These photos were sent to me by a friend in Tomball, Texas to give you an idea of the devastation of the floodwaters.
This is a retention pond behind my friend's house. Normally it is bone dry.
This was from day 1 of the storm.
Retention pond day 2: It looks like a river.
Looking out his front door.
I spent a considerable amount of time on the phone today with Sen. Huffines Education Policy director, Lauren who is at the Austin office (very nice lady)
***ALERT***
THERE WILL BE TESTING for all those that apply and get the state funding through Education Savings Accounts (ESA) in this proposed "School Choice" legislation.
Now with that said a student has to be in the public school system for an un-determined amount of time to qualify for the funding. (There was original discussion that this would be 100 days and it is not set in stone as of yet).
Now I want you to wrap your head around this home schoolers. Texas has been the best State in the US to homeschool due to our freedom from state mandates and testing. If this "School Choice" bill passes those who choose to exit the public school system to homeschool and buy into the money carrot of (ESA's) are unfortunately NOT aware of the freedom we have been blessed with.
Unfortunately, I feel many will be duped into taking the $$ keeping their child in the system. With this comes control, state mandates, testing and data collection on TEXAS' future homeschool community.
Please do not buy into the "MANTRA" that this $$ is going to parents to "EMPOWER" them to be involved in their child's education.A parent that wants to be involved in their child's education WILL BE!!
With that said I am most upset that the Texas Home School Coalition is throwing future Texas Homeschoolers under the bus.
If your on facebook please join in our discussion.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1848649718688814/
Texas is larger than most countries in the United Nations, some not much bigger than the postage stamps they print for collectors, but each with a vote that can cancel ours out. Texas is about to a vote against the U.N.’s sovereignty-destroying Agenda 21, so named because it claims to be setting a “sustainable growth” agenda for the 21st century.
Agenda 21 is in fact a global power grab similar to climate-change treaties like the Kyoto Protocol. It uses the imaginary threat of unsustainable growth which allegedly threatens to plunder the planet’s finite resources, like climate change allegedly threatens planetary doom, to impose a liberal wish list of restraints on our freedoms to decide how we live our lives in our pursuit of one of those inalienable rights liberals fear -- the pursuit of happiness.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/05/texas_messes_with_agenda_21.html#ixzz3ZZPvl1OM
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
For the second time in a row, the Texas Family and Protective Services agency has been party to what has come to be called "mednapping:" seizing a child from its parents, apparently without any cause beyond the parents’ disagreement with some hospital functionary’s opinion or behavior.
(see: http://medicalkidnap.com/2014/10/22/4-month-old-texas-baby-seized-from-parents-in-medical-dispute/
Baby Kathryn Hughes, born with a cleft palate and with extremely rare Pierre Robin Sequence (see: http://www.online-medical-dictionary.org/definitions-p/pierre-robin-sequence.html) went through a series of complex and conflicting diagnoses, with equally conflicting and complex prescriptions and instructions, at UMC hospital of Lubbock, Texas, before her condition was finally diagnosed.
The Texas Child Protective Services agency, acting on a complaint made by a functionary at the Hospital, summarily seized Baby Kathryn. Furthermore, they initiated action to permanently terminate her mother’s parental rights The reason they gave was that the functionary declared the mother "could not have been" following instructions on how to administer the medications.
The agency appears to be uninterested in substantial eyewitness testimony that Mrs. Blaylock was indeed following physician instructions. They have instead relied on the word of the hospital functionary, who appears to have no first-hand experience of the child’s home-care at all.
Some questions come to mind.
Call me a cynic, but it apparently took the hospital a while to figure out what the problem was.
Also, the mother disagreed with some of the things the hospital was doing, and they did them anyway. Is the hospital’s complaint a particularly odious way of trying to avoid a possible malpractice suit?
I don’t know. I hope not. But the question does present itself.
Second, the retired judge who runs the agency, Hon John Specia, seemed to express impatience at regular legislative and judicial oversight of his agency in an October 3rd interview with ABC's KSAT (See: http://www.ksat.com/content/pns/ksat/news/2014/10/03/child-protective-services-undergoing--transformation-.html). Yet, he has a stellar career record, both as a child advocate and as an even-handed jurist. Since he took over, his agency has received plaudits for their improvement. Is His Honor protecting this record by covering for an over-zealous bureaucrat in his department? Again, I hope not. Given the man’s reputation, it seems unthinkable. But the question does present itself.
Finally, where is due process in this picture? Do the self-assumed prerogatives of administrative agencies now override the protections of American families under the law? I would think this would be distasteful to a distinguished jurist like Judge Specia; that he would want more, not less, incorporation into the judicial system he served with such distinction.
Tragically, Texas is not the only place where this sort of thing is happening. “Mednapping” has taken place in various parts of the country, all of it following what looks like the same pattern: a spurious complaint by a self-important hospital functionary to a government agency that appears not to be answerable to anybody but itself, which then proceeds to summarily capture a child.
Now, don’t get me wrong: we need for law enforcement to have an avenue to rescue children from actually abusive situations; that is to say, real law enforcement, properly trained and sworn to city, county or state.
We need the judicial capacity to withdraw custody from actually abusive parents; that is to say, real courts, part of and answerable to the real judicial system.
And we need facilities to house and care for these children during the judicial process and to handle foster placement if the court so orders. If these facilities wish to be called “Child Protective Agencies,” that’s fine. But that should be the limit of their mandate.
What we don’t need is an extrajudicial bureaucracy, unrestrained by the real legal system, that has the power to break up families simply because they give that power to themselves, however nobly motivated they may believe they are.
For more information, see:
http://medicalkidnap.com/2014/07/23/legal-medical-kidnapping-a-growing-problem-in-the-u-s/ .
By: Juan Reynoso, activist - voteforamerica@gmail.com
http://anticorruptionact.org/. STAND FOR AMERICA http://www.teaparty.org/
"Americas must realize that self-scrutiny is not treason. Self-examination is not disloyalty."
Texas needs to protect its Border to defend the Texas sovereignty and the sovereignty of The USA. http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/HC00050I.htm
Wake up America, this invasion of unaccompanied children seeking asylum is the work of the Obama administration, in fact is part of the North America Union agenda, The United States corporate and the financing Banking elite want to control the economics of the American continent; The big picture is the organization of the “North American Union”
This invasion of illegal immigrants is not new for the last 3 years we had knowledge that unaccompanied children from Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador enter the US illegally, The Dept. of Home Land Security, The Border Patrol, The Border Governors, congress, The President and the US. Dept. of justice and most Washington politicians have knowledge of this illegal invasion of foreign nationals. The proposed legislations and initiatives to stop this immigration problem from Congress, Home Land Security and the law enforcement is a charade to appease the people that was concern about the issue and send letter to congress asking to protect the border.
