Newsweek has another installment in the don’t-blame-Arizonans coverage of the state’s new immigration law (FAIR Blog, 4/28/10, 5/3/10, 5/4/10). Under the charming headline “Mexican Standoff,” reporter Eve Conant writes:
Some accuse lawmakers and the 70 percent of Arizonans who support the bill of acting like Nazis, or of turning Arizona into an apartheid state. But spend some time in Arizona, and you may come to see why so many Arizonans want this.
The bulk of what follows is Conant’s account of a month worth of ride-alongs with Arizona law enforcement officials, who showed her a number of ostensibly immigrant-related crimes. “It’s terrifying to live next door to homes filled with human traffickers, drug smugglers, AK-47s, pit bulls, and desperate laborers stuffed 30 to a room, shoes removed to hinder escape,” Conant writes.
No doubt it is, but how many Arizonans actually do live next door to such places? As we’ve pointed out before, there’s nothing particularly remarkable about the state’s crime rate; it had 483 violent crimes reported per 100,000 people in 2007, according to the Statistical Abstract, just slightly more than the national average of 467–and well below the rate of such well-known crime hubs as Delaware and Maryland, where the police are not yet mandated to demand the papers of brown-skinned citizens. And there’s no reason to think that immigrants are responsible for more violent crime than their native-born counterparts; research suggests the opposite.
If a state passed a law that had the effect of discriminating against African-Americans, and a newsweekly argued that the law was understandable by recounting anecdotes of blacks in that state who were involved in crimes, one would have to say that the magazine was being remarkably racist. I don’t see why you’d say anything different about Newsweek‘s article.
As though this law does anything to stop the drug cartels. This argument is pervasive and weak. Does anyone stop to think whether this is a viable solution? And what does this have to do with undocumented immigrants? (answer: nothing)
This law, for good or evil, was passed by Arizonians in a mix of whites, blacks and latinos. Until something is done to allay their fears and calm the hysteria this will escalate into a potential time bomb. Cooler heads are needed now more than ever. For more unasked for opinions, suggestions and comments, that will probable pi$$ off just about everyone, check out my unfunded, write in candidacy for the 2012 presidential elections at
thetruthtzar.blogspot.com/2010/04/to-run-or-not-to-runthat-is-the-question-or.html
Even if we cant hate black people, at least its still ok to hate spics and ragheads.
FAIR SAYS:
“where the police are not yet mandated to demand the papers of brown-skinned citizens. ”
WHY are you lying about what the AZ law says? It does NOT mandate that papers be demanded of brown-skinned citizens. Why are you using a report that is over 3 years old to justify your opinion that illegal immigrants commit no more crimes than American citizens. AZ legislators have reported that 65% of those in prison there, convicted of violent crimes…are illegal immigrants.
I lived in Maryland…and by the late 90s, crime was so bad, most in my county were living in constant fear. Houses were broken into, cars were stolen or just vandalized, my neighbors were robbed and beaten, the Giant Foods and Safeway stores were robbed frequently, and most in my neighborhood were afraid to go outside after dark. This was happening in a middle class neighborhood where the houses were selling for $200,000 – $400,000, So..don’t justify the crime of illegal aliens in AZ, by saying the crime rate is no worse than Maryland.
SHAME ON YOU!!!!!
I recently read Tony Judt’s history of Europe since WWII. One of the realities faced by most Western European countries was that by the late eighties and early nineties they realized that they were not getting adequate population growth to support the social programs of education, health, and social security. This led to profound econmic problems, imported labor, and race relation difficulties.
It seems to me that if one takes the long term view that the flow of illegal immigrants across the border will after a generation or so produce thousands of new U.S. citizens that will contribute through their taxes toward the cost of similar programs here in the United States. Hasn’t it always been that way?
Like most who oppose this Arizona law I agree that this is not the most effective solution to the illegal immigration problem. We should fine any business employing illegal aliens out of existence and we should deny any type of government assistance to any person who is in this country illegally. Our social welfare system is already overburdened just trying to take care of our own people. Regardless of what many may think, it is not and should not be the responsibility of the United States to care for the needy of the world when we cannot even take care of our own. I would also support a national i.d. program. That way everyone would be exposed to the same â┚¬Ã…“mistreatment.â┚¬Ã‚ Even â┚¬Ã…“evilâ┚¬Ã‚ white males like me.
Regardless of if this is the best solution; I do understand why it is such a big deal. Arizona is giving their law enforcement officers the power to enforce existing Federal law. They are not making up new laws. This fact seems to be lost on most opponents to this bill.
Well … of course ‘undocumented’ immigrants have commited a crime: they have apparently forgotten to file paperwork.
Or maybe not, huh? That’s what I told the policeman who stopped me for speeding last week. I’m not breaking the law, I’m an undocumented emergency vehicle.
As a 37-year Arizona resident, I am appalled at the failure of the state government and some of the law enforcement officials to separate immigration from the real problem–drugs. Law enforcement focus on immigration will distract disastrously from the murderous drug wars. First, the flood of guns from the U.S. to Mexico needs to be stopped. Good luck on that! Legalize marijuana, and much of the problem will just go away. Good luck on that! There’s too much money being made by we really don’t know whom (and in what country) to hope those things will ever happen.
As a criminologist I was appalled to see such misleading representation throughout this discussion of illegal immigration in Arizona. Phoenix (and most cities in Arizona) is no anomaly among cities in terms of crime. Indeed, it is quite average, and even below average on many indicators. Out of 75 of the largest cities Phoenix ranks 47th for total violent crimes, 32nd for murder and manslaughter, 34th for property crime, and 29th for burglary. The real “crime cities” are more likely to be in places like Tulsa (OK), Toledo(OH), Memphis (TN), or Minneapolis (MN). While some of these cities are growing in popularity among new immigrants, no serious criminologist would dare suggest that their high crime rates are the result of “illegal immigrants.” Likewise, any criminologist and most politicians know very well that New York has seen a significant decrease in crime rates and is now one of the safest large cities in the United States to live in. Newsweek, O’Reilly, and all the politicians suggesting otherwise know exactly what they are doing–duping the public. Shouldn’t come as a surprise though since these guys have been doing this for years now.
I’ve shared this on Facepages. This is a good match with the earlier post about Newsweek’s “Glory Days” (shared that, too). I haven’t read Newsweek for years. My parents used to subscribe when I was a kid. I like what “Victor said.”
“democracy now” recently broadcast actual audio of a former bush administration lawyer named kobach instructing arizona law enforcement personnel on “how to spot illegal aliens”-presumably to carry out the hateful new law their lege recently passed -understand that experienced cops don’t need tin horn demagogic lawyers to help them “identify” much of anything-atty kobach was merely providing the officers with a cover story for illegal racial profiling-consider the “reverse” of this racism-many years ago james meredith required a phalanx of federal marshals in order to enter the registrar’s office at ole miss in order to enroll as the first african american at that venerable univ back in 1962.governor ross barnett was on hand to meet the prospective student who was the only black man in the group-the old seg looked ’em all up and down and queried “which one of you is meredith”? barnett would obviously be right at home in the arizona lege-less obviously,he might be a good fit for employment at newsweek-snarky,cutting edge attacks on reverse racism.everything old is new again? we haven’t had enough racism and bigotry? enough scapegoating? the arizona law in question does not remotely pass constitutional muster-on supremacy clause grounds,on due process grounds,leaving aside that it depends on the illegal practice of racial profiling-pal,if this crock ain’t unconstitutional ,nothing is.
This abomination will only frighten legal Latino citizens and prevent them from wanting to walk out of their houses or vote! It will also increase racial tensions and suspicions, not just in Arizona but everywhere! Another thing this does is take the focus away from things like Wall Street reform. God forbid if we actually went after the real criminals!
To Barb; I don’t know where you are getting your figures of prisoners that are Illegals but it must be out of a hat, or worse. I’ve worked in the AZ State Prisons, County Jails and the Private Prison in Florence and I’m sorry but illegals don’t represent more than a few % of the prison polulation.
Two of our Az County Sheriff’s, both are in border areas that most illegals come through, are as against this law as much of the Nation. Both are on record here as stating that they will NOT enforce such a law because it takes time away from the duties they need to be doing to stop crime and the job should be done by the border patrol, not the local Police Dept’s. The only Sheriff that is for this law is good Old Sheriff Joe and most believe he is for it because he already faces a Federal Investigation on violating the rights of American Citizens that happen to be Hispanic, as well as, a number of individual law suits for false arrest and abuse by his Officers. He’s already lost several law suits by families of American Citizens whose family member has died at the hands of County Jail officers and has cost the county tax payer over $7 million so far.
To Mike; You are more in line with what is going on here. This is another one of the diversionary tactics used by the “Divide and Conquer” elite to sidetract people away from what “criminals” we should really be going after.
If the Federal Goverment would do its job, there would be no Arizona law. Stop calling them undocumented immigrants. They are illegals. That means crimminals. Period. I myself would have started deportations on the spot years ago and by now, we could see if our whole country could survive or come crashing down around us without people who don’t follow the laws like their fellow countrymen who wait years to do it correctly. Why is it racist to demand that laws be followed? If we’re not going to enforce the laws, then just get rid of them and have a free for all without the whining.
While I agree that this law in unconstitutional in its application, what people are missing is the intent behind this racist law. Greg Palast has used statistics to explain that this is an effort by Arizona’s Republicans to boot more than 100.000 qualified voters off the rolls. His arguments are well reasoned and his facts well documented. You can read his piece on truthout at http://www.truthout.org/behind-the-arizona-immigration-law-gop-game-to-swipe-the-november-election58877
as i understand it,this arizona law IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS IT IS WRITTEN-EVEN IF IT WAS NEVER APPLIED-however michelle is quite right-its racist in its intent.its also unconstitutional to bait the legal system with fictive statutes which systematically deny people their right to vote-although,ironically,the constitution does not provide for an affirmative right to vote-that glaring oversight is derivative of the stinking racial bias which permeates our legal system in general.palast also documented the racially motivated theft of a recent presidential election which was actually endorsed by the supreme court,which merrily suspended the us constitution for the occasion-like wb yeats said-“mere anarchy is loosed upon the land.”thanks,michelle.
looks like i “stepped in it “again-its not necessarily unconstitutional to bait our legal system with fictive statutes which systematically deny people the right to vote on racial grounds-that merely violates certain federal statutes which actually passed constitutional muster-we don’t have an affirmative right to vote-most of us don’t notice that because we are not impacted by this issue-or others like it.a great law professor here at the univ ky used to tell 1ls in constitutional law class that “discrimination isn’t illegal,only ILLEGAL discrimination is illegal.”
I live in Arizona. Neither I, nor any of my acquaintances, has been asked what we think of the new immigration law. Therefore, I serioiusly wonder how the media can say that 70% of Arizonans support the measure.
I live in Arizona. Neither I, nor any of my acquaintances, has been asked what we think of the new immigration law. Therefore, I serioiusly wonder how the media can say that 70% of Arizonans support the measure.
An article (http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/153513) in the East Valley Tribune references a recent poll by the Pew Research Center that claims that “…67 percent [of Americans surveyed] say police should be able to detain anyone unable to verify their legal status”.
But what is most remarkable are the last two paragraphs. The penultimate paragraph says:
“Just last month, only 2 percent of 1,029 adults questioned listed immigration and illegal aliens as one of the Top Ten problems facing the nation, a figure fairly consistent with prior months. By last week, though, the issue was a top concern of 10 percent of those responding to the survey which has a 4 percentage point margin of error.”
It is followed by a paragraph purporting to describe Arizona’s law, which simply says that the law required police to “inquire about the immigration status of anyone they believe is not in this country legally. It also permits police to charge illegal immigrants with violating state law.” Apparently the paper feels its not worth mentioning the provisions permitting detention of anyone who fails to produce identification and making it a crime for an illegal immigrant to make any “verbal or nonverbal communication by a gesture or a nod that would indicate to a reasonable person that a person is willing to be employed.”
Find a despised group to demonize, use distorted claims of the supposed threat from that group to pass laws that curtail EVERYONE’S liberties, then conceal the actual effects of those new laws. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?
The excerpt was –
“Some accuse lawmakers and the 70 percent of Arizonans who support the bill of acting like Nazis, or of turning Arizona into an apartheid state. But spend some time in Arizona, and you may come to see why so many Arizonans want this.”
If FAIR has taught us anything over the years it is to be critical of any statement that starts with “some”.
The writer can say anything after that. “Some” people believe …………. or “Some” argue that …………
It is NOT journalistic but is becoming ubiquitous in today’s press.
Thank you FAIR for helping all of us read and listen to reporting with more critical eyes and ears.
Regarding all of the blab, bluster and baloney evident in “debates” about migration, immigration and the like, several things stand out:
(1) most of the discussion has no basis in fact, but much misinterpretation of the little mentioned, bending the numbers (if any) to fit an ideological or preconceived idea;
(1a) The unquestioning use of biased “expert” opinion helps arriving at erroneous analysis and conclusions.
(2) as a “debate” strategy, particularly on the anti immigrant side, fear of “the other” is one of the easiest tools to create and manipulate, especially when no one knows what they are talking about.
(2a) On the other hand, the creation of viable, honest and legal solutions based on comprehensive knowledge are the hardest to develop.
(3) Fear morphs into hate, and thus easily passed on to others, especially children and the ignorant. Of the latter we have a great many due to the declining citizen interest in maintaining and investing in our schools.
(4) The demagoguery of the Republican politicians and their “enforcers” — the myriad of talking heads, thrive in the present climate. Good luck America.