How long do women have to wait for equality?

Photo by Samantha Sophia on Unsplash

March is Women’s History month.  And today, March 8, is International Women’s Day.  But here in the United States, women still do not have equal rights.  In women’s marches, older women now hold signs that say “I can’t believe I still have to protest this fucking shit” and “My arms are tired from holding this sign since the 1960s.”

Nothing illustrates women’s inequality better than the failure of the Equal Rights Amendment to be ratified.   It was first introduced in Congress almost a century ago in 1923.[1]  But it took Congress 49 years to pass it.[2]  For an amendment to become part of the Constitution, 2/3 of the state legislatures must then vote to ratify it.  But only 37 states have done so – one vote short of the needed total. [3]    In the 47 years since Congress passed it,[4] 13 states have refused to support women’s equality.

Even worse, five states have rescinded their ratification of the ERA.[5]  Because it is unclear that states have the power to rescind a ratification, it remains to be seen if these actions set the ERA back even further.[6]  Moreover, the original deadline for ratification of 1979 and an extension to 1982 has passed, so Congress would need to extend the deadline.[7]  Recently, bills have been introduced to do just that.[8]

The latest state to fail to ratify the ERA is the Commonwealth of Virginia.  In light of the scandals that have plagued three highest officials in the state,[9] including accusations of sexual assault,[10] this state could have improved its reputation by ratifying the ERA. Instead, it was never brought to a full vote before the Virginia legislature.[11]

What is so scandalous about this amendment that has made its passage impossible in almost a century?  It says only this:  “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.”[12]  It simply requires that men and women be treated equally.  How can anyone oppose gender equality?

The opposition’s reasons for opposing the ERA consist mainly of quaint paternalistic notions that have been nullified with the passage of time and new laws.  The latest reason is that “tax dollars could be used for abortion.”[13] In support of this argument, opponents cite a New Mexico state case, New Mexico Right to Choose/NARAL v. Johnson.[14]  They claim that this case ruled that “since abortion is unique to women, restricting abortions is a form of sex discrimination.”[15]   But that is not the ruling in this case.  In fact, the ruling turned on medically necessary treatment, including abortion, being made available to women equally to men, not the fact that “abortion is unique to women.”  975 P.2d 841 (1998).

Opponents to the ERA also claim that supporters want to overturn all restrictions on abortions based purely on their rejection of pro-lifers’ proposed amendment to the ERA:  “Nothing in this Article shall be construed to grant or secure any right relating to abortion or the funding thereof.”[16]  But equal rights have nothing to do with abortion where only women can have an abortion.  If men were being provided abortions and women were not, equal rights would have indeed required that abortions be provided to women in the same way.  But of course that is not the case  So this provision was rejected because it is irrelevant to the ERA.

Opponents make other claims as well.  For example, they claim that women are paid 98% of men’s earnings and that these statistics are not meaningful because they do not consider occupation.[17]  But when occupation is considered, the gap widens.[18]

They also claim that current laws are working and that women are already getting equal treatment.  If that were true, why are they opposing a constitutional amendment that would merely formalize laws already in place?  Perhaps it is because current laws are not working.  Look at the Equal Pay Act.

Last, opponents of the ERA claim that it will end preferential treatment for women embedded in current laws, like those that benefit pregnant women.[19]  This argument suffers from the same flaw as that for abortion – men cannot get pregnant so equal treatment between pregnant men and women is impossible.  The ERA will not change that.

Opponents also claim without support that all bathrooms will be unisex if the ERA is enacted.[20]  Equality is related to the number of bathrooms; it does not require the same bathroom.

If a person opposes the ERA, then that person believes that men and women are not equal.  In the United States, the ceiling for women is not glass; it is clearly visible in the form of a Constitution that fails to provide for gender equality.  Until the ERA is enacted, women are second-class citizens in this country.


[1], The History of the Equal Rights Amendment.

[2] Id.

[3] Alison Thoet, One of these states could ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, PBS, February 26, 2019.

[4] Id.

[5] Maya Salam, What is the Equal Rights Amendment and Why Are We Talking About It Now?, The New York Times, February 22, 2019.  h

[6] Id.

[7], The History of the Equal Rights Amendment.

[8] Alison Thoet, One of these states could ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, PBS, February 26, 2019.

