Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

The Savings You Can’t Measure

By Greg L | 6 April 2008 | Illegal Aliens, Crime, Prince William County | 42 Comments

Monday evening is the public hearing on the budget and tax rate in Prince William County, and without a doubt funding for efforts to reduce the number of illegal aliens will be a topic of discussion. Prince William County has announced that it has placed over six hundred immigration detainers on persons who were incarcerated in the Adult Detention Center, or who went through the center’s intake unit. During the first month of the Police Department’s implementation of the Rule of Law Resolution, forty-one illegal aliens have been arrested. Although it’s easy to talk about what that cost county taxpayers, the benefit they got as a result is a lot harder to pin down. Despite that, it’s not difficult to talk about the benefit this provides, even if putting a dollar figure on that full benefit is impossible.

The first murder in Manassas in 2007 was that of Manassas City resident Breneley Ester Lessing-Yanes. She was brutally murdered by an illegal alien MS-13 member by the name of Jose Martinez-Zeron who raped her in her bedroom during a party at her house. When Martinez-Zeron walked out of the victim’s bedroom, he casually remarked to his friends that Breneley “wasn’t going to wake up”. It was a stunning display of wanton disregard for human life.

Jose Martinez-Zeron was previously apprehended by the Manassas Park Police Department for driving without a license. He provided three false identities, and as a fake address the location of a vacant lot behind a 7-11 on Ashton Avenue in Manassas. He was held on a $1,000 bond for two days without being identified as an illegal alien. The day after he was released, he went to a party at the house of Breneley Ester Lessing-Yanes and killed her. This isn’t unheard of at all, as the illegal alien that killed Tessa Tranchant and Allison Kunhardt in 2007 had five previous interactions with the Virginia Beach Police department and was released each time before this act of manslaughter occurred. Illegal aliens who commit serious violent crimes more often than not have previous interactions with law enforcement.

This kind of horrific scenario is what the Rule of Law Resolution and the Section 287(g) Program help prevent. Although it is clear that not every illegal alien who drives drunk or without a drivers license is inevitably going to kill someone, the frequency of an illegal alien who does so having prior interactions with law enforcement officers who don’t bother to address an unlawful presence in the United States is alarming. When someone violates federal immigration laws, then starts breaking local and state laws on top of that, where that pattern of lawlessness will end, or even if it will end, is a disturbing thing to ponder.

A jurisdiction that has implemented the Section 287(g) Program and requires police officers to investigate the legal status of a person suspected of a violation of a state or local law helps make these scenarios very rare. Criminal illegal aliens are caught before they graduate from drunk driver to murderer when local law enforcement treats immigration violations seriously. It is quite possible that some of the illegal aliens detained by the Prince William County Police Department, or placed under an immigration detainer by the jail personnel at the Adult Detention Center would have otherwise gone on to commit a much more serious crime than the one they were detained or incarcerated for. Catching these illegal aliens who are exhibiting a pattern of unlawful behavior is a very important public safety effort, which very likely produces a real although immeasurable impact. You can’t quantify the lives saved, although some pretty clearly are.

More than the savings to the school system, more than the savings in public benefits that illegal aliens are no longer receiving, more than any other cost that illegal aliens impose on localities, the greatest burden is the one you can’t measure. The value in lives saved is worth more than all of this, and well worth the cost of enforcing the Rule of Law Resolution and the Section 287(g) Program.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

42 Comments

  1. Benton said on 6 Apr 2008 at 6:28 pm:
    Flag comment

    Yawn….. The jails can’t take it and there isn’t enough money NOW. If there is some in the future from the schools, great, let’s give the teachers a raise.

  2. Anonymous said on 6 Apr 2008 at 6:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    Benton said on 6 Apr 2008 at 6:28 pm:
    Yawn….. The jails can’t take it and there isn’t enough money NOW. If there is some in the future from the schools, great, let’s give the teachers a raise.

    Yes, but after the area is cleared of illegals. First things first. With a major decline in ESOL requirements and a decrease in thefree breakfast and lunch programs for the illegals, the should be some “leftover” monies available for raises.

  3. Bryanna said on 6 Apr 2008 at 7:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    My neighbor is a teacher and insist that she will be getting her raise, but her health insurance deduction has increased.

