Arizona passed 'Prop 200' by a landslide

W

Wallew

Moderator
Arizona citizens passed Prop 200 by a landslide (greater that 80%).

Prop 200 basically said "Illegal aliens were no longer to receive ANY state benefits".

Arizona as a state is almost overrun by illegal aliens and is going broke RAPIDLY as a state. Even LEGAL ALIENS voted for it. Who knew?
 
I wonder if the crime rate or the homeless population will increase. This should be interesting.
I wish TX would do the same thing. Illegal aliens children get free medical care here. Well, not exactly free since I pay property taxes out the wazzoo so they can get their runny noses wiped. :mad:
 
Illegal parents or not, children shouldn't have to suffer because their families can't afford medical care. They generally didn't have a choice in their legal status.
 
I hope it will not go the way of prop.51 in Cal. The people vote ,A judge or court overruels. As far as children go,It is sad,but my children come first! A lot of bleeding hearts out there.
 
BCannell

Illegal parents or not, children shouldn't have to suffer because their families can't afford medical care. They generally didn't have a choice in their legal status.
Click to expand...

Life isn't prety, sometimes you have to make the hard choices. If the parent can't provide for the child there is alway's adoption, or perhaps stop having kids. There are thousands of unfit American parents whose children suffer. There will alway's be suffering in the world. All the "feel good" legislation has not solved the problem. Sometimes you have to tighten the screws.

I have legal immigrants at work and they are amased that we put up with this crap today. :mad: There are several Bosnian refugees that came here with nothing and now earn a modest living with no government support. One of them I beleve had to walk through a minefield at night to cross the border and escape. Now we have people walking across the border with their hands out.
 
BC,

Illegal parents or not, children shouldn't have to suffer because their families can't afford medical care. They generally didn't have a choice in their legal status.
Click to expand...

Are you actually saying that it is the responsibility of the United States to be the worlds caretaker of children of parents who commit crimes?

We don't even take care of the children of parents who live here LEGALLY and are arrested. Generally, unless both parents and all legal relatives are either missing, in jail or dead does the state or federal government actually step in.

Even then, sometimes they don't. So, we should give the children of these criminals equal treatment to LAW ABIDING US CITIZENS AND THEIR CHILDREN?

Just curious.
 
Everything is a matter of numbers, how many can we feed, care for, what
is our limits, should we sink the boat so all may die or save 10, tough
questions but as world population increases we will need to become more
tough. :(
 
I hope they learned from CA's mistake...

... and wrote the Prop so that it will not fall victim to the same legal arguments as the CA prop. However, if the AZ prop is watered down because of that, I'll be more disappointed.

I grew up in a CA border town. When I was a freshman in high school, there were 500+ kids in my freshman class. On graduation day, 220 of us walked across the field to get our diplomas. Now, some had chosen alternate schooling or had dropped out. But 80% of the no-shows were due to the fact that since a HS diploma is an official document, the school demanded a copy of a form of legal ID (driver's license, Social Security card) before they will give you a diploma to make sure the name was correct. So 80% of the no-shows had been sucking up half of the teaching staff and half of the resources that could have been used to teach American citizens were being used to teach illegal aliens. Our classes in high school had an average of 35 kids in them. It wasn't very conducive for a learning environment.

In 1994 when the CA prop was passed, we had a mock election at the school. The prop failed at school 60-40%. 19 months later on graduation day, I learned why.
 
"Illegal parents or not, children shouldn't have to suffer because their families can't afford medical care. They generally didn't have a choice in their legal status."

That's fine. That's very noble of you. I applaud your charity. So, since this is your point of view, you pay for it. You shouldn't have a problem with that. Where the problem arises is that you want ME to pay for it against my will. You think that your view on the subject should over ride my view on the subject. You think that if my viewpoint doesn't agree with your viewpoint, then my viewpoint doesn't count and I should be forced (at the point of the government's gun) to comply with YOUR wishes.
For a thinking person, that causes a difficult moral situation. You think you are a moral person because you don't want children to suffer, but are willing to make me suffer and take away my rights to see that it happens.
 
Are you actually saying that it is the responsibility of the United States to be the worlds caretaker of children of parents who commit crimes?
Click to expand...

No, of course not. Just the ones who for whom the closest hospital is within our borders.

We don't even take care of the children of parents who live here LEGALLY and are arrested. Generally, unless both parents and all legal relatives are either missing, in jail or dead does the state or federal government actually step in.
Click to expand...

If you or a dependent are taken to the hospital, they don't ask you for your insurance card up front, nor do they say "We'd really like to restart your heart with this defibrilator but we need you to write us a check for $2000 first." They treat you and start sending you bills. They can't force you to pay if you're unable to. There aren't any debtor's prisons to send you to. Eventually they stop asking for payment and the taxpayers end up footing the bill. That's just how it works, illegal alien or not.

Even then, sometimes they don't. So, we should give the children of these criminals equal treatment to LAW ABIDING US CITIZENS AND THEIR CHILDREN?
Click to expand...

Well, yeah. I just don't buy that being born a mile north of the Rio Grande instead of a mile south of it makes your life magically worth more. Sorry.

BCannell, I am just glad you are not my parent..........
Click to expand...

Could you explain? I'm not saying that you and your children aren't entitled to treatment, I'm merely saying that you aren't more entitled to treatment than others. Again, it's not a zero-sum game. (For non-mathematicians, that means a game in which one person must lose for the other to win).

Where the problem arises is that you want ME to pay for it against my will. You think that your view on the subject should over ride my view on the subject. You think that if my viewpoint doesn't agree with your viewpoint, then my viewpoint doesn't count and I should be forced (at the point of the government's gun) to comply with YOUR wishes.
Click to expand...

Whoa whoa, I think what now? The greatest gift that this country has given us is the right to hold our own viewpoints (not the right to own weapons, though that's important too). I wouldn't dream for a moment of pretending that your opinion doesn't count. If an issue like this comes up, we vote on it. Your opinion is counted as equal to mine. Unfortunately, people don't get to choose to keep their tax dollars out of a program they don't support. You can vote to remove the program, but while it stands you are financially supporting it. That's part of the social contract involved in being a citizen. That's why my taxes pay for the war in Iraq and your taxes pay for emergency services for non-citizens.

I still think we should call them what they are: INTERNATIONAL CRIMINALS. If we could just convince the media...
Click to expand...

Probably too vague. People won't know if you're talking about someone crossing the border without papers or someone who buys and sells sex slaves on the international market. Much like the term "homicide bomber" doesn't distinguish from someone blowing up half an office building with a car bomb and someone blowing up a market stall with dynamite strapped to his shirt.
 
Have you ever seen those Sally Struthers commercials for the "poor hungry" kids . (By the way she doesn't look like she EVER missed a meal ..... or seconds and thirds for that fact) .We are asked to support kids that were had by parents that have watched 90% of children dying and they continue to have more . Then WE get stuck looking at the big cow eyes of some starving kid as if it's our fault . These people know they are on thin ice when it comes to survival but they continue to have kids . To tell the truth the people that hire them should be dealt with severly . If not by the Govt. then by those in the community . They are a de facto threat .
 
BCannell,
I just don't buy that being born a mile north of the Rio Grande instead of a mile south of it makes your life magically worth more.
Click to expand...
No. It's that being born a mile south of the river makes one magically a citizen of a different country than the United States. When that's the case, one needs to stay in one's own country unless granted permission by a different country to go there.

That's not new, nor is it complex.

A further thought: you wrote to 444,
... your taxes pay for emergency services for non-citizens.
Click to expand...
Yeah, well, in the example that you've chosen, that's not all he contributes.

Sorry if I've spoken out of turn on that, 444.
 
