U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 27, 2010 11:24 PM UTC

Romanoff Denounces Arizona Immigration Law

  • 32 Comments
  • by: RomanoffForColorado

U.S. Senate Candidate Andrew Romanoff today issued the following statement:

“The passage of Senate Bill 1070 marks a terrifying turn of events, not only for Arizona but for the United States as a whole.  Anyone who lives in or visits Arizona may now be stopped if a law-enforcement official has “reasonable suspicion” to believe that he or she is unlawfully present.

As the son and grandson of immigrants – and as an American – I am outraged by this decision.  Arizona’s new law invites racial profiling and puts police officers themselves in an impossible position, by requiring them, in effect, to violate the rights of people they are sworn to protect.

This law is unwise, unsafe and unconstitutional.  Indeed, it is un-American.

Arizona’s action cannot stand:

(1)   Today I ask the U.S. Department of Justice to file for injunctive relief in federal court to prohibit the enforcement of the Arizona statute.

(2)   I urge the Attorney General to dispatch a legal team to Arizona to defend the Constitutional rights of those affected by this reckless law.

(3)   I call on Congress to replace Arizona’s misguided effort with federal action – now long overdue.

We need comprehensive immigration reform.  What Arizona has enacted is a poor and dangerous substitute.

Comprehensive reform means securing our borders.  It means enforcing the laws against drug running, smuggling, and human trafficking.  It means providing a path by which individuals who are willing to work hard, pay taxes and play by the rules can enjoy legal status in a society that benefits from their labor.  Read my 10-point plan http://www.andrewromanoff.com/…

The haphazard enforcement of our immigration laws – and Washington’s failure to reform them – have split families, sown fear and confusion, and undermined respect for the rule of law itself.  While Congress dodges the debate over immigration reform, states are expected to pay for mandates they cannot afford and to address a problem they cannot solve.

We deserve better.  We deserve a fair and practical system that preserves our nation’s security, strengthens our economy, and reflects our values.  That is the approach I will champion as a member of the U.S. Senate.”

About Andrew Romanoff:

Elected to four terms in the Colorado legislature, Andrew Romanoff was Speaker of the House from 2005 to 2009. He led the Democrats to their first back-to-back majorities in more than 40 years.  His leadership earned national recognition, including Governing magazine’s top honor as Public Official of the Year.

Tweet
Share

Comments

32 thoughts on “Romanoff Denounces Arizona Immigration Law”

  2. Immigration reform is going to be a tough nut to crack, because there’s really no perfect solution. But the status quo is untenable, and the drift into racist and xenophobic reactions to it is horrifying (and horrifyingly familiar, since we go down this road periodically in our history, with every new wave of immigration).

    2. I remember a person who touted before this that they had passed the “toughest immigration laws in the nation” in 2006. It was Andrew Romanoff.  1023, anyone? Does anyone buy his support of the DREAM act after 1023?

      SB 1020 is bad, but the special session was all gravy, huh? Did you think the Latino community would just forget what happened?

      The audacity…

    1. It’s re-codified federal law and the best that could be done with a Governor so hell-bent on “fixing” immigration in Colorado.  Don’t be naive…instead, get your canvassing shoes on and go support Dems in tough districts.

  5. I just got another email in my inbox from Andrew Romanoff announcing that he has finally arrived (4 years late) to the party, and supports the rights of undocumented individuals.

    Here’s an email from an immigration rights attorney with a very different perspective:

    Hello All….

    I wish I could share the enthusiasm for Mr. Romanoff, but since I spend seven days a week counseling families whose lives have been completely destroyed by inhumane immigration laws, including those passed in 2006 in Colorado , I refuse to endorse Mr. Romanoff.

    Mr. Romanoff is no friend to immigrants.  That pleases some, but it should offend any of you who value human rights, human dignity, family unity, tolerance and justice.  He has demonstrated, on more than one occasion, that he is willing to sacrifice immigrants and families of immigrants, (which include US citizens) for political gain.   For example, in 2004/2005 he pledged his support to immigrants and their allies as we worked long and hard to obtain driver’s licenses for immigrants in Colorado . (Including speaking at a large immigrants rights conference in Denver , where he clearly stated, to great applause, his commitment to immigrant rights and that he would work with us to get licenses)  At the last minute he totally betrayed us, without even an apology, and did nothing to support the campaign or introduce legislation.

    But you can’t top the 2006 legislative session, which produced a set of laws deemed “the toughest immigration legislation in the nation” and was praised by anti-immigrants as “the best [legislation] that could be obtained under the circumstances”.  (Defend Colorado Now website).  Thousands of Colorado residents continue to suffer under these repressive laws, which deny immigrants everything from a fishing license to heating assistance, lead to increased arrests, detentions and human rights violations of undocumented people in Colorado, gave legitimacy to immigrant bashing which results in increased hate crimes, and have caused hardships for poor families and individuals, including the elderly, the homeless, and veterans throughout the state.    

