• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Calls to boycott Arizona are spreading like a virus

Why did the Federal Judge intervene? Because the law thinks we are to stupid to vote for what we the people believe is the right thing to do?? Or something silly like that..

Tim, your opinion here counts more than most, you know that don't you. Thanks for your input.
 
Why did the Federal Judge intervene? Because the law thinks we are to stupid to vote for what we the people believe is the right thing to do?? Or something silly like that..

I feel woefully ignorant, especially since somewhere in the deeper recesses of my mind is the answer, but aren't federal judges elected?
 
News from today

AZ boycott over immigration law sees mixed results

(AP) – 5 hours ago

PHOENIX (AP) — A boycott brought on by Arizona's controversial immigration crackdown raised the specter of vacant convention centers, desolate sports arenas and struggling businesses throughout the state.

Seven months later, the effects of the boycott are coming into focus, showing it has been a disruptive force but nowhere near as crippling as originally feared.

Businesses have lost lucrative contracts and conventions have relocated, performers called off concerts, and cities and counties in about a dozen states passed resolutions to avoid doing business with Arizona. A report released Thursday says the boycott has cost the state $141 million in lost meeting and convention business since Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed the law in April.

But the state's economy hasn't come to a screeching halt — as some who organized the boycott hoped. In fact, more people went to the Grand Canyon this summer than last year, and more stayed in Arizona's hotels and resorts, according to a review by The Associated Press.

"My occupancy has been pretty strong," said Flagstaff bed and breakfast owner Gordon Watkins. He got a few calls from confused international customers wondering if they would be asked for their papers, but no one canceled their reservations, he said, and business has been brisk.

Many conventions decided not to move, despite questions from their members. At the Phoenix Convention Center on Thursday, about 1,300 exhibitors, distributors and buyers were attending an annual show put on by the National School Supply & Equipment Association.

"We just kind of kept our eye on our members, and at least in our industry, they were coming whether that law was there or not," said Bill Duffy, the group's vice president of operations and meetings.

The most controversial parts of the law are on hold, including a section that would require police officers who are enforcing other laws to question the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally. A lawsuit by the federal government seeking to invalidate the law awaits a decision from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

Civil rights groups organized the boycott to slow the state's economy in much the same way that a boycott punished Arizona 20 years ago over its refusal to honor the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. with a holiday. After voters approved that law, the NFL pulled the 1993 Super Bowl from Phoenix, and the NBA told the Phoenix Suns not to bother putting in a bid for the All-Star game. By the time voters finally passed a holiday bill two years later, estimates of lost convention business in the Phoenix area alone topped $190 million.

This time around, groups called on people not to fly Tempe-based US Airways or rent trucks from Phoenix-based U-Haul. There was talk of fighting Major League Baseball's plans for holding the All Star Game in Phoenix next year.

Most of those protests haven't come to fruition. The midsummer classic is still on, a spokeswoman for Tempe-based US Airways said the company saw no effect from the boycott call, and a U-Haul International executive said the same thing.

"In fact, year over year, we're up," said Jim Pena, the Phoenix-based rental firm's president for Arizona.

Cities that called for boycotts, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, largely found themselves with few contracts to cancel and little Arizona travel to avoid.

"Ultimately only a few city employees' travel was changed and the few contracts we had with Arizona companies were allowed to go forward for economic reasons," said Tony Winnicker, a spokesman for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. A city of Los Angeles spokeswoman said only a few contracts were not continued, none large.

Still, some Arizona businesses have taken a big hit. In August, officials in Santa Monica, Calif., recommended that Phoenix-based Cavco Industries be awarded a $3 million contract to replace 20 aging mobile homes in a city-owned park. But the city council refused to give the contract to Cavco — the low bidder — because the company is Arizona-based, and Santa Monica had passed a resolution imposing sanctions.