[9] Alan Suderman, Virginia Gov. Northam, Lt. Gov. Fairfax reject growing calls for resignation, Associated Press/PBS, February 9, 2019.

[10] Norman Leahy, A Virginia House committee hearing on the allegations against Justin Fairfax is probably a trap.  But for whom?, The Washington Post, February 27, 2019.

[11] Alison Thoet, One of these states could ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, PBS, February 26, 2019.

[12] Proposed Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

[13] PBS, One of these states could ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, February 26, 2019.

[14] Douglas Johnson, The ERA and Abortion:  Not So Simple, National Right to Life, April 4, 2000.

[15] Eagle Forum, 10 Reasons to oppose the Equal Rights Amendment (last visited 3/6/19).

[17] Id.

[18] Bureau of Labor Statistics, Highlights of women’s earnings in 2017, August 2018; Bureau of Labor Statistics, Women’s earnings 83 percent of men’s, but vary by occupation, January 15, 2016.

[19] Eagle Forum, 10 Reasons to oppose the Equal Rights Amendment (last visited 3/6/19).

[20] Id.


Oliver Twist is coming to America

boy in poverty.jpg
Photo by Muhammad Muzamil on Unsplash

The Department of Health and Human Services has now passed rules[1] that will usher in a Dickensian era in America.  These rules promote the least effective forms of birth control and hide abortion as a dirty secret.

The methods promoted by these rules are abstinence and “fertility awareness-based methods.”  While abstinence is 100% effective,[2] many may feel that this is not a viable option.   According to HHS, fertility awareness-based methods depend on women identifying when they are ovulating and avoiding sex at that time or using condoms.[3]

But these methods are the least effective. Fertility awareness-based methods do not work 12%-24% of the time.[4]  Condoms don’t work 15% of the time.[5]  So if the women of this country use these methods, pregnancies will increase 12-24%.  That is a lot of unwanted babies.

Those who get pregnant under the new rules are less likely to have an abortion.  The rules treat abortion as a dirty secret.  Family planning clinics receiving federal funds must separate facilities that provide family planning from those that provide abortions or abortion referrals.[6]  And those clinics cannot refer patients to an abortion facility.[7]  If a pregnant woman decides to have an abortion and requests a referral, the clinic may provide a list of family planning facilities but may not indicate which of them provide abortions.[8]  The pregnant woman will have to take the time to figure that out, delaying an abortion — perhaps until it is too late.  The new rules, then, will result in fewer abortions, which in turn means that more babies will be born.

Some mothers may keep their babies, but others will be unwilling or unable to care for them.  Where will they go?  Orphanages no longer exist in this country.[9]  Instead, they have been replaced by foster homes.[10]  But the foster care system here has been strained beyond its limits by the opioid crisis.[11]  There are not enough foster homes now for children who need them.[12]

Where will all these children go?  No additional allowance has been made for their care.  Who will pay for their food, clothing, health care, and other needs?

The rules provide only that more women will get pregnant and more children will be born.  But after birth, they are on their own.  Those advocating pro-life look no further than the birth of the child and provide no relief for unwanted children after they are born.  As someone once pointed out to me, the more correct term for those people is pro-birth, not pro-life.

And the women most affected by these rule changes are likely to be poor.  After all, more poor women use federally funded facilities because the cost is lower than private facilities.  Saddling these women with more children will result in their remaining or sinking deeper into poverty.  What will happen to those children?

Visions of Oliver Twist spring to mind — ragamuffins living on the streets by any means possible – committing crimes or being victimized by the unscrupulous.  That’s the bright future that the new HHS rules promise.

The best prevention of abortions is the prevention of conception.  If fewer or no abortions is the goal, information about and access to effective contraception must be made available to women.  Otherwise, the additional children resulting from ineffective contraception must be provided for.  Paying for their care means higher debt or taxes.  If our country wants to force women to have more children, we must pay for their care. Abandoning them at birth is not an option.


[1] I discussed these rules before they were enacted in a post published October 2018.

[2] Planned Parenthood, “Abstinence and Outercourse.” 

[3] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “What is fertility awareness?

[4] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, “Frequently Asked Questions:  Fertility Awareness-Based Methods of Family Planning.”

