posted on January 12, 2004 09:38:11 AM new
fenix - No, I didn't overlook your comment. Just not sure where you got the 87,000 figure from.
And on the reason the state of CA wasn't reimbursed all the fund is that the Federal funding has limits/caps.
Here's an old 1997 article from testimony from Joe Sandoval a member of the sub-committe on immigration and claims.
His report alone...mind you from 6 years ago...stated:
[begin quote:]
First, is the magnitude of costs and numbers. California currently houses over 152,000 inmates within its 32 correctional institutions. Each of the 32 institutions house an average of approximately 4,500 inmates. Of the 152,000 total inmate population, approximately 15 percent, or 20,000 are criminal aliens.
At an annual cost of $20,981 per inmate, this equates to a total cost of almost $420 million just for housing the criminal alien population in prison. These 20,000 criminal alien inmates occupy the equivalent of five overcrowded prisons whose construction costs to house our criminal alien population exceed $1.3 billion at overcrowded levels.
These cost figures for California alone are about three times what Congress appropriated for criminal alien reimbursement to cover the entire nation for Federal Fiscal Year 1997. Not included are the costs for arrest, prosecution, trial, local incarceration and other related costs.
end quote/
This illegal situation, especially in CA, is much more grave and costly to taxpayers, than you are willing to see.
posted on January 12, 2004 09:43:09 AM new
Here's another part from that same testimony:
1. Criminal Alien Reimbursement
"California is very thankful for the work of the members of this subcommittee and the Congress over the past few years to secure additional funding for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) to reimburse state and local governments for the costs of incarcerating undocumented criminal aliens. I was especially pleased to learn of recent action taken by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies to increase funding to $600 million in the coming fiscal year, $100 million over the last two previous years.
"Unfortunately, the costs of this offender population continues to outstrip the SCAAP funds that have been distributed to California. And, to make this situation even more troubling, a recent Court of Appeals ruling has excused the Attorney General from complying with her obligation under Section 241(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to take into federal custody any undocumented criminal aliens for whom the State has not been reimbursed. Given these facts, the State will continue to work with the subcommittee to relieve state and local governments from the financial hardships associated with illegal immigration.
posted on January 12, 2004 09:54:03 AM new
Back to the FAIR article:
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS NOT A VICTIMLESS CRIME
Apologists for illegal immigration like to paint it as a victimless crime. But in fact, illegal immigration causes substantial harm to American citizens and legal immigrants, particularly those in the most vulnerable sectors of our population--the poor, minorities, and children.
Illegal immigration causes an enormous drain on public funds. The seminal study of the costs of immigration by the National Academy of Sciences found that the taxes paid by immigrants do not cover the cost of services received by them. We cannot provide high quality education, health care, and retirement security for our own people if we continue to bring in endless numbers of poor, unskilled immigrants[/b].
Additionally, job competition by waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees.
Illegal immigration also contributes to the dramatic population growth overwhelming communities across America--crowding school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland.
posted on January 12, 2004 09:59:17 AM new
The 87K number came from Nation Bureau of Prisons.
According to you new article linked in order for the stats in the original article to be correct, the population of incarcerated illegals would have to have doubled in four years in order for them to be correct.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 12, 2004 10:19:11 AM new
Twelve - DL's for illegals would have denoted non citizen status.
Gravid - Let be realistic. I realise that there are illegals from all over the world. But the the largest percentage are from or coming thru Mexico (Mexico actually has a larger problem than ours ).
A very small percentage of those coming across are paying to do so - if they could pay they would be driven across the border as opposed to crawling thru fences.
I assume that if you worked with a number of these foreign nationals wising to come into the US you also did a little research regarding legal imigration avenues. Someone that can afford to pay most of the fees you have mentioned, quite frankly would have little problems securing a valid tourist Visa for legal entry then finding a job and establishing legal work status. The fact that you would suggest that someone with $30,000 to $40,000 to come across would need to go thru any chanel other than ones legally available to them lead me to believe that you did not understand the situation since someone with that income could easily get status.
By the way, I notice that you want them to come, work, pay social security taxes and then leave before they are eligible to benefit from those contributions. Was that just an accident?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Jan 12, 2004 10:20 AM ]
posted on January 12, 2004 01:06:06 PM new
fenix - While you don't wish to 'buy' the numbers....you can check them out on MANY sites. They all say the same thing with little variation in the numbers.
If you click on some of those links on the FAIR site, you will see how much the illegal population has increased in CA. The graph is there, showing from 1960 to 1960 - to either 2001 or 2002.
You're number is not taking into consideration the illegals who are in local jails either. Their numbers are taking the illegal count from Federal prisons, state prisons and local jails. Plus that stat was from 1997.
Do a google search on the 'cost of illegals'. This FAIR site isn't the only one that has the stats.
--------
DL's for illegals would have denoted non citizen status. That wasn't a 'given', there was disagreement on whether that would single them out from everyone else.
Gravid - Let be realistic. I realise that there are illegals from all over the world. But the the largest percentage are from or coming thru Mexico.
Just barely, according to the FAIR site. There's a link on there for everyone to get the stats on their own state. It says in CA alone the illegals account for only 55% of CA's illegal problem.
I'd pull these up for you, but I'm packing. "Leavin' on a jet plane..... don't know when I'll be back again." [tomorrow] Headed to ol' CA.
posted on January 12, 2004 01:21:32 PM new
::Just barely, according to the FAIR site. There's a link on there for everyone to get the stats on their own state. It says in CA alone the illegals account for only 55% of CA's illegal problem.::
Considering the number of different nations that people come to the US from isn't 55% for one nation a rather large percentage? It's not like the other 45 are from a single other nation.
BTW - I'm not doubting that those are the stats given by the state, I'm saying that I don't believe them and from the what the feds actually paid out, it doesn't look like they did either.
I realize that numbers don't lies but if the last couple years of corporate scandle have taught us anything, it is that the providers of those numers can and sometimes do.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on January 12, 2004 01:22:26 PM new
Hope you enjoy your vacation BTW!
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
This topic is 6 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new
