WHEN THE DEMS HAND 40 MILLION MEX FLAG WAVERS AMNESTY THEY WILL BE LEGALLY ENTITLED TO BRING UP THE REST OF THEIR FAMILIES.
BY 2050 MEXICO WILL HAVE DOUBLED U.S. POPULATION!
Millions of illegal aliens live in California; drive in California with official state-issued drivers’ licenses; and of course, use those licenses to vote in California. Millions. That’s precisely how Hillary won California by over 4 million votes.
California supports illegal aliens over legal, law-abiding American citizens. They support illegals getting free college tuition, while children of native-born Americans pay full fare. They support illegals over police and ICE. Many liberals in California want to abolish ICE. They want no borders and no immigration law. WAYNE ALLWYN ROOT
California governor reaches
‘historic’ deal to cap rising rents
Proposal sets 5% limit plus inflation with a 10% maximum
increase
By ERIN
BALDASSARI | ebaldassari@bayareanewsgroup.com | Bay Area News
Group
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:
SACRAMENTO — Apartment dwellers and other tenants may soon see
relief from steep rent hikes thanks to a landmark deal California Gov. Gavin
Newsom reached Friday on legislation that would cap how rapidly rents can rise.
In a boon to tenants, the deal caps annual rent increases at 5%,
plus inflation, with a maximum of 10% per year. That’s a lower threshold than
the 7% lawmakers had previously negotiated amid strong opposition from the real
estate and development industries. Staff members from San Francisco Democratic
Assemblyman David Chiu’s office shared with this news organization details of
the amended bill which have not yet been formally disseminated.
The bill must still be approved by both houses of the Legislature,
which adjourns in two weeks, and signed by the governor before it becomes law.
But proponents say it is now looking more likely the legislation will be
approved. It comes at the end of a contentious legislative session, which was
marked by early optimism among Democratic legislators about making significant
progress to address the state’s housing shortage that then began to fade when
many of those bills fall apart.
Progress on the rent cap bill, however, marks a victory for
tenants who say they are being priced out as rents rise, although many tenants’
rights groups have said there is still much more that needs doing to fully
protect tenants from rapidly escalating rents and widespread evictions. Chiu,
the bill’s author, had made numerous concessions to the real estate and
development industries even to get the bill to the state Senate. But he said in
an interview Saturday the deal struck by the governor was very similar to the
one he initially proposed, while still balancing the interests of real estate
developers and property owners.
“We are in the most intense housing crisis in our state’s
history,” he said. “We have millions of Californians who are living
paycheck-to-paycheck and are one rent increase away from being forced out of
their homes and becoming homeless.”
He added, “This bill will protect millions of Californians from
egregious rent increases and predatory evictions, while providing landlords and
the rental housing industry with the opportunity to make a fair rate of
return.”
In an email, Debra Carlton, senior vice president for public
affairs for the California Apartment Association, said her organization would
not oppose the bill. But other real estate groups said they would continue to
fight it.
“The proposed version of (the bill) headed to the senate floor
will not incentivize production of rental housing or help more people find an
affordable place to live,” California Association of Realtors President Jared
Martin said in a statement Saturday. “It discourages new rental housing, which
is why C.A.R., representing more than 200,000 real estate agents and brokers
across California, strongly opposes it.”
The bill exempts new apartments built within the past 15 years
from the rent cap on a rolling basis, up from a period of 10 years proposed in
earlier iterations. Other changes to the bill include a longer sunset period of
10 years, as opposed to three and inflation costs determined on a regional
basis, meaning the costs could increase at different rates in San Francisco
than in the Central Valley. Single family homes, except those owned by large
corporations, are exempt.
Voters last year rejected a ballot measure that
would have allowed cities and counties more flexibility in how to implement
rent control, by removing provisions in California law that exempt single
family homes and apartments built after 1995. Backers of the ballot measure
threatened to mount another campaign if lawmakers didn’t act. It wasn’t
immediately clear if they were satisfied with Newsom’s proposal, which would
not change that state law.
Michael Lane, the deputy director of SV@Home, likened the state’s
housing shortage to a natural disaster and the rent caps to the same
anti-gouging measures that are often instituted following a major fire or
earthquake.
“In this case, we have a housing affordability crisis, so we think
it’s appropriate to take this kind of measure,” he said. “It’s an historic
breakthrough that strikes the perfect balance between the interests of real
estate investors and tenants.”
SV@Home was part of a coalition of private companies, nonprofits
and politicians called the Committee to House the Bay Area, or CASA, that is
taking a three-pronged approach to addressing the housing crisis: advocating
for tenant protections, the production of housing at all levels of affordability,
and the preservation of already-affordable housing. There’s still more work to
be done to address the state’s severe housing shortage, Lane said.
California needs to build about 180,000 new homes each year to
meet the demand for its nearly 40 million people. But the state has averaged
only 80,000 new homes in each of the last 10 years, according to a report from
the California Department of Housing and Community Development.
Lawmakers this year proposed a number of bills that would have addressed the shortage, but many failed to pass. The much-watched Senate Bill 50would have allowed fourplexes in neighborhoods where only single-family homes currently are allowed, and forced cities to approve taller, denser condo and apartment buildings near transit stops, but it died in committee. Its author, state Senator Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, has vowed to resurrect it for a third time next year.
But other bills did advance on Friday, including ones to
streamline the approval process for projects that comply with local zoning
rules, to make it easier to build on surplus public land and to remove barriers
to “granny” or in-law units.
“We need to move forward on all fronts simultaneously to address
the production of 3.5 million units of new housing, the preservation of
affordable housing and the protection of millions of tenants,” Chiu said. “As
soon as this session is done, we will be back at it, looking for the most
significant ideas to accomplish all of these simultaneously.”
The Associated Press
contributed to this report.
HOMELESS IN CALIFORNIA
- MEXICO’S SECOND LARGEST CITY
WITH A MULTIBILLION DOLLAR MEXICAN WELFARE STATE THAT INCLUDES WELFARE
SUBSIDIES FOR MEXICANS NOT LAWFULLY IN THIS COUNTRYing Medieval in California’s Streets
Fueled by progressive
indifference, the state’s public-health crisis is mounting.
June 4, 2019
California
Health Care
California,
to some people’s way of thinking, is the most modern state in the country, if
not the most cutting-edge place on earth. It’s progressive, hip, innovative—a
bellwether, filled with pioneers and opinion-makers. It’s also unique for its
constant battles against biblical catastrophes—earthquakes, droughts,
landslides, and floods are all part of the state’s past as well as its present,
as are raging wildfires that have left large tracts in ashes. Even secular
humanists might be tempted to declare the state cursed.
Now
California is home to a public-health crisis. This one is no act of God,
though, but rather the inevitable result of tolerating unsanitary conditions.
Diseases, some bringing to mind medieval times, have returned to urban
streets. Typhus, carried by infected fleas and transmitted by rats and other
animals, plagues Los Angeles. Hepatitis A, spread through fecal matter,
has sickenedmore than 1,000 people in Southern California
since 2017. A “trash and rodent nightmare” threatens downtown Los
Angeles. There’s “a mountain of rotting, oozing, stinking trash” that stretches
“a good 20 yards along a skid row alley,” where “rats popped their heads out of
the debris like they were in a game of Whac-A-Mole.”
The
garbage and disease outbreaks are closely linked. In late May, the local NBC
affiliate reported that “piles of rotting garbage left uncollected by
the city of Los Angeles, even after promises to clean it up, are fueling
concerns about a new epidemic after last year’s record number of flea-borne
typhus cases.” These garbage piles, along with human feces in San Francisco
streets requiring apps for avoidance,
contrast with California’s progressive past. Progressives once cared about
clean streets and public health. Today, they value political correctness,
protecting the interests of the homeless over pedestrians. Their policies have
produced appalling conditions in urban neighborhoods.
“This approach calls itself progressive but is
the polar opposite of what progressives supported, which was sanitation and
public health,” said Joel Kotkin, a City Journal contributing editor and a
Chapman University fellow. “Sewer socialism, if you will, was a noble attempt
to clean up what were often dirty dystopias. The new progressives want to
create a new green dystopia, turning the modern city back into a place more
like Dharavi in Mumbai than La Guardia’s New York.”
Henry
Miller, a senior fellow for health studies at the Pacific Research Institute,
believes that California is virtually unable to provide basic municipal
services. The state “has become a victim of its own attractiveness, combined
with political mismanagement” and “one-party rule.” Miller agrees with the
downtown merchant who told a Los Angeles Times columnist that
“once a pile takes shape, the appearance of lawlessness and neglect is a magnet for other dumpers.” The same, he noted, is
“true of homeless encampments, panhandlers, the expansion of skid row
neighborhoods, the increase in vandalism and other minor crimes, and so on.”
