Immigration Watch International (2): Texas lawmakers want feds to reimburse states for the high cost of Biden’s border crisis

Sunday, February 5, 2023

Texas lawmakers want feds to reimburse states for the high cost of Biden’s border crisis

A group of Republicans from Texas is pushing for the federal government to reimburse states and border communities that are spending billions of dollars to secure the southwest U.S. border that they say President Biden has ignored for the last two years.

These lawmakers introduced two bills this week that would let border states and border towns recoup some of the local funding they’ve spent on border security – a step they say is increasingly necessary in light of Biden’s "failures" to increase border security.

The first bill, from Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, would require the federal government to pay back any state that has spent more than $2.5 billion on border security over the last decade. Crenshaw’s bill says that Texas qualifies, as it has spent more than $3.2 billion on the border since the 2008-2009 state budget was passed.

"Citizens of border States are being taxed twice for the same purpose," Crenshaw’s bill says. "States using their taxpayer dollars and allocating State budgets to meet public safety obligations, which fall under Federal responsibilities, imposes an undue burden on the State."

The bill said that reimbursement is needed due to the "failures of the federal government."

A second bill from Rep. Ronny Jackson, R-Texas, would create a grant program that the Department of Homeland Security could use to pay back communities that are overspending, to make up for the federal government’s failure to secure the border.

"For the past two years, the Biden administration’s failed border policies have left our border communities on their own to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants crossing our southern border," Jackson said. "Drug dealers, human traffickers, and cartel members are marching through these communities and devastating everything in their path, yet Biden is still silent."

"Our border communities should not be paying for Biden’s America-last agenda," he added.

Jackson’s bill would create a total grant pool of $25 million per year for the next decade and would let DHS distribute that money to border communities as needed. No community could receive more than $500,000 per year.

Under Jackson’s bill, grants would have to go to communities that are within 200 miles of the U.S.-Mexico land border, and sanctuary jurisdictions that protect illegal aliens from prosecution would be ineligible for the funding.

Both lawmakers sponsored both bills, and several Texas Republicans are cosponsors of the two measures.

The legislation was introduced in the wake of several moves by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to pressure Biden to pay attention to the growing border crisis. Abbott announced a state-wide border czar this week and has said that he supports efforts in Congress to impeach Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for ignoring his duty to secure the border.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/texas-lawmakers-want-feds-reimburse-states-high-cost-bidens-border-crisis

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Sunday, February 5, 2023

Texas lawmakers want feds to reimburse states for the high cost of Biden’s border crisis

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors