America's Voice Blog

Posted 01/05/12 at 11:06am By Web Team

“Defiant” Joe Arpaio Says He Will Cooperate with DOJ Discrimination Investigation

joe arpaio

Yesterday was the deadline for Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio to indicate whether he would cooperate with the United States Department of Justice. On December 15 2010, DOJ released the findings of a three-year study of racial discrimination in Arpaio's department, which found evidence of what we've long known.  Arpaio has "engage[d] in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional policing"  and "a chronic culture of disregard for basic legal and constitutional obligations." 

Well, Arpaio did respond -- in typical Sheriff Joe fashion with some bravado and attitude:

It was a pledge for cooperation with a dose of confrontation when Sheriff Joe Arpaio told the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division that he would cooperate with the federal government's efforts to resolve allegations of widespread discrimination in the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.

 Maricopa County Sheriff's Office's letter to the Department of Justice

Arpaio's promise Wednesday to cooperate came with a detailed 29-page request for more than 100 pieces of information that U.S. Department of Justice investigators compiled during the years-long probe of the Sheriff's Office, including the identity of sheriff's employees interviewed during the course of the investigation and the names of Latino residents against whom Arpaio's deputies have allegedly discriminated.

The Phoenix News Times Blog has more, noting Arpaio's continued "whining" -- and a prediction that this will end up in court:

A defiant sheriff, however, also says he "will not cower to the threat of litigation" -- the DOJ says it plans to take the sheriff to court if he fails to cooperate.

Arpaio says his cooperation is contingent on the fed's ability to "play ball" -- he's demanded the DOJ produce evidence of all the allegations it's made against the MCSO before the sheriff will consider cooperating. He's given the DOJ until January 18 to cough up the proof.

From the sound of the sheriff's letter -- which includes more whining about the DOJ's "political witch hunt," and griping about the timing of the announcement of the fed's report -- it seems like Arpaio and the feds are destined to find themselves in a courtroom, which will cost taxpayers even more community coin defending America's priciest sheriff.

We'll continue to watch how this plays out. Arpaio can talk tough and be defiant, but he may have finally met his match in Tom Perez and the US Department of Justice.

Posted 12/20/11 at 02:51pm By Van Le

Latino Army Veteran is Brain Dead After “Use of Extensive Force” by Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Department

ernest atencio

A Gulf War veteran has been left brain-dead after being arrested, restrained, and tasered by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department, says the Arizona Republic, a case which starkly highlights last week’s news about “America’s Toughest Sheriff” Joe Arpaio.

According to his family, Ernest M. Atencio, 44, was a “sweet and loving boy” who suffered from a mental illness.  According to the Republic, he became aggressive when being booked into a jail in Phoenix last Friday. Guards then tasered him until he suffered a heart attack.  His family is now deciding when to take him off life support.

As Lieutenant Mike Stauffer, an Arpaio opponent for county sheriff, wrote on Facebook:

We received news from an inside source that a Latino inmate at the 4th Avenue Jail is brain dead due to excessive force by detention officers.

The news is the latest scandal in a string of headlines on how Sheriff Arpaio is policing Maricopa County.  Last week, the Department of Justice found evidence of “discriminatory policing that was deeply rooted in the culture of [Arpaio’s] department, a culture that breeds a systematic disregard for basic constitutional protections,” according to Thomas Perez, who heads the DOJ’s civil rights division.  The evidence included instances of discrimination and racial profiling that involved keeping Latino inmates who didn’t understand English in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day, and forcing a pregnant undocumented woman to give birth while shackled to a bed.

The Department of Homeland Security consequently severed its ties with Arpaio, revoking the remainder of Maricopa County’s 287(g) program and stripping local officers of the federal power to check their inmates’ immigration status.

Arpaio now has until January to decide whether he will reform his policies or face a lawsuit.  Despite calls for him to step down, he says he has no intention to resign as Sheriff and, incredibly, suggests that he is still interested in a run for U.S. Senate.

In the meantime, Atencio’s condition is all-too-real proof of Arpaio’s heartlessly destructive policies.  As State Sen. Steve Gallardo (D), who met with Atencio’s family at the hospital to offer support, said:

If someone is booked in jail and they are acting up, I expect (deputies) to do what they can to subdue them; you should not end up having an individual on life support.