Under
progressive governance, California appears to be regressing at an alarming
pace. While the state can’t do much about some disasters, aside from cleaning
up afterward, it can stop its self-inflicted march into the past.
Kerry Jackson is a fellow with the
Center for California Reform at the Pacific Research Institute.
Los Angeles Homelessness Surges 12 Percent: 59,000 Now on
the Streets…. OF COURSE ,THEY REALLY HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY HOMLESS OR ILLEGALS
LIVE IN LOS ANGELES!
KYLE MORRIS
4 Jun 20191,633
The number of
homeless people in Los Angeles County jumped 12 percent over the last year to
nearly 59,000 living on the streets, according to a report released Tuesday.
The newly released data revealed
that nearly three-fourths of the homeless population, which includes 58,936 people,
are sleeping in cars, tents, and other make-do shelters.
Released by the Los Angeles Homeless
Services Authority to the Board of Supervisors, the data found that the
majority of homeless people were residing in the city of Los Angeles, which saw
an increase of 16 percent to 36,300.
Officials claim the data show
economic stress placed on the thousands that are on the streets and said that
they have worked to provide permanent housing for some 21,631 people over the
year.
The report revealed more than 3,800
of the total homeless population are veterans, 2,866 of which are unsheltered
and “not in family units.”
The total of unaccompanied minors
who are “not included in family units” and are homeless totaled 66, with 45 of
those without shelter.
In a tweet issued to his account
last week, Democrat California Gov. Gavin Newsom boasted that “California’s
what happens when rights are respected.”
California’s what happens when rights are respected. When
work is rewarded. When nature’s protected. When diversity is celebrated and
free markets are fair markets.
“California’s
what happens when rights are respected,” Newsom stated. “When work is rewarded.
When nature’s protected. When diversity is celebrated and free markets are fair
markets.”
He
added, “We are nothing less than the progressive answer to a transgressive
President.”
AMERICA: ONE PAYCHECK
AND ONE HUNDRED ILLEGALS AWAY FROM HOMELESSNESS!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/12/rick-moran-los-angeles-mexicos-second.html
A dashcam video of downtown
Los Angeles on Christmas day reveals a stunning sight: hundreds of tents and
lean-tos on the sidewalks that serve as shelter for the homeless. The scene is
reminiscent of a third-world country. RICK MORAN / AMERICANTHINKER
com
HOMELESS CRISIS IN LOS ANGELES, MEXICO’S SECOND LARGEST
CITY WORSENS BY THE DAY….
Approximates the great depression
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/11/homeless-crisis-in-mexicos-second.html
HOMELESS AMERICA’S
HOUSING CRISIS as 40 million illegals have climbed U.S. open borders.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/12/homeless-in-america-hundreds-of.html
EVERY AMERICAN (Legal) only one paycheck and one hundred illegals away from living in their cars.
Nolte:
Punk Legend Johnny Rotten Sounds Alarm over L.A. Homeless Epidemic
Michael
Loccisano/Getty Images for Tribeca Film Festival
JOHN NOLTE
29 Apr 2019422
3:13
Sex Pistols
frontman Johnny Rotten isn’t afraid to buck the establishment and sound the
alarm over L.A.’s homeless epidemic, which has literally landed at his front door.
The 63-year-old lives in Venice
Beach where there has been a surge of homeless vagrants that have vandalized
his multi-million dollar home and spoiled the beaches with “poo” and “needles.”
“A couple of weeks ago I had a
problem,” he said. “They came over the gate and put their tent inside, right in
front of the front door. It’s like . . . the audacity. And if you complain,
what are you? Oh, one of the establishment elite? No, I’m a bloke that’s worked
hard for his money and I expect to be able to use my own front door.”
He added that his wife Nora, who
suffers from Alzheimer’s, isn’t able to cope with bums trying to “steal the
iron bars off the windows” for the scrap metal and bricks coming through his
windows.
“My wife’s ill and she can’t cope
with this. But at 2 a.m. last week, a brick whizzed through the top floor
window, the bedroom. Sorry, Mr. Policeman. I need your help.”
“The vagrants moved in en masse . . . [in]
tent cities. They’re all young; they’re all like 24,” he said, adding that,
“They’re aggressive, and because there’s an awful lot of them together they’re
gang-y.”
They have also spoiled beach life:
“And the heroin spikes . . . You can’t take anyone to the beach because there’s
jabs just waiting for young kids to put their feet in — and poo all over the
sand.”
This might sound like hypocrisy
coming from a punk rocker, but it’s really not. The whole ethos of ’70s and
’80s punk rock is live and let live. No rules … at least until you interfere
with me living the life I want to live, which is exactly what is happening to
Rotten.
If you want to know what an actual
punk rock sellout looks like, I give you Henry Rollins, the Vandals
legend who endorsed … Obamacare.
In fact, Rotten (whose real name is
John Lydon) is bucking an establishment that treats these vagrants as sacred
cows while at the same time pretending they do not exist because their rising
numbers reflect badly on the Democrat-run strongholds that cannot manage the
growing problem.
The media and the left-wing political
establishment want us to see the homeless as victims of a cruel American
capitalism that allows good people to fall through society’s cracks. Naturally,
the only solution to this problem is big government socialism.
But the truth is that American capitalism
licked poverty decades ago. The so-called “poor” in this country now have cable
TV, central heat, air conditioning, videogames, microwave ovens, iPhones, and
struggle with over eating.
The homeless are an altogether different problem.
Certainly, good people slip through
the cracks temporarily. No question. But there are all kinds of avenues to help
those who are sincere about getting back on their feet. The homeless epidemic
is actually an epidemic of mental illness, addiction, and tolerance.
City’s that tolerate poopy beaches
and sidewalks, hypodermic needles, and aggressive panhandling only end up
attracting even bigger problems and making the lives of their normal citizens
miserable.
Johnny Rotten complaining about one
of the most sacred of sacred cows is as punk as it gets, and so is his support
of Trump and Brexit.
Another line
they cut into: Illegals get free public housing as impoverished Americans wait
Want some perspective on
why so many blue sanctuary cities have so many homeless encampments hovering
around?
Try the reality that
illegal immigrants are routinely given free public housing by the U.S., based
on the fact that they are uneducated, unskilled, and largely unemployable. Those are the
criteria, and now importing poverty has never been easier. Shockingly,
this comes as millions of poor Americans are out in the cold awaiting that
housing that the original law was intended to help.
Thus, the tent cities,
and by coincidence, the worst of these emerging shantytowns are in blue
sanctuary cities loaded with illegal immigrants - Orange County, San Francisco,
San Diego, Seattle, New York...Is there a connection? At a minimum, it's worth
looking at.
The Trump
administration's Department of Housing and Urban Development is finally trying
to put a stop to it as 1.5 million illegals prepare to enter the U.S. this
year, and one can only wonder why they didn't do it yesterday.
The plan would scrap
Clinton-era regulations that allowed illegal immigrants to sign up for
assistance without having to disclose their status.
Under the new Trump rules, not only
would the leaseholder using public housing have to be an eligible U.S. person,
but the government would verify all applicants through the Systematic Alien
Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database, a federal system that’s used to
weed illegal immigrants out of other welfare programs.
Those already
getting HUD assistance would
have to go through a new verification, though it would be over a period of time
and wouldn’t all come at once.
“We’ve got our own people
to house and need to take care of our citizens,” an administration official
told The Washington Times. “Because of past loopholes in HUD guidance, illegal
aliens were able to live in free public housing desperately needed by so many
of our own citizens. As illegal aliens attempt to swarm our borders, we’re
sending the message that you can’t live off of American welfare on the
taxpayers’ dime.”
The Times notes that the
rules are confusingly contradictary, and some illegal immigrant families are
getting full rides based on just one member being born in the U.S. The
pregnant caravaner who calculatingly slipped across the U.S. in San Diego late
last year, only to have her baby the next day, now, along with her entire
family, gets that free ride on government housing. Plus lots of cheesy news coverage about how
heartwarming it all is. That's a lot cheaper than any housing she's going to
find back in Tegucigalpa.
Migrants would be almost
fools not to take the offering.
The problem of course is
that Americans who paid into these programs, and the subset who find themselves
in dire circumstances, are in fact being shut out.
The fill-the-pews
Catholic archbishops may love to tout the virtues of illegal immigrants
and wave signs about getting 'justice" for them, but the hard fact
here is that these foreign nationals are stealing from others as they
take this housing benefit under legal technicalities. That's not a good
thing under anyone's theological law. But hypocrisy is comfortable ground for
the entire open borders lobby as they shamelessly
celebrate lawbreaking at the border, leaving the impoverished of the U.S.
out cold.
The Trump administration
is trying to have this outrage fixed by summer. But don't imagine it won't
be without the open-borders lawsuits, the media sob stories, the leftist
judges, and the scolding clerics.
