Boycotts should not drive policy choice

Posted Sunday, July 15, 2007

Looking for any additional leverage that might aid their cause, activists on both sides of a controversial law enforcement proposal in Waukegan have turned to economic pressure.

Those who oppose a city council effort to give local police certain authority to enforce federal immigration law have given Waukegan business owners bright orange posters signifying opposition to these enforcement powers. Organizers have told business owners that stores and restaurants that display the posters can count on their patronage. Owners and managers who fail to display the orange signs will be the targets of a boycott.

In response, Americans for Legal Immigration, which favors the enforcement powers, is urging people from inside the city and out to patronize businesses that decline to display the orange posters.

There’s nothing new about utilizing economic boycotts as a political tool, but the fact is that organizers on both sides have unfairly placed business owners, who have no direct role in this debate, in a no-win situation. Display the orange sign, and a business owner presumably loses a share of business. Fail to display the poster, and he or she loses a different segment of customers.

This regrettable turn of events signifies how high both sides believe the stakes to be. Indeed, the proposal does bear citywide ramifications. In June, council members voted to seek from the Department Homeland Security special status — dubbed 287(g) — for some city police officers. With federal approval, these officers would receive training, among other things, to initiate deportation proceedings against illegal immigrants. City officials, led by Mayor Richard Hyde, say they would use this authority only against persons involved in such serious crimes as murder, rape or other violent felonies.

In those instances, deportation of those who gained entry to the country illegally would seem the appropriate course of action. If 287(g) status helps the city expedite that process, then it would have a definite value.

City council members, scheduled to re-vote on the issue Monday, will be weighing that benefit against concerns of those — particularly Latinos — who fear that police would use the authority more broadly. Hyde has pledged that police would not use 287(g) status to conduct random sweeps either housing or workplaces for the purpose of finding those here illegally. Indeed, it’s not at all clear what benefit Waukegan would gain from such sweeps. Still, Hyde, the city council and police brass would do well to reiterate the pledge if the council again votes in favor of the application.

There is no easy answer to the question of whether 287(g) status is, on balance, more beneficial or detrimental to Waukegan. If the city uses the authority as pledged, then the scales tip toward beneficial. In any case, though, city council members are obliged to base their votes on the proposal’s merits or drawbacks — uninfluenced by the threats and counter— threats of economic damage.

http://www.dailyherald.com/search/searc ... ?id=331653