Apparently Prince William County is keeping a watchful eye on the White House and its policy on immigration, since President Obama took office, according to the News and Messenger. What is being specifically watched is whether the 287(g) program will continue to be supported under the department of homeland security. Certain supervisors fear that the program will lose its federal funding and basically cease to exist. And if 287(g) is no longer funded as part of ICE, that leaves PWC without its program.
The article includes a brief explanation of how the county partners with the federal government:
The 287(g) program is how the county jail and police partner with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to apprehend and process those with criminal backgrounds. Since July 2007, ICE has issued 1,606 detainers for those arrested in the county and 1,506 have been processed, according to county statistics received last week.
The two supervisors who are most tied to the federal program are Chairman Corey Stewart and Gainesville supervisor John Stirrup. Stewart explained the possible ramifications:
“This is what I think is going to happen,” said Corey Stewart, R-at large, chairman of the Board of County Supervisors, looking at the national scene. “I think the administration is going to shift its enforcement focus from illegal immigration to the employer.”
Moreover, he continued, depending on federal budget decisions, the 287(g) program could lose funding. And if that happens, its fate in Prince William is jeopardized.
“If they defund it, it stops our program dead in the water,” Stewart said, rating the chances for such to occur at 50 percent. “It’s just based on the budget and the [actions of] Democrat members of Congress.”
A GAO report and Congressional testimony call for tighter control over the 287(g) program. According to the written testimony of March 14 of Richard Stana, director of Homeland Security and Justice, to the House Committee on Homeland Security:
Specifically … guidance on how and when to use program authority is inconsistent, guidance on how ICE officials are to supervise officers from participating agencies has not been developed, data that participating agencies are to track and report to ICE has not been defined and … taken together, the lack of internal controls makes it difficult for ICE to ensure that the program is operating as intended,”
Stana’s statements were linked to a January GAO report entitled, Immigration Enforcement: Controls over Program Authorizing State and Local Enforcement of Federal Immigration Laws Should Be Strengthened
John Stirrup also expressed his concerns to the News and Messenger:
“I’m hearing the administration is going to use these [GAO] studies as a basis for defunding or reducing the 287(g) program locally,” said Supervisor John Stirrup, R-Gainesville, who was the original author of the county’s immigration enforcement policy. “We could seek assistance from the state … but it could be problematic.”
Meanwhile, county elected officials will probably have to take the wait and see approach. Many local government people have quietly suggested that the problem with these federal programs is the very thing these 2 supervisors seemed to fear. PWC has put much time, money and reputation into these programs. At any minute, the Feds could pull the plug. Should that happen, everything goes up in smoke. All the training and county resources dry up and there is not plan to deal with criminal illegal immigrants. Manassas City, who also participates in 287 (g) at the jail, was not quoted.
Perhaps this county ought to look at a new motto: Only fund and pay for that over which you have total control.
(Just a thought….)
My, my, my, and on a Monday morning no less. It would appear that the scramble is on to find a new “wedge issue” for the next round of elections, both State and local. This was a real “eye opener” this morning.
You gotta respect guys who just jump out of the starting gate. Remember, a rolling stone gathers no moss…..
My, my, my is right! Did you notice that if the policy changes, it will all be those rascally old Democrats? Nooooo, the Republicans would NEVER not jump on the Immigration band wagon. (except all those McCain supporters and everyone else except for Mr. Make Over Mitt Romney and Tom Tancredo)
This is odd… many people here have stated how they fully support the 287g program (every you Moon if I’m not mistaken) and now what? Is everyone that supported the program now going to support getting rid of it? Amazing… the only immigration enforcement most here seem to support is no enforcement at all.
I just wonder when the lawsuits are going to start rolling in from people who have had loved ones hurt or killed by illegal immigrants who have been arrested before but never detained or deported because of a lack of enforcement.
Wasn’t Corey just complaining about the School Board raising teachers salaries by a little over 2% cost of living? I believe his premise was that because it was “stimulus money” from the Feds, their budget would not be balanced without more fed money. HMMMM, I wonder if Corey should take his own advice.
