Tag: red states
Why Red States Will Rue Trump's Plan To Deport Undocumented Immigrants

Why Red States Will Rue Trump's Plan To Deport Undocumented Immigrants

Whether immigration played a significant role in Donald Trump’s presidential victory this November, he and his nascent administration have certainly read the election results as a mandate to deliver on his promises of mass deportations.

Yet talk is easier than action, and if carried out, the costs will be disproportionately borne by red states and areas.

Half of all undocumented immigrants in the country live in Florida, Texas, and California, according to data compiled by the American Immigration Council. But while California will put up every legal roadblock and refuse to assist federal authorities in targeting its own undocumented population, Texas and Florida may gleefully participate.

In Florida, 5% of the population is undocumented, or 1.1 million people, and that doesn’t include immigrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Haiti residing under temporary protected status, which will clearly be targeted by the Trump administration.

If emptied out of all undocumented immigrants, Florida would lose $1.8 billion in tax revenue, while Texas would lose nearly $5 billion, while those same immigrants are mostly ineligible for government benefits. That’s free money for the states.

Then there are the economic consequences—if you remove millions of low-wage workers, everything from agriculture, to construction, to industries like hospitality suddenly become dramatically more expensive. Florida’s 2023 anti-immigrant law, which cracked down on businesses hiring undocumented workers, could end up costing the state over $12 billion a year. Crops are rotting in the field, as farms lack the labor for harvest. Roofing companies, swamped with work after hurricane season, lack workers to patch up homes.

And what happens when demand is greater than supply? Trump is going to have a hard time fulfilling promises of lowering prices when his signature policies (deportation and tariffs) are both highly inflationary.

For industries like agriculture and construction, the cost of mass deportations is so high and obvious that it is downright shocking that they would vote as Republican as they did. Nationally, 64 percent of rural voters—heavily dependent on agriculture—voted for Trump.

The numbers are even more stark in counties classified as “farming dependent” by the United States Department of Agriculture. Of the 444 farming-dependent counties, Trump won 433 of them by an average of 78 perccent. The outliers? They were mostly Black-majority farming counties along the Mississippi River in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.

So it’s kind of pathetic watching industry agricultural groups now beg Trump to spare their workers from the very thing they voted for. (These are the same people who are also freaked out about tariffs and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.)

There are electoral ramifications as well. Undocumented immigrants are counted by the census and are included for purposes of reapportionment, which impacts the Electoral College. Given that California and New York are expected to lose as many as 7-8 seats to Texas and Florida, a massive shift in the undocumented population would certainly affect these projections. If these projections pan out, a Democratic presidential nominee will need more than just the swing states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin to win the White House (unlike today).

The combination of expulsions, self-deportations (as immigrants head back home on their own), and migratory shifts from unsafe red states to sanctuary blue states could very well dramatically reshape the reapportionment math. It will bear watching if Trump disproportionately targets blue states for this very reason, despite the aggressively anti-immigrant governors in Florida and Texas, happy to lend the feds a helpful hand.

Trump’s biggest challenge, of course, is reality. How do you deport 12 million undocumented workers? The United States Border Patrol has less than 20,000 agents as of 2022, and just under 17,000 of those actually patrolling the border.

Where are they going to get the manpower to raid Los Angeles, Houston, Omaha, and Peoria in any appreciable numbers? Some estimates place the cost of deportations at hundreds of billions of dollars per year.

Without state support, the feds will have limited options. “It’s not going to be successful, as long as we have sanctuary cities and states that refuse to allow local and state police departments to work with ICE,” former Trump U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner Mark Morgan told Stateline.

So what is the benefit of a plan that is horrifically expensive, drives prices up for everyone, disproportionately harms rural America and red states, and may actually give blue states a population boost ahead of the 2030 census?

