|
|
Interfaith and Growers Say No on 200
Yuma Sun, 9/25/04
A group of Yuma-area growers and religious leaders spoke out Friday against what has become one of the most controversial measures voters will decide in the upcoming general election: a proposition aimed at preventing illegal aliens from voting and receiving public benefits.
Standing on the edge of a broccoli field southwest of Yuma, grower Gary Pasquinelli called Proposition 200 poorly written and ineffective, and gave some of reasons why he hopes it doesn't pass.
"To me, it's a classic case of the cure being worse than the disease," said Pasquinelli, speaking as the director of the Western Growers Association, which represents 95 percent of the fresh fruit and vegetables produced in California and Arizona. "We are against this thing."
Joining Pasquinelli were Tim Dunn, the first vice president of the Arizona Farm Bureau; the Rev. Marcus Velasquez, pastor of St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church in Yuma; and two Yuma County Interfaith members, Rosalia Delgado and Silvia Lopez.
Interfaith, which organized the news conference, is a nondenominational faith-based organization affiliated with numerous other religious organizations across the country.
The group, which frequently unites around social issues, has in the past held "get out the vote" campaigns prior to elections, has helped endorse candidates who supported its agenda of reforming immigration policies and guest-worker programs, and wants to establish Yuma as an "immigrant-friendly" city.
Proposition 200, or the Protect Arizona Now (PAN) initiative, would require proof of citizenship when registering to vote as well as the verification of immigration status before receiving welfare and social service benefits. Voters will decide whether it becomes a law or not in the Nov. 2 general election.
While backers of the proposition - which is favored by a majority of voters, according to recent polls - say it would put a stop to the spending of state or local tax money on undocumented immigrants, Pasquinelli said his biggest complaint against it is that there isn't any proof it's a widespread problem here.
"The problem is that the people who have analyzed this say the cost of enforcement is going to greatly outweigh the cost we are spending now to provide these people with benefits," Pasquinelli said. "We have no overwhelming evidence that there is any big abuse in this area."
Velasquez said the reason he attended the event was that he wanted to reiterate the stance taken by Arizona's Catholic bishops, who have previously issued a statement saying not only would it deny basic rights to undocumented immigrants, it wouldn't solve any of the complex issues facing the state.
Kathy McKee, who spearheaded the drive to put the initiative on the ballot, said she isn't surprised that the two groups have come out against the proposition. She said she thinks they may feel threatened by it.
"I think the agriculture industry is trying to rationalize in their own minds why they are still illegally hiring undocumented immigrants, and they think it's going to be affected by the proposition, but it's not," McKee said. "As for the Catholic clergy, it's embracing these people because most of them are predominately Hispanic, which means they are Catholic and the clergy sees a way to fill their pews and collection baskets by a ready-made audience for their religion."
Pasquinelli said there is nothing in 200 that would reduce the number of immigrants crossing the border to come into the country.
"It purports to protect our borders, but there is absolutely nothing whatsoever in it to protect our borders," Pasquinelli said. "Even if it did, I wouldn't want to be protected from the type of immigrants who are coming over here.
"Most of them come here due to dire economic need or to reunify themselves with their families who are already here," he said. "They are honest, hard-working, God-fearing, good people."
James Gilbert can be reached at jgilbert@yumasun.com or 539-6854.
|
|
All Rights Reserved - 2006
Arizona Interfaith Network
|