For more about the worst of Maricopa County's Sheriff Joe Arpaio, read our fact sheet here.

Posted 12/19/11 at 02:28pm By Van Le

Surprise, Surprise: Steve King, Rick Perry, and the Anti-Immigrant Crowd Defend Sheriff Arpaio

arpaio and kingBirds of a feather truly flock together.

Last week, the Department of Justice announced the results of their years-long investigation of Arizona’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio, saying Arpaio had “engage[d] in a pattern of unconstitutional policing” and practiced “a chronic culture of disregard for basic legal and constitutional obligations.”  The Department of Homeland Security followed by revoking its remaining 287(g) agreement with Arpaio’s office, breaking off many means of local law enforcement / immigration enforcement coordination.  The news was a huge step forward in the fight against the man we’ve repeatedly called the “Bull Connor" of the immigration world and a starting point to checking his excesses of power.

While immigration advocates and immigrant communities across the nation celebrated, however, members of the anti-immigrant crowd were quick to circle the wagons and align themselves with the wrong side of the law.  Anti-immigrant “leader” Rep. Steve King (R-IA) released no less than a video proclaiming his steadfast support of the Sheriff, in which he denied that Arpaio could be involved in any unconstitutional profiling and accused the DOJ of playing a political game.

As King says in his video:

I think it's a shame that the Department of Justice has targeted Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  I've been to visit his operation, I've gone out to visit his tent city, I've seen what kind of job he does.  He takes great pains to make sure that he doesn't discriminate against people based on race.  There is not a profiling operation going on down there that I can see.

King is not Arpaio’s only defender.  Texas Governor Rick Perry, whom Arpaio had recently endorsed for the Republican presidential nomination (Rick, didn’t we tell you that one would only bring you trouble?) also suggested that the DOJ had an agenda:

As CBS News quotes Perry:  

I would suggest to you that these people are out after Sheriff Joe.  He is tough.  And again, when I’m the president of the United States, you’re not going to see me going after states like Arizona or Alabama, suing sovereign states for making decisions.

Rounding out this trio of misguidedness is Arizona State Rep. John Kavanaugh (R), who is calling DOJ’s investigation a political “smear job” and “a sneak attack on Arpaio.”

In response, we have to ask: are we talking about the same Sheriff Joe Arpaio?  Are these tough-on-crime Republicans really trying to defend a man who has been so obsessed with stamping out immigration that he’s allowed 400 sex crimes cases to go uninvestigated, who has seen violent crime rise 58% in his county while the rest of Arizona has seen a 12% decline, who has been accused of re-routing $100 million in taxpayer dollars so that he could fund his own anti-immigrant mania?  Does Steve King know racial profiling when he sees it, or know that Arpaio once settled a racial profiling case (in which he zip-tied a legal permanent resident suffering from diabetes for three hours) for $200,000?  Do Arpaio's defenders want to read some of the facts first, before they make more videos?

What is it about illegal that Sheriff Arpaio's defenders just don't seem to understand?

Posted 12/15/11 at 05:29pm By Web Team

The Worst of Maricopa County’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio

joe arpaioAs the Department of Justice’s investigation has shown, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s discriminatory practices and abuses of power have made him a Bull Connor for the 21st century. Below are some of the highlights--or rather, lowlights--of Arpaio’s career: terrorizing immigrants and detainees such as the mother he forced to give birth in shackles; abusing power and embracing corruption, including misusing $100 million in taxpayer money to fund his own pet projects; and ignoring serious crime in his county, including letting over 400 sex crimes cases go uninvestigated.

April 2008: Over 40,000 Un-Served Felony Warrants 
In an interview with Arpaio, an Arizona Republic reporter pointed out that the county had over 40,000 unserved felony warrants, and quoted Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon saying that Arpaio had created “a sanctuary county” for felons.

June 2008: 2,700 Lawsuits Filed Against Arpaio
Between 2004 and 2007, 2,700 lawsuits were filed against Sheriff Joe Arpaio in federal and county courts – 50 times the number of suits filed in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Houston combined.

