D News Makes Stuff Up
I hadn’t seen this D News editorial until today. Apparently, I’m an evil simpleton because I raise questions regarding the cost of educating illegal aliens.
First off, I’m not quite sure how they conclude that I’m a Johnny-one-note “throw-the-bums-out” on immigration. As far as I recall, I haven’t ever spoken with anyone at the D News about my ideas on immigration. My ideas actually are quite a bit more nuanced than “throw the bums out.” Though I do want to throw out bums (e.g., murderers, drug dealers, and other bad actors), I’d like to give law-abiding workers an honest path to citizenship. Did I ever suggest we stop educating children who are here illegally? No. Just that we inform Congress of the burden. So, I’d guess the D News wanted to attack a strawman, and just attached my name to it.
Second, I guess the editorial board can’t read or do basic research. Contrary to their assertion, the audit report we examined in committee clearly did mention the Texas study. The audit report stated that many governmental services are funded at the local level in Texas. By not analyzing those costs, the Texas study understated the costs associated with illegal immigration by $1.44 billion – a little factoid that a better editorial board would not have fudged.
Third, as the D News states, ITINs are issued to illegal immigrants. But, to get a job, open a bank account or establish credit, these same people often are asked to produce 2 forms of i.d. What does the D News have to say about where that other form of i.d. comes from? Nothing. The answer is that it often comes from identity theft, which adversely affects thousands of Utahns.
So maybe facts, financial implications and crimes relating to illegal immigration aren't important to the D News. Whatever. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
The editorial concludes with this: “But then this argument isn't about taxes or education. The motives behind the hostility against school children, in fact, feel more angry and emotional than fact-based.” I’d agree that most of the “dialogue” on illegal immigration is “more angry and emotional than fact [sic] based.” To that end, I’d invite the D News to be a bit more cheery and to do a little research. True dialogue on a complex issue requires some sophistication of thought, not a bunch of hackneyed drivel slopped on paper.
The D News editorial board does not have moral superiority because it believes we should ignore the issue of illegal immigration. Board members simply have an opinion -- one that is simplistic and not tethered to a factual basis. My opinion is that illegal immigration is an important issue and should be addressed. How should we address it? I'm searching for options; that isn't accomplished by outlawing dialogue and inquiry.
First off, I’m not quite sure how they conclude that I’m a Johnny-one-note “throw-the-bums-out” on immigration. As far as I recall, I haven’t ever spoken with anyone at the D News about my ideas on immigration. My ideas actually are quite a bit more nuanced than “throw the bums out.” Though I do want to throw out bums (e.g., murderers, drug dealers, and other bad actors), I’d like to give law-abiding workers an honest path to citizenship. Did I ever suggest we stop educating children who are here illegally? No. Just that we inform Congress of the burden. So, I’d guess the D News wanted to attack a strawman, and just attached my name to it.
Second, I guess the editorial board can’t read or do basic research. Contrary to their assertion, the audit report we examined in committee clearly did mention the Texas study. The audit report stated that many governmental services are funded at the local level in Texas. By not analyzing those costs, the Texas study understated the costs associated with illegal immigration by $1.44 billion – a little factoid that a better editorial board would not have fudged.
Third, as the D News states, ITINs are issued to illegal immigrants. But, to get a job, open a bank account or establish credit, these same people often are asked to produce 2 forms of i.d. What does the D News have to say about where that other form of i.d. comes from? Nothing. The answer is that it often comes from identity theft, which adversely affects thousands of Utahns.
So maybe facts, financial implications and crimes relating to illegal immigration aren't important to the D News. Whatever. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
The editorial concludes with this: “But then this argument isn't about taxes or education. The motives behind the hostility against school children, in fact, feel more angry and emotional than fact-based.” I’d agree that most of the “dialogue” on illegal immigration is “more angry and emotional than fact [sic] based.” To that end, I’d invite the D News to be a bit more cheery and to do a little research. True dialogue on a complex issue requires some sophistication of thought, not a bunch of hackneyed drivel slopped on paper.
The D News editorial board does not have moral superiority because it believes we should ignore the issue of illegal immigration. Board members simply have an opinion -- one that is simplistic and not tethered to a factual basis. My opinion is that illegal immigration is an important issue and should be addressed. How should we address it? I'm searching for options; that isn't accomplished by outlawing dialogue and inquiry.
posted by steve u. at 7/25/2007
Subscribe
7 Comments:
And this surprises you? The job of a newspaper is to sell newspapers. Why should they let facts get in the way of a good story? Even when shown data which contradicts their beliefs (such as transit provides no meaningful improvement to air quality and some modes even make air pollution worse) the editorial writers refuse to respond and correct their statements.
When I was reading:
"...The D News editorial board does not have moral superiority because..." I naturally assumed the sentance would end "... the paper is owned by the LDS Church and run by the former Chairman of the Republican Party of Utah." Well, that would have been more interesting.
John,
As I think of the laziness and biases of editorial boards, your experience with the Trib on the food stamp challenge is at the top of the list. I still can't understand how you were chastised for takinng the thing lightly when your logistical efforts and data collection efforts dwarfed that of all other participants. But, then again, you did reach the "wrong" conclusion.
The D-News' position on immigration is not surprising. Afterall, the paper's owner has a lot of interest in what goes on in Latin America and needs to kiss up to the powers that be down there.
Umm, the D-News Editorial Board has the market on Moral Superiority CORNERED.
Would this be a good place to ask my question again since you likely didn't see it from your prior post on this topic?
Of all the big bad unfunded mandates the feds put off onto us, why have you focused on this one? This one actually pales in comparison to others such as medicaid, special education etc...
The reason I ask is that I fear some of the people speaking out on this issue are simply trying to score political points and (worse) others are just proudly displaying their xenophobia as though it were the save-all-end-all to our problems.
Well, Tim, it's really fairly interesting how I got involved in this recent round regarding the audit findings. I was minding my own business at the committee hearing, figuring that the audit spoke for itself. A fellow committee member asked me to make the motion to foward the findings to the feds, along with the reimbursement request. Sen. Stephenson wanted to do it, but he had temporarily left the meeting.
Despite that history, I think it is an important issue. The other issues you raise also are important, and I don't think I've been a slacker about raising issues regarding unfunded mandates and federal overreaching. However, there is a bit of a difference. With Medicaid, NCLB, and other fed programs, the feds dangle dollars before the states under the spending clause, and if we grab the dollars, we also grab the redtape and funding shortages. Immigration is simply a wholesale failure by the feds to act on an enumerated power they hold and where the states have few, if any, options.
Post a Comment
<< Home