Horizon, Host: Ted Simons

September 30, 2010


Host: Ted Simons

ASU Immigration Conference

  |   Video
  • The Role of States in Immigration Policy and Enforcement is the name of the conference taking place October 8th at ASU’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. ASU law professor Carissa Hessick talks about the conference that’s designed to explore the complex legal and policy issues raised by increasing state involvement in immigration.
Guests:
  • Carissa Byrne Hessick - ASU Law Professor
Category: Immigration

View Transcript
Ted Simons:
Arizona's senate bill 1070 is prompting no shortage of debate about the role that states should play in setting immigration policy. A conference on immigration issues will be held next week at Arizona state University. Earlier today I talked to Carissa Byrne Hessick, an associate professor at the ASU's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, about the upcoming conference. Thank you for joining us tonight on "Horizon."

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
Thank you for having me.

Ted Simons:
What is this conference specifically focusing on?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
Specifically we wanted to have a conference that would talk about the role that states can, are, and should play in immigration policy and enforcement.

Ted Simons:
OK. Legal issues, obviously will be involved as well?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
We'll be talking about legal issues, as everyone who has been following the SB 1070 case knows, that federal preemption of state immigration law has been a big issue. So that's definitely one of the topics we'll be talking about.

Ted Simons:
And I guess societal issues?

Carissa Byrne Hessick: Societal issues.

Ted Simons:
Political news.

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
Political issues.

Ted Simons:
And economic issues.

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
Exactly.

Ted Simons:
So how do you get that in a one-day conference?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
It's a one-day conference, we're very lucky because we have immigration experts who specialize in different fields. Immigration experts from across the country joining us to talk about these legal issues, we have someone who's been doing a study on the economic impact of immigration, we have someone who's been doing a study on state law enforcement practices with respect to immigration, so all of these people across the country are doing really fascinating research on immigration, they've all agreed to come here and speak with us.

Ted Simons:
Is the research on immigration in and of itself, or is someone looking at what happens to a state like Arizona when it adopts a law, or tries to at least put into law a bill that really is hard, is tough on immigration?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
We have a couple of people, our keynote speaker, a professor from Princeton University, is really interested in studying Arizona and why it is that Arizona seems to have become ground zero for the debate on immigration in the United States.

Ted Simons:
Is there a -- obviously we share the border, obviously it looks like California and Texas and those areas decided to -- those areas were focus order, everyone starts funneling toward us. Is it more than that, though?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
I 30 there are a few other sort of unique situations and unique circumstances that gave rise to this issue in Arizona. One of them were political actors willing to enact the this sort of immigration law. Another was that they were working with some people out of state who were helping them to draft this law. And then I think it's also really the political climate within Arizona. And about how important immigration has ended up becoming in this election.

Ted Simons:
And with this particular state and the situation here, you've got other states now kind of moving along the same line, and that gets back to the main focus, which is, where do you go? Do you go fed, do you go state? A mix of the two?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
Exactly. I think a lot of state actors are frustrated, especially border states. They perceive there to be a problem with current immigration policy and current federal immigration law. But as you know, Congress hasn't done much recently in the realm of immigration, there's a stalemate, a deadlock. So states are trying to do things on their own.

Ted Simons:
Has the heat died down enough on this issue for this kind of discourse? Right now the discourse is pretty hot and heavy, and a lot of yelling, a lot of shouting, a lot of marching, but we don't get this kind of thing yet. Are we ready for this kind of thing?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
I hope we are. In fact, I think a conference like this could help bring down the heat and the intensity of the debate. What we're looking for is to bring nuance and bring some facts and ration at into this debate, a lot of people I've talked to in the wake of SB 1070 have been concerned they think they know what's going on, or they're not sure they know what's going on, and we're hoping an immigration conference like this can help to inform those people out there who realize how important of an issue immigration is, but maybe don't know exactly all of the facts and all of the important and difficult arguments that can be made about this issue.