The increase in unaccompanied children seeking asylum, it is not a refugee problem, in reality this is an acceleration of the Agenda to form the North American Union, it is not the lack of capacity from the Border Patrol to secure our Borders, but the deliberate actions of our government to reemphasizes the people and Congress’s that our immigration system is broken and that will be fix by passing the comprehensive immigration reform that will address the invasion and the 12 million illegal immigrants that are in our country illegally for many years.
The truth is that our government plan and executed the demise of the core of the citizenry of our country to form a country without a firm ideology and principles by promoting the immigration of a multiplex ideology, principles language, religion and morality, we cannot communicate and we are complete divide and easy to control; that is their plan and look like they have accomplished, the creation of a “babel tower”; divided by the language, principles and ignorant of our constitution or what American stand for.
Fellow Texans we are in the last days of the USA being a sovereign country, accountable to the American people. With the North American Union come the demise of our constitutional rights and our freedom and also the enslaver of the people of Mexico, The USA and Canada. The control of natural resources and human capital is the objective of the American elite through the North American Union; no borders or laws that prevent them to have absolute control of the people and the economic. Fellow Texans we, California, Arizona and New Mexico are the hope of America. Being the USA as we are today is a must, our constitution must be defended at all cost it guarantees our freedom and our state sovereignty. We Texans had to contend with this open border issue since Ronald Reagan, the amnesty of 1986 and the free trade promote by Reagan was the beginning of the end of our United States.
We must support Rick Perry and defend and secure our border, the price of this open border policy and the promotion of the North American Union is too high to bear; our freedom, liberty and our constitution must never be compromise. The greed for power and money are the evil that is destroying our country.
To share this please clicks here Share|
Sources for this article include:
Texas’ Sovereignty under the 10th Amendment
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/12227/
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?194226-HCR-50-The-Texas-Sovereignty-bill-passes!
California is a sovereign State.
http://section520.org/cal.html
Arizona and New Mexico are a sovereign State.
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/sovereignty-for-new-mexico.html
US Visa waiver – I-94W forms- were implemented to facilitate the invasion of illegal immigrants.
LATINOS FOR HONEST GOVERNMENT
Seek the truth – stand by the truth – live the truth.
Our agenda is to establish a government base on the truth and our Christian principles
San Antonio, corruption and fiscal responsibility.
I don’t believe we the people of San Antonio are getting our money’s worth. The San Antonio City manager, the fire Dept. Chief and the Chief of police are over pay. Our city council needs to get inform about these jobs responsibilities and seek ways to save the city Taxpayers money. I can see that the council approved these pay package agreements base on what other cities are paying for their city managers, not about the city most important objective “financial stability” Our city’s debt obligation is $1,406,185,000. That is secured by property taxes. Today we are paying more property taxes by assessment value of your property not by increasing the tax rate on your property. This is a clever way to do it, that way you cannot complain about this tax increase. The truth on this matter is that the replacement cost of your property has not increase because construction labor have decrease and material cost have increase but not to a point that justified the change of your home value, most people will not complain because they are glad that their property worth more. We need to remember the housing bubble and the crash of 2008. See labor cost. http://www.workersdefense.org/Build%20a%20Better%20Texas_FINAL.pdf
Our municipal debt is a Debt Trap, $1,406,185,000. Is not where we want to be financially. San Antonio has responsibilities for public safety, infrastructure, cultural institutions - schools, Economy development and public transport. To finance these essential services, San Antonio dependents on Property tax revenue, municipally owned energy utility and the Convention Center Hotel Finance Corp. Now we are doing fine do to the increase on our cost of utilities and taxes, but we must remember the decline of revenue in 2009 and we must be prepare for the future. Due to the increase of population our infrastructure expenses will grow and to maintain our quality of life we must think forward and implement a new strategy on city planning to deal with this population grow.
The economic impact invisibility must end. Policymakers and city administrators must recognize the economic value of a good city planning to deal with transportation, clean environment, mobility and the cost of living of the people of San Antonio and take that into account in their decision-making. Otherwise, we can forget about improving our “quality of life.”
Our future depends on fiscal responsibility and our ability to maintain our city operating cost low to enable to pay our debt as soon as possible and be able to pay for future essential city projects that will be of benefit to the people. Mayor Julian Castro and the city council, must review city employees wage and benefit and re-negotiate severance package.
Since 2005 when city manager Sheryl Sculley was hire, our long term liability went from 1,613,274 to 2,593,223. 14.3% of our city budget goes to pay for this deb payment and our cost of public safety (Police and Fire Dept.) is 66.5% (657,190,952) of the city budget; those two items eats most of our budget, while on education we contribute less that the half of the cost.
We should focus on education and our quality of life; “Quality of life” can be understood in three main ways. First, there is the wealth or purchasing power of citizens, and the quality and accessibility of goods provided in the community; including education, healthcare, parks, public roads, air, and water. A supplement to this first category is social and political goods, such as democracy, integrity and clarity in city hall, the rule of law, political and religious freedom, zero discrimination policy, and a sense of community social justice.
Our future depends on our ability to seek the truth and demand efficiency in our government.
http://sanantonio.gov/Portals/0/images/Commpa/HRB/news/jan/public.pdf
http://www.expressnews.com/news/politics/article/Police-fire-medical-plans-targeted-5238686.php
http://www.sanantonio.gov/budget
http://www.ubmfuturecities.com/author.asp?section_id=234&doc_id=526348
https://www.facebook.com/CAGW/posts/517999751580682
Where the money goes (Service Delivery Expenditures):
Public Safety- Police and Fire Dept. 45.2%
Debt Service (2,593,223.000)- 14.3%
Health and Human Services 12.6%
Streets and Infrastructure 6.3%
Environmental 5.7%
Economic Development 5.6%
Convention, Tourism and Culture 4.4%
Administrative city manager and stuff 3.7%
Parks & Recreation 3.9%
Neighborhood service 1.9
A months-long Watchdog.org analysis of political influence on the admissions process at UT Law found there’s some truth, after all, to the old line about who you know mattering more than what you know. We found dozens of Longhorns who don’t know enough to be lawyers but know somebody important in the Legislature.
Two of those mediocre students are legislators themselves.
Some have connections to the leadership circle of House Speaker Joe Straus, others to powerful state Sen. Judith Zaffirini, who’s already been caught three times trying to pull end runs around the admissions process.
Wallace Hall, a University of Texas regent, cited dozens of emails and letters that he obtained in a records review to support claims that some members of the Legislature abused their positions to influence admissions decisions.