The Trump Administration Is Cracking Down On
Illegal Aliens' Housing
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/04/17/the-trump-administration-is-cracking-down-on-illegal-aliens-housing-n2544966
Source: AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais
The Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) plans to crack down on illegal aliens who
are taking advantage of public house assistance programs, The Daily Caller reported. As it
currently stands, illegal aliens are now allowed to receive financial housing
assistance. They often skirt this rule by living with family members who are
U.S. citizens and receive their assistance from HUD.
The new rule would
prevent illegal aliens from living in homes that receive HUD funding, even if
they're not the ones actually receiving the assistance. Those who are caught
with illegal aliens living in their homes will have to comply with the new rule
or move to a different non-HUD location.
To determine whether or
not a household is complying with the program, families will be screened
through the "SAVE" program, which stands for Systematic Alien
Verification for Entitlements.
HUD estimates that
there are tens of thousands of illegal aliens who are skirting the requirement
process by living in these "mixed families." As of now, millions of
Americans are on the HUD waitlist because there isn't enough money to assist
everyone.
“This proposal gets to
the whole point Cher was making in her tweet that the President retweeted.
We’ve got our own people to house and we need to take care of our citizens,” a
HUD official told The Daily Caller. “Because of past loopholes in
HUD guidance, illegal aliens were able to live in free public housing
desperately needed by so many of our own citizens. As illegal aliens attempt to
swarm our borders, we’re sending the message that you can’t live off of
American welfare on the taxpayers’ dime.”
Sanctuary Cities Welcome
Illegal Aliens with ‘Open Arms’ While 38K American Veterans Remain Homeless
Sanctuary
cities across the United States are responding to President Donald Trump’s
threat to bus border crossers and illegal aliens to their jurisdictions, saying
they plan to welcome all illegal immigration with “open arms” despite soaring
homelessness problems.
Last week, Trump threatened to bus border crossers and illegal aliens into
sanctuary cities and states, like California and New York City, if the
country’s asylum laws were not changed. White House Press Secretary Sarah
Huckabee Sanders on Sunday confirmed that the White House is considering the plan.
“The USA has the absolute legal right to have apprehended
illegal immigrants transferred to Sanctuary Cities,” Trump posted on Twitter
over the weekend. “We hereby demand that they be taken care of at the highest
level, especially by the State of California, which is well known or it’s poor
management & high taxes!”
Just out: The USA has
the absolute legal right to have apprehended illegal immigrants transferred to
Sanctuary Cities. We hereby demand that they be taken care of at the highest
level, especially by the State of California, which is well known or its poor
management & high taxes!
Sanctuary city mayors like Oakland, California, Mayor Libby
Schaaf have responded to Trump’s threat by saying they plan to welcome any and
all illegal aliens to their cities — even those cities that are struggling with
rising homelessness. Currently, there are nearly 38,000 homeless American veterans across the country.
“Oakland welcomes all, no matter where you came from or how you
got here,” Schaaf wrote on Twitter.
As of 2017, there were more than 2,700 Oakland residents who were homeless — an increase of 25
percent when compared to two years before. In all of Alameda
County, there are about 5,630 homeless residents. In all of California,
there are nearly 130,000 homeless residents, including nearly 11,000 homeless
American Veterans.
Sanctuary city New York City’s Mayor Bill de Blasio originally
blasted Trump for the plan, claiming the president was using illegal aliens as
“chess pieces,” but he then advocated for giving illegal aliens driver’s
licenses in order to attract more illegal aliens to the state.
“Undocumented immigrants are our neighbors and part of the
backbone of our economy,” de Blasio wrote online. “It’s mind-boggling that they
aren’t allowed to have driver’s licenses in New York State.”
New York City homelessness has reached the highest levels since
the 1930s when the country struggled through the Great Depression. Today,
there are nearly 64,000 homeless residents in New York City, including more than
15,000 homeless families with almost 23,000 homeless children. This is the
largest metro area homeless population in the country. There are more than
1,200 homeless American veterans living in New York state.
In interviews with the Daily Beast, sanctuary
city mayors from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Chicago, Illinois; and Cambridge,
Massachusetts, said their jurisdictions would be happy to welcome all illegal
aliens.
Philadelphia, Chicago, and Cambridge have a combined homeless
population of at least 12,000 residents. In the state of Massachusetts, alone,
there are now more than 20,000homeless residents, including almost 1,000 homeless American
veterans.
“The city would be prepared to welcome these immigrants just as
we have embraced our immigrant communities for decades,” Philadelphia Mayor Jim
Kenney said.
“As a welcoming city, we would welcome these migrants with open
arms, just as we welcomed Syrian refugees, just as we welcomed Puerto Ricans
displaced by Hurricane Maria and just as we welcome Rohingya refugees fleeing
genocide in Myanmar,” Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel said.
Burlington, Vermont, Mayor Miro Weinberger said in a statement that illegal aliens were vital to making
his city “more prosperous” and “more diverse.”
“We know from decades of experience that newcomers to Burlington
will make us more prosperous, more diverse and stronger, just as generations of
past immigrants have driven our past growth and success,” Weinberger said.
In total, there are more than 550,000 American residents who are
homeless nationwide. Meanwhile, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million illegal
and legal immigrants every year — the overwhelming majority of which are low
skilled workers who compete for jobs against America’s poor, working, and
middle class. The Washington, DC-imposed mass immigration policy drives housing costs up for Americans, economists have found.
Cher: Los Angeles ‘Can’t Take
Care
of Its Own, How Can It
Take Care of’ More Immigrants
JOHN BINDER
Pop icon Cher said Sunday that Los
Angeles, California, “can’t take care of its own” residents, much less newly
arrived illegal and legal immigrants.
Cher said
she failed to understand how the city of Los Angeles in the sanctuary state of
California could afford to admit and take care of any more immigrants when city
officials have failed to care for homeless, veterans, and poverty-stricken
Americans.
“I Understand Helping
struggling Immigrants,but MY CITY (Los Angeles) ISNT TAKING CARE OF ITS
OWN.WHAT ABOUT THE 50,000+Citizens WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS.PPL WHO LIVE BELOW
POVERTY LINE,& HUNGRY? If My State Can’t Take Care of Its Own(Many Are
VETS)How Can it Take Care Of More,” Cher said.
I Understand Helping struggling Immigrants,but MY CITY
(Los Angeles) ISNT TAKING CARE OF ITS OWN.WHAT ABOUT THE 50,000+ Citizens
WHO LIVE ON THE STREETS.PPL WHO LIVE BELOW POVERTY LINE,& HUNGRY? If My
State Can’t Take Care of Its Own(Many Are VETS)How Can it Take Care Of More
The post came after President Trump threatened to bus border crossers and illegal aliens into
sanctuary cities and states, like California, if the country’s asylum laws
were not changed. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders confirmed that the White House is considering the plan.
In response, Democrat mayors across the country — like New York City Mayor Bill de
Blasio and Oakland, California Mayor Libby Schaaf — have welcomed bringing illegal aliens and border
crossers to their cities.
While left-wing mayors say they will continue to admit any and
all illegal and legal immigrants, Los Angeles is home to the second largest homeless population in the country, second to only New
York City. About 50,000 residents of Los Angeles are homeless and about 7.5
percent of California’s American Veteran population is homeless.
As the city remains crippled by homelessness and skyrocketing
housing costs, Los Angeles metro area is also home to the second largest
illegal alien population — with nearly a million illegal aliens living in the
region, according to Pew Research Center.
Last year, economists at Deakin University found that immigration — both illegal and legal — drives up
housing prices on average, with the researchers writing “we find no evidence
that house prices sink as a result of immigration.”
MEXICO WILL DOUBLE U.S. POPULATION
MAP OF THE LA RAZA OCCUPATION:
IMMIGRANT SHARE OF ADULTS QUADRUPLED IN
232 COUNTIES
"La Voz de Aztlan has produced a video in honor of the
millions of babies that have been born as US citizens to Mexican undocumented
parents. These babies are destined to transform America. The nativist CNN
reporter Lou Dobbs estimates that there are over 200,000 (dated) "Anchor
Babies" born every year whereas George Putnam, a radio reporter, says the
figure is closer to 300,000 (dated). La Voz de Aztlan believes
that the number is approximately 500,000 (dated) "Anchor Babies" born every year."
HOUSING CRISIS? HERE ARE THE NEW
NUMBERS:
“Currently, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million legal
and illegal immigrants every year, with more than 70 percent coming to the
country through the process known as “chain migration” whereby newly
naturalized citizens can bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the
U.S. In the next 20 years, the current U.S. legal immigration system is on
track to import roughly 15
million new
LA City
Council May Operate Tent Encampments for 34,000 Homeless… THEY DON’T ASK
ILLEGALS TO LIVE IN TENTS!!!
