Arizona GOP Defies Bush, Calls For Accountability on Illegal Aliens

Talon News Service ^ | 27 January 2004 | Jimmy Moore

[Spiff]

Arizona GOP Defies Bush, Calls For Accountability on Illegal Aliens

By Jimmy Moore
Talon News
January 27, 2004

MESA, AZ (Talon News) -- In direct response to President George W. Bush's recent call for a temporary worker program for illegal aliens in the United States, the Arizona Republican Party overwhelmingly supported a resolution that would protect Arizona taxpayers from the financial impact this would place on them.

During the Arizona Republican Party convention on Saturday, delegates voted 317-109 for the Protect Arizona Now (PAN) petition, which was drafted to help protect taxpayers against the consequences of granting amnesty to illegal aliens including overcrowded hospitals, increased crime rates, rise in prison populations and escalating health care costs, among other things.

The petition itself states that it wants to prevent "abuse or fraud" by illegal aliens of the government services paid for by Arizona taxpayers.

Supporters of the PAN petition are hoping to get the initiative on the November ballot. If the measure is voted into law by Arizonians, then it would require proof of citizenship to be shown prior to receiving government support and benefits.

However, despite the immense support for the PAN petition by most Arizona Republicans, it is not favored by either state or national GOP leaders.

Regardless, state Rep. Randy Graf, a PAN supporter, said voting for this measure equates to upholding the rule of law by ensuring the rights of all Arizona taxpayers and voters.

"This initiative protects the sacred right of voting in this state," Graf stated. "This has nothing to do with any federal law or guest worker program. It is simply about protecting citizens."

However, state Sen. Carolyn Allen expressed her concern that supporting PAN would ultimately be detrimental to the Bush campaign.

"We want to re-elect George Bush and Dick Cheney in this state," Allen explained. "If this passes, we will suffer."

Allen added that the Bush administration is not happy with this proposal.

"The White House is very concerned about this initiative," she said. "This is not going to help our president in this state."

State House candidate J.T. Ready said concerned Republicans should realize that PAN is a common sense approach to dealing with the problem of illegal aliens.

"Why shouldn't we pass this?" inquired Ready. "After all, Blockbuster Video requires two forms of ID to rent a video."

Ready is extremely concerned that Bush appears to be circumventing the law with his proposal to allow for a temporary worker program for illegal aliens.

"I support the president, but the question is if he supports the U.S. Constitution," Ready expressed.

Sen. John Kyl (R-AZ) told the GOP activists in remarks made early in the convention that his meetings with Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney and U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft helped educate him on the proposed national Temporary Worker Program.

"My suggestion is as Republicans, we take a breath, gather the facts and not criticize the president other than in our opinions," Kyl instructed.

Kyl admitted that while "virtually all Americans oppose amnesty," Bush's proposal would actually help minimize the continued influx of illegal aliens by holding employers more accountable for who they hire.

"We try hard on the border to keep illegal immigrants out," Kyl stated. "We could do a better job, but we are winking at those hiring illegals. There is a disrespect for the rule of law. It's not good for everybody or the taxpayers who end up subsidizing lower wages."

Arizona Republican Party Chairman Bob Fannin even expressed his concern that the rift between conservatives and GOP leadership over illegal immigration should not be divisive and encouraged the state executive committeemen to support Bush's plan.

Yet Fannin's call for unity was met with criticism and disgust by the committeemen. They believe Fannin should be addressing their sincere concerns with the Temporary Worker Program with the Bush administration directly.

GOPUSA Arizona Editor Dennis Durband warned national GOP leaders to listen to the concerns of the base or else risk losing them as voters in November.

"The lesson to the story is that the Republican Party needs to take in opinions and information from below and give rank and file Republicans legitimate consideration -- as opposed to dictating unpopular policy on an unwilling constituency," Durband wrote.

He continued, "The White House had better start listening to the people and re-thinking its position, because a lot of Republicans are saying Bush will not get their vote as things currently stand. The White House can choose this day whom it will serve. If the White House gets behind PAN, Arizona is in the bag for the president's re-election chances. It's that simple."

Talon News will continue to follow developments in this story.

Copyright © 2004 Talon News -- All rights reserved.

[lewislynn]

Uh, minor correction ... nationalized 55MPH speed limit, set your thermostats to 68 in the winter and 78 in the summer,... was Carter not Nixon.

Uh, no it was Nixon, I was there, I lived it, do a search, or take a history lesson.

[FITZ]

This will be a close election and if Bush is not reelected we will have worse than the illegal issue.

