Legislature’s special session on immigration
Re: “Legislators in dark on immigrant costs,” July 6 news story.
The headline in the Thursday Denver Post is simply wrong. It is the readers of the accompanying article who wound up in the dark on the issue. As I reported to the legislature’s Joint Budget Committee, there actually are costs that can clearly be attached to the issue of illegal immigration.
Throughout my remarks to the committee on Wednesday, I specifically listed many of the more significant costs, especially those related to education and health care.
Regarding K-12 education, I directly cited a report from the Federation for American Immigration Reform that estimated the cost of educating illegal alien students in Colorado at $235 million in 2004. The organization further estimates that the state’s cost to educate the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants that same year was $329 million.
That combines to more than a half-billion dollars, a cost that is certainly escalating each year as the number of illegal immigrants in Colorado continues to grow. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that a quarter of a million illegal immigrants are in Colorado. We are fifth in the nation in the number of illegal immigrants per capita.
Concerning Medicaid, I cited a report from the budget committee’s own analyst that 41 percent of all births paid for by Medicaid in Colorado are for non-citizens. That equates to more than 8,500 births annually at a cost of $3,552 for each delivery, more than $30 million a year.
My Cabinet and local government officials outlined millions of dollars in additional costs of illegal immigration during eight hours of testimony. Costs to our state correctional system were cited for housing illegal immigrants who are convicted of crimes. As of May 31, there are 976 illegal immigrants in Colorado prisons who, upon release, will be detained by the federal office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for likely deportation. At a cost of $26,812 per prisoner, the annual cost to taxpayers to house these offenders is more than $27 million.
Yes, I am aware of the argument that, under federal law, the state is required to provide such services as K-12 education and Medicaid. However, I made the point to the Joint Budget Committee that one way to reduce these costs is to stem the tide of illegal immigrants coming to Colorado. I believe we can begin to do just that during the legislature’s special session.
It is fair to say that there are certain unknown factors when it comes to calculating the costs of illegal immigration. However, certain major costs are known and should be a part of the public policy debate on this critical subject.
Gov. Bill Owens
…
Re: “Illegal-immigration puzzler,” June 30 news story.
It’s hard to believe that no state agency tracks funds spent on illegals in Colorado. Money spent has to be budgeted, unless the state isn’t operating within a budget. After reading this article, I see why state officials begged us to pass Referendums C and D. Those funds would temporarily ease the financial burden illegals are creating.
I lived in California and Arizona. I witnessed the financial devastation those states suffered for providing services to illegals. And Colorado taxpayers are paying plenty to support illegals living here. State officials claim it would cost millions to enforce tougher laws; we would save hundreds of millions if those laws were enforced.
I live in Longmont, a city overrun by illegals. Our city council bends over backward to accommodate illegals. Does that make Longmont a sanctuary city? Does that make Colorado a sanctuary state?
Scott J. Sedei, Longmont
…
The state legislators meeting in special session to deal with illegal immigration had better understand that the people are watching them very closely. If they don’t produce broad, meaningful legislation that aggressively goes after felonious employers of illegal aliens, legislation with no-nonsense, prosecutable enforcement teeth written into it, then those legislators better plan on looking for different work come November. No more amnesties for criminal employers and malfeasant legislators!
Linda Lou Roy, Snowmass
The value of “McMansions” to neighborhoods
Re: “Preserving neighborhoods as they were built,” July 5 Open Forum.
Bring on those neighbors with their McMansions, I say! I live in a tiny 100-year-old house with one bathroom and two bedrooms in one of Denver’s “established neighborhoods,” as letter-writer Betsy Snyder calls it. My house is just a tad too small for myself and husband and two young children. Would Snyder advise us, as many of our friends with growing families are planning on doing, to abandon our humble but honest little house, which I love dearly (along with the tree I planted out front just before my eldest was born) for a house in some new neighborhood that was prairie not too long ago? It would double our space for about the same money, but what of the cost of all those new roads and pipes and concrete, not to mention driving hours to get where we want to be?
I think staying where we are, adding one more bedroom and another bathroom upstairs (and no doubt “destroying the integrity and history of our established neighborhood”) is much more advantageous to our somewhat rundown neighborhood.
And I would welcome a rich neighbor wanting to build a McMansion next door, instead of the run-down bungalows that haven’t seen a new coat of paint in the 10 years we have been here. For one, it will keep those folks from tearing up more prairie somewhere else for their more energy-efficient and better-kept abode; and two, I’d rather have them pay their taxes here, where my kids’ local school will profit from it. People who are willing to spend their precious dollars making my neighborhood theirs are a lot more welcome than folks worrying about other people’s “greed” in making a place fit to raise a family in.
Marie Meyer, Denver
Rainbow gathering
As someone who loves Colorado’s national forests for their many camping opportunities, I can understand why members of the Rainbow Family are gathering here this summer. One of the wonderful traits of our national forests is that they are open to anyone who can walk or drive into them and, in most cases, at no cost to the visitor. All that is asked of visitors to national forest land is that they leave no trace after they depart, taking care not to change or harm the environment while camping.
I find it appalling that a large group of people is abusing our forests, violating Forest Service regulations, and leaving many traces of their presence. It’s time for the Forest Service to be tough, creative and apply the law and the rules fairly and to all violators. If the Rainbow Family wants to have a Woodstock in the forest, let them find private land that doesn’t belong to you and me.
Eric Bakken, Arvada
Leave Montbello alone
I worked at Montbello High School for 20 years as a teacher and administrator, so I feel that I know the community fairly well. I am continually dismayed by the repeated connections drawn by the media when individuals are arrested or, in the recent case of Michael Ford, killed, and are connected to Montbello High School. Michael was 22 years old and had graduated years ago. Why do you insist upon connecting him to the school or this specific community? If he had lived in Washington Park and graduated from South High School, would that have been in the article? How old do you have to be before the connection to the high school from which you graduated is left out of an article?
Janet Johnson, Denver
Elk overpopulation
Re: “Wildlife officials take aim at elk,” June 25 sports story.
Hunting the elk herd in Rocky Mountain National is a bad idea. There are much easier ways of dealing with overpopulation. Introduce natural predators in that area, such as wolves and coyotes. Another idea is to transport the elk to other national parks. Just think about it. It would make parks popular. I can guarantee happier tourists and happier elk if you take this into consideration.
Connor Alfrey-Bethke, 10, Denver
TO REACH OPINION EDITORS
Phone: 303-820-1331; Fax: 303-820-1502; E-mail: openforum@denverpost.com (only straight text, not attachments)
Mail: The Open Forum, The Denver Post, 1560 Broadway, Denver, 80202 or PO Box 1709, Denver, 80201
Letters guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 200 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address and day and evening phone numbers. Letters may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.
Archives: Missed your favorite columnist or the latest Mike Keefe cartoon? Archives available at The Denver Post Online (www.denverpost.com)