Jae C. Hong / Associated
Press
The Los Angeles City Council voted last week
to develop an “emergency” plan that could operate trailer and tent encampments
to house 34,000-homeless — similar to the plan developed by Orange County.
The Los Angeles City Council on March 23 declared a homeless crisis by requesting the Los Angeles County
Homeless Services Authority implement an Emergency Response to Homelessness
Plan that would provide an alternative to encampments for 100 percent of the
Los Angeles homeless population by December 31, 2018.
The Los Angeles Housing Authority recently reported that of the 34,189 homeless identified in the 2017
federally mandated count, 25,237 or 76 percent, were unsheltered and living on
sidewalks, cars, tents, or mobile homes.
The report was released 16 months after homeless advocates
convinced city voters they could permanently solve homeless by passing Measure HHH ballot initiative, which raised property taxes by $9.64
per $100,000 of assessed valuation to fund a $1.2 billion bond.
Los Angeles County then convinced voters in March 2017 to pass
Measure H to provide $350 million per year worth of homeless mental health and
addiction services through a ¼ percent increased sales tax up to 10 percent in a number of L.A. County cities.
Both measures only achieved the 2/3 majority required to pass
because of a miraculous surge from absentee voters
in central and south LA districts that supported higher taxes.
LA City Council members also recently voted to build 222 units of permanent supportive homeless housing in each
of the 15 LA City Council districts by 2020. The first 122 of the 3,330
approved homeless units broke ground in East Hollywood in November.
But the federal 2017 City of Los Angeles homeless count found the population had spiked by 5,698, or about 20 percent,
since 2016. That means despite raising $1.2 billion in taxes, the net number of
homeless after the new construction has already increased by 2,368.
Last month, the city council voted unanimously to start
housing 60 homeless people in trailers on a city-owned downtown lot. But despite the city paying
$2 million for trailers equipped with bathrooms and showers, and funding
allocating another $1 million a year to operate the downtown trailer park, CBS
News reported that local restaurant owners say transients already hurt
their business, and the trailers will make the situation worse.
The City of Los Angeles told voters it could solve the homeless
problem with the HHH tax increase and $1.2 billion. But it cost Orange County
$780,000 per month temporarily to house 700 homeless evicted from the Santa Ana
River in 400 motel rooms. Given the enormous scale of L.A.’s homeless problem,
that would cost the city about $49.2 million a month.
Orange County Supervisors voted on March 19 to set up tent
cities on county parcels next to public parks in Irvine, Huntington, and Laguna
Niguel. All 3 cities are threatening to file lawsuits to prevent the Orange
County from dumping its problem on local communities.
None of the 15 Los Angeles Districts wants the risk exposure to
infectious diseases that come with a homeless encampment. Breitbart News reported that a hepatitis A outbreak began among San Diego’s
homeless population and has spread statewide. The latest California Public
Health report found 703 new cases, 460 hospitalizations, and 21 deaths.
Rising Homelessness Among
Working Californians… a state that employs millions using stolen social
security numbers and hands out tens of BILLIONS in social services and welfare!
BE HONEST! WHEN HAVE YOU EVER HEARD EVEN ONE OF THESE PRO-AMNESTY AND OPEN BORDERS POLITICIANS EVEN MENTION THE TRAGEDY OF AMERICA’S MILLION HOMELESS LEGALS???
In
California, the rising number of homeless people are not who you may think they
are. The Los Angeles Times editorial board
recently drove home that point by personalizing what
it means to be homeless in the United States' second-most populous city in
2018.
Many people think of homelessness as a problem of substance
abusers and mentally ill people, of chronic skid row street-dwellers pushing
shopping carts. But increasingly, the crisis in Los Angeles today is about a
less visible (but more numerous) group of “economically homeless” people. These
are people who have been driven onto the streets or into shelters by hard
times, bad luck and California’s irresponsible failure to address its own
housing needs.
Consider Nadia, whose story has become typical. When she decided
she had to end her abusive marriage, she knew it would be hard to find an
affordable place to live with her three young children. With her husband, she
had paid $2,000 a month for a three-bedroom condo in the San Fernando Valley,
but prices were rising rapidly, and now two-bedroom apartments in the area were
going for $2,400 — an impossible rent for a single parent who worked part time
at Magic Mountain.
Nadia and her children are among the economically homeless —
men, women and, often enough, families, who find themselves without a place to
live because of some kind of setback or immediate crisis: a divorce, a
short-term illness, a loss of a job, an eviction. In many cities across the
nation, these are not necessarily problems that would plunge a person into
homelessness. But here they can. Why? Because of the shockingly high cost of
housing in Los Angeles.
Perhaps the most important thing that anyone should take away
from Times' editors' take on Nadia's situation is that she is functional adult
who is more than capable of improving her lot. Later in the editorial, the LA
Times' editors disclose that she was able to get her family into a homeless
shelter and that she has been able to secure a full time job doing data entry
at an insurance company, where only a few of her co-workers know of her
homeless status.
Nadia is far from alone in Los Angeles.
Meanwhile, north of Los Angeles, Santa Barbara is one of
the wealthiest cities in California. There, the New Beginnings counseling
center has made arrangements to
allow up to 150 Californians who are either living in their cars or in recreational vehiclesto
be able to park them overnight in the otherwise empty parking lots of local
churches and government offices.
The clients can park after 7 p.m., but have to clear out as
early as 6 a.m. The benefit is that the vehicles are no longer parked on city
streets, which riles some residents and merchants. And because the lots are
monitored by New Beginnings, the clients, who all go through a screening
process, can at least feel safe while they sleep.
Santiago Geronimo works in the kitchen of a high-end Santa
Barbara restaurant and until recently, he, his girlfriend and her son Luis
lived in a two-bedroom apartment shared by four adults and three kids. But the
girlfriend, Luisa Ramirez, lost her retail clerk job because of a back injury,
and they've lived in a Ford Explorer since September. Their new home is a
church parking lot on the Goleta border.
There is a common element among many of California's employed
homeless, in that many were living in apartments or houses until one of their
household's members experienced a job loss. Beyond that, many were employed
with relatively good incomes until they lost their jobs, where they soon found
that their available employment options were limited to low-paying jobs that
weren't enough to pay their rents or mortgages.
Then the evictions came, and they became homeless. All across
the state.
Steve Lopez, a LA Times columnist, asked a good question
about why California's working population doesn't move to where housing is
cheaper:
You might ask why
people of lesser means don't head to less expensive areas than Santa Barbara —
it's a fair question, and I've written about people who eventually did make
such a move. In Santa Barbara, the answers I got were the same ones I've heard
elsewhere in coastal California. People hold open the option of leaving, but
many are connected to specific places by history, family and employment
connections, and they're not quite ready to give up on a turnaround, move to a
place they don't know, and start over from scratch.
Besides that, local
economies rely on those of lesser means, so where are they supposed to live?
"You know,"
said Phil, "there's a huge Hispanic population that does all the damn work
around here. Every restaurant you go into, you can watch them slaving away. And
they're taking care of people's gardens and everything else, and they wind up
with eight or 10 people living in a one-bedroom place."
Until that doesn't work, as Santiago Geronimo found out.
The truth is that many Californians have tried to move to
greener pastures, as many have from California's economically-distressed
Central Valley, where that region's oil industry has yet to recover from
the decline of oil prices from July 2014 through February 2016. According to
Moody's, for every job lost in the oil and gas industry, an additional 3.43 jobs may be lost in other sectors, creating a negative deficit that
other, more strongly growing sectors of the economy must be in overdrive to
overcome, just to get to the point where any positive economic growth may be
recorded. California's Central Valley lost thousands of
oil and gas industry jobs during the downturn, where some of the impact of
those losses are also being felt in other communities throughout
the state's interior.
In Bakersfield, in Kern County, where many of the state's
oil and gas industry jobs are centered, the city's homeless shelters were forced to turn away Californians seeking shelter earlier this year
because they ran out of space to accommodate them during a short cold snap,
when having to sleep outdoors became too intolerable.
Some of the economically displaced from California's
Central Valley have migrated to where jobs are available in the state's
thriving metropolises, such as San Francisco and Los Angeles, where they've run
into the same situation of excessively high rents. Consequently, they've joined
the ranks of the employed homeless.
Others are fleeing the
state altogether, paradoxically seeking to escape the
"prosperity" of the state's coastal cities, with the housing shortage-driven soaring rents and declining quality of life in those cities becoming a primary motivation for
their flight.
All these things together would appear to have set
California on a very different course than the rest of the United States. At
the very least, where the trends for homelessness are concerned.
For his part, the state's governor, Jerry Brown, refused to declare the
state's homelessness crisis to be an emergency in 2016, which denied the
state's counties and cities any additional resources to combat homelessness.
