I know you referenced responding to my e-mail but, unfortunately, I did not receive it. I actually wrote you because I believe that the blogosphere is just as valid a communication medium as “old media” used to be and I enjoyed reading your blog.
As for prosecuting employers for hiring illegal immigrants, there’s no safe harbor in my candidacy or service as Attorney General. My reference to partnering with employers is to insure that the majority who follow the law are not saddled with undue regulatory burdens that drive up the cost of doing business which, ultimately, is borne by consumers. Right now, we do pay $3 for a head of lettuce – the difference shows up in increased costs for our healthcare, education, and criminal justice systems. I’d like to see use of a biometric card for more reliable verification of employment eligibility and, once we eliminate excuses for employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens, they will be just as much in my sights as the coyotes (with or without lobbyists).
As far as experience, I’ll gladly match my time as a prosecutor with my opponent’s and leadership lessons learned in and out of the Army, let alone actual time spent working as a lawyer. I prosecuted several hundred felony matters and appeared in nearly 1,000 cases for the citizens of Maricopa County in the nearly four years I had the pleasure of working at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. Also, unlike some prosecutors who are just looking for trial experience before moving off to practice criminal defense, I begrudgingly left so my wife could stay home with our kids. Unfortunately, that was short lived since my Mom was then diagnosed with lung cancer. I set up my own firm to give me the flexibility to care for her and still bring in some income. Since then, though, my practice has been overwhelmingly in litigating on behalf of crime victims and safeguarding their rights under Arizona’s Victim’s Bill of rights.
Last point: “tweety bird” – that’s bit pejorative. Nonetheless, if you love the representation we’re getting from the incumbent AG, we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
I’m glad he made it clear that he wants to prosecute coyotes. However, I am always amazed that small government Republicans, who seem to think that a simple background check to make sure that a felon can’t buy firearm is tantamount to fascism, would support a system of “identity cards” similar to something you’d find in Czechoslovakia circa 1972 or Vichy France. Every job I have ever had to apply for involved me filling out an I-9. The employer had to verify my eligibility with already available paperwork. This is why I don’t buy the excuse that employers can’t check their employees, and also why I don’t think we need to take that system and add yet another layer of bureaucracy and government control.
Interestingly, he says that he doesn’t want to burden employers with more responsibilities. His plan sounds, at best, a transfer of those responsibilities to employees, who probably don’t have office managers and assistants to handle such things.
Montgomery, from what I understand, ably served in the Army and ought to be commended for that. I am not sure that his experience there necesarilly translates into being a good Attorney General. Since he would be replacing Terry Goddard, he needs to tell us why he wouldn’t only be adequate, but what would make him a better Attorney General. What decisions has Goddard made that he doesn’t agree with? Who has Goddard gone after that he wouldn’t have? Payday lenders? Polluters? People who scam the elderly? Warren Jeffs?
I didn’t make the “Tweety Bird” comment. This wouldn’t be the first time I got blamed for something that one of my readers posted.