Arizona's Prop. 200 an example of voters' intolerance of immigrants
The passage of Arizona’s mean-spirited Proposition 200 is a cautionary
tale for the Bush administration, showing the extremes to which fed-up
state voters will go when their concerns about illegal immigration are
ignored for too long by the federal government. The initiative is a slightly
milder version of California’s notoriously divisive Proposition
187, passed in 1994 but thrown out by the courts in part because it conflicted
with federal law.
As in any other border state, immigration has played a key role in Arizona’s
history — from Spaniards to Mexicans to Europeans, and now a new
wave from Central America.
In the mid-1990s, the Border Patrol cut off entries to the U.S. along
urban border areas. That pushed would-be immigrants to wild, unpopulated
desert areas, primarily in Arizona. Thousands have died attempting to
cross the state’s forbidding terrain. Most of those who made it
traveled on to other states, but some stayed on in cities like Tucson
and Phoenix. The masses of immigrants also provided opportunities for
smugglers of both humans and drugs. The supply of cheap labor in the state
increased, but just as in California, Arizona’s schools, hospitals
and public services felt the strain.
The state’s congressional delegation has worked over the last year
to develop proposals for an orderly and federally regulated immigration
process. It should be given the chance to succeed, without being undercut
by shortsighted initiatives like Proposi-tion 200.
The measure requires proof of citizenship when voting or registering to
vote. Sounds OK, but how many people have a birth certificate or passport
right at hand? And would it be applied to everyone, not just people who
“look like immigrants”? It also requires such proof when applying
for “public benefits”—which could mean emergency room
care or a library card, because there is no clear definition of such services.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington-based anti-immigration
organization, was the chief funder of the measure.
In addition, state workers are required to report to federal authorities
any illegal immigrants trying to receive welfare services, or face a possible
four-month jail sentence. Such problems prompted the conservative Arizona
Republic, the state’s largest newspaper, to devote seven editorials
to the measure out of concern over the likelihood of unintended consequences.
Most likely, Proposition 200 won’t survive the lawsuits it will
provoke. But it demonstrates a problem in need of immediate federal attention.
Someone in power needs to hear the frustrations of ordinary people who
have witnessed the strain on their state and to heed the suffering of
the masses crossing the desert.
—This editorial appeared in
The Los Angeles Times
|
