Just How Supportive WAS Kirk Adams Of SB1070?

The week that the Supreme Court was hearing oral arguments on SB1070, Kirk Adams participated on a panel at the Heritage Foundation.  His statements at this meeting didn't exactly paint the picture of someone who whole-heartedly supported SB1070.  It doesn't even give the illusion that he supported the author of the bill who we know to be Russell Pearce. 

But, Adams sure likes to use SB1070 when it is politically expedient. 

You can view his complete remarks here.

Adams first talks about SB1070 and then makes the claim:

"Not to be outdone, there are a few proponents of SB1070 who have oversold the bill for what it actually does.  Pretending that this bill will actually secure the border.  And that some have used ensuing controversy in order to bolster their political careers...  all of which brings me to a comment I made to my Chief of Staff just a few moments before walking out onto the floor to pass this bill.  'The worst thing about this bill', I said, 'is not what is IN the bill, but what the opponents and some proponents will say is in the bill'.....Now the bill passed the state senate in February 2010 and came to the house, where using the power of the Speakership, I held it.  I held it because the bill was destined for the same fate as its previous version the year before, which died on the floor of the house.   And while in the house, we agree with the INTENT of the bill, we felt that some of the language was inarticulate and key protections were missing, and we wanted to be absolutely certain that racial profiling was clearly, and on multiple occasions, prohibited in the plain language of the bill.  For 2 months, the house worked on the amendment.  Initially, the sponsor would not agree to the changes.  But, after a legislative maneuver, the bill was reassigned back to the original committee, and to his credit, he did agree to eventual changes. 


Now here are the key provisions... the house made to 1070.  We inserted officer discretion.  That they would ask these questions only when reasonable and practical.  We made sure that protections for faith based groups and community organizations who provide humanitarian aide to immigrants... We wanted to be sure that the bill was focusing on the real bad guys, the smugglers.  We included a prohibition in asking immigration status if a determination would hinder an investigation or obstruct an investigation of another crime.  This was intended to protect witnesses and victims of crime.  And on numerous occasions, we inserted language to specifically prohibit racial profiling.  Language that we believe goes above and beyond the underlying federal law upon which 1070 is based.


A question was then posed to Adams,

"It sounds like you spent a lot of time worrying about the civil rights challenges to the case....."

He responded,

"To put this in further context, SB1070 came after the 2007 passed the employer sanctions legislation.  The decisions of the lower courts and the way that worked its way through the process, served as a bit of a guide for us in drafting 1070.  We did pay close attention to these preemption issues and believe that we have appropriately threaded that needle with the legislation.  The way we did this, when the bill got to the house is essentially, I assigned a committee of 3, an informal committee to review the legislation.  So, we had an immigration attorney, another attorney, and a representative from a border community in Yuma Arizona."

(It is probably safe to assume that the representative from Yuma was Rep. Russ Jones.  The Rep who "struggled mightily" to vote for SB1070.  We covered Rep. Jones previously.)

Adams continued...

"There was significant concerns within the house caucus originally about the preemption issue and specifically about the civil rights issue.  But, 2 months working on that amendment and agreement by the sponsor, eventually led to a final amendment which was dubbed the "Biggs amendment", named after one of the attorneys familiar with immigration law that worked on this issue.  And so all of those issues were thoroughly vetted.  And this is, I suppose, one of the characterizations of the Arizona state legislature that I think needs to be corrected.  This was not a bill that was rapidly rushed...this was perhaps the most vetted piece of legislation that I had seen in my time at the state legislature.  To make sure that we were not only 'legally' right, but that we were doing the 'right thing'."

Again, what happened to Adams' campaign claims that he was a big proponent of SB1070? 

If he was such a staunch supporter of SB1070, why the subtle digs on Pearce who was the ACTUAL author of SB1070 and on Governor Brewer for signing the legislation? 

Adams' comments sound like they are intended to lead us to believe that he should be given credit for drafting and ultimately passing SB1070.  On his own campaign site, he makes the claim "Talk about securing our border is popular during election time, but I have an actual record of accomplishment.  As Speaker of the House, I passed SB 1070."  The same bill that he admits he "held" and then proceeded to put together a committee which then spent months "fixing" portions of the bill he didn't like?  The same bill that he claimed proponents "oversold" and "pretended to secure the border"?  THAT bill?  Darn "political rhetoric".  

And why would Adams make sure to protect the "faith-based" and humanitarian groups who cater to and encourage illegal behavior?  Is that the kind of person we want representing us in DC?  Someone who would allow aiding and abetting of illegals by specific groups at the expense of LEGAL citizens?

Or someone who talks out of both sides of his mouth when it politically behooves them?

No thanks.

Why Rep. Jones "Struggled Mightily" About SB1070

Arizona Representative, Russ Jones, stood to explain his "yes" vote for SB1070.  He clearly was conflicted about voting in support of the bill.  Let's look at his explanation as to WHY he struggled mightily to do so.

"As you know, Mr. Speaker, I have struggled mightily with this bill.  The district I come from along the AZ-Mexico border...it's not broken.  That district along the border has the highest REDUCTION in illegal immigration along the entire US-Mexico border.  That's because our local law enforcement and ICE work well together, hand in hand, effectively...I still have problems with this bill...Frankly, my community is NOT a sanctuary city.  I can't think of one community in the State that is truly a sanctuary city.  It's unfortunate we are using that term...I don't see this as a problem and wonder what it is we're fixing."


Let's break it down:

"The district I come from along the AZ-Mexico border...

it's not broken"

Smugglers and immigrants link up in San Luis Rio Colorado
(2006)


Study: Illegal immigration costing border counties millions

Cost to Yuma may total $49.2 million since 1999

(March 2008)

Illegal immigrants: SB-1070 will not stop us
(May 2010)


Mexican Children crossing border in San Luis, AZ to attend US SCHOOLS
(2010)

Unfinished drug tunnel found in San Luis Rio Colorado   
(Feb 2011)

San Luis CBP Officers Seize Ammunition
(Feb 2012)

"our local law enforcement and ICE work well together, hand in hand, effectively"

The 287(g) program is an agreement between the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) within the Department of Homeland Security and state and local law enforcement which allows local law enforcement to receive delegated authority for immigration enforcement within their jurisdictions. "The cross-designation between ICE and state and local patrol officers, detectives, investigators and correctional officers allows these local and state officers necessary resources and latitude to pursue investigations relating to violent crimes, human smuggling, gang/organized crime activity, sexual-related offenses, narcotics smuggling and money laundering."

While it may be true that the local law enforcement and ICE in Mr. Jones' district worked effectively together prior to SB1070 (although the above links paint a different picture than that of a district that wasn't "broken"), it is known that President Obama has since begun to shut the 287(g) program down. 

Even here in Arizona.

The fact of the matter is, the 287(g) program is only set up to crack down on those who are arrested after committing a secondary crime and does not do anything to curtail those who are committing the primary crime of entering our country illegally.  

"Frankly, my community is NOT a sanctuary city.  I can't think of one community in the State that is truly a sanctuary city.  It's unfortunate we are using that term..."

Sanctuary Cities
Arizona

• Chandler, AZ   (Added 5/30/07, Congressional Research Service Report, 2006 )
• Mesa, AZ  (Added 10-18-09, Sources: Judicial Watch; East Valley Tribune article,1-4-2008)

Mesa, Arizona has been added as a sanctuary city list because of its reported "don't ask don't tell policy" and criticism by the local sheriff that the city is not enforcing the law. The sheriff has arrested illegal aliens working in city buildings (as contract workers for a private cleaning company), reportedly after the city police department refused to investigate complaints of illegal hires by a whistleblower. 

• Phoenix, AZ
• Tucson, AZ   (Added 11-12-07, Source: 11-11-07 story by Brady McCombs, Arizona Daily Star.)

Tucson Arizona has been added to the sanctuary city list because the Tucson police have instituted a new policy which prevents their officers from calling Immigration and Customs Enforcement to schools and churches. 

" don't see this as a problem and wonder what it is we're fixing."

Illegal Immigration Costs U.S. $113 Billion a Year, Study Finds


Illegal Immigration Costs Arizona Taxpayers $1.3 Billion Annually
(Arizonans fork out nearly $1.3 billion annually to pay for all of the costs incurred from illegal immigration; around $810 million for education, $400 million for health care related expenses, $80 million in incarceration costs, and the remainder in welfare benefits.)

http://www.immigrationcounters.com/


I think we can see why Rep. Jones "struggled mightily" to vote for SB1070.

Here.

Here.

Here.

Arizona Border Security Committee

In 2010, with some tweaks to SB1070, House Bill 2162 established the formation of a Joint Border Security Advisory Committee designed to discuss the critical border issues for our state.  The committee is created from the appointments by the Speaker of the House, the Senate President and the Governor, and includes Sheriffs from border counties.


When reviewing the meeting minutes for the JBSAC, it was interesting to note that the Speaker Of the House, Kirk Adams, was listed as one of the members of the committee, yet he never actually attended any of the meetings prior to his resignation.  He chose, rather, to send someone to "represent" him instead.

It was also interesting to note that half of the bills which the committee discussed that were critical to border issues, were ones that Mr. Adams was not present to vote for as a member of the Rules Committee.  Mr. Adams was absent on March 8th to vote for SB1546 and again on March 14th for SB1495.  I think we can guess what he was busy focusing on those first couple of weeks in March.

A summary of the meeting minutes for 2011 can be viewed here.

We've discussed Rep. Russ Jones before.  Mr. Jones was one of Kirk Adams' appointments to the JBSAC just a few months before Adams resigned.  After reading the minutes as well as viewing video of the meetings, it was clear what Mr. Jones' main issue was with the border.  His biggest concern is the need to see a quicker response at the border for trucks and more funding for Customs and Border Protection Agents.  This isn't a big surprise since his own, personal company deals with the trucking and manufacturing industries in shipping goods across the US/Mexico border.  Reducing the "bottleneck" would allow his company to transfer more goods back and forth which obviously helps his bottom line.  Conflict of interest?

Mr. Jones is also a Treasurer for the Executive Committee and Board of Directors for a group called the Border Trade Alliance.  His company, RL Jones, is also a contributor to the BTA.  The BTA has been pushing for more Customs and Border Protection agents in order to facilitate trade.  While it is certainly understandable to want to have more personnel at the border in order to man the newly built lanes, one has to wonder if the "border protection" part of the Customs and Border Protection agents is really what the BTA, and Rep Jones, is concerned about.

Alan Bersin, is a former California Secretary of Education (who must have been so knowledgeable about border security that he had to be appointed while Congress was in recess in March 2010).  He is currently Obama's "Border Czar".  Mr. Bersin spoke at a BTA conference in the fall of 2010 and said:

I want to offer an alternative vision.  We have to start thinking about the border in a much more holistic and broad way than simply a line on the map between Mexico and the United States...Canada and the United States...We have to start thinking about the borders not only as juridical lines on a map, which they are, and ports of entry that we build, and the infrastructure...we have to think about the border and the flows of goods and people...and this notion of flows is much more consistent with where the WORLD is in thinking of borders as flows of goods and people, capitol and ideas.  Because, we limit ourselves if we think about juridical lines and physical ports of entry and we have to get more efficient at the physical lines, yes we do, no question about it.  And we need more resources at the physical line, but we actually have to think differently about what a border is and what an inspection is...

