1. Sen. Feinstein accepted money
2. Gov-elect a boon for enforcement
3. Hispanic voters boosted CO Dems
4. NY voters reject candidates
5. NE Supreme Court nix case

1.
Feinstein, other Democrats accept donations from architect of Arizona immigration law
By Mike Riggs
The Daily Caller, November 1, 2010

Just 10 days after the Arizona legislature passed SB 1070, a much ballyhooed law aimed at reducing illegal immigration by empowering state and local law enforcement to suss out undocumented residents, California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein wrote a stern letter to Attorney General Eric Holder criticizing Arizona’s new law.

“We write to support your thorough review of the recent immigration law enacted in Arizona — a law which is troubling on many levels,” reads the April, 2010 letter that Feinstein co-signed with fellow Californian Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer. “This state law…is already proving to be polarizing and hurtful.”

Fast-forward seven months: Feinstein has turned her attention from governing Arizona by proxy to discouraging the folks back home from legalizing marijuana.

What else has changed? According to OpenSecrets, Feinstein, who is not up for re-election until 2012, accepted a $2,500 campaign donation from one of the architects of SB 1070 — the Corrections Corporation of America. The Democratic Party of California has also accepted money this election cycle from CCA — $15,000, to be exact.

Late last week, NPR reported that *CCA met frequently with Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce to discuss SB 1070 and opportunities for incarcerating illegal immigrants in privately operated prisons, and that representatives of CCA made the same sales pitch in cities throughout Arizona.

That law ended up being SB 1070, which CCA helped write and that Sen. Feinstein and the Democratic Party of California criticized.

But while CCA and Feinstein’s interests stood opposed in Arizona, in California they have seemingly become aligned. The former San Francisco mayor and 18-year Senate veteran has vocally opposed any and all drug-law reform efforts dating back to 1996, when Californians voted to legalize medical marijuana. As the co-chair for the opposition committee, Feinstein has become one of the most vocal critics of Prop. 19, the California ballot initiative which would legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana.
. . .
http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailycaller/20101101/pl_dailycaller/feinsteinoth...

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

2.
Republican governors-elect may up the chances for Arizona-style laws on immigration
By Elise Foley
The Washington Independent, November 5, 2010

Lawmakers from at least 25 states have pledged to pass copycat laws to Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law. There are a number of reasons these plans might not succeed — other legislators might want to focus on economic concerns, or might be deterred by the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona — but Republican victories at the state level mean Arizona-style legislation is all the more likely in other states. At least 10 governorships flipped Republican on Tuesday, including states such as New Mexico where the governors-elect campaigned on promises to crack down on illegal immigration, and a number of other governorships remained in the hands of Republicans.

Our sister site, The Florida Independent, reports that Republicans in Florida will now have a veto-proof majority in both the state House and Senate, plus a vocal supporter of tough immigration laws in the form of Governor-elect Rick Scott (R):

Scott has allies in the legislature. State Rep. Willliam Snyder, R-Stuart, already announced a drafted immigration bill that mimics Arizona’s S.B. 1070 and would obligate local law enforcement agencies to inquire about a person’s immigration status during a routine stop. [...]

In July, state Rep. Kevin Ambler, R-Tampa, and state Sen. Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland, also proposed legislation modeled after Arizona’s S.B. 1070.

State Sen. Mike Bennett, R-Bradenton, told The Florida Independent in July that he would introduce legislation based on the Arizona law during the 2011 session, and state Rep Mike Horner, R-Kissimmee, also supported an Arizona-type law in Florida during his campaign.

“I expect there will be an effort to pass an S.B. 1070-type law and several anti-immigrant bills,” says Jonathan Fried, the director of We Count, a community and workers’ organization located in Homestead. “I would hope sensible members of the Republican Party understand what this would do to the state and their party. In the long term, they would be the anti-Latino party.” [...]

With the small number of Democrats in Tallahassee, Fried says there is little real opposition to an Arizona-style law. “I hope African-American and Latino legislators will step up and oppose this bill,” Fried says.