Hello,
The reality is that we need comprehensive immigration reform. The reality is that ICE is can only confirm about 19% of its detainees actually leave after being arrested. This is a broken system and with all the serious financial stresses before us, is THIS the problem we want to just throw money at? My answer would be no.
The 287(g) program started as a program to deport undocumented
aliens that were hardcore felons who presented a clear and present
danger to the public. That I have and will continue to fully
support.
Of course the right wanted to expand it to include more and more
minor offenses, while the left didn’t want it at all. They are
both wrong. We need to keep a properly run and clearly
focused 287(g). The current program at our ADC works
for the good of the ENTIRE community.
Hi Elena, sure, the system needs to be fixed and made to be more efficient but you don’t do that by cutting things that work. Besides, didn’t you support 287g as well? But now you don’t, interesting.
Look, with unemployment at record high levels do you really think ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ is going to get anywhere? It couldn’t get anywhere when we had virtually no unemployment with everyone saying how bad we needed illegal immigrants in the work force. So what, your going to get rid of any type of enforcement until that happens? Don’t hold your breath…
Actually Hello, I don’t see one single place in the thread where I have condemned nor criticized the 297(g) program. Do you always look for the negative even when there is none?
I am simply bringing this issue to light. I do support the 287(g)program as a matter of fact. I do not want criminals on the street. However, perhaps it needs to undergo improvement. Perhaps it needs to be revamped. If the program is flawed, then let’s fix it. Meanwhile, I am just going to agree with Poor Richard….and stay right here as a moderate on the subject. Thanks for your input, PR.
As a matter of fact, I don’t even think I castigated either of our esteemed supervisors–now there’s a first.
I could be wrong Moon but your last statement “Perhaps this county ought to look at a new motto: Only fund and pay for that over which you have total control.” suggests to me that you no longer support it. Doesn’t that statement suggest that you believe PWC shouldn’t use 287g because PWC doesn’t ‘have total control’?
If the issue is about money then wouldn’t it be a total waste of money to just get rid of it after all of the training and such…?
Actually, I hope that doesn’t happen. Both the county and city have a great deal invested in the 287(g) program.
There has always been concern over the lack of control of any program that involves the feds. It is always something to consider when spending a great deal of money. Remember when our jail was spilling over and we were having to farm out non-illegal immigrant detainees? Why? Because ICE wasn’t coming to pick up illegal aliens. It wasn’t until Congressman Wolf got involved that we saw this problem aleviated or perhaps lessened would be more to the point.
Hello, I will continue to support things but yet retain my right to look at them more closely. That is a weak statement of disapproval at best. Hopefully we will learn from this experience if it does go south. And again, I repeat, at this stage of the game, that is not what I wish for.
Poor Richard, you make an excellent point. The purpose of the program was to catch violent offenders, not the 87% that committ traffic violations. So, the question is, how do we focus our resources on those that are a danger to society, no matter what their status. @Poor Richard
Hello, I am one of those who supported 287(G), but I am open to the new administration doing a comprehensive review and perhaps improving on the system.
287(G) was the solution Chief Deane recommended before the “ambush” that was the Immigration Resolution. If Chief Deane had been left alone to administer 287(G) as it was meant to be administered, Prince William County might have been an example of how to do it right, rather than an example of the tragic consequences of politicians monkeying with law enforcement for their own political advantage.
287(G) was a good solution for a period in which there was no immediate prospect of a solution at the federal level. If we wanted our police force and 287(G) to operate MORE EFFECTIVELY during this time, it would be the Immigration Resolution we would do away with, not 287(G). The Immigration Resolution has sought to cast the widest possible net which includes traffic violations … and, at one point, was going to include anyone and everyone the police comes into contact with … while 287(G) is designed to focus on serious offenders.
Let’s remember the stated intent of 287(G). If you arrest someone for a serious offense who is in the country illegally, you notify the feds. Seems like common sense.
If the operators of 287(G) programs had the instruction and the discipline to focus only on serious crimes … the “worst of the worst” as Chief Deane originally recommended … then the program would not only be noncontroversial, it would also be effective. Offenders would serve their time and then be turned over to ICE to be deported.
But often, 287(G) is enacted in an environment where there is political pressure to “deport them all,” and where extreme rhetoric and public perception infects the administration of program. The definition of a “serious crime” expands to include driving, for instance, and working. The “worst of the worst” get lost in the shuffle and local and federal authorities are overloaded with people and paperwork, losing sight of the original intent of the program.
This folly was made official policy by our Board of County Supervisors, by the way, when they adopted the Immigration Resolution, ON TOP OF the 287(G) program approved at Chief Deane’s request the previous year. Now, PWC police are mandated to throw people who committed traffic violations in with the serious offenders and force ICE to do the sorting and prioritizing. (In other 287(G) jurisdictions, this corruption of the original mandate has happened gradually and not by way of legislation, but the result has been the same.) By expanding the definition of “serious crime” to include drivers and workers, 287(G) is creating chaos and confusion in local jails, at ICE, and in our immigration court system.
Think about it. Do we want to go down the road of incarcerating moms and dads who were driving their kids to soccer practice? There are 12 million undocumented people in our country and all of them are going to drive a car at some point. If we don’t prioritize serious offenses over rolling stops at stop signs, then 287(G) … a program that was supposed to focus on serious offenders … is in effect a blueprint to bankrupt the nation and create a quasi police state while we’re at it.
Local taxpayers end up footing the bill to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars per month to house drivers and workers who would NOT ORDINARILY be incarcerated. When ICE picks these people up, taxpayers don’t get reimbursed, by the way. And that’s when the real chaos ensues.
There is no way to accurately describe what happens once ICE becomes involved because there are no reliable records being kept. But one thing we do know is that a large percentage of the people Prince William County taxpayers have paid so much money to arrest and house come right back to our community. I assume this means the “worst of the worst” principle is being exercised by an overwhelmed ICE administration forced to prioritize. That would mean they are sending the drivers and workers back to us; not the serious offenders, but I don’t know that for certain. (Does anyone know? Lucky Duck?)
The Obama administration says they are interested in efficiency and effectiveness at Immigration and Customs. Let’s see if they can figure out how to achieve that. I’m certainly not opposed to the idea.
Perhaps the 287(G) system will be refined to better function in a post-Comprehensive Immigration Reform America, where the only people who don’t have status are people who don’t want it. That way, the “worst of the worst” principle will occur naturally. Registering with the federal government … as a guest worker, resident alien, applicant for citizenship, etc. … will be mandatory, and the process will be streamlined so there is not a 10-year back-log. Those who meet the requirement of registering with the federal government would be given a temporary classification while going through the process.
That way 287(G), or whatever it will be called, can focus on the “worst of the worst” as originally intended. If it is practiced the way it was preached, I can’t see why a program like 287(G) would remain controversial in a post C.I.R. America.
I supported 287g because I heard that Chief Deane supported it. That’s all there is to it for me. I think that most people who opposed 287g didn’t realize that its stated intent was sound, and only know about all the problems caused by doing a bad job of applying it. Poor Richard and WHWN have explained the problem really well.
Fewer than seventy localities in the US employ the 287(g) program. How do they handle their felons/violent criminals? For that matter, how did PWC and the Cities handle theirs prior to the implementation of 287(g)?
Have participating local/state governments created a national nightmare with erratic,non-uniform reporting?
Censored, the bright line distinction between felony and misdemeanor would have been a good way to separate out the “worst of the worst” and achieve the original intent of 287(G). Law enforcement officials would have had a uniform standard, and a guideline for prioritization.
But as with any experiment, results are not guaranteed. Sadly enough, we guaranteed failure in Prince William County by passing the Immigration Resolution on top of 287(G). Manassas City did not go to such extremes. They allocated public safety resources more effectively, and have seen crime rates drop, while we have seen crime rates increase. To boot, they have spent a lot less taxpayer money. Live and learn, I suppose. But it would be nice if there was some learning going on in the Gainesville District Supervisor’s office, and in that of the County Chair.
WHWN, I wonder how PWC and Manassas City compare in funds squandered on immigration related issues – money wasted per resident. The City didn’t get off cheaply – it had to spend money defending its definition of “family” as well as money spent because some people (PWC residents as well as City residents) couldn’t ignore Gaudencio Fernandez’s sign. Manassas Park appears to be the locality that didn’t get wrapped up in this hysteria.