[5] Planned Parenthood, “How effective are condoms?

[6] Ariana Eunjung Cha, “Trump administration bars clinics that provide abortions or abortion referrals from federal funding,” The Washington Post, February 22, 2019.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] Virginia Spence, “Do Orphanages Still Exist in America?,”, June 30, 2018.

[10] Id.

[11] Perry Stein and Lindsey Bever, “The opioid crisis is straining the nation’s foster-care system,” The Washington Post, July 1, 2017.

[12] Id.

Have you heard? Democrats hate America.

No hate.jpg
Photo by T. Chick McClure on Unsplash

A few weeks ago, someone close to me, who is a Republican, posted on Facebook this message:

We hated Obama like you hate Trump.

Except we hated

Obama because he

hates America.


You hate Trump

Because YOU hate


And I saw comments posted in response to articles in The Washington Post that Democrats hate America.  I wondered where this came from.  Why do Republicans think that Democrats hate America?  So I searched and found a Facebook page called “Democrats Hate America.”  This is their story, quoted from their Facebook page:

Every day, the modern Democrats take the side of criminals, illegal aliens, and foreigners over law-abiding U.S. citizens. Democrats despise free speech and the free exchange of ideas. Democrats despise Democracy, where free pe0ple [sic] can speak their minds and argue for change or not without being attacked and insulted. Democrats routinely act in bad faith and tell lies about their opponents. Democrats also despise the rule of law, and always seek political, extra-legal, and corrupt judicial pronouncements to circumvent the law the People want.

Yes, we were all Democrats once, until we did years of independent research, reviewing source documents, interviews, statements, statistics, etc. At some point, we had to be honest with ourselves. We had to admit that we believed in a Big Lie: the modern Democrat Party.

Please submit your examples of how Democrats Hate America. . . .

P.S. We reject the use of threats and violence, except in extreme cases where force is needed to defend oneself or others. If attacked by a Democrat Resistance member, try to run away. Use force only if there is no escape from Democrat violence. And use only that force necessary to stop the threat, and no more than that.

I had no idea that Democrats were such ignorant, hateful, violent, lying criminals who hate free speech.  I was shocked.  One post says that Democrats don’t want to secure the border because “Democrats benefit politically and financially from the work of Drug Cartels/Human Traffickers. Naturally, there will be no evidence of direct payments made to Democrats by Crimimals [sic].”  If they have no evidence, how can they make this statement?  I thought they conducted “independent research.”  Where is it?

Adding to this anti-Democrat fervor is a book called “Why the Left Hates America,” which, according to Publishers Weekly, criticizes those who criticize the United States government.

Then the Washington Times used Gallup poll data that only 32% of Democrats are “extremely proud” to be an American as evidence that Democrats hate America.[1]  And because 46% of Democrats answered this poll in the same way when President Obama was in office, the Washington Times concluded that “the left only likes America when a progressive-slash-socialist is at the helm — which, in constitutional terms, would mean the Dems only profess pride in America when America’s headed down a path it was never intended to tread. How quaint.”[2]

The same is being said of Republicans.  It turns out that they, too, hate America.[3]  But at least the sole article that makes this statement backs it up with facts.  In contrast, Republicans offer no facts at all.

Do all Americans hate America?

No American – Republican or Democrat – needs to be “extremely proud” of America to be patriotic.  Those who want to improve America – to “make it great again” – can be patriotic.  So criticizing the government by those on either side of the aisle does not make them unpatriotic.

Mark Twain said, “Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.”  Patriotism is not unquestioning loyalty to a political party.  It is loyalty to a country.

But accusing others of being unpatriotic without facts is not patriotism.  It is hate.  When someone accuses another of being unpatriotic based only on speculation, those people look like they hate everyone but those in their own party.  That is a whole lot of hate.


[1] Cheryl Chumley, Democrats hate America – and here are the numbers to prove it, The Washington Times, July 3, 2018.

[2] Id.

[3] Carol Anderson, Why Do Republicans Hate America, Huffington Post, January 18, 2018.


Every day is Backward Day in the Trump Administration

!yaD drawkcaB yppaH


Today is National Backward Day.  It honors everything backward.  That means this is a great day to honor the Trump Administration.

Why do I say this?  Because the policies of the Trump Administration move our country into the past. For example, Mr. Trump promised in his campaign to “bring back jobs in manufacturing after decades of decline.”[1]  But “[t]o those who see the future of the American economy in services, these promises seemed backward.”[2]

President Trump also wants to build a wall across our Southern border.  Texas State Representative Will Hurd (R.) rightfully called it “a third-century solution to a 21st-century problem.”[3]

And President Trump promised to put coal miners back to work mining “the dirtiest of fossil fuels”[4] by loosening pollution regulations on coal-fired power plants.[5]  But coal is no longer cost-competitive with cheaper natural gas and the declining costs of cleaner, renewable energy.[6]   In short, coal’s time is over.

Those that President Trump has appointed to head federal agencies have worked against the goals of those agencies:

  • Scott Wheeler at the Environmental Protection Agency: The mission of the E.P.A. “is to protect human health and the environment.”[7] The person in charge of this mission is a former coal lobbyist.  And he has acted in accordance with his former occupation, proposing changes to the way the government evaluates the costs and benefits of air pollution generally and the regulation of mercury emissions specifically.[8]  This change invites the very industry that causes mercury emissions — the coal industry — to challenge their regulation in court.[9]  And Wheeler is involved in other rollbacks of E.P.A. regulations that threaten the health of this country and climate change.[10]


  • Ryan Zinke, Secretary of the Interior: Among other tasks, the Interior Department “conserves and manages the Nation’s natural resources.”[11] Instead, Zink promoted opening the East Coast to offshore drilling, weakened the Endangered Species Act, and slashed the size of two national monuments, “constituting the largest rollback of federal land protection in the nation’s history.”[12]  His resignation is unlikely to stop the abuse of this country’s natural resources with his likely replacement to be David Bernhardt, a former oil lobbyist.[13]


  • Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development:  With no experience in housing or urban development, Nancy Pelosi called him a “disturbingly unqualified choice.”[14]  But more disturbing is his view on fair housing policy, which he called “social engineering.”[15] Under Carson, more federally subsidized housing is failing inspections, unfit for human habitation, and is not being remediated.[16]  But with subsidies tied to housing, tenants cannot leave.[17]  Carson has also proposed raising poor families’ rents.[18]  In other words, he heads up a housing agency that is not interested in housing anyone.


  • Rick Perry, Secretary of Energy: The mission of the U.S. Department of Energy “is to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.”[19]  Once vowing to shut down the Department of Energy, Perry is now in charge of it.[20]  In the battle between economic growth and protecting the environment, Perry has chosen to boost the economy by supporting fossil fuels.[21]


  • Betsy Devos, Secretary of Education. The Department of Education’s mission “is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.”[22]  An advocate of school choice, Devos has sought to permit children to abandon public schools by giving tax money to private schools that they attend.[23]  And she has worked to protect for-profit colleges who failed to provide legitimate degrees by eliminating loan forgiveness to their students.[24]  To oversee fraud investigations at the Department of Education, she appointed the former dean of Devry University, who paid $100 million to settle a lawsuit against Devry for misleading marketing tactics.[25]  In short, Devos is an Education Secretary who has worked to harm students and public schools and is not interested in ferreting out fraud in education.


So, if President Trump honors Backward Day, he’ll reverse his backward direction and move this country forward.  That will be a day to celebrate!


[1] The Economist, Manufacturing jobs are defying expectations, October 18, 2018.

[2] Id.

[3] William Cummings, Texas Republican Rep. Will Hurd calls Trump border crisis “a myth,” USA Today, January 20, 2019.

[4] Nicole Goodkind, Trump Says He ‘Saved Coal,’ but Miner Deaths Nearly Doubled in His First Year, Newsweek, January 27, 2018.

[5] Brad Plumer, Trump’s New Pollution Rules Still Won’t Save the Coal Industry, The New York Times, August 22, 2018.

[6] Nicole Goodkind, Trump Says He ‘Saved Coal,’ but Miner Deaths Nearly Doubled in His First Year, Newsweek, January 27, 2018.

[7] United States Environmental Protection Agency.

[8] Dominique Browning, This Coal Lobbyist Should Not Run the E.P.A., The New York Times, January 14, 2019.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] U.S. Department of the Interior.

[12] Julie Turkewitz and Coral Davenport, Ryan Zinke, Face of Environmental Rollbacks, is Leaving Interior Department, The New York Times, December 15, 2018.

[13] Id.

[14] Rebecca Harrington and Skye Gould, Meet the Cabinet:  Here are the 24 people Trump has appointed to the top leadership positions, Business Insider, March 13, 2018.

[15] Id.

[16] Suzy Khimm, Laura Strickler, Hannah Rappleye and Stephanie Gosk, Under Ben Carson, more families live in HUD housing that fails health and safety inspections, NBC News, November 14, 2018.

[17] Id.

[18] Id.

[19] U.S. Department of Energy.

[20] Rebecca Harrington and Skye Gould, Meet the Cabinet:  Here are the 24 people Trump has appointed to the top leadership positions, Business Insider, March 13, 2018.

[21] James Osborne, Energy Secretary Rick Perry calls shift away from fossil fuels ‘immoral,’ Houston Chronicle, March 7, 2018.

[22] U.S. Department of Education.

[23] Laura Meckler, The education of Betsy Devos:  Why her school choice agenda has not advanced, The Washington Post, September 4, 2018.

[24] Gail Collins, The Bane That is Betsy Devos, The New York Times, August 17, 2018.

[25] Id.


Why are men – and boys – making decisions about women’s bodies?

Photo by Janko Ferlič on Unsplash

The recent episode involving the boys from a Covington, Kentucky high school and a Native American activist has ignored the reason for the boys being in D.C. in the first place.  These high school boys were there to participate in a pro-life march.[1]  Now, wait.  Let that sink in.  These high school boys were there to participate in a pro-life march.  They drove half-way across the country so they could tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies.  Who do they think they are?

Well, they are probably exactly like men across this country who are telling women that if they get pregnant, they have to carry the baby to term.  Women are being attacked on two fronts.

First, abortion rights under Roe v. Wade are being whittled away by state legislatures.  With conservative Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh joining the U.S. Supreme Court, state legislatures feel emboldened to pass more anti-abortion measures.  Several state legislatures are expected to ban abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which can be as early as 18 days after conception.[2]  Other states have enacted bans on abortions of Down’s Syndrome babies.[3]  Another state seeks to include abortion in the state’s definition of felony homicide, which could be punishable by life in prison.[4]  Many of these laws have been challenged in court.[5]

The second area of attack is legislation that subjects mothers to jail time if they cause harm to the fetus – even accidentally.[6]  In fact, at least 38 states and the federal government have these fetal homicide laws.[7]  In those states, a mother who took a drug prescribed by her doctor or who was involved in a car accident and wasn’t wearing a seat belt can be charged with manslaughter if the fetus dies.[8]  In some states, pregnant women have lost the right to consent to surgery or receive treatment for a medical condition.[9]  If you are a woman and become pregnant in one of those states, your body is no longer your own.[10]

And who is leading these efforts?  Men.  In Kentucky, the Senate Majority Leader said that his state challenging Roe v. Wade “would be absolutely the pinnacle of my career in the legislature.”[11]  In Missouri, Florida, and South Carolina, the lawmakers introducing fetal heartbeat bills are men.[12]

Obviously, men cannot get pregnant.  Absent legal process, men also do not have to take responsibility for a baby they fathered.  Even after proving paternity in court, men can disappear and refuse to support that child.  Yet men are telling women that they have to carry these babies to term.  And in 38 jurisdictions, these women have to do so carefully – or they may serve time in jail.

Whether you support abortion or not, it is women who should be making these decisions – not men whose lives proceed uninterrupted by pregnancy and childbirth.  And certainly not high school boys who know little or nothing about women’s reproductive issues.

In short, I am not willing to listen to a grown man – let alone a high school boy — tell me how to live my life.  Are you?


[1] Michelle Boorstein, Kentucky bishop apologizes to Covington Catholic students, says he expects their exoneration, The Washington Post, January 25, 2019.

[2] David Crary, Battles expected in many states over abortion-related bills, Chicago Tribune, January 18, 2019; Heather Shumaker, Dear State Legislatures:  Stop Advancing Unconstitutional Abortion Bans, National Women’s Law Center, May 14, 2018; Micaiah Bilger, South Carolina Bill Would Ban Abortions After an Unborn Baby’s Heartbeat Begins,, January 11, 2019.