Barely two weeks after Hall began his investigation of influence peddling last June, the Legislature launched proceedings to impeach him. The correspondence Hall saw has been kept from the public, as have the conclusions of an inquiry into favoritism conducted by Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa.
This Watchdog.org review of the record is meant to shine the available light on a process shrouded in secrecy by education privacy laws and by top school officials reluctant to embarrass powerful politicians, some of whom happen to be their friends.
Watchdog.org found a pattern of overlapping political influence and underwhelming performance on the bar exam. Any single one of the cases we describe could have an alternate explanation, such as personal problems that derailed studies.
Taken as a whole, however, they offer clear evidence that political influence is the reason dozens of students who are unable to pass the bar are getting into the state’s top law school.
Wherever it’s possible to tell this story without using the names of people who are one or two degrees removed from public life, we’ll do so, for reasons of privacy. We will provide a complete list of names to any university official interested in a review.
Until now, the most striking piece of evidence for the favoritism charge is the result of the February 2014 bar exam, published by the state Board of Law Examiners. UT is usually near the top of the list, with a passage rate for first time takers of about 95 percent. In February, UT’s 59 percent pass rate was dead last in Texas.
That could be a fluke. But we’ve found two dozen reasons to think it’s not.
Read more at: http://watchdog.org/144169/ut-law-school-hookups/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Watchdog%20Newsletter
http://godfatherpolitics.com/14464/democrats-caught-video-admitting-illegal-campaigning-texas/
Marlise Munoz and husband Erick with their son, Mateo.photo credit – Marlise Munoz – Facebook
There is a classic life and death tug of war being played out in a Fort Worth hospital and for a husband and son of Marlise Munoz, who is considered brain dead her life’s end is now in the state’s hands. This is due primarily to Texas state law which protects the life of her growing baby. And there lies the dilemma for Marlise’s husband Erick Munoz, who wants the doctors to let her body die without the continued artificial life support keeping her alive.
So should Marlise be let go and with her cause the automatic death of the child she is carrying? According to ABC News, John Peter Smith Hospital officials have their hands tied, because even with the insistence of Marlise’s parents and husband to allow the hospital to pull the plug, a pregnancy nullifies any and all previous directives.
At the time that Marlise suffered a blood clot and collapsed in November, she was 14 weeks pregnant and according to her husband, a paramedic, he did not know just how long she had been unconscious on November 26th. Of course it is certainly understandable that Marlise’s husband would not want his wife to exist in the condition that she is in, as he stated to ABC News.
But there has to be a much larger and much more fundamental issue that has to be dealt with and that is who has the legal responsibility to cause the intentional death of a baby that has a viable chance to be born. Is murder by convenience the reality or should the state protect the growing life of an innocent?
TEXAS CHILI COOK-OFFS
INEXPERIENCED CHILI TASTER:
Notes From An Inexperienced Chili Tester Named FRANK, who was visiting Texas from the East Coast: "Recently, I was honored to be selected as a judge at a chili cook-off. The original person called in sick at the last moment and I happened to be standing there at the judge's table asking directions to the beer wagon, when the call came. I was assured by the other two judges (Native Texans) that the chili wouldn't be all that spicy, and besides, they told me I could have free beer during the tasting - So I accepted."
Here are the scorecards from the event:
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 1 - MIKE'S MANIAC MOBSTER MONSTER CHILI
JUDGE ONE: A little too heavy on tomato. Amusing kick.
JUDGE TWO: Nice, smooth tomato flavor. Very mild.
FRANK: Holy shit, what the hell is this stuff? You could remove dried paint from your driveway. Took me two beers to put the flames out. I hope that's the worst one. These Texans are crazy.
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 2 - ARTHUR'S AFTERBURNER CHILI
JUDGE ONE: Smokey, with a hint of pork. Slight Jalapeno tang.
JUDGE TWO: Exciting BBQ flavor, needs more peppers to be taken seriously.
FRANK: Keep this out of the reach of children. I'm not sure what I am supposed to taste besides pain. I had to wave off two people who wanted to give me the Heimlich maneuver. They had to rush in more beer when they saw the look on my face.
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 3 - FRED'S FAMOUS BURN DOWN THE BARN CHILI
JUDGE ONE: Excellent firehouse chili! Great kick. Needs more beans.
JUDGE TWO: A beanless chili, a bit salty, good use of peppers.
FRANK: Call the EPA, I've located a uranium spill. My nose feels like I have been snorting Drano. Everyone knows the routine by now get me more beer before I ignite. Barmaid pounded me on the back; now my backbone is in the front part of my chest. I'm getting shit-faced from all the beer.
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 4 - BUBBA'S BLACK MAGIC
JUDGE ONE: Black bean chili with almost no spice. Disappointing.
JUDGE TWO: Hint of lime in the black beans. Good side dish for fish or
other mild foods, not much of a chili.
FRANK: I felt something scraping across my tongue, but was unable to taste it. Is it possible to burnout taste buds? Sally, the barmaid, was standing behind me with fresh refills; that 300 lb. bitch is starting to look HOT just like this nuclear waste I'm eating. Is chili an aphrodisiac?
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 5 - LINDA'S LEGAL LIP REMOVER
JUDGE ONE: Meaty, strong chili. Cayenne peppers freshly ground, adding considerable kick. Very Impressive!
JUDGE TWO: Chili using shredded beef, could use more tomato. Must admit the cayenne peppers make a strong statement.
FRANK: My ears are ringing, sweat is pouring off my forehead and I can no longer focus my eyes. I farted and four people behind me needed paramedics. The contestant seemed offended when I told her that her chili had given me brain damage; Sally saved my tongue from bleeding by pouring beer directly on it from a pitcher. I wonder if I'm burning my lips off? It really pisses me off that the other judges asked me to stop screaming. Screw those rednecks!
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 6 - VERA'S VERY VEGETARIAN VARIETY
JUDGE ONE: Thin yet bold vegetarian variety chili. Good balance of spice
and peppers.
JUDGE TWO: The best yet. Aggressive use of peppers, onions, and garlic.
Superb!
FRANK: My intestines are now a straight pipe filled with gaseous, sulfuric flames. I shit on myself when I farted and I'm worried it will eat through the chair. No one seems inclined to stand behind me except that Sally. She must be kinkier than I thought. Can't feel my lips anymore. I need to wipe my ass with a snow cone!
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 7 - SUSAN'S SCREAMING SENSATION CHILI
JUDGE ONE: A mediocre chili with too much reliance on canned peppers.
JUDGE TWO: Ho Hum, tastes as if the chef literally threw in a can of chili
peppers at the last moment. I should take note that I am worried about Judge Number 3, He appears to be in a bit of distress as he is cursing uncontrollably.
FRANK: You could put a grenade in my mouth, pull the pin, and I wouldn't feel a damn thing. I've lost sight in one eye, and the world sounds like it is made of rushing water. My shirt is covered with chili, which slid unnoticed out of my mouth. My pants are full of lava-like shit to match my damn shirt. At least during the autopsy they'll know what killed me. I've decided to stop breathing, it's too painful. Screw it, I'm not getting any oxygen anyway. If I need air, I'll just suck it in through the 4-inch hole in my stomach.
________________________________________________________________________
CHILI # 8 - Helen's Mount Saint Chili
JUDGE ONE: A perfect ending, this is a nice blend chili, safe for all, not too bold but spicy enough to declare it's existence.
JUDGE TWO: This final entry is a good, balanced chili. Neither mild nor hot. Sorry to see that most of it was lost when Judge Number 3 passed out, fell over and pulled the chili pot down on top of himself. Not sure if he's going to make it. Poor Yank, wonder how he'd have reacted to a really hot chili?
FRANK: (Not available for comment.)
Lisa Fritsch, Tea Party Black Woman, Wants Governorship
They do things big in Texas, so when a conservative black woman tosses her hat in the ring for governor, Texans stand up, notice and signal change for the rest of the nation. Lisa Fritsch, a popular former radio show host and noted conservative Texan Tea Party activist is making growing political waves in her bid to take out current Attorney General Greg Abbott in the Republican primary for governor.
Fritsch is part of a growing number of black conservatives vying for elected office across the nation like former Miss America Erika Harold, who is running for the 13th Congressional seat in Illinois.
Then there was of course Mia Love, who electrified the National Republican Convention in 2012 with her speech, according to the Huffington Post. Love, mayor of Saratoga Springs, Utah, is a Mormon, Tea Party favorite and appears poised to run against current Democrat congressman Jim Matheson.
Lisa Fritsch, Charles Lollar and Mia Love all embody the clarity of spirit and purpose that has awakened a resurgence of conservative values in others. They openly reject failed liberalism and embrace freedom and liberty and Christian values long held and deep in their fore-father’s bones for generations since President Lincoln.
Many have likened Lisa Fritsch’s run for the governorship of Texas as a long shot that will possibly fall markedly short of the goal line. But Fritsch is undeterred about the long shot notions being tossed around and instead embraces her reliance on her own background and experience.
According to the New York Times, Fritsch reaches into the seven generation roots she has in Texas to strengthen her resolve, she stated, “What if Davy Crockett had said, ‘How could we compete with the Mexican Army at the Alamo?’ ” She said. “Should they have given up? Absolutely not.”
What is remarkable is the generations of so-called liberal leaders who are ever ready to tear apart aspiring Americans leaders like Fritsch who embraces their conservatism. The Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons and other poverty pimps poison the well.
If the nation has yet to recognize her name, Tea Party members all across the great state of Texas certainly have. It is not an accident that in a recent poll taken by the Tea Party in the state capitol, Fritsch was the top GOP vote getter last weekend, according to the New York Times.
Has anyone seen this yet?
The Democrat Party and the Obama Administration have brought 'Texas sized' fraud and organized crime to Texas in an unprecedented way as was reported today in the National Review article online: The Truth About Navigators, by John Fund - http://www.nationalreview.com/article/363699/truth-about-navigators-john-fund
The under-cover video is incontrovertible evidence that the 'Navigators' are operating in Texas as a criminal enterprise and are apparently using fraud and deceit to encourage Texans to defraud the federal government and become criminal accomplices as a result of the explicit instructions of these people operating under the auspices of the federal government and the Democrat Party.
The Texas Nationalist Movement calls on Governor Rick Perry and Attorney General Greg Abbott to immediately investigate the extent of this organized crime and prosecute those involved to the fullest extent of the law, as is their duty to Texas and Texans.
Over the last month it has become clear that the unconstitutional federal government takeover of the health care infrastructure was conceived in deceit, negligently implemented, and will negatively affect more people than it could possibly 'help'.
The Healthcare.gov website, probably the most expensive website ever designed, has never worked and only a small, small fraction of those they expected to use it to enroll have actually successfully used it to sign-up for care under the 'Affordable Care Act.'
Texans do not need more federal involvement in either Texas, or in their personal lives. Texans need the freedom to make the choices that serve their needs without regard to the grand designs of the federal government. The Texas Nationalist Movement is working diligently to empower them to have these choices and cut the controlling strings of the federal government at the same time by working to achieve Texas independence at the ballot box. Our mission is clear and the only rational solution for the fraud and tyranny the federal government has imposed upon Texans.
The Texas Nationalist Movement's mission is to secure and protect the political, cultural and economic independence of the nation of Texas and to restore and protect a constitutional Republic and the inherent rights of the people of Texas.
While the official motto of the Tenth Amendment Center is “Concordia res parvae crescunt” (Small things grow great by concord), one of our “unofficial” mottoes is “The Constitution. Every Issue, Every Time. No Exceptions, no Excuses.”
It’s a great standard to stick to. Here’s an example why.
Earlier this year, Dr. Gary North put up a short post on his “Tea Party Economist” blog, where he mentioned a topic that a number of people have asked me about:
“In a dozen states, there are bills to make gold legal tender… What is significant is this: there is enough interest in gold today to call forth such bills. It indicates a major shift in the fringes of public opinion. Such bills would have been unthinkable in 2007.”
He’s absolutely correct: thanks to a number of factors (the Crash of ’08, the Great Recession, the monetary policy-focused Presidential campaign of Rep. Ron Paul, etc.), more Americans than ever have had an “awakening” of sorts regarding gold and silver, and as a result, we’ve had several different types of “sound money” bills introduced in State legislatures across the country. What North is referring to in particular here is what are commonly called “State Legal Tender” bills. These bills have been introduced in a number of States around the country over the last few years. It’s a growing movement (see the main website here), and has already been successful in getting a law passed in Utah declaring gold and silver coins to be “legal tender” (and they were almost successful in Arizona, where both legislative houses passed a similar bill, only to have Gov. Jan Brewer veto it).
Now, before I get into any details, let me start off by making one thing perfectly clear: I like the fact that “State Legal Tender” bills (and gold and silver coin “Sales Tax Elimination” bills, discussed below) are being introduced and passed in the States. I agree with Dr. North that what’s significant is that “there is enough interest in gold today to call forth such bills,” which “indicates a major shift in the fringes of public opinion.” And I agree with a number of my friends who promote these kinds of bills, as being “incremental steps” towards “returning to sound money” in America. But there’s a few things I need to clear up.