    As one researcher noted, “virtually all close observers of Colorado ‘s 2006 summer immigration episode agree that it was all about politics, not policy. Over and over both legislators and pundits called the special session a “circus” and a “charade”.  (See John A. Straayer, CSU, Making Policy in the Dark)   Romanoff was a leader in this debacle, considers it a feather in his political cap, and congratulated himself and others on passing the “toughest illegal immigration package in the nation.” (See Romanoff quoted in Denver Business Journal, 7/11/2006)

    I find the Colorado laws passed in 2006 to be nothing short of a political attack on immigrants resulting in a waste of time and money and causing harm to the community.  Romanoff’s role in this is indefensible.

    Senator Bennet has demonstrated that he has the courage to speak his values and beliefs on issues affecting immigrants.  Since coming into office he has publicly stated his support for things like immigration reform, despite his precarious political position.  In fact, he has said that he will risk his political position in order to do the right thing on immigration and immigration reform.  THIS is what we need in a politician, someone with the courage to stand up for what is right regardless of what it does for their career, and whose concern is policy, not politics.  We do not need someone who has already demonstrated that he will sell out the most vulnerable for political gain.

    Kim

    Kimberly Baker Medina

    1. It’s so easy to stand on the sidelines and carp.  Romanoff is stating loud and clear in his release that the Feds force states to “fix” what they cannot fix…that this belongs to the Feds alone.

      Let’s recap what Romanoff’s role was.  Governor Owens was hell-bent on pushing through anti-immigrant legislation that year.  Perhaps you don’t remember Amendment 55?

      [Shall there be] an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the restriction of non-emergency government services to certain persons who are lawfully present in the United States, and, in connection therewith, restricting the provision of non-emergency services by the State and local governments to United States citizens and aliens lawfully present in the United States, except as mandated by federal law; and providing for the implementation and enforcement of this restriction?

      It was Romanoff that rounded up the troops from the Ref C battle to force this off the ballot, even though it was trending in the high 70% at the time.  I will state for the record that the Senator was the Superintendent at the time and did NOTHING…no resolution for the school board to pass, nothing.  

      Romanoff pulled together a coalition of Latinos, including Polly Baca, Federico Pena and Ricardo Martinez, to minimize the damage and produce 1023 as a compromise.  It was the best that could be done under the circumstances, no matter what people with blinders on may want to think.

      As a Latina, I am grateful that Romanoff chose to work with our leadership to stave off a constitutional amendment that would have denied basic services to pregnant women or caused Coloradans to sue the state for not enforcing immigration laws in parks.  Had it not been for this law that can easily be rescinded in the State Legislature and not by ballot initiative, we would have the same Arizona police state today.

      And Bennet?  Where is his statement denouncing this atrocity?  Why are you, a supporter, letting him get away with this?

       

      1. So it goes when opportunistic career politicians see tragedy as opportunity.

        The hypocrisy evident here shows that Andrew Romanoff doesn’t want to believe himself to be accountable the way the rest of us are.  

        1. Where is his statement denouncing this civil rights atrocity?

          You must be a paid staffer to be so obtuse that you cannot understand political brinkmanship.

          1. So attack, attack, attack.

            I am no paid staffer. But I would hope even someone who is a paid staffer would have had the courage to point out to their candidate his obvious hypocrisy when attacking Arizona’s xenophobic legislation. That is apparently not the case on the Andrew Romanoff campaign.  

            1. I even posted the proposed ballot question.  If you want to support Bennet, that’s totally on you, but there’s a problem when you have to use mendacity to do so.

              I have no patience for people that can’t pull their heads out of the sand and READ.

              1. And from it the hypocrisy is crystal clear:

                2006: Andrew Romanoff demagogues against undocumented individuals in Colorado.

                2010: Andrew Romanoff defends undocumented individuals in Arizona.  

                And it all fits a career pattern. When in office his name is on resolutions endorsing Bush’s war. Now he sends out emails claiming he “stood up” to George Bush. It’s all pretty predictable by now.  

                1. Even Hillary Clinton endorsed the war.  What does that prove?

                  I want a career politician that knows how to keep racism out of the state constitution.  I appreciate that.

                  And hypocrisy?  What about the hypocrisy of talking about financial reform and taking money from Goldman Sachs…worse, refusing to return it?

                  Give me a break.

                  1. Did Hillary Clinton, to quote: “commend and support the efforts and leadership of President George W. Bush in the conduct of military operations in Iraq.”  

      2. Your analysis is facile and deflection obvious.

        The only reason you claim this is weak is because it criticizes your preferred candidate.

        I have met Kim Medina and she gets it.

        But let me see if I understand campanoff’s argument:

        Healthcare (AR on the sidelines) : should have had single payer and a better process.

        Immigration: (AR in the middle) it was the “best that could be done under the circumstances”

        Wow.

