The city of Pahrump Nevada - former home to Art Bell - is considering a "Hazleton-style" ordinance, but with the additional twist of trying to block banks from doing business with illegal aliens. In response, Timothy Pratt of the Las Vegas Sun offers a slab of pro-bank propaganda in "Bank on it becoming more difficult if Pahrump's anti-immigrant act passes" (link). The story was picked up by the AP (link), and there's more on the author below.

The whines from the banks quoted in the article are somewhat reminiscent of the same whines emanating from growers in the long line of "crops rotting in the fields" propaganda:

"How do I do business in Pahrump with an ordinance like this?" said Bill Martin, president of Nevada State Bank, which has two branches in the fast-growing town an hour's drive west of Las Vegas. [...later in the article he says:] "If somebody pays a landscaper with a check, and it's a good check, and the landscaper comes in to cash the check, are we breaking the law if we cash the check? ...If they (customers) look Hispanic, do I ID them? Can I profile? I don't think so... [ordinances like the current one] has been done around the country... They've actually seen businesses pick up and leave. Some of the towns ... have suffered because of these ordinances."

And, there's a threat to get banking associations involved:

Kirk V. Clausen, regional president of Wells Fargo Nevada - and whose bank was among the first to accept the consular ID cards to open accounts - said not accepting the cards "would be a huge concern."

Clausen said he would look to the bankers association for guidance and intends to let the group know that "there's a conflict here, we need to resolve it."

And, of course, there's the expected bias:

The card, nearly 106,000 of which have been issued by the consulate in the last four-plus years, is not an immigration document and confirms only the identity and current residence of its bearer.

First, he doesn't name the "card", but of course he's refering to Matricula Consular cards, often called "IDs for illegals". That old card was revived for use by illegal aliens and if someone has that card it's a very strong indicator that they're an illegal alien because legal immigrants have no use for that card when doing business in the U.S. And, Mexican consuls freely admit that they hand them out to their citizens irrespective of their immigration status. In brief, Timothy Pratt isn't telling the whole truth about the cards.

Which brings us back to the reporter and/or editors at his newspaper. The third link above has more on a previous article in which he portrayed a far-left group as moderate. In a previous report (original article here) he failed to disclose a key affiliation of a pro-illegal immigration protester; that affiliation was disclosed not just in the related AP report (!) which drew on the LV Sun article, but also in an earlier, more human interest Pratt article.