Posted on 11/25/2006 6:22:53 AM PST by Kimberly GG
It's time to call things what they are with the illegal immigration issue, and the Prescott City Council should approve the resolution it unveiled at this week's study session.
The draft resolution:
• Urges the federal government to seal the borders against entry of "illegal immigrants, criminals and terrorists."
• Opposes amnesty for illegal aliens currently in the United States.
• Urges the federal government and state to secure that state border and the city borders against illegals and to let the state and city enforce existing laws on illegal immigration, Social Security and related federal benefits fraud and laws governing illegals in the workplace and the hiring of illegals.
• Urges the federal government to enact laws that allow state and local government to enforce immigration laws and provide money to help them.
It's a sad fact of life that Congress and the Bush Ad-ministration have done precious little fix the problem. Even though it's the federal government's job, if someone doesn't do that job and soon things will get even worse.
The Daily Courier has noted in past columns that Immigration Customs and Enforcement people show no inclination to pick up illegals involved in crimes in Prescott and Yavapai County once they make it this far north.
Some people attending the study session were wringing their hands aloud about the blunt language in the resolution. Too bad. Not all of the people entering the U.S. illegally are criminals and terrorists, but plenty of them are. If enough local governments speak as plainly to federal officials as this resolution does, it might inspire the do-nothing Congress to fix this long-standing problem. The council should approve this resolution unanimously with no changes.
And, after they got through telling everyone else what to do, they got back to the serious business of banning smoking. sarc/
Council resolution deals with illegal immigration
By CINDY BARKS
The Daily Courier
PRESCOTT In the wake of the overwhelming approval of several state immigration-related propositions earlier this month, the City of Prescott will weigh in on the issue this week.
At its regular study session at 3 p.m. Tuesday, the Prescott City Council will consider a resolution that urges the federal government to "move expeditiously to seal our borders against this flood of illegal immigrants, criminals and terrorists, and to employ all practical and legal measures required to achieve this endŠ"
The three-page resolution lists more than a dozen reasons for the action, including:
• "Whereas, in the last 10 or more years, the Immigration Act has not been strongly enforced and literally millions of individuals have come into our county in flagrant violationŠ"
• "Whereas, the citizens of Prescott are worried and concerned about the impact of illegal aliens on our national security, our national, state and local crime rates, the increasing illicit drug trade, as well as the negative impacts on property values, public schools, hospitals, taxes, and welfare costsŠ"
• "Since 2001, our city has experienced homicides, aggravated assaults, rapes, burglaries, drug sales and trafficking directly attributable to illegal aliensŠ"
The resolution also mentions that polls repeatedly show that citizens "strongly support reform of this country's immigration policy."
*****Laurie Hadley, Prescott's assistant to the city manager, noted on Friday that the city resolution stems, in part, from the Nov. 7 approval of four state propositions that deal with immigration issues, such as availability of public programs to illegal immigrants.
****"Especially in light of the propositions," Hadley said, some council members "feel like the voters have made a very strong statement."
A memo for the council from City Attorney Gary Kidd stated: "Over the past six months, (Police) Chief (Randy) Oaks and I have met with members of the council, each of whom has expressed concerns regarding the issues of illegal immigration, including the burdens our community faces with the increases in undocumented, illegal aliens."
http://prescottdailycourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=41930&TM=25293.19
Waaaayy past time.
I see Neil Cavuto declaring the immigration issue dead again this morning. I wonder why these people feel a need to keep declaring a dead issue dead?
Seems to me that they wouldn't need to talk about a dead issue.
http://prescottdailycourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=41858&TM=25437.06
11/14/2006 4:00:00 AM
PRESCOTT -- Prescott police on Sunday arrested three men and a juvenile, all Mexican nationals, on suspicion of rioting charges stemming from the Oct. 28 stabbing death of Prescott resident Daniel Cook.
Cook, 22, died at the Yavapai Regional Medical Center from a stab wound to his chest he received during the clash with a group of Hispanic men at a hotel's parking lot on Gurley Street.
Cook's brother, Lance, 24, received a knife cut to his arm. The fight concluded with the Hispanics leaving on foot and since then police have been trying to identify not only the suspect, but also the witnesses.
