This proposed ballot measure, much more moderate than California's struck-down Proposition 187, wouldn't even prevent illegal immigration, it simply would prevent illegal immigrants from receiving welfare and voting without identification, yet anyone who opposes it is labeled a racist.

"They're not paying their fair share of taxes!" Sound like a Democrat? Wrong. When it comes to the issue of welfare benefits, Democrats conveniently forget their concern about taxes, and use the race card to fight for the opposite – helping illegal immigrants who have not paid their fair share of taxes obtain welfare and other government benefits. Protect Arizona Now (PAN), the Arizona Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act that supporters are trying to get on the ballot, would require applicants for Arizona's welfare, AHCCCS, to show identification demonstrating proof of citizenship before receiving welfare. Currently, AHCCCS does not require any proof of citizenship, applicants simply check a box stating they are legal residents and automatically qualify for welfare. This is unfair and contrary to federal law. Since most illegal immigrants have never paid any income taxes, why are they entitled to take welfare money from the rest of us who work? A report from the Center for Immigration Studies found that illegal immigrants use more in social services than they contribute in taxes they do pay such as sales taxes, although opponents of PAN dispute those numbers, claiming that it is too difficult to track illegal immigrants. Regardless of what the numbers are, if illegal immigrants are going to be entitled to the full panoply of U.S. benefits, they should pay their fair share of taxes, which includes income taxes.

The Democrats leading the opposition to PAN are using disinformation and racist accusations to scare people away from supporting the measure, labeling it as extremist instead of the moderate solution that it is. Arizona State Representative Steve Gallardo (D), who apparently didn't bother to read the measure or understand it, said that PAN will prevent illegal immigrants from receiving police and fire protection. This is false. Proposition 187, a similar measure which was passed in California in 1994, was struck down by a federal judge partially because its prohibition on federally mandated services was deemed an encroachment by the state on federal powers. PAN has been carefully drafted to avoid that pitfall, and does not prohibit illegal immigrants from receiving federally mandated services such as emergency medical care and K-12 education.

Arizona State Senator Ben Miranda (D) has accused Arizona House Majority Whip Randy Graf (R) of being racist as well as stupid for supporting the measure, stating, "…to call Randy Graf – and I wish he was here – a racist or an uneducated fool is perfectly on the dot." Regarding the requirement of PAN that prospective voters must produce identification, which seems like common sense, Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano suggested that it was instead racism, accusingly stating, "this bill is not designed to prevent voter fraud, I'll tell you that." Arizona Republic columnist E.J. Montini, in his article, "A Deck Stacked With Race Cards," from July 13, 2003, has implied that some of the supporters of the measure are racist. If that is true, who are they racist against? For example, who are the Hispanic supporters of PAN racist against? According to an ASU/KAET-TV poll, 40 percent of Hispanic voters support PAN.

Unlike most other bills, referendums, and propositions that seek to address the problems caused from illegal immigration, PAN will not prevent illegal immigrants from entering the country. It simply seeks to prevent them from obtaining benefits they have not paid for. Our forefathers came to this country expecting to work hard in order to survive; it was "The American Dream" to come to America and work your way up. They weren't lured here with the promise of free government handouts. And that philosophy of free immigration has worked well. The melting pot of America is a big part of the reason why we are #1. Immigrant labor, whether we admit it or not, has been beneficial to this country, and the jobs that immigrants take are recreated in other markets. However, it was hard work that achieved this, not welfare. There would be fewer objections to more immigration if it didn't come with the burden of subsidizing immigrants. Objection to more immigrants is not due to racism against Hispanics; Americans would protest just as loudly if thousands of illegal English immigrants signed up for welfare.

The real problem lies with the Democrats' arguably racist premise that Hispanics need welfare, and that most Hispanics on welfare are illegal immigrants. How does making easier access to welfare help Hispanics? And it is condescending and insulting for Hispanic representatives to be the ones leading the opposition to PAN. It fosters the perception that one of the most important issues to Hispanics is receiving welfare, which ultimately stigmatizes and hurts those Hispanics who are not receiving welfare. Instead of focusing on the self-defeating policy of receiving welfare, the Hispanic leaders' focus should be on removing the barriers to immigration, beginning with supporting President Bush's guest worker program, which would allow foreigners to work legally and pay income taxes, therefore contributing to some of the services they use in large amounts, such as emergency hospital care. PAN is a step in the right direction to ending the dependency upon welfare, although it does not go far enough; we should work on taking all Americans off of welfare, not just illegal immigrants. After all, America's official national symbol is an independent eagle, not Santa Claus.