Does Abbot have a point after all? (1 Viewer)

[SystemShock]

There was an article in my local newspaper (taken from EFE, which is the Spanish speaking version of Reuters) about the Mayor of NYC declaring a state of emergency due to the arrival of thousands of immigrants ( ~17,000 since April according to the article) due to the inability of the city to cover the financial burden imposed on them by the arrival of immigrants, and is asking for both State and Federal financial aid to cover the costs. According to the article, NYC is looking at a billion dollars in added expenses this year. Their shelters are at full capacity, so they have turned to cruise ship companies like Carnival Cruise to rent out cruise ships to house these immigrants.

I don't have the latest numbers, but in the first 3 months of the year, Mexican authorities detained 115,000+ undocumented immigrants in Chiapas. It is estimated that about 8000 people are detained every day at the MX-U.S. border, aand week doesn't go by that my local paper reports thousands departing Chiapas on foot, usually after a riot: can't deport them fast enough, can't detain them (no facilities).

Considering how relatively little took NYC to declare a state of emergency to get funds, compared to what Texas sees every day, does Abbott have a point after all?

 

[MT15]

Why don’t we hear about these issues from the states of New Mexico or California? Do people not cross the border in those states?

This is an honest question, I don’t know the answer.

I know we need to reform immigration, but I also wonder why it’s only Texas, Florida, and Arizona who are complaining. I’ve also been led to believe that border states get additional federal money to deal with the problems.

Knowing how badly Abbott has handled his state’s electrical grid, I’m skeptical that he is doing anything constructive to help the situation.

 

[SystemShock]

Why don’t we hear about these issues from the states of New Mexico or California? Do people not cross the border in those states?

Geography.
Shortest distance from the Guatemala-MX border hits TX. Going to the border with California would almost double the distance. TX also has the significantly biggest border, which offers much greater chances to cross illegally. For those who venture further West, in comparison with AZ, NM not only has a very small border, but the terrain is brutal, and there aren't many roads between the State of Chihuahua and NM, unlike AZ and Sonora.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

I'd need information on whether the southern border states (and Florida) have budgets to account for border security issues (a lot of which I'm sure would come from the feds). Obviously New York is not used to dealing with massive influx of immigration.

 

[coldseat]

There was an article in my local newspaper (taken from EFE, which is the Spanish speaking version of Reuters) about the Mayor of NYC declaring a state of emergency due to the arrival of thousands of immigrants ( ~17,000 since April according to the article) due to the inability of the city to cover the financial burden imposed on them by the arrival of immigrants, and is asking for both State and Federal financial aid to cover the costs. According to the article, NYC is looking at a billion dollars in added expenses this year. Their shelters are at full capacity, so they have turned to cruise ship companies like Carnival Cruise to rent out cruise ships to house these immigrants.

I don't have the latest numbers, but in the first 3 months of the year, Mexican authorities detained 115,000+ undocumented immigrants in Chiapas. It is estimated that about 8000 people are detained every day at the MX-U.S. border, and week doesn't go by that my local paper reports thousands departing Chiapas on foot, usually after a riot: can't deport them fast enough, can't detain them (no facilities).

Considering how relatively little took NYC to declare a state of emergency to get funds, compared to what Texas sees every day, does Abbott have a point after all?

What exactly is Abbots point? I live in San Antonio and I have no idea what his point is.

If his point is that Texas has to deal with an outsized portion of border crossers than other states, that has always been the case due to its border with Mexico. There's nothing really new with that. Because of that, Texas has the aid infrastructure from non-profits, and Yes, also the federal investment to help manage that issue. They have certainly been stretched by the numbers of migrants coming across the border recently, but it's still much more effective at dealing with the issues than states like New York or DC that haven't built up that infrastructure over time. This is a constant reality that the governor of Texas needs to be able to manage and not pawn it off on other states through political stunts and wasting money. But that's not politically advantageous for Abbot in this environment and it won't be until Latinos in Texas take note and start voting accordingly.

All he's really doing is giving free bus rides to migrants up the New York or DC and making Texas tax payers pay for it. It's not saving the state money and it's not addressing any root causes. And these migrants would have left the state anyway eventually. So I don't really see any point to this other than the feed to Republican base of hate mongering.

 

[Devildog]

It's a complete political stunt by Abbott in order to OMG PWN the LiBs!!

 

[J-DONK]

There was an article in my local newspaper (taken from EFE, which is the Spanish speaking version of Reuters) about the Mayor of NYC declaring a state of emergency due to the arrival of thousands of immigrants ( ~17,000 since April according to the article) due to the inability of the city to cover the financial burden imposed on them by the arrival of immigrants, and is asking for both State and Federal financial aid to cover the costs. According to the article, NYC is looking at a billion dollars in added expenses this year. Their shelters are at full capacity, so they have turned to cruise ship companies like Carnival Cruise to rent out cruise ships to house these immigrants.

I don't have the latest numbers, but in the first 3 months of the year, Mexican authorities detained 115,000+ undocumented immigrants in Chiapas. It is estimated that about 8000 people are detained every day at the MX-U.S. border, aand week doesn't go by that my local paper reports thousands departing Chiapas on foot, usually after a riot: can't deport them fast enough, can't detain them (no facilities).

Considering how relatively little took NYC to declare a state of emergency to get funds, compared to what Texas sees every day, does Abbott have a point after all?

This is easy to answer if you care about it so much. How much does Texas spend on immigrants? The most glaring, and obvious question about a red state like Texas. What cost are they incurring when Texas sends the vast majority to ICE detention center?

Why would New York have extra cost? Are they possible not using ICE detention centers? Is that possibly the difference? I know that New York treats the homeless different from California, and Texas. There is a reason you don't see a ton of homeless in New York.

I personally have always assumed this was a political stunt for the simple fact that detention centers, and the Border patrol exist. Maybe, I'm wrong.

Since you wanted to make a thread on this, why don't go you investigate this, and get back to us. It's seems obvious to me.

How long ago was demonizing sanctuary cities a Republican talking point? Have all Republicans forgotten what that was all about?

 

[SystemShock]

What exactly is Abbots point? I live in San Antonio and I have no idea what his point is.

If his point is that Texas has to deal with an outsized portion of border crossers than other states, that has always been the case due to its border with Mexico. There's nothing really new with that. Because of that, Texas has the aid infrastructure from non-profits, and Yes, also the federal investment to help manage that issue. They have certainly been stretched by the numbers of migrants coming across the border recently, but it's still much more effective at dealing with the issues than states like New York or DC that haven't built up that infrastructure over time. This is a constant reality that the governor of Texas needs to be able to manage and not pawn it off on other states through political stunts and wasting money. But that's not politically advantageous for Abbot in this environment and it won't be until Latinos in Texas take note and start voting accordingly.

All he's really doing is giving free bus rides to migrants up the New York or DC and making Texas tax payers pay for it. It's not saving the state money and it's not addressing any root causes. And these migrants would have left the state anyway eventually. So I don't really see any point to this other than the feed to Republican base of hate mongering.

Let me put it this way: are federal immigration policies putting an undue burden on Texas and the Texas tax payer?
NYC is crying uncle because they got ~17,000 in 4 months. That's like a 2-3 day haul in TX.

As for the busing, it is cheaper for the TX tax payer to bus them, rather than process them.

 

[SystemShock]

This is easy to answer if you care about it so much. How much does Texas spend on immigrants? The most glaring, and obvious question about a red state like Texas. What cost are they incurring when Texas sends the vast majority to ICE detention center?

Why would New York have extra cost? Are they possible not using ICE detention centers? Is that possibly the difference? I know that New York treats the homeless different from California, and Texas. There is a reason you don't see a ton of homeless in New York.

I personally have always assumed this was a political stunt for the simple fact that detention centers, and the Border patrol exist. Maybe, I'm wrong.

Since you wanted to make a thread on this, why don't go you investigate this, and get back to us. It's seems obvious to me.

How long ago was demonizing sanctuary cities a Republican talking point? Have all Republicans forgotten what that was all about?

We can always count on you to add substance to any discussion.

 

[coldseat]

Let me put it this way: are federal immigration policies putting an undue burden on Texas and the Texas tax payer?
NYC is crying uncle because they got ~17,000 in 4 months. That's like a 2-3 day haul in TX.

As for the busing, it is cheaper for the TX tax payer to bus them, rather than process them.

