Thanks for the info.
I guess we'll find out just how much the people of Arizona care about their part of the illegal alien problem.
Posted on 04/18/2006 10:18:22 AM PDT by BradtotheBone
Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill that would have criminalized the presence of illegal immigrants in Arizona, citing opposition from police agencies that want immigration arrests to remain the responsibility of the federal government.
The proposal would have expanded the state's trespassing law to let local authorities arrest illegal immigrants anywhere in Arizona, the nation's busiest illegal entry point. Congress also had considered criminalizing the presence of illegal immigrants in the country.
In a letter to lawmakers, Napolitano said she opposes automatically turning all immigrants who sneaked into the state into criminals and that the bill provided no funding for the new duties.
"It is unfortunate that the Legislature has once again ignored the officials who are most directly affected by illegal immigration and instead has passed yet another bill that will have no effect on the problem but that will impose an unfunded burden on law enforcement," Napolitano wrote Monday.
Supporters said the bill would have given Arizona a chance to get a handle on its vast border problems by providing a second layer of enforcement to catch the tens of thousands of immigrants who slip past federal agents each year.
Republican Sen. Barbara Leff of Paradise Valley, who proposed the bill, said the governor has painted herself as tough on illegal immigration by declaring a state of emergency at Arizona's border, but has taken little action to back up her rhetoric.
"I don't think the governor wants to do anything about this problem," Leff said. She said the bill would have been a means to detain illegal immigrants until federal agents can pick them up.
The Democratic governor, accused by her Republican critics of being soft on immigration, has vetoed other immigration bills from the GOP- majority Legislature within the past year, including a proposal to give police the power to enforce federal immigration laws.
While immigrants provide the economy with cheap labor, Arizona spends tens of millions of dollars each year in health care and education costs for illegal workers and their families. An estimated 500,000 of the state's population of about 6 million are illegal immigrants.
I read about that. Sickening!
Your argument is off base. Criminals are supposed to make restitution to a victim who suffered a loss. Here if an illegal does not use govt. services, no one has suffered a loss. The employer gains, the illegal gains, the govt. even gains via more taxes on a higher profit.
Further, even if an illegal uses govt. services, it will be a stretch to charge an employer. It would be like a citizen works at a 7-11, takes his paycheck to buy a gun, shoots someone and asking the 7-11 to make restitution.
So I find your restitution comment to be without merit.
I never said they couldn't - local law enforcement budgets being what they are, that is low on my list of priorities.
quite fitting names. : )
Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dee
Resolved to have a battle,
For Tweedle-dum said Tweedle-dee
Had spoiled his nice new rattle.
It's really not a hard concept to grasp. The current penalties aren't stringent enough, and yes all laws need to be enforced.
stupid twit......
Dittos to that! What is it with these RAT/lib/socialist/feminazi governors? Napolitano isn't the only one trying to ruin her state. You can add Granholm (RAT-MI); Blanco (RAT-LA); Sebelius (RAT-KS); Gregoire (RAT-WA). Might be more.
What are the current penalties for employing illegals?
I wonder if this will effect her reelection.
She is up for reelection this year
Arresting just the illegals who are committing State crimes will also lower the crime rate AND is a better allocation of resources.
"so that these folks can come in here and work leagally,"
If you mean enter the country as legal immigrants that will pay all the same taxes as a citizen, then that would be fine. If you mean some sort of "guest worker", then that is a problem.
A "guest worker" would not pay all the same taxes as a citizen -- specifically, no SS/M taxes on the employer or employee sides. That would make allow the employer to spend 16% less on that worker compared to a citizen that had the same after-tax income. That means the citizen is still at a disadvantage.
Check this out:
1) Employer spends $100/day on a citizen
2) That is $93 wages and $7 employer-side SS/M tax.
3) Employee has an additional $7 withheld for employee-side SS/M tax.
4) Employee is left with $84 and must then pay Income taxes.
5) The guest worker can work for $84, pay income taxes, and have the same standard of living as the citizen.
If the State has any taxes that will not apply to a guest worker, then the difference in labor prices gets even worse.
If you are suggesting that guest workers should pay into SS/M, then I think that would mean they also were entitled to benefits. That is a losing equation, since low-wage workers always collect more from SS/M than their contributions would justify. They are subsidized by high-earners that receive much less than their contributions would justify.
This is why even legal immigration should be limited to people that will be high-earners and will contribute more to the system than they take out.
Thanks for the info.
I guess we'll find out just how much the people of Arizona care about their part of the illegal alien problem.
Re what Napolitano would have done --
It would appear that hers is a red herring argument.
It would impose further duties on law enforcement. If it wasn't enforced, it too would then look like empty rhetoric. Arizona has a sizable surplus right now and the biggest political battle in the state is over what to do with it. Republicans want to reduce taxes. Napolitano wants to (1) spend it and (2) stash away any balance she can't spend. Maybe a compromise would be funding new police to enforce this new felony.
That she hasn't proposed that, and actively opposes it, should answer your original question.
thanks for the campaign ad Janet
We got the queen bee, at least in the Senate, Here in the Peoples Republic of NY. Ghastly!
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Len Munsil is going to be the Republican nominee. He's a solid Reagan conservative. Although he only recently got in to the race, he has raised the maximum amount of seed money and has raised enough contributions to qualify for clean election funding; something Goldwater has not been able to do, even though he started running last summer. And he can beat Janet.
We are talking about MONETARY restitution for a MONETARY crime. So your 7-11 strawman is garbage.
"Here if an illegal does not use govt. services, no one has suffered a loss."
This is not true. All the other employees that suffered a depressed wage are victims of the employer's action. All the people that paid higher auto-insurance because illegals didn't are victims. All the people that paid higher health-care costs because illegals used private hospital emergency rooms without paying are victims.
There are a myriad of ways that these employers have shifted a monetary burden onto society at large, not just government-provided services.
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.