Republican Nathan Deal’s victory in the Georgia governor’s race puts the state in a similarly likely position to pass anti-illegal immigration legislation next year. Georgia was ranked by a pro-immigration group among the four most likely states to pass copycat SB 1070 laws. In two of the others — Oklahoma, where Mary Fallin (R) won for governor, and South Carolina, where Nikki Haley (R) will take over — Republican candidates for governor won on Tuesday. (The fourth, Mississippi, is led by Republican Gov. Haley Barbour.)
. . .
http://washingtonindependent.com/102780/republican-governors-elect-may-u...

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

3.
Numbers show Hispanic voters carried the day for Colorado Democrats
By Scot Kersgaard
The Colorado Independent, November 5, 2010

Eighty-one percent of Latino voters in Colorado voted for Michael Bennet. Split the Latino vote down the middle between Bennet and Republican Ken Buck and Buck wins easily. Even if Buck had only received 30 percent of the Latino vote, he would have won the election.

As it was, Buck barely out-polled gubernatorial candidate and anti-immigration hardliner Tom Tancredo among Hispanics.

Roughly 10 percent of voters in Colorado are Latino, according to Latino Decisions, a non-partisan polling and opinion research firm run by two West Coast political science professors.

Sens. Michael Bennet, left, and Mark Udall address the crowd Wednesday on the grounds of The Museum of Nature and Science.

What were the issues that drove Hispanic voters? Issues important to Hispanic voters were pretty much the same as the issues important to everyone else.

According to polling done by Latino Decisions, 48 percent of Latino voters said jobs and the economy ranked as the most important issues. Thirty-seven percent said immigration was most important.

Political consultant Lorena Chambers takes the idea that Latino voters care about the sames things as Anglo voters one step further, saying that immigration is not even a first-tier issue for Latino voters.

“Latinos are simply not a one-trick pony. Project New West polling had found consistently time after time that jobs, the economy, education and health care are their top issues,” Chambers said on a conference call with reporters this week. She said that as recently as the weekend before the election, polling showed that economic issues far outweighed other issues with Hispanics. She said immigration was important, but that candidates first had to pass muster on economic issues.
. . .
http://coloradoindependent.com/66544/numbers-show-hispanic-voters-carrie...

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

4.
Vote Cuts Both Ways on Immigrant Issues in NY
Public News Service, November 5, 2010

This week's election saw some candidates portraying immigrants in a negative light, but when the results came in, local immigrant advocates claim victory in saying New York voters rejected those stereotypes.

Pat Young is an attorney active in immigrant issues and a blogger for Long Island Wins. He says New York voters had four chances to elect candidates to Congress who campaigned on anti-immigrant platforms, and Young says New Yorkers rejected them all.

"Even though the Republicans made a lot of pickups in New York State, none of those who took the anti-immigrant pledge won their election. So we've seen New York voters really say that they don't want immigration issue politicized, they want immigration to be dealt with in a rational way."

Young says he believes these negative depictions of immigrants are changing voting patterns. Although 40 percent of Latinos voted Republican five years ago, exit polls show only 33 percent of Latinos are now voting with the GOP.

Young sees proof that New York Latino voters were clearly turned off by negative comments made by the GOP contender in the governor's race.
. . .
http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/16827-1

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

5.
Neb. court won't weigh in on immigration measure
By Timberly Ross
The Associated Press, November 5, 2010

The Nebraska Supreme Court won't weigh in on whether municipalities can enact immigration-related restrictions on where people can live or work, the court said in an opinion issued Friday.

A federal judge had asked the state's highest court to consider the issue as she hears a lawsuit challenging the city of Fremont's ordinance barring illegal immigrants from renting or working there.

The high court said the request didn't allege a violation of state law, so it won't take up the question.

Fremont voters approved the ordinance in June, but it has yet to go into effect.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska and the Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund, also known as MALDEF, have challenged the ordinance. The groups, whose lawsuits have been combined, say the voter-approved ordinance is discriminatory and contrary to what is allowed by state law.

U.S. District Judge Laurie Smith Camp has said she wasn't sure which court should hear the lawsuits because they suggest the ordinance violates both state and federal laws. She asked attorneys to craft the language of a question to be answered by the Nebraska Supreme Court that would indicate whether the ordinance is valid under state law. The question was submitted to the high court in September.
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/05/AR201011...