|
"It
is completely outrageous that these local
governments are increasing property taxes and
crying that they don't have enough money but they
want to be able to give illegal aliens
taxpayer-funded services."
– Del. David B. Albo
With
more than one million residents, Fairfax County
represents about one seventh of our
Commonwealth’s population. With such a large
population, one would expect that the local county
government would mirror some of the policies
enacted by our state government in Richmond.
Sadly,
that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Take,
for example, the bill recently enacted by the
General Assembly to withhold state and local
public benefits to illegal aliens. This
commonsense bill introduced by Del. David B. Albo,
R-Springfield, proposed that no person who is not
a U.S. citizen or legally present in the U.S.
would be eligible for public benefits.
The
bill also required applicants for state or local
assistance to provide proof of legal presence in
the United States. It even goes as far as setting
up a mechanism for providing a process for the
temporary receipt of benefits when applicants
cannot readily provide such proof.
This
is pretty middle-of-the-road stuff that should be
agreed to by all Virginians. So much so, that even
in the polarized state Senate, the 40 senators
voted unanimously for an amended bill that was
reported out of the conference committee. (In the
House, 85 Delegates voted in favor of the
conference report, while 9 voted against it.)
The
bill was signed into law by Gov. Mark R. Warner, a
Democrat, in March 2005 and goes into effect on
Jan. 1, 2006.
Given
such wide, bipartisan support for this
legislation, one would expect no objections from
local governments. By denying public benefits to
illegal aliens, local governments stand to reap
millions in savings. Common sense would dictate
that the most populous county in the state would
support this legislation.
But
that was not the case. Somehow in the warped minds
of the tax-and-spend local commissars, this bill
imposed on them an unfunded mandate!
Either
words truly have no meaning or politicians can
simply get away with saying whatever they want to
justify their political agenda. And in the case of
Gerry Connolly, the Democratic Chairman of the
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, he was
emphatic that the law should exempt local county
governments.
Connolly
said that the restriction should not be applied to
local health and public welfare services, “which
are created to address local needs and are
supported with local-funds only.” He then
lobbied the Governor to remove all references to
local governments from the bill.
It
is patently obvious that county governments derive
their local funds from the same pool of taxpayers
that pay taxes to the state government in
Richmond. And when the General Assembly almost
unanimously votes for a new piece of legislation,
that should be a strong indication that the
initiative enjoys wide popular support in the home
districts of our state representatives.
Somehow,
this fact is missed by big government liberals,
like Gerry Connolly, who seem to operate under the
impression that they are immune from any
accountability to the taxpayers who are footing
the bill for their spending sprees.
Fairfax
County was not the only local government to take
objection to this new law. Arlington County,
another Mecca of tax-and-spend liberalism, was
just as adamantly opposed, with Arlington County
Board Member J. Walter Tejada (D) saying that the
bill erodes local authority.
“We
know best our community and feel that we ought to
be able to serve all the members of our community
in the best way that we can,” said Tejada.
“The neediest are always targeted by
conservative legislators.”
Tejada’s
quote is a perfect example of how political spin
is used to convey a point—regardless how
inaccurate the underlying statement. By applying
the label “conservative legislators” to
“targeting the neediest” that is intended to
give instant legitimacy to his statement.
Never
mind the fact that a number of Democrats and
moderate Republicans in the General Assembly also
voted for this bill. This is a truly irresponsible
statement by a politician who obviously cares more
about grandstanding than promoting the welfare of
his constituents—the taxpayers who are footing
the bill for these sort of irresponsible programs.
But
the notion that this law imposes an unfunded
mandate on local governments is simply
incredulous. This is particularly true given the
fact that new restrictions have been imposed on
drivers’ licenses limiting their issuance to
legal state residents only.
Accordingly,
eligibility verification could be as simple as
flashing a Virginia driver’s license. But for
our local government officials even this simple
screening step represents a burdensome, unfunded
mandate.
Accordingly,
one can only conclude that under the process
currently in use before the new law goes into
effect, little or no screening takes place to
determine the eligibility of applicants for public
benefits based on their family income. If
applicants underwent a thorough screening process,
adding a legal residency requirement should not
be an issue.
So
much for making an effort to stamp out waste,
fraud, and abuse. No wonder some of these programs
are responsible for bankrupting our state and
local governments.
As
real estate property taxes are skyrocketing out of
control, voters should keep in mind how local
politicians squander our hard-earned taxes—they
want to give them away to illegal immigrants.
--
April 25, 2005
|