There is a very real chance that Trump’s mass deportation effort accounts to little more than typical Trump bluster and some high-profile raids. But if Texas and Florida lean in hard to help out in their own states, self-deportation back to their homelands and internal migration to safer blue states may very well end up backfiring on Republicans with the only thing they truly care about—their ability to wield power.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Maternal And Infant Mortality Are Highest In 'Pro-Life' Red States

Maternal And Infant Mortality Are Highest In 'Pro-Life' Red States

Valuing life is the official reason for abortion bans, but on measure after measure, the states banning abortion show just how little they really value life.

After Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves claimed that his state’s successful battle to overturn Roe v. Wade was “always about creating a culture of life,” we took a close look at Mississippi: Highest infant mortality rate. Highest homicide rate. Highest firearm mortality rate. Lowest life expectancy at birth.

But it’s not just Mississippi. The New York Times has a look at a range of ways states can support children and mothers, and states that are banning abortion come out worse on just about all of them than do states that are not likely to ban abortion.

Outcomes on which the 24 current or likely abortion ban states are worse than the 20 states unlikely to ban abortion:

  • The infant mortality rate in states banning or expected to soon ban abortion is 6.3 per 1,000 births. In states that aren’t going to ban abortion, it’s 4.7 per 1,000.
  • The maternal mortality rate in the ban states is 25.2 per 1,000, compared with 15 per 1,000 in states that won’t ban abortion.
  • 18.5 percent of children live in poverty in the ban states, compared with 14.8 percent in the no-ban states.
  • 15.7 percent of women of reproductive age are uninsured in the ban states, compared with nine percent in the no-ban states.
  • It’s 7.2 percent to 3.6 percent for uninsured children—that’s double.
  • 8.8 percent of babies in the ban states are born with low birth weights, compared with 7.7 percent in the no-ban states.
  • There are 21.2 births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19 in abortion ban states, compared with 12.1 per 1,000 in no-ban states.

Alongside those outcomes are some striking policy differences: Not one of the states banning abortion has paid family leave. Eleven states that won’t be banning abortion have paid family leave. Every single one of the latter has expanded Medicaid, while just 15 of the 24 abortion ban states have done so. All but one of the no-ban states have minimum wages above the federal level of $7.25 an hour, while just eight of the ban states do. Both groups of states include six that have universal pre-K, though that’s a larger percentage of the no-ban states.

None of the state lawmakers who have pushed through and supported abortion bans can seriously claim that their states’ governance reflects a priority on life. The numbers are clear.

Even if every one of these states had 100 percent insurance rates and the lowest infant mortality and maternal mortality in the world, forcing people to carry pregnancies and give birth against their will would be a moral outrage. But there really should be a rule that anytime a lawmaker is quoted opposing abortion, they should be identified with the infant and maternal mortality rates of their states and with any votes they have made to support or oppose things like expanding health care or establishing paid family leave or reducing child poverty.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

What’s So Bad About ‘Coastal Elites’?

What’s So Bad About ‘Coastal Elites’?

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

There was a time when "coastal" was an innocent geographical adjective, as in "coastal islands" or "coastal flooding." It referred to events and places located on large bodies of saltwater. But somewhere along the way, "coastal" gained a sinister, shameful connotation.

Populists and pseudo-populists have long fulminated against elites. But these days, the only thing worse than being one of the elite is being one of the "coastal elite."

Read NowShow less
Arkansas State Capitol in Little Rock

How That ‘Blue State Bailout’ Is Rescuing The Reddest States

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

Since May 10, the federal government has dispersed $105 billion of the $350 billion included in the American Rescue Plan to state and local governments. The Treasury Department says 1,500 entities have received that funding, the funding Sen. Mitch McConnell adamantly opposed for the entirety of the pandemic, calling it a "blue state bailout."

"This state and local aid program is going to provide transformative funding to communities across the country, and our Treasury team is focused on getting relief to these communities as quickly as possible," Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in a statement announcing the progress of the funding thus far. "In the past 11 days, almost a third of the funding has gone out the door, and I'm hopeful communities will be able to rehire teachers and help businesses re-open much sooner than otherwise."

