiative on the 2008 ballot that would be even harsher and blunter, and all but impossible to repair. That promise was reneged on; petitions for the Minutemen’s initiative are being collected now.

As Arizona exacts its punishment on the undocumented workers who have made it so prosperous, it runs the risk of proving itself tough but not smart.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/opinion/18tue1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Oklahoma's "Son of 1804"

This is from a state that has the honor of getting those transplanted Native Americans who were banished from their lands. Son of 1804 has been suggested by one state legislator I will not name. The proposed law will make other states' anti-immigration measures look like chld's play. And here, at least the Oklahoman is saying that Son of 1804 is too much. But the paper's criteria is the cost and time, not ethics.


_____


Mon November 12, 2007
Slow down: Too soon for more immigration law
The Oklahoman Editorial

OKLAHOMANS have barely begun to understand the practical implications of the state's new immigration reform law, and its author is promising even more such reform in the coming legislative session.


House Bill 1804 took effect Nov. 1. Within days, those with expired driver's licenses got a taste of the newest layer of immigration-related bureaucracy. Oklahomans who renew their licenses before they expire have nothing to worry about. But those who let their license lapse or are seeking an upgrade to a commercial driver's license must provide proof of residence to an examiner. That means rounding up a birth certificate, passport or naturalization certificate and taking a trip to a driver testing station — rarely a pleasant experience.

The easy answer is not to forget about renewal, which is easier said than done since the state no longer sends out renewal reminders. This example is just a small taste of HB 1804's potential consequences for those here legally. The big and more costly issues lie ahead.

Unfortunately, Rep. Randy Terrill is too excited about publicity over what some are calling the nation's toughest immigration law. So now he's promising the "son of HB 1804” will take aim at children of illegal immigrants. He wants public schools to start keeping tabs on such children. He also wants to forbid noncitizen mothers from getting subsidized prenatal care and not issue traditional birth certificates to their children who are born in Oklahoma.

Our advice: Slow down. Legal challenges to HB 1804 need to be sorted out. State and local governments are still figuring out how to enforce it, and we don't know yet what the costs — in money and time — will be.

It would be best for the federal government to craft comprehensive immigration reform. Meantime, state lawmakers shouldn't hurry with new laws until we better understand the consequences of the one already on the books.

http://newsok.com/article/keyword/3167970/