H -°, L 7° | Tomorrow: 
H 17°, L 4°Every once in a while you get the feeling an issue will be decided a certain way. Public opinion seems behind it, and various interest groups are poised to convert the question at hand into another notch on their belt of activism. But somehow, in the end, everything turns out OK. While Sheriff Mahoney is certainly no Andrew Johnson, and the Dane County Board no Edmund G. Ross, their vote to not withhold funds from the sheriff’s department in protest over its treatment of illegal immigrants was nevertheless an important one. Though within their power to slash the budget of the sheriff’s office, the board correctly recognized such a move as misguided and wrong.
In setting the budget for the coming year, the board has the power to allocate funds to each specific department, and, in doing so, exercises considerable control over how that branch executes the laws. Just as in the federal government, our legislative body may use the “power of the purse” as a means to control executive behavior they deem unacceptable. Without a doubt, it would have been entirely within the board’s authority to deny the sheriff over $200,000 of funding and effectively cut five deputies in the coming year.
However, such a move would have been indefensible. Cutting the law enforcement budget in order to satisfy monetary constraints or trim fat would be completely acceptable, but to do so in order to simply send a message is grossly irresponsible. Sacrificing public safety in order to prove a point is not what the board was elected to do, no matter what Progressive Dane or the Campus Antiwar Network say. At a time when the public has repeatedly expressed its desire for increased public safety through initiatives like the Downtown Safety Initiative and the Downtown Lighting Initiative, it would take either callous disregard of public opinion or extreme arrogance for the board to ignore an issue of such importance to all its constituents to satisfy the demands of a few.
It is difficult to fathom exactly why the bill’s author chose to target the general safety of the public instead of the other alternatives that exist. Cutting funding would work fine if those cuts directly affected the behavior in question, but since it doesn’t really cost anything to call up the men and women of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, any fiscal penalties would do nothing but impair the ability of the county to enforce its laws.
A more targeted censure, such as cutting the good sheriff’s salary, would certainly get his attention, while at the same time allow the rest of the department to continue doing its job. Or perhaps — if the board was feeling more lighthearted — Sheriff Mahoney could be forced to wear a funny hat every Monday during the coming year. Again, such a move would not be as glamorous as taking $200,000 and change from the department, but it would also threaten public safety a whole lot less.
If Sheriff Mahoney is in such clear violation of the law, as many insist, impeachment could also be an appropriate measure. Such proceedings, however, would reveal just how shaky the case against Mahoney really is. Emotional testimonials reported by the Capital Times, such as, “I feel like my son is being treated like a criminal, when he is just charged with a driving infraction,” ring hollow when it turns out that the son really is a criminal — imprisoned for his second drunk driving offense.
Charges of racism come off as frivolous in light of the legal questions at hand. A 2004 law (the “Sanctuary” Law) prohibiting disclosure of immigration status by county officers (such as the sheriff) only applies to those not suspected of criminal activity. Sheriff Mahoney’s policy appears to be motivated not by racial bias or xenophobia, but rather by a genuine desire to comply with a request made by ICE in 2006.
By a resounding vote of 30 to six, the Dane County Board of Supervisors firmly demonstrated that it knows the difference between having the power and exercising it. In the meantime, I suggest Progressive Dane make like the Cubs and wait until next year.
Joey Labuz ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in biomedical engineering.
IP hash: 3cdf78a8
So, in your convoluted mind, it’s ok to discriminate against a underprivileged segment of society if the Sheriff feels that it’s appropriate?
I guess you would’ve also supported former Dallas County (AL) Sheriff Jim Clark, who beat and arrested blacks for trying to register to vote, relying upon the believe that it was illegal in Alabama for blacks to vote. He was just complying with a request from the governor, after all.
Or Birmingham Police Commissioner Bull Connor, who sent dogs,fire hoses, and lynch mobs at blacks trying to desegregate local business. He was also complying with a request from the governor.
Just because the Sheriff thinks it’s appropriate, doesn’t mean that it’s right. Well, at least a sane and open mind would think so.
IP hash: 4bcb4df1
I’m not impressed. This article was really poorly researched and your arguments suggest nothing but quite ludicrous alternatives. OK let’s make him “wear a funny hat every Monday” when families continue to get ripped apart in Dane County. Is that your attempt at a joke? Best hit the books again buddy because that’s just ridiculous! The fact that your making jokes about this matter is actually pretty sickening.
First of all, they weren’t voting to cut 5 positions. Rather, the amendment was designed to not grant the extra 5 positions that Sheriff Mahoney requested in this year’s budget. Sounds like this amendment would have not only been able to “satisfy monetary constraints,” but it would have also effectively told the sheriff that he will not get his requests met until he stops legislating from the badge. Sheriff Mahoney is supposed to be enforcing Dane County law, but so far he’s been blatantly ignoring it to carry-out his xenophobic (yes, I said xenophobic) policies. Furthermore, can we start thinking about some solutions to the crime problems in Madison that doesn’t involve putting more cops on the block? I mean really we’ve got to be more creative than that.
Secondly, what exactly is your point with the drunk driving case? I mean are you trying to suggest that this singular example can somehow be representative for the whole of these deportation cases? That’s a pretty biased choice of an example to use isn’t it? If you actually attended some of these hearings you would hear testimonies of various families that have in fact had relatives reported to ICE after a couple of minor “driving infractions” or other non-criminal and certainly non-violent situations. So really your representation of the facts is overall confused and misleading.
See there is a huge difference here between our ideas on the role of a legislator. While you seem to think that our elected officials are there to simply work out budget concerns and dump as much money as possible into law enforcement, I see our board members as a force to defend and ensure justice to our community and all the individuals in it. That budget amendment that the County Board voted on would have not only sent a message to a sheriff that is clearly abusing his power, but it would have also provided more support to community organizations that would ultimately help to prevent future crime and protect those that are most vulnerable.
I just don’t see how you can think that our elected officials voting this piece of legislation down was a positive for our community. Instead of holding true to the promise for “liberty and justice for all,” the majority of our board supervisors decided to vote against some of the most vulnerable families of our community while continuing their support for a sheriff’s office that has continued to target and report a certain segment of our population. So next time, instead of writing yet another worn out oped demonizing PD for trying to make change in our community, go sit down on the next round of testimonies and find out who’s really on the side of justice.
IP hash: 07178e33
Progressive Dane is a bunch of cheesy dorks. Seriously. I’ve seen what they do with their toenail clippings. Gross!
IP hash: 4fe5cde6
Dear Joey Labuz, what you are saying lacks of any sense at all. First your article�s headline “Progressive Dane�s good intentions have poor execution” does not represent the content of your article, what you really want to say “Progressive Dane and others groups are successfully bringing this issue to the public, and I BTW do not like it because I agree with the Sheriff” If you want to use a public venue like this newspaper to voice your opinions, you need to be more sincere about it. Second, so second DUI is a crime, so it is the second time a person drives without a driver�s license. I have a lot to say about the criminalization that Real ID has done to the thousands of undocumented families in this county; but actually I rather focus in the center point: Sheriff Mahoney is sending the information before sentencing, and for that matters ICE placed hold to inmates that were actually found innocent in court. That is the point! If, as you claim in your article headline, you �think� there are good intentions behind this already one year long campaign, we would love to have you meet us and discuss strategies as we did not stop anything, and we will not stop until justice is set for our families. I am suspecting you rather use your “journalist credential” to inoculate doubts and noise into an issue that keeps worry to around 7% of the population in Dane County, if so, I publically denounce that you did not have any contact with our group and I publically ask and invite you to meet with us so you can learn our positions and reasons behind our strategies from us. Sincerely, -Alex Gillis- Immigrant Workers Union
IP hash: aaea1778
Hey kid, you obviously know nothing about this topic. The sheriff’s budget was targeted as a LAST resort to get him to stop the deportations, since other options hadn’t worked thus far. And if you think public safety only includes keeping white people safe, and not stopping detentions of Latino immigrants that tear apart families and keep people in perpetual fear, than you reveal more about yourself than you probably cared to.
IP hash: cde9e5f5
Hmmm… how many of the comments posted previously do you think came from people in some way affiliated with Progressive Dane? I’m betting 4 (though there’s a chance 9:24 might be too, and just happens to have a sense of humor).
IP hash: 69cc3cc2
This article is stupid. Try harder next time.
IP hash: 3113ba0d
The author seems to have misunderstood some of the basic facts of this situation. Though it might not occur to individuals that have only loosely followed this story the simple fact is that the Sheriff Mahoney has been voluntarily turning in citizenship information to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency. His Republican predecessor (Mahoney is a Democrat)listened to the advice of the County Board and the public and did not turn over this information for anyone other than repeat or violent offenders. Most importantly, Mr. Labuz does not seem to realize the impact of the Sheriff’s actions on the community as a whole. Crimes have and will continue to go unreported in communities where individuals fear police interaction and the potential deportations of loved-ones that may result. It is indisputable that innocent (and “legal”) individuals are suffering under Mahoney’s policy. That is not the sort of community I want to live in and I know we can do better. Regardless of one’s views on immigration law, a careful look at the facts will show that Mahoney’s policy is threatening the safety and cohesion of our community. It is quite possible his only real motivation for this, assuming he is not a bigot, is to endear himself with conservatives voters. In either case Sheriff Mahoney’s discriminatory practice is a disgrace and a just target for whatever means necessary to change his mind.
IP hash: 29f0c552
Hmmm… So 2:23pm… what’s your point? Nice job making a comment that has nothing to do with the content of the article or other comments. Anything else to add?
IP hash: a085593f
Blah blah blah, “vulnerable members of the community,” “undocumented individuals…”
Wow, some people are really afraid to admit that they’re called Illegal Immigrants for a reason. Your indignation at the deportation of these criminals is a real slap in the face to those that earned their citizenship legitimately.
IP hash: 27632b98
whoa guys, give joey a break…
Oh, and 2 48 am, I don’t think he was ever advocating that it’s ever OK to discriminate. Rather, that the case at hand is not black and white, and had it been, the easy solution would be to fire him (if what he had been doing was SO wrong, but in truth, it is not clear). So quit jumping to wild and erroneous conclusions. All of ya.
LASTLY, if by taking away 5, or not granting, deputy positions, sure, its a consequence to mahoney and the 5 deputy positions, but its also a huge consequence to the taxpayers. Why punish citizens who are uninvolved?