Other transcripts

Transcripts

December 22, 2004

Host: Michael Grant
Topics:
· Proposition 200;
· Polly Rosenbaum
In-Studio Guests:
· Kathy McKee, founder, Protect Arizona Now

Michael Grant:
Tonight on "Horizon", voters approved proposition 200 in November but a restraining order kept the initiative from becoming law. Now, A ruling by a federal judge in Tucson allows that ballot measure to go into effect. We'll have reaction from the attorney who argued the case on behalf of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund and the founder of the group who got the initiative on the ballot. Next week marks the one-year anniversary of the death Polly Rosenbaum, one of the most beloved and respected lawmakers in Arizona history. We'll look back at her many contributions.

>> Underwriter:
"Horizon" is made possible by the friends of Channel 8, members who provide financial support to this Arizona PBS station. Thank you.

>> Michael Grant:
Good evening. Welcome to "Horizon". I'm Michael Grant. A federal judge this afternoon in Tucson ended a restraining order preventing proposition 200 from becoming law. In a moment I'll talk to Le Templar of the East Valley Tribune about the judge's decision. Then we'll hear from Daniel Ortega, the attorney from the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. And I'll also talk to Kathy McKee of Protect Arizona Now, the group that came up with the idea of proposition 200. Covering today's hearing was Lee Templar from the East Valley Tribune. He joins us by phone. Lee, thank you very much for taking the time to join us.

>> Le Templar:
Good evening, Michael.

>> Michael Grant:
Why don't we start with the basics, what did the judge rule today?

>> Le Templar:
Judge Bury said after hearing about 90 minutes of arguments from the parties he doesn't believe that opponents of proposition 200 can prove it violates federal immigration law, welfare reform or the U.S. constitution. He felt there was no reason to keep the restraining order in place or to issue a preliminary injunction. The net effect of it is it allows the law to go into effect. And Governor Napolitano issued an executive order a short while later directing agencies to follow the law.

>> Michael Grant:
Lee, obviously both sides had briefed this issue over the past three or four weeks. Today's hearing was basically legal argument on the arguments that had been presented in writing? In other words, there was no testimony?

>> Le Templar:
That's correct. In fact, it was pretty clear both from the judge's questioning of the plaintiffs who were challenging the law and the fact that he issued a 28 page detailed opinion only a short while later. He pretty much made up his mind about the issue but he gave the lawyers for the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund one more chance to make their case, to explain why they thought Congress's actions precluded Arizona for adopting a law like this. He says in his opinion that Congress intended for states to be able to determine eligibility for welfare benefits and encourages them to communicate about when they come in contact with people who might be here illegally. Contrary to some positions we have heard on the immigration policy in the past.

>> Michael Grant:
Lee, essentially that was in response to the argument that opponents of proposition 200 had made that well, hold it, you're basically making little tiny federal immigration deputies of state workers who have to process these benefits and that, in the opinion of opponents of proposition 200, was wrong. The judge obviously saying no, that's not the case.

>> Le Templar:
He points out in his opinion that law passed by Congress in '96 that took an overhaul of welfare and banned illegal immigrants to receive most forms of benefits. It encourages government agencies to report a minimum four times a year if they have come in contact with illegal immigrants. He says that is a clear sign that Congress intended local and state governments to share the information with the federal government when they come across it. Proposition 200 goes quite a bit further than encouraging communication, it makes it a class 2 misdemeanor if a government employee does not report an illegal immigrant or somebody they suspect being an illegal immigrant or somebody breaking immigrant law if they apply for these welfare benefits.

>> Michael Grant:
What did MALDEF indicate they were going to do in reaction to the ruling? Are they going to take it to the 9th circuit?

>> Le Templar:
They said they would appeal immediately to the 9th circuit asking for a stay of the judge's order. They think he is misinterpreting Congress's actions. They hoped they could act quickly enough to prevent, even though the law is in effect, to get a hearing before the 9th circuit panel of judges before the state starts enforcing the law. They didn't know is the Department of Economic Security, which will be enforcing the provisions against some welfare programs, has been training its employees to deal with the law. And they expect to start enforcing it tomorrow.

