From the Guardian

Arizona threatens to cut power to Los Angeles over immigration row

Warning ramps up tensions over bill 1070 – but state's stance turns out to be toothless

Ed Pilkington in New York
guardian.co.uk
Thursday 20 May 2010 23.39 BST


Arizona's tough new immigration law has drawn it into an open conflict with one of the most powerful cities in America, after a prominent Arizona politician threatened to pull the plug on its power supply to Los Angeles in retaliation for the city's boycott of the state.

Gary Pierce, a commissioner with the Arizona Corporation, an elected body in charge of the state's public utilities, sent an angry letter to the mayor of LA, Antonio Villaraigosa, prompted by LA's boycott of Arizona and its local businesses.

"If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation," he wrote.

LA, which has a large Hispanic population and is opposed to Arizona's immigration law, receives a quarter of its electricity from power plants located in Arizona.

Villaraigosa counter-attacked, saying in a statement that he would "not respond to threats from a state which has isolated itself from the America that values freedom, liberty and basic civil rights".

At the centre of the dispute is a law that comes into effect on 29 July requiring all police officers in Arizona to check the immigration status of anyone they are lawfully in contact with whom they reasonably suspect to be illegally in the US.

Critics say that the law is discriminatory as it will lead to racial profiling of Hispanics.

The spat between Arizona and LA came as Felipe Calderón, president of Mexico, took his country's criticism of Arizona's new clampdown to the US Congress. On Wednesday, Calderón had talks with Barack Obama in which he made clear that Mexico sees the law as discriminatory, a view with which Obama agrees.

It soon emerged that the corporation has no power to cut off power supply to LA, and that California owns several of Arizona's power plants. Pierce was forced to backtrack.

LA is thought to have trade with Arizona worth more than $50m (£35m). Several other cities implement similar boycotts, including San Francisco, Boston and Austin. Early estimates suggest that Arizona stands to lose at least $90m from cancellations of conferences and travel, the lion's share of the losses falling on the state's largest city, Phoenix.

On Wednesday an unscripted encounter between Michelle Obama and a seven-year-old girl during a photo opportunity in Maryland unwittingly highlighted the dilemma the Obama administration faces over immigration.

The first lady was appearing with her Mexican counterpart, Margarita Zavala, at a school. On camera, one girl told her that her mother – who she revealed was an undocumented migrant – had said Barack Obama was "taking everybody away that doesn't have some papers".

"That's something that we have to work on, right?" Obama replied. "To make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers, right? That's exactly right."

The girl responded: "But my mom doesn't have any."

"Well, we have to fix that and everybody's got to work together in Congress to make sure that happens," said Obama, and quickly moved on.

Quote:

It soon emerged that the corporation has no power to cut off power supply to LA, and that California owns several of Arizona's power plants.

“Barack Obama is taking everybody away” says little girl to the first lady Restore Fairness


“Barack Obama is taking everybody away” says little girl to the first lady


Sometimes it’s about keeping it real. As President Obama welcomed the Mexican President Felipe Calderón to the White House for the first series of official talks between the two countries, Michelle Obama and Mexico’s first lady Margarita Zavala met a little girl who put a human face to the diplomatic talks about immigration that were taking place in the White House.While the two Presidents were to discuss a number of issues including the economy, climate change and drug wars, given President Calderón’s vehement condemnation of Arizona’s new law, immigration was likely to take center stage. Meanwhile, the first ladies stopped off at a elementary school in Silver Spring which is two-thirds Hispanic students and has a large proportion of students below the poverty line to promote Michelle Obama’s campaign for healthy eating. But a little girl changed all that with a powerful question.

Student: “My mom … she says that Barack Obama is taking everybody away that doesn’t have papers.”

Mrs. Obama: “Yeah, well that’s something that we have to work on, right? To make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers, right? That’s exactly right.”

Student: “But my mom doesn’t have any …”

Mrs. Obama: “Well, we have to work on that. We have to fix that, and everybody’s got to work together in Congress to make sure that happens.”

The abstract issue of immigration was brought into human focus by the little girl’s question, prompted by the fear that her mother would be taken away from her. In the midst of the pomp of diplomatic state visits and lawmaker’s efforts to appease their electorates, a little girl’s honest fears about her family summed up the massive problem that the country currently faces.

Addressing this volatile issue, President Obama concurred with President Calderón on the pressing need for immigration reform and joined him in denouncing Arizona’s harsh new immigration enforcement measure, SB1070. President Obama said-

We also discussed the new law in Arizona, which is a misdirected effort – a misdirected expression of frustration over our broken immigration system, and which has raised concerns in both our countries.. Because in the United States of America, no law-abiding person – be they an American citizen, a legal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico – should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like.

While the President reaffirmed his commitment to work with Congress to pass bipartisan, comprehensive reform, the truth is that the Obama administration has already surpassed the Bush administration’s deportation levels. And enforcement continues to be a problem. Former New York City District Attorney Robert Morgenthau lashed out against programs that promote collaboration between federal officials and local law enforcement on immigration, including Arizona’s new law.

Morgenthau drew on his personal experience as district attorney in Manhattan to criticize the Criminal Alien program which enables federal immigration officials to be stationed in local jails and issue “detainers” to foreign born inmates, many of whom are unaware of what is happening to them. In addition to increasing the burden of cost on New York, programs such as these mostly trap people who have committed minor crimes (or sometimes none at all). But for the former D.A., the most dangerous consequence of such programs is that by blurring the distinction between federal officials and local law enforcement, they severely impair the relationship that local police have with the public. Speaking of New York he explains-

When immigrants perceive the local police force as merely an arm of the federal immigration authority, they become reluctant to report criminal activity for fear of being turned over to federal officials. Given that immigrants (legal and illegal) currently comprise 36% of the city’s population, this unwillingness to cooperate with local law enforcement presents an obstacle to stemming crime in the city as a whole. That’s why during the 35 years I was district attorney in Manhattan, I made it a policy never to turn over names of individuals involved with the criminal justice system to immigration authorities until after they were convicted of a serious crime.

It is not surprising then that police chiefs across Arizona have spoken out in opposition to Arizona’s anti-immigrant law. Following this, police chiefs from Nevada, California and Maryland have also opposed Arizona’s law on the grounds that it would lead to racial profiling and breed fear of the police within Hispanic communities. Maryland Police Chief Thomas Manger said that taking on federal enforcement responsibilities would result in local police losing much more than they would gain and would prevent them from doing their jobs. But lawmakers seem oblivious to this advice. Similar bills are in the works in 10 states including Nebraska and Rhode Island.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Is Dora the Explorer an illegal immigrant? Groups against Arizona law adopt cartoon as mascot

Could Dora the Explorer be an illegal Mexican immigrant?


A group of campaigners fighting Arizona’s tough new immigration act have adopted Dora the Explorer, a popular children’s cartoon character, as a sort of mascot.

Dora, a Latina TV show character, can be seen in a doctored image here, where she becomes a victim of the new Arizona law that basically makes it illegal for immigrants not to have their papers on hand.

In Dora’s doctored police mugshot, the cartoon character is seen with a black eye, a bloody nose and a bleeding lip. She is also holding a sign that says her crimes are “Illegal border crossing” and “Resisting arrest.”
Nickelodeon representatives have declined t o comment, the U.K.’s Daily Telegraph reports:

Representatives from Nickelodeon declined to comment on Dora’s background, and her place of birth or citizenship have never been clear. She has brown skin, dark hair and speaks Spanish with an American accent.

“She’s always been ambiguously constructed,” said Angharad Valdivia, who teaches media studies at the University of Illinois and has explored the issue. “In the U.S. the way we understand race is about putting people in categories and we’re uncomfortable with people we can’t put into categories.”

Dora lives in an unidentified location with pyramids that suggest Mexico.

There’s even a Facebook group called “Dora the Explorer is soo an illegal immigrant” that shows a photo of the happy litte girl jumping over the barb-wired Mexico-U.S. border. Here are some statements the group makes about Dora:

• She speaks spanish… she speaks spanish perfectly… what is she like…5? Her backpack even speaks spanish perfectly!

• She’s always on an “adventure” to transport a “package” to some destination and is always being stalked by a person trying to take that package… i mean… really, Swiper is so obviously some sort of border patrol person trying to collect evidence of Dora’s entire narcotics trafficking buisness

• That backpack of hers has EVERYTHING in it! And we’re talking everything! Life support, water/food, clothing for any weather, ropes, grappling hooks, shoes…. i mean c’mon!

It’s not the first time a cartoon character has been dragged into a political debate. Remember when Tinky Winky from Teletubbies and Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street were thought to be gay and used as a supposed weapon to brainwash children?

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Someone should call LA on the bullshit. They're a sinking ship financially and a huge resourse suck for the rest of CA. That 90 mil is just a part of a budget cut, not that they were going to spend it anyway, or that they should have been spending it anyway.

But the power thing is interesting. CA may own a couple of the companies, but the state regulates the power and it's disposition. The state could say, no sales to CA and if the CA companies don't like that, they're free to move.

Wonder what LA is gonna do now that 11 other states have either filed or indicated they would file, new laws similar to Arizona's?

Quote:

Wonder what LA is gonna do now that 11 other states have either filed or indicated they would file, new laws similar to Arizona's?

Perhaps lobby to establish an apartheid nation, where a white minority battles to control the wealth and power against increasing numbers of Latin Americans, Blacks, Asians and people who have come from nations that most Americans have never heard of.

If so, good luck with that.

Originally Posted by roadkill

Perhaps lobby to establish an apartheid nation, where a white minority battles to control the wealth and power against increasing numbers of Latin Americans, Blacks, Asians and people who have come from nations that most Americans have never heard of. If so, good luck with that.

Huh? Are you saying that it'll be whites against illegals of all colors? I don't get what you're saying, because those "increasing numbers of Latin Americans, Blacks, Asians and people who have come from nations that most Americans have never heard of" that are here legally, are citizens - they don't want the illegals either.

This isn't about color, we have citizens and legal migrants, workers here of all colors and national origins. No one is trying to kick them out. It's those here illegally that are the issue.

It's time to boycott LA. I was going to take the grandkids, the whole family to Disneyland this summer. Just wrote their management to let them know we'll be going to the Grand Canyon this year.

Originally Posted by clownboy

This isn't about color,

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Originally Posted by contracycle

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

I am quite happy to point out the racist underpinning of much anti-immigration discourse, the world over.

However, it does not mean that the US is not facing a serious problem with having too much illegal immigrants. Just as the influx of eastern europeans may destabilise the UK etc.

So I don't see why Clownboy cannot be one of the reasonable one and simply pointing out that illegal immigration is creating huge problems for legal residents. I don't buy the crime wave aspect (statistics are clear on that) but I can totally understand the salary pressures poor immigrants create (stats are pretty clear on that as well) and the associated costs in social services provision is not entirely imaginary either.

Of course, cheap labour is good news for companies and rich individuals employing house personel. But, surely, these people liking something should be proof it is evil?

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.