I've read threads where they're predicting he's going to win by a landslide and for that reason is throwing away the votes from the Right. I think Bush may really be convinced that former PRI party voters are going to become Republicans magically just by illegally crossing the border. Or he's stereotyping "hispanics", believing because Cuban Americans tended to be Republicans and many Spanish-Americans of the SW tended to be Republicans that automatically everyone in Mexico is a Republican.

[SandRat]

Hmmmm wasn't it Carter telling us to wear sweaters and turn our thermostats down? Wasn't it Carter giving us speeches in cardigan sweaters as he extolled us to save energy during the great gas shortage?

[ought-six]

I'm really beginning to think Bush will lose this thing in November. He is pissing off his base, alienating the swing voters, and doing absolutely nothing to address either one. My God, he's acting just like his father did in 1992. The Dem that I think has the best shot at beating him is Edwards. He'll be portrayed as a moderate Democrat from the South, who is for the private ownership of firearms, is not overly obnoxious, and speaks very well. The soccer moms will love him, he'll get enough of the Southern vote to cause Bush real concerns, and he'll take the Northeast, Illinois, and California without any problem whatsoever. The media is going to go after Cheney like it went after Agnew, and then some. That will weaken Bush even further. Bush is blowing it, bigtime. It's such a shame, because he really did show a lot of promise. But his reckless spending, CFR, and the abomination of amnesty for illegals have all but done him in; and if he signs another AWB he's really finished. 40% will vote for the Dim, no matter who it is; and all the Dim needs is a hair over 10% of the swing voters, from critical states, and it's all over. Right now, I see the odds at Bush getting re-elected at 55-45 against him. But a lot can happen in 9 months. We'll see what develops. But I'll not hold my breath.

[Sabertooth]

What they (and he) didn't mention often and tried to hush up was that he supported the idea if it was done "the right way".

But no one payed attention until after the recall was done.

Hey man, where's the love?

[SandRat]

Went to AskJeeves and entered in Federal mandate of 55 mph and this came up An example is the 55 MPH speed limit. In the 1970’s the Carter administration wanted a 55 MPH law to promote gas conservation. A federal mandate of a nationwide 55 MPH speed limit would be seen as an unconstitutional encroachment on the states’ authority. Instead, Carter used federal funding to compel the states to his way of thinking. By withholding highway money (issued under the constitutional mandate for the federal government to regulate interstate commerce) to states that do not have 55 MPH speed limits, Carter forced the states (which had grown dependent on federal highway funds) to pass a 55 MPH speed limit. In this way the federal government got what it wanted without visibly encroaching on any state’s power.

Also see Deconstructing Democrats: The Failure of Jimmy Carter The American Partisan ^ | 1 March, 2002 | J. King
Posted on 03/03/2002 12:16:41 PM PST by The Right Stuff right here on FR.

Sorry, but your memory must be playing tricks on you.

[leprechaun9]

"There are wonderful people that immigrate to this country.ILLEGALLY!

Both of my parents came to this country after following the rules and being SPONSORED!

They came to this country to become AMERICANS and not to set up a satellite province of the country that they left. Many of their characteristics and traits became blended in the "Melting Pot" along with many other immigrants of many countries. BUT THEY DID SO LEGALLY!

What happened to the oath of office to uphold the Constitution and laws of our country? Or is that exercise only a prop for the business interests to make people think that their freedom and quality of life will actually be protected the government?

[Sabertooth]

Can't you have an honest disagreement with him over this?

Not according to you:

---

To: Howlin

However, state Sen. Carolyn Allen expressed her concern that supporting PAN would ultimately be detrimental to the Bush campaign. "We want to re-elect George Bush and Dick Cheney in this state," Allen explained. "If this passes, we will suffer."

Carolyn, it doesn't matter. These people WANT him defeated.

17 posted on 01/27/2004 1:39:24 PM PST by ClintonBeGone (Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.)

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse | LINK ]

---

Unfortunately for your theory, I'll be voting for President Bush in November, unless his signature finds it's way onto an Amnesty like the one he's proposed.

That's why I want to defeat his proposal: so that I can vote for him.

Hasnt he earned your trust?

On the subject of Illegal Aliens, George W. Bush has earned my suspicions since 1994, when he opposed California's Proposition #187. He chose to be part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.

On January 7th, 2004, President Bush confirmed my worst suspicions of him by proposing to Amnesty millions of Illegal Aliens. He no longer wants to be part of the problem, he wants to make it manifestly worse.

[Missouri]

My God, he's acting just like his father did in 1992.

It sure seems that way. All is needed is a rich guy with big ears to jump into the race and its all over.

I'm starting to think this election will be close.

[citizen]

These are just like the people that founded this country and have given it life over the past 200 or so years. Come on, wake up please.

The LEGAL immigrants over past centuries knew they had to make it on their own.

In today's overly Liberal-America they know they only have to get here and birth babies and then the great wealth born of the New Deal and the Great Society programs as well as more recent safety net programs wil afford them a great wealth - that's their perspective - and they're right it seems.

My perspective is that I am subsudising their entrenchment in my country. Why would any real American condone this invasion? Their stated aim is repatriation of the Southewst. Don't aid and abet, please.

Query: Why don't these "New Americans" learn English before migrating? Answer: They are not nor will ever be real Americans.

Go ahead, rubber stamp Bush, he and Rove are counting on you.

***Reluctantly, an ex-Republican base voter***

[citizen]

I said: Willfully encouraging the importation of poverty into my country on a massive scale is most certainly NOT in the national interest.

You replied: Thats simply not what it does.

Explain why not in detail.

Bush's plan in his own words welcomes the illegals be it those already here or those soon to be here -- history, recent and historical, disagrees with your claim, encouraging poor people to come here enmasse is the height of folly.

PS - When will you answer Post #30? Simply saying you aren't convinced as to the premise is quite weak. Either debate B4Ranch or fade away, intellectual decency demands it.

***Reluctantly, an ex-Republican base voter***

[Travis McGee]

GOPUSA Arizona Editor Dennis Durband warned national GOP leaders to listen to the concerns of the base or else risk losing them as voters in November. "The lesson to the story is that the Republican Party needs to take in opinions and information from below and give rank and file Republicans legitimate consideration -- as opposed to dictating unpopular policy on an unwilling constituency," Durband wrote. He continued, "The White House had better start listening to the people and re-thinking its position, because a lot of Republicans are saying Bush will not get their vote as things currently stand. The White House can choose this day whom it will serve."

You had better send this up the GOP chain of command, because millions of us will NOT vote for Bush if he signs any kind of amnesty, no matter how it is disguised with weasel words. Mark my words, Bush will LOSE if he pushes this against the will of his core constituency. If Rove is telling him there will be a net pickup in votes by Hispandering, he is dead wrong, and Bush will be unemployed in 2005.

[Kay Soze]

I agree that if Bush does not move back to the right he will loose .

Not all GOPers are as enlightened as those here at Freepyworld.

I submit his Dads loos as evidence.

[Travis McGee]

Yep. That's exactly right.

[Risa]

>>We want to re-elect George Bush and Dick Cheney in this state," Allen explained. "If this passes, we will suffer." <<
Spoken like a true authoritarian. She isn't the state.

[Risa]

>>Do you realize that illegal immigration has increased EIGHTfold since Bush made his pronoucement?<<

Bush doesn't care. Flooding our country with tens of millions of third-worlders is part of his plan to completely restructure our economy in the same way
the IMF and World Bank have been practicing on all those poor countries for the past 50 years. (sheesh--it really worked for them, didn't it?)He's going to serve his super-rich corporate monopoly supporters, and that's all there is to it. Bush is too authoritarian for me, yet I imagine all of the democratic candidates think the same way.


One can see plainly how Bush feels about the opinion of U.S. citizens with regard to his immigration policies by examining his comment in the excerpt below (article entitled "U.S. law enforcement on the frontlines are speaking their minds about the president’s immigration moves")

EXCERPT
(Border patrol view)That being the case, our job is hopeless and keeping America safe is also hopeless. When anyone—and I do mean anyone—can enter this country without much trouble because our borders are not secured, then no one in this country, regardless of where in the country they live, is safe. Ask the families of the people who died on 9-11. They know that,” he concluded with tinge of bitterness.

EXCERPT
Some critics point to the origins of the problem beginning in 1994 when the United States had a trade surplus with Mexico. Then, along came the impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Clinton and Bush administrations’ efforts to allow U.S. industry to flow south of the border, taking with it millions of American jobs.

Those same critics warn that the latest concession to allow illegal Mexican aliens—at least 8 million of them—to remain in the United States and work will rob Americans of jobs. Such a policy, they point out, will set a low ceiling on wages for menial jobs in America, further aggravating the economic situation.

Dissenting voices in the United States complain bitterly that all the concessions are one way and benefit Fox, leader of a country with high levels of poverty and endemic corruption, and with no real commitment to securing the Mexican side of the border.

In part, the flow of illegal aliens suits the Mexican economy, with millions pouring into the United States and easing the burden at home. Additionally, there is a constant flow of dollars back to Mexico from the millions of illegals in this country.

The explanation from President Bush and those who support his policies is that “America is part of the global economy.”

His critics respond that his global economy is costing millions of American jobs.
Patrol Agents Slam Alien Amnesty
By Mike Blair

[13foxtrot]

Also I just read an article describing how Illegals are buying up affordable houseing with FHA loans -- The FHA has no rules requiring proof of citizenship.

In my mind it is an unprincipled adminstration that on one-hand wants to fight terrorism, and on the other wants to, at best, ignore the illegals, and at worst open the borders.

Regretably, I will not vote Republican this time.

[JustPiper]

What state are you in?

Some linkg to get everyone started:

http://www.foxnews.com/
http://www.msnbc.com/news/default.asp
http://www.cnn.com/
http://www.abcnews.com/
http://www.cbsnews.com/
http://www.boston.com/globe/
http://www.chicagotribune.com/
http://www.suntimes.com/
http://www.nationalreview.com/
http://www.nytimes.com/info/contents/textpath.html
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/newsindex11.htm
http://www.washtimes.com/
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/
Scarborough
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/Default.aspx?id=3036789&p1=0
Lou Dobbs Comments Page
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?9

[Mr. Mojo]

Arizona GOP Defies Bush

Kerry supporters, the lot of them! You know, moles. Either that or a bunch of "principle over party" sorts. Very unseemly. Next thing you know they'll be speaking out against renewing the AWB as well.

[Polly]

I have a hispanic coworker who grew up in Mexico, and used to take a bus over the border to go to school here in the US. That would make most Americans BOIL.

Her grandfather (a US citizen) then brought her over several years ago. She is now 21, and can't speak a work of Spanish. Every story is different. She took advantage of american schools back when they refused to teach in spanish. Now she has completely assimilated.

I just don't know how all of this can be cheaply taken on. Do you remember the member nomasmojarras? Well, I have been to Ciudad Juarez Mexico....a real pit....and have seen now boths sides of the immigration situation. It still shouldn't happen, but I think our government looks at it as cash flow. Sure, we are losing billions of $$ when illegals send money over the border. BUT if we give them a worker program, the same thing will happen. If we hire 300,000 americans to daily monitor 30 illegal guestworkers movements around the country (that should cover the illegals that are ALREADY in the country...not the ones that plan on coming over), and these government workers make only $20,000 per year, that would equal the amount of money that is going over the border. So figure 6 billion a year to pay our employees, and 6 billion a year going over the border, plus the guest workers will be receiving some benefits, and will making possibly more money.

I suppose that could stimulate our economy.....yes, a lot of the money goes down to mexico, but I have seen known illegals buying $40,000 cars....that is 3 times more than what I can afford. It is still stimulating the economy.

I probably anger a lot of people because I contradict myself with praise for Bush's plan, and skepticism for the future of immigration control. But that is the reality. There is no one step that our government can take to control it. Finally Bush stepped up and started the debate. It needs to start now so we can fix things before the hispanic constituency is so huge that they will be able to vote their own advocates into office.

After all this, I have to agree that the majority of illegals don't plan to stay forever. They stay 3 years, go down to Mexico, come back, work some more. Bush's idea isn't that different from the illegals present schedule. Yes, there are many hispanic families growing. Not only for the anchor baby program (which should be stopped NOW), but because hispanics are extremely family oriented. It isn't always "colonization" that hispanics have in mind...it is an old desire to have many kids.

My husband has the same feelings about large families. He has 3 sisters who only have one or 2 kids each...they are NOT for having big families. So every time you or I say something against illegal immigrants, there will always be someone else that has a contradicting anecdote. Just as Americans are all individualistic, the rest of the world sees us as all the same, with the same goals (destructive).

So why should we be surprised that Americans think that all hispanics are all the same? That is one of the first steps in dehumanizing a group or a race, and I think we are all guilty of it. And as you know, dehumanizing is meant to lower any group of people so you are more justified in treating them badly.

Lastly...about the slaughters on the border...It would be interesting to know how many massacres occured outside the berlin wall, and that didn't last either. I see history repeating itself. All impoverished societies accumulate at the walls of the wealthy empires to try and grab onto the extra "crumbs" that fall onto their side. It has happened for thousands of years. Walls just make people want to tear them down. Difficult situation we are in.

I enjoyed hearing your opinions before, and I still do today. We gotta keep the conversation open, right?