>> Michael Grant:
Essentially that amounts to does much of that falls on the Department of Economic Security? The DES is the one that really superintends the qualification process for those benefits that are at issue here, right?

>> Le Templar:
Right. Because of the opinion that state attorney general Terry Goddard issued about a month ago or 45 days ago, right now, 200 only affects four programs administered by DES, out of 49 or 50 programs found in the section of the law where proposition 200 was inserted. The biggest of those four programs would be just general cash assistance to the poor, which is a $4.2 million program. Really a tiny slice of the number of public benefits that the proponents of proposition 200 wanted to go after and are now in state court claiming that a judge could rule that the law has a much broader definition than Terry Goddard says it does.

>> Michael Grant:
Meantime, Lee, unaffected by the suit is the fact that the justice department has to take a look at the election aspects and the attorney general started that process a couple of weeks ago?

>> Le Templar:
Right. As a reminder, Proposition 200 also requires proof of citizenship before anybody can be registered to vote or who isn't already registered to vote, and any time you cast a ballot in person at the polls you would have to show some form of photo identification. Arizona is covered by the 1965 federal voting rights act, any time we change election law, before that change can go into effect, we have to send that proposed change to the justice department for review to see if it complies with the federal civil rights act. As soon as the judge said it was okay to do that, the Attorney General's office sent that information on, I think the date was December 10. The Justice Department has 60 days unless they have any questions, which could extend the process out a little bit further.

>> Michael Grant:
Le Templar, of East Valley Tribune, we appreciate very much your participation this evening, and a merry Christmas to you.

>> Le Templar:
Happy New Year to yours as well, Michael.

>> Michael Grant:
The ruling, of course, coming as a disappointment to opponents of Proposition 200, the Mexican American legal defense and education fund, or MALFDEF, was granted the temporary restraining order November 30. Sal Quijada of KGUN-9 News in Tucson talking to Daniel Ortega of MALDEF about the ruling.

>> Sal Quijada:
Daniel Ortega, Jr. is the lead attorney for MALDEF. Thank you for being with us. First of all, your reaction to the judge's decision, is this the end of the war or the battle that's been lost?

>> Daniel Ortega:
First of all, I'm disappointed with the judge's decision. We had hoped he would deal with it differently based upon our arguments. He didn't. We intend to appeal this decision immediately to the 9th circuit court of appeals with the hope they will reverse the decision. Clearly the disappointment is not just from a personal standpoint but standpoints that other chaos could potentially erupt over what public benefits are affected. It is our hope that the judge's decision was based upon the attorney general's interpretation of this. If that's what he relied on and felt that it was so limited in application which is why he wouldn't grant us preliminary injunction we hope that he will say that in his opinion. If that's the case, the kind of chaos we expect will not occur. Let me explain that. Depending on what the judge says about why he denied the preliminary injunction, if he does not say anything about the attorney general's opinion which limits its application, you could literally have every city, every junior college system, every governmental entity that's not the state say we disagree with the attorney general. One of the things that we said, until there's a definite interpretation of Prop 200, which we don't have and is ruled as not the basis for our request for preliminary injunction, you need to enjoin it. He didn't feel it was necessary. Hopefully, everybody will agree with the attorney general's opinion, that it has limited application to title 46, which is welfare benefits. If that's the case, there are, in essence, four programs affected, the general assistance project, the conservation project, the utility payments, utility deposits. Which is very limited, quite frankly. If everybody agrees with that, all cities, all towns, all counties, all junior college systems agree with the attorney general, then the situation will be at best. If people start disagreeing, assuming that the judge does not say something in his order with regard to why he denied the preliminary injunction, chaos could break loose.

>> Sal Quijada:
We really are talking about an experiment of sorts because proposition 200 doesn't really have any facts or findings behind it, it's really based on beliefs that taxpayers are paying millions of dollars that shouldn't be paid.

>> Daniel Ortega:
Yeah. It has been our position that numbers and reasons that were given by the proponents of proposition 200 were never validated and in some cases absolutely false. At this point, we have Prop 200. The people have passed it. The judge decided not to grant a preliminary injunction and it's going to go into full force and effect. We hope to overcome this one battle. We will still have our day in court to continue to litigate this and the potential for having the court of appeals reverse the denial of the grant of the preliminary injunction.

>> Sal Quijada:
You're going to ask the 9th Circuit to reverse this judge's opinion and stop 200 from being implemented?

>>Daniel Ortega:
Exactly.

>> Sal Quijada:
Thank you very much for being with us. We appreciate you taking time to talk to us.

>> Sal Quijada:
Thank you very much.

>> Michael Grant:
Proposition 200 passed by Arizonans with 56% of the votes cast last month. The initiative of course put on the ballot by Protect Arizona Now, its founder Kathy McKee joins me to talk about the ruling. I would assume that you're pretty pleased with what happened in Tucson today.

>> Kathy McKee:
Ecstatic is the word.

>> Michael Grant:
You were there and we appreciate you driving back on Interstate 10 to Phoenix to join us here. We trust you did not violate the 75-mile-per-hour speed zone in doing that.

>> Kathy McKee:
No.

>> Michael Grant:
Give me your impressions of what went on in court.

>> Kathy McKee:
Actually what the judge ruled was that the plaintiffs failed to meet the standards that are necessary to grant a preliminary injunction, they did not demonstrate that they had likelihood of succeeding on the merits. And certainly did not demonstrate that they would suffer irreparable harm. He really didn't have a legal basis and we felt very strongly that he wouldn't have a legal basis to grant them a preliminary injunction. It's kind of merry Christmas to the 56% of Arizonans that voted for this.

>> Michael Grant:
Le said the judge issued shortly after the end a multi page opinion, which seems to indicate that the judge had made his mind up based upon the writings over the last couple of weeks. You were indicating there was a fair amount of paperwork provided to the judge prior to today's hearing.

>> Kathy McKee:
Yes, there was. The Washington legal foundation submitted a brilliant amicus curiae brief, on our behalf, on Protect Arizona Now's behalf, and the attorney general, our attorney and another attorney all in court quoted from it. I think that really did lay out that the plaintiffs didn't meet any of the standards that are necessary for preliminary injunction and are very unlikely to succeed on the merits. In fact, our attorney in Tucson that was in court today and another out of state attorney that I called afterwards, they said this an unappealable order as an interim order, so I'm not sure they can appeal to the 9th circuit.

>> Michael Grant:
They seem to be indicating at least for the time being they did not feel MALDEF could not get up to the 9th circuit --

>> Kathy McKee:
Right.

>> Michael Grant:
-- to appeal the ruling handed down today.

>> Kathy McKee:
Right. And that proposition 200 would make history tomorrow being enforced in Arizona.

>> Michael Grant:
As you know, one of MALDEF's main arguments was not so much the immediate impacts of Proposition 200, but the fact that it could make people concerned about applying for benefits who were otherwise eligible for benefits. I mean, in other words, you can be legally in this country, but you are concerned that you would be somehow harassed or otherwise denied the benefits simply because of the color of your skin. Did that come up? Did that argument come up today?

>> Kathy McKee:
It did. And I think the attorneys that addressed it addressed it well. They have the fears, based on speculation and hypotheses is not a violation of constitutional rights; that we weren't changing anybody's eligibility, Prop 200 wasn't changing anybody's eligibility, it was just asking people to prove it. Really the fear people have, 14 of the 18 plaintiffs in this suit, were illegal aliens and the fear they have is based on apprehension of being caught by, for being illegal aliens, not because they are apply for benefits they know are entitled to and that really they're not entitled to benefits that aren't federally mandated.