"I don't think that what they did serves any real useful purpose," said company CEO Joe Stegmayer. The homes would have been built at a plant near Phoenix, he said, which would have led to more work for the primarily Hispanic work force there. "I don't think it really meets their objectives of trying to help people in the Hispanic community, for example, or the average working person."

The pain also has been felt by the convention industry. An estimated 15 million visitors come to Arizona each year for vacations, conventions and sporting events such as the Fiesta Bowl, pro golf tournaments and baseball spring training. The state tourism office estimates that conventions and other tourism-related activity brought in $16.6 billion in 2009 and that 157,200 people were employed in the industry.

An analysis commissioned by the Center for American Progress put hotel industry losses during the first four months after the signing of the law at about $45 million. Visitors would have spent an additional $96 million during their stays, said Angela Kelley, the group's vice president for immigration and advocacy.

"This is as much I think to serve as a warning to other states, particularly those who rely on tourism and conferences and conventions, that there is an economic impact to it," Kelley said. "We feel like this is a very modest slice, just a piece of what the economic impact is, and we don't think that we're overstating it or overselling it."

The study was paid for by the group, a liberal-leaning think tank, but conducted by the respected Scottsdale-based economic firm Elliott D. Pollack & Co. It also found that canceled meetings and conferences could cost the state nearly 2,800 jobs, $86 million in lost wages and more than $250 million in lost economic output over the next two to three years.

The jump in hotel occupancy cheers tourism officials. Visitation at the Grand Canyon went up by nearly 3 percent in June, July and August, compared with the same period in 2009. Arizona hotel occupancy rose by 8.3 percent in June, 2.6 percent in July and 3.4 percent in August, according to Smith Travel Research.

But conventions and the business they spark bring in much more revenue than the leisure market, said Debbie Johnson, president and CEO of the Arizona Hotel & Lodging Association, and the increase in visitation is compared with dismal 2009 occupancy levels that were below national rates.

Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...9ba-Sw?docId=f84bd8c8b6b44da7b6cbf3007094db61
 
I swear, this thread has to have a spot on the AMC series "The Walking Dead". It just keeps coming back to life. LOL. Though it is nice to see someone posting updates on stuff like this.
 
I swear, this thread has to have a spot on the AMC series "The Walking Dead". It just keeps coming back to life. LOL. Though it is nice to see someone posting updates on stuff like this.

Yeah, some of us like to discuss the issues and some of us like to argue politics, so the political threads are zombies that never die, no matter how much flaming goes on. I thought you could kill zombies with a flamethrower? :flames:

And the OP seems genuinely interested in finding information on this topic & posting it at intervals.
 
Deportation nation

I found this today

Enforcement and deportation costs skyrocket
Tuesday, December 28, 2010 02:51 AM

It would cost each U.S. taxpayer about $500 to deport all 11.1 million immigrants estimated to be living here without permission.

On average, each deportation cost taxpayers more than $6,000 in 2010, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement budget numbers.

The amount Americans spend annually to detain and deport immigrants increased by more than 100 percent since 2005, to $2.55 billion in 2010. During the same period, the number of people deported more than doubled, to more than 390,000.

The Department of Homeland Security says the investment to step up enforcement of federal immigration laws has been worth it.

The number of illegal immigrants living in the United States has dropped from 12 million in March 2007 to 11.1million in March 2009, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, D.C.

Homeland Security officials say the decrease is because of increased deportations and more funding for agents, investigators and prosecutors. But others say the national economic downturn has slowed the flow of illegal immigration.

Immigrant-rights activists question whether the mass deportations are money well spent. Most illegal immigrants are here to build productive lives and contribute to the economy, said Ruben Castilla Herrera of the Ohio Action Circle, a statewide grass-roots immigration-rights coalition.

Studies disagree about whether illegal immigrants are a net benefit to or drain on the U.S. economy.

