Here they go again
Compliance with DUI laws and hiring regulations harming businesses, according to the state’s largest newspaper
Just when you think they’ve run out of ways to get their immigration laxity across, the daily Fish wrapper delights us with a new and refurbished slant.
We imagine they run employee contests to come up with innovative concepts to tackle illegal immigration and the impact of employer sanctions.
Today, they actually outdid previous attempts to conceal their true agenda. In yet another front-gage, above-the-fold article titled Economy serves up an unhappy meal, readers are led to believe they are being informed about the economic downturn as they read that, despite a financial dip, people are still eating out–albeit in less expensive restaurants.
Okay. At one time when reporting standards actually meant something to the daily, this would have merited a puff-piece in the D index entertainment section.
But we might have guessed this comes packaged with their immigration agenda. Read on, and it becomes obvious that this article is yet another vehicle to bemoan the employer sanctions law and deride the federal E-Verify program, a means of ascertaining only legal employees are hired.
In their zeal, they quote restaurant owner, Ken Nagel, who “scoffs at the E-Verify system,” saying his own daughter flunked the eligibility check. He is married to former state Rep. Candice Nagel who resigned her seat in the1990’s.
Also receiving blame is the increased state minimum wage. The law they endorsed they now fault as accelerating labor costs, cutting into restaurant profits.
Further, we read that Chicago-based restaurateur Richard Melman, with 75 businesses across the country, recently scratched plans for adding a Scottsdale site since having to comply with the law was too problematic for him.
But we’ve saved the best for last. This outrageous comment comes straight from the article: The public crackdown on drunken driving in Arizona not only has cut into alcohol sales, but hurt dining out generally, owners say.
So, not only do they advocate hiring illegals, but they deride laws which crackdown on DUI offenders.
That’s our hometown paper!
March 3, 2008 at 3:30 pm
My understanding is that Sheriff Joe and his deputies will no longer be frequenting Valley restaurants as often after they were threatened by a chain restaurant manager in retaliation for their crackdowns on illegal hiring.
I wonder if the Republic bothered to report that incident?
March 3, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Actually they did cover it. The manager was fired. The Republic should do the same with Steve Benson—although they probably love the attention he’s bringing their way. When you are dragging bottom, the issue becomes, “I don’t care what you have to say about me, just spell my name right.”
My wife watched part of the video, turned around and walked out of the room in disgust.
March 3, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Most entreprenuers get it. If your profit margin is dependent on illegal practices, you need a new business model. Our largest paper reports on the few laggards just figuring this out. Hey, if your profit margin is reliant on dragging down the quality of life for the rest of us….good riddens to you and your business!! Many of your competitors have figured out how to make a profit AND obey the law.
March 4, 2008 at 9:52 am
It’s clear that many of the articles are two-in-oners. There is often a sub-plot just below the surface. It rarely requires much effort to find. Then when they come out with the sub-plot as the main event story, we’ve already been primed for it.
The Republic is attempting to turn us all into Pavlov’s dogs…awaiting the next bone to be thrown our way.