>> Michael Grant:
The governor immediately indicated that proposition 200 would start being enforced tomorrow. Are you confident and secure that it will be enforced? You have expressed some concerns about whether it would be in the past. Are those concerns behind you or not?

>> Kathy McKee:
Talking to our attorneys today, because we're very concerned about the fact that only five areas of programs are covered and we are confident that there are far more, that DES was just counting on if they were getting federal funding that it would be considered a federal benefit, which we disagree with very vehemently. If it's offered under title 46 and administered through a state agency and it's not federally mandated, that we think it was included in Prop 200. This is a great start and I think the voters expect no less than to the law enforced and to have it enforced timely. So tomorrow is not too soon to see this.

>> Michael Grant:
Kathy McKee of Protect Arizona Now, appreciate you joining us. And happy holidays to you.

>> Kathy McKee:
Thank you. Merry Christmas.

>> Michael Grant:
She was an institution at the state's capitol. Polly Rosenbaum, served longer than any other state lawmaker, about 45 years. Next week is going to mark the one-year anniversary of her death at the age of 104. Elected to the legislature, a record 22 times. She lost for the first and last time in 1994. Shortly thereafter, "Horizon" producer David Majure and photographer Richard Torruellas profiled the contributions of the legendary lawmaker.

>> David Majure:
January 9, 1995, as she has done countless times before, Polly Rosenbaum reconvened the Arizona legislature with a bang of her gavel. For the first time, in 45 years, she is not a member of Arizona's legislative body. Only a few days earlier, Polly sorted through years of accumulated documents in her third floor office at the Arizona House of Representatives.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
This goes way back. When you were first going to putting grand jury, '78, and '79. I think grand jury's all taken care of, I don't need that anymore.

>> David Majure:
This was a time to reflect on a legislative career that has spanned decades and touched thousands of lives. A career that began when lawmakers didn't have offices to clean. They didn't have offices, period.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
I want you to know this is like it was.

>> David Majure:
All of the work was done here on the floor of the House, a place that's now a museum. It's been over 30 years since Polly worked at this desk, but it seems like only yesterday.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
Things have changed. Would you say they were better back then? They were better and they were worse. You did your own work, you didn't have anybody to help you much on things. But lots of history has taken place in this room. This was the all night filibuster. This is where the constitutional convention was held. The ghosts of the past are round every place. Lots of memories here.

>> David Majure:
Polly became a legislator in 1949. That's the year her husband died and she was appointed to complete his term.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
It was difficult. It was very difficult for me, after my husband died, to come in and take over his place.

>> David Majure:
Perhaps her greatest difficulty was relating to men who weren't used to working with a woman.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
Some of them wanted to be helpful and some really wanted to do you in if they could. You had to be a legislator and not just a woman if you wanted to get things through. Understand what I mean?

>> David Majure:
I'm not sure.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
You had to be smart enough to know what you wanted and could back it all the way instead of saying, we need this and we need that, you had to know why and you had to back up everything.

>> David Majure:
It didn't take long for this former teacher to prove herself in the legislative arena. When she looks back to the early days, it's mostly fond memories that surface.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
There was camaraderie and friendships were made for life in those days.

>> Betty Rockwell:
She was the most respected person both in the House and the Senate. And everybody, every freshman that came in, oh, first person they wanted to meet, want to meet Polly Rosenbaum, she is such an institution.

>> David Majure:
Polly has seen a dozen governor's come and go. Those who are still living joined 90 lawmakers to make a quilt they presented to Polly in 1992 when she was awarded the first Arizona Spirit Arizona Pride award.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
When it was unveiled, I couldn't believe it. I just couldn't believe it.

>> David Majure:
10 years earlier the legislature honored Polly with a resolution, the first lady of the Arizona House of Representatives.

>> Art Hamilton:
It fit her then, it fits her today, it will fit her 50 years from now. She has given of herself in a way that no one would have a chance to equal. She will never have a peer in terms of service or commitment to the state or House of Representatives. She is the first lady of the Arizona house, always will be.

>> Henry Evans:
When she says something, it's worthwhile to listen to. There was no rhetoric; there was no partisanship. There was no, if you will, innuendo's or -- it was straightforward, it was to the point of what she was wanting to get done. And so out of, I think that's what gained her the respect. Plus the fact that she had this enormous knowledge of what had gone on before us.

>> David Majure:
Polly remembers things few others do, like why certain committee meetings lasted unusually late into the night.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
We had quite a little bit of gambling going on there at night. There was one of those panels in the ceiling and they hid the poker chips, all the paraphernalia up there.

>> David Majure:
As a representative from Globe in the heart of Arizona mining country, Polly has seen it all.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
You name it and somebody has called me about it.

>> David Majure:
Polly works hard as a lawmaker and expects others to do the same. When it comes to legislative decorum, Polly wrote the book.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
It is very important. I feel so strongly that we have a government of the people. And it should be respected and you should do things properly. And there are maybe a lot of people think it's not quite necessary to say Mr. Speaker and would the lady from so-and-so yield to a question, instead of saying hey, how about this. I think in everything, I think in church, in school, in legislation, you do need dignity and decorum. Have a respect for the process.

>> David Majure:
Polly has brought a great deal of respect to the legislative process and the energy she displays while representing her district is beyond that of any mere mortal.

>> Art Hamilton:
I say get behind Polly Rosenbaum on any day try to follow to her down the hall, try to follow her down the steps, to committee and out of committee, the woman is a bundle of energy. I don't know what it's from, I don't know what kind of elixir that she has in the morning with her cereal, but whatever it is we ought to bottle it and sell it to the world.

>> Henry Evans:
I think her vitality and youthfulness is borne out by the fact that she is constantly striving forward for young people. And doing things for young people and staying young that way.

>> Arlene Bansal:
In the 1980s, she and Senator Denny who really saved the rural county libraries. They would have gone under had they not been able to have passed the secondary special district tax.

>> David Majure:
Polly believes every child should have access to a library, as well as access to Arizona's heritage. That's why she is such an advocate of historic preservation. She helped save the Carniege library from demolition. She found a home for the office of tourism in the old Evans house. Thanks to Polly, thousands of school kids visit the Shriner's auditorium each year.

>> Arlene Bansal:
The old building that was the old mining museum was going to be torn down, was to be razed, she saved that, and now we all value the beauty of these buildings.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
You would be amazed at the thousands of school kids who go through there. They are very well-behaved because they are interested.

>> Polly Rosenbaum :
Nice to see you.

>> David Majure:
Polly Rosenbaum is leaving the legislature after 45 years.

>> Polly Rosenbaum:
It's sad in a way. Who was it? Alexander the Great said, he regretted there were no more worlds to conquer, but there are plenty to conquer now.

>> David Majure:
As she moves ahead, one thing is certain, Polly will be missed. Perhaps Jo Ann Selby, Polly's secretary of 18 years, says it best.

>> Jo Ann Selby:
She made her mark in Arizona, in the nation, really, and people aren't going to forget her. She is always going to be Polly Rosenbaum, state legislator.

>> Mike Sauceda:
Arizona's the only state that has ever had three women governors. They got together recently in an historic gathering at the Wrigley mansion in Phoenix. Join us as we take you to that historic event where our three female governors talk about their lives and their time as governor. Arizona's Capitol Women Thursday at 7 on "Horizon".

>> Michael Grant:
"Horizon" is off Friday, Christmas Eve but returns next week with a couple of holiday traditions. The year-end show with editorial cartoonist taking a look and jab at news and stories. That's Monday on "Horizon". Then next Thursday annual journalists year-end prediction show, Howie Fisher, Mark Flatten, Doug MacEachern make incredibly inaccurate predictions about next year's top news stories. Thank you very much for joining us this evening on "Horizon". Have a happy holiday season. I'm Michael Grant. Good night.

Back to the top