        It just seems so …convenient. The issue where he was in the room that had a less than great outcome was the best that could be done.  But the issue where he did nothing was flawed.  Ok.

          1. Hawaii has single payer.  So obviously states can do it without the feds.  If Romanoff is such a big single-payer supporter and was such an effective legislator and great leader, why didn’t he do single payer for Colorado when he was Speaker?

            Perhaps he was such an “effective” legislator because he picked popular, easier issues? Hell- Ref C had 35% + of the R’s voting for it.

    2. is an outspoken, abrasive open borders advocate and immigration attorney. She has actively lobbied against any and all immigration law enforcement.  Outside of her open borders immigration advocacy, she has not worked for any other Democratic candidates or issues.  She is so fringe, she makes the fringe look middle of the road.  Is she even a Democrat?  Beware trying to please the Kimberly Baker Medina’s of the world without putting off other Democrat and Independent voters.  

  6. For all you knuckleheads that don’t want to research and just take on the Bennet talking points, here is the text of the proposed ballot initiative from 2006 that Romanoff kept away from voters that would have approved it by 70% at least:

    Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:

    SECTION 1. Article V of the Colorado constitution is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read:

    SECTION 51. Restrictions on Non-Emergency Services

    (1) Except as mandated by federal law, the provision of non-emergency services by the state of Colorado, or any county, city, or other political subdivision thereof, is restricted to citizens of and aliens lawfully present in the United States of America.

    (2) Any person lawfully residing in the state of Colorado shall have standing to sue the state of Colorado, or any county, city, or other political subdivision of the state of Colorado, to enforce this section.

    (a) Courts of record of the state of Colorado shall have jurisdiction to hear cases brought to enforce this section.

    (b) The general assembly may provide reasonable and appropriate limits on the time and manner of suits brought under this section.

    (3) The general assembly shall have the authority to implement this section by definitions and other appropriate legislation.

    SECTION 2. Effective date – applicability. This section shall take effect thirty days from the date of adjournment of the regular session of the general assembly following the proclamation of the vote by the governor, and shall apply to causes of action accruing on or after said date.

    1023 was a statutory compromise that we can easily fix by electing the right people to the State Legislature.

    Now quit the crap already.

    1. You seem totally blind to the effects Andrew Romanoff’s bill had on the lives of real people in your attempt to whitewash history. How disgusting you would try and inject your ethnicity into this exercise in apologism.

      http://www.denverpost.com/ci_6…

      ID law packs fear factor

      Hospitals and nonprofits that help the needy say a law barring state funds for illegal immigrants has kept away those eligible for aid.

      A homeless man tried to yank out his abscessed tooth with pliers and fishing line after he was turned away from three hospitals because he wasn’t an emergency patient and had no proof of U.S. citizenship.

      The leader of a nonprofit agency is worried he might have to turn away subscribers to a newspaper-reading service for the blind because some of its elderly listeners could lack identification.

      And some illegal immigrants are too scared to ask for food at soup kitchens or medical care at free clinics – even those funded by private or federal money – because word has spread of a Colorado crackdown on illegal immigration.

      1. This makes the need for comprehensive immigration reform all the more pressing.  You cannot blame a state legislator for the ramifications of what the federal government would do if they decided to enforce what’s already on the books.

        But how would you like to be in a position to have to sue the state because undocumented people were using parks?  Amendment 55 would have forced you to turn in your own.

        No, I’ll say it again.  Thanks, Andrew Romanoff, for working with our community’s leaders and producing an easily-revokeable statute as a compromise to keep off a ballot measure that would have changed our state constitution.  Thank you for not allowing the state’s racists to have a chance to set xenophobia in stone.

          1. He wasn’t even in the state legislature last year when the state senate voted it down.  What the heck are you talking about?

            Links, please.  

  8. I know many Democrats who probably won’t be supporting either Romanoff or Bennett because they support Comprehensive Immigration Reform (aka, amnesty).

    They are so busy pandering to the Hispanic vote that they forget that many within their party, let alone Independents, are not so enamored with illegal immigration and massive immigration.

    Massive immigration of about 1.5 million people per year, plus their children, is responsible for about 80% of the projected population growth in the US (from 310 million today to 460 million in 2050).  It also takes jobs from the millions of unemployed Americans and pushes down wages for millions more.

    While the Arizona law is not the ideal solution to the illegal immigration problem, it is necessary because the Obama administration and other administrations before that have failed to enforce our immigration laws — at great expense to many states.

    We would rather have strict enforcement of laws against employers hiring illegal workers, but neither the US Congress or the Colorado legislature will pass a law to make this mandatory.  

    This is not a “terrifying turn of events” to many of us, but instead a much needed step towards getting our immigration laws enforced.

    Wake up Democrats, there are a lot more voters out there then the Hispanics and the far left open borders crowd you are pandering to.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

141 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!