‘Red-state burden’ commentary excuses immigration costs

Published 1:30 am Monday, October 17, 2022

I take exception to a recent Bloomberg Opinion commentary (“The ‘red-state burden; and other immigration myths,” The Herald, Oct. 9).

The writer bluntly states that the governors of Texas and Florida are misleading the public about being overburdened with the cost of illegal immigration into their states. He ignores the cost to the state of Texas through law enforcement needed to back up small town sheriff and police departments charged with stopping and holding illegals until they are turned over to immigration officials and charities to then transport them throughout the U.S.

He makes no mention of the human toll on local citizens of very small towns being overrun by over 2 million illegals this year alone. Where is his criticism of Washington, D.C., New York and Chicago mayors? These sanctuary cities are not heard complaining about those being bused in by the charities because they are not being expected to bear the burden of financially settling them. How about it Seattle? Will taxpayers continue to support your sanctuary status if the southern governors find you?

The author cheers California’s ability to absorb 25 percent of its population as being foreign-born without so much as a mention of where the cost of illegals is derived, California’s taxpayers. Will the taxpayers get the bill directly or will it just be added to the national debt? Is there any doubt that the intent is to swell Democratic ballot box returns?

Instead of feeding your readers more Bloomberg Democratic liberal idealism, please provide us with an occasional piece from “The Epoch Times” where real investigative journalism is practiced.

Paul Friedrich

Camano Island