Greetings, Race 4 2008! I bring you on this day news from the People’s Republic of Massachusetts – that our current Governor, he of the perfect hair and teeth, and erstwhile candidate for the 2008 GOP Presidential nomination has decided he’s had enough of illegal aliens (I’m still allowed to call them that, right?) running amok in the Commonwealth:
Governor Mitt Romney is seeking an agreement with federal authorities that would allow Massachusetts state troopers to arrest undocumented immigrants for being in the country illegally.
Oh, please do read on…
It is widely known that state officials are essentially powerless to do anything about the sizeable number of criminal trespassers in our midst. Well, it would appear that Gov. Romney would like to change that:
Under the agreement Romney is seeking, troopers would have greatly expanded powers: They could check an immigrant’s legal status during routine patrols such as during a traffic stop and decide whether the immigrant should be held.
“It’s one more thing you can do to make this a less attractive place for illegal aliens to come to work,” Romney said.
Indeed. Well, it cannot be said that Romney is hiding from one of the major hot button issues of the day – and the one issue I happen to believe has the potential to blow-apart both major-party coalitions in what could be a very, very messy realignment. That said, this is not exactly “new trail” material:
If the proposal is approved, Massachusetts would join a handful of states and localities that have entered into such pacts since they were first authorized in 1996. That list includes Florida, Alabama, and a few counties in California and North Carolina, where a limited number of officers have been trained to enforce immigration laws.
But what is the likelihood that the General Court of the Commonwealth (that would be the legislature, by the way) – with 6-of-7 seats in the control of Democrats, most of them raving, moonbat leftists (but I repeat myself) – would sign-off on something like this:
The agreement would not require legislative approval, said (Romney spokesman Eric) Fehrnstrom.
Well thank Heaven for small favors, I suppose. OK, so even if we get past that hurdle, how will the Kennedy-voter-on-the-street take it?
The arrangement is likely to be controversial in Massachusetts, where Cambridge, for example, has passed a resolution declaring itself a sanctuary for immigrants, and moves are underway in other cities to follow that example.
Behold! Planet Cambridge – the People’s Republic of the People’s Republic. Glad to see them leading the way on this.
Unsurprisingly, the Usual Suspects?? are less than pleased:
Immigrant and civil rights advocates derided the plan yesterday, saying that turning troopers into immigration enforcement agents would lead to racial profiling and have a chilling effect on immigrants who might otherwise report crimes.
“This will overwhelm the State Police force, it will hinder real law enforcement, real community law enforcement, and it clearly will lead to racial and ethnic profiling,” said Carol Rose, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts. “That’s not effective law enforcement, or effective immigration policy.”
Oh, come now Ms. Rose. You and your organization have spent considerable money and effort precisely to “overwhelm” police forces and other law enforcement agencies across the country. Further, your organization’s record demonstrates that you don’t care a whit about either “effective law enforcement” or “effective immigration policy”, so forgive me if I call “BS” on your entire statement.
BTW, in case you’re wondering – you ACLU stooge – when dealing with the finding of criminal illegal alien trespassers, “effective law enforcement” is precisely the same as “racial and ethnic profiling”. So thanks so much for demonstrating precisely how clueless you are in one neat, clean, easy to digest morsel.
Not satisfied demonstrating their utter cluelessness in this area however, Ms. Rose and other “advocates” for the felons decided to trot-out the canard about how enforcement of our immigration laws undermines the “trust” these same felons have that they can report crimes without fear of deportation. Boo. Hoo.
Happily, Romney’s flak was buying precisely none of it:
“It’s not a very effective argument to say that people who are in the country illegally will be less likely to report crime if they themselves are arrested,” he said. “If we applied that principle across the board, we wouldn’t arrest anybody for anything for fear it would deter crime reporting.”
Stay tuned. This could get interesting.
June 21st, 2006 at 8:58 am
Why should the citizens of the Commonwealth pay to do something the Federal Gov’t is quite capable of doing itself but has refused to do?
Also, this is nothing more than a publicity stunt for Mitt’s campaign for President, and as a resident of the Commonwealth I don’t appreciate it. I don’t remember Romney saying much of anything about illegal immigration until it was being talked about in the news and on the floor of the Senate.
I wish Mitt had the guts to run for Governor again. I would love to vote against him.
June 21st, 2006 at 9:08 am
Thanks for the input – especially coming from somone who would apparently perfer to have have Deval Patrick (s younger, blacker Mike Dukakis) as Governor. Bring Back the Massachusetts Miracle! I suppose.
As to your tongue-in-cheek question? Well, someone has to do it. I wish it was the Feds, but it’s not gonna happen.
As for “I don’t remember Romney saying much” yadda yadda yadda. Yea, well things change. No? Since all I’m hearing from your side is “Amnesty NOW! Amnesty FOREVER!” I’ll take Mitt’s pandering, thank you very much.
June 21st, 2006 at 10:20 am
Thank you for your response.
Illegal immigration is a nationwide problem and any solution to it can only come from the Federal Government. If you got rid of every illegal immigrant in the Commonwealth you wouldn’t come close to solving the illegal immigration problem in the US and you would put MA in a position were they would be the only state that couldn’t benefit from cheap illegal immigrant labor. For those two reasons I think Romney’s plan is a waste of resources and nothing more than a way to help his Presidential ambitions.
PS: I haven’t decided who to vote for in the Gov’s race.
June 21st, 2006 at 11:42 am
Howdy again BN.
OK, the snark machine is off this time. We’ll have to agree to disagree on several points – to wit:
1) Illegal immigration is a nationwide problem and any solution to it can only come from the Federal Government.
There are lots of facets of this problem that have NOTHING to do with the Feds – companies illegally hiring people, drivers’ licenses, school tuition, etc. Also, since no one (other than the kook from CO) is talking about “rounding people up” this is strictly passive – as in local officers making local arrests and handling the problem locally.
2) …MA in a position were they would be the only state that couldn’t benefit from cheap illegal immigrant labor.
Bunk. I’ll happily pay a little more for landscaping (though my condo fee, I suppose) and a hotel room if it means I get to have a citizen or LEGAL immigrant doing the work. I fail utterly to see how the Commonwealth as a whole “benefits” from illegal labor in the aggregate. In fact, it’s readily apparent (primary/secondary school and ER Medical costs alone) that they are a net drain on the state and local governments – certainly well within the perview of the Governor’s responsibilities.
And yes, this certainly has a great deal to do with his all-but-declared Presidential ambitions. He also just happens to be right on this one.
Off-topic: Patrick is going to be your nominee (56% at the convention plus ALL the grassroots energy is going to be hard to get over) – or Reilly in an ugly bloodbath. The winner gets to take-on Muffy and the Lark. Uninspiring all around.
June 22nd, 2006 at 5:03 pm
Blue Neponset said,”you would put MA in a position were they would be the only state that couldn’t benefit from cheap illegal immigrant labor.”
This has got to be the weakest argument I’ve seen on this subject. You fear that other states are going to benefit from the additional illegal workers, therefor it’s AOK for them to stay? What kind of sense does this make? What has this country come to?
Ann Marie Curling
PR@electromneyin2008.com
http://blog.electromneyin2008.com