  4. Bayberry resident said on 6 Apr 2008 at 7:26 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg, Thank you for the great information and the updates. But you should know that I am sure the murderer caught by the MPPD provided a false address, but it was not an empty lot behind the 7-11 on Ashton Avenue. I remember this case and I checked the City of Manssas Commissioner of the Revenue records and the address was not a City address. This is according to the very nice female employee who sits at the front desk. Not a huge issue, just thought you should know.

  5. monticup said on 6 Apr 2008 at 7:31 pm:
    Flag comment

    What does the savings have to do with giving teachers a raise? Give any savings back to the taxpayer.
    Benton, what are you, an educator?

  6. Greg L said on 6 Apr 2008 at 7:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    The murder of Breneley Ester Lessing-Yanes was discussed pretty extensively at http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2007/08/15/another-grisly-murder/

    Anyone who is interested in the details,and what readers contributed to our understanding of that crime should read through the post and comments for a pretty comprehensive discussion.

  7. Benton said on 6 Apr 2008 at 8:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    No, I am not an educator. Couldn’t handle that stress or parents (look around this blog!).
    Okay, Monticup, you can have your money back. You don’t have to participate.

  8. mnd said on 6 Apr 2008 at 9:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    Benton,

    You mean we can individually opt out of the portion of taxes that fund public schools?

    Outstanding!

  9. MP Resident said on 6 Apr 2008 at 9:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    “But you should know that I am sure the murderer caught by the MPPD provided a false address, but it was not an empty lot behind the 7-11 on Ashton Avenue. I remember this case and I checked the City of Manssas Commissioner of the Revenue records and the address was not a City address.”

    It wasn’t a County address either; I looked it up on the PWC GIS mapper. The address simply does not exist.

  10. park'd said on 6 Apr 2008 at 10:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    the point is that this poor woman is dead because of the mppd and their failure. jones and his cronies are just as at fault as well. way to protect and serve guys…

  11. Greg L said on 6 Apr 2008 at 10:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    Regardless of where this false address actually was, it’s clear that law enforcement failed to notice that it was a false address, failed to identify this individual as an illegal alien, and then released this individual who murdered a Manassas City resident one day later. Had this person been screened on intake by personnel trained under the Section 287(g) Program, or had police asked the question of whether he was an illegal alien or not, this individual probably would have been held instead of being released.

    When we play catch-and-release with illegal aliens, sometimes really bad things happen. The rule of law resolution and the Section 287(g) program are two significant initiatives that help make sure this doesn’t happen.

  12. AWCheney said on 6 Apr 2008 at 10:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    “My neighbor is a teacher and insist that she will be getting her raise, but her health insurance deduction has increased.”

    So has OUR health insurance (in the private sector)…and my husband’s employer had to change to insurance with fewer benefits despite that. ALL health insurance premiums have increased, Mike. Anybody read about how the insurance companies have been impacted by the health care for non-paying illegal aliens?

  13. me-n-u said on 6 Apr 2008 at 10:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    AWCheney- Do you have a link on that? We all know there is an impact, except maybe those who cater to the illegal alien population. It wouls be interesting to see some actual figures on this.

  14. AWCheney said on 7 Apr 2008 at 12:21 am:
    Flag comment

    There are numerous articles that you can check out. Essentially, what’s being said is that uninsured illegal aliens are tremendously impacting medical costs in this country, which is in turn being picked up by the insurance companies, the cost of which is in turn being picked up by those they insure. I recall recently hearing something on the news (I believe it was WTOP Radio) about a report from a study conducted by one of the insurance institutes (can’t recall which one) which actually linked the increase to illegal aliens. Go figure.

    Several links you might want to check out (and Google to find many more):

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43275

    From the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
    http://www.jpands.org/vol10no1/cosman.pdf

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-21-immigrant-healthcare_N.htm

    http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/09/08/news/top_stories/19_46_779_7_07.txt

    http://www.vdare.com/misc/levin_illegals_in_er.htm

  15. Dolph said on 7 Apr 2008 at 1:59 am:
    Flag comment

    Anonymous said on 6 Apr 2008 at 6:47 pm:

    “Yes, but after the area is cleared of illegals. First things first. With a major decline in ESOL requirements and a decrease in thefree breakfast and lunch programs for the illegals, the should be some “leftover” monies available for raises.”

    I don’t expect the area to be ‘cleared of illegals.’ Furthermore, there has been no decline in ESOL requirements, whatever that means. There may be fewer students enrolled in ESOL, but the requirements remain the same. That isn’t going to have a major impact on the overall school budget.

    The free and reduced meal program is federal. Demographic changes will amount to no savings for Prince William County Schools with the federal meal program. In fact, with the way the economy around here is going, I expect to see an increase in the number of students on free and reduced lunch. Remember, it is based on both income and expenses.

    Prince William County has the 2nd largest school system in the state. It has to stay competitive with other areas if it is to attract qualified teachers. Leftovers just aren’t going to cut it. World class school systems attract businesses and a more educated population. If you fail to have decent schools, thus goes the county…….

  16. Freedom said on 7 Apr 2008 at 7:04 am:
    Flag comment

    Please excuse me for a bit….this is off-topic, but it strikes a tender nerve when people speak of “competitive salaries, retaining quality, and that left-overs just don’t cut it,” when referring to PWC teachers.

    If we had a pay scale and salary increase designed to appropriately reward outstanding performance, and likewise, appropriately reward good and poor performance, we could afford large increases for quality teachers, and zero increases for the “leftovers” who would hopefully move on.

    Unfortunately, it’s 6% across the board…for the good and the bad, and for the $40K and the $200K people. We don’t buy merchandise like that; we expect to pay more for quality, yet when it comes to teacher salary increases, we give the outstanding, the good, the mediocre and the poor teachers all the same. How’s that for incentive. I’d much prefer 12% for the outstanding and 0% for the poor…but AFT would say, “we don’t have any poor teachers, they’re all outstanding.” Sigh…

  17. Benton said on 7 Apr 2008 at 8:16 am:
    Flag comment

    MND - sorry just can’t keep up with which laws and rules are endorsed to be followed here. Guess Monticup can’t opt out of taxes…… My bad. I am new to the place and find it hard to follow the trains of thought here. I am up to speed on some.

  18. Anonymous said on 7 Apr 2008 at 8:42 am:
    Flag comment

    Dolph said on 7 Apr 2008 at 1:59 am:
    Anonymous said on 6 Apr 2008 at 6:47 pm:

    “Yes, but after the area is cleared of illegals. First things first. With a major decline in ESOL requirements and a decrease in thefree breakfast and lunch programs for the illegals, the should be some “leftover” monies available for raises.”

    PICK, PICK, PICK!. If you prefer, a decline in ESOL enrolement! PICK, PICK, PICK!

  19. monticup said on 7 Apr 2008 at 9:25 am:
    Flag comment

    Actually, Dolph, you have it backwards.
    Businesses and a higher educated population result in better quality schools.
    The real estate and education industries came up with the canard that quality schools boost property values.

    More intelligent and more educated parents are more involved in the schools their children go to. They tend to demand more. This keeps the school on its toes.

  20. park'd said on 7 Apr 2008 at 9:49 am:
    Flag comment

    I swear Dolph is Leila incognito these days with all the wordsmithing and pick pick pick. Looks like Leila is taking a break from antibvbl to hang out over here and hang out with those of us who are interested in the rule of law.

  21. mnd said on 7 Apr 2008 at 11:04 am:
    Flag comment

    Benton,

    Ah, so you were, in a round about way, saying that we could break the law and just not pay our taxes?

    “Okay, Monticup, you can have your money back. You don’t have to participate.”

    “sorry just can’t keep up with which laws and rules are endorsed to be followed here.”

    Property tax is an obligation placed on property owners. Law abiding citizens pay their taxes (and indeed all their obligations.)

    This is why it is important for citizens to be involved in government to make sure that budgets are realistic, rates are reasonable, and assessments are correct. This current thread is discussing what potential savings we may or may not see due to 287g participation.

    We can’t opt out of any portion of our property tax. We have to pay them. We can participate in local government to make sure our money is spent wisely and our taxation is bearable.

    No law breaking is being advocated here.

  22. Wdg. taxpayer said on 7 Apr 2008 at 11:33 am:
    Flag comment

    Has anyone done a study on the demographics of our County?

    On the School web site,each school is listed and has figures of how many different groups are in our schools. It also has the percentages of ESOL students.

    There is great comparisions between these two.

    Now I need a way to go back several years to compare the percentages.

    Anyone that can help.

