Xenophobia in the Desert: Racist Fever Becomes Law in Arizona

[Guest guest]

This article can be accessed from the internet at

http://americas.irc-online.org/articles/2005/0506prop200.html

Reacting to a barrage of anti-immigrant messaging and misinformation,

Proposition 200 was approved by 56% of Arizona voters on November 2, 2004. Prop.

200 forces all Arizonans to present proof of U.S. citizenship, such as a birth

certificate or passport, to receive basic public services and to register to

vote. Arizona's Attorney General has limited its application to five public

benefits programs, but Prop. 200's most far-reaching impact has been one of

widespread fear and intimidation. Immigrants are afraid to access even programs

to which they are entitled. The voter- registration component of Prop. 200

constitutes a modern-day poll tax that often keeps low-income people and

communities of color from voting.

Since Proposition 200 passed last fall, its backers have presented an alarming

20 bills targeting immigrants in the Arizona legislature, have cheered the

vigilante Minuteman Project on the Arizona-Mexico border, and have worked to

sponsor similar bills in other states. But there is a growing grassroots

mobilization against the resurgence of racist policies in Arizona, and the

threat of an international and national boycott of the state looms.

Prop. 200 Passed After a Campaign Rife with Xenophobia and Half-Truths

In 2004, anti-immigrant groups nationwide with intimate ties to white

nationalist organizations focused their attention on Arizona. Residents there

were frustrated with low-wage jobs, poor healthcare, and funding being directed

away from schools and public benefits programs. Extremists joined with a handful

of fringe local groups to promote a hateful agenda of blaming immigrants for the

state's woes.

By the time election season rolled around in 2004, Arizona voters had already

been primed for an anti- immigrant message thanks to a campaign of lies and

race-baiting that built upon a decade of intense border militarization. Early

polling in August of 2004 showed high rates of approval for Prop. 200.1 However,

local community organizations mobilized against fringe groups from outside the

state, and by mid-October, approval had dropped from 64% to 42%, and appeared to

be falling further.2

Back in the spring of 2004, signature-gathering to place Prop. 200 on the

November ballot was waning. A fringe group calling itself, " Protect Arizona

Now, " had initiated the signature-gathering with support from national

anti-immigrant figureheads and organizations. When Protect Arizona Now's efforts

lagged, the Washington, DC-based Federation for American Immigration Reform

(FAIR), an anti-immigrant organization with white supremacist ties, moved into

Arizona and began paying signature gatherers, investing $500,000 to ensure Prop.

200 would appear on the ballot.3 FAIR also wooed voters with a bogus study

alleging that undocumented immigrants " cost Arizona $1.3 billion per year. "

Their study, among other inaccuracies, misleadingly included $810 million per

year worth of state spending on education provided to children of immigrants who

were U.S. citizens.4FAIR refers to such children as " immigrant stock, " language

that offers a glimpse of the white supremacy inherent in their analysis of

immigrants.5

In fact, immigrants, both documented and undocumented, contribute heavily to

Arizona's economy. The Thunderbird School of International Management and Wells

Fargo Bank, in their report Economic Impact of the Mexico- Arizona Relationship,

demonstrated that immigrants make enormous tax contributions, paying annually

$300 million more than they receive in services in Arizona.6 In 2001, Mexican

immigrants in Arizona paid $1.5 billion in mortgages and rent, and Arizona banks

and other financial institutions received $57 million in transaction costs and

fees from remittances sent to Mexico from the state. In addition, Mexican

immigrant purchasing power in Arizona was estimated at $3.9 billion in 2001.7

Further contradicting FAIR's numbers, the New York Times recently reported that

the 8to 10 million undocumented immigrant workers in the U. S. are now providing

the Social Security system with a subsidy of as much as $7 billion a year. This

money will never be collected by undocumented immigrants themselves and will

help fund the retirement of U.S. citizens for decades to come.8 Nevertheless,

FAIR continues to peddle its own statistics to promote Prop. 200 copycats in

other states, scapegoating immigrants -- not the federal government -- for the

severe cutbacks in state social and health services.

Since the approval of Prop. 200 by Arizona voters, immigrants have come under

further attack from the Arizona legislature. This legislative session there were

more than 20 anti-immigrant bills that sought to expand Prop. 200's application

and many of them have been approved or are still pending.