October 2008: Arpaio Stages Phony Murder Plot Against Himself, Accused Released for Wrongful Imprisonment, County Pays Over $1 Million to Settle
In 2004 a man was released from prison after being wrongly accused of plotting to kill Arpaio. Evidence suggested that Arpaio’s office staged the plot and the County agreed to pay over $1 million to settle the case. The County’s insurance policy paid an additional un-released amount.

October 2008: Judge Says Conditions in Arpaio’s Jails “Violate the Constitution”
A federal judge ruled in October 2008 that Sheriff Arpaio and county health officials “violated the Constitution by depriving jail inmates of adequate medical screening and care, feeding them unhealthy food and housing them in unsanitary conditions.”

May 2009: Arpaio Stalks Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard
On the day the Arizona Republic ran an article about an FBI investigation of Arpaio’s office that quoted Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, Arpaio’s deputies went to Goddard’s home. They sat in a squad car watching the house for ninety minutes before leaving.

November 2009: Arpaio Forces Mother to Give Birth while Handcuffed to Bed
In a story reported by Telemundo in 2009, Sheriff Arpaio forced Alma Minerva Chacon to give birth while she was in shackles. Following the birth, Chacon was told that unless someone came to pick up the newborn in 72 hours, her child would be turned over to state custody.

December 2009: Arpaio Under FBI Investigation for Using his Power to Intimidate Political Opponents
After Arpaio and a political ally attempted to indict local officials they saw as enemies, the FBI launched an investigation into whether Arpaio was abusing his position to target his opponents. As local TV station KPHO reported: “The merit of the charges” Arpaio filed against opponents “are lost on a public who is becoming increasingly cynical of the persecution of political foes in Maricopa County even for a local folk hero like Arpaio.”

October 2010: Violent Crime Rates Rise Under Arpaio, Fall in Rest of Arizona 
From 2002 to 2009, the rate of violent crime across the state of Arizona fell by 12%, and cities within Maricopa County saw significant decreases as well. Areas policed by Arpaio’s sheriff’s office, however, increased by 58% during this time. Meanwhile, 911 response times in Maricopa County increased significantly.

March 2011: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Blames School and Parents of Hispanic Children For Cancelled Event
After Sheriff Joe Arpaio was uninvited from reading to sixth-graders at an elementary school in Phoenix, he blasted out a nasty press release blaming “parents of Hispanic students," as well as the school’s administration. 

April 2011: Arpaio Suspected of Misspending $100M in Taxpayer Funds, Refuses to Turn Over Records
An investigation into the Maricopa County sheriff’s office discovered that Arpaio, the Bull Connor reincarnate of immigration enforcement, inappropriately spent $99.5 million from two jail funds over the last eight years to pay for other law enforcement operations—including immigration patrols.  When the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors met to discuss the investigation, Arpaio didn’t attend--he was busy leading an immigration raid on a dry cleaners in Mesa.

May 2011: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Is Too Busy Chasing Immigrants to Investigate 400 Sex Crime Cases
ABC 12 News in Arizona reported that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) failed to adequately investigate more than 400 sex-crime cases over a two-year period, many of which involved children from 2 to 16 years old.   Many of these victims were the children of undocumented immigrants.  Perhaps it’s unsurprising that Arpaio was so uninterested in investigating cases when immigrants were the victims instead of the perpetrators: as Arpaio once told Larry King, his deputies arrest “very few” non-Hispanics.

July 2011: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Settles $200k in Racial Profiling Case
Arpaio paid $200,000 in a settlement to Julian and Julio Mora, a father and son who his agents zip-tied and held for three hours during a 2009 raid of the Phoenix landscaping firm Handyman Maintenance Inc., where the father worked.

September 2011: Sheriff Arpaio Comes Out as Birther, Assigned “Cold Case Posse” to Obama Birth Certificate CaseAs World Net Daily reported: “Arizona’s Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio told WND [World Net Daily] he has assigned a five-member ‘Cold Case Posse’ to investigate the authenticity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate.” 

September 2011: Arpaio’s Department Sued for Killing Puppy in Raid Conducted for Steven Seagal’s Reality Show
During filming of his reality show Steven Seagal: Lawman, actor Steven Seagal  went with Arpaio’s deputies to film an anti-animal cruelty raid on a cockfighting facility. Ironically, the raid resulted in the deaths of one dog and over 100 roosters, and the owner sued the sheriff’s office and Seagal.

