Children are collateral damage in battle against illegal immigration

“Unconstitutional.” This is what a federal district court judge said last week of efforts by Attorney General Jeff Sessions to penalize “sanctuary cities” in the United States for failure to fully cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Still, states like Tennessee are rolling out their own laws that require local authorities to cooperate with ICE in detaining and removing undocumented immigrants.

In the ongoing wrangling across different levels of government over control of immigration policy, we typically hear very little about the collateral damage experienced by children. Regardless of how you feel about the unauthorized parents, you should care about the children living with them, 80 percent of whom are American citizens.

Let me make the devastating consequences vivid with the example of an immigrant mother in Tennessee who has been detained in another southern state for months since being turned over to ICE. Left behind are her four citizen children and one older child, a recipient of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). They have not seen their mother since she was moved nearly a 1,000 miles away.

If you knew him, you would be proud of her oldest son. He came to the United States with his parents at about age two from Central America. He graduated as the valedictorian of his high school class in Tennessee and dreams of becoming a doctor. But it has not been easy. He received a scholarship to college in recognition of his academic excellence, but soon learned that DACA students must pay out of state tuition in Tennessee. He thought he could reduce his course load to afford the tuition but was forced to forfeit his scholarship as a result. Still, he is working hard to balance two jobs with his studies and stay on track toward his goals.

Moreover, he has new responsibilities trying to help his family navigate the legal and financial morass of the pending deportation of his mother. His teenage brother and father alternate working to continue supporting the family and caring for the younger children. One elementary age sibling has a disability that usually requires full time care from the mother. Another sibling is preschool age. Most distressing, the youngest was just eight months old and nursing when the mother was ripped away. As a mother who nursed all three of my children past age one, I cannot fathom the pain this has inflicted. It is keeping me awake at night.

In fact, neuroscientists and child psychologists have provided clear evidence that separation like this leads to major trauma for both mother and infant. It could even mean lasting damage to child development. Then there are the extreme financial burdens. The family must try to provide the legal support required to help their mother stay here. Most of their income has gone to hiring an attorney and meeting the demands of the grinding legal process. The loss of the primary care provider for the children also means other adults in the family are not able to work as much. All of this derails the education and career plans of the teenage son.

These children are either citizens or are here legally. They are as deserving of opportunities to pursue their dreams and contribute to society as any of us. Their success is our success. But we are stomping on their dreams and impeding their potential. We will ultimately be responsible for the consequences. Just take a look at what the eldest son of this family has accomplished, despite the obstacles thrown down on his path. This is just one measure of the costs of harsh treatment of immigrants in our country. There is no number that could adequately capture the human costs to this family. I hope this also keeps you up tonight after reading this.

Carolyn J. Heinrich, Ph.D., is the Patricia and Rodes Hart professor at Vanderbilt University and a member of the Scholars Strategy Network.

 *  Carolyn is a friend of mine from college and I wanted to share this important article.  - JS

City In Ruins

By Jeff Simpson

What happens when a group of people with similar ideologies gets together with a single purpose?

  

  



There are so many other, legal, ways to destroy a city that does not include violence.  

See? Government Doesn't Work!

The ever-talented Stuart Carlson nails it:

Government Doesn't Create Jobs - Except When It Does.

How many times have we had to listen to Scott Walker and his apologists utter their bumper sticker mantra that "Government doesn't create jobs?"

This might come as a surprise to some people, but Walker was lying:

Grant funding awarded to the city of Fond du Lac will support a project that adds 70 new jobs at McNeilus Steel.

Gov. Scott Walker announced the $600,000 Transportation Economic Assistance grant on Thursday. It represents the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s contribution toward rail improvements to serve McNeilus Steel. The city will not provide funds, but will act as sponsor of the grant.

“It’s exciting news to have things finalized and moving forward and we’re excited about the support from the state,” McNeilus General Manager Greg Head said.

To make it even more ironic is that it is taking to bodies of government to create these jobs.

But gee, does this mean Walker might be lying about other things too? Like the supposed surplus? Or that he's not John Doe?

Another Right Wing Cliche Proven False

"The government doesn't create jobs."

How many times have you heard a right winger say that?

It's been a common talking point among Republicans for years. Scott Walker ran on it a couple of years ago and credits it, in part, for his election as governor. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are going back and forth across the country repeating it. Almost every Republican candidate, on all levels of races, are using it as their tagline, promising to reduce government spending.

But look what happens when you do cut government spending:

Oshkosh Corp. will lay off 450 production employees in mid-January in response to declining military spending.

The company announced the layoffs to employees over the lunch hour Thursday. In a press release, the company said reduced U.S. Defense Department spending will require it to reduce its production workforce in Oshkosh from about 4,000 to 3,500. The company’s total Oshkosh workforce, including managers and office personnel, will be reduced from 4,500 to 4,000.

The company aggressively ramped up the size of its workforce between 2008 and 2011 after winning contracts to produce more than 8,000 Mine-resistant All-Terrain Vehicles, or M-ATVs, and 23,000 Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles trucks, or FMTVs.

It held job fairs in 2008 and 2011 to hire more than 1,000 workers, which brought thousands of people from across the state to Oshkosh in search of work at a time of high unemployment in most cities.

Now, Oshkosh Corp. needs to adjust as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan come to a close.

“These are always difficult decisions,” Oshkosh Corp. spokesman John Daggett said. “Unfortunately, there’s no huge contract in the near future that will have a significant impact. But there could be different changes just based on a lot of moving factors.”

Another right wing talking point, about those damn greedy union thugs, also gets shut down at the same time:

The United Auto Workers Local 578 Bargaining Committee released a written statement Thursday afternoon expressing concern about the layoffs’ impact on the community and working families.

“As expected, the union is very concerned not only about the impact to our membership, but also their family members and the surrounding community,” the statement reads. “The union is also very concerned that the company has outsourced work and we are in the process of attemping to bring this work in and explore additional work with the company. We are also looking into ways to lessen the impact of an outright layoff, such as the possibility for some to retire early. The union will continue discussions with the company on these matters to lessen the burden as much as possible.”

Are the Republicans so greedy that they are absolutely unable to tell the truth anymore? Or is that they are merely looking at increasing their hold on power so that we can all become corporate serfs, just like in the "good old days?"

The scariest part is that Scott Walker has no clue about what he needs to do so it could end up being absolutely devastating to not only the region's economy, the entire state's as the ripple effects are felt.

Fitzwalkerstan Jones and the Lost Ark

Last night, Scott Walker made the following tweet:

This fits in with the latest right wing meme that the only way to succeed is on your own and that the government can't solve or even help with people's problems.  With people like him in charge, he just might have a point.

However, true to the nature of the weasel that he is, that statement didn't last 12 hours before he blew himself out of the water.

Bright and early this morning, Walker was part of the joyful news that Kohl's was going to keep its headquarters in Menominee Falls, WI.  He sent out a press release on how his administration is giving Kohl's up to $62.5 million in tax breaks for staying in the state and adding jobs.  On top of that, the village of Menominee Falls will be giving the company $41 million in the form of a TIF.

Obviously, right-wingers must consider Kohl's to be a failure since they needed over $100 million in government assistance.

But Kohl's is not the only failure.

Walker is one as well, by his own standards:

Governor Walker requested a Federal Disaster Designation for 23 Wisconsin counties due to significant damages suffered from the ongoing drought conditions, according to a news release from the Walker administration.

Under the designation, Wisconsin farmers could apply for emergency loans through the Farm Service Agency.

Like I said, he just might have a point. For example, if we wait for Walker to create 250,000 jobs, it might never happen.

Reagan Got It Wrong

First, read this article by E.J. Dionne, Jr. from which comes this excerpt:

Yet the drumbeat of propaganda against government has made it impossible for the plain truth about the stimulus to break through. It was thus salutary that Douglas Elmendorf, the widely respected director of the Congressional Budget Office, told a congressional hearing last week that 80 percent of economic experts surveyed by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business agreed that the stimulus got the unemployment rate lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been otherwise. Only 4 percent disagreed. The stimulus, CBO concluded, added as many as 3.3 million jobs during the second quarter of 2010, and it may have kept us from lapsing back into recession.

So when conservatives say, as they regularly do, that “government doesn’t create jobs,” the riposte should be quick and emphatic: “Yes it has, and yes, it does!”

Indeed, our unemployment rate is higher today than it should be because conservatives blocked additional federal spending to prevent layoffs by state and local governments — and because progressives, including Obama, took too long to propose more federal help. Obama’s jobs program would be a step in the right direction, and he’s right to tout it now. But he should have pushed for a bigger stimulus from the beginning. The anti-government disposition has so much power that Democrats and moderate Republicans allowed themselves to be intimidated into keeping it too small.

Let’s turn Ronald Reagan’s declaration on its head: Opposition to government isn’t the solution. Opposition to government was and remains the problem. It is past time that we affirm government’s ability to heal the economy, and its responsibility for doing so.

As I've tried to catch up on all the news and the general feel of the state, I see a lot of people expressing concern and disatisfaction with the messaging from Tom Barrett and the Democrats, especially in the recall election.

I can't say I disagree. I even said as much when I pointed out that I think one of the mistakes made in the recall was the Barrett/Democratic abandonment of Labor and collective bargaining.

Until the Dems start getting back to the things that work, like standing up with the people instead of the corporations and the plutocrats, they will continue to keep coming up short. They can't do greed as well as the GOP who has had years to hone that game.

A Risk Worth Taking

The other day, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Kathleen Falk made an amazingly bold statement.  She said that she would veto any budget that did not restore collective bargaining.

As news of this statement spread, you could hear Republicans' heads exploding across the state.

Jeff Wagner, afternoon squawker on WTMJ radio, was damn near in hysterics as he was predicting that such an act would do everything  short of causing the universe of imploding.  With panic in his voice, he was stating that this was so "reckless," "irresponsible" and that it would "endanger every person in the state."  He followed that up with a fear-filled blog post:

Let's break this down.  Falk has apparently promised to veto a $60 billion document unless it restores collective bargaining rights.  In other words, Falk is willing to potentially destroy the credit rating of the State, devastate municipal budgets, jeopardize public safety and bankrupt programs - all to appease her Union masters.

John Mercure, the late afternoon squawker on the same station was having the same level of histrionics.

In a frenzy, the right wing echo chamber started flailing about this.  One blogger called it "really stupid."  Another twit said that Falk would be "holding the state hostage."

Ernst-Ulrich Franzen, another pro-Walker blogger, disguised as a member of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial board, tried to use it to prove that the recall is about just one issue, and in doing so insults every child, every parent, every senior citizen, every vulnerable citizen, every woman, every taxpayer, and every working man and woman in the state.  That's a whole lot of apologies he needs to do, and he still hasn't apologized to John Weishan yet.

And as you can imagine, the Koch Brothers, via one of their front groups, was practically apoplectic.

By the way they were acting, one would think that Falk had proposed making cannibalism an official state function, or even worse, saying that women shouldn't be treated as breeding stock.

As I watched this happen, amused and bemused, I started thinking about the absurdity of their statements.

First of all, as any intellectually honest person knows, the recall is about much, much more than just collective bargaining.  The abolishing of workers' rights is a big part of the movement, but not even the most of it, much less all of it.  There is so much more to it.

But when we recall Walker, what are we really risking?

Higher taxes? We already have higher taxes thanks to Walker.

Job losses?  Under the Walker plan, the state has seen six straight months of job losses, leading the nation for two of them, while the rest of the county has seen job growth.  In fact, Walker's record at losing jobs is nearly twice the rate of Governor Jim Doyle's rate, and Doyle had the full brunt of the recession to contend with.

Destruction of the economy?  Under the Walker plan, Wisconsin is ranked 50th in economic activity.  Dead last.  How could anyone destroy it more?

But there are things - besides job losses, higher taxes and a stagnant economy - that Wisconsin would risk by recalling Walker.  They include, but are not limited to:

• Women being treated as breeding stock;
• Senior citizens and disabled citizens not receiving services that would keep them out of nursing homes and other institutions;
• Our children crammed into overcrowded classrooms and receiving a poor education;
• Workers not receiving the necessary training for the few jobs remaining;
• People not being allowed to vote just because they're poor or a student;
• Having fresh air to breathe or clean water to drink;
• Everyone receiving medical attention;
• A government that is representative and responsive to the people;
• An increase in transparency in government; and
• A government that doesn't operate through a secret wireless router in a closet.

You know, come to think of it, it's a risk I'm willing to take.

Did Christopher Thomas Die In Vain?

Owen Robinson, in his usual foaming-at-the-mouth union-bashing mode, went after the Shorewood School District because they would rather act like adults as opposed to our emotionally stunted, temper tantrum throwing excuse for a governor.

In the comment thread of said union-bashing post, Robinson wrote this:

If it sucks so bad, quit. If we can’t replace you with comparable talent, compensation will have to rise. That’s how it works. If you don’t quit, then I have to assume that your compensation is adequate for the services you provide.

This caused something to click in my mind.  It exemplified what was wrong with Walker's Budget Disrepair Bill, why the right cannot understand why it is wrong, and the full impact this bill could have on our lives.

You see, I've seen this happen before.  And it's not pretty.

In the early and mid 1990s, Governor Tommy Thompson had a bad habit of regularly underfunding different mandated services and programs, especially those in Milwaukee County.  Thus, the county operated child welfare system (read foster care) was underfunded and children's civil rights were being denied. Three different independent audits came up with the result that all of the foster care system was grossly underfunded.

Thompson and the Republicans disagreed and said it was mismanagement by county officials.They said that they could do it better.

As a result, in 1996, Alberta Darling was again spearheading some real bad legislation.

As part of that year's budget, she introduced a small clause that caused big problems.  That clause was that the State of Wisconsin would take over the child welfare system of any county with a population of over 500,000 people.

Because of this clause, the Bureau of Milwaukee Child Welfare was created.

In 1998, they took over.  However, when they took over, they only kept one part, dividing the rest amongst the county and three different private agencies.  That meant there were now five different agencies doing the work that one used to do, and the price tag to the tax payer went up by almost half again of what it was.

Even though showing the best records in performance, the state had pushed Milwaukee County out of the way and privatized the whole system, with the small part they controlled as the only exception.  It should be noted that the only agency that was still one of the originals was La Causa.

During the next decade, there were problems galore.  One of the biggest issues was the staff turnover amongst the front line case workers.  Even as recently as two years ago, turnover rates among workers were at unacceptably high numbers:

According to the report, the bureau started 2008 with 179 ongoing case managers. By December, 105 had left. That would seem to mean the turnover was 59%.

The reason for this turnover was that instead of investing the money into workers or services, the private agencies were more concerned with their profit margin and paying extravagant salaries to their executives. With low pay, high case loads and no support, workers were quick to look for and find other lines of work.

The only thing that slowed this down was by increasing the money paid to the workers.  But in order for this to happen, instead of demanding that the executives lower their pay or that they stop buying $9,000 conference tables, the state, led again by Darling's efforts, just threw more tax money at them.  Even with the increase in pay, turnovers are still at a high rate.

As a result of these turnovers, the foster children were the ones paying a price greater than the tax payers. They would have a new worker even as often as every month.  This new workers, unfamiliar with the system, the laws around foster care, or even the scope of their job, were often overwhelmed and things kept falling apart.

Eventually, as anyone who was watching this debacle unfold could've told you would happen, the system finally had one tragedy too many occur.  Because of the way the system was set up, Christopher Thomas died due to severe injuries suffered at the hands of his abusive aunt.

The lesson that the Republicans failed to learn from Christopher's death, as well as the deaths of the other children that the system failed, is that government simply cannot be operated like a business.

Businesses provide a service or produce a product with one goal: to make a profit.  A government exist simply to provide a public service for the common good, whether it is law enforcement, fighting fires, taking care of the ill, the elderly, the disables or abused children.

When you try to combine those two mentalities, profit margins take precedence and people...real people...suffer for it.  And that is not acceptable.

Yes, it is important to keep costs down as much as possible.  Workers need to understand they have to take that into consideration when negotiating their contracts.  But if you take away that right (and yes, Owen, it is a right), then you set yourself up to have a system that is guaranteed to fail, and fail at a cost far, far greater than any money you might have saved in your stinginess.

If you don't like the contract that the government agreed to on your behalf, the answer is simple. Don't elect that person again.

Of course, then again, if you aren't happy with the cost of the government employees' benefits, that too can be fixed.  Reinstate regulations on the health care industry and you will control the out of control escalation of the health care costs.  Likewise, don't elect people that cause Great Recessions, like George Bush, and the pension funding would not be an issue either.

There are solutions to the problems we are facing as a state, but taking away people's rights, not to mention the other atrocities that are in the disrepair bill, is not only not a solution, but will actually make the problems worse.

Q: What Is Brown And Smells Really Bad?

Possible answers include:

A) A big pile of dung.
B) Scott Walker's Brown Bag Movement
C) Who are you trying to kid? A and B are the same thing!

If you answered C, then you are correct.