Ted Simons:
And yet, you know, we tried every night on this show, and you're trying with this conference to get to kind of a -- an academic sort of an approach, an objective look at a very controversial issue. Can you do that with something that if someone doesn't agree with a policy, it's almost as if there's nothing you can say. No numbers you can show them. On either side, to convince them that the policy needs to be looked at.

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
I really hope that that isn't the case. One of my colleagues describes sort of intellectual endeavors like work can out at the gym. It's painful and it takes a lot of effort. And people like to try to avoid doing it. But once you do it, it's better for you and it becomes easier. So the more debates like this we have, and the more rationale nuance discourse we V. the more we would expect to see that spreading in the public.

Ted Simons:
You mentioned one professor, anyone else we should know?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
We have a number of great people coming. Justice O'Connor will be giving the welcome address. We have Judith Resnick, a lot of really impressive people.

Ted Simons:
OK. Public can register to attend?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
That's right on our web site, immigration.law.ASU.EDU.

Ted Simons:
And apparently attorneys, you want to make sure attorneys know credit can be applied?

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
They can get up to four credits.

Ted Simons:
Very good. Good luck on this, because it's such a contentious issue. And it would be nice to have folks sit down, just to act civil and try to figure out a solution. At least get close to a solution.

Carissa Byrne Hessick:
I agree. Thank you very much.

Pinal County Deputy Shooting

  |   Video
  • One week after Senate Bill 1070 was signed into law, a Pinal County sheriff’s deputy was shot while on patrol in the desert. He was shot, allegedly, by drug smugglers. However, questions have been raised about the validity of the shooting. Paul Rubin of the Phoenix New Times explains the latest developments in this story.
Guests:
  • Paul Rubin - Phoenix New Times
Category: Immigration

View Transcript
Ted Simons:
Just one week after SB 1070 was signed into law, a Pinal county sheriff's deputy was shot while on patrol in the desert. He was shot, allegedly, by drug smugglers. Almost immediately, questions were raised about the validity of the shooting. The Phoenix new times has been following the story closely. Here to talk about the shooting of deputy PUROLL is new times reporter Paul Rubin, who has been doing the story on this and doing great work. Who is Louie PUROLL?

Paul Rubin:
He's a veteran range deputy from Pinal county who has the task for many years of really patrolling this wide mountainous desert terrain, about 50 miles from where we're sitting right here in downtown Phoenix out in the valley in Pinal county.

Ted Simons:
What did he say happened in that part of the desert?

Paul Rubin:
He said that on the afternoon of April 30th, he was just out there, kind of by himself, with no bulletproof vest on, no police radio, some other stuff that came into question later on, and he happened to see five or six guys walking up a trail that's used quite often for human smuggling and also drug smuggling to some degree, and he said that they were carrying large backpacks that he thought were full of marijuana, didn't see any weapons, followed them for a couple miles, walked over a ridge after they disappeared, and then by his account was shot by an AK 47 bearing individual who wounded him, grazed him in the left flank.

Ted Simons:
So he's trailing a group, he loses them, he finds them, they shoot him. AK 47, direct -- he said it was straight in front of him?

Paul Rubin:
That's what he said, in front of him. It was actually turned out it was 14 feet -- 10-14 feet below him, which is a crucial part in the whole account.

Ted Simons:
OK. Then what happens as far as trying to find these bad guys? What was the response?

Paul Rubin:
He retreats, there's a huge law enforcement response as there would be, 200 people by 14 different agencies, rush out to the desert. You can't rush way out to where they were, because it's mountainous terrain. Four-wheel drive country, and walking up hills. They go to I-8 between Gila Bend and Casa Grande. And there's a huge law enforcement response, they start going into the desert, four helicopters are deployed, they eventually find the deputy after an hour and take him to safety. The hunt, the manhunt continues until dark that night. The smugglers were never found, the five or six smugglers were never found, nor was the dope.

Ted Simons:
You're talking five or six smugglers carrying heavy backpacks, AK 47s,.

Paul Rubin:
Some of them, yeah.

