This is the second part of my critical examination concerning Arizona’s controversial immigration legislation. Yesterday, I began this process by taking a look at the law itself in order to determine the facts of the matter according to the written legislation. Today, I am going to examine the position of one of the process’ primary stakeholders - that of Arizona’s Republican Governor: Jan Brewer.
Governor Brewer came into office via succession. When the state’s former governor, Janet Napolitano became President’s Obama Secretary of Homeland Security in January 2009, Arizona’s then Secretary of State, Jan Brewer was first in line to succeed her predecessor. Currently, Governor Brewer is running for reelection (or election depending on your viewpoint), which is an extremely important consideration when examining her support for the immigration legislation in question. This past Sunday while watching NBC’s Meet the Press, I noticed a poll that stated two-thirds of whites (in the United States) supported Arizona’s new immigration law. In comparison, only one-third of minorities supported the bill. This information is significant and relevant because according to the 2008 voter-registration statistics, 2,150,000 of Arizona’s 2,874,000 registered voters are white – in an election year, Governor Brewer is pushing for these votes.
Previously, Governor Brewer has described the protection of Arizona’s borders as the federal government’s “obligation and moral responsibility.” She has accused President Obama of failing to take the necessary measures to secure the U.S. – Mexican border in relation to Arizona, thus the explaining the need for the legislation. Taking a step back, the aforementioned, featured words of “moral responsibility” invoke an inherent moral judgment. It seems as though the governor is taking the position that U.S. citizens deserve priority over all other persons in regards to access to U.S. spaces. In a statement released following the bill’s passage, Governor Brewer said the following:
“There is no higher priority than protecting the citizens of Arizona. We cannot sacrifice our safety to the murderous greed of drug cartels. We cannot stand idly by as drop houses, kidnappings and violence compromise our quality of life.”
In the same statement, she also had the following things to say concerning the bill’s possible racial implications:
“Let me be clear, though: My signature today represents my steadfast support for enforcing the law — both AGAINST illegal immigration AND against racial profiling.”
“I will NOT tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.”
“Because I feel so strongly on this subject, I worked for weeks with legislators to amend SB 1070, to strengthen its civil rights protections.”
That effort led to new language in the bill, language prohibiting law enforcement officers from “‘solely considering race, color, or national origin in implementing the requirements of this section…’”
Furthermore, Governor Brewer instituted a training program in order to help Arizona law enforcement properly enforce the law:
“Words in a law book are of no use if our police officers are not properly trained on the provisions of SB 1070, including its civil rights provisions.”
“Today I am issuing an executive order directing the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board – AZPOST -- to develop training to appropriately implement SB 1070.”
As evidenced by her statement, Governor Brewer is dedicated to the protection and security of Arizona’s border, but not at the expense of U.S. citizens’ civil rights. In theory, this law is just and should work; however, in reality, there are two factors that are influencing the law: politics and race. First, make no mistake that this legislation is entangled within a political struggle between liberals and conservatives. As cited in a recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, 82% of Republicans are in support of the bill compared to only 45% of Democrats. Secondly, race – the issue W.E.B. DuBois nominated as “the problem of the 20th century” – takes center stage in this conflict. There is little question that this legislation disportionately affects individuals of Latino and Hispanic descent, particularly Mexican-Americans, hence the reason why the law is being called racist. Tomorrow, I’m going to take a closer look at the role of race in this debate, but I’m going to end tonight’s critical exercise with this thought:
Does Governor Brewer need the Hispanic vote?
Perhaps not…
0 comments:
Post a Comment