How LONG have we waited for this day?

 All 34 counts. 

GUILTY! 

I'm getting emotional.

It's about damn time. 

Turn off the convicted FELON's microphone, unplug it, and throw it away.

SB1070 redux, only worse?

Conned by GOP lawmakers into spending more than $325 million annually

The Arizona Republic published an op-ed yesterday (Saturday May 11) regarding House Concurrent Resolution 2060. 

Arizona Republicans aren't giving you the full story on their 'border security' bill

"Arizona lawmakers pushing a ballot measure to crack down on illegal immigration aren't telling the truth on what it does."

Does that secondary headline strike you as euphemismistic? Perhaps it allowed the author to starkly call attention to those who are supposed to respect the WILL OF THE PEOPLE but actually don't. Thankfully, the op-ed laid out clearly and unambiguously how Arizona's GOP state lawmakers have been lying through their teeth hoping to further divide our state's already deeply polarized electorate. And it's far from the first time.

SB 1070 was touted as the toughest immigration law in the nation when [then Gov.] Brewer signed it on April 23, 2010.

But several months later, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton blocked key provisions from taking effect, including one that required law-enforcement officers engaged in a lawful stop to ask about a person's legal status when reasonable suspicion exists that the person is in the U.S. illegally. Two years later, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that portion of the law but struck down several other provisions.

In Saturday's op-ed,

The Arizona lawmakers pushing for a Texas-style law authorizing local officers to go after illegal border crossers insist nobody will be racially profiled because of it.

That’s a [demonstrably false] myth and they know it.

There’s no such thing as an immigration crackdown without racial profiling — not in Arizona or any place else in America.

Reality is that most asylum seekers and border crossers fleeing poverty and other calamities come from countries where darker skins predominate.

Imposing a penalty for a crime not necessarily related to border crossing by immigrants (selling fentanyl) seems designed to augment the slave population of the Arizona prison industrial complex. 

Because current Gov Katie Hobbs vetoed SB1231 which sought to do much the same thing as HCR2060, and because the GOP controls both chambers of the Arizona Legislature (by ONE VOTE in each chamber), they apparently think they're pretty clever. They are fully aware that the reproductive rights initiative will draw many people to vote in November. Are the Republicans now trying to further inflame racial animus to get an already polarized electorate to decide on their feigned "border security" measure in November?

Think back a few weeks to when AZ GOP legislative leadership proposed running an abortion initiative to confuse voters in November. However, Arizona is NOT Texas. Does trying to hoodwink voters qualify as a Republican dirty trick?

The op-ed further notes:

They know exactly what they’re doing. They’re counting on Arizonans to merely take their word for what they say the ballot measure would do — whether that’s true or not.

Today (Sunday May 12) protesters showed up at the Arizona Capitol. 

[Gina] Mendez, who acts as organizing director for Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), was joined by more than 100 activists from multiple organizations in a rally decrying House Concurrent Resolution 2060.

"It's scary," Mendez said of HCR 2060, which is likely to be approved Monday by Republicans as a ballot measure in the general election.

According to the Grand Canyon Institute, taking on federal government responsibilities as spelled out in HCR2060 would cost Arizona taxpayers:

The report by the institute’s research director, Dave Wells, says state government would have to shell out $185 million a year for the border enforcement provision, basing the estimate on 40% of the state allocation Texas approved for its program. Arizona’s law is based on Texas law SB4, which the Biden administration opposes and is currently under a stay by a federal appeals court. City and county governments would have to pay another $140 million, for a total cost of $325 annually.

Engaged citizens can call (even on Sunday) to leave a voice mail or send an email to their state representatives to tell them what you think about HCR2060 and how they should vote when it does come up for final approval.