The limit of 500 words imposed on letters will preclude my being able to respond in full detail to the referred to article. Since I authored two of the letters you chose to use as justification for the article, I want to set the record straight.
To begin with, the entire premise of the article is wrong. While impressive, the mathematical gymnastics displayed had little to do with answering the questions posed in the letters submitted. What I asked for reporting on was:
What is the policy of the city/county administration with regard to illegal immigration? Have they declared Warsaw and Kosciusko County a sanctuary zone? If so, how do they justify their condoning the breaking of, or non-enforcement of existing laws? It's unclear from your article if these questions were ever posed to the responsible parties. Were they asked?
My other request was for a summary of expense to the taxpayer for the past two years as a result of illegal immigration. Your article took off on a search for the number of illegal immigrants in the USA and how difficult it was to project that number. I was not seeking a projection, but a recap of paid bills for which public funds were used and receipts should be available in one or more county/city offices.
My further disappointment in the article stems from the possible misleading of the readers by some of the content and also by obvious omissions.
An example of content which might mislead is your choice of the word "none" to describe the number of illegal immigrants drawing taxpayer funded benefits. That sounds pretty ironclad in this day of counterfeit and multiple-user documentation. I spoke with the Division of Families and Children after the publication of your column and the terminology I was given was "no known" as opposed to none. You did mention the anchor baby situation where a child born of illegal parents qualifies for benefits.
An example of omission would be there was no mention of medical costs associated with caring for the illegal immigrants. In addition to emergency room and EMS services that cannot be denied, the Division of Families and Services also has an emergency pregnancy fund that illegal immigrants can qualify for that was unmentioned.
Let's return for a moment now to the anchor baby mentioned above who qualifies for benefits. It is possible for people to enter this country illegally, become parents at taxpayer expense, receive help feeding and raising that child, who then is enrolled in our schools creating crowded classrooms, added teacher requirements, duplicate curriculums and expansion needs. In other words, become an ongoing burden to the citizens who obey the law and pay the bills. A totally avoidable burden if immigration laws were enforced.
In conclusion, I will add that I think you missed a chance to enlighten the public, and even worse did a disservice by trivializing the problem through the cavalier tone with which the article was presented. Of course, that's just my opinion and I could be wrong.
