Reply #11: Prop 200 ... [View All]

[troubleinwinter]

This article is from 2005, and gives an interesting look at some of the effects.

Prop. 200 Passed After a Campaign Rife with Xenophobia and Half-Truths

In 2004, anti-immigrant groups nationwide with intimate ties to white nationalist organizations focused their attention on Arizona. Residents there were frustrated with low-wage jobs, poor healthcare, and funding being directed away from schools and public benefits programs. Extremists joined with a handful of fringe local groups to promote a hateful agenda of blaming immigrants for the state's woes.

In fact, immigrants, both documented and undocumented, contribute heavily to Arizona's economy. The Thunderbird School of International Management and Wells Fargo Bank, in their report Economic Impact of the Mexico-Arizona Relationship, demonstrated that immigrants make enormous tax contributions, paying annually $300 million more than they receive in services in Arizona.6 In 2001, Mexican immigrants in Arizona paid $1.5 billion in mortgages and rent, and Arizona banks and other financial institutions received $57 million in transaction costs and fees from remittances sent to Mexico from the state. In addition, Mexican immigrant purchasing power in Arizona was estimated at $3.9 billion in 2001.

Further contradicting FAIR's numbers, the New York Times recently reported that the 8 to 10 million undocumented immigrant workers in the U. S. are now providing the Social Security system with a subsidy of as much as $7 billion a year. This money will never be collected by undocumented immigrants themselves and will help fund the retirement of U.S. citizens for decades to come.8 Nevertheless, FAIR continues to peddle its own statistics to promote Prop. 200 copycats in other states, scapegoating immigrants--not the federal government--for the severe cutbacks in state social and health services.

Voting Rights of U.S. Citizens Under Attack

Prop. 200 backers also made unfounded accusations that undocumented immigrants voted in Arizona. Their true aim was to suppress voting by people of color. They openly declared during a televised debate, "Too many Latinos are voting." The impact of Prop. 200 identification requirements on voter registration has been staggering--in Pima County, over a two-week period early this month, 423 of 712 voter registration forms were rejected, or 59% of new voters. Last year, when 6 times as many people were registering because of the presidential election, no voter registration forms were rejected.

Since the approval of Prop. 200 by Arizona voters, immigrants have come under further attack from the Arizona legislature. This legislative session there were more than 20 anti-immigrant bills that sought to expand Prop. 200's application and many of them have been approved or are still pending.

Arizona is already red-flagged by the U.S. Justice Department (USDOJ) because of its history of widespread voter intimidation against people of color. Consequently, all changes to the state's voting laws must be approved by the federal government. Despite Prop. 200's blatant discriminatory intent, in January 2005 the USDOJ ruled that forcing people to show proof of citizenship when registering to vote does not deter people of color from voting.

Arizona is now the first state in the U.S. to require that anyone registering to vote present a birth certificate, passport, or tribal identity card. In Arizona, approximately one-third of the Latino and African American populations live in poverty. Citizens who cannot afford to purchase a birth certificate ($15 in Arizona), or passport ($85) will be prohibited from registering to vote. Civil rights leaders say this is eerily reminiscent of racist poll taxes. Prop. 200 also wipes out clipboard voter registration drives because making copies of the required documents at a potential new voter's doorstep is practically impossible. A number of bills currently before the legislature seek to further restrict voting rights and are sponsored by the same anti-immigrant contingent of legislators.

Arizona Becomes the VanguardState for Anti-Immigrant Measures

Since the approval of Prop. 200 by Arizona voters, immigrants have come under further attack from the Arizona legislature. This legislative session there were more than 20 anti-immigrant bills that sought to expand Prop. 200's application and many of them have been approved or are still pending.

Prop. 200-like legislation is actively being promoted by FAIR and other anti-immigrant organizations around the country. Emboldened by Prop. 200's passage in Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia, and Ohio are all facing similar measures. In Arkansas, Joe McCutchen recently became the chair of "Protect Arkansas Now," a group supporting the "Arkansas Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act," closely modeled on Proposition 200. A recent report by the Southern Poverty Law Center notes that Joe McCutchen was a member of the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) in 2001, according to the CCC's newspaper.

National and International Boycott of Arizona Imminent

Prop. 200, the rapid advance of its legislative offspring, and the upsurge of armed paramilitaries on the border, have prompted communities in Mexico, Arizona, and across the United States to begin organizing a boycott of Arizona. The boycott will target Arizona businesses, conventions, and tourism, and will ask individuals and businesses to shop, travel, and conduct business elsewhere.

The communities most affected by Prop. 200 and its offspring bills in the Arizona Legislature wield considerable economic power. Mexican tourists alone spend an estimated $1.6 billion in Arizona every year, and Mexican immigrant purchasing power is close to $4 billion. Mexicans who might normally visit Arizona to shop would be asked not to purchase anything in the state. In addition, immigrants, Latinos, and their allies in Arizona have begun to engage in work stoppages, and are considering boycotting specific industries or companies that support anti-immigrant legislation.

More: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0605-25.htm