" The Minutemen vigilantes have diverted the attention of the public and the

media while their counterparts sporting suits and ties in the State Capitol

promote racist laws, " said Herrera, an organizer with the St. 's

Housing Committee in San Francisco. " A war against immigrants and people of

color has been declared in Arizona. "

Voting Rights of U.S. Citizens Under Attack

Prop. 200 backers also made unfounded accusations that undocumented immigrants

voted in Arizona. Their true aim was to suppress voting by people of color. They

openly declared during a televised debate, " Too many Latinos are voting. " The

impact of Prop. 200 identification requirements on voter registration has been

staggering-- in Pima County, over a two-week period early this month, 423 of

712voter registration forms were rejected, or 59% of new voters. Last year, when

6 times as many people were registering because of the presidential election, no

voter registration forms were rejected.9

Arizona is already red-flagged by the U.S. Justice Department (USDOJ) because of

its history of widespread voter intimidation against people of color.

Consequently, all changes to the state's voting laws must be approved by the

federal government. Despite Prop. 200's blatant discriminatory intent, in

January 2005the USDOJ ruled that forcing people to show proof of citizenship

when registering to vote does not deter people of color from voting.

Arizona is now the first state in the U.S. to require that anyone registering to

vote present a birth certificate, passport, or tribal identity card. In Arizona,

approximately one-third of the Latino and African American populations live in

poverty. Citizens who cannot afford to purchase a birth certificate ($15 in

Arizona), or passport ($85) will be prohibited from registering to vote. Civil

rights leaders say this is eerily reminiscent of racist poll taxes. Prop. 200

also wipes out clipboard voter registration drives because making copies of the

required documents at a potential new voter's doorstep is practically

impossible. A number of bills currently before the legislature seek to further

restrict voting rights and are sponsored by the same anti-immigrant contingent

of legislators.

Arizona Becomes the Vanguard State for Anti-Immigrant Measures

Prop. 200's legalization of racial profiling has had a detrimental impact on

U.S.-Mexico relations, as well as earned Arizona a reputation for intolerance

within the United States. Recent headlines in Arizona's Spanish- language

newspapers included, " En riesgo imagen de Arizona [Arizona's Image at Risk], "

and " Peligroso racismo en Arizona [Dangerous Racism in Arizona]. " Harry Garewal,

the president of Arizona's Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, warned that Arizona is

being singled out at a national level as the most intolerant and racist state.10

In March, a 7-member delegation of Mexican senators visited Arizona to

investigate the effects of Prop. 200. The senators, seeking to analyze the law

and its effects on Mexican nationals, had appointments with Arizona Attorney

General Terry Goddard and Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon. However, Governor Janet

Napolitano, a one- time opponent of Proposition 200, announced her refusal to

receive the delegation and later Mayor Gordon, also a one-time opponent of the

measure, canceled his meeting with the Mexican legislators.11

Following their three-day visit to Arizona, their official report described a

" desolate panorama " of rising anti-immigrant sentiment. " The anti-Mexican

atmosphere that prevails there, far from diminishing, is being felt with

ever-increasing force, " delegation member Sadot Sánchez noted.12

Prop. 200-like legislation is actively being promoted by FAIR and other

anti-immigrant organizations around the country. Emboldened by Prop.

200'spassage in Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee,

Virginia, and Ohio are all facing similar measures. In Arkansas, Joe McCutchen

recently became the chair of " Protect Arkansas Now, " a group supporting the

" Arkansas Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act, " closely modeled on Proposition

200. A recent report by the Southern Poverty Law Center notes that Joe McCutchen

was a member of the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) in

2001, according to the CCC's newspaper.13

A Post-Prop. 200 Nightmare

The Arizona legislature is now debating 20 additional bills that seek to

criminalize and further marginalize immigrant workers and their families.

*HB 2030 expands Prop. 200 to prohibit undocumented immigrants from attending

public universities and community colleges, as well as Adult Education and

Family Literacy programs. It also blocks access to utility and child care

assistance. It is based on the false premise that immigrants are a net economic

drain on the state. HB 2030 passed the Arizona Legislature and was vetoed by the

Governor.

*HB 2592 bans state funding for day labor centers. It would prohibit cities and

towns from maintaining or building a day labor center if it is used to

" facilitate the hiring of undocumented workers. " Day labor centers provide safe,

organized, and convenient locations for both workers and employers. HB 2592

passed the Arizona Legislature and has already been signed by Governor

Napolitano.

*SB 1306 allows for police and Border Patrol cooperation. Police would be able

to detain immigrants for the purpose of calling Border Patrol, creating further

abuse and policing in low-income communities of color. SB 1306 passed the

Arizona Legislature but was recently vetoed by the governor.

*HB 2709 would build a private prison in Mexico to jail undocumented immigrants

arrested in Arizona. Private prisons are already cashing in on immigrant

detention and are notorious for human rights violations. This bill would require

a new treaty between the U.S. and Mexico. HB 2709 passed the Arizona Legislature

and was vetoed by Governor Napolitano.

