FARMERS BRANCH, Tex., May 13, 2007
Texas Voters Pass Anti-Immigrant Rule
Dallas Suburb's Controversial Law Will Require Landlords To Verify Tenants' Citizenship
-
Natalie Villafranca, 6, left, hold a flag as her mother, Elizabeth Villafranca, holds a sign in front of city hall in Farmers Branch, Tex., in this Aug. 26, 2006 file photo. (AP Photo/LM Otero)
-
Video Archive Hot Topic: Immigration Video Coverage: CBS News examines the heated debate over immigration in the United States.
- Photo Essay Immigration Protests
Thousands march in support of immigrant rights in cities across the nation.
-
News Tools Immigration Reform Plan President Bush lays out his vision for comprehensive immigration reform.
The ban was approved by a vote of 67 percent (4,058) to 32 percent (1,941).
The balloting marked the first public vote on a local government measure to crack down on illegal immigration.
"It says especially to Congress that we're tired of the out-of-control illegal immigration problem, that if Congress doesn't do something about it, cities will," said Tim O'Hare, a City Council member who was the ordinance's lead proponent.
The ordinance requires apartment managers to verify that renters are U.S. citizens or legal immigrants before leasing to them, with some exceptions.
Property managers or owners who break the rule face a misdemeanor charge punishable by a fine of up to $500.
Council members approved the ordinance in November, then revised it in January to include exemptions for minors, seniors and some families with a mix of legal residents and illegal immigrants.
Turnout was heavy.
Ofelia Rodriguez, a lifelong resident of Framers Branch and a U.S. citizen, has never voted in an election until now. Hers was a vote against 2903.
"Hey, my one vote might just make a difference this time," Rodriguez told CBS Station KTVT correspondent Stephanie Lucero at one polling place. "So hopefully I'm making a difference today to try and get my city back."
Proponents of the ordinance believed that it would address some of the city's problems.
"We received lots of complaints about overcrowding and lots of cars in front of houses that only have 900 square feet and multiple families in apartments," Ben Robinson told KTVT. "And so I hope this will help. It's something that our citizens have wanted."
Farmers Branch has become the site of protests and angry confrontations, and opponents of the regulation gathered enough signatures to force the city to put the measure on the municipal election ballot.
The city was already facing four lawsuits brought by civil rights groups, residents, property owners and businesses who contend the ordinance discriminates and that it places landlords in the precarious position of acting as federal immigration officers. Their attorneys say the ordinance attempts to regulate immigration, a duty that is exclusively the federal government's. One lawsuit also alleges the council violated the state open meetings act when deciding on the ordinance.
O'Hare contends the city's economy and quality of life will improve if illegal immigrants are kept out.
Around the country, more than 90 local governments have proposed, passed or rejected laws prohibiting landlords from leasing to illegal immigrants, penalizing businesses that employ them or training police to enforce immigration laws.
Both sides say if Congress had already passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill by now, then this debate wouldn't be taking place right now in Framers Branch.
"This is going to be a black stain on the city of Farmers Branch," one opponent to 2903 told KTVT. "This is going to be in the same column as sitting in the back of the bus."
The law will become effective in 10 days (May 22), but opponents say they will challenge it in federal court and are confident it will not become law.
"I think it's interesting when they call themselves 'Let the voters decide' and they get a petition signed to let the voters decide,
and now that it appears that the voters have decided, that's not good enough," O'Hare told KTVT.
Local proposals aimed at regulating illegal immigration often fail to pass constitutional muster, said Muzaffar Chishti, director of the Migration Policy Institute office at New York University School of Law.
"There is significant frustration, so that's what's driving it," Chishti said. "But the simple fact is they cannot do too much other than impress upon the Congress the need for immigration reform."
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More From U.S.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 9
- next
See all 171 CommentsPosted by RandalDS at 04:16 PM : May 14, 2007
Oh No, a flashback, Knew those joints were bad for ya...
LOL
info found at http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/05/numbers_immigration.html
Watch for the warning sign in your children and do NOT enable them. For as much as I love my Aunt and Uncle they enabled my cousin. They should have used some tough love with him, but didn't.
Posted by mikealford3 at 10:14 PM : May 14, 2007
Of course not. One has nothing to do with the other. I believe alcohol should remain legal too, but would that mean I believe in drunk driving? That makes no sense. Same with pot. Thinking it should be legal doesn't mean in any way I think people should drive stoned.
You win, I disagree with almost everything you say, but I shall not argue/disguss this topic with you ever again.
Have a nice day!
Do you think driving drunk should be allowed? Certainly if you think pot should be legal, certainly driving while under the influence of a legal beverage should be legal as well. Should we repeal all the laws regarding alcohol consumption?
But we are not being "milked" by the vast majority of the illegals in any manner. Most of them are good hard working people who are contributing members of society. They hold jobs, own business and homes and even provide some jobs for others. Sure some are unemployed day workers who work for cash, but they are a tiny minority of the illegals and there are probably fewer of them unemployed as there are legal Americans and they're actually out there trying their dam*nest to find work by doing day work, something most Americans won't do.
As an aside Tancredo is a racist and a vocal supporter of the racist organization The Minutemen. That doesn't in and of itself make him (or even them) wrong on this issue, but you should be aware that he has ulterior motives to his opposition of immigration and they are the KKK without the sheets.
Sales should be available in any place that has a liquor license. Sure big business will jump at the chance to sell pot. It's relatively cheap to produce and costs virtually nothing to process. Once they do start growing and selling it here it'll cut the legs out from underneath many foreign drug rings and completely destroy any illegal American based growers. The biggest upside is of course it'll be taxable and the quality will be consistent.
Either that or just make growing your own in limited amounts legal, just as many states do with beer and wine. Allow a person to grow say 5 to 10 plants for their own personal use. Works for me. I have no serious problems with either option.
You are correct, not everyone who smokes pot, moves on to cocaine or crack. And not everyone on heroin or cocaine has used pot. However to legalize pot is wrong.
Based on your idea to legalize marijuana, I have a question. I guess you think someone who walks into a convience store and requests a pack of cigarettes, should have the option of marijuana or tobacco? A person walks in says, "I'll have a pack of Marlboro's", the cashier asks "tobacco or marijuana?" The thought of someone driving up to fill their car with gasoline and also buying a pack of marijuana cigarettes seems crazy.
Is it that crazy to think if it is legal that the greedy corporations would exploit it for profit?
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Electe
d.shtml
SEND THEM THIS LETTER IF YOU AGREE:
I am a member of a group of 30 (insert state) voters that are very concerned about the illegal immigrant problem in the US and especially in (insert state). We urge you not to vote on any bill or legislation that allows an automatic or easy path to citizenship. These people are criminals, no matter what age or circumstances. If we allow them any type of amnesty it will only encourage more illegal immigration. This is a historical fact, evidenced by current problem on the heels of President Reagan%u2019s 1986 Immigration Reform. You need only to look at the comment section of any online news service to understand that this is the way most of the country feels on this issue. We will not vote for any candidate, in any election, that does not have a firm negative stance on amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Actually I haven't gotten high in about 13 years. I took a job on a rescue squad and they check that sort of thing. Since then I just haven't bothered. Still from the sound of your posts you certainly could use a few hits off a good joint once in awhile. Might take some of that terrible self-righteous stiffness out of your neck. Must be painful as all hell on the back and neck to walk around looking down on everyone else that way.
--RandalDS
I'm just having fun with you that's all, I'm sure you don't do drugs now. See, I know when Post are serious and when they are not, its called common sense! No one is perfect, including myself, no one lives a mistake free life, no one! I don't look down on anyone, I pay my bills, have good credit, mind my business, take care of my family and obey the law! I was only trying to point out that kids have questions and this illegal immigrant topic is in the news with Police firing rubber bullets, beating protesters and kids need an explanation that makes sense to them. My comments were not a big deal, I just think its a good idea to have an answer for why in this case the immigration law can be broken with no consequences. The only answer I heard from President Bush is that its too much trouble trying to deport 12 million people. What a sad answer, its too much trouble, so we make them all citizens! Sheese! Everyone is free to express their opinions and we all don't always agree.
Thanks for posting the laws. As anyone can see it's still much more difficult for people from South of the border to immigrate here (120,000 as opposed to 170,000 from elsewhere, a difference of 50,000). However it should also be noted the the government routinely "violates" those laws, or at least provides exceptions to them. For instance anyone who comes here from a communist country is automatically granted permission to stay and apply for citizenship. This is why Cubans have only to reach dry land (and are not counted against the Western Hemisphere total), yet Haitians are forcibly returned.
Anyway, time for lunch. All of the talk about pot has given me the munchies. Be Back Later.
Posted by RandalDS at 03:33 PM : May 14, 2007
Things were also very different then, the US population was smaller, there weren't government assistance programs, health coverage, etc: if you wanted to survive you had to work. There were many more jobs for people of all education and experience levels, and there weren't threats to national security like there are now. Laws must evolve with the times.
Immigration is not a right, it is a privilege. Many of these immigrants come to the US with nothing, no education, no skills, no respect for the laws, and all they want to do is take and take. But some of us don't like to be milked for all we are worth, and then spat in the face on top of it.
tucanofulano is right, none of the laws currently in place are anti-immigration, otherwise I wouldn't be here right now. They are in place to avoid chaotic free-for-all. If you want to enter a country, and you know what that country requires to enter, you are the one making the choice: you can 1)not like it and stay where you are, 2)enter legally, or 3)enter illegally. That's your choice, nobody is forcing you. The individuals must take responsibility for their own choices and actions, and take the consequences.
I wonder what you will do when your grandchildren show up on your doorstep with a bag of pot and rolling papers or a bag of crack. I suppose you think meth use is ok as well, being as it's made from legally sold products?
Posted by mikealford3 at 03:44 PM : May 14, 2007
Hey I have an idea! Let's see how many people who are addicted to Cocaine or heroin started out being breast fed! As George Carlin once said "Mother's milk leads to everything"! I mean come on! Saying that everyone who is addicted to Heroin started smoking pot and therefore pot leads to Heroin is backwards logic! In order for that to be true then everyone who smokes pot would have to move on to harder drugs and the truth is the vast majority do not. Pot is as likely to lead to Heroin or Coke as beer is...or cigarettes....or mother's milk...or breathing.
Posted by nottellin1 at 03:54 PM : May 14, 2007
It's a pittance and was then too. For all of the land they were forced to surrender? It was pocket change or less. It was a throwing a few bucks at them to try to justify the out and out theft of hundreds of thousands of square miles of valuable land. The natural resources of the West were worth Billions of dollars and yes Washington D.C. knew that at the time. Also this was part of "Manifest Destiny". That insane idea that God himself had decided that the white man had a right to all of the American continent that he could conquer, from sea to shining sea.
Posted by RandalDS at 03:21 PM : May 14, 2007
So Randal, all the people you saw started with Cocaine or Heroine or crack? I have a brother who didn't think pot was so bad, until he woke up living under someone's home using insulation for blankets. He started with minor pot smoking and ended with a terrible cocaine and heroine addiction. I agree lying is not a good thing, however telling them that it's ok and should be legal is also not a good thing.
I wonder what you will do when your grandchildren show up on your doorstep with a bag of pot and rolling papers or a bag of crack. I suppose you think meth use is ok as well, being as it's made from legally sold products?
If I bring up uncomfortable historical realities then I suggest you go back to reading the back of your Lucky charms, hmm? Yes?
As for the question of 'white' people and hate, oh, come now. One can discuss a simple reality without having to be rapped up in hate.
White people aren't the problem (I have white friends! LOL) however their way of life most certainly is. And now that that way of life has been exported to other countries round the world, now that it has been presented as the only model for human development our species and many other are in profound danger for locust like behavior.
Leave America someone said. And go where? None of us can get off this planet. There is nowhere you can go now and not feel the affects of the lifestyle the European experiment has wrought. We must deal with the problem. Imagine 3 billion Indians and Chinese consuming at the level of the average American. That%u2019s a problem. And we must deal with it.
Now.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 9
- next
See all 171 Comments