Ted Simons:
And they manage to elude this massive manhunt. Among the questions -- let's get to it, why are folks -- you investigated this, a lot of folks are questioning the story. Why?

Paul Rubin:
Well, from the get-go, I wasn't at all suspicious. I was driving back up from Cochise county, where I was meeting with Sue Krentz, the widow of rob Krentz, who just got hit by a car, tragically, and she's doing OK from what I've heard. But I was driving up and heard it on I-10 about this deputy getting shot out in the desert, and I said, that's terrible. In the days that followed, I'm kind of known, I've been here a long time, 25 years, and I've become known for better or worse as a real pro-cop reporter. I usually -- my bias tends to be to trust the cops until proven otherwise. I started getting calls from my law enforcement sources who said, take a look at this. This thing didn't look right on several accounts to them. So very, very slowly, over four or five months, no rush to judgment whatsoever, I started coming to the conclusion that his story didn't pass muster.

Ted Simons:
In your story, you've got a retired homicide sergeant, not buying it, a forensic psychiatrist not buying it, former medical examiners, not buying it. What aren't they buying?

Paul Rubin:
Different things. From the Dr. Steven Pitt, the forensic psychiatrist, didn't buy it -- some of the behavioral pieces, how the deputy acted afterwards, just typical shrink stuff. But it's been -- came up with some plausible theories about why he might have done it. I didn't go there in my story. This story very important to deal just with facts. I can't get into his mind to know what happened. Two of the forensic pathologists, ESTEEMED gentlemen, both concluded that the gunshot wound was contact wound or near contact wound, which really goes against what the deputy is saying was a 35, 40 yards away, maybe less than that. I tried to give deputy PUROLL every benefit of the doubt because of the adrenaline rush, he's under the fog of war thing, all that stuff. Very, very slowly does it add up to a story that just doesn't make it.

Ted Simons:
Response from the Pinal county sheriff's office?

Paul Rubin:
Sheriff Babeu -- I want to make this point that that whole agency was about the most open and transparent agency I've dealt with in a very high-profile case ever. Their P.I.O., the sergeant, the sheriff himself, I actually enjoyed our interactions, and we're still talking. Even though we're on different sides of the conclusion here. These guys really at least sheriff Babeu gives a strong impression that he truly believes his deputy. And as a byproduct of this whole thing, not to be too cynical, but the sheriff was propelled to national prominence as a result of this incident. No matter what happened out there.

Ted Simons:
I was going to say, your story, the first quote in your story is from a sergeant, it's not about illegal immigration. But almost everything about this story has -- touches of illegal immigration in the sense of how it plays in the public.

Paul Rubin:
The sheriff has milked this thing hard. He's been on fox news talking about, this was the Mexican cartel that gunned down his deputy. However, the deputy himself in his interview with his own agency, wasn't really an interview, more of a monologue. He spoke for 29 straight minutes without a follow-up question. A very dramatic rendition of his -- the K he himself said he wasn't sure if they were Mexicans. He said they could have been Native Americans. He just -- big strong guys, he just wasn't sure. He said they weren't -- didn't look like typical undocumented aliens. It's curious, it's all over the blogs that these guys for sure, if there were these guys, which they disappeared into thin air, these guys were UDAs.

Ted Simons:
Where do we go from sneer a T-shirt is part of it, but how much a factor --

Paul Rubin: it's a piece of the puzzle. It's not --

Ted Simons:
PUROLL's T-shirt.

Paul Rubin:
His bloody T-shirt the county chose not to send in for analysis after the shooting. There's an explanation in the story, some of them are plausible, some are head-scratching. But basically they sent the T-shirt finally as a result of the firestorm caused by the story, they've sent it to DPS to check it out. Now, Ted, it's just one piece of a total bunch of circumstances that led me to conclude that his story, the probability of his story being accurate is very slim. So it's not -- but once again, this is not a reopened case. All the headlines, including my own paper, case reopened, reopened case is you look at every suspect. They're sending a T-shirt in that will tell something. But not everything.

