Walter Scott
2004-06-27 02:32:39 UTC
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com seattle.politics:403053 wash.politics:83665 az.general:187783 az.politics:89534
In today's Tacoma Tribune, the Associated Press reports that Governor
Gary Locke "says he opposes President Bush's proposed temporary guest
worker program, and is more in favor of an amnesty." The Governor,
while in Mexico's Western Jalisco state to promote Washington apples
and other products, also stated he is "grateful to the Mexicans for
their contributions, their work in Washington and [he is] opposed to
discrimination against them." Locke points to, as the Associated Press
put it, the fact Washington state "is spending $40 million to build
permanent and temporary housing for migrant farmworkers as well as
offering free health care to pregnant and undocumented women."
http://www.tribnet.com/news/local/story/5233854p-5168453c.html
We in Washington are rather dependent upon undocumented migrant
workers to harvest our crops and pick our fruit. Without them, no-one
could afford to buy a Washington apple; that's if they'd even be
picked. But in Arizona, the perspective of some folks is quite
different. Thus, I've included az.general and az.politics in this
discussion under the hope that people from Arizona will put in their
two cents (or more) on whether Governor Locke and Washington state
government are doing the right thing. Perhaps it's the right thing for
us but could never be right for Arizona? Perhaps circumstances there
and here just can't be compared? Or maybe they can? What would happen
to Arizona without lots of migrant workers? Would Arizona's economy
suffer just as would ours? Do Mexicans not ADD to what Arizona has to
offer its citizens and beyond? Is there really significant job-loss to
Mexicans in Arizona from which Arizonans would otherwise benefit? Or
are these jobs that the vast majority of Arizonans would never take at
the wage employers are willing to surrender?
For those of us here in Washington: some Arizona residents would tell
you of higher crime near their border with Mexico and increased usage
of vital services -- hospitals and schools -- at taxpayer expense or
incurred private debt which has caused some facilities to close their
doors or shut certain services simply to survive. If it can be proven
that it all hasn't balanced out or won't soon balance out, why
shouldn't we assume that Arizona's circumstances are but a harbinger
of what we may soon expect? What's the right and wrong thing to do in
all this?
The search for truth requires the courage to accept it.
NTReader v0.37w(P)/Beta (Registered) in conjunction with Net-Tamer.
In today's Tacoma Tribune, the Associated Press reports that Governor
Gary Locke "says he opposes President Bush's proposed temporary guest
worker program, and is more in favor of an amnesty." The Governor,
while in Mexico's Western Jalisco state to promote Washington apples
and other products, also stated he is "grateful to the Mexicans for
their contributions, their work in Washington and [he is] opposed to
discrimination against them." Locke points to, as the Associated Press
put it, the fact Washington state "is spending $40 million to build
permanent and temporary housing for migrant farmworkers as well as
offering free health care to pregnant and undocumented women."
http://www.tribnet.com/news/local/story/5233854p-5168453c.html
We in Washington are rather dependent upon undocumented migrant
workers to harvest our crops and pick our fruit. Without them, no-one
could afford to buy a Washington apple; that's if they'd even be
picked. But in Arizona, the perspective of some folks is quite
different. Thus, I've included az.general and az.politics in this
discussion under the hope that people from Arizona will put in their
two cents (or more) on whether Governor Locke and Washington state
government are doing the right thing. Perhaps it's the right thing for
us but could never be right for Arizona? Perhaps circumstances there
and here just can't be compared? Or maybe they can? What would happen
to Arizona without lots of migrant workers? Would Arizona's economy
suffer just as would ours? Do Mexicans not ADD to what Arizona has to
offer its citizens and beyond? Is there really significant job-loss to
Mexicans in Arizona from which Arizonans would otherwise benefit? Or
are these jobs that the vast majority of Arizonans would never take at
the wage employers are willing to surrender?
For those of us here in Washington: some Arizona residents would tell
you of higher crime near their border with Mexico and increased usage
of vital services -- hospitals and schools -- at taxpayer expense or
incurred private debt which has caused some facilities to close their
doors or shut certain services simply to survive. If it can be proven
that it all hasn't balanced out or won't soon balance out, why
shouldn't we assume that Arizona's circumstances are but a harbinger
of what we may soon expect? What's the right and wrong thing to do in
all this?
The search for truth requires the courage to accept it.
NTReader v0.37w(P)/Beta (Registered) in conjunction with Net-Tamer.