Posted 12/15/11 at 04:10pm By Mahwish Khan

Obama Administration Delivers a Message to Sheriff Joe Arpaio: The Constitution Does Matter

joe arpaioAs we mentioned earlier today, there was a significant development in Arizona today: The United States Department of Justice took a strong and welcome step towards ending Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's reign of terror. 

In its three year investigation of the Sheriff’s policing practices, DOJ found evidence of what we've long known.  Arpaio has "engage[d] in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional policing"  and "a chronic culture of disregard for basic legal and constitutional obligations."  The United States Department of Homeland Security also decided to revoke its remaining 287(g) agreement with the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and restrict other mechanisms of coordination. Courtesy of Talking Points Memo, the full document can be viewed here.

Here at the America's Voice Education Fund, we have worked with our allies to shine a spotlight on Arpaio. Today, our Executive Director, Frank Sharry, issued this statement: 

For years Arpaio, a modern-day Bull Connor, has targeted Latinos by the color of the skin and the language that they speak, and bragged about it.  He has neglected serious crimes in favor of enforcing civil immigration laws, and made it impossible for immigrant crime victims to trust the police.  Anyone who dared challenge his ugly reign of terror was subject to harassment and retaliation.

Arpaio’s tactics have had a long reach, as vigilante law enforcement officers in other states have seen him operate with impunity and adopted his approach.  Today’s announcement from the U.S. Department of Justice is a critical step toward ending racial profiling and discrimination in law enforcement in Maricopa County, Arizona.

Today, in Maricopa County, DOJ's Civil Rights Division, under the direction of Tom Perez, let Arpaio and his followers know that the Constitution and the rule of law do matter.  America’s Voice Education Fund thanks the DOJ and responsible police leaders who have spoken out against Arpaio’s tactics for years.  He must be held accountable for undermining public trust and public safety.

Yes, Perez, the Assistant Attorney General for Civil rights, went right into Arpaio's backyard to deliver this report. He held a press conference in Phoenix to release the news. And, he's given Arpaio until January 4, 2012 "to decide whether to voluntarily cooperate with federal officials."

So, again, kudos to Perez and his team. That's the kind of fearless advocacy we like to see -- and it's the only way to deal with a lawless bully like Arpaio. 

For more on the reign of Sheriff Joe Arpaio see:

DOJ's Release of Investigative Findings on Sheriff Arpaio

America's Voice Education Fund Fact Sheet on Sheriff Arpaio's Notorious Record

Posted 12/15/11 at 10:55am By Mahwish Khan

Heads Up: US Dept. of Justice to Announce Results of Arpaio Investigation Today

joe arpaioMaricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is definitely one of the most despicable elected officials in the country. He's been notoriously anti-immigrant -- and prides himself on it. The tide may be turning, finally.

Via ABC 15 in Phoenix, at 10 AM MT/noon ET, the United States Department of Justice will announce the results of its investigation of Arpaio:

Federal authorities plan to announce their findings in a civil rights investigation of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio accused of using discriminatory tactics in its signature immigration patrols.

The U.S. Justice Department has been investigating Arpaio's office since June 2008 for alleged discrimination, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and for having an English-only policy in his jails that discriminates against people with limited English skills.

The self-proclaimed toughest sheriff in America has been a national political fixture who has built his reputation on jailing inmates in tents and dressing them in pink underwear, selling himself to voters as unceasingly tough on crime and pushing the bounds of how far local police can go to confront illegal immigration.

The federal agency had previously provided little details of its probe, but Arpaio believed the inquiry was focused on the 20 immigration patrols known as "sweeps" that his office has conducted since January 2008.

Stay tuned. We'll be monitoring this closely and will have updates as soon as the DOJ releases its findings.

Posted 12/13/11 at 04:06pm By Pili Tobar

Supreme Court Prepares to Review Arizona’s “Papers, Please” Anti-Immigration Law

supreme courtThe Supreme Court yesterday decided to review the federal government’s challenge to Arizona’s restrictive immigration law, SB 1070.

According to Frank Sharry, Executive Director of America’s Voice Education Fund:

We fully expect the Supreme Court to uphold the U.S. Constitution and long-standing court rulings which have held that immigration policy is an area reserved under the Constitution for the federal government, and to rule that Arizona’s state law is preempted by federal law. 

