As misguided politicians and regulators continue to target short-term lenders, which provide American…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: Sure Enough, Credit Card Balances Are Exploding

As misguided politicians and regulators continue to target short-term lenders, which provide American consumers with vital financial lifelines when the only alternatives are skipping payments, bouncing checks, running up credit card debts or even going to dangerous loansharks, we've consistently noted how short-term lenders' role becomes increasingly important as the U.S. economy deteriorates and credit card reliance skyrockets.  Sure enough, the New York Fed numbers provide an alarming illustration:

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="546"] Credit Card Debt Skyrocketing[/caption]

All the more reason to protect consumers' access to legal, reliant, efficient short-term lending rather than irrationally target it.…[more]

December 05, 2022 • 02:38 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's Courtroom Legal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts
D.C. Feels Sting of Biden Border Policy Print
By Byron York
Wednesday, July 27 2022
The massive influx of illegal border crossers is a problem for all of the country, not just the areas closest to the border.

Recently, this column focused on the Biden administration's practice of allowing illegal border crossers to stay in the United States. Documents made public as a result of a lawsuit over border policy revealed just how many illegal crossers the administration has admitted into the country.

The documents showed that 1,049,532 illegal border crossers were allowed to stay in the U.S. between Inauguration Day 2021, the day Joe Biden became president, and May 2022. That is greater than the population of Wyoming, of Vermont, of Alaska, of North Dakota, of South Dakota and of President Biden's home state of Delaware.

The real number is even higher, if one counts the so-called got-aways, who crossed the border illegally and eluded the Border Patrol. The number also does not include 190,053 unaccompanied minors who were allowed to stay. Put them all together, and Biden has allowed as many as 2 million illegal border crossers to stay in the country they entered unlawfully  and that's in less than two years in office.

Many in the president's party are happy with what is going on. Remember that the 2020 Democratic presidential primary contest was essentially a bidding war in which each candidate proposed progressively more permissive border policies. Biden is making good on his promises.

But now Biden's policies are becoming a painful problem in some Democratic strongholds far from the border. Those areas are getting a first-hand feel for conditions on the border  and they don't like it.

In April, the Biden administration announced it would let even more illegal border crossers stay in the country by rescinding the Trump-era regulation that allowed authorities to cite the need to stop the spread of COVID as a reason to turn migrants away. In response, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, whose state has borne a tremendous burden as a result of Biden's policies, announced that he would begin sending busloads of migrants to Washington, D.C. Then, Abbott said, the Biden administration "will be able to more immediately address the needs of the people that they are allowing to come across our border."

On April 13, the first bus arrived. Then, in May, Arizona began sending migrants, too. "With Arizona community resources under all-time demand, and little action or assistance from the federal government, individuals who entered Arizona seeking asylum have the opportunity to voluntarily be transported to Washington, D.C.," said Arizona Republican Gov. Doug Ducey.

The buses kept coming. "In the last few weeks the number of buses arriving a day has increased from two to four, sometimes five, sometimes late at night," the Washington Post reported recently, "exhausting donations and exceeding the ability of volunteers and mutual aid networks in the city to respond."

That sounds a bit like the situation in Texas, doesn't it? The flow of migrants, encouraged by the Biden administration and supported by many Democrats around the country, has taxed the resources of border states. What Abbott and Ducey have done, by sending migrants to Washington  which is, after all, a sanctuary city  is spread the burden around.

At first, local officials, Democrats all, did not react publicly. But now, with more arriving every day, Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser is beginning to complain.

Bowser has claimed, without evidence, that Texas and Arizona have "tricked" migrants into boarding buses to Washington. (Both Abbott and Ducey have made clear that getting on a bus is entirely voluntary.) Bowser has said that local taxpayers in Washington "should not pick up the tab" for the cost of dealing with the migrant surge. And she is looking to the federal government for help. 

"We have for sure called on the federal government to work across state lines to prevent people from really being tricked into getting on buses," Bowser said on CBS recently. "We think they're largely asylum-seekers who are going to final destinations that are not Washington, D.C. I worked with the White House to make sure that FEMA provided a grant to a local organization that is providing services to folks. But I fear they're being tricked into nationwide bus trips when their final destinations are places all over the United States of America."

What Bowser said about Washington, D.C is true of the situation in Texas. For many migrants, Texas is not the final destination. They are hoping to get to destinations that are not on the border. The cost of their care has to be paid by somebody. It is a problem thrust on Texas and Arizona and other border areas by the Biden administration. And now Abbott and Ducey are pushing back.

Recently, another voice jumped into the argument  New York City Mayor Eric Adams. The city has a right-to-shelter law, meaning officials are required to provide shelter to anyone who needs it. There has been a spike recently in people staying in the city's shelters, with the system coming under tremendous strain. The mayor is blaming the situation on the border. "Adams said the asylum-seekers are arriving from Latin America and other regions, and in some instances, being sent in on buses by the federal government and the state governments of Texas and Arizona," Politico reported.

Both Abbott and Ducey said they are not sending migrants to New York (which is also a sanctuary city). "If these Democrat mayors are now that concerned about having migrants in their cities, they should call on President Biden to do his job and secure the border, instead of attacking Texas with baseless political accusations," said a spokeswoman for Abbott.

Whatever the case, neither Mayor Adams nor Mayor Bowser should blame Texas and Arizona. Their real problem is with the president of the United States. The massive influx of illegal border crossers is a problem for all of the country, not just the areas closest to the border. When this argument erupted, Christina Pushaw, who is a spokeswoman for another Republican governor, Florida's Ron DeSantis, tweeted, "If wealthy NYC cannot handle an influx of migrants, what makes you think small working-class Texas border towns can handle it?" Thanks to Abbott and Ducey, more Americans are now asking that question.


 Byron York is chief political correspondent for The Washington Examiner

 COPYRIGHT 2022 BYRON YORK 

Quiz Question   
Which of the following Presidents replaced the traditional candles with electric lights on the White House Christmas tree?
More Questions
Notable Quote   
 
"One of the old saws of censorship apologists is that without a government directing the suppression of free speech, it is not censorship.That is clearly untrue. Many groups like the ACLU stress that 'censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups.'The same figures insist that if, there is not a violation of the First Amendment (which only applies to the government…[more]
 
 
—Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University
— Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University
 
Liberty Poll   

Congress is debating adding $45 billion more than requested to defense spending for 2023. Considering a fragile economy and geopolitical threats, do you support or oppose that increase?