Let’s pretend there were two types of gasoline: the first contained tetra-ethyl lead, while the other kind didn’t.
The lead-containing gasoline boosted octane, added power and decreased engine knocking. Unfortunately, it also injected toxic heavy metalsinto our biosphere.
Most Kossacks would support laws that prohibited leaded gasolineand taxed unleaded gasoline to offset the costs roads, highways and bridges.
Right?
Most people would gladly choose unleaded gasoline, just because it's the right thing to do.
But let’s pretend some people decided that it was too difficult to change from their tetra-ethyl lead consumption. Some would argue that it’s actually better for their engine, and their car. Some may claim that it would be too difficult and expensive to add a new catalytic converter to their classic car, and waiting at the garage for an upgrade is far too onerous. Some might even go so far as to claim this whole toxic pollution myth was yet another step towards big government socialism driven by prejudice and discrimination against old cars. Some would even point out that they had inherited the leaded-gasoline-using engine from their parents. The fact that they had not actually purchased the vehicle should exempt them from unleaded fuel requirements. Would they have a point? As for unleaded gasoline taxes, well, haven’t we been taxed enough already?
Most Kossacks would argue that the public benefits of not adding lead to the environment outweigh the individual desire to use leaded gasoline, and if someone drives on public roads, then they must contribute to the common tax base. We would also point out that we're not anti-driving - after all we are a nation of drivers - but we just need people to follow the rules and use unleaded gasoline because it's better for everyone.
Right?
Would we support a market that promoted the continued use of tetra-ethyl lead in gasoline? What if gas station owners (not BP, Exxon and Shell, but the local guy at the station around the corner) could increase profits by selling leaded gas under the table? Where would we stand on claims that the entire Environmental Regulation System was broken and needed comprehensive reform? Would we allow drivers to continue using leaded gas so long as they paid back taxes on the miles driven in the past, learned about bio-amplification, and promised to eventually buy a new car?
I'm not so sure.
* * *
Of the four points of SB 1070 enjoined by Judge Bolton, I would concede one was correct: Arizona cannot require residents (legal or otherwise) to carry identification papers. This aspect of SB 1070 unequivocally preempted Federal law. End of conversation.
Prohibiting illegal immigrants from soliciting work in public places is sticky. Governor Brewer would perhaps be more successful by approaching the problem from a labor law perspective (something clearly governed at the State level). Requiring the issuance of a "public solicitation permit" which required the confirmation of Immigration Status similar to the I-9 form would accomplish her policy and political goals.
Article 6 empowers a State Law Enforcement officer to arrest individuals if they have probable cause to believe that the person has committed any deportable offense. From what I can tell, Judge Bolton enjoined this component because the determination of removability is complex and ultimately decided by a judge. I disagree here. Police do not adjudicate guilt or innocence for anything. Instead, to the best of their abilities, law enforcement concludes the probability that laws have been broken a submit individuals to the judicial system. Determining is someone robbed a bank is complex, but this fact does not prohibit a cop from arresting me if s/he has probable cause to believe I was involved. [I know that some may see this differently and would certainly welcome comments re. this one.]
Judge Bolton was most wrong on Article 2B. The USDOJ argued that Article 2B would impose substantial burden on the Federal Government, and therefore be preemptive, due to
"a deluge of information that the [federal agency] neither wants nor needs, resulting in additional burdens."
Judge Bolton’s decision cites the figure of 36,821 individuals detained/arrested in Tucson alone who would need to have their immigration status confirmed. The USDOJ claimed this influx would
"impermissibly shift the allocation of federal resources away from federal priorities"
and Judge Bolton agreed, noting
"State laws have been found to be preempted where they imposed a burden on a federal agency’s resources that impeded the agency’s function."
Hog biscuits and balderdash!
Let's take a look at that one for a second:
I would argue that Judge Bolton incorrectly ruled that this clause would apply to every single detention and arrest. Even if it did, I would argue that the majority of cases would not require federal resources because citizen/residency/immigration could be determined by several other ways outlined in SB 1070 But let’s pretend that Judge Bolton was correct. Would Article 2B overly burden the federal government?
The population of Arizona is just about 6.6 million people. Tucson has about 520,000 people Using Judge Bolton’s figure of 36,821 detained/arrested we conclude that 7% of Tuscon would be subjected to this check. 7% of 6.6 million Arizonians is 462,000 Immigration Status checks. Let’s even assume that Sheriff Joe Arpaio goes hog wild and increases that number to half a million. Would 500,000 status checks overburden the Federal Government? Let’s remember that the AZ police officer is not determining whether or not an individual is ELIGIBLE for a VISA, but merely whether s/he has legally registered within the Federal Immigration System.
The next logical question would be, "What kind of Federal System is already in place?" Right?
According to the Department of Transportationthere are well over 300 million visits into and out of the United States annually. Each year, about 11.5 million international travelers pass through O’Hare, another 17 million through LAX and over 20 million enter through JFK. That's about 50 million people - each year - just at three airports!
All of these people have their immigration status checked. The State Department, USCIS, CBP and ICE electronically coordinate over 1 million international travelers each and every day. Even under the worst case scenario envisioned by Judge Bolton, SB 1070 would amount to an increased daily burden of about three extra Boeing 777s.
For the US Department of Justice to claim that Article 2B is preemptive because it would result in a deluge of work is a profound cop-out. Judge Bolton got this one wrong.
* * *
In my analogy above, lead is toxic, and that’s why we regulate it.
People are people, and most people are good, but a few are not, and that’s why we have the right to enact an effective system to regulate immigration.
Just because it might be difficult for some to follow the unleaded gasoline law, most Kossacks would not advocate the use of tetra-ethyl lead. Likewise, most Kossacks support gas taxes.
It has been pointed out that illegal immigrants pay taxes. I would agree that sales taxes are paid through everyday purchases, and property taxes are paid through rents and mortgages.
But what about FICA and Medicaid? These Federal taxes which don’t get paid under the table go towards many of the Social Services which must be provided to all. If Arizona is mandated to provide services to all, then Arizona should have some say in the enforcement of Immigration Laws.
[I’ve even heard the argument made that some illegal immigrants use falsified Social Security numbers and therefore are eligible for those benefits. That’s like claiming that the guy who stole my wife’s VISA card is entitled the Free Mileage Points on his next trip with United Airlines.]
I’ve heard that the Immigration System is broken, and too often the conversation swiftly devolves into rants about racism, or vacuous references to "comprehensive reform." Aside from the party line of secure borders, another round of amnesty, back taxes and learning English, I have never actually heard anyone state exactly what about the Immigration System itself needs to be reformed.
I’d be interested in hearing specifics.