That sounds an awful lot like an "open borders" mentality.  Remember, he is Obama's border Czar!  Since when does our country have to prescribe to and be "consistent" with the same (faulty) notions of what a border is in the eyes of the world?  How is that notion working out for Arab countries?  North and South Korea?  In fact, try and tell Israel that they should have free flowing borders with their neighbors who want to wipe them off of the face of the earth.

Mr. Bersin's complete remarks can be seen here.

We don't begrudge Rep. Jones for wanting to speed up traffic at the border to help increase and grow his business.  We just question his motives and whether he can participate on a Border Security Advisory Council (as well as be appointed to attend the Legislative Border Conferences) with an open mind.



The wrap-up on Rep. Jones, border security and SB1070 will be in our next installment.

Border Legislative Conference

The Border Legislative Conference began in 2002 and is comprised of legislative representatives from states along the US/Mexico border.  Members meet regularly to discuss issues relating to the border.

In 2003, the BLC declared:

Whereas, the goal of the Border Legislative Conference is to empower border state legislators to engage in the binational agenda and provide input and direction in the development of policy between both countries;

 

On the subject of  IMMIGRATION:  (pay attention to the number of immigration buzz words)

The members of the Border Legislative Conference conducted an open and passionate discussion on the topic of immigration. Participating legislators strongly reaffirmed their call on the federal governments of the United States and Mexico to work towards the implementation of a comprehensive immigration accord that addresses the United States’ demand for workers and the border security needs of both countries.

Some of the concepts which were adopted at the conference included:

• Limited state resources should not be diverted to support policies and initiatives that tolerate or result in racial profiling in border communities;


• It is the United States government’s obligation to fund and oversee a well-trained Border Patrol acting consciously of basic human rights of immigrants;


• Legislation, or any acts that violate the human rights of immigrants, documented or undocumented, should be condemned. Law enforcement agencies, both federal and state, must treat all immigrants with respect and dignity and adhere to the legal rights they are entitled under state, federal or international treaties, especially the rights of minors through the utilization of procedures and programs that protect them;


• Legislation that focuses solely on enforcement will be ineffective. Border legislators support fair and comprehensive immigration legislation that balances border security concerns with recognition of the U.S. demand for workers in the numerous sectors of the U.S. labor force, including agriculture, construction, and the service economy;


• Border legislators support laws that offer a path to citizenship, under clearly defined guidelines, to immigrants who have demonstrated citizenship, paid taxes, and birthed children and grandchildren;


• A temporary worker program that allows employers to sponsor low-skilled immigrant workers to obtain residence status should be supported. Undocumented students under the age of 21 should be able to satisfy the requirements under such a program by attending an institution of higher education or a secondary school full-time;


• Border legislators support legislation that provides a larger number of employment and family-based residency cards to promote family unification and reduce backlogs in application processing;


• The ongoing implementation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America between the U.S., Canada and Mexico, aimed at establishing a common security strategy, competitiveness, quality of life, and to promote economic growth by streamlining the secure movement of low-risk traffic across our shared borders, should be supported;


• Border legislators support legislation that authorizes additional federal funds to states and local governments for reimbursement of the indirect costs relation to the incarceration of undocumented immigrants should be supported; as well as for the health and educational needs of immigrant populations;

Discourage state legislation aimed at taxing immigrants' remittances; and border legislators recognize and respect signed international immigration agreements between United States and Mexico.

Remember 2003?  Jeff Flake, John McCain and Jim Kolbe were trying to push through their idea of "Comprehensive Immigration Reform".  It was so much to the liking of immigration activist, Frank Sherry, that his response was,

THIS IS HUGE!

Fast Forward to 2008:

Legislators from the State of Sonora presented members of the Border Legislative Conference a resolution expressing strong concerns regarding the adoption and implementation of an employer sanctions law in the State of Arizona. The law imposes penalties on employers that knowingly or intentionally hire undocumented immigrants in Arizona. The resolution was unanimously supported by Mexico members of the Border Legislative Conference. Mexico members requested the Chair and Vice Chair of the Border Legislative Conference that the document be included in the meeting minutes to ensure the expressions and concerns of the Mexico delegation regarding this law are recorded.

So, we are not allowed to pass laws and create policy unless they are first approved by other nations?  Sounds like one of the excuses the US attorney used when he argued recently in front of the Supreme Court over portions of SB1070.  What happened to sovereignty?  What are we even doing agreeing to resolutions with other countries that are not in our nation's best interest?

The Mexican BLC representatives were upset by the E-Verify bill which passed the Arizona legislature in 2007.  The same bill which sparked a lawsuit against the state of Arizona and which one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit was  Maricopa County Board of Supervisors candidate, Steve Chucri.

(Chucri, President of the Arizona Restaurant Association, is seen standing on the far right, next to Jason LeVecke, Carl's Jr. franchise owner, and Mac Magruder who owns several McDonalds franchises in the valley.  Businesses that depend on cheap labor).

There was another BLC conference held in San Diego around the same week in April 2008.  According to the minutes, they also discussed immigration:

The members of the Border Legislative Conference unanimously adopted Resolution 2005-

01 urging the federal governments of the United States and Mexico to accelerate discussions

on the topic of immigration. The resolution also expresses concerns over the current impasse

in the United States Congress on immigration reform, as well as a lack of progress on

practical and comprehensive legislative solutions to address this important matter.

They also appointed then Representative, Amanda Aguirre to the BLC Health Committee.  She certainly knows all about how to take advantage of   utilize healthcare resources at the border.

Jeff Flake was again trying to push through comprehensive immigration reform around the same time.



In 2011, the BLC claimed they supported immigration policy that included:

• ...fair and comprehensive immigration legislation that balances border security concerns with recognition of the U.S. need for workers in certain sectors, and that does not preclude them from consideration from eventual citizenship;

• A comprehensive, bipartisan immigration approach that is endorsed by immigrant advocates, and other important stakeholders such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Service Employees International Union, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, and the Western Growers Association, as well as their counterparts in Mexico. Additionally, the Utah Compact, which was recently adopted, should be seriously considered by the U.S. Western States.

• ...supports a more humane and appropriate family-friendly system aimed at the legal residency of young people who were involuntarily taken to the U.S. when they were children, who attended school, and who are currently attending an institution of higher education in the U.S.;

• Increase the quotas of employment and increase family based green cards to promote family unification and reduce waiting times for the consideration of their application;

US Chamber of Commerce? 

(Director of US Chamber of Commerce in 2007 giving Flake an award at the Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform conference)

SEIU? 

(Eliseo Medina is a representative of the SEIU seen here at the Supreme Court Hearing on Arizona's immigration bill)

US Conference of Catholic Bishops?  The same group who has ties to radical organizations such as the Center for Community Change who promotes abortion and gay marriage?  (Jerry Lewis should be familiar with CCC.  They donated at least $9000 of "in kind" donations to Promise Arizona during the recall election and who then canvassed on Lewis' behalf. They also were represented at the Supreme Court hearing.)

Western Growers Association?
The same group who signed off on the Arizona Accord along with groups like Chicanos por la Causa, IAF affiliated organizations, and Jerry Lewis?  The group that bemoans any kind of enforcement legislation to combat illegal immigration?

Did we mention that Rep Russ Jones is one of the members of the BLC appointed to represent Arizona?
Stay tuned for more connections....

Affiliates And Their Affiliated Affiliates

A lot can be deemed about one's leanings when digging into the groups with which they are affiliated.


Take, for example, Arizona Representative, Russ Jones (R).  Mr. Jones is on the advisory board and council for the Arizona Community Foundation (Yuma sector).  He is also a donor.