*SB 1511 prohibits public entities from accepting the matrícula consular as a

form of identification. The matrícula consular is an official I.D. card issued

by the Mexican Government through its consular offices. SB 1511 passed the

Arizona Legislature and was vetoed by Governor Napolitano.

National and International Boycott of Arizona Imminent

Prop. 200, the rapid advance of its legislative offspring, and the upsurge of

armed paramilitaries on the border, have prompted communities in Mexico,

Arizona, and across the United States to begin organizing a boycott of Arizona.

The boycott will target Arizona businesses, conventions, and tourism, and will

ask individuals and businesses to shop, travel, and conduct business elsewhere.

The communities most affected by Prop. 200 and its offspring bills in the

Arizona Legislature wield considerable economic power. Mexican tourists alone

spend an estimated $1.6 billion in Arizona every year, and Mexican immigrant

purchasing power is close to $4 billion. Mexicans who might normally visit

Arizona to shop would be asked not to purchase anything in the state. In

addition, immigrants, Latinos, and their allies in Arizona have begun to engage

in work stoppages, and are considering boycotting specific industries or

companies that support anti- immigrant legislation.

The boycott will coincide with a petition drive to repeal Prop. 200. Arizonans

held a series of community meetings in May, 2005, to decide what industries the

boycott will target and to consult the communities that would be most impacted

by such an action.

In the early 1990s, Arizonans challenged white supremacists with a boycott and

won. When a ballot initiative to recognize the Luther King Jr. holiday

failed to pass, local and national civil rights groups initiated a national

boycott of Arizona. The year- long boycott cost Arizona $200 million, its

reputation, and an NFL Super bowl. When given the chance to vote on the holiday

again, Arizona voters approved it.

Arizona currently is at the epicenter of a national and international struggle

to defend the human rights of immigrants and U.S. citizens of color. The passage

of Prop. 200 here marked the kick-off of a dangerous state- by-state drive to

hide a racist campaign behind a strategic front of blaming immigrants for

economic and social ills.

Almost completely missing from the heated contest playing out in Arizona and

nationally is a discussion of the unjust U.S. trade policies that propel

migration. Immigrants suffer increasing imprisonment and policing for simply

crossing a border. Instead of imposing harsher restrictions on the First World's

exploitation of Third World peoples, U.S. laws punish the victims of the global

economic system even further.

" We see the effects of these free trade policies every day in the faces of the

workers at our Centers, " said Salvador Reza, director of the Macehualli Work

Center in Phoenix, a day labor center that could soon be banned under HB 2592.

" Prop. 200 and its henchmen have got to be stopped, or this place is in for a

boycott. "

--------------------------------------------------

Margot Veranes and Navarro are members of Defeat 200 in Tucson, Arizona.

For more information on Prop. 200 and similar bills currently before the Arizona

Legislature, the Boycott of Arizona, and other ways to support immigrant rights

campaigns in Arizona, please contact Defeat 200 at defeat200@....

Endnotes

========

1.KAET Poll,

http://www.kaet.asu.edu/horizon/poll/2004/8-24-04.htm,

2.Associated Press, Support Drops for Arizona Immigrant

Measure, October 15,2004, available online at

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=170041, accessed on 10/15/04 .

3.See Right Web profile at

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/fair.php

4. " The Costs of Illegal Immigration to Arizonans, "

available online at

www.fairus.org/ImmigrationIssueCenters/

accessed on 4/22/05.

5.Ibid.

6.Economic Impact of the Arizona-Mexico Relationship

(2003), available online at

www.thunderbird.edu/faculty_research/research_centers/e

con_impact/, accessed on 5/03/05.

7.Id.

8.Porter, . New York Times, Illegal Immigrants

are Bolstering SocialSecurity with Billions, April 5,

2005.

9.C.J. Karamargin, " Prop 200 bouncing new voter

signups, " Arizona DailyStar, May 6, 2005.

10.Apodaca, Edmundo, Prensa Hispana, Peligroso racismo

en Arizona, April 6, 2005.

11.Fischer, , Arizona Daily Star, House OKs 4

Measures on Entrants, Governorwon't discuss Prop 200

with Visiting Mexican Lawmakers, " March 0, 2005.

12.Hawley, Arizona Republic,. Mexico Report:

Arizona 'Xenophobia' Hotbed, April 3, 2005.

13.Southern Poverty Law Center Intelligence Report,

Xenophobia: Extremist headsArkansas Anti-Immigrant

Lobby, ( 1/25/05), available online at

www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=

530, accessed on 5/02/05.

--

E.

Marketing and Conference Manager

NCFH, Inc.

1770 FM 967

Buda, TX. 78610

512-312-2700 phone

512-312-2600 fax

www.ncfh.org