On May 6th, 2010, I cross-posted an e-mail from Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen, in which she explained why she supported the SB 1070 immigration enforcement bill, since superseded by the more moderate HB 2162. Senator Allen regaled us with blood-chilling tales about life for ranchers who live down on the Arizona-Mexico border.
Now the originator of SB 1070 is speaking out. Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce (R-Mesa), who drafted SB 1070, has sent out an e-mail explaining why he drafted the bill. This e-mail has been picked up by a number of sources, including the Arizona Tea Party Network, from where I got it. Senator Pearce has been subjected to savage political persecution by a motley group of progressives, anarchists, multicultural advocates, and Hispanic supremacists. His chief tormentor has been Phoenix New Times blogger Stephen Lemons, who is a more vitriolic version of the Anchorage Press' Brendan Joel Kelley. Lemons continually defames and smears Pearce as "neo-Nazi" and "white supremacist", in part because of Pearce's previous political association with J.T. Ready. Ready was once a paleoconservative who has since morphed into a full-blown activist with the National Socialist Movement. You can view all the posts in which Lemons mentions Pearce HERE.
In 2006, then-Rep. Pearce sent out an e-mail in which he also forwarded a copy of the National Alliance's research report "Who Rules America", which documents Jewish domination of the mass media and the entertainment industry along with its deleterious effects; after a public outcry in which J.D. Hayworth denounced Pearce, Pearce apologized, explaining he hadn't read the research report all the way through. Not to matter, though. Progressives never forgive sins against political correctness; look at the hell progressives put Sarah Palin through here in Alaska for over a year, trying to inflict political death by a thousand cuts upon her by obsessing with the length of her skirt, the logos on her jacket, and a sundry assortment of other nitnoid concerns. Plus there were the endless litany of ethics complaints, the bulk of them filed by Republican turncoat Andree McLeod.
Nevertheless, Senator Pearce is unbowed, unbent, and unbroken. In fact, he's even running for re-election this year, knowing full well he'll be subject to even more abuse by his political enemies because of his fidelity to America's sovereignty. But even the Arizona media hasn't always given Pearce a fair shake, and the biased national media is portraying him as the Antichrist. So to counter the negative propaganda, he has taken to the Internet to spread the truth about his bill and his motivations. The full e-mail is posted below, after the jump:
America's Choice: Arizona or San Francisco.
I am State Senator Russell Pearce, the author or SB1070 which was signed by Governor Jan Brewer. Fear mongering and misinformation is the tool of the left against this common sense legislation.
Illegal is not a race, it is a crime. SB1070 simply codifies federal law into state law and removes excuses and concerns about states inherent authority to enforce these laws and removes all illegal "sanctuary" policies.
When do we stand up for Americans and the rule of law, if not now, when? We are a nation of laws, a Constitutional Republic.
Arizona did not make illegal, illegal. Illegal was already illegal. It is a crime to enter or remain in the U.S. in violation of federal law. States have had inherent authority to enforce immigration laws and has failed or refused to do so. Sanctuary policies are illegal under federal law (8 USC 1644 & 1373) yet we have them all over the United States.
Paul Kantner of the 1960s rock band Jefferson Airplane once remarked, "San Francisco is 49 square miles surrounded by reality." When I first heard that San Francisco was planning to boycott Arizona over the SB 1070 legislation that I introduced, this description seemed fitting.
However, when neighboring Oakland's city council voted 7-0 to boycott Arizona last Tuesday, and President Pro Tem of the California State Senate Derrell Steinberg announced a campaign in the legislature to boycott us, it became clear that San Francisco is merely ahead of the California crazy curve.
Why did I propose SB 1070? I saw the enormous fiscal and social costs that illegal immigration was imposing on my state. I saw Americans out of work, hospitals and schools overflowed, and budgets strained. Most disturbingly, I saw my fellow citizens victimized by illegal alien criminals. The murder of Robert Krentz - whose family had been ranching in Arizona since 1907 - by illegal alien drug dealers was the final straw for many Arizonans. But there are dozens and dozens of other citizens of our state who had been murdered by illegal aliens. Currently 95 illegal aliens in Maricopa County jail for murder.
Most of the hysterical critics of the bill do not even know what is in it. All SB 1070 does is allow Arizona law enforcement officials to detain illegal aliens under state law. The law does not allow police to stop suspected illegal aliens unless they have already come across them through normal "lawful conduct" such as a traffic stop, and explicitly prohibits racial profiling.
Aside from the unfounded accusation of racial profiling, the chief complaint about the bill is that it infringes on federal jurisdiction by enforcing laws. However, there is a long legal precedent going back to 1976 that allows states to pass legislation to discourage illegal immigration so long as it does not conflict with federal law. SB 1070 was specifically designed to mirror federal immigration law to avoid such a conflict.
For all their new-found respect for the authority of federal immigration law, the open borders advocates who oppose SB 1070 have no problems with "sanctuary cities" such as San Francisco that explicitly obstruct federal immigration authorities to protect illegal aliens. In 2008, San Francisco began a campaign to encourage illegal aliens to take advantage of the city's public services.
Mayor Gavin Newsom stated, "We have worked with the Board of Supervisors, Department of Public Health, labor and immigrant rights groups to create a city government-wide public awareness campaign so that immigrants know the city won't target them for using city services." The results were tragic. A few months after the campaign, Edwin Ramos, an illegal alien and member of the MS 13 gang, murdered San Francisco resident Tony Bologna and his two sons who he mistook for rival gang members. Ramos had a lengthy criminal record including a felony assault on a pregnant woman. He was arrested on gang and weapons charges and promptly released just three months before the murder. Not once did San Francisco report him to immigration authorities.
One month after the murder of Bologna, illegal alien Alexander Izaguirre stole Amanda Keifer's purse and then intentionally ran her over with an SUV, laughing as she hit the pavement and fractured her skull. Four months earlier, Alexander Izaguirre had been arrested for felony dealing of crack cocaine. Not only did San Francisco refuse to turn him over to immigration authorities, they expunged his record and helped get him a job, which is criminal in and of itself.
Keifer asked the obvious question, "If they've committed crimes and they're not citizens, then why are they here? Why haven't they been deported?"
The answer is that politicians like Gavin Newsom put the interests of illegal aliens before the safety of American citizens, not unlike Mayor Gordon and others.
Our law is already working. One can just scan the newspapers and see dozens of headlines like "Illegal Immigrants Leaving Arizona Over New Law: Tough, Controversial New Legislation Scares Many in Underground Workforce Out of State." In contrast, American citizens are leaving California. For the last four years, more Americans have left the state than have moved in.
In criticizing the SB 1070, Barack Obama said, "Our failure to act responsibly at the federal level will only open the door to irresponsibility by others." There is nothing irresponsible about enforcing our law, but President Obama is right in that this is only necessary because the federal government does not do its job.
But the solution is not "comprehensive immigration reform," a euphemism for amnesty. This will only encourage more illegal immigration. And making illegal aliens legal does nothing to change the social and fiscal costs they impose on Arizona or the nation as a whole. In fact the Heritage Foundation's research puts the cost of Amnesty at over $2.5 Trillion dollars.
The federal government simply needs to enforce its immigration laws by cracking down on employers of illegal aliens, securing our borders, and deporting illegal alien criminals. Attrition by enforcement.
If states understand states rights and our Constitutional duty and responsibility to our citizens this legislation in Arizona will be a model for states across the nation and the federal government, it will end illegal immigration to America, but President Obama is looking towards San Francisco instead.