How do Alexandria, Arlington, Stafford, Henrico for example deal with felons? Do they check immigration status? Are they now required to do so by Virginia law?
The point is being missed here about 287(G) being “expanded” and “applied”. The police department, with its 287(G) officers, has been instructed to focus on serious offenders regarding investigations, apprehensions etc., which they do.
The program has not been “expanded” by the local police department. The Criminal Alien Unit is not out looking for traffic offenders or people who are intoxicated in public.
Those arrested illegal immigrants enter the system at the Detention Center. But the reasoning behind their entry is because if someone is arrested on Driving While Intoxicated charges or for driving without a license, if that individual, whether legal or illegal, cannot provide positive ID or demonstrate ties to the community, they are going to be physically taken into custody – not because they are illegally here. A citizen would face the same fate. Without ID and/or ties to the community, they go to the Adult Detention Center where 287(G), by jail policy mandates the questioning of immigration status and triggers ICE notification.
WHWN…no illegal immigrant is just “released” without follow up. True, some of those arrested on traffic charges maybe released by ICE, but they are scheduled for a hearing in the future. Regardless of being freed at that time, they are in the process of hearings that could end in their deportation as opposed to ICE not knowing they are in the Country as it was prior to their being arrested.
Censored, as I understand it, Del. Dave Albo’s law passed last July applies only to people who are (1) incarcerated and (2) admit to being foreign born. Their status is checked and if they are undocumented, federal authorities are alerted.
The Virginia law limits it to foreign born, I assume, because checking everyone would be too costly. (In Prince William we check everyone because cost is no obstacle, they can always raise our taxes.) Also, we check everyone who is arrested, as opposed to everyone who is incarcerated. Many people who are arrested never make it to jail.
In my view, the Virginia law is good example of an approach that is less controversial and also more effective than what we have done in Prince William. (And you’re right, Manassas City should not be praised for their handling of the immigration issue, except in comparison to PWC.)
By only checking people who are convicted and incarcerated, I gather that the Virginia law is helping not hurting ICE in its attempt to allocate limited resources toward deporting the “worst of the worst.”
I often wonder what would have happened if the Board of Supervisors had done their homework first, and THEN passed the Immigration Resolution. It might not have been quite the election issue that people like Stewart, Letiecq, Frederick, and Stirrup (among many others) were counting on. But the chances are they would have arrived at something much closer to the Virginia state law. Or, perhaps they’d have arrived at something like the amended version of the Immigration Resolution … the compromise the Board settled upon after a year of being distracted from core responsibilities such as public safety, our schools, and the health of our local economy … in which we abolished the “probable cause” standard and moved the status checks to after arrest instead of out in the streets.
As I have said, 287(G) was not a bad idea. But it is becoming counterproductive because too many jurisdictions are doing what PWC has done: failing to prioritize the “worst of the worst.”
Lucky Duck, thanks for the added insight.
I’ll say this much, the Republicans never had a good story on illegal immigration enforcement. They never went after employers because their greed would never allow them to stand up to businesses, and deportation-only is, of course, a losing game. The Democrats might actually have better luck going after employers, because they’ve spent the nation into oblivion and will need every dollar they can get to offset the damage they’ve done. I’ve always thought employer enforcement was the way to go, and normally I would never expect Democrats to enforce a law that didn’t rob citizens of their freedoms, but economic necessity might actually force the strategy to work this time. Of course, amnesty is the ultimate goal of the Obama administration, and that would be the best thing for the Republicans in 2010. That would be like bolting NOS onto the engine of backlash.
SP, what did you just say …last sentence? Repeat in laymen’s terms por favor.
I don’t see why ICE can’t come up with the oversight it needs. It makes no sense for each jurisdiction to just do its own thing with 287(g).
Also, what was Superintendent Melitis talking about when he said that x number of worst of the worsts were back here in the county? Do we have any accounting of what happens to detainees after they are turned over to ICE?
Actually, Slow, the next big battle of Comprehensive Immigration Reform is most likely going to hurt the Republican party in 2010. The Democrats are not the ones who are divided on the immigration issue. We are!