Walker's entire campaign was based on the recycled brown bag movement used in Ohio 12 years ago. His little brown bag included three basic campaign points:

• Don't spend more than you have.
• Smaller government is better government.
• People create jobs, not government.

Walker's never meant one of those things.

Consider the first point in contrast to the job he is leaving, as Milwaukee County Executive, his 2010 budget is currently officially expected to have a $8 million deficit. His 2011 budget has another gaping hole in it, leaving tens of millions of dollars as a deficit. In other words, he spent more than he had.

As for the smaller government, that is just another steaming pile of you know what. First, he offers the suggestion of creating a deer czar. Add to that this morning's news about some of ideas for "hitting the ground running," which includes this gem:

A proposal to split the state Department of Commerce so that its secretary no longer divides time between fostering economic growth in the state and regulating everything from amusement rides and elevators to petroleum storage tanks.

The new entity would combine existing economic development functions of state bodies like the Department of Workforce Development and the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority. To do that, it would likely have to be structured differently than a traditional state agency.

Great, a whole new bureaucracy at the state level. Just how does that equate to less government?

Finally, Walker said that government doesn't create jobs, but then at the same time, he, a career politician himself, claims he is going to create 250,000 jobs.

What all this means is he doesn't have a clue to what he is doing. The smart money is on things getting worse, not better, for the state.

And again, I have to ask: Is it too soon to say "I told you so?"

The Secret to Keeping a Job

It's apparently to be the only one that knows how things work (emphasis mine):

Oneida County Clerk of Courts Gina Olson has been publicly reprimanded, after she revealed to the County that she had been having an affair with a Sheriff's Deputy for several years, according to a release from Oneida County Circuit Court Judges Mark Mangerson and Patrick O'Melia.

According to the release, the Circuit Courts received a letter from the deputy's spouse, requesting they consider removing Ms. Olson from her office as the Clerk of Courts. But they decided not to remove her because, "She is the only person in the office who is fully knowledgeable on some of the systems and procedures used in court operations." The release continues, "Removal of Ms. Olson from office at this time would result in a severe curtailment of services to the public and the need to implement emergency plans to continue proper functioning of the courts."

Quote of the Day

Comes from Brewtown Gumshoe:

Maybe government isn't bad after all. Maybe the way Republicans govern is the real problem.

MJS Editorial Board Contradicts Itself

Earlier this year, when Scott Walker tried to revive his desire to dismantle county government, the Editorial Board at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel found the thought "intriguing":

The Lubar and Walker suggestions are intriguing. As Walker said in a news release Monday, much of the work of county government overlaps the work of local municipalities and state government. Some services, such as the courts, human services functions or policing the freeways, could be taken over by the state. Other services could be turned over to local governments. They or new regional boards could handle, say, transit and parks.

Walker is also right in pointing out that Milwaukee County is the only county in the state entirely made up of incorporated villages and cities. There are no townships or unincorporated areas where the county necessarily fills a governance gap.

They liked the idea of breaking up one unit of government and spreading it around among the state, the municipalities and other yet-to-be-created authorities.

This morning, they take the exact opposite position by agreeing with consolidating smaller parts into a larger one:

Contracting out for police services shouldn't be the only option, though. Other promising avenues could be partnering with other governments on purchasing or services, consolidating or sharing certain services or even merging communities, as has been suggested in the past for the city and village of Pewaukee and the town and city of Brookfield.

These are hard times, but they are also times of opportunity. It is just at such times that smart officials can come up with creative solutions that provide the right services at the right price.

Come on, people, it's one or the other. One simply cannot have it both ways.

For the record, if one had to choose, I still believe that consolidating the county and all of its municipality into one body is the smarter choice. It would help alleviate costs and promote more efficient use and provision of services. That said, I also still think that it is not very feasible to do at this time.

If They Had Been Reading This Blog...

If the fine folks at Badger Blogger, Boots and Sabers, Dad29, Fairly Conservative, From Where I Sit, and the rest would not have been so surprised and/or outraged at the fraud going on in the child care program if they had only read this blog.

I only pointed out the high volume of money being recouped three months ago.

Oh, and by the way, Cindy retired last month, due to health-related reasons. Mr. Fiscally Responsible, aka Scott Walker, never bother having anyone train under her so that I level of recoupement and diligence could be maintained.

Remember that when your taxes go up, but you get even less services next year.

And good luck to Cindy.