The United States filed suit against Arizona on July 6, 2010, in a case entitled U.S. v. Arizona. The government argued that SB 1070 is preempted by federal law, violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, encroaches on an area constitutionally reserved for the federal government, conflicts with federal immigration laws and federal immigration policy, conflicts with U.S. foreign policy, and impedes the execution of the objectives of Congress.

A related but distinct legal challenge to SB 1070 is still pending in the lower courts and has not yet been considered by the Supreme Court.  This case, Friendly House v. Whiting, was brought by a broad civil rights coalition and argues that if state immigration enforcement laws are allowed to take effect, communities of color will suffer extensive rights violations.

The experiences of residents in Arizona, Alabama, and other states after passage of their “papers, please” immigration laws confirms these concerns.  These states’ reputations have taken a hit as a result.  A July 2011 report from the Center of American Progress on the economic impact of Arizona’s immigration law revealed that "losses have already totaled at least $141 million, including $45 million in hotel and lodging cancellations, and $96 million in lost commercial revenue."   A separate CAP report on the economic damages incurred by Alabama's law showed that Alabama farmer, Chad Smith has lost $3000,000 in revenue "because of labor shortages in the wake of HB 65."

In response, Arizona business leaders pressured Republican state legislators to stop pressing for more anti-immigrant legislation.  Russell Pearce, the architect of the Arizona “papers, please” law, lost an unprecedented recall election due to a number of issues--but his role in promoting SB 1070 was a major factor.  In Alabama, a federal judge’s decision to let parts of the law to be implemented has touched off a humanitarian, civil rights and economic crisis that is reminding many of the state’s ugly role in the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, and driving many African American leaders to stand up and say “never again.”  Alabama politicians are already talking about making changes to the law, but it’s clear the law simply isn’t fixable.   The only solution to our broken immigration system is common sense, federal reform.   

As Sharry said:

If the Supreme Court allows these and other states to go forward, it will lead to a conflicting patchwork of 50 different immigration laws, something that makes as much sense as having a patchwork of 50 different foreign policies.  The issue of immigration is crying out for federal, comprehensive reform.   

America values equal treatment before the law for all persons.  If the Supreme Court allows states to criminalize hard working immigrant families who only want a better life for themselves and their families, it will represent a huge setback for the cause of civil rights in this country.  Stopping the odious Arizona anti-immigrant law is not only the right thing to do legally, it’s the right thing to do morally.

Posted 11/28/11 at 03:18pm By Van Le

Arizona Sheriff Arpaio Gives His Toxic Endorsement to Texas Governor Rick Perry

joe arpaioKirsten Boyd Johnson, the wait is over.  It looks like the hottest girl at prom has finally chosen a date.

Earlier this fall, we wrote about the hoops that the 2012 GOP presidential candidates were jumping through to earn the endorsement of notoriously anti-immigrant Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  Now, in what the Atlantic calls “one of the many mind-bending absurdities of the 2012 race,” Arpaio has chosen a fellow dance partner: Texas Governor Rick Perry.

Clearly Perry is hoping Arpaio will shore up his immigration bona fides after Perry lost his co-front-runner status over comments on immigration.  But frankly, Arpaio’s record as a sheriff is so completely toxic that we have to wonder whether Perry did his homework on what Arpaio’s endorsement would mean.  From the outrageous showcasing to the two (two!) federal investigations to the numerous settlements to the millions in misplaced funds, Arpaio is the kind of guy no sensible politician wants to get anywhere near.  The Dallas Observer has called Arpaio a “walking civil rights violation”; the Atlantic today called him a “vainglorious autocrat of dubious achievement.” 

Why would anyone want his endorsement on anything?

We’ve written a lot about Arpaio’s foul deeds over the years, but the Atlantic today has a good summary of his corruption:

Arpaio may be nationally known, and raucus on the stump, but he's made a terrible mess of his own job in Maricopa County, which is littered with litigation over his policies and practices. "Do as I say not as I do," is a terrible campaign slogan. And yet it is all Arpaio can candidly say when he vouches for his new pal Perry.

