Thread: SB1070 "tough" on tax payer wallets...

SB 1070 not so 'tough' in reality
20 commentsby E. J. Montini - Jul. 8, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic .

One of the big lies being spread about Senate Bill 1070 is that the law is "tough."

Not only "tough," but according to just about every politician and news organization in the country, it is the "toughest" immigration-enforcement law in the country.

Really?

We could have saved ourselves a lot of anxiety, a lot of arguments, a lot of time, trouble and money if only we had added two words to our description of SB 1070.

Those words are: "On paper."

As in: "SB 1070 is the toughest immigration-enforcement law in the country - on paper."

If by some chance the law was to go into effect on July 29, we'd probably discover that "on paper" has little to do with "in reality."

We should have learned this lesson from the employer-sanctions legislation that was passed in Arizona in 2007. That legislation also was called the toughest of its kind. And it was - on paper.

In reality, it turned out that the employer-sanctions law wasn't tough at all. If anything, it has been a joke, with only a couple of business owners having faced sanctions.

The same thing could happen with SB 1070. Given all the precautions that law enforcement must take to avoid any hint of racial profiling, I'd guess that there is little chance that any police agency - besides the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office - will pursue the law with any vigor.

And Sheriff Joe Arpaio didn't need SB 1070 in the first place to conduct his "crime suppression" sweeps.

Even the way that politicians talk about SB 1070 mimics the way politicians talked about employer sanctions.

When Gov. Jan Brewer says that SB 1070 was necessary because federal inaction had forced the states to act, she's reading from a script used by then-Gov. Janet Napolitano in 2007 after signing employer sanctions into law.

Napolitano said, "We're dealing somewhat in uncharted territory right now - uncharted territory because of the inability of the Congress to act. The states will take the lead, and Arizona will take the lead among the states."

Yeah, right.

State Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, who sponsored SB 1070, also sponsored the employer-sanctions law. He described that law as "the toughest yet fairest employer-sanction law in the country."

Sure it is.

His colleague, then-Speaker of the House Jim Weiers, said of employer sanctions: "It's monumental. It's a change from anything we've done in the past. It's time for the states to start stepping up and stop waiting for Congress."

Sounds exactly like what politicians are saying about SB 1070, doesn't it?

It didn't take long before business groups, civil-rights organizations and immigrant activists decided that they must file lawsuits against the employer-sanctions law. And while the lawsuits worked their way through the courts, the law itself didn't work at all.

Now the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of the employer-sanctions law.

Why would the highest court in the land take on a case involving a law that has resulted in so few actual prosecutions?

Because constitutionality does not necessarily have anything to do with common sense.

Laws like SB 1070 and employer sanctions make people feel good. They help politicians get elected. They make lawyers rich.

But since we pay for the lawsuits, the only things they're tough on are taxpayers' wallets.



Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... i0708.html?

Full circle the argument that IA's help the economy is ludicrous...the financial and division of people, state and law is so totally unjustified simply to protect the supposed "rights" of a group that has no legal right to even be in the country at all!

The unjustified/illegal/sanctuary protection of them from Government, Churches, States and the bleeding hearts is simply unbelievable/incomprehensible and also illegal.

How so much propaganda (lies) can exist and continue to circulate is beyond my comprehension. Maybe that is the "comprehensive" effect they keep talking about? The crazy unrelenting unrealistic unlawful protection and sanctuary simply to provide existence for an illegal class of people in this country.

They continue to try and make the law abiding of this country "comprehend" their insanity reasoning? But further...they want us to feel bad and racist because we believe in America, in protecting our way of life and obeying her laws.

I will never "comprehensive" anything they are talking about because it is wrong at every level of legal and moral and this argument is devastating our country.

All this waist and cost over getting some paper work together and obaying our laws...!?!?! INCOMPREHENSIBLE!