San Diego Faces Own Medicine as Arizona Residents Cancel Travel Following............

Status
Not open for further replies.

yizuman

Active Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
2,345
Reaction score
2
....Boycott of State.

Arizona tourists are biting back against San Diego for its city council's decision to boycott the Grand Canyon State over its immigration law signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last month.

Arizona tourists are biting back against San Diego for its city council's decision to boycott the Grand Canyon State over its immigration law signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last month.

Would-be tourists have notified the San Diego Convention and Visitors Bureau and some hotels that they are canceling their scheduled travel to the coastal vacation destination, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune.

According to the newspaper, the convention bureau has received about 25-30 emails from Arizona residents, with some saying they are canceling their reservations and taking their money elsewhere.

That has tourism officials urging Arizonans to consider the resolutions as merely symbolic and local politics at work.

"We're in a very tough environment already because of everything else going on, and we don't need another negative impact to our industry," ConVis President Joe Terzi told the Union-Tribune. "This affects all the hardworking men and women who count on tourism for their livelihoods, so we’re saying, don't do something that hurts their livelihoods."

"I've been approached by a number of hotels who are very concerned because they’ve received cancelations from Arizona guests," Namara Mercer, executive director of the county Hotel-Motel Association, told the newspaper.

Roughly 2 million Arizonans visit San Diego each year but the recession has taken a toll on the hotel industry that was hoping for a comeback this year. Hotels are offering deep discounts to fill up their undersold rooms while the tourism board spends $7 million this spring and summer season to promote travel to the area.

Several councils in large cities like Los Angeles, Austin, Boston and San Francisco have approved boycotts on employee travel or future contracts with Arizona businesses as a result of the law that goes into effect on July 1. The state tourism bureau has said the losses so far have reached nearly $10 million as a result of 23 canceled meetings.

But others are cautious, noting unintended consequences. Milwaukee’s city council delayed a vote on a boycott and Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said he opposes such action.

On Saturday, former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin appeared with Brewer in Phoenix to criticize President Obama for not passing an immigration law and putting Arizona in the situation where it had to act on its own.

“It’s time for Americans across this great country to stand up and say ‘we’re all Arizonans now, and in clear unity, we say, Mr. President, do your job, secure our borders,’” Palin said.

Palin also has denounced a decision by Highland Park, Ill., officials who canceled the high school girls’ basketball team’s travel to the state in December. Both Highland Park Assistant Superintendent Suzan Hebson and the Austin City Council suggested that their decisions were less based on politics than concern their players and employees could be in harm’s way if they want to Arizona. Hebson, however, told the Chicago Tribune that she did not know if any student players were themselves illegal immigrants.

Palin, a former basketball player, said she would raise money or find other ways to get the players to the tournament.

Meanwhile, in San Diego, school board President Shelia Jackson said she is sorry people don’t want to come to her city, but she still supports her vote to boycott Arizona.

“It’s sad that people would cancel their plans to come here in reaction to that, but I still think we did the right thing,” Jackson told the Union-Tribune. “Certainly, we know how important tourism is to San Diego, and it wasn’t my intent to impact the tourism trade.”

Source: FOXNews.com - San Diego Faces Own Medicine as Arizona Residents Cancel Travel Following Boycott of State

LOL, SD lost 10 million already because they were dumb enough to voice their opposition against the Arizona's immigration bill. Sometimes some things is best left unsaid, otherwise it'll come back and bite'em in the ass.

Yiz
 
Cal needs arizona mush more than Arisona needs Cal, think water rights!
 
That has tourism officials urging Arizonans to consider the resolutions as merely symbolic and local politics at work.

"We're in a very tough environment already because of everything else going on, and we don't need another negative impact to our industry," ConVis President Joe Terzi told the Union-Tribune. "This affects all the hardworking men and women who count on tourism for their livelihoods, so we’re saying, don't do something that hurts their livelihoods."

"I've been approached by a number of hotels who are very concerned because they’ve received cancelations from Arizona guests," Namara Mercer, executive director of the county Hotel-Motel Association, told the newspaper.

Yep. They (San Diego city council) need to add ketchup on their shoes now. They should've thought of the repercussions of their mouths. They get the Darwin of the Year award.
 
Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,

I was dismayed to learn that the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based companies — a vote you strongly supported — to show opposition to SB 1070 (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).

You explained your support of the boycott as follows: “While we recognize that as neighbors, we share resources and ties with the State of Arizona that may be difficult to sever, our goal is not to hurt the local economy of Los Angeles, but to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars — or the withholding of our dollars — to send a message.”

I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.

If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.

People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.

Sincerely,

Commissioner Gary Pierce
http://hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/letter-azcc-villaraigosa.pdf.pdf

Gary Pierce is one of the commissioners to the utility regulation panel for Arizona. And make a careful note that Los Angeles gets about 25% of its power from Arizona for its electricity producers.

Imagine cutting off electricity up to 25% of what LA gets and see the economic impact from that alone affecting thousands of businesses. Not to mention irate customers who see their electric bill go up, too.
 
That is what that letter was trying to say.
 
Agreed it is ridiculous. When local governments start boycotting each other we are asking for trouble.
 
Wonder if both states will go at war with each other?
 
Yeah, I have heard this. San Diego is extremely popular for Arizonians to visit for breaks/vacations. You would notice lots of Arizona plates everywhere in Southern California. I bet from now, they will still call them Zonies.

There have been reports that California has a similar law to Arizona SB 1070.

Here's California Penal Code, section 834b

(a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully
cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization
Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is
suspected of being present in the United States in violation of
federal immigration laws.

(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected
of being present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the
following:
(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen
of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent
resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time
or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of
immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not
be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and
place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding
documentation to indicate his or her legal status.

(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien
who is present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal
justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or
leave the United States.
(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United
States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal
status and provide any additional information that may be requested
by any other public entity.

(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city,
county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with
jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent
or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly
prohibited

CA Codes (pen:833-851.90)
 
The state cannot pass immigration law that above the federal.

That means you have not read the bill nor do you understand it. Arizona has not crafted a law that supercedes or go beyond the authority of a federal law. In fact, Arizona meets the federal law as required to do so. That's the whole irony in this whole thing by doing what the federal law requires of from each state. That's exactly what Arizona is doing.
 
That means you have not read the bill nor do you understand it. Arizona has not crafted a law that supercedes or go beyond the authority of a federal law. In fact, Arizona meets the federal law as required to do so. That's the whole irony in this whole thing by doing what the federal law requires of from each state. That's exactly what Arizona is doing.

I already read the AZ immigration bill and understand so perfectly, period.

I agreed with Jiro about immigration law that passed in state can't goes above the federal.

I have OWN OPINION so don't tell me if I don't read or understand so go hush your mouth up, even you can't put your mouth on anybody whoever disagree with you.
 
The state cannot pass immigration law that above the federal.

no. I do not believe the state cannot pass the immigration law that mirrors federal immigration law and then make it a state crime.
 
no. I do not believe the state cannot pass the immigration law that mirrors federal immigration law and then make it a state crime.

It is partly of them that why I disagree with AZ.

I rather to let federal to deal with it.
 
I already read the AZ immigration bill and understand so perfectly, period.

I agreed with Jiro about immigration law that passed in state can't goes above the federal.

I have OWN OPINION so don't tell me if I don't read or understand so go hush your mouth up, even you can't put your mouth on anybody whoever disagree with you.

:shock: and :eek3:
 
Really, I am not interested in doing the French kissing or any kind of kissing thing here. Sorry.

There is nothing in the Arizona bill where it has superceded the authority of the federal govt. Arizona's bill and now law explicitly follows federal requirements when it comes to illegal immigration.
 
Really, I am not interested in doing the French kissing or any kind of kissing thing here. Sorry.

There is nothing in the Arizona bill where it has superceded the authority of the federal govt. Arizona's bill and now law explicitly follows federal requirements when it comes to illegal immigration.

Of course not. State law can never supercede Federal Law. Again, that is exactly why these proposals are redundant and open to criticism.:roll:

Perhaps if you were a little more interested in kissing, you would not have so much time on your hands to continually argue moot and ridiculas points. LOL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top