Reply to Trump wanted to release immigration detainees onto the streets of “sanctuary cities"

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Trump wanted to release immigration detainees onto the streets of “sanctuary cities""

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Tell us why Sanctuary and Sanctuary-like cities/counties shouldn't participate in incoming immigrant receipt please? We all need to participate in helping imho. [/quote]

No one is saying they shouldn’t help, we’re saying that that help should be provided through an organized system that allows everyone to manage it safely, and that decisions should be made based on what’s more efficient and effective rather than using people as pawns to score political points.  Basically, make good choices that aren’t motivated by sticking it to someone else, because the latter is just poor governance.[/quote]

organized system
huh

ok - So here are the areas for which you all need to create plans:

This means that you need
- housing
- a larger allocation for ESOL (and maybe sped, which is harder to identify when language is an obstacle) 
- (regarding schools) more bilingual counselors
- easy access to social services (wrap around services, for example, to help with transitioning, and healthcare)
- help with employing newcomers and . . .

- a raise in taxes

Are you ready?  [/quote]

Are all the judges we are supposed to "send to the border" volunteers? Or do they cost $$? How about the doctors?[/quote]

My friend works in immigration. She sent an article a while ago that detailed the number of judges they would hire to help with processing b/c they were getting slammed for being inefficient.

so yes, more money

medical care?  another good question - But I don't know the answer. [/quote]

Obama repeatedly asked for more funding for immigration judges to clear out the backlog, as well as for more funding for detention facilities and was repeatedly denied by the Republican-run congress.  So there's that, too.[/quote]

thus far 
424 judges handling 892,000 cases . . . That's over 2000 cases per judge.

They were given the OK to hire another 100 judges to assist.  However, we're not talking only about judges; the budget includes funding for attorneys, legal assistants, interpreters and other support staff.

We're still paying no matter how you look at it.  However, the more people we process, the more taxpayers pay - every step of the way . . . before processing, during processing and after processing them through.

We don't think about the details, do we?  I can b/c I have friends who work in the field.  But these logistical questions are the ones the 2020 candidates NEED to address.

What are the long-term cost benefits of continuing in this manner?  Are we that certain that once they're processed, the benefits we provide them  in terms of finding employment and housing, in schooling them, and in providing them healthcare will strengthen our society?  So far, many of our schools in urban areas are already coming apart at the seams. And we can't even figure out healthcare for our own citizens.

just sayin' . . .

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics