The Command Post
Iraq
December 10, 2004
Judge Gives Go Ahead For Governor Janet Napolitano To Sign Proposition 200 In Arizona

Governor Janet Napolitano of Arizona has been given the go ahead to sign into law and implement portions of Proposition 200 that was passed by Arizona voters this November despite major opposition. From an earlier entry of mine on Prop 200.

Even with businesses, politicians and churches against the Proposition in Arizona, which requires proof of citizenship when seeking public benefits or registering to vote, it was passed with a fifty-six percent vote approval. An astounding statistic within that approval percentage is that forty-seven percent of Hispanic voters voted in favor of the proposition. This reinforces the fact that the legal Hispanic community is sick of the bad name illegal aliens are giving them and that they are also sick of their taxes being wasted and people jumping ahead of those trying to come to the United States through legal channels.

Arizona Daily Star

A federal judge has given the OK for Gov. Janet Napolitano to officially proclaim approval of Proposition 200.

Judge David Bury, in an order released Wednesday, said Napolitano is free to declare that voters approved sections of the initiative which require proof of citizenship to register to vote and mandate that those seeking to cast a ballot must first present identification.

Hey great! This is a step forward right? I mean checking voter ID's, even though the voting season is over for the most part. Wrong
But Bury left intact part of his original Nov. 30 order which bars the state from enforcing the section of Proposition 200 which says government employees must get proof that applicants for public benefits are here legally and are required to report illegal entrants to federal officials. That order also precludes proclaiming voter approval of that section of the initiative.
See, they totally bypassed the major portion of the proposition that voters agreed upon in November. I mean after all it would be racist to require someone to prove they are entitled to benefits before they receive them right? We don't require citizens to provide proof do we? Of course we do. I've heard so many stories of those in actual need of temporary services who have been denied because they tell the whole truth on the forms -- even though they are legal citizens who have paid massive amounts of tax in the past.

Out here in California if you own a car that's worth more than $3000 or so you are not qualified to receive benefits. So in order to get the benefits you have to ditch your car, which pretty much prevents you from getting a job. Out here in California a car is almost a necessity for any really reliable job.

If you lie however, you can get all the benefits and services and keep your car and apparently the state is none the wiser since they can't ask you for any proof.

Janet Napolitano is no friend of immigration reform. For instance here's a little blurb for you.

On June 26, Napolitano, in front of a cheering Hispanic audience at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials annual convention, vetoed H.B. 2345, a bill that would have required voters to show identification at polling places.

... Napolitano and her cronies claim carrying ID is inconvenient and burdensome for the elderly!

So I'm sure she was thrilled at signing Prop 200 into law. I'm also sure they aren't too worried since they have about 800 million lawyers already working on getting this thing repealed as soon as possible before the next election, when showing an ID will actually mean something.

Burdensome for the elderly indeed! They might break their hip carrying around that cumbersome drivers license.

They stopped the more important measure that would have saved Arizona's social services by getting rid of the fraud and now they'll get rid of this little speedbump as well.

California had a proposition similar to proposition 200 that passed by 59% of the vote in 1994. Proposition 187 would have required proof of legality for getting benefits and serices in California. To see what happened to it see my entry California Looking At It's Own Proposition Restricting Illegal Aliens From Services

Tipped by: Lonewacko

Originally posted at Diggers Realm

Posted By Digger at December 10, 2004 08:35 AM | TrackBack

Comments
Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?