The Arizona Immigration Debate: Political Domination is Now the Ends not the Means

I was in CT this weekend and got into a brief conversation with a good friend and president of my synagogue. He was asking why there was no well balanced and informative article dealing with the immigration debate.

Sherrif Joe Arpaio the quintessential Western lawman and leading advocate of Arizona's bill to suppress illegal immigration (II), like many honest hardworking and not racist citizens argue that illegal immigration is overtaxing our states resources. Healthcare, which II’s get free when they show up in emergency rooms. Education costs for II children, law enforcement and incarceration costs, as 17% of II’s are second time offenders (all II have already broken the law, when they entered illegally), and the fact that we don’t know who is coming into the country, terrorists etc. Let us not forget the most questionable refrain made famous by South Park “they took are jooobs”.

The bill is opposed by a coalition of organizations and people. Businessman like Bloomberg argue that we need these immigrants to do the work Americans wont, i.e. American companies need a source of cheap un-union labor, as evident by the increasing outsourcing of jobs that keep some companies internationally competitive. The ACLU, which opposes the bill because they claim it leads to racial profiling. The Justice Department, under Eric Holder, because its good politics. The Hispanic community is the biggest minority population in the states, and is a major supporter of the Democratic party, specifically because of the party policies like this one.

Everyone agrees that the ideal immigrant is one that gains citizenship, like my great-grandfathers father did, legally. Furthermore most agree that this country thrives on absorbing the full spectrum of humanity, and we benefit from providing the opportunity for every community to elevate and contribute their unique talents. The obvious solution then, and the one most agree with is comprehensive immigration reform.

Unfortunately they don’t agree about how to deal with the 20 million II’s that are already here. That is the crux of the debate. Arizona has responded with their own measures, deport them like FDR did after WWII to provide returning soldiers with jobs. The pro-illegal immigration community offers different reasons why the illegal’s shouldn’t be deported. We need them, it would require racial profiling, they equal votes for a beleaguered Democratic party. So what the pro-illegal immigrants propose is amnesty with a fine. The anti-illegal immigrants respond that amnesty, like the immigration reform and control act of 1986, will result in further incentive for border infiltration and ultimately the same problem we are dealing with now, a massive undocumented population being accused of causing too many problems.

Frankly I believe that the issue revolves around one legitimate superficial issue, and another more insidious illegitimate issue.

The superficial legitimate issue is that many businesses (especially agriculture) require cheap labor to survive/remain profitable in lieu of closing or moving their business overseas. At the same time the 1986 immigration law also referenced this legitimate need, thus seasonal workers who had worked for a number of seasons were given a path to citizenship and the bill also allowed subcontracting which basically allowed employers to hire illegal’s without responsibility for their illegal status. Either way these loopholes did not achieve its intent of a narrow exception, rather it contributed to the overall disregard of immigration reform and ultimately contributed to the situation we are in now.

From this perspective it makes sense that states should do what they can until the federal government gets its act together. Especially states like Arizona ,which is absorbing more than its share of illegal immigration. We live in a Democracy and state governments have an obligation to achieve optimal results for their residents. Arizona’s electorate voted for their bill, it is legal. AG Holder and the ACLU, opposed the bill referencing the 14th amendment which imposes the bill of rights of states (Dual Process clause), and the Equal Protection Clause which requires states to offer equal protection to all people in their jurisdiction. They claim that Arizona, by virtue of the requirement for everyone to carry documents and for officers of the law to ask for them, will violate the equal protection clause because they will racially profile i.e. not all people will be treated equally.

Yet the 14th amendment, as stated in the Citizenship Clause, expressly states that only citizens are protected under the 14th amendment.
It would seem then that Arizona is acting legally and justifiably. So why the tremendous opposition?

This leads us to the insidious illegitimate issue, votes. Yes votes!

The pro-illegal immigrant coalition is basically the Democratic party. They do not really care about whether illegal’s are deported from as Arizona on the contrary, this country will be better off if we have strong borders, and suppressed illegal immigration. Yet this is an opportunity for the Democrats to firmly establish themselves as the party of the Hispanics. Just as they effectively gained and solidified the black vote by being the party of the new deal and JFK’s civil rights bill. By coming down hard on those “racist white Republican Arizona folk” the Democrats, led by Obama and AG Holder can affirm and galvanize the Hispanic vote for the upcoming election and add to the Democratic coalition of next half century. The Republican establishment is aware of the political game and sees this as an opportunity to harness their constituency for the upcoming election, by opposing illegal immigration and supporting Arizona’s efforts.

Meanwhile Arizona, California, and many other states are drowning in a sea of illegal immigrants and the unique financial/social burden that they represent. Then again political domination of America has for some times become more an ends then a means.

Raphael I hope this adds some perspective.