Initiatives for the ACF reads like the Democratic propaganda platform:

Black Philanthropy Initiatives  ("The mission of the Black Philanthropy Initiative is to advance equity, health, education, leadership, and SOCIAL JUSTICE for African-Americans in Arizona.")


Education Reform (The ACF partnered with the Ellis Foundation on a report about the Education system in Arizona.  One of the partners of the Ellis Foundation is the Creighton School District.  The Creighton Elementary school is an affiliate of the IAF.  The ACF also gave a grant to STAND FOR CHILDREN which then campaigned in Arizona for the Prop 100 "temporary" sales tax increase.)


Affordable Housing

Latinos Unidos

VISTA- AmeriCorps (Obama's personal recruiting arm)

What piqued our interest was the Latinos Unidos initiative.

The website states:

The Arizona Community Foundation's Latinos Unidos initiative is the natural evolution of the highly successful Hispanics in Partnership program and the Arizona Hispanic Funders' Collaborative launched in 2005. With matching funds from the national Hispanics in Philanthropy organization, Arizona's HIP program granted $620,000 to the following 10 Latino-led nonprofits in 2006:

• Border Action Network
• Borderlands Theatre
• Florence Immigration Project
• It’s a Baby’s Life
• La Sociedad Mutualista de Obreros Mexicanos
• Pinal Hispanic Council
• Pirtleville Community Action Network
• Regional Center for Border Health, Inc.
• The Way of the Heart: The Promotora Institute
• Xico, Inc.

The grants were paid over a three-year period to boost the capacity of these organizations in several areas.

Let's look at just a few of these groups who received funding and what exactly they were doing during that three year period to "boost their capacity":

1.  Border Action Network (BAN).  A leftist open borders group whose activist leader, Jennifer Allen, is closely tied to people like Sal Reza, Randy Parraz, Raquel Teran, Isabel Garcia etc.

Anti-SB1070 video showing Allen, Reza, etc.
BAN and Citizens for a Better Arizona
BAN 2008 Year in Review Video
2009 at the Legislature showing Allen, Teran, AILA lawyer and ACLU representative

2.  Borderlands Theater
"Border people, in the best sense of the word, are citizens of the world.
Borderlands Theater has also benefited from the legacy of the artists/activists who performed with an earlier theater, Teatro Libertad, a collective and outgrowth of the early Chicano civil rights movement."

3.  Florence Immigration Project
"The Florence Project is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization providing free legal services to men, women, and unaccompanied children detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Arizona."

4.  La Sociedad Mutualista de Obreros Mexicanos
 
5.  Xico, Inc
One of the board members is Martin Quintana from Chicanos por la Causa. Another familiar board member is Brian Barabe, one of the founders of Parraz's first organizations created to fight illegal immigration legislation called the East Valley Patriots for American Values. He was one of the many who paraded the Utah-style Compact in front of both the Chandler City Council and most recently, the Mesa City Council.  Barabe donated to both Jerry Lewis' campaign as well as to Citizens for a Better Arizona.

6.  Regional Center for Border Health?  The same RCBH whose CEO is former Arizona Senator, Amanda Aguirre from the same district as Rep. Russ Jones?  The same organization that receives almost all of its funding from the Alinsky IAF which receives THEIR funding from the TAXPAYERS?


Two of the Arizona Hispanic Funders' Collaborative organizations who help contribute funds included:

• Arizona Community Foundation  (Rep. Jones serves on the Advisory Council)
• Border Philanthropy Partnership  (Rep. Jones serves as the Treasurer)

I think we're beginning to understand why Rep. Jones had "struggled mightily" about voting for SB1070.  He himself claimed,

...he intends to represent all people in his district, and thus will not sign on to any type of voting pledge. “We narrow ourselves down and make ourselves less flexible,” he says. “It’s more important for a constituent to try and understand the candidate’s core values that make the person who he is; that’s the best a candidate can possibly do.”

We'll explore more of Mr. Jones and his core values in our next installment.