• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AP Source: Feds suing to stop Ariz. immigrant law

ric27 said:
Correct. This will adversely affect neighboring states, but it will ONLY benefit Arizona. Which is really the purpose of a state law.

i.e. A particular state stops providing non essential services to illegals...In short, gang bangers move. Crime drops and stays down. Business supporting illegals leave, the state.

The surrounding states complain that all the illegals and crime moved there.

We are back to square one
Click to expand...

This could be said about a lot of laws that one state may pass. Take CA for example, pass more strict vehicle smog standards. One state may increase taxes forcing people to move to a lower tax state. Point is, Feds need to enforce the law.
 
mike2810 said:
This could be said about a lot of laws that one state may pass. Take CA for example, pass more strict vehicle smog standards. One state may increase taxes forcing people to move to a lower tax state. Point is, Feds need to enforce the law.
Click to expand...

However, what's the alternative? The Feds are categorically ignoring the problem, either do to lack of political will or through some cynical policy designed to enhance the liberal voting block. At any rate, nothing meaningful is being done at the Fed level.

So, a state a like AZ is taking action, but where in hell are the others? Make no mistake, its a great first step. Who knows, maybe it will cause, the Feds to stop acting like the problem doesn't exist, but MORE states have to get involved and present a solid, unified front
 
ric27 said:
Arizona's law will not have much effect nationally.
Click to expand...
I do not think Arizonans care if illegals flee to sanctuary states.Arizonans are worried about illegal immigration in their state and that is why they enacted SB1070.
It will adversely affect neighboring states.
Click to expand...
If those neighboring states are sanctuary states then I do not think they will have a problem with illegals fleeing to their states. Therefore it is not adverse to those states.

Now, if other states start joining, the pressure would be enormous and thats what is needed. Obama is simply afraid that other states will begin to follow along and soon the states wouldn't need so much fed govt...

Thats the bottom line
Click to expand...
States taking Arizona and Oklahoma's lead means that Amnesty is that much harder to pass because it proved that simply enforcing the law will deter illegal immigration and encourage illegals to go home to sanctuary states.
 
ric27 said:
However, what's the alternative? The Feds are categorically ignoring the problem, either do to lack of political will or through some cynical policy designed to enhance the liberal voting block. At any rate, nothing meaningful is being done at the Fed level.
Click to expand...


Seeing how the feds want to push Amnesty with hollow promises of enforcement like the Reagan Amnesty I will be satisfied for now with states doing what they can to crack down on illegal immigration.

So, a state a like AZ is taking action, but where in hell are the others?
Click to expand...

Praising Arizona: Lawmakers in nearly 20 other states pushing similar immigration legislation
 
ric27 said:
However, what's the alternative? The Feds are categorically ignoring the problem, either do to lack of political will or through some cynical policy designed to enhance the liberal voting block. At any rate, nothing meaningful is being done at the Fed level.

So, a state a like AZ is taking action, but where in hell are the others? Make no mistake, its a great first step. Who knows, maybe it will cause, the Feds to stop acting like the problem doesn't exist, but MORE states have to get involved and present a solid, unified front
Click to expand...

I agree and have been supporting 1070 since the start. I live in AZ and things have got to improve.
 
texmaster said:
But the feds aren't using it. So what do you tell the people? Sorry?
Click to expand...

Your point is well taken. Maybe we sue the gov't for not doing their job? You know how much AZ has to spend on this issue because of the fed's lack of action?

And, sadly, had AZ not passed the law, it would still be a non issue with Obama, and congress.

How do we get the fed's off their ass to deal with this issue??

We blame the prez, why not congress? McCain and Kyle for AZ try to be the poster boys of this issue in the senate, yet in 2008 neither were ringing the bell.
 
MrVicchio said:
So your problem is that the law is just an AZ thing, and it's the Feds who need to be acting.

The fact they are not is why the AZ law happened, somehow, I think you don't know why you are agains teh AZ.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you. I am against it because this is a federal responsibility. Why should my tax dollars go for enforcing this law?
 
ric27 said:
Thats good! Do the same thing across the country and they will continue towards Canada - the real beneficiaries of NAFTA.

Let Canada handle, the pesky problem
Click to expand...

If we got rid of NAFTA there might not be as bad of a problem to begin with.
 
TBone said:
I disagree with you. I am against it because this is a federal responsibility. Why should my tax dollars go for enforcing this law?
Click to expand...
If you pay federal taxes then isn't your tax dollars already go for enforcing the law(Token enforcement of the law on the federal level)?

Besides that your tax dollars go for not enforcing the law. Do you think the money used to pay for the education of anchor babies and other children of illegals is free? Do you think its free to incarcerate an illegal if that illegal commits a crime other than illegal immigration? Do you think health care for illegals is free? Do you think its free when welfare has to be handed out to those who wages were artificially depressed due to illegal immigration?

This is what it cost Californians to not deal with illegal immigration and those costs keep rising.
Illegal Immigration Costs California $10.5 Billion Annually
 
TBone said:
Your point is well taken. Maybe we sue the gov't for not doing their job? You know how much AZ has to spend on this issue because of the fed's lack of action?

And, sadly, had AZ not passed the law, it would still be a non issue with Obama, and congress.

How do we get the fed's off their ass to deal with this issue??

We blame the prez, why not congress? McCain and Kyle for AZ try to be the poster boys of this issue in the senate, yet in 2008 neither were ringing the bell.
Click to expand...

washingtonpost.com
I think its an issue with them, they just can't get anyone to sign on with them. While not perfect, what they are asking for is better than what has been done. (nothing)
 
TBone said:
Yeah, there is no bigotry involved in this issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree.

I could give a rats ass about any of it. If blacks want to blame me for slavery and say I'm a bigot, or of the gay/lesbian/confused plumbing crowd want to call me a homophobe, Hooah
 
TBone said:
I disagree with you. I am against it because this is a federal responsibility. Why should my tax dollars go for enforcing this law?
Click to expand...

Again, your arguments don't make any sense at all. You believe it's a Fed Responsibility, but the Fed's are failing, but you don't want your "tax" dollars to enforce laws the Feds are (with your tax dollars) failing to enforce. It seems you're attempting to play principled objectionist to the law, but you have failed to make a coherient point as to why the law is bad.
 
MrVicchio said:
Again, your arguments don't make any sense at all. You believe it's a Fed Responsibility, but the Fed's are failing, but you don't want your "tax" dollars to enforce laws the Feds are (with your tax dollars) failing to enforce. It seems you're attempting to play principled objectionist to the law, but you have failed to make a coherient point as to why the law is bad.
Click to expand...

Let me explain. My state tax dollars should not pay for immigration enforcement, my federal tax dollars should pay for it. What's the difference, in AZ we are sufferring a budget crisis. When we house, feed, arrest, and jail the law breakers on the AZ law, AZ pays for it, not the Feds. I am an objectionist to the law when it is enforced by a state rather than the feds. I understand completely why AZ did what they did, we had no choice, we are being over-ran. It could have been done better, e.g. address the profiling issue in the first version instead of the second, allow for someone other that a known bigot to sponsor the bill, and not be used by a lousy governor to gain political capital. I know these items may seem petty, but in retrospect, they hurt AZ by causing idiots to boycott us, and it gave us the label of being bigots.
 
Mickey Shane said:
The link states "20 states" yet they only mention 5.
Click to expand...

Also, is it actually a law that will arrest illegal aliens if they are trespassing in the state? Or is it only penalties for those that employee, house, etc. Arizona did the employer sanction stuff and it did not help completely, sheriff Joe is still raiding places. Let's see how much balls the other states have to do what AZ did? If all fifty did it, they we'd actually have illegal immigration enforcement, not token.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom