Posted on 07/31/2002 7:42:38 PM PDT by Selmo
State fights for U.S. funds in jailing of immigrants
WASHINGTON Year after year, California lawmakers battled the White House whether the occupant's name was Clinton or Bush for more money to help pay for the cost of jailing criminal immigrants.
Now, the Bush administration has fueled more controversy among state politicians. It wants to eliminate the 6-year-old State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, which could result in the loss of more than $200 million to California and its counties.
"I believe it would be a terrible mistake to eliminate funding," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "The bottom line is that the control of illegal immigration is a federal responsibility, but more and more of this burden is shifting to our state and local governments."
Last year, state and local jurisdictions nationwide received $565 million in federal funds for the program, with California receiving the bulk of it 40 percent. One of every seven prison beds in California is occupied by a criminal illegal immigrant, officials said.
Feinstein sponsored a bill approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last month that would continue funding the program.
So far, however, no money has been proposed by the Bush administration. The Senate Appropriations Committee which holds the purse strings for the Justice Department and other government agencies also has not included funds.
But Capitol Hill sources said there is a strong likelihood that a proposal may be forthcoming in the House to provide $565 million for the reimbursement program the same as last year.
"Usually, the House puts more money into the program, but no bill has been proposed," said Mary Beth Sullivan, an analyst for the California Institute for Federal Policy Research. "There's going to be a lot of horse-trading."
Despite the Bush budget plan, Sullivan doubts the program will be eliminated. "I don't think it's going to happen," she said.
Nationwide, state and local governments face more than $13 billion in incarceration costs.
As governor of Texas, Bush usually lobbied the federal government for more reimbursement funds. When he became president, however, his position changed.
Last year, the White House proposed $265 million for the program less than half the amount ultimately approved by Congress.
But in the president's fiscal 2003 budget documents, the Justice Department said it proposes to eliminate the reimbursement program.
"Unlike other grant programs, this money is not used to encourage states or localities to fund effective and innovative criminal justice programs that address crime problems in their communities," it said in the budget statement.
"Therefore, in light of the tight 2003 budget," it says in the document, "the department proposed to eliminate this program which is less critical to the department's mission than other grant programs."
Well I don't diagree with you .. but when some folks talk about my way or the high it tends to scare voters which is exactly what the liberals want .. The Votes
Yes, but that might change so that the alien felons can avoid deportation after serving their sentences, according to a guest/caller on the Roger Hedgecock show last Friday, 7/26.
Last week, 7/23/02, the House Judiciary committee held a Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session where they voted for Barney Frank's "Family Reunification Act of 2001", H.R. 1452, which has this in the summary, among other things:
revise the conditions under which the Attorney General may cancel the removal of certain aliens from the United States, including cancellation of removal for humanitarian or public benefit reasons for certain aliens convicted of aggravated felonies.
While Ashcroft might be careful with granting exceptions, a future AG, perhaps under a liberal administration, might let many released felons stay in this country. We have enough home-grown felons; we don't need alien felons to stay here, too, just so they can stay with their families. They should have thought of the deportation risk before committing their crimes.
5 Republicans on the committee voted with Democrats for this bill, including Darryl Issa (North county San Diego, CA) and Committee Chairman Sensenbrenner, saying that having the AG make the decisions is better than having Congress pass private bills to grant exceptions. 15 Republicans voted against HR1452.
....
(b) CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL FOR CERTAIN OTHER PERMANENT RESIDENTS FOR URGENT HUMANITARIAN REASONS OR SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC BENEFIT- Section 240A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229b) is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(f) CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL FOR CERTAIN PERMANENT RESIDENTS FOR URGENT HUMANITARIAN REASONS OR SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC BENEFIT-
`(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of an alien otherwise eligible for cancellation of removal under subsection (a), except that the alien has been convicted of an aggravated felony that renders the alien unable to satisfy the requirement in subsection (a)(1)(C), the Attorney General may cancel removal of the alien under such conditions as the Attorney General may prescribe, but only--
`(A) on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons, significant public benefit (including assuring family unity), or any other sufficiently compelling reason; and
`(B) after making a written determination that the cancellation of removal poses no danger to the safety of persons or property.
`(2) RELEASE FROM DETENTION PENDING DECISION- Subsection (a)(4) shall apply to release of an alien applying for cancellation of removal under this subsection in the same manner as such subsection applies to an alien applying under subsection (a).'.
....
I agree. It is actually about not deporting convicted felons released from jail. It also waives deportation for some regular aliens and allows deported foreigners to return.
The requirement is for "humanitarian or public benefit," but family unification appears to qualify.
Gray Davis' administration did not try to defend Prop. 187, but constantly tries to make the state attractive to illegal aliens -- low-cost health insurance, welfare, in-state (subsidized) tuition rates for illegals to attend college, etc. The Anaheim police accept Mexican consular ID's now, even though illegal aliens aren't even supposed to be here. The L.A. county ballots (presumably for actual citizens) are available in many languages, but immigrants can sue if the translations have errors.
If immigration were only a federal matter, California should stop providing so many incentives to aliens to avoid undermining federal policy.
Not to mention drug dealers and child molesters, who obviously have low rates of true rehabilitation.
from the article: One of every seven prison beds in California is occupied by a criminal illegal immigrant, officials said.
If 1/7 are illegal aliens, how many are/were legal aliens? Permanent resident aliens who commit felonies are supposed to be deported after serving their jail sentences, too.
Deportation of felons is our chance to prevent further crime by bad people who slipped through the INS sieve. If the INS mistakenly allowed a criminal to be here legally, he should lose that privilege once he commits crime.
HR1452 gives the Attorney General the authority to perpetuate that mistake, given as flimsy a reason a "family". Many aliens have "family" in their home countries, too. If the felon stays here, he many commit more crime and land in jail again. Given the 3-strikes laws, he might even have a sentence enhancement, costing the state more, even though it all might have been prevented by deporting and blocking re-entry.
I think HR1452 will increase incarceration costs in the future. Since Feinstein seems somewhat concerned by illegal immigration, I hope she votes against this bill if it ever reaches the Senate.
Maybe because the average American doesn't know what this is??
You guys bring them in, you pay to keep them in jail.
I don't see why the rest of us have to help.
Luis, if you were a Californian in '94 would you have voted for prop 187? You know, the successful measure intended to cut off benefits to illegals, with the exception of educational and emergency medical?
It was a federal judge that threw it out, it is the federal government that refuses to effectively guard the borders, and the federal government that refuses to police the enterior.
Maybe if the rest of the country has to help pay the costs of illegal immigration they'll realize it for the problem that it is.
Prop 187 had a problem in its wording if I remember correctly. The benefits should have been rolled back at the State level without voting into place such a flawed proposition. I would have voted for it, but I would have known that it was going to be seriously challenged as discriminatory.
You can't target legislation against a specific group of people, it will always be challenged in Court as discriminatory.
I would furthermore, vote out of office every politico that even dreams about more welfare programs.
California does the exact opposite.
Ants.........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.