hburgnews.com

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 20, 2008, 12:32 pm

I think, in the first paragraph, you may have meant to use the word “affect”, as opposed to effect.

Perhaps you might seek an Opinion from the Attorney General on the issue? :-)

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 20, 2008, 12:37 pm

Good catch…I read it twice, but still I miss stuff…

Any thoughts on the actual issue?

Comment from Deb SF
Time: June 20, 2008, 12:58 pm

Won’t this decision affect patient load at the emergency room at RMH? If patients are denied preventative care and basic stuff like antibiotics for infections, they will wait until they are extremely ill to seek medical care. Isn’t RMH going to end up picking up the slack at a much, much higher cost for everyone? As I understand it, the hospital has a legal obligation to treat these folks (and, I would argue, an ethical one, too).

Jeremy reports that excess demand for services at the clinic is not an issue, so it’s not a matter of some folks being denied care because an undocumented person is seeing a physician.

Who benefits from this? The Free Clinic really thinks that donations aren’t going to be affected by instituting a policy to turn away sick people they have been treating all along? It sounds like a bad decision from pretty much all points of view; sicker people, higher ER load, higher costs for everyone.

I wonder how much disagreement there was on the Clinic board about this change. Yow.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 20, 2008, 1:22 pm

I think my views on the illegal alien problem are probably well known to readers of this blog…those views would extend to the Free Clinic’s actions — especially as both the City and the County, I believe give funds to that organization.

Comment from John
Time: June 20, 2008, 1:28 pm

Anyone that needs a SSN to be treated can get one pretty easily. And will. I’d bet this won’t reduce the number of patients there – they’ll just have new names!

It seems the mission is to treat those that are in need. Having a need and having a SSN have nothing to do with each other.

Just a CYA maneuver to insure that they don’t lose access to free drugs, or buckling to pressure from somewhere.

Comment from finnegan
Time: June 20, 2008, 1:58 pm

Thanks for reporting on this, Jeremy.

John, you might be right on the money with that last statement.

Burying head in sand — pretending to address the issue without actually addressing it — seems to be the response across-the-board, from the federal government down to local organizations. I think I understand why the clinic is doing this, but it seems like it’s only a gesture for show.

It’s probably beginning to sound like a broken record by now, but what was true a year ago is still true: immigration is a federal (some would say global) issue. Until it’s seriously addressed at the federal level, local free clinic boards across the nation will be having to make decisions like this that they should never have had to make in the first place.

Pingback from BLACK VELVET BRUCE LI : Clinic Discontinues Services To Illegal Aliens
Time: June 20, 2008, 2:36 pm

[...] Hburgnews.com is reporting that the Harrisonburg-Rockingham Free Clinic has announced that it wil cease providing medical services to illegal aliens, something that health clinics in Northern Virginia refuse to do.  The clinic, which is 95% taxpayer supported, had up until recently using those taxpayer dollars to provide healthcare services to illegal aliens, which account for an estimated 10% of their patient population according to clinic staff.  This should spark some discussions within other publicly-supported health clinics in the Commonwealth about the advisability of providing support to illegal aliens, a practics which may violate state and federal law. Executive Director Rich Sider says that the board decided to limit participation in the free clinic based on feedback from some volunteers and other medical providers who were concerned about the amount of resources going to people who aren’t here legally. Sider also says that drug companies which donate pharmaceuticals require a Social Security number from recipients. Sider says they do not have resources to determine whether documents presented are valid or not, but that new patients without documentation will not receive services after their initial eligibility screening. [...]

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 20, 2008, 2:57 pm

The fact is, Brent, the illegal aliens in our community cost EVERYONE a helluva a lot more than if they weren’t here. Talk to us once you’ve gotten a majority of the taxpayers in this community to agree to fund them — then, let them make their contributions to the Free Clinic PRIVATELY without having government take money from us, at the point of a gun, to provide funding to them.

Comment from Seth
Time: June 20, 2008, 3:51 pm

funny headline. you should work for the dnr.

Comment from AJ
Time: June 20, 2008, 8:06 pm

Illegal aliens say they are only here to work. Employers say they need the help. Why have the two not made the connection that employers provide health care benefits to their (otherwise VISA) employees through payroll deduction?

If employers are going to lure illegal aliens to the US with promises of jobs, the least they can do is take care of them.

I commend the Board for doing the right thing and complying with our laws, rather than playing games while trying to sneak around it as they are doing in Fairfax County.

In Fairfax County, the BoS hides the funds and then hands out Kaiser Permanente HMO membership cards to the illegal aliens and their constantly growing families. Board Supervisor Connolly, who has aspirations to become a Federal Senator, feels this is a good thing and tax payers should be grateful for the opportunity to pick up the $1.7M tab.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 4:05 pm

I’m wondering if the Free Clinic will now be violating the non-discrimination policy required by the United Way, which as I understand it is one of the Free Clinic’s major donors. The policy states that an agency receiving funds from the United Way must: “Maintain a non-discrimination Policy or Plan that does not discriminate on the basis of…national origin.”

Comment from Brian M
Time: June 22, 2008, 5:16 pm

Jeremy, the United Way’s policy wouldn’t be violated (based on national origin). As I understand it, the Free Clinic is preventing illegals from utilizing the benefits. It wouldn’t matter where they were from just whether or not they were in the US legally. Right?

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 5:38 pm

Well, since the policy favors those born in the US, who automatically receive the required documentation, it does seem to discriminate based on national origin. Someone from Spain or France or Japan or Mexico wouldn’t be able to receive the same services an American can.

Illegal is not a noun, by the way.

Comment from whackette
Time: June 22, 2008, 8:50 pm

“Someone from Spain or France or Japan or Mexico wouldn’t be able to receive the same services an American can.”

Wouldn’t they be able to receive services if they are here legally?

And you may want to check the dictionaries again. Illegal is listed as a noun as well as an adjective.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 9:47 pm

“Someone who is black can vote just like a white person if they pay the poll tax.”

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 9:50 pm

Megan’s correct, as usual. I had to correct JGF on that many moons ago.

And Jeremy, the policy says “national origin”, and not “immigration status”.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 9:52 pm

And they can get free or subsidized medical care if they come into this country legally.

Nothing is stopping you, Jeremy, from lining up outside the Free Clinic and offering to pay for the medical care (and interpreter costs, in many cases) for any illegal you wish to.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:02 pm

Dave, nothing’s stopping you from buying enough land to keep your gun on you at all times without going elsewhere…but I seem to remember a number of occasions where you made sure people’s rights to bear arms were protected without having to stay on their own property. Are you saying if some or even most taxpayers disagree, your rights go out the window?

But that’s an aside, really. Here’s the issue as I see it: we’ve got chronically ill people who apparently don’t have the resources to pay for their own medical care, being tossed aside so that either 1) they die 2) they cost some other agency/group MORE money (i.e. emergency room care) or 3) they come up with a way to pay for it themselves, and who’s hiring sick undocumented workers?

Matthew 25:31-46 comes to mind:
“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:09 pm

One’s right to legally possess a firearm in this state is not necessarily dependent upon their legal status in this country — though it ought to be. Legal aliens can, in fact, buy firearms as well as apply for concealed handgun permits.