I believe most of that process cost is coved by the federal government and aid organizations. I don't know what the state of Texas is covering, but I doubt much.

What's most complained about from Republicans here (and what they say they want federal money for) is the increased cost of law enforcement around the border communities. But I don't know what busing migrants to New York has to do with that.

All of these political stunts surrounding the border do cost Texas taxpayers a lot of money. Business as well when you consider the cost of the freeway inspection for immigration that didn't produce anything all. As a Texas tax payer I can tell you I don't like that.

Texas has spent billions of dollars on border security. But what taxpayers got in return is a mystery.

Since 2005, Texas Govs. Rick Perry and Greg Abbott have launched a multitude of widely publicized and costly border initiatives, which usually kicked off during their reelection campaigns or while they were considering bids for higher office.

www.texastribune.org

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

I don't believe Abbot has point, it's just another ill conceived political stunt much like his stupid "enhanced" vehicle inspections at the border that just further strained an already strained supply line. Without looking it up, I'm willing to bet that NYC has its resources already fully engaged in protecting our border as they likely see millions in border entries every month! Those entries are by land, sea and air, and they are from all over the world, not just Mexico and S. America.

If Abbot is so concerned about this country, perhaps he should stop sabotaging it with these STUPID stunts. The southern border is not open and there are processes in place to address illegal immigration and asylum claims. Instead of putting up roadblock to those processes which backs the already broken system up, how about he let this system work as is while actually work to fix what is actually broken.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Let me put it this way: are federal immigration policies putting an undue burden on Texas and the Texas tax payer?
NYC is crying uncle because they got ~17,000 in 4 months. That's like a 2-3 day haul in TX.

As for the busing, it is cheaper for the TX tax payer to bus them, rather than process them.

As I said, it's not a fair comparison. How much money do the feds put into the Texas economy with all of the Custom and Border Patrol agents employed there? If you're going to ship the immigrants to New York then you might as well ship all the border patrol/immigration infrastructure (both physical and personnel) up there with them. Then we can see how New York manages.

If Texas is just going to bus immigrants to other states then they don't need all that federal money and manpower to deal with immigrants. I'm sure they can handle it with the Texas Rangers (not the baseball team).

Asking how well prepared New York is for handling a massive influx of immigrants is like asking how well prepared New Orleans (or the rest of the South) is at handling earthquakes.

 

[SystemShock]

As I said, it's not a fair comparison. How much money do the feds put into the Texas economy with all of the Custom and Border Patrol agents employed there? If you're going to ship the immigrants to New York then you might as well ship all the border patrol/immigration infrastructure (both physical and personnel) up there with them. Then we can see how New York manages.

If Texas is just going to bus immigrants to other states then they don't need all that federal money and manpower to deal with immigrants. I'm sure they can handle it with the Texas Rangers (not the baseball team).

Asking how well prepared New York is for handling a massive influx of immigrants is like asking how well prepared New Orleans (or the rest of the South) is at handling earthquakes.

Yes, it is going to depend on whether federal money covers the costs of dealing with immigrants or TX has to put money of its own.

The comparison, I think it is fair. Not a 1:1 comparison, but rather one of scale. The Chiapas border gets 17,000+ in a week, and it is probably the poorest State in MX, and they more or less handle them, but NYC can't?

 

[SystemShock]

I believe most of that process cost is coved by the federal government and aid organizations. I don't know what the state of Texas is covering, but I doubt much.

What's most complained about from Republicans here (and what they say they want federal money for) is the increased cost of law enforcement around the border communities. But I don't know what busing migrants to New York has to do with that.

All of these political stunts surrounding the border do cost Texas taxpayers a lot of money. Business as well when you consider the cost of the freeway inspection for immigration that didn't produce anything all. As a Texas tax payer I can tell you I don't like that.

Texas has spent billions of dollars on border security. But what taxpayers got in return is a mystery.

Since 2005, Texas Govs. Rick Perry and Greg Abbott have launched a multitude of widely publicized and costly border initiatives, which usually kicked off during their reelection campaigns or while they were considering bids for higher office.

www.texastribune.org

I do agree with you about the stunts. I am referring at the actual costs of dealing with the immigration issue and the entire immigration process.