Arizona Prospering After SB 1070
Arizona has replaced Hispanics with Canadians and refugees from other American States
Arizona’s tough anti-illegal immigration law SB 1070 was enacted into law on June 29 of last year. The Obama administration immediately sued Arizona and got an injunction preventing it from going into effect while the case was litigated. Critics warned that the law would hurt Arizona; no one would want to move to Arizona and illegal immigrants would flee the state, ruining the economy.
The sky-is-falling alarmists were wrong. Results from the 2010 Census reveal that Arizona is the second-fastest growing state in the country after Nevada. Lee McPheters, director of the J.P. Morgan Chase Economic Outlook Center at Arizona State University’s W. P. Carey School of Business, predicts that Arizona’s population will increase by close to two percent this year.
Canadians tired of the cold weather are flocking to Arizona, taking advantage of the weak American dollar and the high number of foreclosures in Arizona. Phoenix has the second highest foreclosure rate in the nation.
People all over the country fought back against the boycotts of Arizona, organizing “buycotts” and purposely traveling to Arizona to help with tourism. After the Los Angeles City Council issued a resolution against Arizona, Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce sent Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa a letter saying he would “be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation.” Los Angeles gets 25 percent of its electricity from Arizona power plants.
Governor Jan Brewer set up a legal defense fund to cover the costs of defending Arizona against lawsuits over SB 1070. Close to $4 million in contributions has come in from over 43,000 Americans around the country, more than enough to cover the $1.5 million in costs so far. Meanwhile, taxpayers across the country are stuck footing the bill for the Obama administration’s lawsuit.
Reports that SB 1070 is hurting Arizona economically are not taking into account the economic downturn. Since Arizona has been one of the fastest growing states, it now has one of the highest rates of foreclosures. It has been hit harder by the recession than most of the rest of the country. Arizona lost twice as many jobs as the average state during the recession. Even so, by fall of last year Arizona ranked 12th for job creation of the 50 states.
Most Arizonans have noticed little difference in the service industries where illegal immigrants work, such as landscaping, fast food, construction, car washes, and the hotel industry. Although illegal immigrants have fled the state, prices have barely increased, if at all. Illegal immigrants were already leaving Arizona before SB 1070 was passed, due to previous enforcement efforts led primarily by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Senator Russell Pearce. The federal government estimates that the illegal immigrant population dropped by 18 percent in Arizona from 2008 to 2009. The Mexican government reports that 23,380 Mexicans returned from Arizona to Mexico between June and September of last year, and BBVA Bancomer Research found that as many as 100,000 Latinos left Arizona total during a similar time frame.
Arizona’s prosperity should come as no surprise. Arizona is a red state, and the 2010 Census indicates that people are fleeing the bluest states for more conservative states like Arizona, New Mexico, Idaho and Utah. Even growth in California has finally slowed; its disastrous liberal policies now outweigh its attractiveness. For the first time in history, California has failed to add a new House seat.
Arizona’s aggressive efforts to crack down on illegal immigration reflect majority opinion. A Rasmussen poll last year found that 60% of voters nationwide favor authorizing local police to stop and verify immigration status. Arizona began passing tough laws against illegal immigration in 2004 and its population still increased faster than most states – even as illegal immigrants were fleeing the state.
Critics point to the failure of other states to pass similar laws this year as evidence SB 1070 is not popular. However, they fail to acknowledge that the hesitation is due to uncertainty over what will happen in the courts. Similar bills were proposed in five states last year, but only Georgia was able to get it through the legislature. Governor Nathan Deal is expected to sign it.
Arizona is becoming a leader in passing laws popular among conservatives. It passed numerous pro-life laws last year, and became one of the first states to opt out of the federal abortion mandate in Obamacare. Last year, Arizona became the fifth state to ban race and gender preferences. Ward Connerly, who spearheaded Proposition 107 in Arizona and similar initiatives in other states, observed recently, “Arizona seems to be the only sane place these days.”
The economic outlook for Arizona is only getting better. In February, Governor Brewer signed the Arizona Competitiveness Package, which greatly improves the conditions for business. Among other things, it reduces the corporate income tax rate from 6.97% to below 4.9% between 2014 and 2017, dropping Arizona from the 24th most favorable state for businesses to the fifth. Up until this bill, Arizona had the highest corporate income tax rate of any neighboring state except California; in a few years it will be lower than all of them with the exception of Nevada which has no corporate income tax. Intel has already indicated it is making a $5 billion investment in Chandler as a result of this bill.
With all the people moving to Arizona these days, maybe it would have been a good thing if SB 1070 had scared some of them away. Fortunately, Arizona is not destined to become another California. It may become crowded, but its extremely conservative legislature will never adopt the bankrupting, politically correct laws that have ruined California.
SOURCE
Recent posts at CIS below
See here for the blog. The CIS main page is here.
1. Panel: Welfare Use by Immigrant Households with Children (Video, Transcript)
2. Sin 'Salon' (Blog)
3. April in Vekol Valley, Ariz.: Drug Shootings, Again (Blog)
4. DHS Pressies Face a Quandary Regarding Publicizing Some Deportations (Blog)
5. House Hearing Lays Down Record for Ending the Visa Lottery (Blog)
6. Fired Illegals Say Chipotle Was Soft on Immigration (Blog)
7. Rising Frustrations, Call to the Streets (Blog)
8. Massachusetts Health Plan Giveaway (Blog)
9. Salt Lake Chamber Dupes the Supporters of the Utah Compact (Blog)
10. A Worm's-Eye View of IRS Tax Collection Practices vs. Some Aliens (Blog)
11. Univision Does It Again (Blog)
12. 61% of Americans Agree: Unregulated Immigration Increases Poverty (Blog)
13. What about Nativism? (Blog)
Background
Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.
Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.
The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:
1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.
2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.
3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.
4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.
5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.
6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.
I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.
taco bell has a lot of problem with Unregulated Immigration thats why my son that has worked there for 4 yrs only gets 20 hrs every two weeks this sucks
ReplyDelete