Don’t attempt to put words in my mouth…and don’t quote scripture to me.

If illegal aliens weren’t in this country, they wouldn’t be a burden on this country’s citizenry — PERIOD.

As I wrote previously, you can write checks to infinity and beyond to support your local illegal aliens — just don’t ask taxpayer dollar-supported organizations to have money taken from us at the point of a gun to do it.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:10 pm

By the way, Jeremy, my right to carry a concealed handgun stops at your property line should you not happen to agree with the practice. Happy?

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:11 pm

And, Jeremy, they’re are undocumented, they are ILLEGAL.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:16 pm

Dave, I’ll quote scripture as I see fit. I think that’s one of them rights in the Constitution too.

Whether undocumented people are more of a burden or not to this country has been argued elsewhere, and if you’d like to reopen that argument we can…but in this situation you’re applauding the removal of a safety net that should exist for every person in our community. 100 people. 100 sick people. What do you think they should do? What would you do if you were one; a sick old woman or a little boy or a man of your age, with chronic illness, no legal status, no way to pay and no way to take care of your illness?

Roll over and die? Steal the resources you need? Go back to your home country that you left because there was nothing there for you and which won’t help you deal with your sickness? Come up with a solution, Mr. Cold Heart. And don’t become one of those sent away to eternal punishment.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:16 pm

Of course, I meant that “THEY’RE NOT undocumented, they’re ILLEGAL.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:23 pm

I think they should return to their own country…I’m sure if they call the ICE office on Neff Avenue, we can assist them with transportation.

I don’t want my kids, family, parents (whatever) to go without because we’re paying taxes to support people who should be within these borders.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:27 pm

Are your kids, family, parents (whatever) going without? Or is that just empty rhetoric, spoken by a middle class person in the wealthiest country in history?

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:29 pm

Jeremy,

Your quoting of scripture is irrelevant when it comes to the government’s funding of anything…perhaps if we were speaking of individual churches or people, in general, your scriptural recitations might have some merit.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:33 pm

The Free Clinic’s operations are funded mostly by donations, not the government.

Anyway, the government of a democratic republic is acting on behalf of its citizens.

I’m sure Jesus couldn’t have been thinking of anyone like us when he said we should care for the least of these. He probably meant somebody else, right?

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:35 pm

Every time we pay our taxes to support illegals, pork barrel spending, etc., we go without.

Every time we pay medical bills, we’re paying for the illegals who don’t.

Every time we pay our car insurance, we’re paying for the illegals who don’t.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:40 pm

Jeremy, we live in a Constitutional Republican…that means, we live in a country that is SUPPOSED to function by the rule of law.

And there are budget items in both the City and County budgets for the Free Clinic.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 10:41 pm

Oh sheesh. Undocumented workers pay taxes too. Kids and old people and chronically sick undocumented people don’t, because they don’t work. So let’s throw them all out by the curb and hope they die soon. After all, they’re a different group from us. I’M not a kid. I’M not old. I’M not undocumented. I’M not chronically ill. Those people don’t deserve my sympathy, since they’re nothing like me!

What are you going without, Dave? What are you willing to let “illegals” die for so that you can have? Let’s hear about the hardship of being poor taxed-to-death Dave Briggman, who without the burden of caring for others would surely be healthy, wealthy and happy!

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 22, 2008, 11:17 pm

Sorry, let me return the conversation to a more civil and problem-oriented discussion. What should these 100 people do? What would be an appropriate community response?

Comment from Lowell
Time: June 22, 2008, 11:23 pm

Dave,
Jeremy is right here and you know it. You are making your point of view seem irrelevant and un-Christian, and you know it. And your point is well taken, just not in this context.
This is one of those times when it would be best for you to walk away and choose another fight.
And I say this David considering you a valued friend for whom I care greatly, and whose opinion I hold in equal esteem.

Comment from AJ
Time: June 23, 2008, 7:19 am

Jeremy, often illegal alien apologists miss the point. Federal and Virginia Laws cleary state that tax funded programs are intended for “qualifying” beneficiaries. Federal and Virginia laws also clearly state that non-citizens ar not entitled to these benefits.

Providing benefits to illegal aliens, in violation of Federal and Virginia laws places those funds in jeopardy. In the event of an investigation, the Clinic may be barred from receiving ANY tax payer funding if found to be in violation.

If funding is lost, the clinic closes and ALL sick people are denied this service.

I find it ironic that people who are so quick to quote the scriptures belong to churches that will not reach out to provide this service with private donations from the parishioners.

Jeremy, if you want to take a stand and ensure illegal aliens receive affordable health care, I encourage you to work with your church and implement a privately funded on-site health clinic, with volunteer doctors and nurses.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 23, 2008, 7:43 am

Can you specify which federal or state laws would bar a free clinic from serving undocumented people? Since this was the result of pressure from sources other than the state or federal government, I’m not sure that their government funding is/was in jeopardy as a result of their clientele.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 23, 2008, 8:24 am

Jeremy,

The predicate federal law being broken is the criminal offense of having penetrated our borders illegally, or, having overstayed the duration of one’s visa.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: June 23, 2008, 8:34 am

David,

There is a large linguistic difference between “had to correct” and “chose to hairsplit.” In good writing, the first dictionary definition is generally accepted as the best. If the definition you want to use is the second or third, especially if it is a different part of speech from the first, then you probably need to use a different word. An example would be “deadbeat,” a slang noun for a con-contributing member of society, and sometimes a gross injustice when used as an adjective as in, for instance, “deadbeat dad.”

The first definition of “illegal” is as an adjective. Using it otherwise is bad writing.

You may, if you choose, take this comment not just as grammatical instruction from a professional to an amateur, but as a mockery of hairsplitting in general.

The philosophy in Matthew, by the way, is not something we adhere to because it is the law or God’s command. It is something that our society acknowledges as a guiding philosophy much the way we recognize the Magna Carta or the Declaration of Independence.

I realize there are those who resent their station in life and project the blame onto others. We take taxes from them to help others because even those who are resentful to the point of mean-spiritedness deserve to live in a world where people don’t suffer for want of medical care.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 23, 2008, 8:52 am

Dave, crossing the border without papers is a crime. You bet. So let’s figure out how severe a crime it is, punish with a fine, and move on. Let’s not say “these people committed a crime at some point in their past, so now we will relegate them to a permanent underclass.” We don’t do that with drug users, drunk drivers, or thieves. We do with murderers and sexual criminals, to some extent, but you’d be pretty hard pressed to put an illegal border crossing with the intent to work in the same category as rape. In fact, based on the number of people doing it and the consequences of the act, you could probably put it in the same category as speeding or downloading songs illegally.

AJ said continuing to serve undocumented people would put their funding in jeopardy. I asked what law says the free clinic can’t serve them. Your non-answer about a crime in their past is a smokescreen in the purest sense. The free clinic serves plenty of people who committed crimes in the past; if it didn’t it wouldn’t serve many people at all.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 23, 2008, 8:54 am

No Joe, today’s taxes are taken to pay for the governmental functions that churches, in large part, use to perform.

The difference is that people could, in another time, afford to donate generously to their churches to perform those functions…today, not so much because those functions are now performed in large part by government.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: June 23, 2008, 9:18 am

Fascinating! A comment touches on the philosophical grounding of our society, the need for linguistic precision, and the resentments that underlie too much of our politics, yet the reply focuses on a casual aside about taxes. I love blogging.

Comment from AJ
Time: June 23, 2008, 1:11 pm

jeremy:

This is from the House Ways & Means Appendix J (2003)

Alien eligibility requirements, if any, were set forth in the laws and regulations governing the individual Federal assistance programs. Summarizing briefly, lawful permanent residents (i.e., immigrants) and other noncitizens who are legally present on a permanent basis (e.g., refugees) are generally eligible for Federal benefits on the same basis as citizens.

With the single exception of emergency Medicaid, illegal aliens are barred from participation in all the major Federal assistance programs that have statutory provisions for noncitizens, as are tourists and most other aliens here legally in a temporary status (nonimmigrants).

========

VA CODE is ripe with duplicity so to conserve space, I am providing only a list of aliens who are NOT eligible for services other than emergency health care in the Commonwealth

TN #86 1/07 FAMIS Page 2
Virginia DSS, Volume XIII M21, Appendix 3
UNQUALIFIED ALIEN GROUPS
NOT ELIGIBLE REGARDLESS OF ENTRY DATE OR LENGTH OF RESIDENCE
Aliens residing in the US pursuant to an indefinite stay of deportation (I-94; Immigration Letter)
Aliens residing in the US pursuant to an indefinite voluntary departure (I-94; Immigration Letter)
Aliens on whose behalf an immediate relative petition has been approved and their families covered
by the petition who are entitled to voluntary departure under 8 CFR 242.5(a)(2)(vi) and whose
departure the INS does not contemplate enforcing (I-94; I-210)
Aliens who have filed an application for adjustment of status pursuant to §245 INA that the INS has
accepted as properly filed and whose departure the INS does not contemplate enforcing (I-181;
Endorsed Passport)
Aliens granted stay of deportation by court order, statute or regulation, or by individual determination
of the INS whose departure the agency does not contemplate enforcing (I-94; Court Order; INS
Letter)
Aliens granted voluntary departure pursuant to section 242(b) of the INA whose departure the INS
does not contemplate enforcing (I-94; I-210; I-688B – 247a.12(a)(11) or (13))
Aliens granted deferred action status pursuant to INS Operations Instruction 103.1(a)(ii) prior to
6/15/84 or 242.1a22 issued 6/15/84 and later (I-210; INS Letter)
Aliens residing in the U.S. under orders of supervision (I-220B)
Aliens who entered before January 1972 and have continuously resided in the U.S. since January 1972
(Case Record)
Aliens granted suspension of deportation pursuant to Section 244 of the INA and whose deportation
the INS does not contemplate enforcing (Immigration Judge Court Order)
Any other aliens living in the US with the knowledge and permission of the INS whose departure the
agency does not contemplate enforcing (INS Contact)
Illegal aliens – aliens not lawfully admitted or whose lawful admission status has expired
Visitors (non-immigrants): tourists, diplomats, foreign students, temporary workers, etc.
(I-688B – 274a.12(b)(1)-(20); I-94; I-185: I-I186; SW-434; I-95A)

=======

It’s pretty cut and dry Jeremy. We have to educate them up to the 12th grade and provide emergency medical care – that’s it. To try to slide anymore in just sets a group up for sanctions.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 23, 2008, 2:42 pm

AJ, you’re really cracking me up here. What you’ve done is show, very conclusively, that undocumented people are not eligible for federal or state medical benefits, such as FAMIS (the source of the long quote in your above comment). Thus, you have demonstrated the dire need for the services the free clinic (which is not a government agency) has provided to this point. You have also refuted the common claim that undocumented people leech off our medical system.

What you HAVEN’T done is show why the free clinic’s funding would in any way be jeopardized by continuing to serve undocumented people. They are not funded through FAMIS, or Medicaid, or the other state or federal medical assistance programs that undocumented people don’t qualify for. The Free Clinic has received some federal block grant funding (which is not contingent on not serving undocumented people), but most of its funding comes from private sources like the United Way, RMH, medical groups around the area, and local universities (according to the Free Clinic’s website).

So you’ve reiterated the sad situation for those 100 people affected, but you’ve yet to demonstrate that the Free Clinic made the right choice by cutting them off.

Comment from AJ
Time: June 23, 2008, 4:04 pm

As I said before, apologist usually miss the point. For started, United Way is a part of Virginia 2-1-1, so that blows part of your no tax funding theory. No need to further embarrass you by going into more detail.

Any privately funded health care clinic can serve anyone they want. It’s when they accept tax dollars to subsidize the venture that it becomes a misuse of tax dollars.

I asked before and you evaded my question Jeremy. What is your church doing to reach out and provide medical care to illegal aliens?

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: June 23, 2008, 8:39 pm

What in the heck does Virginia 2-1-1, which refers people to nonprofits (and some government agencies) across the state, have to do with the United Way being a private, not government, source of funding? Please, do go into more detail about how that relates in any way to this conversation. I promise I won’t be embarrassed.

The Free Clinic is a privately funded health care clinic, registered as a non-profit in the state of Virginia. It has received money from local governments which are not in any way tied to restricting services to people with documentation. I have no idea why you refuse to acknowledge that and keep insisting to the contrary. If compliance with state or federal requirements for free clinics were the issue here, then why didn’t the executive director or anyone on the board mention that? Instead, they specified pressure from unnamed volunteers and community medical providers as the impetus for their change.

I didn’t evade your question about my church. I don’t currently attend any church regularly.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 23, 2008, 8:49 pm

Jeremy, if it is privately-funded, then it would receive NO MONEY FROM GOVERNMENT, WOULD IT?

And, Jeremy: I believe my Church initially founded the Free Clinic…as they did CASA…

I would point out that if volunteers are VOLUNTEERING, they are free to provide (or choose not to provide) services to any one (or group).

Certainly, if the Free Clinic continues to provide services to illegals, I would go before the County Board of Supervisors to demand that they stop providing taxpayer dollars to the Free Clinic.

Comment from Emmy
Time: June 24, 2008, 11:41 am

Forgive me if someone already answered this question, but I got a little lost along the way. RMH is a private hospital correct? If so, then will they turn these people away also? Do they have a policy on this?

Not trying to beat a dead horse, but we were talking about it at work and I was just curious.

Comment from seth
Time: June 24, 2008, 3:34 pm

‘The free clinic serves plenty of people who committed crimes in the past; if it didn’t it wouldn’t serve many people at all’

wow.

even if it were true (which i don’t believe it is), you’re really not supposed to say this sort of thing.