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Id.

[6] Editorial Board, A Woman’s Rights, December 28, 2018.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] David Crary, Battles expected in many states over abortion-related bills, Chicago Tribune, January 18, 2019.

[12] Samuel King, Missouri to Consider ‘Fetal Heartbeat’ Abortion Restriction That’s Been Struck Down Elsewhere, KCUR, January 24, 2019; Micaiah Bilger, South Carolina Bill Would Ban Abortions After an Unborn Baby’s Heartbeat Begins,, January 11, 2019; Danielle Garrand, Florida bill would ban abortions if fetal heartbeat detected, CBS News, January 22, 2019.

Don’t put up with another shutdown!

Photo by Evan Wise on Unsplash

We Americans have permitted our government to behave this way.  The shutdown may be over for now, but the border wall battle rages on with another showdown coming in three weeks.  We tolerated forcing 800,000 federal employees to live without a paycheck.  We consented to the drag on our economy.  We accepted the long TSA lines.  But we don’t have to.  And we shouldn’t.  This is our country and our government.

But many people are tired.  They are tired of the lies and the inaction and the blaming and the bickering coming out of Washington.  Some I know have simply stopped watching the news.  They just can’t take it anymore.

Others are waiting to see what happens next.  So America waits, either out of exhaustion or wariness.  And nothing changes.

Unlike a toddler throwing a temper tantrum, ignoring the President is unlikely to end his bad behavior.  He is more likely to behave like a kid who doesn’t get caught stealing cookies from the cookie jar – he’ll keep ruining his dinner and move on to the cash in your bureau drawer.  And like children bickering in the back seat, Congress, too, will continue its contentious ways if we don’t threaten to “come back there” by voting for someone else in the next election.

Urging the need for a border wall, President Trump calls the immigrants “a humanitarian crisis . . . on our Southern border” and an “invasion” that is “bad and dangerous . . . for our ENTIRE COUNTRY.”[1]

But a Texas Congressman with a district along the border calls that a “myth” and the border wall “a third-century solution to a 21st-century problem.”[2]  Republican Will Hurd offers a common-sense approach to address the problems of drugs and immigrants entering this country illegally.  He proposes four solutions: [3]

  1. Erect a barrier only where cities in America and Mexico butt up against each other at the border, like El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.
  2. Increase “security at points of entry, where the bulk of illegal drugs come into the U.S.;”
  3. Improve “technology along the border to create a ‘smart fence;’” and
  4. Develop a “Marshall Plan for Central America” to improve life there so migrants will stay in their own countries.

The only thing left out of this plan is the majority of immigrants in this country — those who overstay their visas.  So we need to provide additional funding for their apprehension as well.

Let’s all get on board with this Republican and end this shutdown permanently by doing something about border security that will make a difference, not a monument.  Reach out to your representatives in Congress – by phone, email, or postcard — and let them know what makes sense to you.

[1] Rebecca Morin, Trump warns of invasion as he tried to pitch border crisis on the border,” Politico, January 11, 2019.

[2] William Cummings, Texas Republican Rep. Will Hurd calls Trump border crisis “a myth,” USA Today, January 20, 2019.

[3] Id.

Most illegal immigrants would love a border wall

man at airport
Photo by JESHOOTS.COM on Unsplash

Since 2007, more than twice the number of immigrants overstay their visas than cross the border.[1]  Of those coming across the border, 18% are seeking asylum.[2]  So, illegal immigrants crossing the border number only 218,820 per year with over 700,000 overstaying their visas. [3]

The Department of State would be the agency to deport those illegal immigrants.[4]  But no one is talking about increasing their funding.  In fact, no one is talking about visa overstays at all.

So these illegal immigrants have to be thrilled.  They are safe from deportation.  And they didn’t have to trek miles to the border and be separated from their children.  Life is easy for them and will likely remain so.

[1] Carmin Chappell, Most illegal immigration doesn’t come through the Mexican border where Trump wants to build his wall, CNBC, January 8, 2019.

[2] Id.

[3] Id.

[4] Richard Gonzales, For 7th Consecutive Year, Visa Overstays Exceeded Illegal Border Crossings, npr, January16, 2019.