1. Appeals court overturns AZ law
2. Jesse Jackson says vote Dem
3. ALIPAC drops support for Dems
4. Immigration lacks impact
5. MA taxpayers cover $35.7M

1.
Arizona Citizenship Proof Law for Voters Overturned by Court
By Karen Gullo
Business Week, October 27, 2010

Arizona’s election law requiring residents to show proof of citizenship conflicts with the National Voter Registration Act, a federal appeals court ruled in overturning portions of the measure.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco yesterday invalidated parts of Arizona’s Proposition 200, a 2004 voter- approved initiative on registration for state and federal elections. The court didn’t disturb a requirement that voters show identification at the polls.

A three-judge panel of the court, in a 2-1 decision, said the proof-of-citizenship requirement conflicted with the intent of the federal law aiming to increase voter registration by streamlining the process with a single form and removing state- imposed obstacles to registration.

The federal law requires applicants to “attest to their citizenship under penalty of perjury” without requiring documentary proof, the panel said.

“Proposition 200 creates an additional state hurdle to registration,” the judges said.

The law was challenged by voting rights and Hispanic advocacy groups.

The decision is “a warning to anyone who seeks to deter or prevent voter participation” that the Constitution “will protect our democratic process,” Thomas A. Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, a San Antonio-based group that argued the case, said in a statement.
. . .
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-10-27/arizona-citizenship-proof-la...

********
********

2.
Jesse Jackson Sr.: Protect 14th Amendment
By Simmi Aujla
Politico (Washigntno, D.C.), October 26, 2010

Jesse Jackson Sr. is robocalling Chicago-area residents to tell them to vote for Democrats next Tuesday to prevent Republicans from getting their hands on the 14th Amendment.

In the recorded message, the veteran civil rights activist tells voters he wants to remind them it’s important to vote because Republicans will hurt the country by changing the 14th Amendment, which gives automatic citizenship to anyone born here. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) suggested revisiting the amendment in August to discourage illegal immigration, with top House Republicans like Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) and Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Lamar Smith (Texas) quickly backing his position.

Jackson told POLITICO Republican talk about changing the 14th Amendment is “threatening” and “divisive.”

“Tampering with the 14th Amendment sends signals of states’ rights. It sends signals of backsliding of equality,” he said. “Even for them to run on platforms questioning the 14th Amendment, we are backsliding. Questioning the 14th Amendment, we do not think that is healthy. A call to rally against these basic amendments is always threatening.”

One of the calls was received by a voter in a predominantly Hispanic Chicago zip code. But Jackson, who’s traveling in California and Illinois this week in get-out-the-vote efforts, said he isn’t targeting Hispanics.
. . .
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44218.html

********
********

3.
Anti-Illegal immigration group revokes backing for two House Dems
By Shane D'Aprile
The Hill (Washington, D.C.), October 26, 2010

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is revoking its support for two embattled House Democrats, one of whom touted his backing from the group during a debate earlier this month.

ALIPAC had endorsed Reps. Mike McIntyre (D-N.C.) and Jim Marshall (D-Ga.), but decided Tuesday to rescind and endorse both of their Republican challengers.

Marshall is facing a tough challenge from Republican Austin Scott this fall, while McIntyre is locked in a battle with Ilario Pantano. During a debate in mid-October, McIntyre touted his backing from ALIPAC as proof that he's tougher on illegal immigration than his GOP challenger.

The PAC's president, William Gheen, said the move is meant to send a message to the Democratic leadership in Washington that the party is moving toward "amnesty for illegal immigrants" and is "encouraging illegals to vote in the midterms."

While the organization still supports four other House Democrats — Reps. Gene Taylor (Miss.), John Barrow (Ga.), Peter DeFazio (Ore.) and Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Gheen said due to the close nature of the contests in North Carolina's 7th district and Georgia's 8th district, the group decided to switch its backing to Republicans who he said are more in line with the organization's goals.
. . .
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/125917-anti-illegal-immi...

********
********

4.
Will immigration affect elections in Florida?
By William Gibson
Sun Sentinel (Florida), October 26, 2010

Support from Hispanic voters helped President Obama win Florida two years ago, but will they turn out for Democrats in the midterm elections?

A research group that favors greater restrictions on immigration issued a report on Tuesday predicting that Hispanic turnout nationwide will drop this year and that the national debate over comprehensive immigration reform won’t make much impact.

Based on Census data and past patterns, the Center for Immigration Studies projects that Hispanics will comprise 6.8 percent of the electorate nationwide, a reduction from 7.4 percent in 2008 but an increase from 5.8 percent in 2006.

Hispanic turnout or lack of it could tip the governor’s race and close congressional elections in Florida, home to large numbers of legal and illegal immigrants.

Reform would not directly affect Puerto Ricans, who are citizens, or Cubans, who are granted legal status when they arrive in this country. But polls have shown that both groups as well as other Hispanics generally support an overhaul of immigration law.

Immigrant advocates in Florida and nationwide are trying to boost Hispanic turnout. They say many voters are motivated by a desire for immigration reform, including a path to citizenship for unauthorized foreign residents. The Arizona law requiring local police to check the immigration status of suspects has also stirred participation, advocates say.
. . .
The Center’s report, "The Hispanic Vote in the Upcoming 2010 Elections," can be found at http://cis.org/hispanic-vote-pre-2010.
. . .
http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/dcblog/2010/10/will_immigr...

********
********

5.
Illegals’ medical bills top $35.7M
By Jessica Van Sack
Boston Herald, October 27, 2010

Beleaguered Bay State and U.S. taxpayers coughed up a staggering $35.7 million this year in free emergency health care for more than 52,000 illegal aliens in Massachusetts, sparking outrage from candidates and critics who back a tougher line on immigration.

The figures — released by Gov. Deval Patrick’s administration under an order for the Secretary of State’s office and after more than a month of ducking questions — show illegal immigrants who belong to MassHealth Limited received $33.8 million in taxpayer-funded in-patient hospital care this year.

They also made 6,160 visits to the state’s overburdened emergency rooms in the fiscal year ending in June for an additional cost of $1.9 million, a Herald analysis shows.

The Patrick administration, which supplied the figures last week, refused to make state health insurance officials available to discuss them.

But critics were quick to blast the huge medical bill being footed by hard-pressed, law-abiding taxpayers.

“Incorporating illegal immigrants into any type of government-sponsored health care is legitimizing their presence here,’’ said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the conservative Center for Immigration Studies, which favors stricter immigration policies. “It’s a kind of piecemeal amnesty.’’

Added state Rep. Robert Hedlund (R-Weymouth), “It’s just another example in this state of working people paying the bills, and some people availing themselves of the benefits we have in the commonwealth.’’

The Patrick administration maintains that its hands are tied because failing to treat gravely illegal immigrants would be a violation of federal law, but some disagree.

“It’s hard to say that’s the case directly,’’ said James Edwards, a fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based immigration center. “My suspicion is it’s willful ignorance.’’

The center calculates that Massachusetts has 220,000 illegal immigrants overall.
. . .
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1291805