Massachusetts rejects Arizona-style copycat legislation, resolutions opposed to Arizona grow in numbers

While media attention has focused on the 20 or so states where anti-immigrant legislators have said they plan to introduce bills similar to SB1070 in Arizona, there is a growing story nation-wide about the avalanche of opposition against the Arizona law reflected through dozens of resolutions passed at the municipal and state level. State, city and county elected officials from coast to coast have proposed or adopted at minimum 60 measures in opposition to the Arizona law that call for a boycott of Arizona, prohibit travel to the state and call on Congress and President Obama to enact comprehensive immigration reform. At least half of these measures have passed. Just last week, the city council of Chula Vista, CA voted to condemn the Arizona law, and the board of the Milwaukee public school system voted to both condemn the law and boycott the state of Arizona.

“As MPS parents and children held signs reading, “Wisconsin is Not Arizona” the Milwaukee Public School Board, representing 82,500 students, the largest and most ethnically diverse public school system in Wisconsin, voted 5-2 with one abstention to condemn Arizona’s racial profiling legislation, SB1070, and HB2281 which bans ethnic studies. The Board also voted to support a national boycott of Arizona until these laws are repealed.”

These resolutions passed even as the Massachusetts state legislature stripped Arizona-style amendments from a budget bill in conference committee. Angry that such measures even made it into the Senate budget proposal in the first place, thousands of Massachusetts residents poured calls and e-mails into key bill negotiators to remove the onerous provisions. These included a measure that would have created an anonymous 24 hour hotline to report suspected undocumented workers their employers, burdensome employment verification provisions, and new proof of residency requirements that could have harmed American citizens. Advocates were pleased that these provisions were stripped from the bill, but were disappointed that the legislature did eliminate health care access for some immigrants in order to shrink the state budget.

The New York state legislature passed a resolution denouncing the Arizona law. The Los Angeles city council and county board passed resolutions in support of a boycott of Arizona. The council resolutions considers up to $56 million in Arizona-related investments the city could boycott. Chicago, IL and Philadelphia, PA city councils also adopted resolutions to boycott Arizona. The Navajo Nation Council, the country’s largest American Indian reservation, passed a resolution condemning the Arizona law.

The US. Conference of Mayors adopted two resolutions and mayors in San Francisco, Boulder, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Columbus issued travel bans.

The number of efforts in opposition to the Arizona law dwarfs the 22 states that are reported to have proposed or considering copycat bills. Several of the copycats are predicted to be unlikely to pass even by their authors and anti-immigrant groups.

For example, Representative Kim Meltzer, a first term Republican in Michigan who is running for a state senate seat, introduced a bill similar to Arizona SB 1070. It was reported that she is aware that the chances of her bill passing are unlikely and that other immigration legislation she proposed has not made it out of committee. Also, In North Carolina, anti-immigrant groups concede that copycat legislation has a very low chance of passing in their state.

Furthermore, of the four state copycats that were introduced this session, three failed to be heard in committee before the sessions adjourned for the year.

State legislators are not only just combating copycats and anti-immigrant legislation, they are also advancing pro-immigrant legislation at the state level while urging Congressional leaders to quickly address immigration reform nationally. Iowa will consider wage legislation intended to address the exploitation of immigrant workers. Utah will consider healthcare legislation for legal immigrant children and Pennsylvania will consider a community policing and anti racial profiling bill. A bipartisan group of Virginia state senators and delegates sent Senator Warner a joint letter urging federal action on immigration reform.

The lack of action from Washington on immigration reform has allowed Arizona’s new law to become reality. Patchwork measures by states cannot begin to address the nation’s immigration system. Only a federal solution will succeed in its true overhaul. Many local law makers recognize this and continue in growing numbers to condemn the Arizona law.

Categories: California, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia

Send to Friend

Barrett

Do they even use the term, “illegal alien”, in any other nation? ” Invader” and “spy” are very commonly used terms in countrys where the government understands and gives a damn how the citizens would be hurt by mass invasion.
If you blame the Obama administration or the democratic party for our current situation, you are in denial, and big business loves it. Both parties have sat in control while employers have disobeyed the long standing law against hiring illegal invaders and Attorney’s General turned a blind eye. The fence was too much, too late, and mostly served as a diversion from the fact that huge numbers of illegals were openly and obviously employed during republican administrations, one after another, as well. It didn’t make any difference when a single employer, for example, entered a single S.S.N. on over a thousand of their employee’s tax forms during the latest, (and I hope, last) Bush administration. Why didn’t the Bush administration, with support from the republican congress, even file charges in this nationally publicized instance? (It probably didn’t make Faux ENTERTAINMENT news.) Because BOTH parties have always favored business money and migrant votes over the welfare of our citizens. The largest invasion in history was fueled by employers breaking the law, and the drug runners are a fraction of the problem. A radical fringe group that naturally grew with the vast majority of invaders. This avoidance of enforcement falls under the category of deregulation. An effort made famous by the line; “Get the regulators off the backs of …” ,(and I insert the real objective), BUSINESS. The politicians’ cash cow.
It is racist to say that invaders from the south can do more or better work than the real citizenry, (as opposed to occupants), of our country.
It is NOT racist to humanely remove invaders. I say humane and gentle in comparison to the treatment an invading American citizen may expect anywhere else.
When the jobs of Americans were usurped by southern invaders by way of the 1967 grape boycott, the price of produce did not fall, the quality of produce did not improve, but the profits to farmers dropped and job opportunities for our citizens were completely cut off by Caesar Chavez’es union. We used to work during school summer breaks, in lean times and in retirement, in local harvests. In the last 43 years, have you seen wages climb and prices fall? Have you simultaneously known unemployed American citizens and employed invaders?
Do not be afraid of the facts nor of the ridiculous and unfounded label of “racist” where your own well being is concerned. Invaders come from Europe as well.
I don’t care how many studies there are representing how beneficial invaders are, the point is that if you remove 12 million plus invaders from America tomorrow, there will be a lot of job vacancies. That is a FACT. All of those jobs are illegally held, and the law abiding residents know it. The majority of Americans, just as the majority in any other country, oppose invasion. Where in the world do you think a cop doesn’t have the authority to see anyones’ ID? American cops have had that authority since way before AZ brought enforcement to the longstanding national law. The sad thing is that we have yet to have any justice department enforcement on the employer side.
Contrary to uninformed opinion, all adult citizens are required by law to have their ID with them at all times when not in their own homes, and to provide it to any peace officer on request. They taught school children that when I was 15 years old, in 1967.
Barrett

Oh! For heavens sakes, let us do save all those votes and campaign monies!

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!

It’s time for the nations’ politicians to put the needs of their legal citizens
first and give us the jobs we desperately need by sending the message, loud and clear, that American employers who give jobs to illegal invaders will be vigorously prosecuted under the long standing federal law.

Massachusetts rejects Arizona-style copycat legislation, resolutions opposed to Arizona grow in numbers

SHARE THIS ON

FIND US ON

Partner Blogs

Think Globally, Blog Locally

Blogroll