Ted Simons:
So basically, this could end whenever the Pinal county sheriff's office decides it's going to end.

Paul Rubin:
They've decided. They're kind of -- they said last night, it's a closed case. Which, wait, we have -- by their account, the shooting of a deputy, a would-be murder of a sheriff's deputy. The case is never closed. The case should never be closed. But for their -- right from the get-go, I think there was a rush to judgment by them to really get this case behind them and get that deputy back on the road and they believed everything he said right from the get-go.

Ted Simons:
And the fact that it puts illegal immigration, puts that sheriff's department in the spotlight didn't hurt matters.

Paul Rubin:
That sheriff, actually. There's nothing wrong with being ambitious, and there's nothing wrong with coming up with a point of view that you feel strongly about. And I like that view. I've had coffee with him, he's a decent guy to talk to. However, in this one, he's got blinders on. Big-time.

Ted Simons: All right. Great work. Thanks for joining us.

Paul Rubin:
Thanks, Ted. See you.

University of Arizona President

  |   Video
  • University of Arizona President Robert Shelton talks about the university and the state of higher education in our state.
Guests:
  • Robert Shelton - President, University of Arizona
Category: Education

View Transcript
Ted Simons:
The University of Arizona has 38,000 students pumps $2 billion a year into the state's economy. Here to talk about the challenges and opportunities facing the U of A and all three of the state's universities is University of Arizona president, Robert Shelton. Good to see you again. Thank for joining us.

Robert Shelton:
thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Ted Simons:
You guys are expanding into Phoenix. What's going on?

Robert Shelton:
It's a very exciting time. We have the Phoenix biomedical campus that brings our college of medicine, college of pharmacy, college of public health, and of course we're working closely with ASU, they have a fantastic college of nursing, and NAU already bringing down their health affairs programs to downtown Phoenix.

Ted Simons:
Continuing cooperation, this is going forward, not stalling anywhere too much?

Robert Shelton:
We are moving forward now in spite of all the budget constraints. Pretty soon you're going to see a big hole in the ground for the health sciences education building. That's going up. We're working now to bring a branch of the really world renowned Arizona cancer center to that biomedical campus. So we do have challenges, we're looking for donations. But medicine is important, it is going to be the financial, economic driver for Maricopa County in the future.

Ted Simons:
And I want to you talk more about the valley of the University research. We had Claudia Dreyfuss on the program, we talked about her book, which was cowritten, subtitled, "how colleges are wasting our money and failing our kids." Are colleges wasting our money and failing our kids? Is in a valid any that?

Robert Shelton:
As you can imagine, I have a very different point of view. I can't speak for all colleges, but I can certainly speak for the University of Arizona, where we turn out degrees, high-quality degrees, very efficiently. The research programs that we have in place, you mentioned the numbers, but in addition to the numbers,R are very much oriented to the needs of the people of Arizona. It goes hat in hand with the land grant tradition. So when we're working on issues like health, hydrology, all of those are important to the state of Arizona.

Ted Simons:
And yet she criticizes Universities in general saying that research especially hurts the primary mission of a University of a college, which is to teach undergrads. Talk about that idea.

Robert Shelton:
Well, I think there's where the dispute is. There are some great colleges in this country that do focus solely on undergraduate education. That's an option many people choose to take. For a research University, University of Arizona, member of the AAU, public and private, we have more than that one dimensional mission. In fact, we engage undergraduates in the act of discovery. Two-thirds of our students is undergrad was engage in some kind of internship, some kind of research, it might be in a lab, in a dig in the summer, and we have to realize, this is part and parcel of what we've always done. Back when we were focus order ago and mining, students would get out and do those internships in the field. So this is very much a part of the learning, the education process, students try these professions on for size, they decide where to go and they're learning outside of the classroom. That's available to them because of the $600 million a year that the University of Arizona faculty attract to the state of Arizona.

Ted Simons:
And yet she will say that's all fine and dandy, I think she would agree with you on that. But she would say, do we need another one or 2,000 papers this year looking into the historical context of William Faulkner?

Robert Shelton:
It's interesting, I am of the golden fleece era, and a lot of those awards went on for programs that have had great impact on society. For example, the laser. Who would have known what the laser was going to do when it came out it was used to pop red balloons situated inside of clear balloons. Now it's everywhere. What about issues in biomedical? Do we want people in Arizona to be the early beneficiaries of these research discoveries, or do we want them going somewhere else? You can always make an argument based on one anecdote here or there, but overwhelmingly I think people would have to agree that a research University puts back into the community a lot more than it takes out.

Ted Simons:
Very quickly, a criticism in this book and Goldwater institute put out this criticism, too much administrative bloat. I know you can't wait to get that the one.

Robert Shelton:
I hear from my faculty about the bloated administration. The goldwater institute decided what conclusion they wanted to draw, and they doctored the data. What they did was, they put everybody into the administrative bin, that wasn't teaching a class. So, for example, our research programs, our post-Docs, graduate students, teaching assistance, doing their own research, they were count as administrators. So what we're being is penalized for growing research, growing our ago extension programs, etc., those people would all be counted as administrators.

Ted Simons:
OK. I gotta keep things moving. Aims scholarships for Arizona students. Those are things that will be cut. What are your thoughts there?

Robert Shelton:
I think it was a step that was necessary. And the important point to remember here, and I appreciate getting this out to your viewers, the important point is, we will, as our sister institution, we'll continue to put all of those dollars into financial aid. It's just that we will now be able to gear the merit and the need-based aid according to merit and need, and not be confined by a test that really was sophomore level high school work.

Ted Simons:
And yet the school's chief, Tom horn S. baste saying this is a great motivational tool, that students in the Universities that are there with aims scholarships have better GPAs than those who aren't there. I don't know about those numbers, but the idea of a motivational tool, certainly there.

Robert Shelton:
I think we can still have motivational tools. When we tell people about our Arizona assurance program, when we tell people about merit-based scholarships. The motivational tools will be there, and they'll be better matched to those students that really merit significant cash and those students that have need for that cash as well.

Ted Simons:
A couple of state lawmakers, Pearce says universities have more to give as far as budget cuts are concerned, Kavanaugh says likely to see more cuts to universities than to K-12. How much more can higher education be cut?

Robert Shelton:
It depends on what kind of higher education you want in the state of Arizona. If, like me, if like the voters who passed prop 100, basically a 2-1 ratio, feel education is part of the future of this state, then I think you have to be very cautious about further deep cuts. We've lost $100 million from 440 to 340, that's a huge percentage cut. When John Kavanagh, whom I respect, when he says it's been a 5% cut in the last couple years, that's just a bogus number. He's using the tuition dollars that we remit to the state, they turn around and give us, he's using that as part of the calculation. I don't think that's the way the families who are paying this tuition would calculate state support to higher education.

Ted Simons:
So how do you -- I'm a lawmaker. How do you convince me that a state, when which the budget is going to go crazy in the next couple years, how do you -- tell me that we need to keep higher education where it is if not let it grow?

Robert Shelton:
What I've said all along is, we understand that the state has these severe budget problems. We as an institution are prepared to do our work to do our share, and we have been. We have cut 20% out of our budget. We have dealt with that by making hard choices. I think the legislature needs to make hard choices that include considering revenue generation. Look at prop 100. The voters understand that, yes, we have to make cuts. But you can't cut your way fully to a solution. There have to be other components.

Ted Simons:
Do you think, though, bottom level here, is there political will to push higher education in Arizona? Are we there yet?

Robert Shelton:
This is a really key question. And I think the disheartening factor to me isn't that we have a tough budget. Many states have tough budgets. It's where we're setting our priorities. And we're not preparing ourselves to come out of this for an educated population that's going to have high-paying jobs, that's going to pump money into the economy. We cannot go back to a situation where we're content with just high school educated folks in Arizona.

Ted Simons:
All right. President Shelton, good to see you. Thanks for joining us.

Robert Shelton:
Thank you.

Content Partner: