IBJNews

GOP senators leery of Indiana immigration crackdown

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A bill aimed at having an Arizona-style crackdown on illegal immigration in Indiana is on its way to the state Senate, but some Republican senators expressed concerns Thursday about the ramifications for law enforcement and taxpayers.

Republican Sen. Tom Wyss of Fort Wayne joined the Senate Appropriations Committee's four Democrats in voting against the bill, saying he believed the federal government should deal with immigration matters and that such a state law could lead to other problems.

"We're going to have some law officers overstep their authority," Wyss said. "We're going to have people doing things that are going to cause us trouble in a legal manner."

The proposal underwent some changes before the committee advanced it on an 8-5 vote.

Amendments included a change to require officers enforcing employment laws to have probable cause to ask for proof of a person's immigration status. Police officers stopping someone for other offenses can ask for such proof under the lower legal standard of reasonable suspicion.

The committee also deleted a provision calling for the Office of Management and Budget to calculate the costs of illegal immigration to the state and seek reimbursement from Congress.

Republican Sen. Ed Charbonneau of Valparaiso called the changes "lipstick, rouge, eyeliner and fake eyelashes on an ugly bill" and said he only voted to pass it out of the committee because the issue was important enough to be debated by the full Senate.

"I'm concerned about the message that we're delivering that maybe Indiana isn't the welcoming, inviting, inclusive state that many people thought that we were," Charbonneau said. "I think ultimately something like this bill would have a major negative impact on our economic development as we continue to move Indiana toward being a global state."

Republicans hold a 37-13 majority in the Senate, so more than one-third of the Republicans would need to join all Democrats in order to defeat the bill. Gov. Mitch Daniels has declined to take a public stance on the proposal, which also calls for most government documents and hearings to be made available only in English and sets up tax penalties for businesses repeatedly caught hiring illegal immigrants.

Sen. Brent Waltz, R-Greenwood, told the committee that hundreds of millions of dollars from Indiana taxpayers is spent a year dealing with illegal immigrants and that the bill would send the message "that we are state and nation of laws."

"Individuals or corporations that choose to break the law suffer consequences and are punished accordingly," Waltz said.

Sen. John Broden, D-South Bend, raised concerns that cash-strapped local police departments would bear the brunt of the costs for arresting and detaining possible illegal immigrants. Sen. Earline Rogers, D-Gary, said that as the only minority on the committee she was sensitive to racial profiling and that blacks are stopped more often than whites for traffic violations.

"Hopefully along the line more reasonable heads will prevail and we will realize this is something the state of Indiana does not need to have to do at this time," Rogers said.

Bill sponsor Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, said he was confident it would win approval from the full Senate.

"We tried to put together a product that is tough but fair so I understand how senators can struggle with searching to find what is the right thing to do," Delph said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • jeffpublic
    What you fail to understand is one of the reasons the economy is so bad and there aren't jobs for LEGAL AMERICANS is that employers can hire "illegal aliens" for a fraction of what you will work for so IT IS ABOUT JOBS!!
  • Ilegal is Ilegal
    Our state budget would greatly benefit the removal of all illegal immigrants from our great state. The health care system, education system, social services, judicial system, and employment of legal Hoosiers is negatively impacted by their presence. I'm tired of our legal system making excuses for not doing their jobs and still expecting their pay from the legal taxpayers of this great state. If our government doesn't want to do their job I'm sure we can find capable replacements.
  • History is repeating itself
    In 1933, Adolph Hitler became Chancellor of Germany, and with that event began the persecution of Jews in that country. Germany was in the serious depression, with unemployment at an all-time high. Hitler convinced the German people that the Jews were at the root of all their problems. Illegals are not the problem, nor will this fix the problem with American, it will destory us.
  • Witch Hunt
    I absolutely agree! I am Replublican and this is a ridiculous Bill that will do so much damage to our state, and even more damage to hard working individual's that just want a better life.
  • The Real Problem
    The real problem is not the illegals whom want to work, it is the Americans that do not! Goodluck, to you and yours.
  • Illegal is Illegal
    Illegal is Illegal
    Joyce HaleFebruary 18, 2011 4:04 PM
    Since when do we enforce our laws based on the impact on our economy? All are welcome to enter our wonderful country legally. I believe we are only asking for the demise of our legal system when we pick and choose to optionally enforce our laws.


    So Agreed,The City of Bloomington Indiana incitement for Boycott of Arizona 5-17-2010 Declaration letter, is Direct Constitution Contempt! it is out of line! End of Story!

    Itâ??s time to Vote out or sue out City of Bloomingtonâ??s common defense Leadership for the unconstitutional incitement of Boycott of Arizona 5-17-2010 Declaration letter, itâ??s Direct Constitution Contempt!
    Book by John R. Schmidhauser. Constitutional Law in American politics. Chapter five page 122 {Gibbons V. Ogden}, 9 Wheaton 1 (1824). Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall. The Court so upheld, Only Congress can regulate Inter States Commerce!
    I sigh the Gibbons v. Ogden 9 Wheaton 1 1824 case, It has been said that they were sovereign, {â??The Statesâ??} were completely independent, and were connected with each other only by a â??Leagueâ??! I so so add it would be for the Common League of Common defense for the National defense to secure the well being of we the people from threats! To reject such to let open border be without being secured would be Treason at the rate of witch laws are so passed to disarm we the people, I so sight the rancher case by the late Judge Federal Judge Roll who should have been disbarred , as well I so sight H.R. 2640 Veterans Disarmament Act & S 2084, H.R. 45, H.R. 5820 Ban on Traditional Ammunition! http://momus1978.posterous.com/peter-king-introducing-gun-control-legislatio
    Treason Article 3 Section 3 US Constitution Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A3Sec3.html



    Even the view they may bring of I sigh the Gibbons v. Ogden 9 Wheaton 1 1824 case,
    It has been said that they were sovereign, {â??The Statesâ??} were completely independent, and were connected with each other only by a â??Leagueâ??!

    sence Obama and Clinton are worth so much and have so much "What a joke", fine for every perosn that is Ill Affected from crimes carried out because they failed to act being paid to act! Each person who has lost because of crimes from should sue for the taxes they paid to recover what was lost dereliction of duty to the Oath of office as the leadership of common defense Direct Criminal Constitutional Contemp!

    What Bloomington is doing
    From what I understand that is like was part of the fuse of the Civil War!

    Bruce Michael Anderson on www.writing.com
    • Agreed
      Illegal is Illegal
      Joyce HaleFebruary 18, 2011 4:04 PM
      Since when do we enforce our laws based on the impact on our economy? All are welcome to enter our wonderful country legally. I believe we are only asking for the demise of our legal system when we pick and choose to optionally enforce our laws.


      So Agreed,The City of Bloomington Indiana incitement of Boycott of Arizona 5-17-2010 Declaration letter, is Direct Constitution Contempt! it is out of line! End of Story!

      Historical Note
      {Gibbons V. Ogden}, 9 Wheaton 1 (1824). Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall. The Court so upheld, Only Congress can regulate Inter States Commerce!

      What Bloomington is doing
      From what I understand that was part of the fuse of the civil war!
    • Illegal is Illegal
      Since when do we enforce our laws based on the impact on our economy? All are welcome to enter our wonderful country legally. I believe we are only asking for the demise of our legal system when we pick and choose to optionally enforce our laws.
      • Good Job
        One way to Stop the problem is to secure the border, if they do not have say like a sponsor they do not come across the Border! That would help ! less the Burdens of people that has to house etc those that have nothing to start with !
        One way to Stop or check is to check with the selective service records!


        Itâ??s time to Vote out City of Bloomingtonâ??s common defense Leadership for the unconstitutional incitement of Boycott of Arizona 5-17-2010 Declaration letter, itâ??s Direct Constitution Contempt!
        Work Sighted:
        Book by John R. Schmidhauser. Constitutional Law in American politics. Chapter five page 122 {Gibbons V. Ogden}, 9 Wheaton 1 (1824). Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall. The Court so upheld, Only Congress can regulate Inter States Commerce!

        On 9-15-2010 The City of Bloomington Indiana declares public comment time is not a right and our constitution does not protect such rights and seeks to restrain the right of inter-action at city town hall meetings. Tort claims are being filed to suit them for the actions of constitutional contempt, using United States Title 42 United States Code Section 1983. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00001983----000-.html
        Attend a Council meeting. Meetings are generally held the first four Wednesdays of the month at 7:30 p.m. in Council Chambers, City Hall, and 401 N. Morton. . Call the Council Office at 349-3409 The Email is council@bloomington.in.gov
        Press Release:
        Updates will be made on and at http://Writing.Com/authors/epistemology , www.StoryWrite.com , and on www.Complaints.com .
        Filed January 01- Day 04 2011, a $33 million Dollar Tort Claim to Suit City of Bloomington Monroe County Indiana Elected & Appointed for Direct Constitutional Contempt. For the Unconstitutional Restraint of 1st Amendment Freedom of Speech & Redress of Grievance. No taxation without representation is tyranny! So Out lined in the rules of Public Comment So passed & unconstitutionally upheld. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation



        Notes and New related to Arizona Boycott:
        A Bloomington Police Department investigation into harassing postcards recently sent to city council members yielded no criminal charges for the person who sent them.

        BPD Capt. Joe Qualters said the postcards addressed to each individual city council member and sent to City Hall contained harassing

        Comments in response to the Mayor Mark Kruzan & councilâ??s vote to boycott Arizona businesses over Governor Jan Brewer the stateâ??s controversial immigration law.

        The 1st Amendment was upheld and used to rebuke the Common defense traitors. Thank God the police did not stop the action of A good use of the Constitution and the 1St Amendment, too bad the Mayor does not understand what the terms Common defense Leadership Means otherwise he would never Said wrote the letter dated May 17th 2010 sighting a Boycott.
        In the Letter, itâ??s States â??Any immigration reform must balance fairness, compassion, and {SECRUTIY},

        I write if his views of security are what they are as to live with a open border for just anyone without just do restraint as Obama is wanting with Open borders, to be able to carry out crimes against legal Americans then letting those same Illegalâ??s being to suit legal American for securing their safety as like the rancher case then what is the point of paying the Taxes to pay for the common defense to secure the well being of.

        Was not the reason of government created to do as such! The Tax System was so created bases on such history that under the Home steed Act and daws Act of 1887 we the people are still sovereign hence forth for the right to keep and bear arm shall not be infringed. The federal System was to be voluntary. The States right of collection of Taxes was to pay for the Common defense a police force in a time of war and without a time of war on United States soil was to pay for the protection of us the people. Obama and the anti self defense anti Arm treasons seek to maintain to form a like Police State.

        The federal system was to be voluntary unless a war was so being fought on â??United Soilâ?? to pay for again the Common defense to protect the United States or the Common â??Leagueâ?? in form of the National defense leads by the executive Branch of Government common defense League. From threats!
        Historical Note Ben Franklin was one that so create the Common defense Active police force! The reason the Star of David is so on our Federal Common defense crest is because of the History of in part for the honor of the polish Jew Hebrew Man Named Haymn Solomon as I understand he sighted the Torah & Bible for such self defense views Nehemiah Chapter 4 and Esther 8:11
        I sigh the Gibbons v. Ogden 9 Wheaton 1 1824 case,
        It has been said that they were sovereign, {â??The Statesâ??} were completely independent, and were connected with each other only by a â??Leagueâ??!
        In My view Mayor Kruzan ,Isabel Piedmont Smith President district V rep, Andy Ruff Vice President , Parliamentarian district 3 Rep. Mike Satterfield, At-Large Rep. Tim Mayer, At- Large Rep. Susan Sandberg , District 1 Rep Chris Sturbaum, District Rep IV. Dave Rollo , District Rep VI. Steve Volm, City Clerk Regina Moore, and The Mayors Lawyers should be disbarred for backing such. They Should be Voted and or suited out for not seeking to get the vote of we the people before Acting to sight â?? We The Peopleâ?? The â??League â?? Boycott Arizona, I mean come on at least a Town Hall meeting should have took place, that did not. But because of such rules of public comment like # 5 and the Statement made as such the constitution does not give us such right to speak and town hall meeting let alone are we let to have dialog and is such part of the reason for the Tort Claim filed.
        I will not be intimidated By rules that say if you did not do as we say and seek to speak up YOU will BE Removed by the Misuse of The very Defense your as the leadership of so are misusing. I personally have removed By Police Because I spoke out!

        The City Government & Mayor's Actions are Unconstitutional. Congress is the only ones that have the power to control markets, Constitutional Law in American politics. Book by John R. Schmidhauser Chapter five page 122, {Gibbons V. Ogden} 9 Wheaton 1 (1824). Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall, Upholds Only Congress can regulate Inter States Commerce!, Itâ??s time to Vote out City of Bloomingtonâ??s Leadership for the unconstitutional Boycott of Arizona 5-17-2010 Declaration letter, its direct Constitutional contempt!

        The local government is way out of line in writing letters sighting Boycotts; itâ??s not illegal for common people to refuse to buy sell or trade it is Unconstitutional for local governments to!

        It is wrong and an Act of treason By the Leadership of Common defense to reject the safety a well being of secured Borders from, Known threats to legal United States Americans.


        Check YouTube this one is Good, he talks about {Gibbons V. Ogden} 9 Wheaton 1 (1824). Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall, Upholds Only Congress can regulate Inter States Commerce!

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRiCicJOa04

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCNGzMVgTxE

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_JZ7VXrKdg

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3C6ajXyMVi8

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO-g9N6Faq4

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODTd_-ovOY8
      • No more laws
        Arizona type laws will do nothing but anger the people. They are shameful even if they are right.
        let us not add the never ending lists of rules but enforce what we already have. And the next time someone without a license or insurance runs into my car - the state better follow the law (citizen or not).
      • selective service records! use it as a tool!
        One way to Stop and or check is to check with the selective service records! every one has to sign up at the Age of 18!
      • Tired of it
        Delph is wrong, and so are the Republicans. I don't want bills on "social" issues. I want them to take steps to fix the economy...nothing else. And I will personally will work as hard as I can to see that we keep "voting them out", Republican or Democrat, until one oe the parties gets the message, or an alternative emerges. Republicans who kowtow to the Conservative Right, Moral Majority, etc., will not get my vote...most of us who don't regulary join the cacaphony of voices on social issues agree with Mitch on that one (even if we don't agree with him on much else)...a truce on social issues Please! Otherwise, the Republicans get hammered in 2012.
      • immigration
        The republicans need to pay attention to what really matters to the voters in Indiana-JOBS. Unemployment is high, opportunities for jobs, job growth and income growth is low. Stop fooling around with peripheral matters and solve the real problems. Bring JOBS to the table, not more laws.
        • thundermutt and Jim
          You are so very right!!
        • Tonia's wrong
          I agree that these are people and as such should be treated humanely. However that is different than allowing them to mooch off of "us americans". If they want to enjoy the standard of living that we have created, let them come here LEGALLY. The key here is that they are ILLEGAL immigrants.
        • Jim's right
          The middle-of-the-road voters in Indiana who went for Obama in 2008 and then the Republicans in 2010 were largely voting based on their wallets. If the "social-issues" Republican extremists think that 2010 is an excuse to push their "moral majority" views on the rest of us, they'll have an unwelcome surprise in 2012.
        • Jobs?
          The 2010 election weren't a referendum on immigration and the moral status of Indiana residents. It was a referendum on the economy. Why is the legislature wasting its time and resources working on this nonsense? Are they so starved for the attention that was garnered by the Arizona immigration movement, that they decided they need their time in the sun?
          Make some real press and work on putting into place an environment that pushes Indiana beyond the middle tier of states in the Technology industry. Work on fixing the stateâ??s unemployment fund issues. Do anything that improves the economic climate in Indiana. Our representatives need to stop wasting our time.
        • immigration law
          I think this law should not be passed. They are people to. It dont matter where there from. They live and breath like us americans do. Put your minds together for something that will really help. Some of these people have familys here. seperating familys because there not from here is so wrong. Think of of the people this will hurt.

          Post a comment to this story

          COMMENTS POLICY
          We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
           
          You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
           
          Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
           
          No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
           
          We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
           

          Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

          Sponsored by
          ADVERTISEMENT

          facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

          Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
          Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
           
          Subscribe to IBJ
          1. With Pence running the ship good luck with a new government building on the site. He does everything on the cheap except unnecessary roads line a new beltway( like we need that). Things like state of the art office buildings and light rail will never be seen as an asset to these types. They don't get that these are the things that help a city prosper.

          2. Does the $100,000,000,000 include salaries for members of Congress?

          3. "But that doesn't change how the piece plays to most of the people who will see it." If it stands out so little during the day as you seem to suggest maybe most of the people who actually see it will be those present when it is dark enough to experience its full effects.

          4. That's the mentality of most retail marketers. In this case Leo was asked to build the brand. HHG then had a bad sales quarter and rather than stay the course, now want to go back to the schlock that Zimmerman provides (at a considerable cut in price.) And while HHG salesmen are, by far, the pushiest salesmen I have ever experienced, I believe they are NOT paid on commission. But that doesn't mean they aren't trained to be aggressive.

          5. The reason HHG's sales team hits you from the moment you walk through the door is the same reason car salesmen do the same thing: Commission. HHG's folks are paid by commission they and need to hit sales targets or get cut, while BB does not. The sales figures are aggressive, so turnover rate is high. Electronics are the largest commission earners along with non-needed warranties, service plans etc, known in the industry as 'cheese'. The wholesale base price is listed on the cryptic price tag in the string of numbers near the bar code. Know how to decipher it and you get things at cost, with little to no commission to the sales persons. Whether or not this is fair, is more of a moral question than a financial one.

          ADVERTISEMENT