Sheriff Joe, for example, cannot say with a straight face that he recognizes good governance when he sees it. In June, for example, Arpaio settled an embarrassing lawsuit, brought by the Justice Department, which alleged that he was illegally withholding documents relating to a civil rights investigation. When the feds sued Arpaio in 2010, government lawyers said they hadn't seen such an example of local intransigence since the Civil Rights era. Arpaio spent public time and money fighting the lawsuit-- before caving in and abiding by the law.

What hasn't fully settled yet for Sheriff Joe is the fallout from two significant local investigations into fiscal mismanagement in his Maricopa County offices. In April, for example, The Arizona Republic reported that Arpaio's office misspent $99.5 million in public funds -- money for inmates was used to pay officials' salaries. In May, the former chief financial officer of the County told the paper that she "repeatedly" told Arpaio about the problem before it came to light. And how did Sheriff Joe respond? Here's what Loretta Barkell said:

The sheriff waved his hand and said he was not allowing the bean counters to manage his operations, that the budget people, the accounting people, personnel people would have to figure it out and fix it. But he was not going to change his decisions on how he was managing his staff.

The problem evidently is so bad in Maricopa County that investigators from neighboring Pinal County had to come in to investigate allegations about the alleged conduct of some of Arpaio's top officials. Again, a great deal of Arpaio's time and taxpayer funds were spent. Again, the investigation revealed problems with Arpaio and his people. In fact, Pinal County spent six-figures identifying some of what went wrong under Sheriff Joe's watch. Here's how The Republic characterized the extent of the damage so far:

The $102,000 spent investigating the memo's claims is a fraction of what has been spent by the county on internal battles. The tab so far totals more than $5.6 million, most of that spent on legal costs tied to more than a dozen lawsuits between the Board of Supervisors and Arpaio and former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas. More than $177 million in notices of claims or lawsuits have been filed by judges, county supervisors, current and former employees and one private citizen. They were targeted by public-corruption probes initiated by Thomas and Arpaio's office. The claims and suits allege malicious prosecution or false statements by those on both sides of the county conflict.

Even within the last two weeks we've gotten a glimpse of the chaos Arpaio has wrought upon both his bosses and his constituents. In 2009, he improperly purchased a $456,000 customized bus for his office. On November 16th, over two years later, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisorsfinally approved the purchase, contorting their precedent to do so. Is Rick Perry going to employ the same buy-first, justify-later financial policies of his endorser? Is he going to run the White House the way Sheriff Joe runs his sheriff's office? 

It gets worse. Earlier this month, Maricopa County paid a $1 million settlement to the family of a man who died in Arpaio's custody. Predictably, Sheriff Joe downplayed the death and blamed someone else for the deal. "It was settled due to the nature of doing business," Arpaio told The Arizona Republic. "That (settlement) wasn't up to us, that was the county that decided to settle it. We have nothing to do with this..." Is Rick Perry the sort of stand-up guy that Arpaio is? Does he approve of the tactic? The endorsement makes me wonder…

So the man who has fouled his own nest, and brought both expense and infamy to his county and his constituents, believes that Perry ought to be the next president? If that's not the kiss of death for the campaign, I don't know what is. I don't see how the Texas governor can preach fiscal responsibility on the one hand and shake Arpaio's hand with the other. And I don't see how Perry can argue to the nation that he's a competent public servant while he's soaking up praise from a man whose managerial incompetence has for so long been so plain to see.

Governor Perry has had more than his share of missteps in this campaign.  Accepting Arpaio’s endorsement is yet another one.

For more on Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s notorious record, see our fact sheet here.

Posted 11/17/11 at 11:32am By Mahwish Khan

TPM: Because of SB 1070 Fallout, Arizona “Really is a Swing State in 2012”

sb 1070 arizonaTalking Point Memo's Evan McMorris-Santoro reports on how SB 1070 has changed the political landscape in Arizona -- and not in the way its sponsors would have expected:

The rumors are true, Rep. Chad Campbell, the Democratic leader of the Arizona state House, told TPM Wednesday: the state best known for Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the toughest immigration law in the land really is a swing state in 2012. And Democrats have SB 1070 to thank for it.

“I’d hesitate to say it was ever good that it was passed,” Campbell said in a sitdown interview. “Because of the damage it did to the community, damage to the economy. But I do think it motivated a lot of people, especially people in the Latino community, to get involved and it energized them.”

“If that’s the final outcome of it, so be it,” he added. “That’s a good thing, obviously.”

Campbell’s not the only one saying that. The Obama campaign has said Arizona can be a target next year, thanks largely to a fired up Latino base. It wasn’t supposed to be that way — Republicans in Arizona and nationally were eager for a fight with the White House over 1070, which has involved the Justice Department sweeping into Arizona to stop the law. That’s the exact sort of thing the tea party types and conservatives who helped push 1070 through hate the most, and there was a belief that by taking immigration into their own hands in the states, Republicans could show Obama as ineffective on the issue and take states like Arizona off the map.

Rep. Campbell offered the numbers to back up the assertion:

He pointed to record-high turnout in municipal elections like the Phoenix mayoral race which put Democrats in office across the state this month. Those results were fueled in part by huge turnout numbers from the Latino demographic, Campbell said, and in part by a more moderate base that’s had enough.

Not to mention, last week's defeat of State Senate President Russell Pearce in the Arizona recall election is another shining example of how voters are fed-up with politicians who use immigration as a distraction.

Posted 11/14/11 at 03:32pm By Pili Tobar

Conservatives Try to Spin the Russell Pearce Loss, Saying “Blame the Messenger”

mark krikorianThe fallout continues over last week’s recall election of Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce (R), the architect of that state’s SB 1070 anti-immigration law.  As analysts ask what the result might mean for the future of anti-immigrant extremism and for Arizona’s potential competitiveness in the 2012 elections, Pearce’s ideological allies are spinning the results to a foregone conclusion – that the anti-immigrant policies weren’t the problem, just the tone and messenger associated with them.

In particular, Mark Krikorian, executive director of the hate group / “think tank” Center for Immigration Studies thinks the lesson from the recall election was that Russell Pearce lacked the needed “good-natured geniality” to put a happy face on extreme, anti-immigrant legislation.  Wrote Krikorian:

Pearce is an angry guy, and that wore thin with lots of voters…Good-natured geniality is, for instance, a big part of Herman Cain’s appeal — not to mention Reagan’s. And if that’s important when discussing taxes and spending, imagine how much more important it is in the immigration issue…This is why my Center for Immigration Studies has always tried to articulate a pro-immigrant policy of low immigration, and why Numbers USA has had at the top of its homepage, from the very beginning, ‘No to immigrant bashing.’  And it’s not a pose. But even if you didn’t believe it, it would be the politically smart thing to do.

In other words, Krikorian thinks that if Pearce had more kindly told immigrants that they were going to be racially profiled and their families were going to be split up, everything would be ok.

Krikorian completely ignores the possibility that Pearce’s obsession with an anti-immigrant agenda, including the SB 1070 “papers, please” law and his push to repeal birthright citizenship, grew tiresome for voters more interested in bread and butter concerns. 

According to Frank Sharry, Executive Director here at America’s Voice:

According to Mark Krikorian, Russell Pearce’s sin was that of blatancy.  So his theory goes, instead of masking his true intentions behind a façade of smiling respectability, Pearce was too angry and too obvious in his anti-immigrant and anti-Latino ways.  Not only does this absolve Krikorian and his allies from any responsibility about the failures and consequences of their mass-deportation agenda, but it rings hollow given Krikorian’s own record of transparent gaffes.

This attempt to pin the loss on the angry messenger is especially ironic coming from Mark Krikorian, a man with a long history of slip-ups that expose his true uncompromising and hardline agenda.  Krikorian’s own writings include calls to strip Puerto Ricans of their citizenship, pleas to Anglicize the pronunciation of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s name, efforts to pin Haiti’s problems on the belief that it had not been colonized long enough, and straight-faced endorsements of reports blaming immigrants for everything from global warming to the health care crisis to the subprime loan financial collapse. 

Concluded Sharry:

There’s simply no way to endorse or implement mass-deportation policies in a manner that doesn’t expose them for what they are – blatant attempts to round up and deport the entirety of the undocumented population in our country.  As we’ve seen in Arizona and now in Alabama, it’s not the tone of law supporters that’s to blame.  It’s the laws themselves and their negatives consequences on state economies and reputations.

 1 2 3 >  Last »