Did State Legislator’s reflect Commonwealth’s Values?
by Jerold Duquette
Massachusetts legislators have rejected several efforts to toughen the state’s enforcement of sanctions against illegal immigrants (See Masslive story). The measures, in the form of amendments to the Senate’s budget bill, included such things as the codification of the current policy of denying in-state tuition rights to students who are illegal immigrants, and the creation of a 24-hour telephone “hot line” for reporting suspected illegal immigrant workers.
While the Arizona situation and a general anti-immigrant sentiment among some of the loudest voices in American politics presently have led many states to push for “get tough on illegal immigration” measures, Massachusetts likes to think of itself as a bit more enlightened. So, is that the explanation for the rejection of these largely symbolic measures? Do Massachusetts Democratic state legislators see no need to pander to the state’s conservative electorate, despite the recent victory of Scott Brown and the seeming resurgence of the State’s Republicans?
I don’t think so. I think these measures were rejected for budgetary, not electoral, reasons. The fact is that states that chose to enforce federal law and to take on federal issues do so largely on their own dime. In Massachusetts, taxing and spending policy is FAR more politically salient than is immigration policy. So, I’m afraid neither pro-immigrant progressives nor anti-illegal immigrant conservatives can take comfort, or cultivate honest rage, from these decisions.
Jerold Duquette
www.jeroldduquette.org
| Share |
PDF
Comments are closed
ADVERTISE AT THE SI
 |
 |
