VOTE TO BOYCOTT ARIZONA PRESENTS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIANS WITH A NOT-REALLY-ALL-THAT HARDSHIPBy Steve Lowery
The Los Angeles City Council voted Wednesday to ban most city travel to Arizona as a way to protest that state’s tough new immigration law. It was an extraordinary step, which the council has taken only a couple times before, including once to protest South Africa’s then-apartheid policies. Of course, Arizona’s new law isn’t apartheid or racist—Arizonans have been very clear about that—so be on notice, blonde-haired, blue-eyed Aryan visitors, lest you be caught without your papürvügens when asked to produce them.
The council’s move, generally lauded locally, was met with anger and cries for retribution in Arizona. In the comments section of an LA Times story about the vote, one Arizonan said he immediately cancelled a business trip that would have brought 202 people into LAX, leaving locals scurrying to figure out how the state will go on without 200 Arizonans in rented Ford Focuses unclear on the concept of merging while accelerating.
This could devolve into something very nasty between the two states—Californians not going to Arizona, Arizonans not visiting California—in what figures to be called a “boycott” in Arizona and a “win-win” in the Golden State.
I was always under the impression that the only reason anyone lived in Arizona was to be close to California—after all, the state’s motto is “Arizona: California-Adjacent!” So Arizonans will be giving up the Pacific Ocean, Disneyland and Yosemite and Sequoia national parks.
Californians, meanwhile, will miss out on the spectacular Grand Canyon, crippling heat and scores of frustrated tourists angrily trying to convince their children that the Grand Canyon is “spectacular” and not “just a big hole, can we go?!”