Posted on 11/23/2003 10:31:28 AM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO -- Latino lawmakers like Kern County's Assemblywoman Nicole Parra and Sen. Dean Florez seldom find themselves in a tougher political spot than they are in right now. That's one result of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's demand that the Legislature repeal the new law allowing illegal immigrants to obtain driver licenses -- or face the threat of a referendum on the ballot next March.
"It's a tough decision for a lot of us," said Florez, D-Shafter.
It is especially tough for Parra.
She is a Democrat running for re-election in a west-side district with a large Latino population, but with a voting pattern so conservative that she barely eked out a victory in her first try for office last year.
The law has long been a goal of many in the Latino community, although it also has its Latino critics.
Supporters estimate that some 2 million undocumented immigrants drive illegally and without insurance.
When the bill cleared the Legislature in September, Florez and Parra were among 21 Latino lawmakers who voted for it. Two Latino moderates voted against it.
Schwarzenegger's campaign to repeal the law poses a major dilemma for its supporters in the Legislature, especially Latinos.
Do they stick with their original positions and oppose the repeal?
If they are successful in blocking the repeal, they run the risk of seeing a referendum placed on the ballot. A group of conservative Republicans is well on the way toward gathering enough signatures to qualify it
That is a two-pronged political hazard for supporters of the bill.
It would be a made-to-order campaign issue for Republicans. Democratic incumbents would have to spend much of their time defending their votes on the bill.
And if it is overturned at the ballot box over the opposition of the Democratic-controlled Legislature, supporters fear it may be a years-long setback for the campaign for immigrant driver licenses.
Polls show the law is unpopular with a large majority of voters statewide. Critics say it would make illegal immigration more attractive and make it easier for terrorists to operate in the United States.
The other option for Latino supporters of the law is to change their positions and support -- or at least not oppose -- a repeal, in hopes that it can be replaced with a law that would have more security safeguards and be more acceptable politically.
Schwarzenegger has said he is open to another bill "if you can put the whole package together, tied to insurance, tied to background checks and all that."
But it could not be passed until next year, and likely would not go into effect until Jan. 1, 2005.
The author of the bill, Sen. Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles, has begun talks with the governor and administration officials about a possible compromise bill.
However, he has said he has major reservations about agreeing to a repeal this year, with no assurances that a replacement bill would be enacted next year.
So for now, it's a stalemate.
The Legislature is dragging its feet on the repeal Schwarzenegger wants, and the referendum sponsors are continuing to gather signatures.
Meanwhile, Florez, Parra and other Latino lawmakers are left to wring their hands over what to do.
Parra did not return phone calls to discuss the issue, but she has told other lawmakers that she may have to vote for the repeal.
Her opponent, Republican Dean Gardner, who narrowly lost to her last year, said he won't let her off the hook, no matter how she votes.
He said "she created this pickle" by voting with the liberal Democrats who financed her campaign last year.
"When a person lacks a moral compass to know what is right and wrong," he said, "you simply vote for or against things simply on the basis of financial support from special interests and you lose the ability to represent the people."
Republican leaders initially were counting on the moderate Florez to be one of the Democratic votes to repeal the bill, but he says no deal: He won't support a straight repeal of the law without a compromise substitute at the same time.
"I won't go for a two-step process," he said. "In our area, I think everybody needs a driver's license."
The decision may be a little easier for Florez than for Parra and others, because he is not up for re-election next year and won't have to face a Republican challenger hammering him about his vote on bill.
But he and others say it is a complicated issue that does not break down easily, even along ethnic lines.
"The Latino community," said Assemblywoman Sarah Reyes, D-Fresno, "is as conflicted about it as the larger community is."
Oh, please! This is not a "complicated issue". You're either in favor of rewarding illegal aliens or you're not.
Yeah, I know. I just get tired of hearing their same old, sorry old rhetoric. Blech!
The problem with Latino politicians in this state is that they think Latino people are a monolith that sees things one way. Black politicians make the same mistake regarding black people.
No one believes that if illegals get driver's licenses they will automatically get automobile insurance because here in California you don't necessarily need a driver's license to get insurance. But you do need some sort of identification and the only ID illegals have is illegal ID. You also need money and we're constantly reminded how illegals are living "hand to mouth". It's nonsense and most Californians have finally figured it out: the solution is to not allow illegals in.
One other decision Latino politicians need to make: either they are American or they are Mexican. If they are American they need to put America's (and Americans') best interests first. If they are Mexican they need to move there where they can put Mexico's (and Mexicans') best interests first. There is no middle ground and nothing to debate...it is that simple...and it appears that the majority of Californians finally understand that.
Kalifornia already requires that owners of vehicles demonstrate insurance coverage in order to renew vehicle registrations. Arnold's bright idea will lead to an additional requirement that all driver's licenses be tied to insurance, which isn't done now. This will require even more paperwork on the part of insurers to provide the documentation required by the state.
Adding requirements for legal Kalifornia drivers and Kalifornia insurers is just more of the same liberal garbage that got us to where we are. There is absolutely no justification for enabling illegal behavior of any type. And that certainly includes the "free" health care and schooling mandated for illegals today.
You don't have to prove much of anything to register a vehicle. The registration permits taxation, periodic smog checks, and verification of insurance.
Insurance companies issue small certificates, one copy of which is to be in the vehicle and one copy is submitted with registration renewals. There is no requirement that a person be a citizen; just a Kalifornia address would do.
Once the registration has been filed, the insured can probably cancel the insurance, receiving a pro-rated refund, and there is no requirement that the insurance company inform the state. If there is a lien-holder listed as "legal owner" and loss-payee, then the insurance company would notify them of the insurance cancellation.
If the state is not willing to jail or seek deportation for people who are not in compliance with these laws, then there is little motivation for them to be in compliance. I think that most of these laws are overly burdensome and should be repealed. But I resent the fact that they can be enforced against the law-abiding and yet there are no significant consequences for illegals.
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.