I’ve been asked a number of times, “Hey, isn’t this ‘State Legal Tender’ thing the same thing that you’re trying to do, with the Constitutional Tender Act?” Well, no, in fact, it’s not what we’re trying to do, for a number of reasons — some of which North mentions, when he discusses why he doesn’t think these bills will lead anywhere right now. So let’s discuss some of these reasons, starting with his second reason first:
“…most of these bills will not become law this year.”
I’ll grant him that. But that’s not a reason for us to declare, as North does, that “nothing much will come of this.” A lot could “come of this” next year, or the year after or the year after that; it could depend on a lot of things, from grassroots activism in support of various bills, to a currency crisis and the complete devaluation of the dollar, either of which (or some event in between) could bring about passage of sound money-related bills in the States. Regardless, it’s unlikely that Constitutional Tender bills will become law this year, either, so I’m not disagreeing with North here. So let’s look at his third reason:
“…most voters don’t care. People use plastic or currency.”
This is true, too. But one of the goals of both State Legal Tender bills and the Constitutional Tender Act is to enable people to continue using what they’re used to using, only now what they use can be backed by real money (gold and silver). They could use debit cards based on gold or silver accounts, they could write checks based on such accounts, etc. (In fact, the Constitutional Tender Act requires State-chartered banks to create gold- and silver-based accounts.) Or, they could continue using Federal Reserve Notes currency in their everyday transactions, if they like.
So, let’s go back to North’s first reason:
“…the concept of legal tender is anti-free market. A state should not declare anything as legal tender. It should limit itself to declaring the proper currency for the payment of taxes.”
Now, I agree with North, as far as he goes: Congress, for sure, has no Constitutionally-delegated, enumerated power to declare one particular form of money as “legal tender,” and as a conceptual matter, they really shouldn’t do that (which is why the Framers of the Constitution didn’t give them that power, even if the Supreme Court has pretended that they did). But there’s something that is left unsaid, which “strikes at the heart” of this matter: North is talking about the modern definition of “legal tender” here — that is, currency that the law declares may be offered in payment of a debt and that a creditor is supposed to accept. And, in fact, that’s what proponents of “State Legal Tender” bills are talking about, too: having the government make an official declaration that a form of money is acceptable for using as payment. They say that States can declare by law that gold and silver coins are “legal tender,” because the U.S. Constitution says in Article I, Section 10, “No State shall… make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”. Therefore, the reasoning goes, a State may make gold and silver coins “legal tender.”
They then go on to say that, like other forms of “legal tender,” no one has to accept legal tender as payment; “it simply designates it as acceptable currency. It is not uncommon for retailers to decline to accept U.S. paper dollars and coins, for example, as a matter of policy (such as a convenience store refusing to accept large denominations). No one is forced to tender or accept gold and silver legal tender coins.”
So, that’s all well and good — if a State passes a “State Legal Tender” law (as Utah did), no one (including the State itself) is required to use gold and silver coins; it only says they can use them. More specifically, it says they can use them at their actual value (the value of their gold or silver content), rather than at the “face value” that the U.S. Mint stamped on them. In addition, it removes the “sales taxes” in any “commodities exchange” of legal tender Federal Reserve Notes for legal tender gold or silver coins (that is, instead of treating such an exchange as “buying gold or silver coins,” it treats the exchange just like you would treat an exchange of legal tender $1 bills for a legal tender $20 bill).
(By the way, there are other States, like Texas and Louisiana, which have also passed gold & silver “Sales Tax Elimination” bills into law, eliminating the State taxation of “legal tender” exchanges as described. This is a “no-brainer” — of course you shouldn’t tax legal tender currency exchanges… but of course, the national government still does. Because the IRS considers “precious metals,” including legal tender gold and silver coins, to be “collectibles,” a special capital gains rate applies to any “profits” on their “sale.”)
So, what’s the problem with any of these State Legal Tender bills? Actually, there are several.
First, as I said earlier, all of these folks are using the modern definition of “legal tender” — when what we need to be using is whatever definition was used by the people who actually wrote the Constitution. Allow me to explain:
In Article I, Section 10, the national government has been given most of the responsibility regarding money in America: to coin it (notice it does not give Congress the power to “emit bills of credit”, the common parlance of “print fiat currency”, nor does it give Congress the power to bestow that power on any other entity); to regulate the value of (literally, “make regular” or “make consistent” – to make sure there is no deviance in the gold or silver specie content of) the money they have coined; to regulate (again, “make regular”) the value of foreign coins (which meant they could be used here, but they had to be of a specific amount of gold or silver content); to fix the Standard of Weights and Measures for circulating coins (grains, ounces, pounds, etc.); and to declare what the punishment should be for anyone who counterfeits what the U.S. Mint coins (which, by the way, was death — that’s how seriously they took the idea of making our money worth less).
Now remember, in reading the Constitution, we should always try to understand it as written, with the definitions it was meant to be understood by, and not by overlaying modern definitions or understandings upon it. (Can you imagine the international uproar if Congress were to “regulate the Value of foreign currency” today, according to today’s definitions? “Congress hereby declares that one German Mark can only buy 50¢ worth of goods!”) If we don’t like what the framers meant, then they gave us the means to change it: the Amendment process.
So, Article I, Section 8 declares specifically what Congress can do (Section 9 makes some specific declarations of what they can’t do); Section 10 declares specifically what the States cannot do. Included in there is that States can’t print fiat currency (“emit bills of credit”), that they can’t coin money, AND that they can’t “make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”. Now, that’s pretty clear: if a State owes money to anyone or anything, it can’t “make a tender” (offer to pay the debt) to those entities in anything but gold or silver coin; and if the State is owed money, the State can’t accept any tender made (any offer to pay that debt) unless it is made in gold or silver coin.
This is a key point here: for the correct (in context) understanding of this phrase “to make something a tender in payment of debt,” see the original 1828 Webster’s Dictionary – “TENDER: In law, an offer, either of money to pay a debt, or of service to be performed, in order to save a penalty or forfeiture which would be incurred by non-payment or non-performance; as the tender of rent due, or of the amount of a note or bond with interest. To constitute a legal tender, such money must be offered as the law prescribes; the offer of bank notes is not a legal tender.”
So the Framers of the Constitution were being very clear here: No State is allowed to make or accept payments in anything but gold or silver coins. It doesn’t matter what the national government does with so-called “legal tender” laws; it’s not up to the national government to determine whether or not States can now disobey that direct prohibition, any more than it’s up to the federal government to determine whether or not States can now disobey the direct prohibition on passing an ex post facto Law or granting any Title of Nobility. The Constitution says the State CANNOT do it – so the State must simply obey the Constitution, NO MATTER WHAT the federal government says or does. It is the duty of every State, and it is the duty of every State’s elected officials, in keeping with their oath of office, to pass laws that conform to the explicit directives of the U.S. Constitution.
And this leads directly to what North doesn’t mention, but what I consider to be the biggest reason why States DO need to pass Constitutional Tender bills rather than State Legal Tender bills: all of the State Legal Tender bills specifically declare that the State can use either gold & silver coins OR they can use Federal Reserve Notes. But the U.S. Constitution specifically says that “No State shall… make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts” — which means that any law that declares that a State can use Federal Reserve Notes (make them “a Tender in Payment of Debts”) is in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution. By passing such a law, they are making some other “Thing” an offer as payment — they are by law declaring that they will accept, and pay out, Federal Reserve Notes for any debts owed by or to them.
On the other hand, the Constitutional Tender Act takes Article I, Section 10 at “face value” — it unambiguously declares that the State may NOT make anything besides gold or silver a “tender in payment” (which means they cannot “make something else an offer as payment”) for any debts, which would include debts owed by and to the State. It sets up a process by which the State, which is currently in violation of the Constitution (because it accepts and pays out Federal Reserve Notes, which aren’t backed by gold, silver, or anything else), can move back to adherence to the Constitution’s actual “legal tender” provisions. And in doing so, it establishes de facto “competitive currencies” of real money vs. fiat money — and in a level-field playing environment in the free market, real money wins.
Which brings us to the other big reason that I believe States need to pass Constitutional Tender bills rather than State Legal Tender bills: the results. In other words, “What will happen if this or that bill is passed into law?” While no State has passed the Constitutional Tender Act yet (so we can’t know for sure), I discuss the likely outcome in much more detail in the paper I presented at the Mises Institute, “Ending the Federal Reserve From the Bottom Up: Re-Introducing Competitive Currency by State Adherence to Article I, Section 10″:
“Upon going into effect, the Constitutional Tender Act would introduce currency competition with Federal Reserve Notes, by outlawing their use in transactions with the State. Ordinary citizens of the State, being required to pay their State taxes in gold and silver coins, would find it necessary to open bank accounts in those denominations. Businesses operating within the State, being required to pay their State sales taxes and license fees in gold and silver coins, would need to do the same; and in order to acquire such coins, they would begin to offer their goods and services in “dual currency” denominations, where customers could choose to pay in Federal Reserve Notes (which would still be necessary to pay Federal fees and taxes) or gold and silver coins (including checks and debit cards based on bank accounts denominated in such coins). Customers, having found the need to open such accounts in order to deal with the State, would be able to engage in commerce using those accounts.
Over time, as residents of the State use both Federal Reserve Notes and silver and gold coins, the fact that the coins hold their value more than Federal Reserve Notes do will lead to a “reverse Gresham’s Law” effect, where good money (gold and silver coins) will drive out bad money (Federal Reserve Notes). As this happens, a cascade of events can begin to occur, including the flow of real wealth toward the State’s treasury, an influx of banking business from outside of the State (as citizens residing in other States carry out their desire to bank with sound money), and an eventual outcry against the use of Federal Reserve Notes for any transactions. At that point, the Federal Reserve system will have become unwanted and irrelevant, and can be easily abolished by the people’s elected Representatives in Washington, D.C.”
And what about State Legal Tender laws? What results would they bring? Well, we have a real-world example to look at there: Utah. In 2011, the Governor signed H.B 317, the “Utah Legal Tender Act,” which declared that U.S. Mint-issued gold and silver coins were “legal tender” in Utah, and monetary exchanges of these coins could no longer be taxed by the State. It allowed banks to set up gold- and silver-based accounts; it allowed people to pay their taxes and fees in gold and silver coins; and it allowed the State to pay its debts in gold and silver as well.
But it didn’t require any of those things — most of which the Constitution clearly states are required. It simply allowed them — and then noted that “A person may not compel any other person to tender or accept gold and silver coin that is issued by the federal government.” Apparently, that includes any “person” who works as a tax collector in Utah, as one man found out who tried to pay his taxes in “legal tender” silver coins:
Carlton Bowen is frustrated.The Orem man says all he wants to do is pay his property tax, but the Utah County treasurer says no. The reason: Bowen wants to pay his taxes in silver.
“When is Utah going to accept its own legal tender?” Bowen asked.
Earlier this year, the Utah Legislature passed groundbreaking legislation, stating that gold and silver coins can be used as legal tender in Utah… The practical impact of the Legislature’s move has been minimal… the Utah County and state treasurers have rejected Bowen’s payment.
“In my mind there’s still no practical way of making this happen,” said Richard Ellis, the Utah State Treasurer. He said the state simply isn’t equipped to accept, authenticate and store gold and silver, and doesn’t see it becoming a reality in the near future.
So, the Utah Treasurer won’t accept payment in “legal tender” gold or silver coins, even though Utah passed a “State Legal Tender” law. And why not?
Ellis, the treasurer, says gold and silver transactions present enormous risks to the state that have to be addressed before he’s comfortable with the idea. How would the state determine the value of a coin? What’s the exchange rate? How do the state or counties secure the precious metals?
“There are a lot of things that put the treasurer in the middle of it, but I’m not anxious to necessarily be in that role,” Ellis said… “Nobody’s fleshed out all these details, and they want to have as little regulation and oversight as possible,” Ellis said. “I haven’t tried to make preparations to [accept payments] because there’s just not a practical way of making this work.”
So, what are the practical results of passing a State Legal Tender law? Apparently… nothing. In the one case where such a bill has become law, the result has been (a) the State still won’t use gold or silver coins, (b) bank accounts still can’t be set up using gold or silver coins, and — most importantly — (c) the State is still violating Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, by making some other “Thing” besides gold and silver coin a “Tender in Payment of Debts”.
I’m sorry. I just don’t see those “results” as being beneficial in any way.
Again, let me reiterate that I like the fact that State Legal Tender bills (and gold & silver Sales Tax Elimination bills) are being introduced and passed in the States. I agree with Dr. North that what’s significant is that “there is enough interest in gold today to call forth such bills,” which “indicates a major shift in the fringes of public opinion.” And I agree with a number of my friends who promote these kinds of bills, as being “incremental steps” towards “returning to sound money” in America.
What I have a problem with is when these bills, in attempting to return States to obedience to the U.S. Constitution, end up violating the very same Constitution — in fact, the very same Clause that they’re supposedly based on. That’s why we’re so strongly encouraging States to pass the Constitutional Tender Act — a bill template that can be introduced in every State legislature in the nation, setting up clear and methodical systems to return each of them to adherence to the United States Constitution’s actual legal tender provisions.
Which, in turn, will “Nullify the Fed” in the long run, which is itself unconstitutional. Not a bad deal.
This is a Must Read, Folks.......
