The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors passed a resolution by a 3-2 vote to boycott Arizona despite numerous objections from county residents. It was supervisors Michael Antonovich and Don Knabe who did not want the boycott and Zev Yaroslavsky, Mark Ridley-Thomas and Gloria Molina who voted to boycott the Grand Canyon State.
In an article from the Los Angeles Times, Supervisor Molina said, “This law simply goes too far. A lot of people have pointed out that I am sworn as an L.A. County supervisor to uphold the Constitution. All I can say is that I believe that Arizona’s law is unconstitutional.”
A statement from Supervisor Antonovich reads a lot differently; “The propaganda by both the media and others is intentionally misleading because Arizona’s law mirrors federal law. Rather than debating a boycott, this Board should hold our federal representatives accountable for their failure to act on immigration reform but also for their failure to reimburse costs incurred by local government.
One of the residents speaking out against the boycott was Jamiel Shaw Sr. whose son was gunned down by an alleged illegal immigrant.
While his mother was serving the country in Iraq, Jamiel Shaw Jr. was shot and killed on his way home from the mall. He was 17-years old. The kicker is that he was allegedly murdered by a Mexican gang member who was released from prison less than 24 hours earlier and the killer was in the country illegally plus he had a lengthy criminal record.
His father, Jamiel Shaw Sr. said in an interview with Fox News that if California would have had a similar law to Arizona’s SB1070 his son would be alive today. Shaw spoke at the LA County Board meeting denouncing the county board for boycotting Arizona when they should be protecting California residents.
The politicians, the Sheriff Department and the LA Police Department say they don’t have to enforce the 287G law, Shaw said. Yet, “these immigrants want you to feel sorry for their plight because they are coming here for the American dream, but they’re giving us the American nightmare.”
The vote didn’t escape the contentious Republican gubernatorial race candidate Steve Poizner and he joined L.A. County Supervisor Antonovich to condemn the recent vote by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to boycott Arizona.
“Supervisor Antonovich demonstrated both courage and wisdom in standing up for a state’s right to demand that federal immigration laws be enforced. Supervisor Antonovich is correct to focus the Board on the real needs of the citizens of Los Angeles County, such as trying to stop the flow of illegal immigration,” said Poizner. “As governor, I will crack down on illegal immigration by ending the economic magnets that draw undocumented workers to California. I’m the only candidate to call for the revocation of business licenses of any employer that knowingly hires undocumented workers.”
Poizner also announced a new policy initiative that builds on his aggressive immigration proposals for the state of California. He promised that he will issue an executive order requiring all businesses contracting with California state agencies to verify the employment eligibility of their employees.
Furthermore, Poizner said he will conduct an extensive audit of all state contractors to identify any that have hired illegal immigrants.
“States must engage in bold, definitive action to stop illegal immigration. That’s why I support both the 2007 Arizona law, which cracked down on employer hiring of illegal immigrants, as well as Arizona’s recently passed immigration law. As governor, I will take the steps necessary to ensure that employers are following the law and that taxpayer dollars aren’t going to state contractors that hire illegal immigrants.”
A new Quinnipiac poll released this week found that nearly three-fourths of U.S. voters think boycotting Arizona is not a good idea. The national survey also said that most Americans support the law itself by a margin of 51 to 31 percent.
In a daring and controversial move the San Diego Unified School District Board of Education looks to warn K-12 students about traveling to Arizona where a tough new immigration law recently passed.
The resolution was drawn up by SDUSD Board of Education President Richard Barrera and contains language condemning Arizona’s new illegal alien legislation and demanding the governor rescind the law immediately.
The resolution encourages students and parents not to spend time in Arizona, “due to the risk they may face in being subjected to inappropriate and unlawful scrutiny.”
The Arizona law set off a firestorm of rhetoric on both sides of the issue; however, the tough stance on illegal immigration finds favor both locally and nationally according to a Rasmussen poll. In Arizona, 70 percent favor the law to bring down crime that is burdening the state. Nationally, more than 60 percent approve of the new law.
After San Diego’s City Council voted last week to condemn Arizona’s new law and sent a letter to Governor Jan Brewer, apparently the SDUSD school board feels empowered to warn children about the political landscape the country faces during a lingering recession.