The state's data for homeless in 2017 shows the results of that decision, where
at the national level, if not for California, the trend for homelessness in the
U.S. would have improved.
Census
Bureau: Immigration Driving Half of U.S. Population Growth
JOHN BINDER
Immigration to the United States is now driving nearly
half of all population growth in the country instead of increased birth rates,
the U.S. Census Bureau finds.
The latest Census Bureau estimates on the U.S.
population reveal that about 48.5 percent of all population growth is driven by
the country’s mass illegal and legal immigration policy, where more than 1.5
million foreign nationals are admitted to the country every year.
(Axios)
Axios analysis by Stef
Knight details the
growing share to which immigration is increasingly driving population growth
across the U.S. Since 2011, for example, the level to which immigration has
accounted for overall population growth has increased more than 13 percent.
According to
the Wall Street Journal analysis,
about nine percent of U.S. counties are growing solely because of immigration.
This concludes that about nine percent of counties have regional birth rates
that do not exceed the annual number of deaths in the area.
Similarly,
the Wall Street Journal notes,
more than half of all population growth in states like Florida, Ohio, Virginia,
Kansas, and Michigan, among others, is because of immigration.
Though
pundits have claimed that the country’s admittance of 1.2 million legal
immigrants a year is necessary to increase birth rates, researchers have found
that the growth of the immigrant population has little impact on birth rates.
Center for
Immigration Studies Director of Research Steven Camarota discovered in his latest study this year that
“immigrant fertility has only a small impact on the nation’s overall birth
rate,” citing that immigrants in the U.S. raise the nation’s birth rate for all
women by two births per 1,000 women.
“Immigration
has a minor impact because the difference between immigrant and native
fertility is too small to significantly change the nation’s overall birth
rate,” Camarota noted in the study.
At current
legal immigration levels, the U.S. population is set to hit an unprecedented 404 million residents by 2060 — including
a foreign-born population of 69 million.
The U.S.
does not have to rapidly increase its total resident population and
foreign-born population, as legal immigration moratoriums have been implemented in the past to give time for new
arrivals to properly assimilate to American life. Halting all immigration to
the country would stabilize the population to a comfortable 329 million
residents in the next four decades.
California Wants to Secede? Let's Help Them!
California
is a part of America. But it’s no longer American. It is a foreign state. It is
a fugitive state. The U.S. Constitution and the rule of law no longer apply in
California. Call it, “The People’s Socialist Republic of California.” It’s a
state without a country. But it’s certainly no longer American in any
way.
Liberals
in California want to secede. They are trying to put it on the ballot. They
call it “Calexit.” I say, “Glory Hallelujah." Let’s help make it
happen. I propose 63 million Trump voters join the team. Let's work 24/7 to
turn their dream into a reality!
Millions of illegal aliens live in California; drive in
California with official state-issued drivers’ licenses; and of course, use
those licenses to vote in California. Millions. That’s
precisely how Hillary won California by over 4 million votes.
California supports illegal aliens over legal, law-abiding
American citizens. They support illegals getting free college tuition, while
children of native-born Americans pay full fare. They support illegals over
police and ICE. Many liberals in California want to abolish ICE. They want no
borders and no immigration law.
The Attorney General of California has warned any business owner
who cooperates with ICE will face prosecution by the state of California. You heard
correctly. California will put the business owner in prison, for cooperating
with federal law, to protect the criminal breaking the law.
The Mayor of Oakland famously played Paul Revere to warn illegal
felons “ICE is coming. ICE is coming.” The Feds report over 800 felons evaded
arrest because of that stunt. How many legal, law-abiding, native-born
Americans will be robbed, raped, or murdered in the coming weeks because of
that act of sedition?
A California judge just sided with the ACLU and barred LA County
from enforcing gang restrictions that dramatically lowered crime. California
has once again sided with hoodlums and gang-bangers over the law-abiding
taxpayers.
In Oakland, a coffee shop prohibits employees from serving
police, in order to create a “safe space” for their customers. Californians
hate and distrust police more than illegal felons and thugs who speak no
English and wear gang tattoos. Really.
All of this is sheer madness. But California has taken it to a
whole new level.
Just this week the California Senate appointed the first-ever
illegal alien to an official statewide post. Lizbeth Mateo, a 33-year old
illegal alien-turned-attorney, will serve on the official state committee that
doles out money to illegals attending college. In California, illegals now
decide how taxpayer money is spent.
President Trump loves to brand (see "Crooked
Hillary"). Let’s brand California. It’s not a “Sanctuary State.” It’s a
“Fugitive State.” It’s a place that chooses to let felons and fugitives run
free. It’s a place where the rights of criminals are far more important than
protecting legal, law-abiding American citizens who pay taxes. We are the
second class citizens in California.
Here’s the way to fix the problem. Liberal Californians want to
secede. I'm joining the movement. How about you?
Conservatives should beg California to secede. We should make it
easy for them. We should help pay for it. Pass the hat. Every conservative
should chip in $20. I’ll throw $1000 to get the ball rolling.
Just think of elections. Without California, Trump and all
future Republican presidential candidates would win, without breaking a sweat.
Without California, we’d easily win the popular vote. And we'd win the
electoral vote by a landslide.
Next think of Congress. California has 53 House seats. Democrats
lead 39-14, for a net gain of 25 seats. Send California packing and the GOP
gains a 25 House seat lead. We would dominate the House for decades to
come.
And of course, the GOP would gain an automatic two seats in the
Senate through the subtraction of California. As it stands now, those two U.S.
Senate seats are deep blue Democrat forever. But if California secedes a 51-49
GOP lead instantly moves to 51-47.
If 63 million Trump voters just gave an average of $20 each to
the "Calexit movement" that’s over $1.2 billion dollars. That’s
enough money to help California secede, with enough left over as a down payment
on building a wall…
with California.
Democrats enforce crackdown on vehicular homelessness in Los Angeles
On July 30 the Los
Angeles City Council restored regulations that had expired at the beginning of
the month preventing people from sleeping at night in vehicles on residential
streets or living in vehicles within a block of parks, schools, preschools or daycares.
At last count, over
9,500 people live in vehicles throughout the city, and a total of 16,528 in all
of Los Angeles County. In Los Angeles, a program of safe parking sites in
private lots has room for less than 200 vehicles. Violators of the ordinance
are ticketed $25 for the first offence, $50 for the second and $75 for each
offense after that.
According to press
reports, as the Democratic
Party-controlled
City Council voted 13-0 in
favor of the measure,
those present began
chanting “Shame on You!”
Opponents of the
prohibition point out that there are few options for the homeless. Similar
prohibitions apply in the cities that surround Los Angeles. Last month the City
of Long Beach announced a plan to give 30-day parking permits in selected areas
to families living in their cars, which the city estimates at 85, out of Long
Beach’s estimated homeless population of 1,900 persons.
In signing the measure,
which is to last until September, Los Angeles’ Democratic mayor Eric Garcetti
justified his approval of the measure on the grounds of balancing the needs of
the homeless with community complaints of lack of parking and bad sanitation, a
time-worn practice of dividing workers and pitting the homeless against their
surrounding neighbors. Garcetti cynically promised to provide another 200
“safe-parking spots” this year.
The “safe-parking”
initiative, along with many other measures, including giving bus tickets to the
homeless to leave town—known cynically as “Greyhound therapy,” a tactic being
aggressively pursued by San Francisco and San Diego—and the housing of 21,631
persons last year, have not kept up with the explosion of homelessness in Los
Angeles County.
The latest count by the
LA Homeless Services Authority reported 58,936 homeless individuals in Los
Angeles County, a 12 percent increase from 2018. In the city proper the count
is 36,165, 16 percent higher than in 2018. Of those, 27,221 are “unsheltered”
(44,214 in the county), a category that includes those forced to live in their
vehicles.
In fact, with the
exception of a negligible drop in homeless military veterans (from 3,886 to
3,878), the increase impacts every category. Chronically homeless people
increased 17 percent since 2018; youth homelessness exploded by 24 percent;
senior homelessness jumped 8 percent.
While shelter capacity
and homes for the homeless have been built, the growth in the homeless
population is being fed by an increase in the number of evictions across the
state, a product of the ever-rising cost of rents that far exceeds increases in
real wages for most Angelinos.
In Los Angeles,
one-third of households spend more than half of their income on housing costs;
721,000 of them are even more “severely rent-burdened.” According to the
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, a person with an hourly wage of $13.25
in Los Angeles would have to work 79 hours a week to afford a modest
one-bedroom apartment. Los Angeles needs more than half a million “housing
units” to meet the needs of low-income renters.
For apartment units
built before October 1978, there is a limited rent-control law which caps
yearly rent increases to between 3 and 8 percent. A family that has
continuously occupied such an apartment since 1985 would now be paying four
times as much as when they moved in.
Under the terms of this
labyrinthine law, landlords can raise rents above the rent-controlled
percentage for a number of reasons, such as another tenant joining the
household. Once tenants move out or are evicted the rent increases to whatever
the market will bear, a clause that serves as an incentive for landlords to rid
themselves of tenants that face financial uncertainties.
Rent control ended for
apartments built after October 1978 on the pretext that rent control lowers the
supply of affordable housing in the long-run.
While over 5,000 units
have been built in the last year to house the homeless, another 100,000 are
planned over the next decade.
Yet, Los Angeles City
Councilman Mike Bonin estimates that 110,000 units in Los Angeles currently sit
empty; Bonin is proposing a “vacancy tax” such as the one recently passed in
the city of Oakland, California. The actual number may even be higher. Housing
investigators Walter Dominguez and Brad Kane of the Pico Neighborhood Council
found that in many high-rise buildings in trendy West Los Angeles, where
monthly rents start at around $3,000 for a studio apartment, 40 to 50 percent
of the units are unoccupied.
It is more and more the
case that investment firms, such as the Blackstone Group in Sacramento, where
renters were recently hit with a 50 percent rent hike, or Taylor Equities in
Los Angeles, are buying up apartments and homes in bulk across the state,
creating monopolies that manipulate rents at will by controlling the supply of
homes.
According to housing
advocates, the state as a whole has a 300,000 surplus of above moderate-income
rental housing. Investment is also flowing to the building of luxury housing
instead of less profitable affordable units.
In the current
electoral season, it has become fashionable for politicians, Democrats and
Republicans, to call for the break-up of monopolies; this is done with a wink
and a nod. No doubt, any palliative measure on homelessness will avoid
constraining monopoly profits.
The homeless crisis is a sure indication that the breakup
of those monopolies and the solution
of the homeless crisis in Los Angeles and in California requires
the breaking up of the housing monopolies, the takeover of vacant
apartments and homes and their distribution according to need,
at affordable prices. Such a mobilization will not
be carried out by the Democratic Party, which represents
Wall Street and the big banks; it requires the mass mobilization of
workers, independently of capitalist politicians, and the socialist
transformation of society, to place
human needs ahead of corporate profits.
"Instead of saying, 'Where can people
sleep?' they continue to pass things telling us where we can't sleep,"
Busch said. "We can issue hundreds more tickets, tie up more courtrooms,
more jails, more police time with homeless people … and the city can pay out
millions more in civil rights lawsuits, or we can do what we need to do."
L.A.
could ban homeless people from sleeping near schools, parks and other
facilities
Los Angeles has long been locked in battles
over where and how people can bed down on its streets and sidewalks — a debate
that has played out for decades in City Hall, in the courts and on avenues
lined with squalid tents and bedrolls.
The city has been brushed back in court by
homeless advocates, who argue that it is cruel and useless to punish people if
they have nowhere else to sleep. Last year, those advocates hailed a federal
ruling against a Boise, Idaho, law that prohibited sleeping on the street,
saying the ruling cemented their earlier victories in Los Angeles and set a
crucial precedent across the western United States.
Now L.A. politicians are weighing a new set of
rules that could bar people from sitting or sleeping on streets and sidewalks
near schools, parks and day care centers, and in a range of other prohibited
areas — an idea that has drawn fire from homeless advocates.
With tens of thousands of people bedding down
on the streets — far more than the city can house in new homeless housing or
shelters built to date — "You can't do this and expect that you'll have
something that's enforceable," said attorney Carol Sobel.
The newly proposed restrictions, put forward by
Councilman Mitch O'Farrell, would replace a blanket ban on sidewalk sleeping
that has been on the books for decades, but which L.A. had agreed to pull back
on enforcing at night after being sued by skid row residents.
Sobel, one of the attorneys who represented
homeless people in the Jones vs. City of Los Angeles case, called the proposed
rules "completely unworkable" and argued that it was ridiculous for
city officials to frame their newly proposed restrictions as an effort to
comply with the Boise ruling.
The Boise ruling "does not require you to
put in all these restrictions," Sobel said, arguing in a letter to council
members that the proposed rules would make it almost impossible to sleep
anywhere on skid row.
The disputed section of the Municipal Code —
41.18(d) — has been a rallying cry for neighborhood activists who argue that
the Jones settlement has led to chaos and blight on city sidewalks. Mark
Ryavec, president of the Venice Stakeholders Assn., said that the proposed
rules failed to address the most important issue: homeless encampments in or
abutting residential areas.
"What we're dealing with here in Venice —
and what is so difficult for residents — is these encampments literally being
in their frontyard," argued Ryavec, whose group has repeatedly sued the
city over homelessness issues.
The proposed rules were unveiled at the
council's homelessness committee meeting Wednesday at City Hall, where Senior
Assistant City Atty. Valerie Flores said that prohibiting people from sleeping
near schools, parks, newly established shelters and in other specified areas
would be legally defensible, even after the federal decision that tossed out
rules against sleeping on public property in Boise.
In that case, a federal court ruled that
"as long as there is no option of sleeping indoors, the government cannot
criminalize indigent, homeless people for sleeping outdoors, on public
property."
But the court also opined that "even where
shelter is unavailable, an ordinance prohibiting sitting, lying, or sleeping
outside at particular times or in particular locations might well be
constitutionally permissible."
Flores argued that L.A.'s existing laws on
sidewalk sleeping "would benefit from modernization, clarification and a
better balance between the competing needs of persons using the public
right-of-way."
After meeting with Flores and other city
staffers behind closed doors Wednesday, O'Farrell laid out the proposed rules:
No sitting, lying down or sleeping within 500 feet of schools, parks or day
care centers. No bedding down near homeless housing, shelters or other
facilities to serve homeless people that have opened in recent years.
People would also be banned from bunking down
on bicycle paths, in tunnels or on bridges designated as school routes, in
public areas with signs barring trespassing or setting closing times for safety
or maintenance purposes, and in crowded areas near big venues such as Staples
Center.
And people sleeping on the streets would still
have to stay away from entrances and driveways and leave enough room for
wheelchair users to pass under the Americans With Disabilities Act.
O'Farrell said in a statement Thursday that
"the reality is we have sensitive areas to consider and as city leaders we
must strike the balance between the needs of those experiencing homelessness
and keeping our public spaces safe and accessible."
John Lee, who was recently elected to represent
the northwestern San Fernando Valley in a council race that focused heavily on
homelessness, said he was still reviewing the proposed rules but called them
"a good step" toward protecting public safety and ensuring sidewalks
are accessible.
"As I said during the campaign, we need to
be compassionate to homeless people," Lee said. "But we have to be
compassionate to businesses and homeowners too."
The proposed rules still have to be vetted by
the full City Council and drafted by city lawyers before coming back to council
members for approval. At the Wednesday meeting, council and committee member
David Ryu said he was hearing the proposal for the first time.
A spokesman for Mayor Eric Garcetti said
Thursday that their office was reviewing the proposal. Progressive activists
said they were galled by the idea.
Such rules would "create containment zones
like skid row all over the city," putting homelessness out of sight
without addressing the need, said Jed Parriott, a member of the Services Not
Sweeps coalition. He and other activists had urged the city to repeal, rather
than amend or replace, the existing ban on sidewalk sleeping.
David Busch, a longtime activist who is
homeless in Venice, said the city was "looking at this problem
backwards."
"Instead of saying, 'Where can people
sleep?' they continue to pass things telling us where we can't sleep,"
Busch said. "We can issue hundreds more tickets, tie up more courtrooms,
more jails, more police time with homeless people … and the city can pay out
millions more in civil rights lawsuits, or we can do what we need to do."
Other Angelenos had argued against loosening
the law on the books. In a letter to council members before Wednesday's
meeting, Venice resident Travis Binen said that with tens of thousands of
people living on the streets, "the city needs to be able to legally move
them instead of leaving them on the sidewalk to die or harm others."
Ryavec, the Venice association president, said
that it was premature to adjust the rules, arguing that the city should instead
be working with Boise to reverse the "ridiculous decision" that was
handed down by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Attorneys representing Boise filed a petition
Thursday asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the federal ruling, arguing
that the court decision would have "catastrophic" effects.
L.A. and other cities "are grappling with
how to interpret and follow the decision," which "raises more
questions than it answers," said Theane Evangelis, lead counsel for Boise.
Evangelis argued that the Boise ruling ties the
hands of cities to deal with the harmful effects of encampments, including
fires and disease. "It's laudable that L.A. is trying to limit these
encampments — but what the 9th Circuit decision is going to mean, in practice,
is very much an open question," Evangelis said.
Gary Blasi, professor emeritus of law at UCLA,
said that whether L.A.'s proposed rules could survive a court challenge would
depend on how they were implemented, including whether homeless people have a
practical way to know where they can legally sleep and whether the proposed
rules leave enough room on city sidewalks for them to do so.