Either the immigration issue is the stake that drives an irreparable wedge that cripples the party, or it is only a smoke screen that prevents the party from uniting around common goals. The strategy and the conduct of Republican leadership will determine our fate.
My fear (and expectation) is that the CIR fight will be scheduled just as we begin the 2010 midterm elections. The Democrats would like nothing better than to see a rabid pack of House Republicans proving once and for all that Rush Limbaugh is indeed the leader of the party by acting like Corey Stewart and John Stirrup on steroids. If the Republicans fall into the trap of playing to the extremist minority of the party, the party will continue to atrophy as moderate Republicans become Independents or Democrats, and minorities abandon the party forever, not just based on poor performance as was the case with Bush, but based on principle.
What is worse, those Republican Congress members who survive 2010 will either be moderate Senators who have long track records of service to their states, or extremist House members who live in districts where moderation is not required … and, the great chasm will continue.
@Moon-howler
NOS is Nitrous Oxide. Nitrous will make an engine go ridiculous fast (and maybe blow the thing up, too). WHWN, I would give ANYTHING if the vote on CIR (Amnesty) would happen going into the 2010 mid-terms. ANYTHING!
Thanks Slow. I had never heard of that. I’ll bite. Who would do something like that and why?
Why do you all keep saying something that has penalties is amnesty? Amnesty is being forgiven without so much as a Hail Mary.
Well, I doubt you will get that wish, Slow. The Democrats are too smart for that. They will schedule the vote just before the primaries take place.
That way, extremist Republicans will be in scorched earth mode, and insist on nominating a slate of Congressional candidates who are wiling to go on record saying outrageously insensitive, Greg Letiecq type remarks. This might make the extremists happy and get them through the primaries, but in a general election such remarks would come back to haunt them.
That is the one area where you and the Democrats agree, Mr. Slow: both of you want Republicans to nominate as many extremists as possible for another drubbing in 2010.
Well, goodness – an old friend, Pat Hurd (the Hurd family were
very active members of the community, especially supporting
youth sports, and Pat was a Manassas member of the ADC Board
for years) wrote a letter mourning Old Manassas – “a tiny
jewel” during the 1970’s, 1980’s, and 1990’s but now
“reduced to a cesspool of bigotry, hatred and small-mindness”.
News & Messenger (April 6, 2009)
While I think Pat paints with way too broad a brush, it wasn’t
all good then and it isn’t all bad now, he, a retired lawyer,
is a very smart guy and I value his views and insight.
Still – ouch.
“The purpose of the program was to catch violent offenders, not the 87% that committ traffic violations”
I hear talk of how we are at fault for letting these people in and giving them hope – as if we have a moral obligation to criminals to reward them for breaking our rules.
People like to blame the employers, blame the landlords and mortgage brokers, blame the coyotes, blame the Mexican economy, blame US intervention in central America, blame our political ruling class.
It seems to me that some blame also needs to be resrved for anyone who, in the face of all logic and fairness, wants to see our law enforcement officials come into contact with known illegal aliens and then say to them “well this is nothing, go on your way”.
I haven’t heard of any penalties. I’ve heard of “forcing the undocumented to learn English”. I’m still not sure how anyone can say that with a straight face. I’ve heard of “a fine”. I suppose that’s a check made out directly to Barrack Obama, or the DNC. Any amount of a fine that would have any meaning at all is 1000 times what an undocumented immigrant could afford anyway. So I’m sorry, but we’re just going to disagree here. Anything short of “go home and get in back of the line, then come back the right way” is amnesty.
Why would anyone want to put NOS in their car? Well, I’m a stock kind-of-guy, so I don’t relate, but the kids to like “the fast and the furious” just love it! There have always been lots of kids with more money than brains, right?
Rick, I understand where you are coming from. You have a big problem with some former neighbors you think were probably illegal. For all we know they might have been. So it’s fine that you are angry at “illegal aliens” and you want the police to go after them whether they are a threat to society or not.
If it were up to me, I’d have the police focus on someone else entirely. I really don’t like professional boxing. I think it’s a brutal sport. It’s not even a sport. I’d like the police to arrest anyone who looks like they might be a professional boxer. But, I also recognize that it wouldn’t serve the community if I passed a law telling them to do this.