Jeff Schwilk, founder of the San Diego Minutemen called Barrera’s proposed resolution outrageous. “Like the San Diego City Council last week, Mr. Barrera is sticking his nose into a political issue that has nothing to do with the school district. If Barrera really cares about the safety of our children, he should focus on warning them and their parents about the physical dangers of traveling to war-torn Mexico, just a few miles south of San Diego. With the new law in place, Arizona will be a much safer place to visit for all American citizens,” Schwilk said.
The vote is set to take place on Tuesday night and claims that 44 percent of its student body is Hispanic and could be affected if they travel to Arizona.
The resolution also claims these students may “be targeted and harassed by law enforcement officials in Arizona as ‘reasonably suspect’ if they fall into a stereotype held by law enforcement officers.”
However, Arizona’s new law says nothing about targeting children and confirms law enforcement officers can only approach people if they’ve broken the law in some way. Examples of this could be speeding in a car, running a stop sign or robbing a bank. If people and children follow the law there will be no problems in Arizona or any other state.
Nevertheless, the School Board says; “`The law undermines fundamental civil rights and civil liberties, and poses a special threat to people of color who live in and travel through Arizona.”
Parents of school age children feel differently. “Since when did the public school district feel the need to involve children in a political topic that has nothing to do with them and will only deter them from learning,” explained Becky Schuler a parent. “California’s schools are some of the worst in the country and this is just another example of why the kids are failing to learn San Diego.”
San Diego City Councilman Carl DeMaio was the only member who dissented against the City Council resolution.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner
Thousands of Americans and immigrants marched across the country on Saturday; many were celebrating the traditional May Day activities including traditional dancers. However the real story may be the fact those chanting against Arizona’s new immigration law were misinformed.
Camera crews were out in earnest filming the May Day events and calling attention to many aspects of the supposed anti-immigration law American’s in Arizona want on the books. This point can easily be diffused when voters look to the polling on the issue.
In a USA Today/Gallup Poll, 61 percent are very concerned about illegal immigration and the government’s inability to secure the border.
The number increases to eight in 10 citizens who believe illegal immigrants are an added burden to hospitals, schools and other public welfare programs during a deep recession. Another 77 percent are concerned illegal immigrants will push hourly wages lower.
In California, the porous borders make it easy for pregnant women to enter the country illegally and put a significant burden on the hospitals who take in the birthing mothers.
This cost is significant, according to Dr. Gary Gonsalves, who also co-founded StopTaxingUs, a taxpayer advocacy group. “Approximately 107,000 illegal immigrant women will have babies each year in California on the taxpayer dime,” he says. “Of those, 33 percent will need C-sections at $20,000 per baby and 12 percent will have premature babies at a cost of $165,000 per baby.”
The tab for just childbirth reaches past $2 billion per year in the state of California. It is also estimated that California pays out upwards of $10 billion per year in other programs for illegal immigrants and their children.
California is also broke – $20 billion or more in the red.
Groups like NumbersUSA are manning the phones and loading their websites with all the statistical information concerned voters need to arm themselves with the facts. Just as the main- stream media took to the streets and grabbed sound bites, NumbersUSA’s Chad McDonald filmed the rallies looking to see why folks were so angry.
This is what he found;
You Tube Videos
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 1
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 2
Boycott Arizona? May Day March in Los Angeles part 3
In an ongoing trend in local and national government, politicians are voting in a manner that their constituents do not favor. They appear to abide by a new political correctness; “we know better than you what the rules should be.”
First voters watched their lawmakers defy their wishes on health care and now local municipalities are addressing Arizona’s illegal immigration policy. The city of San Diego is the latest city voting to send a resolution to Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer to repeal the new immigration legislation she signed into law.
In a stunning turn of politics the San Diego City Council decided they knew better than the wants of its residents and in a 7-1 vote they abdicated Arizona.
A Channel 10 News poll found the majority of San Diegans support Arizona’s new law, 51 percent favor it while 33 percent oppose and 15 percent do not care. On the local radio Rick Robert’s show approximately 97 percent agree with Arizona’s tough new legislation and only three percent do not.
Now that immigration is front and center on the television screen many who do not know what Mexico’s illegal immigration policy can now read closely. First illegal immigration is a felony punishable by up to two years in Mexican prison and if you attempt to re-enter the country law-breakers can expect up to 10 years in jail.
Mexico will deport foreigners it deems detrimental to their economic livelihood, who is not healthy and anyone who can’t take care of themselves, according to the Washington Times.
