The U.S. economy created 136,000 jobs in September and the unemployment rate fell to 3.5 percent.
Economists had expected the economy to between 120,000 and 179,000 with the consensus number at 145,000, according to Econoday. Unemployment was expected to remain unchanged at last month’s 3.7 percent.
The jobs data for the two previous months were also revised upward, indicating that the labor market was stronger over the summer than previously indicated. Employment for July was revised up by 7,000 from 159,000 to 166,000, and August was revised up by 38,000 from 130,000 to 168,000. With these revisions, employment gains in July and August combined were 45,000 more than previously reported.
The stronger numbers for July and August may also explain the slightly-below expectations figure for September since some of the growth in employment forecast for last month had already occurred.
The last time the rate was this low was in December 1969, when it also was 3.5 percent.
Economic data has been intensely scrutinized this week for signs of economic sluggishness after the Institute for Supply Management’s survey of manufacturing companies suggested the manufacturing sector had unexpectedly contracted for a second consecutive month. Survey data of non-manufacturing companies, however, showed that the services sector continued to expand in September. Similarly, data on private payrolls and unemployment claims suggested that the U.S. economy had cooled but was not near a recession.
September’s hiring may have been weighed down by the strike by General Motors workers, which has sidelined GM plants and likely prevented GM suppliers from hiring new workers. The latest data suggests that manufacturing held its job count near steady, shedding just 2,000 jobs during the month.
Wage growth was weak in the month. In September, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls, at $28.09, were down 1 cent, after rising by 11 cents in August. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 2.9 percent. In September, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees rose by 4 cents to $23.65.
Report:
California’s Middle-Class Wages Rise by 1 Percent in 40 Years
Justin
Sullivan/Getty Images
3 Sep 2019172
6:24
Middle-class wages in
progressive California have risen by 1 percent in the last 40 years, says a
study by the establishment California Budget and Policy Center.
“Earnings for California’s
workers at the low end and middle of the wage scale have generally declined or
stagnated for decades,” says the report, titled “California’s Workers Are
Increasingly Locked Out of the State’s Prosperity.” The report continued:
In
2018, the median hourly earnings for workers ages 25 to 64 was $21.79, just 1%
higher than in 1979, after adjusting for inflation ($21.50, in 2018 dollars)
(Figure 1). Inflation-adjusted hourly earnings for low-wage workers, those at the
10th percentile, increased only slightly more, by 4%, from $10.71 in 1979
to $11.12 in 2018.
The report admits that the
state’s progressive economy is delivering more to investors and less to
wage-earners. “Since 2001, the share of state private-sector [annual new
income] that has gone to worker compensation has fallen by 5.6 percentage
points — from 52.9% to 47.3%.”
In 2016, California’s Gross
Domestic Product was $2.6 trillion, so the 5.6 percent drop shifted $146
billion away from wages. That is roughly $3,625 per person in 2016.
The report notes that wages
finally exceeded 1979 levels around 2017, and it splits the credit between the
Democrats’ minimum-wage boosts and President Donald Trump’s go-go economy.
The 40 years of flat wages are
partly hidden by a wave of new products and services. They include almost-free
entertainment and information on the Internet, cheap imported coffee in
supermarkets, and reliable, low-pollution autos in garages.
But the impact of California’s
flat wages is made worse by California’s rising housing costs, the report says,
even though it also ignores the rent-spiking impact of the establishment’s
pro-immigration policies:
In just the last decade
alone, the increase in the typical household’s rent far outpaced the rise in
the typical full-time worker’s annual earnings, suggesting that working
families and individuals are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends
meet. In fact, the basic cost of living in many parts of the state is more
than many single individuals or families can expect to earn, even if all adults
are working full-time.
…
Specifically, inflation-adjusted
median household rent rose by 16% between 2006 and 2017, while
inflation-adjusted median annual earnings for individuals working at least 35
hours per week and 50 weeks per year rose by just 2%, according to a Budget
Center analysis of US Census Bureau, American Community Survey data.