Even if I was able to come up with a statistic that PROVES that professional boxers are more likely to commit violent crimes such as assault, I STILL wouldn’t be right if I said it was in the interest of public safety for police to harass or arrest people who look like professional boxers as a way of making the community more safe.
As Michael often points out, it’s not a group that commits a crime, it’s an individual. And our police need to be allowed to pursue individuals who commit crimes, not any group that can be defined by visual characteristics such as race or bulging muscles.
There seems to be a consensus on this thread that checking legal status is a good thing to do after arrest, or after people are in jail. Until that time, we should leave our pet peeves out of police business.
Poor Richard, how about a link to this article you mention?
I dated a guy in high school who had a camaro. All his buddies had camaro’s with rebuilt engines. They would go drag racing on weekends. The ones who won had installed an NOS in their engines. And, cars went wicked fast.@Moon-howler
Elena and Slowpoke…aka my thug buds….*I* used to have a camaro, probably both of you all would say vintage. *I* never installed NOS in its engine. That didn’t stop *ME* from getting tickets. Just kidding. (polishing halo) Did I say ticket?
Slow, all kidding aside, I believe the CIR Bill proposed in 2007 had a $5000 fine attached to it as well as some other penalties. I don’t think Obama was slated for those bucks. To me, 5k is not amnesty.
I believe what Twinad was trying to tell you is, There is no line to get in. How does one get in a line that doesn’t exist?
Poor Richard, I saw that letter this afternoon. I thought it spoke volumes, even if it was a bit of a broadbrush.
ShellyB,
You can find it on the website of the News&Messenger
and/or InsideNova.com under letters-to-the editor. Sadly, the only
“links” I know how to navigate are on the golf course (sometimes).
Okay Pat, I went and go the link:
http://www.insidenova.com/isn/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/article/letter_writer_mourns_old_manassas/33207/
All you have to do is cut and paste stuff in the top of the screen.
Sorry Richard, I called you “Pat” because I’d just read Pat Herd’s letter!
“The purpose of the program was to catch violent offenders, not the 87% that committ traffic violations.”
Violent criminals don’t make traffic violations? Those 87% of which you speak may be for DWI which can result in violent and deadly consequences, just ask any member of MADD.
I thought that the Republicans didn’t want any federal funds for Virginia. Did they change their minds?
It’s easy to deny the existence of any problem if your own life has been relatively untouched by the presence of illegal immigrants. And I’m sorry, but any crime that an illegal immigrant commits is one crime too many that should not have occurred in the first place. I am sick to death of reading about yet another child rape that should never have happened in the first place by someone who should not have been here in the first place. Chandra Levy wiould still be alive today, probably raising a family, if it weren’t for the presence of an illegal immigrant.And I do consider a DUI or other traffic violation a crime that could have potentially killed innocent life.
Just because our federal government continues to fail us in this regard does not mean that we should just throw up our hands and do nothing to protect our own communities. We don’t need to sit around and be victimized while we wait in vain for the feds to help out. I fully support 287g, no matter what the degree of crime it is dealing with. Kind of like the death penalty–it won’t happen to you if you don’t commit a capital crime. If you do commit the crime–knowing the potential penalty–well, consider that you have essentially committed suicide.
Rapists are rapists. Killers are killers.
The child rape or the murder would have happened somewhere else.
So that would make it better? At least here, there is the CHANCE justice will be served.
Emma, entrance into the United States doesn’t create a rapist. I disagree with you. If that person were not here, a rape would have still happened. You just probably wouldn’t know about it. Frankly, to me, it is just as bad to have a child raped in say Mexico or El Salvador, as it is to have them raped here. I suppose it just depends on your outlook. To me, rape is rape.
To you all (Emma, Kelly, Former) know how monotonous and parrot-like you all sound when you say your sing song about any crime by an illegal is one crime to many? Please think up something new to say. I can no longer be polite.
SA,
Driving Drunk is not a simple traffic violation and I would not suggest that it was. Furthemore, the 287G program was already in place prior to the resolution! How many times do we have to repeat that fact? It was already being implemented through the ADC. You are missing the point. This is not about immigration, and I will continue to say this, it is about singling out a specific population, latino, and looking at them like they are “less than” the rest of us.
Emma,
How about gun crime? Are you also opposed to the free flow of guns in the United States? If there weren’t so many guns on the streets we wouldn’t have so many deaths….right? It is the individual, not the statusof that person, that needs to be dealt with!
Elena, thank you for reinforcing the information about the 287(g) program. I honestly believe that the ‘powers that be’ deliberately kept it confused with the Immigration Resolution. That confusion was all part of the ambush.
For all those who keep insisting that the Immigration Resolution is working, please explain to me what part is working? Those illegal seniors not on the Blue Bird Senior Trip bus! Guess you showed them!
What part is working? My neighborhood doesn’t have anonylous strangers living in half the houses, and has half as many people in it, and is quieter at all times of day, and I can communicate with my neighbors in English. And, citizens (and maybe a few legal residents) are buying and renting the houses, and less people are running away. So, it’s working well I think.
Rick, how do you attribute that to the Immigration Resolution? Are you saying that the Resolution scared people out of town?
I honestly do not know of any component of that Resolution that would make that happen other than the fear that surrounded it. When did your neighborhood begin to empty?
You know, the people who live in neighborhoods like Rick’s did have a legitimate complaint when so many housing code violations were taking place. Greg Letiecq emerged as the savior and said, “If you want a solution, I have one, and here are the thing you must say, here are the things you must think, and here is when and how to say them.”
Now that nerves are calmed and more is known, many of us are asking, “Why did we take a hacksaw to a hang nail?”
Well, people who were really frustrated and discouraged by the lack of response to their concerns about neighborhood issues were frustrated ENOUGH to say yes to the hacksaw approach. And to them it was more than a hangnail, it was their home that they’d purchased and expected to live their American dream. They believed that their houses were losing value because of the immigrants. They believed Greg Letiecq’s spook tales that the immigrants were committing more crime than average people. They believed our schools were being unfairly saddled with costs we couldn’t afford (we later learned the numbers here were bogus and that the state government pays for ESOL anyway). But if you believed all these things AND you had a frustrating housing situation, I can understand being willing to follow Greg.
There are a lot of problems with taking a hacksaw to a hangnail. But it is true that once the foot is removed, there is no longer a hangnail.
It’s possible to acknowledge this on both sides, and then ask the deeper questions, like: should the whole county suffer the consequences when only certain areas want the wrong solution to a problem? And, should we hold our leaders (Letiecq/Stewart/Stirrup) accountable for fables told to recommend the hacksaw, now that we realize our foot is gone?
Eick, how do you know that the Immigration Resolution – and not the sub-prime mortgage fiasco – was the impetus for moving people out of your neighborhood?
Oops, make that “Rick” up there. Sorry.
yes, many people had legitimate complaints, especially neighborhood complaints. And those who lived in closer quarters had more acute complaints than those who had a little distance between them and their neighbors.
There were/are also school issues which become more apparent as resources become more scarce. Hospitals and courts are also impacted by sudden growth.
I have never said there weren’t problems. I just did not like the approach to the problems when we vilified a single group of people, without having a way to identify that group. Actually, I am not sure I would have felt a bit better even if illegal immigrants had to sew a big old I on their shirts. I think I might have felt worse.
What makes me the angriest is that this entire situation here in PWC was really for political gain, not for problem solving. We have seen what happens to those who try the problem solving approach. They are made fun of and attacked.
Certain people who wanted political fame waved the bloody shirt until their arms nearly fell off. Some wanted to get elected, some wanted to hold their posts, and others probably wanted to get a job in a field related to ….oh never mind, if I said, then everyone would know who I meant.
M-H, you hit the hangnail on the head:
Actually, the patch with the letter “I” would not have worked because no one would have been willing to wear it if it meant “illegal.” If instead it mean “immigrant but not illegal” I know a lot of Hispanic people who might have worn it. A similar patch was offered to Chinese Americans during WWII, so they would not be mistaken for Japanese Americans (due to the bombing of Pearl Harbor).