Comment from Draegn88
Time: June 24, 2008, 4:06 pm

Emmy all hospitals are required by federal law to serve anyone regardless of race, gender, etc… that walks in the door. They are required to do what is necessary to preserve life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLJxmJZXgNI

http://theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/06/illegal-immigra.html

http://aapolitics.us/content/illegal-alien-cost-parkland-memorial-hospital

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43275

Comment from Emmy
Time: June 24, 2008, 5:44 pm

Thanks, that’s what I thought but some of the people I work with thought they might not have to because they were a private hospital. I assume that this only applies to preserving life though, and if there is no immediate danger they could send them to a different hospital correct?

Comment from Draegn88
Time: June 24, 2008, 7:56 pm

If another hospital will accept them. Also there are people who walk in for mental issues rather than physical care. The hospital is still required to care for them as well.

Comment from Emmy
Time: June 24, 2008, 8:13 pm

I heard that RMH would no longer deliver babies for undocumented people so I just wondered if that was actually legal. Google isn’t always my friend when I’m not quite sure how to word what I’m looking for. Thanks for answering my questions.

Comment from finnegan
Time: June 24, 2008, 8:26 pm

Where did you hear that? What ER nurse is going to turn away a woman in labor?

I would be very suspicious of rumors like that.

Comment from Emmy
Time: June 24, 2008, 8:58 pm

It wasn’t an idle rumor, but I’d rather not go into a lot of detail. The person was not turned away in labor, but told during the pregnancy that they were to go to UVA because RMH would not take them. I don’t remember who told her this, but the person who told me was trying to help her out because she was alone and scared. It could have been miscommunication between the woman and the doctor, but she did go to UVA to have her baby. Its been a while, but I don’t think she received very much prenatal care either.

At the time I didn’t really question it because I figured that was something that a private hospital could decide to do (my own lack of knowledge on the subject) so since it has come up here I thought I’d see if it were actually legal. Perhaps this woman just ran into a doctor with some issues with undocumented immigrants.

Comment from Kai
Time: June 24, 2008, 10:27 pm

“I would point out that if volunteers are VOLUNTEERING, they are free to provide (or choose not to provide) services to any one (or group).”

If I had a lemonade stand and asked for volunteers to staff it to serve a cold drink to whoever wants a cold drink, and a couple volunteers said they didn’t want to serve a cold drink to a certain group of people, I’d have the prerogative to say, “Well, thanks for helping, but I’ll find someone who will help me serve who I want to serve.”

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: June 25, 2008, 9:51 am

That may be true, Kai, but then practicing medicine or dentistry takes a lot more education, skill, and government licensing than does finding someone to serve lemonade for you.

Try again, please.

Comment from Misfit410
Time: July 3, 2008, 10:27 am

Since Bible verses are being thrown around, I have one to add.

“Verily, verily (that is, “in truth, in truth”), I say to you, if any one does not go into the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, it is a sign that he is a thief and a robber.”

Comment from John
Time: July 3, 2008, 10:56 pm

Responses from a former Free Clinic volunteer to Dave Briggman’s comments:

“If illegal aliens weren’t in this country, they wouldn’t be a burden on this country’s citizenry — PERIOD.”

Do you have any idea who the real burden in this area is? I’ll tell you, LAZY fat rednecks that come to the free clinic; they’re so comfortable living off the government that they do NOT want to find legit jobs. I’ve seen them, they work and get cash under the table in order to avoid income records against their Social Security (which would automatically eliminate Federal Unemployment Benefits). Undocumented aliens, at least contribute 6.5% of their paychecks to Social Security, plus the other regular fed and state taxes. Now who’s the burden?

“I don’t want my kids, family, parents (whatever) to go without because we’re paying taxes to support people who should be within these borders.”

But you’re comfortable supporting lazy Americans living off the government, right? If so, you’re contradicting yourself (see your statement above about “burden on this country’s citizenry”)

“I would point out that if volunteers are VOLUNTEERING, they are free to provide (or choose not to provide) services to any one (or group).”

Well, let me tell you son, you’re wrong. Many of us were NOT free to provide services to anyone we wanted. As a matter of fact, I have witnessed selective discrimination; we were suddenly not able to provide service to Mexicans, and we were not allowed to ask rednecks, for example, if they had been recently looking for a job, receiving WIC, etc.

I think you’re confused or at least don’t know the whole story about the volunteers. Many of us did not discriminate immigrants, and that includes all the JMU Spanish interpreters.

Comment from finnegan
Time: July 11, 2008, 2:55 pm

The DNR finally did a story on this today.

Comment from Brooke
Time: July 11, 2008, 3:43 pm

Misfit410:
“Since Bible verses are being thrown around, I have one to add.

“Verily, verily (that is, “in truth, in truth”), I say to you, if any one does not go into the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, it is a sign that he is a thief and a robber.””

If you’re going to quote Scripture you might want to keep it in context. That’s talking about the metaphorical sheepfold of Christ’s body of believers. This is purely a spiritual metaphor, and nothing whatsoever to do with immigration.

AND in addition to the passage Jeremy already quoted, I would add:
Ex 22:21 “Do not mistreat an alien or oppress him, for you were aliens in Egypt.”

Dt 10:19 “And you are to love those who are aliens, for you yourselves were aliens in Egypt.”

Now, I’m not a big believer in pushing spiritual beliefs into law, BUT I do see that many of the people going on and on (and ON) about illegal immigrants often seem to be of the Christian persuasion, so these verses are meant to address (and if necessary, check) our attitudes, versus any specific public policy.

Who would Jesus deport?

Comment from eso
Time: August 6, 2008, 10:00 pm

Another story about health care system and illegals:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/03/america/deport.php?page=1

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 7, 2008, 3:42 pm

Interesting article, especially the last part, where they tried to deport a *legal* insinsured immigrant…

In a case this spring that outraged Phoenix’s Hispanic community, St. Joseph’s planned to send a comatose, uninsured legal immigrant back to Honduras, until community leaders got lawyers involved. While they were negotiating with the hospital, the patient, Sonia del Cid Iscoa, 34, who has been in the United States for half her life and has seven American-born children, emerged from her coma. She is back in her Phoenix home.

I’m sorry, but that’s just out of line, period, and I’m glad they were unsuccessful. Can you imagine having your mother, who is here legally, and could wake up from her coma at any time, sent to a country she hasn’t lived in for decades, and you’ve never been to?

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 7, 2008, 4:12 pm

Brooke if you think that an uninsured person should be allowed to soak up hospital resources, kindly pay for them out of your pocket.

The article did not mention how long she was a patient. For all we know Iscoa might have been laying there for years. Hospitals are only required to provide reasonable care, not unlimited.

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 7, 2008, 5:21 pm

So what, you think we should start deporting LEGAL residents of our country because they’re uninsured? What if this was an uninsured anglo resident? Would you deport them, too? Would you prefer they pull the plug all together? This particular woman’s case, the one I’m citing from the end of the article, was not an immigration issue. Period. It was an issue of being uninsured, and should be treated as ANY other case where an uninsured legal resident/citizen of our country is in a coma.

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 7, 2008, 6:21 pm

Brooke did you read the entire article?

from page 2:

“Unlike Iscoa and Jiménez, most uninsured immigrant patients in repatriation cases do not have advocates fighting for them, and they are quietly returned to their home countries. Sometimes, their families accept that outcome because they are told they have no options; sometimes they are grateful to the hospital for paying their fare home, given that other hospitals leave it to relatives or consulates to assume responsibility for the patients.”

I will point out “RETURNED TO THEIR HOME COUNTRIES”

Have you ever been outside the US? Or for that matter outside Virginia?

If you travel to another country and become sick and/or injured, you will be provided with whatever care is necessary to keep you alive until you are returned to the US. The host nation hospital will contact the nearest Embassy or Consulate and they will take care of any bills that you may incur. (If you do not have the ability to pay then and there or travellers insurance) When you return home, you will then be presented with a bill from the government for the cost of whatever services you recieved.

All of this is covered under UN treaty. But no some Americans like you want to be the liberal save the world do-gooders. The problem is that you want someone else to pay for it. No thank you. If you want to help the world pay for it out of your pocket or shut up.

Comment from David Miller
Time: August 7, 2008, 7:10 pm

But no some Americans like you want to be the liberal save the world do-gooders. The problem is that you want someone else to pay for it. No thank you. If you want to help the world pay for it out of your pocket or shut up.

I’ll vote for universal healthcare and you can double my taxes because I call myself human. What word would you use for yourself?

Comment from David Miller
Time: August 7, 2008, 7:10 pm

“Brooke if you think that an uninsured person should be allowed to soak up hospital resources,”

Sorry, I should have quoted your lack of humanity

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 7, 2008, 8:42 pm

“[S]ome Americans like you want to be the liberal save the world do-gooders.”

Yes, actually, we do. You put that very well. (Although I would have hyphenated “save-the-world” and put a comma before it.) And we would just as soon have our taxes pay for it as to have them spent deporting helpless people.

Go figure.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: August 7, 2008, 10:08 pm

We know JGF has never served in the military, I’m assuming that you, Miller, have also chosen not to partake in military service…

If you had, you’d not be blowing the horn for socialized healthcare as you are, here, so vociferously.

No citizen in this country should BE FORCED to pay taxes in order to provide health insurance for others, but I believe that the General Assembly of Virginia created an account where you can donate revenues to the Commonwealth, over and above your tax liability.

Why not step up, Miller, and write the Commonwealth a check?

In the meantime, I’ll see if Chris Saxman can determine the current balance in that account.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 8, 2008, 6:48 am

BS, Briggman. government isn’t a charity. That’s what I pay taxes for. Am I paying less in taxes than you do for the government entities necessary to regulate child support and gun ownership? We don’t get to pick and choose.

By the way, serving in the military gives you a different experience. It doesn’t make you any smarter.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: August 8, 2008, 9:55 am

BS what, Joe?

Actually, Joe, for every dollar I pay in child support (and I pay 519 of them a month), the federal government pays Virginia $.66…thus, the federal government grants Virginia the amount of $342/month solely for Virginia cashing a check and reissuing a check in the same amount to my ex-wife.

The experience we in the military have had is with a program that would be akin to socialized medicine…ask a veteran who has has experience in the military medical system, if you know any, and I am almost positive such experience was unpleasant at best.

Comment from Emmy
Time: August 8, 2008, 10:02 am

I know a vet who still uses the military medical system. He seems to prefer it because he certainly has other options that would cost him little to no money. He has fantastic insurance.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 8, 2008, 11:21 am

BS to picking and choosing what government services we support and sending donations to those, or to the idea that support for a particular government program should be proven by paying a personal surcharge.

I lived in an area that had a lot of military retirees, and that was considered a good posting for military families, because of the quality of health care available there. Perhaps I would have felt different if I’d been in the military, but they didn’t.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: August 8, 2008, 11:26 am

There’s no constitutional right to healthcare, be it free or not, Joe. When healthcare enters into the Constitution, come back and talk to me about paying for healthcare for anyone except those I choose to pay for.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 8, 2008, 12:53 pm

Obviously you can take the word “healthcare” out of the comment about constitutionality and replace it with just about anything that’s not specifically mentioned in the original document. I would think health care would fall under promoting general welfare, but others may disagree.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: August 8, 2008, 1:03 pm

Joe, before liberals came about with Roosevelt’s “New Deal”, people in need were largely cared for by their local churches if they needed the types of aid…now, because of those who insist on mooching off of their fellow man, much of what the churches have done has now switched to “services”…paid fo by everyone.

By the way, Joe. Being a student of the word as you are, you would obviously know that welfare meant “well being” as in “fare well”, happiness, prosperity, etc.

Comment from Emmy
Time: August 8, 2008, 1:05 pm

Aren’t you happier and more prosperous if you are healthy and not worried about how you are going to pay for your medical care? I know I am.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 8, 2008, 1:14 pm

Yes, Dave, I know that welfare means well-being. But thank you anyway.

Comment from eso
Time: August 8, 2008, 4:30 pm

I’m a little uncomfortable with a hospital administrator making the decision who will be (essentially) deported. They don’t have access to the INS/ICE et. al. data. Then again, the government has abandoned the hospital with the illegal problem.

Other than that, sure provide emergency care only for them and return them home. I just don’t see how there can be any controversy. Someone invaded our country and made it on our soil, now we have to provide them a lifetime of specialized care? That idea is just asinine. Sure I feel sorry for them, but we need to take care of our country first before we start providing medical care to the whole continent or world.
The hospital has to pay the staff, equipment, and other overhead needed to take care of them. Our government isn’t going to pay those bills for the illegals. That leaves other patients having to pay to extra to support them.

I have traveled to foreign countries. Not as many as some of you apparently, but around 5+ times. I traveled to participate in what some ( mistakenly ) consider a high risk sport. It is *highly* recommended you carry your own insurance when traveling in a foreign country. Either per-trip or an sport association or whatnot. Some standard policies won’t extend beyond the US and some won’t cover specialized care for “high risk” activities Most countries may provide emergency care — they wouldn’t get as many tourist if they didn’t have some facilities and treatment — and charge you. But if you need long term, high skill treatment you’d be out of luck. Think the local doctor or hospital will see you about a cold, ear infection, or high blood pressure without payment or insurance? Good luck with that. If you die in a foreign country they probably won’t even return your body unless you pay – many travel insurance policies have to provide “repatriating remains” benefit because it is needed. And we are suppose to provide long term, specialized care for people here illegally? No way. We take care of our own first.

Comment from David Miller
Time: August 8, 2008, 6:37 pm

Just tuned back into the thread to discover the character attacks. First Dave; I love how you make assumptions. There’s an old saying about those. But………… I must know who pays taxes that fund your children’s education? I DO. Is it in the Constitution that I must? NOOOOOOOOO but seeing as how it provides for an educated public/workforce that I will eventually see a return on in the form of a better country, a better neighbor and a more productive and valuable labor pool then I’m quite alright with that. The difference is that I accept that my tax dollars going to educate children is OK, I’m fine with that. You on the other hand should write the government a check for all that socialized education you’ve ripped me off for and then I’ll consider writing a check for your children’s health care

Don’t you see how this works, each man for themselves means that I’m in it for me and you’re in it for you. As much as you may believe that this is how the world works, you are wrong. We call this human development CIVILIZATION. Welcome, we’re still improving so please bear with us. Just ask any sociologist what the term Social Compact means. It will help in your understanding of this concept.

Comment from Emmy
Time: August 8, 2008, 6:52 pm

I think Dave’s kids might go to private school. I could be wrong though. For as much as he complains about public school I’d be surprised if they did.

But David, your words are SPOT ON!

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 8, 2008, 7:14 pm

Well said, Dave Miller.

And Daegn, yes I DID read the article, and I think that if someone is here, on our soil, and they get sick and need care, the human, civilized thing to do is treat them, ESPECIALLY if they are here legally, have been here, paying taxes, half their life (as this woman was) and their children were born here and have lived their whole life here. I am not understanding how on God’s green earth you would think it would be ok to send her back to her “home country” when she’s been living here, legally, for half her life, and separate her from her children, or force them to live in a country they’ve never seen.

Maybe you’re ok with throwing people in need to the street corner, or sending them to places where they’re not likely to be given any care at all, and saying, “Well, too damn bad, you’re not MY problem.” But I am not.

So, you can call me a do-gooder, liberal, or whatever you’d like. My vote counts the same as yours and I will use my vote to help take care of those who need a helping hand, as WELL as my own money, because I’m with Joe, I think that’s part of promoting the general welfare (meaning well being) of the people who live in this country.

Comment from David Miller
Time: August 8, 2008, 7:43 pm

By the way ESO, “We take care of our own first.” you are very incorrect because we really don’t take care of our own even. I could give you million examples but I assume that you can do that on your own.

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 8, 2008, 8:08 pm

And virtually all of those “we (don’t) take care of our own”examples involve the very same rationale: “it’s not MY problem you [got pregnant, lost your job, can't get adequate health insurance, got injured, need health care but can't afford it], so why should I have to pay for [insert whatever it is the person needs]. I got mine, so too damn bad. me, me, me. mine, mine, mine. Get your own.” mentality.

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 8, 2008, 9:55 pm

Brooke, here is another thread with a different view of Sonia del Cid Iscoa.

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-115422.html

“Iscoa is legally in the country under temporary protected status. Sharon Rummery, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokeswoman, said temporary protected status can be granted to people who are in the United States without valid immigration status when a catastrophe happens in their home country.”

One comment from the thread:

“UNBELIEVABLE!
17 years in the U.S. on a TEMPORARY visa, seven (7!) kids, no husband?

If she has lived in the United States for more than 17 years, but has been in the country legally since 1998, (10 years) does this mean she was here illegally for 7 years before obtaining her “valid” visa?”

Brooke how long is temporary supposed to be?

Anyone? Why should we be responsible for another person’s actions? Brooke’s example of a woman becoming pregnant. It is the woman’s and her lover’s problem. Not yours or mine. Someone chooses not to have health care. They get sick, that’s their problem.

Why is there a need to give someone an excuse so that they do not have to be responsible for their actions? You do not solve problems by throwing money at them. There will come a time when those who are human, who show compassion and understanding, will have to make a choice between their families and strangers. Where will the humanity be then?

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 9, 2008, 7:19 am

Very few people “choose not to have health care.” Many, many, MANY people simply cannot afford it, especially as health care costs sky rocket. And even some who are INSURED can be easily bankrupted by long-term health care costs.

I don’t care if all 7 kids have different fathers. That has nothing to do with whether or not she should be deported. And as a cleaning lady who is an immigrant, she probably did not get insurance, let alone adequate insurance to cover something like this.

I found it notable that in another article the hospital said that it was forced to do this because of how the law is written and is hoping the law will change, so even the hospital would disagree with you. ;-)

There will come a time when those who are human, who show compassion and understanding, will have to make a choice between their families and strangers. Where will the humanity be then?

So we, “who are human, who show compassion and understanding” should show no compassion now because at some point in the future we might have to choose between being compassionate and our families?

This is your logical argument? Really?

The way I was brought up, you come across someone who needs help, you do whatever you can to help them. That may be a lot, that may be a little. But you show compassion and you try to help. You don’t send them away to become someone else’s problem.

Comment from Deb SF
Time: August 9, 2008, 7:52 am

Dave’s kids may go to private school, but Dave has attended BRCC, and thus has personally enjoyed tax-payer subsidized tuition.

Libertarians don’t seem acknowledge the public-good aspects of public health care, analogous to the public-good benefits of education that Dave Miller mentions above; it seems to be a matter of individual benefit vs. individual cost for them. Ideological arguments aside, the way we run our health care system is just inefficient. We spend more than twice as much as most of the rest of the developed world, yet we cover a much lower percentage of our people and have a higher rates of illness and death for preventable diseases.

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 9, 2008, 9:48 am

Brooke, other posters chose to define themselves as human… whatever. We live in a world of limited resources. There is only so much that you can do. When it comes down to it, you will have to make a choice. Will you feed Africa, or the hungry in Harrisonburg? Will you give to fight disease in the third world, or Harrisonburg?

People will always choose those they are familiar with over a stranger. And, this may involve ethnocentricity, nationalism, nativism, or racism. That’s how things are.

I do agree with Deb, our healthcare system is poorly run and managed. In part because we concentrate on letting people have all the fun they want while they’re young and then taking care of the results of their wanton lifestyles. Instead we should be taking preventive measures throughout a person’s lifetime to prevent catastrophic results at the end.

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 9, 2008, 10:30 am

People will always choose those they are familiar with over a stranger. And, this may involve ethnocentricity, nationalism, nativism, or racism. That’s how things are.

That may be how it is for you, but not everyone thinks that way – thankfully.

If you don’t agree with these things, you certainly have a right to your opinion, and have the right to vote against such measures, when they come up for vote, but understand that not everyone feels the same way you do, and they very well may vote differently on such matters. I know I will.

Comment from DinTN
Time: August 9, 2008, 4:47 pm

Broke-
Since you quoted me from ALIPAC,
I’m very happy that you can afford to provide for the world’s uninsured health care. Feel free to pick up the tab any time you like, but you assume that we all have unlimited resources that you enjoy, but we don’t.

“I don’t care if all 7 kids have different fathers. That has nothing to do with whether or not she should be deported.”
Deportation aside, does it not have anything to do with whether or not WE have to foot the bill? After all, this is about healthcare, not deportation.

“And as a cleaning lady who is an immigrant, she probably did not get insurance, let alone adequate insurance to cover something like this.”

So we should? Our hospitals should continue to be strapped for resources and shutting down? As an UNEMPLOYED cleaning lady, the visa should have been revoked when she stopped working.

Emmy says:
“Perhaps this woman just ran into a doctor with some issues with undocumented immigrants.”

No such person as an “undocumented immigrant”
All immigrants have documents. Legal immigrants have legal documents, illegals have more documents than I do; theirs are either stolen or fake.

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 10, 2008, 7:13 am

DinTN – you’re the one who brought up the 7 children and no husband, so I think it’s fair to say I don’t think it’s relevant to EITHER topic, and it’s an unnecessary jab at the woman.

And no, I didn’t quote you. I quoted a post from someone else who quoted you. I’m a little curious how you even know that someone quoted a *comment* you made on another blog.

Comment from DinTN
Time: August 10, 2008, 11:16 am

How many children an immigrant has while in this country illegally is very relevant to our health care system. An average of 300,000 anchor babies born in this country to illegals each year, at taxpayer expence, is not relevant? I guess you do not know how many hospitals, most in California, have closed down due to illegals. This leaves Americans with the difficulty of traveling farther away just to find an emergency room that is still open.

“And no, I didn’t quote you. I quoted a post from someone else who quoted you. I’m a little curious how you even know that someone quoted a *comment* you made on another blog.”
How do I know? Well, you got me there, because I don’t even understand your logic on that one.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 10, 2008, 12:57 pm

I give up. How many California hospitals have closed down?

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 10, 2008, 2:15 pm

Here you go Joe,

http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/000060.html

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2008/jun/feds-ignore-hospital-s-illegal-immigrant-reports

the cost of illegals
88 hospitals have closed in Southern CA due to the expense of caring for illegal aliens.
The burden of entire countries who are corrupt and hold the very rich oil money in the hands of a few families (ie Mexico) put onto the average American citizen is getting too much to bear.
I never thought I would say this but I am beginning to feel sorry for Americans. Their jobs are being outsourced, they have no medical coverage while paying through the nose for foreigners who come from rich oil countries like Mexico. They have no representation in government and there are very wealthy “elites” who want to give their country away for the “global good”.
I really feel for the citizens of Florida and this hospital and I hope they vote their “representative” Marco Rubio out of office. He obviously likes foreigners who break the laws of America – over American citizens who are paying the costs by the sweat equity of their labor and life.

I wonder how much of RMH’s “charity” (according to a VP 8% of it’s operating expense) is given to “people who cannot pay or will not pay.”? How many of them are illegal aliens? Is this why RMH charges 50$ for two asprin?

Comment from Frank J Witt
Time: August 10, 2008, 2:41 pm

Now, Now Draegn88, you know how the people of this blog will
react when faced with the facts that go against their well intentioned stance on criminal immigrants.

Someone might be looking to punch your nose next.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 10, 2008, 2:59 pm

HH, maybe you didn’t have time to read the links you cite, but one of them only references hospital closings in an anonymous comment. The other cites a NYT article and specifically says the NYT doesn’t mention undocumented aliens. Perhaps you meant to send some other links?

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 10, 2008, 3:39 pm

DinTN – my logic is simple. I went ahead and checked your profile on that website to verify my hunch, and yes, you are from TN, not the VA or the Shenandoah Valley, were not in any way involved in this debate on this site.

And then you show up out of the blue to defend your honor when someone references something you said on an entire different, unrelated blog. It’s almost like you sit around googling your own words, or “illegal immigration” or “alipac” or something.

That’s why I was wondering how you even knew someone (Draegn88, not me) on THIS news site, which is devoted to a very specific geographic area, quoted you.

I think it’s a fair question.

Comment from DinTN
Time: August 10, 2008, 3:40 pm

http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/002793.html

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 10, 2008, 3:51 pm

So what? You can cut and paste links to your favorite xenophobic anti-immigrant sites. Good for you. Why don’t you go find one of your hate blogs to go pontificate on, or perhaps a Tennessee news blog, and leave our news blog be. We already have a couple of people like you here, and they’re more than enough, thanks.

Comment from finnegan
Time: August 10, 2008, 4:59 pm

Agreed, Brooke.

I’m thinking of adding a new amendment to the comment rules: if you have no connection to this community, butt out.

DinTN, Draegn88 has you covered. That’s a nice way of saying “butt out of our local conversation.”

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 10, 2008, 5:33 pm

Hey Joe,

I think it’s fair to say that you are more than capable of finding things out for yourself. But, I’ll humor you.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/12/26/170334.shtml

http://www.nshp.org/?q=node/717

http://one-simple-idea.com/BorderSecurity.htm

This last one imo is neutral.

Frank, that’s really funny. But, I’m not overly concerned with those people who stay in their insulated sheltered realms of comfort. For, one day everything they try to avoid will be in their face and they will say, “Draegn is right, I wish I had listened.”

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 10, 2008, 5:43 pm

Insulated sheltered realms of comfort? What are you talking about? We’re not the ones constantly talking like we’d like keep the Valley as lily white as possible. ;-) Seems to me you guys are the ones trying to stay in your insulated sheltered realms of comfort and are extremely, EXTREMELY threatened and freaked out by anything that doesn’t mesh up with that.

Comment from PaulC1958
Time: August 11, 2008, 6:29 am

I’m live in Colorado, but this blog doesn’t limit comments only to those who live in Virginia. I’m a proud, life-long, liberal Democrat, but that fact doesn’t make me a fool. I believe strongly in what some people call the “commons” those public and private entities that make civil life possible. Things like schools, hospitals, governments, courts, police, churches, and charities just to name a few. Some are public, paid for through taxes, and some are private, paid for through donations. All, however, are limited by resources made available to them. In my view it is hard to reconcile compassionate treatment of individuals in need with the very real constraints imposed by the number of people deserving of compassion and the very real limited resources available to be compassionate. No matter how much we would like it to be otherwise, we must make choices. Just as I put the needs of my family before those of my neighbors, I choose to put the needs of my fellow citizens before those of illegal aliens and legal immigrants. To do otherwise, it seems to me, is to devalue citizenship. You are free to make a different choice.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: August 11, 2008, 8:43 am

Yes, Deb. In fact I did enjoy state-subsidized tuition while at BRCC…but when the bond issues that came out more than a couple of years ago hat were for both parks and colleges, I specifically asked Dr. Perkins to RAISE BRCC tuition for us, at the same time telling people to VOTE AGAINST the bond issues.

My oldest is at Cub Run, however, the level of my wife and my involvement with my children in their education will allow my child to succeed notwithstanding that he’s in a government school.

Miller (I find it easier to sort us out using our last names), government schools were created to maintain a dumb-down worker class.

John Taylor Gatto, former NY State Teacher of the Year, talks about the origin of government eduction here:

http://4brevard.com/choice/Public_Education.htm

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: August 11, 2008, 9:41 am

Draegn, can you find a source within the medical or hospital administration community who says that undocumented immigrants have caused even one hospital closing by overwhelming services?

Everything I am finding links back to a woman with a doctorate in midieval studies and is also a rabid anti-immigrant, named Madeleine Cosman. Here’s her most widely quoted “study”, which as I understand it was published by an ultra-right wing advocacy group.

Most of what I’m seeing from actual medical professionals indicates that hospital closings have happened a lot in poor neighborhoods over decades, and many in California especially are attributed to the high costs of retrofitting buildings (especially small hospitals) to meet required building codes related to earthquakes.

So, if you can help me find a bona fide medical professional who blames undocumented immigrants for hospital closings, let me know.

Comment from David Miller
Time: August 11, 2008, 11:53 am

Briggman (I agree, its easier), you quote an article from a HomeSchooling website whose goals include vouchers and eliminating Public education. Invalid biased perspective denied. I read it, it had some interesting opinions but that’s all. Opinions don’t bother me as much as you using my taxpayer dollars to educate yourself and your children then telling me I’m a communist for believing that all human beings deserve equal and adequate health insurance. You ignored all of my points about the greater good of public education and public health. Those are the only things that I see as valid arguing points (since we seem to have a different set of morals and values when it comes to our fellow man, we must then use practical and self-centered arguments).

Comment from eso
Time: August 11, 2008, 1:53 pm

Even if Dave’s children went to private schools, I can imagine a situation which it would be natural for him to justify the public schools. He investigated the public schools and found them so broken he has to spend his money to send them to private schools. That’s what has happened to some private and home schoolers. And they have every right to complain.

The woman who cuts my hair was talking to another customer and said only 2 or 3 students in her kid’s early ed classes spoke English. IF that’s the case, I would consider it neglectful and being a poor parent sending your child to that school.

Comment from Emmy
Time: August 11, 2008, 2:00 pm

Well then call me neglectful Eso. When my oldest was in Kindergarten there were seven children in his class who spoke no English. By the end of the year they could carry on a very nice conversation with me. My son actually got more time with his teacher because of this. I don’t find my sons school to be lacking at all. In fact I just wrote a letter to the principal and superintendent about the teacher my youngest had last year and what an blessing she is. I wouldn’t change where my kids go to school if I had the option (which I do).

Comment from David Miller
Time: August 11, 2008, 3:38 pm

Eso
”
The woman who cuts my hair was talking to another customer and said only 2 or 3 students in her kid’s early ed classes spoke English. IF that’s the case, I would consider it neglectful and being a poor parent sending your child to that school.”

Why? Why?

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 11, 2008, 3:51 pm

I’m with Emmy on this one. I wouldn’t consider this a bad thing, or consider it neglectful to keep my kids in school where there are a high concentration of children who are beginning to learn English. I would consider it a blessing and an opportunity for my children to be exposed to cultural diversity, but also to do what they could to help their fellow students learn English (and probably pick up a little Spanish in the process) as well as helping them in any way they could, to get more acclimated to life here in the States.In fact, if they ever do implement the Immersion classes, my kids will be first in line!

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 11, 2008, 7:56 pm

Jeremy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP9zVqlS9HU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLJxmJZXgNI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IDbdf5DxIE

http://www.capsweb.org

Comment from Brooke
Time: August 11, 2008, 8:10 pm

Link 1 – Doesn’t mention the hospital closing or even struggling to stay open.
Link 2 – Doesn’t mention the hospital, or any hospital, closing because of this.
Link 3 – Is from an anti-immigrant organization, so far from credible as a source, but again, while it mentions budget and staff cutbacks, doesn’t mention a hospital, any hospital, closing because of this. In fact, this is about a clinic, not a hospital
Link 4 – Not even going to go there after watching the last video, as it’s a site dedicated to anti-immigration, so far from a credible, unbiased source

You STILL have not provided one single, solitary link or source that backs up your previous claims about hospitals being forced to close, let alone one from a credible, unbiased source.

Free tip of the day: Cutting and pasting links does not evidence or a logical argument make.

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 11, 2008, 8:34 pm

Ask some people for a yes-or-no answer and their response is “fourteen.” Ask them for a number and they tell you they already know so they don’t have to tell you.

But … like … here’s a link.

OK.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: August 11, 2008, 8:37 pm

Okey dokey…let me repeat my question: “can you find a source within the medical or hospital administration community who says that undocumented immigrants have caused even one hospital closing by overwhelming services?”
I saw nothing in any of those about hospitals closing or overwhelming services. I saw a doctor saying they couldn’t get reimbursed because the immigrants were not eligible for any medical aid, a hospital administrator complaining that her hospital got sued for forcibly deporting a poor man who had been crippled by an uninsured (American) drunk driver, and another fired hospital administrator who didn’t think his role as caring for indigents extended to undocumented immigrants, which was his job. The fourth link had no original or cited information on the topic and has nothing to do with this conversation.
Let’s look at these again:

1. People badly burned in natural disaster…if they had been anyone other than “illegals” the call would have been to HELP them pay their bills rather than blame them for not having money to get acute care. Notice the doctor is more upset at the system than the immigrants, and rightly so in my opinion.

2. Someone hit by an uninsured drunk driver is literally sent off to die by a private, profitable hospital that pays its executives $4 million a year. Again, if this had been a white guy it would have been the cause for a fundraiser, not a deportation.

3. Indigent services in Sacramento are for residents of Sacramento who can’t pay their bills. The guy did a crappy job heading up that section, was moved to another position he said was “too difficult”, got bad performance reviews and was fired. Umm…this is a hero for the anti-immigrant forces?

I like the way the NYTimes put it about the guy in Florida being caught in the collision of two deeply flawed American systems: health care and immigration. How true.

I’m still waiting for a source that connects hospital closings and undocumented immigrants, Draegn.

Comment from Dave Briggman
Time: August 11, 2008, 9:21 pm

Jeremy, they’re not “undocumented”…they are ILLEGAL. I’m sure many of them have their consulate-issued IDs and most probably have their birth certificates from their homeland.

Comment from Jeremy Aldrich
Time: August 11, 2008, 9:28 pm

Thanks Dave, got it. Hey, how’s your campaign on behalf of illegal fathers going?

Comment from Draegn88
Time: August 12, 2008, 6:01 pm

Brooke, I had a lengthly response for you, however, you are not worth it.

Jeremy, somehow I imagine that you would not care for Lou Dobbs and CNN. However, I did come across this interesting page.

http://www.houstonpress.com/2007-11-15/culture/ask-a-mexican/

The loco-est part of this mess is that both Cosman and her parakeet Dobbs have their figures relatively right: According to the California Hospital Association, 82 hospitals in the Golden State folded from 1996 to 2006. But in an August interview with New England Journal of Medicine contributing editor Susan Okie, M.D., CHA vice president of external affairs Jan Emerson noted, “It would not be fair to place the blame solely on undocumented immigrants, but certainly, they are a contributing factor.” Okie’s article also revealed that illegals make up only about 20 percent of the country’s residents who lack medical insurance, and about 10 percent of the “uncompensated care in California hospitals” — 10 percent too much, sí, but hardly the invasion the now-dead Cosman and Dobbs want Americans to believe. Strangely, Dobbs has yet to mention Okie’s article

http://www.dallasobserver.com/2007-11-15/news/ask-a-mexican/ (same thing printed in a different paper)

http://www.phxnews.com/fullstory.php?article=21492

^^ from a US Senator

http://acertainslantoflight.net/?p=2264

^^ author quotes USA Today

Comment from JGFitzgerald
Time: August 12, 2008, 6:13 pm

I think DraegnHH just answered “true or false” with “fourteen.” Irrelevant, with just a hint of ad hominem dismissiveness. A typical bouquet.

Pingback from hburgnews.com » HburgNews – 2008 in Review
Time: December 31, 2008, 2:22 am

[...] notable downtown stories this year included the Harrisonburg Free Clinic requiring citizen documentation from patients and reactions to that decision, and local success-story Rosetta Stone (creators of the famous [...]