Tens of thousands of state, local, territorial, and tribal governments can request funding. The Treasury Department details the uses of the relief: "Support urgent COVID-19 response efforts to continue to decrease spread of the virus and bring the pandemic under control; Replace lost revenue for eligible state, local, territorial, and Tribal governments to strengthen support for vital public services and help retain jobs; Support immediate economic stabilization for households and businesses; Address systemic public health and economic challenges that have contributed to the inequal impact of the pandemic."

Let's check in on how that "blue state bailout" funding is going so far. Arkansas' Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson has $1.57 billion for the state, and at the Arkansas American Rescue Plan Steering Committee Wednesday said that they could do a lot with it, from vaccine distribution to expanding broadband. "It is unique in history. It's a unique opportunity to improve the infrastructure in our state from broadband to health care to cybersecurity, from IT to water projects," Hutchinson said. Arkansas received a total of $5 billion, with the remaining $3.5 billion going to local governments and other projects.

"We need all the help we can get. It wasn't until vaccines rolled out that we rounded the corner. I think money allocated for vaccines, not just vaccines, but the education of the public about the safety of the vaccines, is essential to continuing to solve what has been a really long year-plus problem," Rogers, Arkansas Fire Chief Tom Jenkins, a COVID-19 response force member, said. The steering committee chair, Larry Walther, agreed: "COVID response, decreasing the spread of the virus, getting the pandemic under control, vaccinations, contact tracing, those sort of the things are the number one," Walther said.

This week, Muncie, Indiana, Mayor Dan Ridenour, a Republican, announced the city's preliminary plans for using the first tranche of the $32 million his city is getting. Just over $2.7 million will help the city overcome a budget shortfall; another $2 million will help the city's restaurants recover; $2 million each will help small businesses and nonprofit organizations; and over $4 million will go to hotels. There's also funding for substance abuse and behavioral health treatment, public art, and neighborhood assistance.

In another not-blue state, Iowa, "both the city of Des Moines and Polk County are receiving nearly $100 million in aid, the most of any Iowa city or county. Twelve Iowa cities are receiving aid, and all 99 counties are receiving at least $600,000." That means each county is getting about $200 per resident, based on 2019 census data. The state as a whole is getting $1.48 billion in American Rescue Plan money.

Idaho is going to get $1.1 billion, and state officials have said it will be used to "substantially bolster the state's water, sewer and broadband infrastructure." Alex Adams, Republican Gov. Brad Little's budget chief, touted the five-year window for completing projects with the funding. "That's a huge benefit for a rural state like ours where it's going to take years for some of these large sewer, water and broadband projects to come to fruition," Adams said. Idaho's largest cities in the state are getting a total of $124 million, smaller cities $108 million, and counties another $314 million.

McConnell's home state of Kentucky is getting $2.183 billion. "Our economy is surging and strong," Gov. Andy Beshear (a Democrat) said. "We are in a strong position to sprint out of this pandemic with continued positive economic indicators and with this funding that will create jobs, momentum and a better quality of life in every corner of the commonwealth." The state had already planned to use "use 1.3 million to boost the state's economy, expanding broadband, delivering clean drinking water and building new schools," and is "expected to create more than 14,500 new jobs." The state's general fund will be shored up.

The Tennessee Comptroller, Jason Mumpower, talked to one county's leaders this week to tout the projects available with the funding. "This could include helping workers, households, small businesses, nonprofits and impacted industries, such as tourism, travel and hospitality industry. Yes. You can use this money to make grants to individuals and small businesses," Mumpower said. "We look out across the landscape of Tennessee on a daily basis and think, 'Where does the greatest financial peril lie?' It lies in water and sewer. It lies underground," Mumpower told the Wilson county officials, who are expecting $28 million in relief funds.

All these Republican states getting all that funding passed solely by Democrats in the Senate, benefitting from the commitment to good governance -- and acting like they're goddamned adults like Democrats continue to model.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World