As if the prison expansion mandates weren't enough, California's people now face yet another unfairly created, unfunded liability.
The Los Angeles Times reports:
Fifteen years after Congress promised that Washington would helpstatespick up the tab for imprisoning illegal immigrants convicted of crimes,California is receiving but a fraction -- less than 12 cents on thedollar -- of its nearly $1-billion annual cost.
In other words, the federal government is refusing to pick up the tab for a failure of itsown criminal justice system, to say nothing of the absurdlyill-administered border controls, which seem to get brought up forcastigation almost rituallyby advocates of scrapping the rule of law. What is always mysteriouslyleft out of these border-bashing sessions is any suggestion for how tomake sure that we are to remain capable of enforcing even the laxest border policy.
But this case is even more absurd, as the state now has to worry about what happens after immigrants break the law more thanonce. A quick consideration of the logic involved clearly exhibits whatis wrong, so let's go through such an exercise right now:
Suppose onesuch "immigrant" breaks into the country. That immigrant already hasone legal strike against him/her. Now suppose that "immigrant" commitsa felony. As the "immigrant" in question isnot a citizen of the United States, there should be no question aboutsending them back to his or her native country to be tried and sentenced in theircourts. But because the border is so weak that such an "immigrant"might find a way of coming back, California's taxpayers are expected toprop up court-appointed defense attorneys for these immigrants andthen pay for their jail time!
It's a wonder "crime" hasn't become oneof the United States's recognized major imports.
Now, one could find reason for optimism even in this uglysituation. After all, California's appeals for increased funding havemet with sympathetic ears among officials in Washington, among themHomeland Security Director Janet Napolitano and Labor Secretary HildaSolis (herself a Californian). Unfortunately, even this optimism mustbe tempered, as no matter how this problem ends up being handled,California's taxpayers will be shafted.
Why so, one might ask. The answer is that, if one ranks states bypersonal per capita income, California is in the wealthiest 20 percent of states in the Union (clocking in at number 9). This means that,whatever programs the federal government undertakes, Californians willend up paying a disproportionate amount for them in federal taxes. Whatthis means is that even if Californians do ultimately receive morefunding from the federal government to take care of our prison problem,those same Californians will still be paying a sizable percentage ofthe required taxes.
One might as well pay for this at the state level,except for the problem that the state was already over-budgeted,meaning that Californians will have to lean on the benevolence of the federal government for a while. Unfortunately, said benevolence islikely to soon make enforcement of border laws even more laughable,considering that President Obama has made noises about moving in the direction of amnesty.
So close the door on your way in. We can't afford to put it back on its hinges