In a classic application of bottom-up management denizens of small towns let their elected representatives in Washington D.C. know exactly how they expected them to handle the compromised immigration compromise bill that neither secured our borders, nor was any more enforceable than previous legislation it was meant to “fix.”

Earlier waves of immigrants – legal and illegal – flocked to CA, , FL, IL, NJ, NY and TX (”gateway” states) but have been dispersing across a wider swath of the U.S. since 2000. The foreign-born, non-English speaking populations of DE, GA, IN, NE, NV and SC have exploded, say demographers, with the “newcomers” (as President Bush is wont to call them) preferentially settling in (some say, overrunning) small towns and sleepy suburbs. And people who live in these places saying, “enough!”

Here’s what Stephanie Usrey, 39, a stay-at-home mother who lives in Gainesville, GA, tells The Washington Post about the “aha” moment she had at a local Wal-Mart about five years ago: 

“That was the first time I looked around and said, ‘Man, I didn’t realize how many Mexicans there were here.’ And they don’t seem to feel any discomfort when they’re, like, six inches from your face and talking to each other in their language, either. I just felt very encroached upon. . . . It was like an instant feeling of ‘I’m in the minority, and if we don’t get control over this, pretty soon all of America will be outnumbered.’”

Spurred into activism by talk-radio Usrey and tens of thousands others like her in small towns all across the U.S. “bombarded their senators with phone calls and e-mails decrying the bill as an unacceptable amnesty for the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants,” says the WaPo. And they didn’t let up till they got results:

Nowhere were the bill’s opponents more influential than here in Georgia, whose two Republican senators, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss, originally helped craft the legislation. Two days after its unveiling in May, Chambliss was booed at his state’s Republican convention. Isakson’s office received more than 21,000 calls from opponents of the bill, compared with 6,000 from supporters.

[B]oth Georgia senators voted to kill the bill they once supported.

Another example of bottom-up management: With the federal government unable or unwilling to enforce existing immigration laws, small town governments, like Hazelton, PA, and Framers Branch, TX, took matters into their own hands by enacting local ordinances against businesses that hire illegal labor. And some local enforcement officials have decided to, well, enforce immigration law.

Panama City, FL, Sheriff Frank McKeithen, for one, has been targeting construction sites, and has arrested more than 500 illegal aliens and reported them to immigration officials since November. The Miami Herald reports:

The sheriff’s department has developed a remarkably effective - and controversial - way of catching illegal immigrants: Deputies in patrol cars pull up to a construction site in force, and watch and see who runs.

Those who take off are chased down and arrested on charges such as trespassing, for cutting through someone else’s property, or loitering, for hiding out in someone’s yard, or reckless driving, for speeding off in a car.

U.S. immigration authorities are then given the names of those believed to be in this country illegally.

Immigrant advocates say the technique is repugnant, and the ACLU says its constitutionality is questionable. …

The sheriff said the raids are justified under a long-standing Florida law prohibiting employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

Such local initiatives are not going unnoticed by state legislatures, which are now going even further in attempting to curb illegal immigration, according to The WaPo:

By the time most legislatures adjourned in May, at least 1,100 immigration bills had been submitted by lawmakers, more than double last year’s record total, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. This year’s total is expected to grow as the issue continues to dominate debate in statehouses still in session.

These laws limit illegal immigrants’ ability to obtain jobs, find housing, get driver’s licenses and receive many government services. They also empower state law enforcement agencies to inquire into an immigrant’s legal status and hold for deportation those deemed to be here illegally. The idea is to make life so difficult for illegal immigrants that they will leave the state — if not the country. …

At least 18 states have enacted laws concerning illegal immigrants. Most of the legislation is seen as punitive, and it reflects legislators’ anger at the federal government’s inability to seal the southern border and at provisions in the Senate bill that would allow the 12 million illegal immigrants already here a path to citizenship. …

[M]any states are increasingly frustrated at having to provide expensive services for illegal immigrants.

In a repudiation of the “sanctuary city” trend, local police in OK now train with federal authorities to learn how to find and capture illegal immigrants, and AZ is considering allowing officers to ask people they arrest whether they are U.S. citizens and to seize them if they don’t have valid documents to prove it.

OK also bars illegal immigrants from receiving public assistance, VA approved a proposal to withhold state and local funding from any non-profit group that uses the money to provide services to illegal immigrants and MA rejected a proposal that would have allowed illegal immigrants to pay in-state college tuition.

The Masters Of The Universe and the business community might not like it, but when marshaled, the will of the people is a force to be reckoned with.

Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here