According to the conservative research group the Heritage Foundation, $100billion in annual welfare spending goes to households headed by immigrants with high-school degrees or less. If illegal immigrants were given a path to citizenship, the welfare system would be flooded with new recipients, the Heritage Foundation says.

On the other side, the Immigration Policy Center, a nonprofit group in Washington, D.C., says legalizing the 11.1 million undocumented immigrants would increase the country's gross domestic product by $1.5trillion over 10 years.

No one disagrees that it costs money to deport someone. In some cases, taxpayers pay to repeatedly deport the same individuals, who keep sneaking back into the U.S.

Stepped-up prosecution


U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws, has been referring re-entry cases to prosecutors in the hope that the prospect of prison time will send illegal immigrants a message: Don't come back.

Prosecuting and imprisoning illegal immigrants takes up much of the federal court system's time.

Almost half the cases prosecuted in federal courts during the first 11months of 2010 were immigration-related, according to Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, or TRAC, which gathers and analyzes data from public agencies.

Federal courts heard more cases that involved illegally entering the country, a misdemeanor punishable by up to 180 days in jail for the first offense, than for any other crime, including drug offenses.

In February, Judge Sam Sparks of U.S. District Court in Austin, Texas, questioned prosecutors about the value of prosecuting people with no "significant criminal history" for immigration-law violations. His docket, like many others in federal courts across the country, was awash in immigration-related cases.

The cost of prosecuting immigrants with no criminal history other than re-entering the country, rather than deporting them again, "is simply mind-boggling," Sparks wrote."The U.S. Attorney's policy of prosecuting all aliens presents a cost to the American taxpayer at this time that is neither meritorious nor reasonable."

The increased prosecutions have not put a burden on prosecutors in southern Ohio, said Vipal J. Patel, district criminal chief for the U.S. attorney's office.

Nationwide, the number of criminal immigration convictions in federal courts in August was up more than 60 percent over the same period five years ago, according to TRAC. The No. 1 charge was sneaking back into the country after being deported.

Immigrants with no criminal history face a maximum of two years in prison if convicted of re-entry. Those who have committed significant crimes can face a maximum of 20 years.

In November, about 11 percent of people serving time in federal prisons had been convicted of immigration-law violations, according to the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

It costs about $24,000 annually to hold someone in federal prison, according to a budget released by the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 2009. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction says it cost about the same to keep someone for a year in Ohio prisons in 2010.

The lure of family

Ten-year-old Jamie Aristigue stood in front of about 150 people on the Statehouse lawn one afternoon in July and cried.

Her father, Fernando Aristigue, had "been taken away from us and is in jail," she said.

Jamie, her sister, Frida, 5, and her mother, Magali Cruz, 29, were participating in a faith-based rally that pushed for immigration reform.

ICE agents had detained Fernando Aristigue at the family's Westerville apartment in June.

He has been deported six times since 2005. He has returned each time.

Instead of simply deporting Aristigue a seventh time, federal prosecutors charged him with illegally re-entering the country, a felony.

Aristigue, 36, had never been convicted of breaking immigration law or any other law, according to court documents.

While taxpayers are footing the bill for deportations and imprisonment, illegal immigrants and their families, including their U.S. citizen children, also pay a price.

In November, the Aristigues' apartment was vacant. A clerk in a nearby Latino grocery remembered the family.

"It was a very sad case," said the clerk, who asked not to be identified. "There are a lot of very sad cases."

It's easy to understand why Aristigue risked federal prosecution, he said. Since Aristigue's arrest, his wife and daughters have returned to Mexico.

But there will be no reunion anytime soon. If a U.S. judge gives Aristigue the maximum sentence, it will be two years before he can join his family.

Cost beyond dollars

About 10 years ago, W. Tom Large was involved in a vehicle crash with an illegal immigrant. Both are still paying the price.

"It was like being in an explosion," said Large, 65, a lifelong Ohio resident.

Luis Valente De La Paz-Flores was driving north on Sawmill Parkway in a Chevrolet Astro van when he ran a red light and struck Large's Ford Expedition, which was heading west on Powell Road, Large said.

Valente, who prosecutors said was under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the crash, pleaded guilty to vehicular assault and was deported to Mexico in 2001 after spending nine months in jail.

Large struggled but was able to keep his special-event business afloat while he recuperated. His SUV was totaled in the crash, and he battled his insurance company to cover his medical bills, he said.

But Large hadn't heard the last of Valente.

"He's back?" Large said after a Dispatch reporter told him that Valente had been arrested this summer in the University District.

"I figured he was going to be back," Large said.

Federal immigration authorities found Valente, now 33, in August and charged him with re-entering the country after being deported, a felony punishable by up to a $250,000 fine and 20 years in prison.

Valente is in the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service, awaiting trial. His attorney did not respond to requests for comment.

Although Large said he harbors no animosity toward Valente, he's reminded of him often.

Before the accident, Large, who has a black belt in karate, lived a life full of physical activity. Today, his joints ache and stiffen when he sits, and he walks with a limp.

"I've had nothing but pain since," he said.

Comprehensive fix


Police, activists on both sides, immigration lawyers and citizens of the United States and countries around the world have been begging legislators for years to reform the broken, contradictory and complex system of laws that govern immigration to the United States.

Attempts by some states to define how local law-enforcement agencies and ICE work together have become flashpoints in the national brawl over illegal immigration.

In July, a federal judge blocked some of the most controversial sections of an immigration law in Arizona - considered among the strictest in the nation - which required police to ask suspected illegal immigrants for their immigration papers in the course of enforcing other laws.

Legislators in Ohio are closely watching what's going on in Arizona.

Rep. Courtney Eric Combs, a Republican from Hamilton, said he plans to approach other members of the legislature about passing a law that would incorporate the elements of Arizona's law that were deemed constitutional.

If the Ohio legislature won't act, he said, there are plans to put the issue on the statewide ballot.

In Ohio and across the country, local and state law-enforcement officers routinely arrest illegal immigrants for various offenses, then turn them over to immigration authorities for deportation.

Since 2002, almost 2,000 people have been transferred from the Franklin County jail to ICE custody.

Those opposed to illegal immigration say it's necessary to root out dangerous criminals, and to find and remove immigrants living illegally in the United States. Immigrants-rights advocates say the practice is outside the jurisdiction of local law enforcement, begets racial profiling and breeds distrust of police within ethnic communities.

What's needed is federal immigration reform, said David Leopold, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

"We need a comprehensive fix, and Congress needs to do it," he said.

Cost of crossings

* The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that about 3 million illegal crossings occur annually at the Mexico-United States border. Those entries earn smugglers more than $6.6 billion.
* Less than a third of all immigrants to the U.S. are illegal, and about 80 percent of those are from Latin America.

Resource: http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten...-and-deportation-costs-skyrocket.html?sid=101
Contact: [email protected]
 
Ok, so I have not changed my personal outlook on illegal immigration, but, my geography professor asked a question that got me thinking...
"How can we have open trade with Canada and Mexico, and then go and close our boarders to their citizens?"

Just thought it would be worth thinking over.
 
Interesting... but let's forget only bordering countries. What about open trade worldwide.

I heard somewhere the idea of a world without borders. Never put too much thought into it since I immediately came up with reasons why it wouldn't work.
 
Mercosul and EU are examples of how these unions make it easier for citizens of participating countries to immigrate to a different one.
NAFTA is strictly economical, allowing only free trade and investment. NAFTA suffers lots of criticism.

As far as people mobilization between CA, US and MX, NAFTA allows for temporary workers. Calculate the % of Mexican and Canadian population allowed to work in the US and you'll see a huge inequality.

Would something like Mercosul or EU work in the US? Not in the near future... Not with the current 2 major political parties in power.
 
Back
Top