Arizona, Bowing to Business, Softens Stand on Immigration
Published: March 18, 2011 - New York Times
Arizona established itself over the past year as the most aggressive state in
cracking down on illegal immigrants, gaining so much momentum with its efforts
that several other states vowed to follow suit. But now the harsh realities of
economics appear to have intruded, and Arizona may be looking to shed the image
of hard-line anti-immigration
pioneer.
In an abrupt change of course, Arizona lawmakers rejected new
anti-immigration measures on Thursday, in what was widely seen as capitulation
to pressure from business executives and an admission that the statefs tough
stance had resulted in a chilling of the normally robust tourism and convention
industry.
The State Senate voted down five bills that among other things sought to
require hospitals to inform law enforcement officials when treating patients
suspected of being in the country illegally and to prod the Supreme
Court to rule against automatic citizenship for American-born children of
illegal immigrants.
The Senate move was a victory for the Arizona business lobby, which on many
issues is more moderate than state lawmakers. And it was a rebuke for the State
Senate president, Russell
Pearce, a Republican and the driving force behind tough immigration
measures, including the law passed last April requiring police to question the
status of anyone they stop if they have a greasonable suspicionh that the person
might be an illegal immigrant.
Opponents of the five bills said that the statefs image had been hit hard,
and that it did not make sense to pass new measures while the state had already
put itself so far out in front of other states and the federal government on the
issue — at a cost to tourism and other industries.
They said that previous immigration bills were still being reviewed by the
courts, and that it was not smart to pass new legislation that plainly
conflicted with the 14th
Amendment of the Constitution.
gI donft believe that anyone, including myself, foresaw the national and
international reactionh to Aprilfs bill, said Glenn Hamer, chief executive of
the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, who said estimates of lost tourism
business ranged from $15 million to $150 million. gNow we have that experience
under our belts. We know these measures can cause economic damage; itfs just a
matter of degree.h
A letter
signed by 60 state business leaders this week blamed last yearfs bill for
boycotts, canceled contracts, declining sales and other economic setbacks.
gArizonafs lawmakers and citizens are right to be concerned about illegal
immigration,h the letter said. gBut we must acknowledge that when Arizona goes
it alone on this issue, unintended consequences inevitably occur.h
While Mr. Hamer said he doubted the bills could have been defeated on
Thursday without broad-based business opposition, he cautioned that support for
tighter restrictions on immigration remained strong in a number of quarters.
But, he added, gOur hope is that these types of measures have crested and we
could spend our time on efforts that could rebuild our economy.h
Indeed, state politicians and other officials interviewed after the billsf
defeat said it was too soon to tell whether the turnabout represented a
long-term change, or merely a breather until the economy rebounds. Concerns
about illegal immigration remain a significant issue, and many state leaders are
angry with what they describe as the federal governmentfs unwillingness to take
firm action.
But for now, genough is enough,h said State Senator John McComish, a
Republican who voted no on all five bills.
Gov. Jan
Brewer, a Republican, did not take a position on the five bills that were
voted down Thursday — her normal practice on legislation that has not reached
her desk, a spokesman said on Friday.
An aide said Senator Pearce was unavailable for comment.
Crucial to changing the discussion was a clearly articulated and executed
strategy by the state business lobby, which made concerns over negative economic
effects a far more significant factor than in the debate last year.
State Senator Kyrsten Sinema, a Democrat, said business opposition — in
contrast to what she called the tepid and delayed efforts of its leaders last
year — gave Republicans the political protection they needed to vote no.
gThey have been working since January to provide people cover against these
bills,h Senator Sinema said. Twenty-one of 30 state senators are Republicans,
and none of the bills would have been defeated without many of them voting in
opposition.
The effect on the statefs convention and tourism industry after the April
vote was immediate. Convention bookings plunged in Phoenix, one of the top
destinations in the United States, with large organizations citing the
immigration bill when canceling their reservations.
gIt was definitely a drastic decline,h said Kristen Jarnagin, vice president
of communications for the Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association. She and other
business officials pointed to data on bookings showing Phoenixfs ranking, on
some measures, had dropped from the top four destinations nationwide to 23rd.
So far, Arizona-style anti-immigration bills have not lived up to their
advance billing in other states, which despite strengthened Republican
legislative majorities have failed to pass any identical bills. Similar
proposals are still advancing in some states, but they, too, have encountered
strong business opposition.
gOur legislature and our state are suffering from immigration fatigue,h
Senator McComish said. gWefve been at the forefront of this issue, and I think
it is time for a timeout.h