Thread: ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION; Crackdown could cost state

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION;
Crackdown could cost state

Jeremy Redmon; Staff


Tourism boosters fear House Bill 87 backlash. They'll try to convince meeting planners that Georgia isn't Arizona.


Georgia tourism and convention boosters are scrambling to prevent the state from suffering the same economic impacts that Arizona felt last year after enacting the nation's toughest immigration enforcement law.

As Gov. Nathan Deal prepares to sign into law a similar immigration measure, House Bill 87, tourism officials here are employing a series of strategies. They're pointing out the differences between Arizona's law and the Georgia legislation, highlighting Atlanta's civil rights history and emphasizing how cancellations could hurt tens of thousands of metro area workers.

Their biggest concern is the series of cancellations that struck Arizona soon after Gov. Jan. Brewer signed that state's hotly contested law.

In all, the Grand Canyon State has lost about 40 conventions amid economic boycotts inspired by its crackdown on illegal immigration, according to the Arizona Hotel & Lodging Association. One estimate says the lost bookings have cost Arizona $141 million.

Partly patterned after Arizona's law, HB 87 is expected to be signed by Deal this week. The measure would empower police to investigate the immigration status of certain suspects. It would also punish people who transport or harbor illegal immigrants in Georgia.

HB 87's supporters say Georgia needs to take action because illegal immigrants are burdening taxpayer-funded resources here. Critics say the legislation is unconstitutional and will scare away tourists and conventioneers.

Last month, the Atlanta Convention & Visitors Bureau went on record against HB 87.

The bureau's executive committee unanimously passed a resolution saying HB 87 could "tarnish Atlanta's reputation as one of America's most welcoming cities."

Ed Walls, general manager of the Westin Peachtree Plaza hotel, voted for the resolution. About 30 percent of his hotel's business comes from conventions, he said.

"Our concern is really the perception of our customers," said Walls, vice chairman of the Georgia Hotel and Lodging Association. "In some cases, groups will cancel based on principle."

Walls said he stands ready to point out the differences between Arizona's law and HB 87, including when police would be able to question suspects about their immigration status under the Georgia legislation.

A lot is at stake. The hospitality industry is the fourth-largest employer in the Atlanta region with about 223,000 jobs, the bureau says.

"Folks that cancel are not hurting just the state of Georgia," Walls said. "They are hurting an awful lot of people that have jobs in the state of Georgia."

No Atlanta conventions have been canceled, though some planners have called to inquire about HB 87, said Pattsie Rand, sales and marketing director for the Georgia World Congress Center. Rand also confirmed that a convention Arizona lost amid the boycotts last year remains scheduled for Atlanta.

Asked about the tourism industry's concerns, Deal spokesman Brian Robinson said "promoting legal immigration and assuring that federal laws are followed is the best way to protect the human rights of everyone in our state."

One organization has already announced it will cancel plans to hold its national conference in Atlanta this year unless Deal vetoes the bill. The U.S. Human Rights Network, an Atlanta-based nonprofit organization, said more than 600 people are expected to attend its three-day event.

"The last thing that Georgia needs in these difficult economic times is to follow Arizona's path and become a national pariah," Ajamu Baraka, the network's executive director, said in a prepared statement last week.

The author of HB 87 --- Republican Rep. Matt Ramsey of Peachtree City --- said the network's actions are "tantamount to economic extortion."

"At the end of the day, we have to take strong action to protect our taxpaying citizens," he said. "Enforcing the rule of law and jealously guarding our taxpayer resources is the right side to be on."

May 9, 2011


http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/En ... 33&start=2

Gov jan
said to close the border . . but gov want them all over for
for Slave . to clean & cook . work cheap that why you gov & Senate want them in our country
that why our country is the way it is .
well it not going to work that way any more . Our men & girl are over sea they should be at the border . we are at war
& you say illegal immigrantion crack down could cost state
well close the SB border & check every one that come over for a visit & for get to go home ?
why we have more mexico In NYC & all up to NY state then mexico
has so what the hell are saying . go out to PA & see what the hell in going on it just like NYC & all the other state
we are sick of this BS
gov . & mayor of every town of the USA do your job right or get the hell out why I could do a better job
I would start with all the illegal immigrant . &
to get them the hell out .of our country
& who hire them I would fine . them good .

No amnesty

Not a single mention of what it will save the state that will counter the boycotts?

Also,
This is "ECONOMIC EXTORTION" plain and simple. It should be Illegal to threaten town and state government in this way to affect law and law enforcement...

by the way
that will save a hell of money .& they should have law
enforcement .

No amnesty

Georgia tourism and convention boosters are scrambling to prevent the state from suffering the same economic impacts that Arizona felt last year after enacting the nation's toughest immigration enforcement law.

Once again, all part of the Myth that our economy depends on Illegals. Pure crap, nothing but crap!

Related:

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-237283.html

What economic impacts Arizona suffered last year? I keep seeing these biased articles stating that Arizona took some kind of economic damage from passing the popularly supported SB 1070, but I do not recall ever seeing an unbiased or objective study proving that.

Please look into this for us here at ALIPAC and arm us with the truth please.

Is there any solid evidence that the Arizona economy experienced a significant negative impact from passing SB 1070?

W

We need to give AZ and other patriotic states our business-and we need to boycott EVERY business that is boycotting those states who are merely trying to self-preserve!!

Arizona’s illegal immigrant population is costing the state’s taxpayers even more than once thought -- a whopping $2.7 billion in 2009, according to researchers at the public interest group that helped write the state's new immigration law.

Researchers at FAIR – The Federation for American Immigration Reform -- released data exclusively to FoxNews.com that show a steady cost climb in multiple areas, including incarceration, education and health, in the last five years.

FAIR’s cost estimates – compiled for a comprehensive national immigration report it plans to release next month – include several new cost areas, including welfare and the justice system, that weren’t in previous reports.

FAIR admits that the cost to implement the new law in some of those categories, such as incarceration, will add to the economic strain on the state. But overall, it says, the loss of immigrants either from the deterrent effect of the law, voluntary exodus or from mass deportations, will help the state financially.

Also, the savings to the state will far overwhelm any fallout from boycotts (estimated at between $7 million and $52 million) being threatened in the wake of the law's passage, according to FAIR spokesman Bob Dane.

FAIR's new breakdown shows that illegal immigrants take $1.6 billion from Arizona's education system, $694.8 million from health care services, $339.7 million in law enforcement and court costs, $85.5 million in welfare costs and $155.4 million in other general costs.

. . . .

Both Dane and Martin said that among FAIR’s most important findings was an estimate that tax revenues to the state will actually increase if illegal immigrants leave.

“We discovered after looking at places where big raids were made that salaries went up after the raids because employers now had to pay competitive wages to Americans.â€

[quote="ReggieMay"] Both Dane and Martin said that among FAIR’s most important findings was an estimate that tax revenues to the state will actually increase if illegal immigrants leave. [b]“We discovered after looking at places where big raids were made that salaries went up after the raids because employers now had to pay competitive wages to Americans.â€