The wage and housing problems are made worse —
especially for families — by the loss of
employment benefits as companies and investors spike stock prices by cutting
costs. The report says:
Many workers are being paid
little more today than workers were in 1979 even as worker productivity has
risen. Fewer employees have access to retirement plans sponsored by their
employers, leaving individual workers on their own to stretch limited dollars
and resources to plan how they’ll spend their later years affording the high
cost of living and health care in California. And as union representation has
declined, most workers today cannot negotiate collectively for better working
conditions, higher pay, and benefits, such as retirement and health care, like
their parents and grandparents did. On top of all this, workers who take on
contingent and independent work (often referred to as “gig work”), which in
many cases appears to be motivated by the need to supplement their primary job
or fill gaps in their employment, are rarely granted the same rights and legal
protections as traditional employees.
The center’s report tries to
blame the four-decade stretch of flat wages on the declining clout of unions.
But unions’ decline was impacted by the bipartisan elites’ policy of
mass-migration and imposed diversity.
In
2018, Breitbart reported how Progressives for
Immigration Reform interviewed Blaine Taylor, a union carpenter, about the
economic impact of migration:
TAYLOR: If I hired a framer to do
a small addition [in 1988], his wage would have been $45 an hour. That was
the minimum for a framing contractor, a good carpenter. For a helper, it was
about $25 an hour, for a master who could run a complete job, it was about $45
an hour. That was the going wage for plumbers as well. His helpers typically
got $25 an hour.
…
Now, the average wage in Los
Angeles for construction workers is less than $11 an hour. They can’t go lower
than the minimum wage. And much of that, if they’re not being paid by the hour
at less than $11 an hour, they’re being paid per piece — per piece of plywood
that’s installed, per piece of drywall that’s installed. Now, the subcontractor
can circumvent paying them as an hourly wage and are now being paid by 1099,
which means that no taxes are being taken out. [Emphasis added]
Diversity
also damaged the unions by shredding California’s civic solidarity. In 2007,
the progressive Southern Poverty Law Center posted a report with the title
“Latino Gang Members in Southern California are Terrorizing and Killing
Blacks.” In the same year, an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times described another murder by Latino
gangs as “a manifestation of an increasingly common trend: Latino ethnic
cleansing of African Americans from multiracial neighborhoods.”
The center’s board members
include the executive director of the state’s SEIU union, a professor from the
Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and
the research director at the “Program for Environmental and Regional Equity” at
the University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Outside
California, President Donald Trump’s low-immigration policies are pressuring
employers to raise Americans’ wages in a hot economy. The Wall Street Journal reported
Overall, median weekly earnings
rose 5% from the fourth quarter of 2017 to the same quarter in 2018, according
to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For workers between the ages of 25 and 34,
that increase was 7.6%.
.
Please let us know if you're having issues with
commenting.S
THE INVITED INVADING HORDES: IT’S ALL
ABOUT KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED!
"In the decade following the
financial crisis of 2007-2008, the capitalist class has delivered powerful
blows to the social position of the working class. As a result, the working
class in the US, the world’s “richest country,” faces levels of economic
hardship not seen since the 1930s."
"Inequality has reached unprecedented
levels: the wealth of America’s three richest people now equals the net
worth of the poorest half of the US population."
Warren's core insight
was fascinating: She argued that massive expansion of the labor force had
actually created more stressful living and driven down median wages. BEN
SHAPIRO
BLOG…. SO,
WHAT DOES LA RAZA WARREN THINK WILL HAPPEN WHEN SHE HANDS 40 MILLION LOOTING
MEXCIANS AMNESTY SO THEY CAN BRING UP THE REST OF THEIR FAMILY???
How
the Quest For Power Corrupted Elizabeth Warren
I first
met Elizabeth Warren when she was a professor at Harvard Law School, in 2004.
She was fresh off the publication of her bestselling book, "The Two-Income
Trap." There's no doubt she was politically liberal -- our only
face-to-face meeting involved a recruitment visit at the W Hotel in Los
Angeles, where she immediately made some sort of disparaging remark about Rush
Limbaugh -- but at the time, Warren was making waves for her iconoclastic
views. She wasn't a doctrinaire leftist, spewing Big Government nostrums. She
was a creative thinker.
That
creative thinking is obvious in "The Two-Income Trap," which
discusses the rising number of bankruptcies among middle-class parents,
particularly women with children. The book posits that women entered the workforce
figuring that by doing so, they could have double household income. But so many
women entered the workforce that they actually inflated prices for basic goods
like housing, thus driving debt skyward and leading to bankruptcies for
two-income families. The book argued that families with one income might
actually be better off, since families with two incomes spent nearly the full
combined income and then fell behind if one spouse lost a job. Families with
one income, by contrast, spent to the limit for one income, and if a spouse was
fired, the unemployed spouse would then look for work to replace that single
income.
Warren's
core insight was fascinating: She argued that massive expansion of the labor
force had actually created more stressful living and driven down median wages.
But her policy recommendations were even more fascinating. She explicitly
argued against "more government regulation of the housing market,"
slamming "complex regulations," since they "might actually worsen
the situation by diminishing the incentive to build new houses or improve older
ones." Instead, she argued in favor of school choice, since pressure on
housing prices came largely from families seeking to escape badly run
government school districts: "A well-designed voucher program would fit
the bill neatly."
Her
heterodox policy proposals didn't stop there. She refused to "join the
chorus calling for taxpayer-funded day care" on its own, calling it a
"sacred cow." At the very least, she suggested that
"government-subsidized day care would add one more indirect pressure on
mothers to join the workforce." She instead sought a more comprehensive
educational solution that would include "tax credits for stay-at-home
parents."
She
ardently opposed additional taxpayer subsidization of college loans, too, or
more taxpayer spending on higher education directly. Instead, she called for a
tuition freeze from state schools. She recommended tax incentives for families
to save rather than spend. She opposed radical solutions wholesale: "We
haven't suggested a complete overhaul of the tax structure, and we haven't
demanded that businesses cease and desist from ever closing another plant or
firing another worker. Nor have we suggested that the United States should
build a quasi-socialist safety net to rival the European model."
So, what
happened to Warren?
Power.
The other
half of iconoclastic Warren was typical progressive, anti-financial industry
Warren. In "The Two-Income Trap," she proposes reinstating state
usury laws, cutting off access to payday lenders and heavily regulating the
banking industry -- all in the name of protecting Americans from themselves.
While her position castigating the credit industry for deliberate obfuscation
of clients was praiseworthy, her quest to "protect consumers" quickly
morphed into a quest to create the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau -- an
independent agency without any serious checks or balances. But despite her best
efforts, she never became head of the CFPB, failing to woo Republican senators.
The result: an emboldened Warren who saw her popularity as tied to her Big
Government agenda. No more reaching across the aisle; no more iconoclastic
policies. Instead, she would be Ralph Nader II, with a feminist narrative to
boot.
And so,
she's gaining ground in the 2020 presidential race as a Bernie Sanders
knockoff. Ironically, her great failing could be her lack of moderation -- the
moderation she abandoned in her quest for progressive power. If Elizabeth
Warren circa 2003 were running, she'd be the odds-on favorite for president.
But Warren circa 2019 would hate Warren circa 2003.
Ben Shapiro, 35, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of
"The Ben Shapiro Show" and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is
the author of the No. 1 New York Times bestseller "The Right Side Of
History." He lives with his wife and two children in Los Angeles.
Munro:
Cornell Study Shows Stagnant Wages Hurting Marriage in U.S.
Getty Images
6 Sep 2019334
4:14
Fewer women get married when fewer men earn a decent salary in an
unstable economy, says a study from Cornell University.
“Most
American women hope to marry but current shortages of marriageable men—men with
a stable job and a good income—make this increasingly difficult, especially in
the current gig economy of unstable low-paying service jobs,” said lead author Daniel
Lichter, a professor at Cornell University. He continued:
Marriage is
still based on love, but it also is fundamentally an economic
transaction. Many young men today have little to bring to the marriage
bargain, especially as young women’s educational levels on average now exceed
their male suitors.
The study
looked at wages and marriage rates from 2008 to 2017, and concluded that
“promoting good jobs may ultimately be the best marriage promotion policy,” says the study, which is
titled “Mismatches in the Marriage Market,” and was
published in the Journal of
Marriage and Family
The study is
useful for the populist wing of the GOP, because it shows that rising wages for
men in President Donald Trump’s low-immigration economy is good for women’s
romantic aspirations and marriage rates. Other data shows that married people —
especially women — are far more likely to vote GOP than single people.
Correspondingly,
the bad news about wages and marriage is good news for the Democratic Party,
which will get extra votes from women if federal policies continue to suppress
wages for American men.
The study did
not try to show how marriage rates have been impacted by the various federal
policies which have flatlined men’s wages for 40
years.
For example,
the federal policy of flooding the labor market with immigrants has flatlined
wages nationwide for at least two decades. Also, President Barack Obama’s
failure to curb opioids — and his reluctance to favor American workers over
‘DACA’ illegals — helped to push millions of Americans out of the workforce and
many into their graves.
The Cornell
study validated conservatives’ view that women are different from men, and
prefer to marry men who earn a higher wage or salary. The press statement said:
The study’s
authors developed estimates of the sociodemographic characteristics of
unmarried women’s potential spouses who resemble the husbands of otherwise
comparable married women. These estimates were compared with the actual
distribution of unmarried men at the national, state, and local levels.
Women’s
potential husbands had an average income that was about 58% higher than the
actual unmarried men currently available to unmarried women. They also were 30%
more likely to be employed and 19% more likely to have a college degree.
Middle-class
women have the best chance of finding a man who earns more money, the study
says.
Low-income
women live among men with very little income, partly because they are in jail
or are suffering from drugs. And the many women who earn above $40,000 a year
face intense competition for the relatively fewer number of men who make more
than $65,000 a year.
This shortage
of prosperous men means that many high-income women must marry down, the study
said.
“Women may instead ‘settle’ for a marital match that falls short of their aspirations in a spouse
... This will be expressed in new patterns of marital hypogamy or downward marital mobility,”
the study said.
The problem
is worse for women who seek husbands later in life, for example, after spending
years in university education:
For example, older women on average were much less likely a suitable marital match ... This is especially true among women who were highly educated
... A 10% increase in age among women with a college degree was associated with a 24.48 percentage point decrease in the likelihood of a suitable match. In contrast, age mattered much less among the least-educated women—those with a high school degree or less who had only a 4.47 percentage point decrease in finding a match. One implication was that delaying marriage, for whatever reason but perhaps especially if pursuing college degrees, had the effect of reducing women’s local-area access to demographically suited marital partners.
Future
studies will examine divorce rates among marriages where women recognize that
they earn more than their husbands.
Young Americans got a pay raise of 7.6 percent from late
2017 to late 2018 -- bigger than other groups -- b/c they are more likely to
switch jobs in Trump's low-immigration economy. http:// bit.ly/2lWHQUD
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.
Census Bureau:
Immigration Driving Half of
U.S. Population Growth
JOHN
BINDER
2:43
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.
set to hit an unprecedented 404
The U.S. does not have
to rapidly increase its total
John Binder is a
reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder .
OF COURSE,
THEY REALLY HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY HAVE JUMPED OUR BORDERS!
“Between 2005 and 2017, chain
migration, alone, brought nearly 10 million foreign nationals to the U.S.”
As Breitbart News reported , though non-U.S.
citizens represent just seven percent of the total U.S. population, they
accounted for 15 percent of all federal arrests and 15 percent of all
prosecutions for non-immigration related crimes in 2018. This indicates that
non-U.S. citizens were about 2.3 times as likely to be arrested or prosecuted
for non-immigration related crimes.
For non-immigration offenses, the total of federal arrests for
non-U.S. citizens between 1998 and 2018 increased nearly eight percent, and
between 2017 and 2018 rose almost ten percent.
Non-U.S. citizens were most likely to be prosecuted for illegal
re-entry, that is illegal aliens who have been previously deported, drugs,
fraud, alien smuggling, and misuse of visas.
A 2018 Government Accountability
Office (GAO) report discovered nearly all
illegal and legal immigrants in U.S. federal prisons are from Mexico, Honduras,
El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, and Guatemala.
Between 2010 and 2015, the average annual cost to incarcerate
criminal illegal and legal immigrants slightly decreased — as the criminal
alien population slightly decreased as well — from $1.56 billion to about $1.42
billion. That cost is paid for by American taxpayers who are forced to offset
the costs of mass immigration to the country.
Every year, the U.S. admits more
than 1.5 million foreign nationals, with the overwhelming majority arriving
through the process known as “ chain migration ,” whereby newly
naturalized are able to bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the
country. Between 2005 and 2017, chain migration, alone,
brought nearly 10 million foreign nationals to the U.S.
John
Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder .
Ben
Carson Warns of Potential ‘Epidemic’ Among Homeless in California Cities
Joel Pollak /
Breitbart News
18 Sep 2019173
2:50
LOS ANGELES, California — Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben
Carson warned that conditions among homeless people in many California cities
were so bad they could “foster an epidemic, if we’re not careful.”
Carson spoke
to reporters after touring the Union Rescue Mission , a homeless shelter and non-profit organization
on Skid Row in downtown Los Angeles, at the core of the city’s homeless
population of almost 60,000 individuals .
The streets
surrounding the mission are lined with tents and trash. Homeless families sat
on the sidewalks, some in chairs, as cars struggled to navigate the chaos: a
homeless pair of lovers quarreled in the middle of an intersection.
Union Rescue Mission, Skid Row, Los Angeles (Joel Pollak /
Breitbart News)
Homeless couple, L.A. Skid Row (Joel Pollak / Breitbart News)
Last
year, Los Angeles suffered a typhus outbreak that spread from the homeless
population to City Hall. Some, including Dr. Drew Pinsky, are now warning that
L.A. could see an outbreak of bubonic plague, which is endemic.
The
secretary focused his remarks on partnerships between the federal, state, and
local governments, as well as the private sector, in urging Americans to
cooperate to find housing solutions for those who had fallen on hard times.
But
Carson also address the ongoing homeless crisis in California — a crisis that has
led President Donald Trump, who is visiting the state, to suggest emergency
federal intervention, overriding state and local government authority.
The
president could invoke the National Emergencies Act of 1976 and
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of
1988 to intervene. Federal officials reportedly visited the
state last week to look at facilities that could be used to house homeless
people after they had been relocated from the center of the city.
“My
preference, obviously, is to work with the state,” Carson said. “But what we’re
concerned about are the conditions. And these are conditions that … can foster
an epidemic, if we’re not careful. And then, after that occurs, what will
everybody be saying? How come you guys didn’t do anything? You knew all this
was going on?”
Carson
also addressed questions about the eviction of illegal aliens from public
housing, telling reporters that the law not only barred illegal aliens from
living in public housing, but those giving shelter to illegal aliens. The only
solution, he said, was an act of Congress, which could change the law with
“comprehensive immigration reform.”
Update: Secretary Carson also rejected requests
for additional federal funds to the state, arguing that state and local
authorities had to revise zoning regulations that discouraged the building of
additional affordable housing units.
Joel B.
Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social
Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a
J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak
Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside
Story of a Revolution , which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter
at @joelpollak .
No comments:
Post a Comment