Woodland council rejects motion to support Arizona immigration law
Applause for the three council members who stood up for Americans- thumbs down to the Mayor Chuck Bloom and the traitor council members. What Idiots. They want to keep their illegal maids and gardeners, while remaining oblivous to the gangs and hispanic slums next door in Kelso and Longview, two communities now worse then Gresham . The Cowlitz jail is full of hardworking illegal mexicans and other latins such as cubans.
By Leila Summers / The Daily News | Posted: Tuesday, June 8, 2010 12:01 am | (45) Comments
mexicans at meeting – typical la raza techniques
Bill Wagner / The Daily News Citizens who arrived too late to get a seat in the City Council chambers stand outside the door and try to listen as the council deliberates Monday on whether to endorse Arizona’s new anti-immigration law.
WOODLAND — The Woodland City Council rejected a resolution recommending that the Washington Legislature adopt an anti-illegal immigration law similar to Arizona’s controversial measure, with Mayor Chuck Blum casting the deciding “no” vote.
Councilman Benjamin Fredricks introduced the resolution, which would not have changed city laws or police practices.
If the resolution had passed, Woodland would have been the second Washington city, after Long Beach, to express support for the Arizona law.
Council members Fredricks, Aaron Christopherson and Susan Humbyrd voted in favor of the measure. Marilee McCall, Al Swindell and John “JJ” Burke voted “no.” Council member Tom Mattison was absent.
Council members who opposed the resolution expressed concerns that endorsing Arizona’s law would be racially divisive in the community and that the issue was inappropriate for the council to take up.
“It would bring hate and discontent to our community,” Swindell said. Translation : illegal criminal mexicans would slash his car tires
McCall said her son, a boarder patrol agent along the Mexican boarder, received five to six months of training to do his daily work effectively. Enforcing immigration laws is not as simple as it seems, she said. Following Arizona’s example would threaten to alienate a portion of the population.
“We do not understand the subtle prejudice that happens on a daily basis,” she said. Passing such a law would “make it not so subtle prejudice,” she added.
Burke simply stated that he didn’t think the city should tackle a federal immigration problem.
“We have a problem that we need to go about it in a different way,” Burke said.
It’s an opinion previously expressed by Mayor Chuck Blum, who gave his “no” vote without explanation. He told The Daily News last week that the resolution didn’t belong at the city level.
Blum’s vote prompted a loud and lengthy applause from a jampacked City Hall. Few people identifying themselves as Hispanic spoke to the council about the measure, but they showed their support by waving small American flags in the audience.
Fredricks, Christopherson and Humbyrd said they support the Arizona law because immigrants need to follow a process to cross the American border.
Fredricks said he’s concerned illegal immigrants cost American taxpayers millions of dollars in health care, education, food stamps, jail costs, legal representation and interpreters when they’re incarcerated. He said he’s worried that illegal immigrants don’t have to pay the taxes as legal citizens.
Crossing the border, he said, “doesn’t give them the same rights under our Constitution.”
Both Humbyrd and Christopherson said they have parents who are immigrants and entered the country legally.
Humbyrd said entering the country illegally puts immigrants from any country off to a bad start because the first thing they do “when they enter our country was break a rule, break a law.”
Christopherson voted in favor of Woodland’s resolution to send a message to the state and federal governments and “remind them of their lack of enforcement.”
He said he supports tougher immigration enforcement because “it’s a legal issue. It’s not a matter of if we like you, if we don’t like you.”