San Diego Council President Ben Hueso, who wanted the resolution, says he supports immigration reform and protecting the nation’s border, but said Arizona’s law as detrimental to national unity.
“This law threatens to divide our union,” said Hueso. “I believe it violates the Constitution. It victimizes legal residents as well as those who are here in the country illegally. And, it discourages the victims of crimes in the immigrant community to access justice.”
The lone dissenting vote came from Councilman Carl DeMaio, who didn’t blame Arizona from wanting to protect its residents from an illegal immigrant invasion, many of whom have criminal backgrounds or ties to the Mexican drug cartels.
“I cannot support the resolution as introduced, as it does not accurately reflect the Arizona state law as amended under HB 2162,” DeMaio explained. “Moreover, the resolution as introduced fails to call the federal government to task for its failure to secure our nation’s borders.”
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the Senate Bill into law on April 23, and it makes it illegal to be in the state without acceptable identification and it authorizes local law enforcement to investigate a person’s immigration status during other routine law enforcement activities.
Brewer says she will “not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.”
On Friday, the governor signed an amendment to the original bill, which will bar race from being considered when inquiring about legal status.
“These new amendments make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal and will not be tolerated in Arizona,” Brewer said.
However, Councilwoman Marti Emerald said the amendment is nothing more than a facade.
“In my mind, this house bill is a smokescreen by people who really do support racial profiling, and it would be totally unnecessary if the Arizona state government would repeal 1070,” Emerald said.
In a Rasmussen Poll taken last week said, 70 percent of Arizonans favor the tough new law as a way to rein in the crime the state is succumbing to on a daily basis.
San Diego Police Chief William Lansdowne said he does not agree with the new Arizona law and felt it would lead the community to distrust law enforcement community and could lead to racial profiling.
“If we change that policy, it would be my belief that the community would no longer trust us and they would not report those crimes and we would not be able to adequately and effectively police the city of San Diego,” says Lansdowne.
However, many law enforcement agencies in Arizona favor the new law and hope it will discourage future illegal immigrants from crossing the border illegally and staying in a state that is over burdened with financially strained public service programs.
San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders said in a statement that he would sign the City Council resolution.
“It’s not the job of our police department to solve the federal government’s immigration problem,” Sanders said. “As a former police chief, I know what we ask of our officers every day with our limited city resources, and their first priority is to protect our citizens.”
In true Tea Party fashion groups have began email blasts to American’s calling for a national Arizona ‘buy-cott.’
“Starting May 5th, we are officially kicking off an on-going Arizona buy-cott to support Arizona bases corporations, local businesses, on-line retailers, and tourism. Our site will list a sampling of the great companies you can support…and there is something for everyone,” say the Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition in San Diego Dawn Wildman.
About 40 people gathered at a rally in downtown San Diego voicing their dissenting view on the tough new Arizona illegal immigration issue signed into law on Friday.
Police on the scene commented that there were more media trucks and law enforcement at the “Boycott Arizona” evening rally than actual rally supporters. One of the officers on duty said, “Media must have been hoping there would be a large number of protesters like we had during the 2006 failed amnesty push.”
Approximately seven media trucks, seven police cars and SUVs, two fire trucks and one ambulance lined the street in front on the federal building along Front Street. There were no reports of any arrests and protesters were able to get their message out with only one counter-protester on the sidelines.
Rally attendees listened to speakers in English and Spanish talk about how racist Arizona’s new law is and the need to show support for the immigrant population throughout the country.
Many signs and Mexican flags sprinkled the crowd and the lone American flag captured the attention of passerby’s as there were many more Mexican flags waving in the air. Folks leaving the building after a long day at work didn’t appreciate the blatant disrespect for the American flag. “Why not support Americans?” asked John Leary of San Diego.
As far as the supporters point of view the rally was a chance to support the Latinos in the country, legally or illegally.
“I support Hispanic immigrants around the country and in Arizona. Because laws in other states affect us we need to make sure illegal immigrants liberties are not violated. I believe this new law infringes on the 4th Amendment and will lead to racial profiling,” said Leo Carrillo of San Diego. “This isn’t my first rally I have been to before and it’s important to let people know I support them.”
While there was only one counter-protester on the sidewalk, many people in cars driving by shouted “No amnesty, go home,” and there were cars that simply honked in support of illegal immigrants.
One thing is clear – this debate is not over.
For more stories; http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Diego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner