Posted on 03/10/2006 6:29:15 PM PST by SandRat
PHOENIX — There won’t be any National Guard troops in Southern Arizona — at least not yet.
As vowed, Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a $10 million appropriation for the Guard because it ordered her to put the troops on the border.
In a five-paragraph letter to legislators, Napolitano cited a state constitutional provision that makes her commander-in-chief of the Guard.
“The Legislature has no constitutional or other authority to control when or how the Guard is deployed,” she said.
But Napolitano insisted she remains interested in putting troops in Southern Arizona and promised that if lawmakers send her a bill with the funds — but without the mandate — she would sign it and begin deployment.
That option may already be in progress: On Thursday the House gave preliminary approval to another bill to appropriate funds to deploy Guard troops in Southern Arizona for “border security functions.” But that measure, HB 2579, has none of the language the governor found offensive.
And Napolitano already has signed an executive order posting troops in Southern Arizona, conditional on getting some cash.
But the governor’s promise held no water for Rep. John Allen, R-Scottsdale, sponsor of the vetoed bill. He wants colleagues to resend his measure to Napolitano, insisting that’s the only way to guarantee deployment.
“I don’t think she has any real expectation of doing it,” he said.
Asked if she was calling her a liar, Allen responded, “There is a difference between what she says and what she does.”
That’s also the assessment of Rep. Jonathan Paton, R-Tucson. “We have seen that this governor does not follow her promises with any actions that are credible.”
Paton acknowledged that the governor, by signing an emergency declaration last year, put some money into the hands of Southern Arizona law enforcement agencies to battle the effects of illegal immigration, including overtime for police officers and increased jail costs. But he dismissed that as meaningless because it does not deal with the underlying problem.
“Not one person has stopped coming over the border because of her efforts,” he said.
“What matters to ranchers in my district is whether people are going to be walking on their ranches ... whether people are going to be dying on their ranches,” Paton said. “That hasn’t stopped.”
While the latest funding plan for the Guard apparently complies with what the governor wants, it does not have support from some legislative Democrats.
Rep. Pete Rios, D-Dudleyville, feared what would happen to industries like tourism if posting Guard units along the border actually cut the number of illegal immigrants.
“Who cuts the greens on those fairways at those resorts where those visitors stay,” he asked. “Who cleans those rooms? Who builds those buildings?”
Aside from adopting the alternative funding plan for the Guard, the House gave preliminary approval Thursday for a measure designed to ensure that Arizona companies only hire people who are in this country legally. It includes penalties for knowingly hiring undocumented workers and requirements for agencies to audit some of the firms they license to ensure compliance with federal and state labor laws.
HCR 2044 is identical to HB 2577 that gained final House approval Thursday on a 35-20 margin. But there is one key difference: HCR 2044 would put the issue on the November ballot, a fallback position in case the governor vetoes the other one.
Words befitting of a Gentleman speaking in reference to a Lady and Elected personage absolutely escape me.
Napolitano is a stinking liar.
L
...seems she wants it both ways.
"..."Jumbo Jack" instead of a "YUMBO YACK"!!!!"
Ha Ha Ha Ha ..... ROTFLMAO That is soooooooo true
My first job was riding a bicycle in downtown Birmingham for Western Union - my second was cutting grass for Alabama Power. During the Carter malaise, I picked up garbage in a stake bed dump truck - no hydraulic clamp, lift, dump and compact. My helper and I got out of the truck, lifted the cans over the stake walls, and periodically stomped down the garbage with our boots. We were glad to have a job, period.
Spare me the "doing the jobs" song and dance, Pete.
I beg to differ...the Governor wants to deploy troops to the points of entry. The legislature wants her to deploy those troops to the unguarded border. The Governor is only after the money.
She is the commander in chief. Not the legislator. Where the troops go is up to the CiC. If the legislator doesn't like it, they don't have to fund the activity. This battle is as old as the USA.
It takes no gonads to place troops at points of entry. Her state of emergency is and has always been a farce. Your latter point is well taken, and I would hope that the legislature would withdraw funding then.
They can also over ride her veto, if they have the votes.
IMHO, it doesn't take any gonads to place the Guard anywhere on the boarder. But if it is to be a face-off between the legislature and the governor, I know who will win. The same person who has won all the other face offs. ;)
Thanks for the background, I did not know all the facts.
Have the Minutemen been sent this one?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.