Much has been written in the blogosphere about Lou Barletta and his stance against illegal immigration, both pro and con. However the same veracity of reaction doesn't seem to be occuring over the Pennsylvania legislature's latest attempt to attack illegal immigration in the Commonwealth.
It seems most of the major newspapers are reporting on two bills cleared the Pennsylvania House last week with wide support that aim to keep illegal immigrants from working on public and private construction projects.
Current state law already forbids using illegal-immigrant labor, but local legislators believe the new measures are needed to ensure only legal residents can get well-paying construction jobs.
"These bills protect hard-working Pennsylvanians," Goodman said in a press release this week. "Illegal immigrants who skirt the system and avoid paying taxes push Pennsylvanians off payrolls and onto the unemployment roles."
Seip said the bills confront "important issues related to illegal immigration in the commonwealth" and remove obstacles for businesses operate by the book.
Representative Todd Eachus voted for the bills however there was a time in the past when he said illegal immigration was a federal issue. Last time I checked he is the Pennsylvania legislature, not Congress so how does he explain his support now. Back to the campaign contributions.
A student in high school asked about the corruption of Luzerne County judges. Eachus said the events have been “embarrassing to every citizen” living in the county.
When the same student asked about illegal immigration, Eachus pointed out that the federal government, not the state House majority leader, makes those decisions.
But he ended his answer with a plea for unity among students. Alluding to immigrant miners of different nationalities who marched together into the massacre at Lattimer in 1897, Eachus implored students not to let the community become divided.
“I’m asking you to stand together,” he said. Mr. Eachus didn't understand that everyone of those immigrant miners waited in line, were examined, and received papers that had to carry with them to enter the country. Some immigrants never made it into the country. There was no Social Security nor Medical Assistance. They had to get a job to make it in this country. Different time and wrong argument on this issue.
Guess he finally saw the light or was it the campaign contributions from organized labor that influenced his decision. Just like the donations from Robert Powell, admitted felon, money is priority one.
Although embedding has been disabled you may want to view this Youtube video capturing a public hearing on immigration in the Commonwealth in 2007. Representative Curtis Smith states that in 2006 there were 500 bills introduced in states concernining immigration. In 2007 it jumped to over 1400 bills, a number of them signed into law.
Many in the blogosphere try to say that Hazleton's oconcerning a rdinance is unconstitutional because Judge Munley said so. He has yet to have his decision upheld by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals where its review been sitting for over 19 months waiting for a decision. If Judge Munley's ruling was that solid why didn't they dismiss the case sooner?
Only six or seven members out of 203 in the House voted against these measures. Where is the battle cry denoucing their votes?