Sgt. Ken Morley said the department is not releasing the names of the arrested individuals because the suspect is still at large. However, the police believe that they now know who the suspect is, Morley said.
Sunday's arrests came as a result of Det. Jason Small's ability to stay alert and observant even during off-duty days.
Morley said Small was running an errand in town when he saw a vehicle he and Det. Mark McClain had been looking for since the incident.
Small notified patrol officers, who stopped the vehicle with five occupants. The officers took them to the station for interviews that culminated in criminal charges for four of them.
"It is a big break in this whole thing," Morley said.
He said the four men, who have no immigration documents, participated in the brawl with the Cook brothers.
Cook's eight-months pregnant girlfriend was sitting in the car during the fight. McClain said it all happened rather quickly.
After the stabbing, Cook went to the room of a friend and collapsed there.
Debbie Manos said his words to her were, "I've been stabbed. Please don't let me die."
Cook died shortly after his arrival to the hospital.
"From witnesses' accounts there were between six and a dozen people there," McClain said previously. "And only one of those people killed Daniel Cook."
Contact the reporter at mburic@prescottaz.com
None of these actions are going to work if we don't get rid of the "anchor baby" law.
Yes, now that we've lost 25 good HR4437 seats in the House, it's time to get tough on illegal immigration. What a joke. Where was this post before the election?
After 30 years of being lack on illegal immigration we finally build a consensus in the House and what happens? We lose 25 good HR4437 seats in the House.
That and hammering people who employ them.
FOLLOW THE MONEY.
Simplified, employers pay Illegals $10/ hour.
An American has to make (salary, benefits, vacation) about $40/hr to get by.
Who pays the $30 difference? You do. The taxpayer.
Employers are getting an unwritten subsidy, and they pass part of that on as "Campaign Donations".
"An American has to make (salary, benefits, vacation) about $40/hr to get by. "
$40 x 40 hrs x 52 = $82,300 a year
That's not getting by. That's high on the hog.
That's not getting by. That's high on the hog.
And how much have you left after that?
This won't be happening. Forget it; the party's over. Instead, deal with reality. Look at the family budget so it can be adjusted with a minimum of upset to maintain the basics when taxes are increased.
Left after what? Forty dollars an hour is only a minimum living wage to union goons. Millions of us can live just fine on considerably less, and do.
Starting salary for an entry-level Police Officer
$51,114 to $68,612
Detective
$72,391- $100,328
Boy, these guys must be rolling money!
Must be. Living wage is no where near as high as 40 an hour.
Here's an article from about a year ago by Mark Krikorian (Center for Immigration Studies)
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=13489
And here's an excerpt:
"Nor do guest-worker programs achieve their goal of replacing illegal immigration. During the Bracero program, for instance, there were 4.6 million Bracero admissions, but also 5.3 million Mexican illegal-alien apprehensions (both numbers include people entering multiple times). What's more, the immigration momentum created by the Bracero program has increased the Mexican-born population here from less than 600,000 in 1960 to some 11 million today, half of them illegal aliens. In the words of economist Philip Martin, one of the foremost experts in the field: "Rather than work temporarily and go home, large numbers of Mexican guest workers over time settled and served as magnets for further immigration, sparking one of the largest migrations in human history."
He has a good article in the latest National Review regarding those who see the election as a victory for open borders, those `whistling through the graveyard': `lock-step' supporters of the president, the Chamber of Commerce and the status quo. I'd post but their site is down.
As Krikorian states in his recent article, Democrats--and others--who ignore the real lesson of 11/7/06 do so at their own peril. The only Democrat who came out in favor a "guest worker program", as pushed by the Bush administration, lost.
The winners all made it clear while campaigning that they were opposed to amnesty, and that's what this all about, no matter what words are used or how it is spun.
Because the `bottom line' is, if we do again what we did in `86 we are then going to be overwhelmed by new `guest workers'.
I took it to mean with ALL expenses involved with hiring a legal employee, such as disability, benefits, vacations. The salary of the employee vs. the actual cost of employing that person. I know my employer kicks in quite a bit of money for health care and 401k match alone.
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.