The weird thing about these issues is that they are completely political and also that there is a difference between theory and reality. Yeah it would be nice if there was no illegal immigration and less tax money spent on caring for and schooling illegal immigrants. Also, another thing to consider is that when a child is born in the U.S. it is an american citizen. I'm not liberal nor conservative although tend to agree more frequently with Republicans. This is all political, no presidential candidate can realistically crack down on illegal immigration while staying in power.

Theoretically, illegal immigration is exactly that illegal, but the worst consequences an illegal immigrant can possibly endure is going back to where they started. Quite simply they have nothing to lose. They live in a sewer and want a better life so they come here understanding that the consequences mean they will be sent back home. No politician is ever going to support a bill that would require health care providers to let children die. That is simply not the way the U.S. was founded nor is it the way the U.S. wants to be internationally. We don't need more propaganda for terrorists to display around the world. The only real answer is to have better security on our border with Mexico and to have the infrastructure in place to track illegal immigrants already in the U.S. Letting children die is simply unacceptable, though.

There should be more documentation necessary to go to school, which would hinder the ability of illegals to go to school, but then what happens, people start complaining about how much of an inconvenience it is to sign their kids up for school. Like others said, their parents may have made a mistake, but I think emergency health care should be provided under any circumstances. It pretty much has to provided any way, however, In an emergency, when someone has a life-threatening illness or is bleeding to death its pretty hard to get documents from someone. You can't really force someone to pay especially if they are an illegal immigrant because any attempt to track them or arrest them and they will simply change their name or go back to Mexico. Illegals are also very resourceful, and many can be working without employers even having the slightest clue that they are illegal. It's a very complex issue.
 
Another thing is that it is really easy to say that it's a "Mexican problem." Mexicans are NOT the only ethnic group that immigrates here illegally. There are dozens of countries from which illegal immigrants come here. Mexico also has its own issues of illegal immigration from Central America. Many illegal aliens also come from southeast asia. Most of them originally get visas and then simply overstay their visas. Many Mexicans do this as well. Mexicans also buy fake I.D.'s and in many cases use the green cards of relatives who have returned to Mexico.

Cracking down on illegal aliens in the U.S. isn't easy and it would cost a lot of taxpayer money to set up the infrastructure to properly do it. That is probably why nobody has attempted to do it yet. First I think you have to shut off the supply of illegal immigration. It doesn't do any good to concentrate on setting up policies that deal with illegals who are already here, while millions more keep coming every year. First we need to beef up the security on our borders and take a big bite out of illegal immigration initially and after this is accomplished we can focus on dealing with immigrants who have already immigrated. If you do it the way around, we would be just wasting time and money.
 
Problem is we don't have the Government paying the price for the policy.

Now, if a person goes to a hospital emergency room and declares themselves unable to pay, the hospital should be given a salable tax credit for 110% of ACTUAL costs.

This will place the burden on the Federal Government, keep emergency rooms open and get accurate figures on the problem.

Some emergency rooms in CA will reopen almost instantly and become a profit center for the Hospital group. Salable tax credits will allow charity hospitals to profit from the trade. It will bring down the cost of hospitalization, which is currently being transferred to the people temporarily able to pay.

Note: In Ohio retired civil servants found themselves with a little problem. Medical coverage which cost them $80 per month when they retired jumped to about $800. This is not a good thing.

Geoff
Who does not believe in high taxes, even though you wonderful taxpayers pay my salary, on which I pay taxes. Hummm. Does this make me self employed? :cool:
 
No. It's that being born a mile south of the river makes one magically a citizen of a different country than the United States. When that's the case, one needs to stay in one's own country unless granted permission by a different country to go there.
Click to expand...

Their children generally didn't get to make that choice. Why should they be held responsible for the actions of their parents?

Yeah, well, in the example that you've chosen, that's not all he contributes.
Click to expand...

Beg pardon?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top