    Thanks

  23. Bayberry resident said on 7 Apr 2008 at 1:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg, I agree and I was not trying to start any problems just wanted to make sure that everyone knew it wasn’t an address in the City. But that just makes it even worse that the address doesn’t even exist. However, I wouldn’t be too quick to put the blame all on the MPPD. I believe they probably followed protocol. This is a clear example of why all ilegials must be sent home and allowed to return legally after being screened.

  24. monticup said on 7 Apr 2008 at 3:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bayberry: Uh, no. They need to be sent home BUT it doesn’t follow that they should necessarily be allowed to return. After all, they had no problem breaking our laws previously. You’re talking about the notorious “touchback” provision in the McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill.

  25. CJC said on 7 Apr 2008 at 5:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    Freedom,
    Merit pay sounds great. But, how about making it fair. Shall we count results on the SOL tests? Should we give bonus points for a teacher that mainstreams an autistic child and the other children still manage to pass the test? How about bonus points for getting a student to pass the test and the child’s parents are illiterate? How about bonus points for just putting up with the kid that terrorizes the neighborhood? (Hey he has to be in somebody’s room, right?) No two classroom situations are ever the same. It is one thing to work in a school with students who come to school with the advantages of bookshelves full of books, trips to museums, and educated parents. The teachers in a school where students have some disadvantages may be working much harder, but with less obvious results. Who deserves the merit pay?

  26. AWCheney said on 7 Apr 2008 at 8:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    “You’re talking about the notorious “touchback” provision in the McCain/Kennedy amnesty bill.”

    I agree with monticup, Bayberry…that would be another slap in the face to those who immigrate to our country legally. I would, however, agree with fast-tracking those who have patiently entered the legal immigration process, without having entered our country illegally, and stuck with it. That would make much more sense to me.

    I would go so far as to say that ANY illegal alien should not only go to the bottom of any immigration list, but be required to PROVE before an arbiter justification for coming here illegally…much as someone requesting political sanctuary would be required. In no way should these illegal aliens get a pass. Doing otherwise is only rewarding those who break the law while penalizing those who respect it.

  27. Bayberry resident said on 7 Apr 2008 at 9:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    Monticup and awcheney, this is where you guys lose a lot of your followers. Why shouldn’t someone who has left the country be allowed to come back legally. Is it because silently you don’t want anyone with brown skin here. Now I have been accused of being an illegal alien apologist, of which I am not, but I am all for legal immigration. I never said they should get a free pass or go ahead of the line, just be allowed to re-enter legally. Jesus Christ, you people are unbelieveable some of the time. Just come out and say what you mean and quit hiding by saying you are against illegal immigration because of the dangers and admit you really don’t want anyone with brown skin to be allowed in the country. At least then I would respect you for being honest. I believe the statistics speak for themselves when we have illegal aliens committing so many horrible crimes, but not all illegal aliens are criminals and many should be allowed back if they can prove they have not committed any crimes and can be a productive contributor to our society, no more or no less.

  28. AWCheney said on 7 Apr 2008 at 9:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    You’re the one being ridiculous, Bayberry. It happens that I am myself a naturalized citizen of this country. Obviously you did not read all that I wrote. Allow me to repeat my salient point: “In no way should these illegal aliens get a pass. DOING OTHERWISE IS ONLY REWARDING THOSE WHO BREAK THE LAW WHILE PENALIZING THOSE WHO RESPECT IT.” I don’t know how much more clearly I might say that. There is absolutely nothing racial suggested by that comment. You’re the one who is bringing the racial element into it, as usual!

  29. monticup said on 7 Apr 2008 at 10:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bayberry, hysteria and wild accusations will get you nowhere.

  30. Freedom said on 7 Apr 2008 at 10:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    CJC said: “Who deserves the merit pay?”

    I really don’t believe it’s the technical challenge of implementation and management that keeps merit pay out of the classroom. :)

  31. wine please said on 8 Apr 2008 at 12:01 am:
    Flag comment

    there isn’t merit pay due to the teacher’s union.

    which is why there isn’t any merit pay in many fields in this country…giving someone who gives 125% more money than the schmo that barely makes it to work would be considered “unfair and dispair treatment” by the local.

    unfortunately, even those teachers who are aware that VA is a Right to Work state and don’t participate in paying union dues are still held to the salary scale created by the union (although they get to keep that much more of their paycheck each pay-period).

  32. Dave in PWC said on 8 Apr 2008 at 12:26 am:
    Flag comment

    CJC,

    You made some very good points on who deserves merit pay. It’s a tough situation for sure.

    Bayberry,

    You forget that the illegals here are already breaking the law by being here illegally in the first place. They don’t get to come back in my opinion.

  33. Freedom said on 8 Apr 2008 at 9:03 am:
    Flag comment

    wine please said: “there isn’t merit pay due to the teacher’s union.”

    Bingo, of course that’s it exactly!!! Just think, if we gave zero salary increase to the substandard teacher, we could give significant increases to, and thereby retain the excellent teachers.

    Effective implementation of merit pay is not easy, but with the academic qualifications and salaries of our Superintendant and his Administrators, wouldn’t you think they could come a long way toward figuring it out? It can be done.

    However, the teacher’s union doesn’t want it, of course. Kinda makes one wonder why we even have a school board, huh?

  34. MP Resident said on 8 Apr 2008 at 10:14 am:
    Flag comment

    “and quit hiding by saying you are against illegal immigration because of the dangers and admit you really don’t want anyone with brown skin to be allowed in the country”

    It seems to me perhaps you think that people with brown skin are incapable of obeying immigration rules.

    Is that what you think, Bayberry Resident, or am I putting words into your mouth?

  35. Loudoun said on 8 Apr 2008 at 1:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bayberry, you are on a tangent again! How many times does it need to be explained to you? It isn’t about race - it is about the willful disregard for our laws and the inability to immigrate into the US in the legal manner. What is with you?

  36. Bayberry resident said on 8 Apr 2008 at 5:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dave in PWC, you are incorrect. Not all people who came here illegally committed a criminal offense. Coming here illegally is defined as a CIVIL offense unless you have been deported before. Loudoun, I couldn’t agree with you more, however, it sounded as if other persons didn’t want anyone here even if they came legally. All I said was all illegals should be sent back home and allowed to come back after screened. I never said they should be put in front of the line or get a free pass. I just said they should have to be screened liek everyone else and if they committed a crime here before or where they came from they should be sent packing back to the god forsaken place they came. It was everyone else who started on me for agreeing with you, please!

  37. Dave in PWC said on 8 Apr 2008 at 8:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bayberrry,

    Not being a lawyer and not really understanding the difference between a civil offense and a criminal offense, other than I guess if you are convicted of a civil offense you don’t go to jail? Like OJ? But they are still breaking the law by being here even if it’s a civil offense in my opinion, therefore they should not be allowed to go back and touch home and come back, and should not be allowed to immigrate here either because they broke the law. Am I correct in my assumptions of civil vs criminal?

  38. monticup said on 8 Apr 2008 at 9:33 pm:
    Flag comment

    Bayberry: you said “all illegals should be sent back home and allowed to come back after screened.” No. WE decide who gets to legally immigrate here. Just because they came here illegally once does not mean they get to come back–legally or not.

  39. Bayberry resident said on 8 Apr 2008 at 10:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    monticup, that is a play on words. If I really meant that all should be allowed to return then why would they be screened. Again, this is why honest people who generally believe in the same principles as most people on this blog get turned off. You know what I meant. Dave in PWC, no they are not the same, when convicted of a criminal offense, you are just that, a convicted criminal, if you violate a civil matter you are not a criminal. If you sue your neighbor because he hit your car and he is found to be at fault, he is not a criminal.

  40. Dave in PWC said on 9 Apr 2008 at 6:35 am:
    Flag comment

    Bayberry,

    Thanks for the clarification on civil vs criminal violations. Is working under the table and not paying taxes criminal or civil? If people run up a large hospital bill and don’t pay it, that’s a civil offense? I know driving without a license or insurance must be criminal.

  41. MP Resident said on 9 Apr 2008 at 11:11 am:
    Flag comment

    “I know driving without a license or insurance must be criminal.”

    I’m pretty sure using someone else’s SSN is criminal, too. (Isn’t that otherwise known as “identity theft”?)

  42. Bayberry resident said on 9 Apr 2008 at 9:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    Monticup and MP Resident, you are correct in your examples, as if you didn’t all ready know, but that wasn’t the discussion. The discussion centered on the miswritten post that people who entered this country were criminals. That is not necessarily correct. I didn’t mean anything by it, it just doesn’t help the cause if when you speak in public at council or supervisor meetings you can’t speak intelligently and with fact.

Comments are closed.


Views: 1230

Site by Greg Letiecq