Debate Speech: 4 Minute: Cons By adopting the same anti-immigration laws as Arizona, Florida would be violating the very values of the constitution. My first point is the violation of civil rights. In order to clarify today’s debate, we offer the following definition: Civil rights are a class of rights and freedoms that protect individuals from unwarranted action by government and private organizations and individuals and ensure one’s ability to participate in the civil and political life of the state without discrimination and repression.
Its Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons (individual and corporate) of life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken. This clause has been used to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, as well as to recognize substantive rights and procedural rights. Its Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction. This clause later became the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decision which precipitated the dismantling of racial segregation in the United States. Supreme courts of both the U. S. and Arizona admitted that race may be directly involved in the enforcement of the law. Secondly, the enforcement of the anti-immigration laws does not value a frugal efficient government. The Arizona SB 1070 law (Anti-Immigration Law) is costing Arizona millions. A new report by the Center for American Progress says the current boycott has cost Arizona 141 million from canceled conventions. Many cities are SUPPORTING these boycotts, and their support is encouraging the uproars.
Boycotting is being supported by Los Angeles – “The Los Angeles City Council overwhelmingly approved a boycott of Arizona-based businesses and governments Wednesday unless the state repeals a new law giving police the power to question a detainee’s immigration status. ”The government of San Francisco, the Los Angeles City Council, and city officials in Oakland, Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Denver, and Seattle all took specific action, usually by banning some of their employees from work-related travel to Arizona or by limiting city business done with ompanies headquartered in Arizona – LA Times, New York Times, Washington Post, New York City Times all agree. According to the New York Times, current and projected losses from conference cancellations as a result of SB1070 include $776 million in lost economic output. $434 million in lost spending by convention attendees. $265. 5 million in lost earnings. $28. 8 million in lost tax revenue. 8,472 jobs lost. The predicted losses Florida would suffer greatly decrease the economic gain that is desired.
While passing the law may possibly open up more jobs for Americans, which was the original intent, the economic losses outweigh the pros. Arizona has adopted the law because they are close to the border of Mexico, thus more prone to illegal aliens. Florida’s borders are on the water, so border control would be enough to keep illegal aliens out. The percentage of illegal immigrants in Arizona is much higher than that of Florida, so adopting the law would have more negative aspects than positive ones, and there are other options available that would be much more beneficial.
Thus, the adoption of this law would be wasting millions of dollars that Florida could be using in other areas of improvement. By adopting the Arizona laws, we are also directly defying the goals and means of the constitution. The United States Department of Justice filed a law suit against Arizona in District Court on July 6, 2010. CNN backs up the view that the new law by saying it “Goes against the framework of the constitution. The local immigration policies go against the set up of policies in individual states.
It’s a decision for the country to make as a whole. ” According to the Associated Press, over 70 U. S. cities have protested against this law. Culture ties into the problem as well. Many states have adopted the Mexican Culture, so they are more unwilling to break the ties that have formed. Similar bills have been introduced to states where hispanic communities are prevalent, including Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Michigan, Minnesota, and South Carolina. a. California went through the breaking of similar ties with Mexico in the Proposition 187 in the 1990s. b.
Associated Press poles showed that illegal immigration was not considered an extremely serious problem. c. “In Arizona State University’s pole, 81% of legal, registered Latino voters in Arizona voted against the SB 1070 d. Cultural ties to Mexico proved to be a bond many did not want to break, and Florida’s adoption of the policy could result in similar outcomes. e. Barack Obama called the bill “misguided” and said it would “undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and our communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe. If the main concern is crime rates, we should be focusing on other causes. Statistics show that the crime rates in Arizona were actually going down before the law was passed. “In fact, the majority of us believe [the Arizona law] will actually cause crime to increase,” said Chris Burbank, the police chief of Salt Lake City, Utah. U. S. Customs and Border Protection Agency and the FBI’s statistics for the crime rate in Arizona show that the number of illegal immigrants AND violent crime have decreased over the past several year.
FBI Statistics show that Violent crimes reported in Arizona dropped by almost 1500 incidents between 2005-2008 According to the nonpartisan Immigration Policy Institute, proponents of the bill “overlook two salient points: Crime rates have already been falling in Arizona for years despite the presence of unauthorized immigrants, and a century’s worth of research has demonstrated that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born. According to FBI data, the crime rates in large cities outweigh those in Arizona.
Not only is the law costing Arizona millions, they are putting it towards a problem that has actually been declining anyways. Impact of the law economically: Arizona is losing economic gain in areas such as schools and churches. According to the Associated Press, churches with congregations made up largely of immigrants experienced a thirty percent loss of attendance since the bill has been in effect. Area businesses say they’re seeing the effects of people leaving the state.
A Food City grocery store in east Phoenix reports a 20 percent to 30 percent drop in business “Parents have pulled 39 children out of Balsz Elementary, which has a student body that is 75 percent Hispanic, since April 23, the day Gov. Jan Brewer signed the law. In the five-school district, parents have pulled out 111 children, said Superintendent Jeffrey Smith, who cites the law as the leading factor. ” These losses mean less income for the state, thus less funding and support. Similar results are highly probably in Florida, who have a high percentage of Latina and Spanish origin citizens.