Via The Texas Tribune:
A coalition of tea party activists called on the Texas Legislature Tuesday to hold the line on taxes, crack down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants, make deep spending cuts and enact several ethics and transparency reforms.
The Tea Party Caucus Advisory Committee expressed support for Gov. Rick Perry’s so-called “budget compact,” aimed at ending budgetary tricks, limiting spending by Constitutional amendment and stopping any tax increases.
But the conservative group took direct aim at Perry elsewhere in its legislative agenda, entitled “Make Texas Strong.” The activists want the Legislature to zero out the hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for a series of tax incentive programs championed by Perry as crucial economic development tools.
THE COMMITTEE'S FULL DOCUMENT IS POSTED AT THIS LINK
Some Highlights include (and you'll love these)
Getting Back to Basics – Make State Spending Fit into a Constitution-sized Box by: eliminating departments, agencies, commissions, and programs that exceed the core constitutional functions of state government (listed above). Texans for a Conservative Budget has compiled a list of spending items, which can be eliminated or reduced by streamlining. [Source: http://www.texaspolicy.com/center/fiscal-policy/reports/real-texas-budget-solutions-2013-and-beyond] Lawmakers should look to this list of reductions before they ever utter the words “we need sources of new revenue.” The Conservative Budget list includes the Texas Enterprise Fund, Texas Emerging Technology Fund, and the Special Events Fund, which is an extended subsidy for Formula 1 racing and other entertainment venues. These state funds mirror the federal government’s practice of tinkering with the economy. Central planning through subsidies is not the proper role of government in a free market society. State government has no business attempting to pick winners and losers and doling out tax dollars to special interests any more than the federal government does. It is time to end this form of corporate welfare in Texas.
Stop Chasing Federal Dollars – Make Texas Strong & Independent of Federal Strings; reduce state reliance on federal dollars and restrict all new federal grant programs.
Implement Tax and Expenditure Limits – State and local government spending from ALL sources should increase only by the sum of population growth plus inflation and no more. We support a constitutional amendment to set this limit in order to protect current and future taxpayers from excessive state spending.
Budget Transparency – practice truth in budgeting by ending diversions; a tax or fee should go to fund the original intent of the legislation that created the tax or fee; should a surplus occur, the fee or tax should be reduced, and the surplus used to reduce state debt.
Reforming Texas’ Public Pension Systems – According to recent reports from the Texas State Comptroller, the Texas retirement system, while fairly well funded compared to other states, is still legally liable to pay defined benefits totaling 10 to 20 times what state employees paid into the system. The legislature should institute these reforms: Freeze enrollment in the current defined benefit system and enroll newly hired or unvested employees in a 401(k)-style defined contribution pension plan.
Zero-based Budgeting – starts a budget from zero and requires justification for requested funding for each line item of a budget. This budgeting discipline has not been used by the State of Texas for the last nine years (2003), but should be instituted immediately to ensure taxpayers get the most value for their tax dollars.
The Rainy Day Fund (also known as the Economic Stabilization Fund) – should only be spent on one-time emergency items or tax relief. The fund should NOT be spent for ongoing expenses. If we truly believe in personal responsibility, then the State of Texas should lead and preserve the Rainy Day Fund for true natural and man-made disasters. We need look no further than the recent example of the devastation wreaked by super storm Sandy. The states of New York and New Jersey immediately turned to the federal government for relief, and many of the people of those states are still waiting, months later. The Rainy Day Fund should be preserved so that Texas can be strong and less dependent on the federal government in times of disaster.
Reducing State Debt – We should avoid a state fiscal cliff by resisting the temptation to add to our state debt just because interest rates are low. Soaring debt is just as wrong for our state as it is for the federal government.
Restructuring state government — Texas state government must be restructured:
To reduce the size, scope, and cost of state government
Because state government is weighted down with far too many overlapping, duplicated efforts = numerous bureaucratic kingdoms. (Natural resources has approximately 38 individual departments/agencies and programs.) Refocus Sunset process on making government more efficient by abolishing agencies, committees, boards, and statutes and consolidating agency functions
State government should be reduced down to its core constitutional functions. Core functions should then be performed as efficiently and effectively as possible to achieve measurable results.
The Texas Legislature should mandate a state government-restructuring project for the interim, which would:
Taxes
The Margins Tax – Abolish the gross margins tax, and begin by making the small business exemption permanent. The tax has underperformed, is complex, costly, and difficult to comply with. The tax is unfair as it is collected even from businesses that show no profit.
Property Tax Reform – Abolish and replace with a reformed sales tax that includes an adjusted tax rate and base.
Sales Tax – any increase in the sales tax base or the sales tax rate must be accompanied by reductions in other taxes. State and local governments should come to rely on consumption taxes as their main revenue generators.
State Income Tax – a non-starter! Texas is one of nine states without an income tax and should remain so. Texas should continue to encourage economic growth (a healthy tax base) by keeping taxes low and adopting pro-growth reforms.
and more......
News report: New Act of Terror!
A local militia, believed to be a terrorist organization, attacked the
property of private citizens today at our nation’s busiest port. Although
no one was injured in the attack, a large quantity of merchandise,
considered to be valuable to its owners and loathsome to the
perpetrators, was destroyed. The terrorists, dressed in disguise and
apparently intoxicated, were able to escape into the night with the help
of local citizens who harbor these fugitives and conceal their identities
from the authorities. It is believed that the terrorist attack was a
response to the policies enacted by the occupying country’s
government. Even stronger policies are anticipated by the local citizens.
Here is the actual lesson....Terrorism.pdf
Is this not appalling? Texas Cscope curriculum is referring to the Boston Tea Party as a Terrorist act! I would refer to these men as Patriots!
Texas Parents wake up and speak out against this Progressive/Marxist ideology. Here is a link to another blog on this.
Dear Patriots,
We have spent the last four years fighting the progressive ideology that has taken over our country. While at the same time our children in Texas are being indoctrinated with the same ideology with the use of a curriculum called Cscope. Over 80% of Texas schools use it. Does yours? Check here. Cscope is based on progressivism and marxist ideology. The curriculum is pro Islamic (lessons attached) and anti Christian. For the most part there are no text books and children do not bring home homework. Parents are not allowed to see the curriculum (if they did they would not understand what they were looking at due to use of their new "educanese" wording. Teachers had to sign a non disclosure statement that they would not disclose the content or say anything negative about it.
The State Board of Education has no say so over curriculum any longer thanks to senate bill 6 passed in the last legislative session. You can find more information on Cscope @ cscsopereview.com.
Please read about my activism in the Willis ISD school district fighting this. HERE & HERE
For the sake of our children and future generations we have to stop this.
HOW YOU CAN HELP
**If someone has an interest in following this money trail.. I wish you would.. Big Bucks behind this mess.
"If there must be trouble let it be in my day, so my child may have peace."
PATRIOTS we need you in Austin on Nov. 15th
Where: William B. Travis Building
1701 N. Congress Avenue, Austin, Texas
Time: 2:00 pm
If you are not aware that there is a curriculum in over 80% of our Texas Public schools, some charter as well as some Christian private schools that is pro Islamic called Cscope. Many are not even aware of what they have purchased. You can thank the last legislative session for giving our school
This is our chance to make our voices heard against this indoctrination. We have got to stand up against this evil. To learn more about Cscope check out this link or this website...
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION open meeting on November 15th. If you want to address the Board on this issue, you need to call TEA and register for a 3 minute time-slot. You have to call the Friday before which is Nov. 9th. The number is 512-463-9087. For additional information on public testimony you may go the SBOE website.
Following your statement the Board Members may or may not ask questions. You are also welcome to attend only as an observer. I have been told that the room capacity is about 200.
If you would like to continue sharing your concerns about C-SCOPE anonymously, you can go to a new website: Texas CSCOPE Review. This site is designed to allow voices to be heard without fear of retaliation. http://www.txcscopereview.com/
As we continue our investigation into the background, intent, and implementation of this program, we are discovering new and more disturbing facts.
The truth is our goal. Please email me if you have questions gingerdr@sbcglobal.net
Ginger Russell
Al Sharpton is one sick individual, as well as the woman who was encouraging him with the same sick comments. I have never viewed one Black person as Hitler did the Jewish people. Have you seen many blacks put into concentration camps in the USA or incinerated in burning ovens, or purposely starved to death in this country. Until you see this kind of treatment of any human being in our Great Country, you are a dishonest, ignorant person for making such comments. How did this man ever get elected to our Government?
Obama was Dead Wrong,
Illegals Cost California Solvency
A recently revealed lowball study of the state’s budget problems shows that withdrawing services from California’s 2.5 million illegal aliens in the state would save the state roughly $4.5 Billion annually. The breakdown of the savings was: $2.5 Billion from the cost of education; $1 Billion from prison budgets; almost $780 Million from medical expenses; and other cost savings amounting to roughly $300 Million yearly. In short, paying for the illegal aliens who have been welcomed into California (the state has more “Sanctuary Cities” than the rest of the country combined) over a typical period of five years would account for the total California shortfall at its 2009 cited $21 Billion maximum. Later in this blog, you’ll discover why Rajjpuut used the term “lowball” to describe this recent study.
How surprising can this statistic be? A mid-2008 study by FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) showed that 60% of the nation’s illegal aliens were concentrated in six states mostly in the Southwest. California’s almost 3.5 million illegals in that study easily topped the list. That figure you’ll notice is a full one million fewer illegals than found in the more recent lowball study mentioned earlier. Poor methodology? Deliberate undercounting? Probably neither. Every year that the state’s abysmal Sanctuary City situation has existed, it’s become much harder to accurately count the illegals, never an easy proposition in the best of scenarios.
Two years later when FAIR updated and expanded its study in 2010 it found that nationally illegals cost America $113 Billion yearly. The study then was called “extremist” and compared to a study that said that rather than costing us, illegals raise the nation’s GDP by $245 Billion. Certainly if that were true, the answer to our budget woes would be to throw open the borders to everyone. This infamous Perryman Report, rumored to have been funded by “Open Society Initiative” founder George Soros, has been cited by all those seeking further amnesty and even citizenship to all illegals. The Perryman Report is suspected of flawed, perhaps even deliberately flawed, methodology because “it fails to fully account for the cost to individual counties, cities and towns” which absorb a huge percentage of the cost of accommodation for illegal aliens.
Are illegals really such a big problem? Ex-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger once said that it would be a “big mistake” to blame California’s huge illegal immigration population for the state’s long-enduring budget crisis. Any sane review of the figures seems to cough up only one conclusion: the Guv’s been in deep denial. The average yearly budget deficit in California is slightly less than the average cost of illegal immigration to the state over 365 days according to the recent figures.
California, with the other five big alien states, together face a cost of $36 Billion annually for K-12 education, criminal incarceration and health care costs. Some studies show that the cost to California is NOT the $4.5 Billion recently touted, but rather, almost $12 Billion yearly to accommodate illegal aliens, roughly $3,400 per each man, woman or child LEGLLY residing in the state. Other studies call even this figure into doubt and indicate the cost could be much, much higher. Besides the monetary price, there is also the matter of sociological cost . . . .
A recent Supreme Court decision is forcing the state to release “up to 46,000 inmates” before their prison terms are concluded. California is only expected to release roughly 30,000 “low-risk inmates” from prisons, the biggest release of lawbreakers in American history, as a measure to combat the state’s deficit. Among ALL the California convicts an estimated 20,000 are illegal aliens about one-seventh of the entire prison population. The state has deliberately given no indication how many of the projected “parolees” will be illegal aliens. Nor has the state answered questions about how many illegals might be turned over to immigration officials for deportation or if any will just be allowed to walk freely back into California society.
Schwarzenegger, of course, has infamously guaranteed there was NO connection between the state’s large illegal alien population and its budgetary woes. The ex-governator, it seems, has been in denial for eight long years.
His predecessor, Pete Wilson commissioned two separate studies which each reached the same conclusions: illegals were bankrupting California. The 1994 Philip J. Romero study showed that illegal immigrants and their American-born children received $3.6 Billion more in state services than they paid in state taxes. The vast majority of those taxes are sales taxes, not income taxes which few illegals pay. In 1997 the Jordan Commission’s study conducted under the National Research Council put that figure at a $3.463 Billion cost to California. But Schwarzenegger even willfully ignored far more up-to-date information: Romero’s 2007 update of his earlier study. Because of the state’s Sanctuary City situation, Romero found it far more difficult to pin down the full extent of the problem. His shocking results: illegal aliens were now costing California between $9.6 and $ $38.2 billion more in state services than they generate in state taxes.
Everything about the illegal alien question is debatable. Recent estimates of their population have used the numbers 12-18 million illegals with 13 Million the most commonly cited figures. President Obama has used the numbers 11 million and even 10 million in describing them and suggested, in line with the Perryman Report that they constitute a huge NET POSITIVE to the nation’s economy.
Regardless of which figures are used, the logical conclusion is obvious. California, Texas and other border states are being negatively affected by huge illegal alien populations. California itself has been bankrupted by several huge policy boondoggles. The Sanctuary City program in that state is definitely the most costly in the nation and the state’s welcoming of illegals has contributed mightily to California’s ongoing financial meltdown.
Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