"Could anyone reasonably be expected to
know if a particular spot is more than 500 feet from something?" Blasi
asked.
The debate marks the latest turn in L.A.'s long
and impassioned battle over where homeless people can lay their heads. More
than half a century ago, L.A. enacted a law declaring that "no person
shall sit, lie or sleep in or upon any street, sidewalk or other public
way."
After homeless residents sued in the Jones
case, L.A. reached a settlement agreeing that until it had built a minimum
amount of homeless housing, it would allow people to sleep on sidewalks from 9
p.m. to 6 a.m. if they stayed far enough from doorways and driveways.
When the 9th Circuit struck down the Boise law,
homeless advocates said it reaffirmed the arguments in the Jones case.
The clash also echoes the recent furor over
L.A.'s restrictions on where people can sleep in their cars. L.A. had crafted
the disputed rules, which ban sleeping in vehicles in residential areas and
near parks and schools, after a federal court struck down a citywide ban.
The Los Angeles City Council recently voted to
extend the rules over the angry objections of activists, who argued that
lawmakers had piled on so many restrictions on parking and sleeping that L.A.
effectively had a "de facto ban" on bunking in vehicles.
Backers of the plan said the rules were needed
to fend off trash and filth from RVs and other vehicles repurposed as homes.
“MORE THAN 10 MILLION” ILLEGALS IN CALIFORNIA
ALONE
Xavier Becerra breaks the news, files suit against Trump administration
public-charge rule.
August 19, 2019
More
than 22 million people are illegally present in the United States, according to
a recent study by scholars at MIT and Yale. Pew Research pegged the
figure at 11 million, and for years it stood as the official count for media
and government. It now emerges that 11 million is more like the number illegally
present in California alone.
“California
is home to over 10 million immigrants,” reads a chart displayed by California
attorney general Xavier Becerra and governor Gavin Newsom as they announced a lawsuit against the Trump
administration’s public-charge rule. “Immigrants,” is California code for
“illegals,” a term the state’s ruling class has banned. As Rachel Bovard notes
at American Greatness, even a legal
immigrant’s ability “to stay off the welfare system must be taken into account
when considering qualifications for a green card.”
California
heaps welfare benefits on those illegally present, including nearly $100 million for health
care in
the recent budget. Many of those 10 million illegals came to California
specifically to get those taxpayer-funded benefits. It disturbs Becerra and
Newsom that this disqualifies the recipients from any future legal status, but
there’s more to it. As attorney Madison Gesiotto explains in The
Hill, voting must also be taken into account.
“Voting
as an illegal alien in federal elections is a crime punishable by fine,
imprisonment, deportation, or inadmissibility.” According to a State Department
investigation, false-documented illegals have been voting in federal, state and
local elections for decades. In 1996, illegals cast 784
votes against Republican Robert Dornan in a congressional race Democrat
Loretta Sanchez won by only 984 votes.
If
Newsom and Becerra are certain that more than 10 million people illegally
reside in the state, they doubtless know how many voted in 2016. Trouble is,
California Secretary of State Alex Padilla refused to release any voter
information to a federal voter-fraud probe.
Back
in 2015, Padilla told the Los Angeles Times, “At the latest, for
the 2018 election cycle, I expect millions of new voters on the rolls in the
state of California,” with “new voters” code for ineligible voters. True to
form, by March, 2018, more than one million
“undocumented” immigrants received driver’s licenses from the state
Department of Motor Vehicles, which automatically registered them to vote under
the “Motor Voter” program.
Padilla
is now claiming that only six “California residents” were erroneously
added to voter rolls for 2018, that it was all due to DMV errors, and that none
was guilty of “fraudulently voting or attempting to vote.” To paraphrase John
Goodman in The Big Lebowski, this is what happens when the
governor’s own department of finance, not the official state auditor,
investigates the DMV.
In
reality, California officials know full well how many non-citizens voted in
2016 and 2018. With more than 10 million illegals in the state, the ballpark
figure of one million illegal voters is probably low. In California,
illegals are the Democrats’ electoral college, and the Democrats reward them with
welfare benefits and protection from deportation through sanctuary laws. This
raises another issue.
Illegals’
use of welfare benefits and practice of voting in federal elections
disqualifies them from legal residency and citizenship. This makes for a
permanent group of more than 10 million foreign nationals in California alone.
In these conditions, Congress should start pushing back.
Public
officials who apportion taxpayer-funded benefits for foreign nationals should
be required to register as agents of the governments of those foreign
nationals. The primary candidates would be the governments of Mexico, Honduras,
Guatemala and El Salvador, which Gavin Newsom visited before he had even
toured his own state.
State
and federal governments should also bill the foreign governments for welfare,
medical, education and incarceration costs. Some of this could be
alleviated by a tax on remissions, such as the 33.4 billion Mexicans abroad
sent back last year. That amount is impossible without massive inputs from
U.S. taxpayers. Legitimate citizens and legal immigrants have no obligation to
relieve foreign governments of responsibility for their own citizens.
Meanwhile,
as Rachel Bovard also notes, the Trump administration’s new rule only updates a
1996 law proclaiming “inadmissible” those aliens likely to become a public
charge. The law was supported by Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden and
other leading Democrats. The Trump administration measure gives more
definition to what constitutes a welfare benefit, food stamps, Medicaid, public
housing assistance and such. Those benefits are all for legitimate citizens and
legal immigrants but Bovard cites Census data showing that 63 percent of
non-citizens use the welfare system.
Those
who thought there were only 11 million illegals nationwide were mistaken.
Thanks to Jerry Brown crony Gavin Newsom, and Xavier Becerra, once on Hillary
Clinton’s short list as a running mate, Americans now understand that “more
than 10 million” illegally reside in California alone, and that might
understate the figure.
The
MIT-Yale estimate ranges as high as 29.1 million nationwide, more than the
population of Australia, with 25,088,636 and a veritable
occupation. To all but the willfully blind, politicians have abandoned the rule
of law, and made false-documented illegals a protected, privileged class.
This
is how a nation loses its sovereignty.
The Homeless, Illegals,
and the Politics of Virtue Signaling
We have no idea how many of the homeless are illegal immigrants,
but we do know that homeless shelters in big cities will not cooperate with
blanket ICE searches for illegals.
Shelter workers are trained to request a warrant for a specific
individual, and without that, they are told to keep ICE at bay.
The extent to which the ACLU and pro-illegal immigration
organizations have gone to educate homeless shelters about how to deal with ICE
indicates that the presence of illegals in these shelters is not insignificant.
Shelters are all-too-often in lesser supply than the demand for
accommodations, especially during winter in brutal climes in places like
Chicago.
Having walked the frigid streets of that city going from shelter
to shelter in search of a homeless relative, I know something about the
dynamics of how the homeless survive the unforgiving cold where a place in a
shelter can mean the difference between freezing to death in the street or
waking up alive.
Competition for safe harbor is fierce. And the homeless line up
and prance in the cold to stay warm long before the shelters open.
American citizens -- even veterans, mothers, and children --
compete equally with illegals. This is the consequence of our so-called policy
of “compassion” enunciated by open-border billionaires like Beto O’Rourke and
liberal virtue signalers.
O’Rourke would like to
send $5 billion to the failed states
that have produced the immigration crisis. How many billions would solve our
own humanitarian crisis of homelessness?
Illegal immigrants do not compete for resources or jobs with
billionaires or smug middle-class professionals who drip with compassion and
want to bring them into America in ever larger numbers.
But on the streets of our cities, illegals compete with the most
vulnerable people in our society, just as decades ago when Cesar Chavez saw an
unending supply of cheap illegal labor being a threat to the wellbeing of his
union members.
A CEO that I know speaks insufferably of her support of “immigrants”
and DACA, but she will never have to face competition from anyone crossing the
border illegally. Her well-paid position in a Silicon Valley startup and her
stock options are not at risk. But America’s homeless sleeping on the streets
and in shelters, just a mile from her trendy townhouse in a gated San Francisco
complex, will compete with these people for the basics of survival.
They are disproportionately
black and LGBTQ, the latter having suffered abuse and neglect, especially sexual abuse.
Homeless youth, contrary to myth, do not choose to be on the
streets, and they are ten
times more likely to die than non-homeless
people their own age.Homeless
children experience developmental delay.
To date, their cause is not part of the 2020 Democrat political
agenda. But an unceasing demand for more resources for the illegals charging
the border is. No one discusses a limit on the resources to be allocated to
illegals -- to feed, house, and clothe them.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D, Ca) can grandstand before the klieg lights
by grilling those responsible for homeland security and immigration about
conditions at the border, but she will not seize the bully pulpit for the
thousands of homeless living under the Oakland maze not far from where she was
born and a few miles down the street from where she went to law school.
