Return to story

'Study' immigration? Why not actually do something?

September 11, 2007 12:35 am

It's no wonder there are so many perceived inefficiencies in government.

After reading Stafford Supervisor Mark Dudenhefer's approach to understanding the impact of illegal immigration in Stafford ["Stafford to study immigrants' impact," Sept. 1], I walked away feeling somewhat vindicated for believing such inefficiencies exist.

While Dudenhefer's approach may sound valiant--"bring in our own people and take a Stafford approach" (which, by the way, seems to be to draw things out long enough that they may go away, like the transportation issue)--it is an incredible waste of resources and time, and demonstrates an ineffective "good ol' boy" mentality.

Supervisor Paul Milde is on the right course and is demonstrating the kind of common sense we need to be successful.

If surrounding counties are leading the country right now in addressing illegal immigration, why is Stafford heading off in its own direction and trying to reinvent the wheel? This is not an issue unique to Stafford. We should be leveraging what other counties are learning to help us get up to speed faster so we can get our arms around this issue.

Why are we going to study the cost of illegal immigration in Stafford anyway? Is there a threshold that will make illegal immigration OK as long as the cost of providing services falls below that threshold?

Is the board planning to send illegal immigrants a bill for services rendered? I am sure we can identify more effective areas to invest that money in than to confirm that Stafford is in the same boat as surrounding counties.

Here is a preview of the findings of the study: People who use hospitals and schools without paying taxes or other bills raise the cost of those services for the rest of us. Epic, isn't it?