The conditions of both our veterans and vulnerable youth living on
the streets do not rise to be considered as even talking points in the current
conversations about how the society is to be improved by a change of
administration in 2020. The focus is almost entirely on our compassion for the
illegals overwhelming the border, the vast number of whom are economic
migrants, not refugees.
Oakland and Berkeley representative Barbara Lee (D) has been in
Congress since 1988. She is an economic progressive, and she is strongly
against deportation. But can you be against deportation while advocating for
social services for your own poor who are living under highways?
Resources are finite. Solving the problems of one’s own poor --
who have grown in number since 1988 when almost no one lived under the maze --
should take precedence over the impossible task of rescuing the poor of Mexico
and Central America, if not the world.
The truth is that the illegals are the latest trend in virtue
signaling. My CEO acquaintance can sit with her friends in upscale San
Francisco restaurants and talk about her compassion for the homeless and her
political work for DACA while ignoring the plight of the people she practically
steps over daily on Market Street.
Kamala Harris will demand more diapers and wipes for the children
at the border while ignoring America’s own homeless under California’s
freeways. Barbara Lee will tout her progressive credentials at the next
election, but whatever her progressive ideology has done for Oakland and
Berkeley’s impoverished, it seems neither to have touched the growing street
population nor to have abated it.
Politics is not about finding solutions. It is about gesturing
toward policies that will provide what the mass public thinks are solutions
while mobilizing their votes.
If you want to see a meaningful change in both immigration and
homeless policies, start inviting millions of middle-class professionals into
America and give them quick licenses as doctors, lawyers, and accountants to
compete with middle-class virtue signalers. Don’t invite poor people who will
end up competing with America’s homeless for a warm grate on a pitiless Chicago
winter night.
Abraham H. Miller is an
emeritus professor of political science and a distinguished fellow with the
Haym Salomon Center.
Paying
for illegals' 'free' health care by fining Californians who can't afford
Obamacare
The leftists running California's one-party state have done
it again. They've rolled out a $312 billion budget that includes $98
million for free health care for illegal immigrants under the age of 26.
That's a dinner triangle to all able-bodied foreign nationals working
off the books that the free ride is about to arrive.
The expansion will take effect Jan. 1, 2020 and
cost $98 million in the upcoming fiscal year. It will make California the first
state to allow undocumented adults to sign up for state-funded health coverage.
The budget includes a
fine on people who don’t buy health insurance known as an individual
mandate. The fines were initially implemented as part of the federal Affordable
Care Act law known as Obamacare, but Republicans acted in 2017 to roll them
back. Newsom and legislative leaders say re-imposing the penalty at the state
level will shore up the state’s health insurance marketplace and keep premiums
from rising dramatically.
As if that $98 million is really going to cover it as
migrants from Central America and beyond surge into the U.S. in record numbers,
and five million from Latin America alone planning to enter
the U.S. with or without papers.
California, remember, was quite convinced $39 billion would cover the
cost of its famed bullet train up and down the state in 2008. The price tag
now, with just a tiny portion of it out in the Central Valley to be
built? $98 billion.
Given the incompetence of those numbers, you can bet the
surplus that the money is about to be taken from is ... not going to
remain a surplus.
All this, while the burned-out city of Paradise remains un-rebuilt due to all the
state's environmental concerns. Priorities, see...
But it's not just that which makes the measure so
objectionable.
The free health care - and Medi-Cal is very, very, free, with
no deductibles for anything - is going to be paid for out of a new program of
fines for California citizens who don't qualify for free health care, yet can't
afford Obamacare - quite possibly due to the high cost they are paying for
keeping a roof over their heads, for one.
The Associated Press reports that the few Republican
legislators remaining have tried to make exactly that point in their objections:
Republicans on the legislative committee
negotiating the budget voted against the proposal, arguing it was not fair to
give health benefits to people who are in the country illegally while taxing
people who are here legally for not purchasing health insurance.
A subsidy program is going into place, supposedly to
"help" them, but you can bet it won't cover the average Californian
who can't afford Obamacare. As for the illegals, well, when you work off the
books, you can pretty well claim anything as your income, so rest assured that
all those who want the free health care, no matter what they earn, are
going to be able to get it.
So what we are about to see now is the fining of
Californians trapped in the high cost of living brought on by leftist policies,
in order to bankroll the state's abundant illegal immigrant population, which
now stands at a quarter of the nation's count.
And the little claim at the bottom of that last cited
paragraph from the Sacramento Bee suggests even more trouble on the horizon for
Californians who can just barely pay those gargantuan Obamacare premiums:
"keep premiums from rising dramatically."
What's the takeaway on that? That bankrolling illegals is going
to make premiums rise on Californians who are stuck in the individual market,
but rest assured, the hikes won't be dramatic.
Sound like a recipe for flight from the state? You would be
insane if you didn't think so, and the state already is bleeding people.
Fifty-three percent of the state's citizens, according to one poll, want to leave, and more
than one report shows that the state lost more people than it gained, even with the border
surge bringing new supplicants in. Voters know their votes don't count in a state where
ballot-harvesting by illegal immigrants is routinely done now, so any
discontent is virtually impossible to telegraph at the ballot box,
and the leftist mafia running the state insists that this is what
Californians want. Color me skeptical on all fronts.
The one thing worth watching for in this is not the cost
overruns, though that should be an interesting topic. It's whether Californians
will finally switch their voting patterns in sufficient numbers to finally get
this crew out. The odds are against them with ballot-harvesting, yet still,
still, one expects something to eventually blow. Maybe this will be what does
it.
Illegal
Aliens in NYC To Be Eligible for Limited Affordable Housing as Rent Skyrockets
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Illegal
aliens living in New York City, New York will soon be eligible to rent
subsidized housing, which is already limited in quantity amid a homeless crisis
and skyrocketing rents.
This week, New York City Mayor Bill
de Blasio rolled out new eligibility rules that will allow the city’s some
725,000 illegal alien residents to apply for subsidized, affordable housing —
which has historically been reserved for American taxpayers.
The rules will no longer mandate that those applying to live in
affordable housing show their credit rating, a legitimate Social Security
number, and documents proving them to be a taxpayer. Instead, applicants will
only have to prove that they paid rent on time every month for a year, a plan
that is likely to allow thousands of illegal aliens to obtain affordable
housing units over American citizens.
De Blasio has hoped to increase the number of affordable housing
units to 300,000 by 2026, a limited amount for a city with more than 8.5
million residents, the majority of whom are renters who have had to deal with
increasing housing prices.
Already, as Bloomberg News notes, the
city receives more than 500 applications for each available affordable housing
unit that currently exists with the stricter rules. That number is expected to
significantly increase when the new rules open the application process to
hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens and temporary foreign workers on
various visa programs, shutting out more and more Americans from cheaper
housing.
The country’s mass illegal and legal immigration policy of the
last four decades has greatly driven population growth in the country’s largest
cities like New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. As a result, experts —
including former federal immigration official Lou Di Leonardo — say rents and housing
prices sour with increased competition for affordable housing.
Just like everyone else,
immigrants need places to live. Their demand for a limited supply of apartments
and houses drives up rents, especially in
metropolitan areas where immigrants tend to concentrate. Curbing immigration levels would do more
than any welfare program to ensure that working-class Americans can afford the
roofs over their heads. [Emphasis added]
Take the Bay Area, for example.
Immigrants account for roughly 36% of the population. The average home was valued around $1.34 million last year.San Francisco’s housing prices have risen so rapidly that one
U.N. official called it a “human rights violation.” [Emphasis added]
In Los Angeles, where
immigrants make up 35% of the population, home values shot up 50% in the past five years. Nine in ten homes are now unaffordable to the average L.A. resident. [Emphasis added]
As of 2017, New York City is now home to more than three million
foreign-born residents — making up about 37 percent of the total city’s
population. This indicates that there are more foreign-born residents living in
New York City today than there are people living in Chicago, Illinois; San
Diego, California; and Houston, Texas.
Coinciding with illegal and legal
immigration that has increased New York City’s population, one-bedroom rents in
the city, as well as two-bedroom rents, have grown to astronomical levels.
The latest analysis by Zumper
finds that median one-bedroom New York City rent is about $3,050 a month,
growing 3.7 percent in August and beating out the last three-year, all-time
high of median rents in June, which came in at $2,980 a month.
Two-bedroom monthly rents in New York City also grew more than
two percent this month, increasing the median rate to about $3,450 for the
city’s residents.
Currently, there is an estimated
record high of 44.5 million foreign-born
residents living in the U.S. This is nearly quadruple the immigrant population
in 2000. The vast majority of those arriving every year arrive through the
process known as “chain migration,” whereby newly naturalized citizens can
bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment