text:
12 months ago Grades
Grades: San Antonio Spurs at Los Angeles Lakers – Game #50
Bryn Forbes and the Spurs got dismantled by the Lakers (Photo via Twitter)
By LJ Ellis
The San Antonio Spurs faced a difficult back-to-back against the Los Angeles Lakers, the top team in the Western Conference standings. While the Spurs were able to keep the game competitive at times, it became a laugher in the fourth quarter as the Lakers galloped to a 129-102 victory. The win improved L.A. to 38-11, while the Spurs dropped to 22-28.
Neither team came out with much energy. By the end of a low-scoring first quarter, the Lakers had a 21-19 advantage. Los Angeles started revving up in the second quarter and rolled to a double-digit lead. They kept a ten-point cushion going into halftime, 51-41.
In the third, the Lakers went up by as many as 19 points before the Spurs got going enough to cut their deficit to nine points, 81-72. Unfortunately, by the end of the third period, the Lakers had fattened their lead back to 13 points, 87-74.
Patty Mills hit a three-pointer to begin the fourth quarter to pull the Spurs within ten points. But that's when LeBron James went nuclear. He hit five three-pointers within the next four minutes. When the fireworks stopped popping, the Lakers had a 108-87 lead with 8:31 remaining and the game was essentially over.
All in all, the Spurs didn't play horribly. This game was more a matter of the Lakers being bigger, longer and more talented. Add in a hot shooting night from the best all-around player in NBA history and the good guys never really had a legitimate chance to compete, especially on the second night of a back-to-back.
Spurs at Lakers – Final Grades
After a stellar game against the Los Angeles Clippers, LaMarcus Aldridge came crashing down to Hollywood. In the first half against the Lakers, Aldridge was scoreless and had such a miniscule amount of energy that I questioned at times whether he was fully conscious. He showed a few signs of life after halftime but it was too little, too late. The best work Aldridge did all night was defensively against Anthony Davis — but even that wasn't overly impressive.
Grade: D
Offensively, I was pleased with DeMar DeRozan. He had a couple questionable shots and was needlessly sloppy at times but in general he did what the Spurs needed him to do. When DeRozan wasn't scoring at the rim, he was taking open shots or finding open teammates. Defensively, he was strong on the boards and was decently physical. Unfortunately, the Lakers were too athletic and too fast for DeRozan's deceptively slow feet to hang with in any kind of open space.
Dejounte Murray wasn't exactly good but he did okay. He kept mistakes to a minimum on both ends of the court. I wouldn't say he ran the offense well but he was at least avoiding the stagnation that has mired his recent play. He shot well but wasn't creating shots for teammates. Net net, it was a mixed bag.
Bryn Forbes
Better. Bryn Forbes delivered from three-point land and his shot-selection was fine. He passed the rock okay, too. Defensively, while the Lakers drove over him like a worn down speed bump at times, give Forbes credit for fighting back enough to cause some turnovers. We don't usually see that level of chutzpah from him so it's worth a few golf claps.
Trey Lyles
That … wasn't pretty. Trey Lyles hit a three-pointer early and that was about the extent of his positive contributions. He was extremely soft in the paint on both sides of the court. (Part of Lyles' problem seems to be that he's a poor leaper from a standstill position, so maybe what appears to be softness is just a lack of athleticism.) His dependable rebounding ability was nowhere to be found. Lyles didn't provide any extras like perimeter defense or playmaking.
Derrick White
Where has Derrick White's ability to score the ball gone? After a five-game stretch in which he averaged 15.0 points and 5.6 assists on 48.0% shooting from the field and 44.4% shooting on threes, White has followed that up with a five-game stretch with averages of 6.2 points and 3.2 assists on 38.7% shooting from the floor and 23.1% shooting from deep. Against the Lakers, he was inept scoring-wise and only decent passing-wise. I thought White was pretty good defensively but the Spurs desperately need more out of him on the other side of the court.
Patty Mills
Patty Mills was forced into taking some difficult shots early on (mostly late in the shot clock) — and that appeared to get him completely out of rhythm and he was never able to recover. Mills hit only one of his eight attempts and his lack of crispness extended into other areas of his game, specifically on defense and when handling the ball.
Grade: D+
Rudy Gay had four fouls in 16 minutes. Outside of that hacking, Gay didn't do much other than miss shots. The one shot he made? A three-pointer he accidentally banked in. To say Gay is in a funk offensively would be an understatement. Add in his slower play on defense and it's clear to see why Gay isn't playing more minutes.
Lonnie Walker IV
The good: Lonnie Walker IV had double figures for the first time since the win over the Boston Celtics almost a month ago. He sank both of his three-pointers and is now shooting 42.1% from three-point land on the season. Walker had a couple good drives to the hoop. The bad: Walker's intensity on defense wasn't there. When the LeBron James and the Lakers caught on fire from deep in the fourth quarter, a lot of that was due to Walker giving up too much room. Sure, the Spurs have always allowed James to shoot threes but Walker took that invitation to an extreme. On offense, Walker had a few plays he should have finished off but simply failed to do so.
Grade: C-
In the last game before the NBA trade deadline, did Marco Belinelli catch the eye of a team that needs a shooter? It's possible, as he was 4-for-5 from the field and 3-for-3 from three-point territory. If the Spurs are hoping to trade him, they have to be thrilled with tonight's shooting display.
Jakob Poeltl
This is the second time this season that Jakob Poeltl has struggled mightily against the Lakers in general and Dwight Howard specifically. The Lakers are strong and athletic and Poeltl hasn't responded well. I was also unimpressed by his defense, especially since he's been playing so well on that end. Poeltl was pretty good on offense but this is a game he'll quickly want to forget.
Chimezie Metu
Chimezie Metu's mobility and the lightness of his feet might be his two best tools right now.
Grade: Inc.
Keldon Johnson
It looks like Keldon Johnson has been lifting weights in Austin. He was already a big body when he was drafted. Now he looks even bigger.
I don't think Pop could have pushed any magical buttons on this night. More Poeltl, less Aldridge? More Walker? Those might have helped — but probably not much to make a noticeable difference. The Spurs played decently at times this game and their defense as a whole was working pretty well until James went loco.
Up Next for the Spurs
Well, first it's the trade deadline. With the Spurs now three games out of the playoff picture, will they become sellers? We'll soon find out. A few hours after the trade deadline, the Spurs have a date with the Portland Trail Blazers — another challenge in this menacing Rodeo Road Trip.
Preview and Prediction: San Antonio Spurs at Los Angeles Lakers
Preview and Prediction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Los Angeles Lakers
Game Preview and Prediction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Los Angeles Lakers
Preview and Prediction: San Antonio Spurs at Los Angeles Clippers
Game Preview: San Antonio Spurs vs. Washington Wizards
What grade do you give the Spurs for drafting Devin Vassell and Tre Jones?
© 2021 Copyright SpursTalk


text:
Carlton Fairweather: Sunderland have surprised people
By Jo CurrieBBC Sport
Last updated on 7 May 20157 May 2015 .From the section Women's Football
Manager Carlton Fairweather says Sunderland Ladies have been WSL1's "surprise package" this season
Sunderland Ladies manager Carlton Fairweather says his side have surprised people with their impressive start to the season.
The Black Cats are enjoying their first campaign in Women's Super League One after gaining promotion last year.
They are currently fifth in the table, with six points from their opening five matches.
"You can understand why people have looked at us as a surprise package," Fairweather told BBC Sport.
"The first part of the season has gone well but we've still got to keep our feet firmly on the ground."
Sunderland announced their arrival in WSL 1 by beating defending champions Liverpool 2-1 in the season opener away from home.
They also beat bottom side Bristol Academy but Fairweather insists the club are not getting carried away.
"The main objective for us is to make sure that we stay up.
"We're still looking behind us, you can't take anything for granted."
Next up for the North East outfit is a home tie with strugglers Birmingham this weekend and Fairweather says winning that game could be a big step towards securing top-flight football next year.
"If we can get something out of Saturday's game, that'll probably put a different spin on it.
"It gives you that chance of being safe."
Victory in that match will see Sunderland finish the first half of their campaign with nine points before the league stops for a nine-week international break.
Fairweather says he would have happily accepted that scenario at the start of the season.
"Yes I would, without a shadow of a doubt. You look at last season and Everton got relegated on four points."
Sunderland are expected to have midfielder Rachel Furness back for the match against Birmingham, after she missed the last two games with groin and back problems.
However, they will be without captain Steph Bannon, who has been ruled out after damaging right arm ligaments.
Australian Open: Nadal breaks Khachanov early in fourth set - radio & text
Premier League build-up and transfers latest

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


From WisdomTree: Last week's "Behind the Markets" podcast highlighted two of the more beaten-down regions on a pure asset price and valuation basis today: Japan and emerging markets.
The overlap between the two is that Japan, in local currency terms, trades with volatility levels not so different than standard emerging market countries, with a large beta to global growth prospects given two-thirds of the country's profits come from global markets. Edward Cole, portfolio manager at Man GLG, and Jesper Koll, CEO of WisdomTree Japan, were on the show to discuss these topics.
Yes, emerging markets have a beta to global equities and growth greater than 1 such that they are riskier, but that is reflected in their price–and they have an 11 to 12 price/earnings ratio and therefore a 9% earnings yield, which means you are paid for taking those risks compared with, say, the U.S. markets and developed markets at higher prices.
Cole believes it would be a struggle to find a market more inefficient than the China A-shares market–which is why he believes it is such a ripe source of opportunity. But in these emerging markets when panic sets in, there is no regard for valuations or fundamental prospects–there is just panic and investors fleeing.
In exploring the reasons China has sold off–Cole pointed out that Xi Jinping, after being confirmed essentially as president for life, has started some deleveraging policies, and that has been reflected in both a slowdown in growth characteristics and pressure on cyclical company earnings. There are further fears that the Chinese state is going to creep further into the affairs of companies. And, of course, there are also the trade war fears.
Case for Japan Today: Koll believes the case for Japan is robust earnings and shareholder value driven by better corporate governance structures. Japan used to have large conglomerate groups, and information about them was very limited.. Twenty years ago, cross-shareholding was 50% of market capitalization, but today it is only 4% of total market cap. This has made managers much more capitalistic. Further, even just five years ago, the average age of an executive director in listed Japan was 72, but today it is 52. This is a radical change for management that is not tied into the old keiretsu management structures, and we see record levels of dividend payouts with robust buybacks.
Japan and China Coming Together: At the political level, there are developments with China and Japan coming together, and they are starting to do joint bidding for upcoming infrastructure projects, leveraging each of their strengths. There is also the first bilateral summit with Xi and Japan's Shinzo Abe–and Koll believes there are more opportunities to collaborate and not just compete with each other.
The WisdomTree Emerging Markets Eqty Incm Fd (DEM) was unchanged in premarket trading Friday. Year-to-date, DEM has declined -11.62%, versus a 1.61% rise in the benchmark S&P 500 index during the same period.


text:
Expanding Government: Beware of the Senate's Immense, Obamacare-Style Immigration Bill
Report Immigration
May 12, 2014 24 min read Download Report
David Inserra
Policy Analyst for Homeland Security and Cyber Policy
David Inserra specializes in homeland security issues, including cyber and immigration policy as well as critical infrastructure.
The Senate's latest effort at comprehensive immigration reform was introduced by the bipartisan Gang of Eight in April 2013, and passed the Senate that June.[1] Titled the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (S. 744), it follows the same broad course as other reform bills that have failed over the past eight years, offering promises of increased border security and interior enforcement in exchange for a "pathway to citizenship" for illegal immigrants. This is not the last time the U.S. will see this type of immigration bill. Many in the House of Representatives have toyed with, and are still considering endorsing, this approach—and even if Congress passes no legislation this year, Americans can expect this approach to be revived in 2015 by the new Congress.
Like many other comprehensive legislative efforts to correct systems that are characterized as broken, S. 744 would greatly increase the size and expense of the federal workforce. And, like other such efforts, it makes numerous unlikely assumptions about the capability and capacity of government agencies to execute the tasks assigned by the bill. Reminiscent of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, the Senate's insistence on one comprehensive solution has resulted in a bill so large and complex that a variety of untested policies and procedures hidden in its depths have not been subject to public examination and debate. As is now evident with the health care system under Obamacare, untested and undebated policies can have significant negative effects, and the immigration system is no exception.
Given the clear and ongoing failure of Obamacare's top-down, government-mandated approach, all policymakers should recognize that S. 744, or any bill that follows this big-government approach, is destined to harm the U.S. far more than it could possibly help. Several important areas of S. 744 that create unfunded, poorly designed, pork-laden, government-expanding, or overly bureaucratic programs deserve attention:
Border security,
Enforcement of immigration laws,
Visa reform,
Kickbacks for immigration advocates,
Massive new workloads and responsibilities for bureaucrats,
Abuse of due-process provisions, and
The total fiscal cost of this approach to taxpayers.
Rather than continuing Washington's reliance on massive, poorly understood, and bureaucratic pieces of legislation, the U.S. should pursue real step-by-step reforms that address the underlying problems of the U.S.'s immigration woes.[2] By starting with pieces that restore integrity and efficiency to the process, the U.S. immigration system can once again serve the U.S. economy and society.
Throwing Money at the Border
The Senate devotes $30 billion over 10 years to the hiring of "at least 19,200 additional trained full-time active duty U.S. Border Patrol agents" to work the border with Mexico, essentially doubling the number of border agents.[3] The bill places a future requirement of no fewer than 38,405 agents on the southern border by 2024, which is twice the number of agents on the southwest border now.[4] When S. 744's funding expires, the discretionary costs for this workforce "are projected to total between $75 billion and $80 billion over the 2024–2033 period, about $55 billion more than under the committee-approved bill," according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).[5]
Critically, it is unlikely that this expensive doubling of the agents on the southern border is necessary or desired by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). When testifying about immigration reform on February 13, and on the bill itself on April 23, 2013, then-DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano did not request any significant increases in border patrol agents, but instead focused on the operational benefits that surveillance technologies could offer the Department.[6] It was only on June 20, when Senators Bob Corker (R–TN) and John Hoeven (R–ND) sought to add "momentum" to S. 744 by offering a 114-page amendment featuring $38 billion in border-security spending (which Senator Corker acknowledged as "almost overkill") that this remarkable expansion of the federal workforce gained traction in the Senate.[7] Current Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson may feel the same way: While he recently pledged his support for S. 744 and applauded the doubling of the Border Patrol in the late 2000s, he said nothing about the need to do it again.[8]
Perhaps the Border Patrol could use more agents, given that it apprehends about 1,000 illegal border crossers each day of the year, and may be catching less than half of the illegal flow.[9] But the point remains that the Senate's doubling of the Border Patrol does not appear synchronized with DHS's actual operational needs. Instead of giving the Border Patrol what it says it needs—surveillance and monitoring technology—the ramping up of Border Patrol agent numbers seems to have been a political red herring to disguise the bill as strong on border security. In any event, having additional agents will not do much good in the face of an Administration unwilling to enforce existing immigration laws and deport those who are caught by the Border Patrol trying to cross into the U.S. illegally.
In addition to the questionable increase in Border Patrol agents, the Senate bill includes various grant programs and other new bureaucracies to deal with border issues. One such program, which may sound good on paper but does not work well in practice, would provide individuals who reside or work in the southwest border region and who are "at greater risk of border violence" due to lack of cell phone coverage with free GPS-equipped satellite phones and service plans.[10] Commercial satellite phone units can cost between $600 and $1,700 apiece, and airtime is markedly expensive (outgoing calls can average $0.85 a minute; inbound calls $10 a minute).[11] However, Congress has set no limit on the number of people who would qualify for these grants, and provided little insight on how the program would be managed. It is reasonable to assume that the program will be as subject to fraud as are subsidized phone services, which the Government Accountability Office has been complaining about for nearly a decade.[12]
The Senate bill would also create plenty of new border security bureaucracies. For one, S. 744 would create a new Southern Border Security Commission, made up of 11 appointees "noted for their knowledge and experience in the field of border security" to advise the President, Congress, and DHS on the best means of achieving effective control of the border.[13] The commission will convene public hearings and issue what appears to be a single report in its 10 years of planned existence.[14] Like many a blue ribbon commission before it, this group may find its efforts ignored in the mix of operations, constrained budgets, and political discourse.
Similarly, S. 744 would reward pro-amnesty activists with new seats at the table. S. 744 would institute a 33-member Department of Homeland Security Border Oversight Task Force that would include civil rights advocates, tribal leaders, and representatives from "faith communities" and "higher education" to "make recommendations regarding immigration and border enforcement policies…that take into consideration their impact on border and tribal communities." The task force would "recommend ways in which the Border Communities Liaison Offices [at Customs and Border Protection] can strengthen relations and collaboration between communities in the border regions" and federal authorities, focusing on "due process, civil, and human rights of border residents, visitors and migrants." The task force would hold hearings, take testimony under oath, demand data, and make findings and recommendations that DHS must respond to, but not necessarily implement, and issue a report to the President, Congress, and the Homeland Security Secretary before disbanding.[15] It is virtually guaranteed that this task force would be dominated by pro-amnesty, anti-enforcement activists.
Ignoring the Central Problem: Ignoring Immigration Laws
The Senate bill is ultimately a sleight of hand that presents border security as the main immigration problem and then offers over-the-top, costly, and bureaucratic solutions to that problem. However, the bill hides and largely ignores a far more serious problem—the consistent flouting and unravelling of the U.S.'s immigration laws by executive fiat. According to Chris Crane, president of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Council,
ICE officers are being ordered by political appointees to ignore the law. Violent criminal aliens are released every day from jails back into American communities. ICE officers face disciplinary action for engaging in routine law enforcement actions. We are barred from enforcing large sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act, even when public safety is at risk. Officer morale is devastated.[16]
While this is not an entirely new phenomenon, it has been taken to new extremes by President Obama, who has issued multiple policy directives to cease enforcing immigration law against certain classes of unlawful immigrants. Most notable was the June 15, 2012, memorandum from DHS, ordering immigration officials to use their "prosecutorial discretion" to refrain from undertaking legal action against DREAMers—immigrants who were brought to the U.S. before age 16. An act of pure lawlessness, this occurred after Congress refused to pass the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act.
The memorandum redefines what "discretion" means in the immigration enforcement context. Instead of meaning commonsense use of DHS's authority to respond to exceptions and special cases, prosecutorial discretion under President Obama means that the exception has become the rule. Even worse, this action comes less than a year after President Obama told immigration activists, "The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting, I promise you, not just on immigration reform. But that's not how our system works. That's not how our democracy functions."[17] President Obama was right—ignoring laws that one has sworn to execute faithfully is not how the U.S. republic functions.
In addition to making federal immigration officials stand down from enforcing the law, President Obama has consistently sought to undermine state and local efforts to enforce existing law. Indeed, the federal government took the State of Arizona to court for passing a law, S.B. 1070, with provisions that simply mirror federal immigration law but do not meet the Obama Administration's "enforcement priorities."[18] Despite the federal government's protestations, the heart of the law, which allowed Arizona law enforcement officials to check the immigration status of individuals who are arrested, stopped, or detained should they have "reasonable suspicion" that they are here illegally, was upheld unanimously by the Supreme Court.[19]
Furthermore, President Obama has repeatedly tried to cut funding for the 287(g) program, which trains and deputizes state and local law enforcement officers to assist ICE agents in enforcing federal immigration law.[20] Not only do these law enforcement officers know their communities better than the ICE agents possibly can, there are one million of them scattered across the U.S., making them a knowledgeable, well-distributed, and cost-efficient force multiplier for ICE's limited force. Instead of S. 744's massive and costly new bureaucracies and policies, the U.S. needs more programs like 287(g), not fewer.
The President's consistent unravelling of U.S. immigration law is the true problem in the U.S. immigration system. But the Senate bill has precious little to say about stopping this travesty. Given the way current law is ignored, there is nothing stopping this or future Administrations from sweeping away the requirements for enforcement in the Senate bill, or any of the House bills, by executive decision or mere indifference.
Making a Cumbersome Legal Visa System Worse
The Senate bill also fails to fix how the U.S. admits immigrants and non-immigrant workers. In fact the bill manages to make the problem worse in several ways, all while expanding government even further.
Rather than fixing problems in U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Senate bill focuses on rewarding the amnesty-advocacy community. For example, S. 744 rebrands and refocuses the Office of Citizenship within the USCIS.[21] Since 2009, the USCIS has spent $33 million on immigrant-servicing organizations to assist 66,000 lawful permanent residents in preparing for citizenship.[22] Now titled the Office of Citizenship and New Americans (OCNA), it would receive $10 million in funding and award $20 million annually in grants to state and local governments and "other entities" to create New Immigrant Councils staffed in part by "nonprofit organizations, including those with legal and advocacy experience working with immigrant communities" to assist integration efforts.[23] Those monies would also flow to a new Initial Entry, Adjustment and Citizenship Assistance Grant Program to help those seeking immigration benefits.[24] The OCNA would in turn be supported by a new public-private partnership known as the United States Citizenship Foundation (USCF), whose council of directors would principally consist of representatives from "national community-based organizations that promote and assist permanent residents with naturalization."[25] The USCF itself may award "grants to eligible public or private nonprofit organizations" that assist new immigrants.[26]
The USCIS would also be the home of another new office created by the bill, the Bureau of Immigration and Labor Market Research. With $20 million in funding and a commissioner appointed by the President, the bureau will designate shortage occupations, calculate annual changes to the numerical limits for nonimmigrant foreign workers, examine unemployment rates, and make recommendations to Congress.[27]
S. 744 also creates a new bureaucracy called the Task Force on New Americans.[28] It will be established by the Homeland Security Secretary, and include nine Cabinet executives and several other Administration leaders, who will focus on education programming, workforce training, health care policy, "community development challenges" and other matters impacting the "lives of new immigrants and receiving communities," ensuring "that Federal programs and policies adequately address such impacts." Among other things, the task force will "suggest changes to Federal programs or policies to address issues of special importance to new immigrants and receiving communities," and help develop new legislation to address those issues.[29] It is hard to believe that the task force, with its wide variety of highly specialized and disparate issues, and lack of identified staff or funding, will be a priority for DHS or anyone else. The Senate, perhaps sensing this, wants task force members to be liaisons to their organizations "to ensure the quality and timeliness of their agency's participation in activities of the Task Force."[30]
In addition to the additional bureaucracy and increased spending in the U.S. immigration and visa system, S. 744 stipulates new rules and regulations that actually make the current difficult system even worse. Specifically, S. 744 makes the critical H-1B visa program essentially unworkable. While it raises the cap on H-1B visas, it requires that employers pay H-1B recipients a government-determined prevailing wage, which is often above the real private-sector pay for such positions, thus making hiring H-1B employees more expensive. Additionally, employers have to prove that they did not pass over "equally qualified" Americans, where the ambiguous definition of "equally qualified" is open to interpretation, thus opening up businesses to costly legal challenges.[31] Employers wanting to use H-1Bs also have to justify any personnel changes with the Department of Labor to ensure that the company is not "displacing" existing employees with H-1Bs. Such requirements strongly discourage the use of H-1B labor, effectively driving away skilled foreign workers.
Regardless, the requirements fit S. 744's faulty model of blindly adding additional bureaucracies, task forces, rules, regulations, and funding as the way to fix the U.S.'s flawed legal immigration and visa system.
The Presumption of Capability
It seems a common feature of large, transformative legislation that Congress presumes a level of capability on the part of federal agencies that may not be justified, especially when it comes to information technology (IT) projects. Obamacare's problems with its Internet portal, data security, interoperability, and reporting are but a recent example of Congress's misplaced confidence.[32]
The Senate's immigration bill is no different. With no hint of the complexity, expense, and time required for such tasks, S. 744 summarily directs DHS to "fully integrate all data from databases and data systems that process or contain information on aliens" from components at DHS, the Justice Department, and the State Department, and to "fully implement an interoperable electronic data system to provide current and immediate access to information in the databases of Federal law enforcement agencies and the intelligence community."[33] But DHS has struggled for years to identify available databases that are relevant to counter terrorism and to make them electronically searchable so that information might be rapidly retrieved; and, with no specific funding to support them, these statutory mandates will likely go by the wayside.[34]
Within DHS, the USCIS has its own profound IT challenges. Having spent a reported $792 million between 2008 and 2012 to wholly replace its paper-based application system with an electronic, Web-based system, it presently allows users to complete only three small transactions online.[35] While the Senate bill is silent on the matter, the USCIS would be responsible for adjudicating the applications filed by the estimated 11.7 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. seeking "registered provisional immigrant [RPI] status" that would put them on a pathway to citizenship.[36] Somewhat perversely, S. 744 prohibits DHS from requiring the electronic filing of immigration benefit forms at least until 2020, and so the operational drag will continue to haunt the USCIS for years.[ 37]
With its existing workforce and infrastructure, the USCIS simply cannot adjudicate the many millions of new applications that the Senate bill would generate. The USCIS already has an enormous caseload, processing millions of applications each year.[38] However, the USCIS experiences frequent backlogs that have added up over time, resulting in a current waiting line of 4.3 million applicants.[39] The USCIS also has grave difficulties dealing with occasional surges in immigrant applications.[40]
The USCIS has never faced anything like the workload that S. 744 would impose on it (nor did its predecessor, the old Immigration and Naturalization Service, which famously bungled an enrollment program a fraction the size).[41] When considering comprehensive immigration reform scenarios in the past, the USCIS has informally shared that its 13,250-member staff would need to double to accommodate the surge.[42] The Senate bill simply avoids this issue altogether.
Nor does it appear that the Senate has given adequate study to the extraordinarily complex tasks that numerous federal agencies would need to perform in order to complete immigration reform as envisioned in the bill. The Senate Judiciary Committee held six hearings on comprehensive immigration reform from February to April 2013.[43] None of them featured the component heads of the DHS or Department of Justice that would be massively impacted by S. 744. Instead, the hearings were populated by immigration activists, unions, businesses large and small, clerics, lawyers, and law professors. The high-level testimony offered by the Homeland Security Secretary gave no hint of the operational challenges that DHS would face if the bill were to become law.[44]
DHS would be responsible for creating and presenting new reports and plans to Congress, adding to the already crippling system of congressional oversight. Currently, DHS is required to report to at least 119 committees, subcommittees, and caucuses that assert jurisdiction over DHS. Former Homeland Security Secretaries Napolitano and Michael Chertoff reportedly both complained that the incessant hearings, briefings, and correspondence required of DHS by Congress interfered with their ability to manage the department.[45] The Senate bill will add to the pile: At minimum, and not counting recurring or annual reporting requirements, S. 744 requires that DHS and its partner agencies produce no fewer than 72 reports, assessments, plans, or studies for Congress. The expense, in work years and dollars, is unknown.
It is also worth noting that the Senate's Verify Employment Eligibility (E-Verify) provisions do not adequately assess and determine how all its provisions for E-Verify will be accomplished. The Senate bill does not even consider how the Justice Department's administrative law judges will be able to manage the thousands of cases arising from appeals to the E-Verify process every year.[46]
Endless "Due Process"
It is clear that the Senate bill lacks a proper appreciation for the practical operational challenges that DHS and its partner agencies would experience if S.744 became law. This is particularly true of the process that the Senate has put in place for illegal immigrants to obtain RPI status in the United States, which is the critical first step to obtaining lawful permanent residence and, eventually, citizenship.
The illegal immigrant seeking RPI status under S. 744 must prove to DHS that he has continuously resided in the United States since December 31, 2011; submit Department of the Treasury documents showing that he owes no taxes; and complete a DHS form explaining how, when, and where he illegally entered the country.[47] Since most unlawful immigrants do not file taxes, it is unclear how the IRS would collect taxes on their unreported income. Indeed, the Internal Revenue Service would likely waive or ignore enforcement for unlawful immigrants given the difficulty that most would have in providing a full record of their income.[48] As a result, this is a fairly light burden of proof, and the illegal immigrant may receive assistance from "eligible nonprofit organizations," which will have $50 million in grant funding from DHS to help RPI applicants and others apply for legal status.[49]
If DHS denies the application because the illegal immigrant has failed to prove his eligibility for RPI status, he is given another chance to file an amended application that includes additional evidence.[50] If the applicant is again denied, he is entitled to administrative appellate review of that denial. He is given an extraordinarily generous 90 days in which to file his administrative appeal—three times longer than people in the country illegally get now to appeal an immigration judge's final order of removal, and six times longer than a defendant gets to appeal a criminal felony conviction in federal court.[51] If he misses that deadline, a late filing is still permissible if the applicant can show his delay was "reasonably justifiable," a standard that is nowhere defined in the bill and which is not a legal term of art.[52] After all this, the Homeland Security Secretary can still certify any appeal for review regardless of filing deadlines.[53]
The bill does not state which group of administrative adjudicators would hear RPI appeals: It is left to the Homeland Security Secretary to establish or designate the appellate authority.[54] That responsibility may end up at the Justice Department, where the bill would nearly double the number of immigration judges by adding 225 of them at an annual cost that could reach $37 million, and increase the Board of Immigration Appeals by 90 staff members.[55] What is known is that review will be de novo, and based not only on the existing record, but also on "additional newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence."[56] If the illegal immigrant's administrative appeal is denied, he may seek review in a U.S. District Court, which may in turn remand the case to DHS "for consideration of additional evidence" if it is considered material and there were "reasonable grounds for failure to adduce the additional evidence" in the administrative process.[57]
This immense stack of administrative and judicial procedures has several troubling issues. First, in most administrative and judicial proceedings, applicants for benefits are commonly expected to have their evidence and documents that support their claim in hand, and litigants are commonly expected to file their appeals on time or risk having their case dismissed. The bill's laxity on the production of evidence and the meeting of filing deadlines reflects more the strong hand of the advocacy community in shaping S. 744 than it does an understanding of the need that DHS will have to administratively close cases—to say "yes" or "no"—in order to adjudicate the millions of other RPI applications that await.
Second, as it stands, an illegal immigrant will have as long as four years after the date of enactment of the bill to gather evidence to support his RPI application, a process that allows him to repeatedly inject new evidence into his case to trigger reconsideration and remand, effectively preventing the deportation of many thousands of ineligible applicants.[58] The Senate takes pains to tell DHS that it is not obliged to remove any illegal immigrant who is ineligible for RPI status.[59]
Finally, undue layers of process such as those contained in S. 744 are very expensive. The bill allows the illegal immigrant to file a flawed application that, if denied, may be resubmitted with perhaps more and better evidence; if this perfected application is not approved, an administrative "appellate" body considers the entire case anew, perhaps with more evidence. If denied there, the illegal immigrant may go to District Court where the terms for remanding the case back to the agency to consider yet more evidence are so generous that no judge will likely pause before doing so, starting the process over again. This circle can last for many months, even years, requiring the repeated attention of agency adjudicators, litigators, and judges, all at taxpayer expense.
Additionally, throughout these potentially lengthy proceedings, S. 744 provides the Attorney General with the option of appointing counsel to represent unlawful immigrants at government expense. Section 3502 explicitly states that "the Attorney General may, in the Attorney General's sole and unreviewable discretion, appoint or provide counsel at government expense to aliens in immigration proceedings."[60] Furthermore, the bill requires the Attorney General to provide counsel for aliens who are minors, have mental disabilities, or are "considered particularly vulnerable." These provisions are potential limitless handouts to immigration lawyers who will fight deportations at government expense even while the government has limited resources to try and deport unlawful immigrants.
S. 744 also expands the opportunities for unlawful immigrants to receive "nonimmigrant alien" status, a temporary amnesty, and then Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) status. Under current law, an alien who has suffered "substantial" harm as the result of a crime committed against him, and who is cooperating with government authorities in the criminal justice system can gain access to temporary amnesty and possibly LPR status at the discretion of DHS. S. 744 would expand these provisions to apply to those who "would suffer extreme hardship upon removal," an overly broad and vague provision, or those who are victims of civil and labor rights violations.[61] Any deportation proceeding is temporarily stayed when an alien has filed claims of civil or labor rights violations or can assist the government in prosecuting such violations. As a result, one can imagine an employer in Arizona dismissing illegal immigrants pursuant to state law, and the Department of Justice, a labor union, or amnesty advocates filing a labor grievance and triggering a temporary stay of deportation proceedings to anyone who is deemed helpful to the investigation. One can also imagine an unlawful immigrant responding to deportation proceedings by filing labor-related grievances, which could trigger temporary and potentially permanent amnesty as well.
Long-Term Costs that Cannot Be Ignored
In addition to the immediate and short-term bureaucracy-expanding costs, there are severe long-term costs and consequences to S. 744 and amnesties in general. Heritage Foundation research has found that providing amnesty to unlawful immigrants under a scheme similar to S. 744 will result in as much as $6.3 trillion in net future government costs. The reason for this is quite simple. The U.S. provides four types of benefits and services including:
Direct benefits: Social Security, Medicare, and workers' compensation;
Means-tested welfare benefits: Over 80 programs, such as Medicaid, food stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families;
Public education; and
Population-based services: police force, firefighters, parks, and highways.[62]
The cost of these governmental services is far larger than many people imagine. For example, in 2010, the average U.S. household received $31,584 in government benefits and services from these four categories.[63]
These government programs are highly redistributive. Some households are net tax contributors, that is, they pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits. For example, in 2010, the average household headed by college-educated individuals received $24,839 in government benefits while paying $54,089 in taxes. Conversely, some households are net tax consumers, such as the average household headed by an individual without a high school degree that received $46,582 in benefits while paying only $11,469 in taxes.[64]
The clear divide between well and poorly educated households is particularly relevant to the discussion of amnesty because unlawful immigrants are on average less educated than citizens. Specifically, half of unlawful immigrant households are headed by an individual with less than a high school degree, while another 25 percent of household heads have only a high school diploma.[65] This means that, if given amnesty, these households will on average be significant net tax consumers.
S. 744 and similar mass-amnesty plans will provide amnesty to as many as 11 million unlawful immigrants, giving them full access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. A reasonable prediction would be that after amnesty, newly legal immigrants would tend to receive government benefits and pay taxes at roughly the same rates as current legal immigrants with the same level of education. This would mean that the typical unlawful immigrant household would receive nearly three dollars in government benefits for every dollar in taxes paid and the average net cost per household would be around $30,000 per year. The total burden to taxpayers (total benefits received minus taxes paid) would soon rise to over $100 billion per year. As a result, the net lifetime costs of these policies would quickly spiral into the trillions of dollars.[66]
The size of government is already unsustainable, and amnesty will make the situation worse. It is unlikely that the U.S. economy can stomach such spending and debt. To finance such deficits, taxes will have to rise, dampening economic growth and harming the standard of living of U.S. residents. In short, current citizens and legal residents of the U.S. will be on the hook for the massive spike in new net costs caused by amnesty.
Real Immigration Reform Starts with the Basics
Rather than implementing costly, government-expanding, comprehensive, and amnesty-centric immigration policies, Congress and the Administration can and should implement real reforms that do not require new laws, but use and enforce existing law with only minor alterations in spending. Congress and the Administration should:
Improve border technology. There are real solutions that do not require throwing large sums of money at the problem. Technology in the form of cameras, sensors, and drones can help the existing Border Patrol do a better job with current manpower. Blanketing the border with agents is simply not practical, but detection technologies can help border agents watch, patrol, and respond to crossings on the border. This can be achieved with targeted investments through the normal budget and appropriations process.
Increase collaboration with local law enforcement. Another cost-effective way to improve border security and immigration enforcement is to work with local and state law enforcement through programs like 287(g).[67] U.S. immigration officials often ignore or even work against state and local governments because the Obama Administration has decided that it wants to enforce the law only in certain ways against certain individuals. This is anything but constructive. The federal government should take advantage of the approximately one million local and state law enforcement officers, many of whom stand ready to assist in border security and immigration enforcement.
Enforce existing law. Perhaps the simplest solution to the U.S.'s current immigration woes is to simply enforce existing law fully and faithfully. Over the past several decades, the executive branch has consistently chosen to bend or break immigration rules, and this lawlessness has reached unprecedented levels under President Obama. Immigration officials are prohibited from enforcing major parts of immigration law, to the detriment of public safety, the rule of law, taxpayers, and local, state, and federal budgets. This might require some additional funding for ICE and other immigration agencies, but the costs would be minimal in comparison to the costs of a big-government approach like S. 744 or the costs currently imposed on U.S. society by unlawful immigrants.
Reform the USCIS. U.S. immigration agencies struggle to keep up with their current responsibilities, yet S. 744 would add huge new responsibilities without fundamental reform. This is especially true of the USCIS. The USCIS struggles due to a budget model that is based on application fees. To provide the USCIS with the flexibility it needs to reform its visa processing system, the USCIS should be given some funding via annual appropriation. This will also allow Congress to exercise greater oversight of the USCIS's activities, such as its overdue and expensive update to the way it delivers its services and its IT requirements.[68]
Obamacare-Style Immigration Bill: Harmful to U.S.
It is often said that the U.S. immigration system is broken and requires massive changes to fix it. While the system is broken, the proposed changes under S. 744 and similar proposals in the House of Representatives only add to the confusion and do not address the root problem—the dereliction of duty by successive presidential Administrations to enforce existing immigration laws. This lawlessness has reached unprecedented levels under President Obama, and serious efforts are required to restore America's faith in the executive.
Adding an Obamacare-style immigration bill will only confound the issue, expanding government, increasing costs, breaking the rule of law, adding special interest loopholes and handouts, and further harming security and enforcement efforts, all while ignoring the laws that currently go unenforced, and placing the costs firmly on the shoulders of American taxpayers and prospective immigrants trying to come to the U.S. legally. The U.S. should resist these harmful, bloated policies and realize that simple solutions, such as enforcing existing law and using existing authority responsibly, are a must for fixing the broken U.S. immigration system.
—David Inserra is a Research Associate for Homeland Security and Cybersecurity in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation.
[1] Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, S. 744, 113th Cong., 1st Session.
[2] The Heritage Foundation Immigration and Border Security Reform Task Force, "Advancing the Immigration Nation: Heritage's Positive Path to Immigration and Border Security Reform," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2813, June 14, 2013, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/06/advancing-the-immigration-nation-heritages-positive-path-to-immigration-and-border-security-reform.
[3] Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, § 6.
[4] Ibid., § 3, and U.S. Border Patrol, "Sector Profile–Fiscal Year 2013 (Oct. 1st through Sept. 30th)," http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/U.S.%20Border%20Patrol%20Fiscal%20Year%202013%20Profile.pdf (accessed March 13, 2014).
[5] Letter from Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director of the Congressional Budget Office, to Senator Patrick J. Leahy, July 3, 2013, http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/s744aspassed.pdf (accessed March 12, 2014).
[6] Janet Napolitano, "The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, S. 744," testimony before the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, April 23, 2013, http://www.dhs.gov/news/2013/04/23/written-testimony-dhs-secretary-janet-napolitano-senate-committee-judiciary-hearing (accessed March 12, 2014).
[7] Alexander Bolton and Justin Sink, "Senate Immigration Bill Gets Major Boost with Border Security Agreement," The Hill, June 20, 2013, http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/306739-reports-senators-reach-tentative-deal-on-border-security- (accessed March 12, 2014).
[8] Letter from Jeh Charles Johnson to Senators Grassley, Sessions, Lee, Hatch, Cornyn, and Cruz, December 12, 2013, http://images.politico.com/global/2013/12/13/scan.html (accessed March 12, 2013).
[9] U.S. Border Patrol, "Sector Profile Fiscal Year 2013," and Brian Bennett, "Radar Shows U.S. Border Security Gaps," The Los Angeles Times, April 3, 2013, http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/03/nation/la-na-border-radar-20130404 (accessed March 12, 2013).
[10] Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, § 1107.
[11] Marc Weber Tobias, "How and When to Buy a Satellite Phone," Forbes, March 18, 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcwebertobias/2013/03/18/how-and-when-to-buy-a-satellite-phone/ (accessed March 12, 2014).
[12] U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Improved Management Can Enhance FCC Decision Making for the Universal Service Fund Low-Income Program," GAO–11–11, October 2010, http://www.gao.gov/assets/320/312708.pdf (accessed March 12, 2014).
[13] Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, §§ 3 and 4.
[14] Ibid., § 4.
[15] Ibid., § 1113.
[16] John Hinderaker, "Law Enforcement to Congress: Listen to Us, Not the Lobbyists!" Powerline, October 28, 2013, http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/10/law-enforcement-to-congress-listen-to-us-not-the-lobbyists.php (accessed March 12, 2014).
[17] Catherine E. Shoichet, "Obama: 'I Need a Dance Partner' on Immigration Reform," CNN, July 25, 2011, http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/25/obama.la.raza/index.html?_s=PM:POLITICS (accessed March 12, 2014).
[18] Elizabeth Slattery, "Supreme Court Immigration Showdown: Why States Can Enforce Immigration Laws," Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 3573, April 20, 2012, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/04/supreme-court-and-immigration-policy-why-states-can-enforce-immigration-laws#.
[19] Hans A. von Spakovsky, "Arizona v. United States: What the States Can Do to Enforce Immigration Laws," Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 3649, June 27, 2012, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/06/supreme-court-decision-on-arizona-immigration-law.
[20] Jessica Zuckerman, "House Stands Up for Important Immigration Enforcement Program," The Heritage Foundation, The Foundry, June 4, 2013, http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/04/house-stands-up-for-important-immigration-enforcement-program/?ac=1.
[22] U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, "Citizenship and Integration Grant Program," http://www.uscis.gov/about-us/citizenship-and-integration-grant-program (accessed March 12, 2014).
[23] Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, § 2511, § 2538, and§ 2541.
[25] Ibid., § 2501 and § 2535.
[28] Ibid., §§ 2521–2524.
[32] Sarah Kliff, "Here's the Obama Administration's Plan to Fix HealthCare.gov," The Washington Post, Wonkblog, October 25, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/25/heres-the-obama-administrations-plan-to-fix-healthcare-gov/ (accessed March 12, 2014).
[34] U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Information Sharing: DHS Has Demonstrated Leadership and Progress, But Additional Actions Could Help Sustain and Strengthen Efforts," Report to Congressional Requesters GAO–12–89, September 2012, http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/648475.pdf (accessed April 22, 2014).
[35] U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, "USCIS ELIS (Electronic Immigration System)," April 16, 2014, http://www.uscis.gov/uscis-elis (accessed April 22, 2014); Aliya Sternstein, "DHS to Recompete Online Immigration Program in 'Crisis,'" Nextgov, December 13, 2012, http://www.nextgov.com/defense/2012/12/dhs-recompete-online-immigration-program-crisis/60144 (accessed March 12, 2014); and U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Immigration Benefits: Consistent Adherence to DHS's Acquisition Policy Could Help Improve Transformation Program Outcomes," Report to Congressional Requesters GAO–12–66, November 2011, pp. 5, 10, and 11, http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/586460.pdf (accessed March 14, 2014).
[36] Jeffrey S. Passel, D'Vera Cohn, and Ana Gonzalez-Barrera, "Population Decline of Unauthorized Immigrants Stalls, May Have Reversed," Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project, September 23, 2013, http://www.pewhispanic.org/2013/09/23/population-decline-of-unauthorized-immigrants-stalls-may-have-reversed/ (accessed March 12, 2014), and Michael Hoefer, Nancy Rytina, and Byran Baker, "Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2011," Policy Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, March 2012, p. 1, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_ill_pe_2011.pdf (accessed March 12, 2014).
[38] U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, "USCIS Accomplishment Fiscal Year 2012," http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/About%20Us/Budget%2C%20Planning%20and%20Performance/USCIS%20FY2012%20Accomplishments%20Brochure.pdf (accessed March 12, 2014).
[39] U.S. Department of State, "Annual IV Waiting List Report: As of November 1, 2013," http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/Immigrant-Statistics/WaitingListItem.pdf (accessed April 25, 2014).
[40] Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman, Annual Report 2008, June 30, 2008, pp. 8–15, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2008.pdf (accessed March 12, 2014).
[41] U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General, "An Investigation of the Immigration and Naturalization Service's Citizenship USA Initiative," Special Report, July 31, 2000, http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/special/0007/ (accessed March 12, 2014).
[42] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, "Annual Performance Report: Fiscal Years 2012–2014," April 10, 2013, http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/images/DHS%20FY%202012-FY%202014%20Annual%20Performance%20Report.pdf (accessed March 12, 2014).
[43] U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, "Recent Immigration Hearings," February 13, 2013–April 25, 2013, http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/search/?q=Immigration&as_sitesearch=www.judiciary.senate.gov%2Fmeetings&access=p&as_dt=i&as_epq=&as_eq=&as_lq=&as_occt=any&as_oq=&as_q=&client=judiciary&sntsp=0&filter=0&getfields=title&lr=&num=15&numgm=3&oe=UTF8&output=xml&partialfields=&proxycustom=&proxyreload=0&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&requiredfields=&site=judiciary&sitesearch=&sort=date%3AD%3AS%3Ad1&start=0&ud=1 (accessed April 25, 2014).
[45] David Inserra and Rosie Brinckerhoff, "DHS Oversight Reforms: The Latest Casualty of Congressional Turf Wars," The Heritage Foundation, The Foundry, January 18, 2013, http://blog.heritage.org/2013/01/18/dhs-oversight-reforms-the-latest-casualty-of-congressional-turf-wars/.
[48] Those given amnesty would also have the ability to claim refundable tax credits, such as the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit that could actually result in the U.S. government paying amnesty recipients. Curtis S. Dubay, "Senate Immigration Does Not Require Payment of All Back Taxes," Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 3970, June 14, 2013, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/06/senate-immigration-bill-does-not-require-payment-of-all-back-taxes.
[51] Ibid., § 2104; U.S. Department of Justice, Board of Immigration Appeals, "Form EOIR-26," OMB No. 1125–0002, revised October 2013, http://www.justice.gov/eoir/eoirforms/eoir26.pdf (accessed March 12, 2014); and "Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure," Rule 4, December 1, 2010, http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/RulesAndPolicies/rules/2010%20rules/Appellate%20Procedure.pdf (accessed March 13, 2014).
[55] The Office of the Chief Immigration Law Judge reports "over 260 Immigration Judges in 59 immigration courts across the Nation." U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Chief Immigration Judge, http://www.justice.gov/eoir/ocijinfo.htm (accessed March 12, 2014), and Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, § 3501.
[58] DHS has one year from the date of enactment to issue interim rules on RPI applications. At some later, unspecified point in time—when DHS notifies Congress that it has started implementing its strategy for securing the southern border—DHS will issue a final rule. When it does, DHS will then accept RPI applications for a period of one year, which will likely extend to two and half years because the Homeland Security Secretary is given broad discretion to enlarge the filing period by 18 months for good cause, which is essentially an invitation from Congress to do so. Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act, § 3, § 2110, and § 2101.
[62] Robert Rector and Jason Richwine, "The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer," Heritage Foundation Special Report No. 133, May 6, 2013, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/05/the-fiscal-cost-of-unlawful-immigrants-and-amnesty-to-the-us-taxpayer.
[67] Matt Mayer, "Illegal Immigration: House Sends Strong Signal with Increased Funding for Section 287(g) Program," Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 3642, June 19, 2012, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/06/illegal-immigration-strong-signal-with-increased-funding-for-section-287g-program.
[68] The Heritage Foundation Immigration and Border Security Reform Task Force, "Advancing the Immigration Nation: Heritage's Positive Path to Immigration and Border Security Reform."
Is Texas Dem Exploiting Loophole by Coaching Migrants to Lie?
How Technicalities Ended the Census Case
Misrepresenting Themselves at the Border


Bucharest, Romania–February 17, 2011–Axigen (www.axigen.com), the professional messaging solution vendor, announced today the signing of a partnership agreement with PT Martunas Tamita Indonesia (MTI – www.mti.co.id), the company's first reseller in the Indonesian market.
MTI provides a wide range of IT solutions and services designed to help local businesses leverage the power of information technology to increase performance and efficiency. From IT consultancy and training to network architecture design and implementation, MTI offers expert support in all phases of the project, giving companies a technological edge over their competition.
"Axigen fits our profile perfectly. We were looking for a reliable messaging and collaboration solution that we could provide to Indonesian businesses, and we are happy to have found it in Axigen," said Zulfikar Djafar, CEO at MTI. "We are confident that our partnership has great perspectives and that it will provide many benefits for both our companies and our mutual customers," added Zulfikar Djafar.
"We are pleased to partner with MTI and count on their in-depth knowledge of the Indonesian business environment to successfully build Axigen awareness and introduce our messaging solutions to local companies. Together, we will provide customers with the flexible and secure email communications they need to gain a competitive advantage in their industry," declared Gabriela Mechea, CEO at Axigen.
One of world's top messaging platforms, according to The Radicati Group, Axigen has a strong focus on meeting the needs of business customers, either directly or through Service Providers employing the Software as a Service (SaaS) model. Winner of the ServerWatch 2007 Product Excellence Award for the Communications Server category, Axigen is becoming the solution of choice for a growing number of Internet Service Providers, Hosting Providers and enterprises worldwide.
Established in 2001, Gecad Technologies SA, member of the GECAD Group and ISO 9001:2008 certified, is the vendor of Axigen, an integrated email, calendaring and collaboration platform, masterfully built using a unique mail server technology, for increased speed and security. Axigen ensures an efficient and secure worldwide communication environment and business growth for both service providers and companies of all sizes. It is currently distributed internationally by over 300 partners from 100 countries and manages the email traffic for more than 11,000 companies with 8 million end-users.


text:
Residents' ideas shaping the York Central plans
13th July 2018 by access1
Playful streets with courtyards, allotments and picnic areas, communal rooftop gardens, an amphitheatre and a village green are some of the ideas that could be taken forward as part of the York Central development.
These are just some of the concepts that emerged from the thousands of post-its and feedback forms contributed by residents during the six-week 'Festival of York Central'.
After careful analysis and consideration, York Central Partnership are now exploring ways to incorporate a number of themes and ideas into the outline masterplan for the 45 hectare site to be submitted this summer.
The masterplan will evolve to include a number of key themes and areas. These include creating places for people, developing the distinct character and designs of the streets and spaces, better ways to integrate the site with the wider city and the landscape and also embedding design quality in to the plans.
Some of the key areas and ideas that are being considered include:
Creating a number of different areas such as a reed garden, a stream garden, a park, a village green and an amphiteatre into the great park
Creating a mixture of streets public spaces, semi public courtyards and quiet streets with a number of different elements to encourage playful and social aspects to the communities. These could include courtyards, quiet areas, picnic spaces, allotments and teentrails or skateparks
The design of the streets and how they can be integrated more seamlessly into the spaces to manage traffic speeds and improve pedestrians and cycle routes in and around the whole space
Developing the design of the main road through the scheme and how it integrates with the park and York Yard South. Different designs for the main bridge from Water End are also being progressed.
Creating clear identities of street, neighbourhoods and spaces to establish a sense of character and place in each area such as the Foundry village, the Station Quarter and Museum quarter
Different arrangements of spaces, building types, pitched and green roofs, communal rooftops, materials and heights across the whole scheme to create distinct identities and characters for each neighbourhood.
There is also more work being undertaken to develop a greater mix of uses with an emphasis on public spaces and workspaces but also how these can be more integrated with living spaces, as well as a key focus on the design comitments and quality that will be brought forward. This will include an emphasis on character and quality, heights, views and sustainability.
Tamsin Hart-Jones, project lead from York Central Partnership, said: "The response we had has been inspiring and it's clear that there is a significant appetite for York Central to be a ground-breaking scheme for the city, but also to be held up as an example nationally of high-quality design. This is about creating places for people and making vibrant neighbourhoods and working environments, through a mix of uses and different types of public and private spaces, both inside and outside buildings that bring this area of the city to life.
"The ideas and feedback we received have really helped us to move the plans on and we are looking forward to sharing them and continuing the conversation around the emerging designs with York residents over the coming weeks."
Feedback is also helping to amend the overall vision of the site with additional focus placed on the developments sustainability, as well as looking at ways that York Central could be a hub for sharing, creativity and innovation.
1. New western entrance to station
2. The New Square
3. Improved connection through Marble Arch/Leeman Road tunnel
4. Expanded National Railway Museum
5. Commercial district
6. Boulevard
7. The Great Park
8. York Yard South
9. Foundry Village
10. Foundry
11. Western access
12. Millennium Green
13. Improved southern access
14. Improved connection to Salisbury Terrace area
15. Diversion of Leeman Road
The following points summarise the main changes and are labelled on the drawing:
A new point of arrival with additional concourse facilities, bus stops and passenger drop-off.
A new civic space and entrance for the station, Museum and the city.
Potential for safer, easier routes for pedestrians and cyclists.
Creation of expanded Museum.
New workspace, offices and homes. Food, drink and retail uses at ground floor, establishing a complementary offer to existing destinations in the city centre.
Connection for pedestrians and cyclists from The Great Park to The New Square.
New park for existing and future residents with a wide range of activities along its length. Connecting from the River Ouse Corridor and Millennium Green to The New Square. Incorporation of steam rides from the Museum, a range of habitats for wildlife and areas for the storage of water during periods of high rainfall.
Predominantly residential neighbourhood with apartments between the railway edge and The Great Park.
A new, predominantly residential neighbourhood comprising terraces, townhouses and some apartments.
Potential for re-use of existing buildings for community, education or enterprise.
New western access route from Water End through to the city. Key route for public transport with segregated routes for pedestrians and cyclists. Detailed alignment and relationship with Millennium Green being considered.
Opportunity to enhance the character of this natural open space and link to The Great Park.
Improved pedestrian and cycle access either via Wilton Rise of Chancery Rise.
Opportunities to improve the route to Kingsland Terrace for existing and future residents and onto Riverside.
The road will be diverted around the park towards the city, to enable the development of York Central.


It is essential that as the population grows medical people get trained at high rates to serve everyone. Diseases continue being discovered and changing a good number of the population. A healthy population is a productive population as they have good and ample time to deal with nation building. The services of medical staff are essential to any nation. Their role is appreciated by everyone, and people tend to give them good support in their work while in return they get the services they require. Medical Field has a lot of demand regarding careers.
People get jobs very quickly when they study courses in the medical field. In the medical field the careers giver a stable income to those individuals who are in it. People who have passion in the medical field always get themselves watching the medical channels and other channels relating to the medical study. People have so many options to take in the medical field when they choose that path of study. It is a sensitive field so whoever wants to go that way should be ready to learn things in depth and make healthy choices.
Medical Field is vast and with a lot of branches of study. It is possible that some people opt to study physical therapy. Physical therapist deals with the proper functioning of the body organs and the muscles. A physical therapist should be an active person for field work. When The muscles are aching, or the back is aching one should contact a physical therapist for their services. Physical therapists are equally important in the field of medical practice.
In some medical fields, the cost of education is prohibitive. While after training one can get good salaries in their jobs, training always leave people with big debts to pay when employed. Always take into account the course you take a number of school fees required and the amount you can raise so that you can plan well for the process without having to incur a lot of debts. We have some courses in the medical field where people take a concise time to complete their training while other courses require some years of study to get the certificate. When Choosing the career the student should make sure that they choose what is correct for them. One should choose between the option of online classes and regular schooling.
After The course is completed one should be able to get a real certificate for their courses. Medical field is a sensitive area that requires proof of having been to school for the work. Licenses are crucial in the field of medicine to allow people to carry out their functions undisturbed.


Will fit 2004 and newer Sportsters.
Crafted from thick, durable top grain cowhide.
The Sportster Swing Arm Bag fits all 2004 and newer Sportster models. You may have to extend your foot peg. Double check all dimensions before ordering. The full dimensions of the bag is 5" x 11" x 10.5" x 13" x 3" (H x L x D).


text:
Georgia head coach Kirby Smart speaks during a media day ahead of the national championship NCAA College Football Playoff game between Georgia and TCU, Saturday,…
Georgia head coach Kirby Smart speaks during a media day ahead of the national championship NCAA College Football Playoff game between Georgia and TCU, Saturday, Jan. 7, 2023, in Los Angeles. The championship football game will be played Monday. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)
Georgia coach Smart's father unable to attend CFP title game
by: RALPH D. RUSSO, Associated Press
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Georgia coach Kirby Smart said his father, former high school football coach Sonny Smart, won't be at the College Football Playoff national title game because of health issues.
"It hurts me that he and my mom won't be here," Kirby Smart said Saturday, during CFP media day. "But I know it's the right decision for him. Nothing worse than watching your parents grow old. It's like taxes; it's inevitable. They're going to get old. And that's been tough."
The top-ranked Bulldogs face No. 3 TCU on Monday night at Sofi Stadium in Inglewood, California.
Sonny Smart has been a regular at his son's game since Kirby became head coach at his alma mater in 2016. Sonny and wife Sharon Smart also missed last week's Peach Bowl against Ohio State.
Kirby Smart played for his father while growing up in south Georgia.
"He's taught me so much just about the way you handle things, the right way, the wrong way," Kirby said. "Control the controlables. The moment's never too big if you're prepared. And I always watched the way he prepared our teams and our staff in high school. He was a very wise man, a man of few words. I tried to follow his mantra as a coach."
Sonny Smart was the head coach at Bainbridge High School for two decades.
"I've certainly evolved from going to coach for other people, but a lot of my core beliefs came from the way he ran our programs in high school," Kirby Smart said.
AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/college-football and https://twitter.com/ap_top25
Crime / 43 mins ago
Austin / 53 mins ago
Round Rock / 2 hours ago
Forecast / 1 hour ago
Texas / 10 hours ago
Austin / 11 hours ago
Texas / 3 hours ago
State of Travel: When to look for the cheapest flights …
National News / 16 hours ago
2 Texas teacher groups rally behind $15K pay raise …
Education / 14 hours ago
Egg prices too high? Try these alternatives
Simple Health / 18 hours ago
City of Austin summer camps: Early registration opening …
'In the middle of a war zone': Salon owners face …


text:
You are here: Home / Column / CERCLA Trumps As-Is Sales
CERCLA Trumps As-Is Sales
October 3, 2017 /in Column, Environment, Feature, Remediation /by hazzmatt1
By Steven L. Hoch, Attorney, Clark Hill
A federal court in Alaska assessed responsibility against the City of Fairbanks (City) for remediation costs found necessary to clean up property it previously owned. The court concluded that the City should have mitigated the problem or at least warned the purchaser about the contamination, even though the property was sold "As-Is". Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) liability is assessed without reference to cause. Further, the court said that numerous courts have held that CERCLA liability cannot be defeated by contract, unless specifically and clearly addressed in the contract language.
In Gavora, Inc. v. City of Fairbanks , Case No. 4:15–cv-00015-SLG, BL 256894 (D. Alaska July 25, 2017), the City owned two parcels of land and Gavora held leasehold on one of the parcels. For a considerable length of time, a dry cleaning business operated in the shopping center located on their parcel. Eventually, the contamination drew the attention of the State of Alaska, who told the City about the contamination and that they suspected the contamination migrated from that parcel to the other. While the State did not verify the findings, the district court found it clear that the City knew or should have known that the first parcel was also contaminated.
Fairbanks Mall – Satellite Image showing borehole and monitoring well locations as well as PCE contamination levels
The City sold the first parcel to Gavora on an "As-Is, Where-Is" basis. This sale occurred 10 years after the City first learned of the contamination on the second parcel. When the purchase took place, Gavora did not perform its own environmental assessment. Five years later, contamination was discovered on the first parcel owned by Gavora. Lacking options, Gavora remediated the parcel and sued the City of Fairbanks for contribution.
Even though the sale was "As-Is", the court nevertheless held the seller liable. Further, the court allocated 55% of the costs to the City and 45% of the costs to the current owner. The court rationalized that this allocation was appropriate because (1) the city knew or should have known of the contamination, yet failed to inform the purchaser; (2) the current owner made substantial corrective action efforts upon learning of the problem whereas the City took no action, and (3) it would be inequitable to hold the current owner responsible for contamination occurring prior to its master lease, but the court could not "effectively apportion the contamination", but (4) the current owner would obtain a greater benefit than the prior owner from the remediation.
In the final analysis this case affirms that "As-Is" does not exculpate a seller from CERCLA liability, and that not disclosing contamination even when it did not make any representation to the contrary. As this was a district court opinion, it does not have significant legal value, but should not be dismissed out of hand when confronting similar issues.
This article was first published on the Clark Hill website.
Steven Hoch has over 40 years of experience with both federal and state environmental laws and regulations in the context of permitting, regulatory proceedings, litigation, enforcement actions, water supply, public policy formation, and advice. His work includes contamination of land and ground and surface water. Steven has critical experience in the areas of environmental law and the federal and state Safe Drinking Water Acts, Title 23, water supply, and the mechanics of water distribution. His experience also extends to groundwater modeling and water quality testing. He also has significant experience in hazardous substances and waste handling practices, remediation, soil erosion, and claims of toxic exposures
Steven has in-depth experience working with numerous public water systems throughout the state. He has also established a sterling reputation for his work with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, the Department of Toxic Substance Control, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency both in the administrative and litigation. His clients range from the country's largest municipal water agency to individuals selling or buying contaminated sites.
Steven often takes primary roles in many environmental trials, and has served as liaison counsel for groups or parties at the request of fellow counsel. He has been involved in several landmark cases, including acting as PG&E's counsel in the case made famous by the movie Erin Brockovich.
Tags: contamination, dry cleaning, law suit, legal case
http://hazmatmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/bt_malleast_fig2.jpg 482 700 hazzmatt1 http://hazmatmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/hazmat-logo.jpg hazzmatt12017-10-03 11:00:432017-10-03 11:38:03CERCLA Trumps As-Is Sales
In-Situ Remediation of Tetrachloroethylene and its Intermediates in Groundwater
Former B.C. Environment Minister Sued for Shutting Contaminated Soil Landfill
Canada: Oil Spill Liability - Kawartha Lakes Continues
Supreme Court of Canada refuses leave to appeal of dry cleaner liable for $1.8 million clean-up
Top 10 Questions to Consider If Sued under U.S. RCRA's Citizen Suit Provisions
Class Action suit filed against CN Rail for derailment
Supreme Court of Canada denies Leave to Appeal in the latest dry cleaner Contamination Case
The Ninth Circuit Reiterates That "Knowingly" Handling Hazardous Waste Without a Permit Is a General Intent Crime Under RCRA
The Ninth Circuit Reiterates That "Knowingly" Handling Hazardous Waste Without... Confirming the Chemical Identity


>should change when another response header is present.
14.9.4 talks about restrictions implied by proxy-revalidate.
which happen to be _lifted_ when proxy-revalidate is present.
Next message: Larry Masinter: "RFC 2068 and 2069!"
Previous message: Blake Winton: "Re: HTTP response version, again"
In reply to: Koen Holtman: "Re: Cache-Control directive, semantics"
Next in thread: Anselm Baird_Smith: "Re: Cache-Control directive, semantics"


text:
Kids' Choice Awards: 'Avengers,' 'Stranger Things,' win at virtual show
After being postponed by the coronavirus pandemic, the Kids' Choice Awards held a virtual telecast to dole out the slime and the awards. "Victorious" star Victoria Justice hosted the show on Saturday, about six weeks after the original date. In addition to the awards and slime given out, the show made a $1 million donation to No Kid Hungry, a national campaign to help end childhood hunger and support people affected by COVID-19.
Read more… http://naijaheadlines.com/agency/vanguard/20200503/5329057/kids-choice-awards-avengers-stranger-things-win-at-virtual-show


text:
Home Events NYC Midsummer Night Swing: Dance to Formell y Los Van Van
NYC Midsummer Night Swing: Dance to Formell y Los Van Van
Wednesday, June 26, 2019 at 6:00 pm – Formell y Los Van Van
The wait is over. Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts and New York-Presbyterian are excited to announce that Formell y Los Van Van will be making a special New York City appearance at Damrosch Park as part of the Midsummer Night Swing events. Tickets won't last. Buy yours today.
Dance floor opens at 6:00 pm / Dance lesson at 6:30 pm / Live music at 7:30 pm
Style: Cuban Salsa / Dance Instructor: Carlos Mateu teaches Timba / DJ: Ron McGugins
The word "legendary" doesn't begin to capture the influence of the Cuban superstar band Los Van Van, founded in Havana 50 years ago by composer, arranger, and bass player Juan Formell. Since his passing in 2014, Juan's son Samuel has stepped up to lead the renamed Formell y Los Van Van, continuing the group's five-decade tradition of innovative charanga, salsa, son, and songo. While their Grammy-nominated 2018 album Legado is a tribute to their founder, it's also "full of a stimulating and current sound" and has made the band "an international reference point for popular Cuban music" (El Desconcierto). You won't want to miss being on the dance floor at this special New York City appearance by living interpreters of Cuban music history. As Juan Formell's famous song says: "Here, he who dances wins!"
New York-Presbyterian
Samuel Formell
Zane Dalal conducts the Royal Conservatory Orchestra with Zakir Hussain, John Patitucci, Danilo Pérez, and Brian Blade
Festival Internacional Jazz Plaza Celebrates 35th Anniversary
A Swingin' Christmas with Toronto All-Star Big Band at Flato's
Emilie-Claire Barlow: Winter Lights at Flato Markham Theatre
Jazz at Teatro LATEA with Jonathan Suazo & Suaz on Dec 14th, 2019
Alfie Alvarado Sep 16, 2019 At 6:15 pm
Thank you Poncho Sanchez!!


text:
Mac DeMarco Met Tom Hanks While Wearing a Mac DeMarco and Tom Hanks Shirt
Last night (December 12), Mac DeMarco and Tom Hanks both appeared as guests on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. Naturally, the pair got a chance to meet backstage, and DeMarco made it super weird by wearing a shirt with both of their faces on it.
The comic strip-style tee features Hanks and DeMarco as the stars of a Da Vinci Code and Garfield mashup universe dubbed DeMarco Code.
The Hollywood actor seemed pretty chill about the whole thing, posing for a photo with DeMarco — managing to maintain a facial expression of polite bemusement.
Check out the Instagram proof of the encounter below.
Had a #gr8time. Big #love to @jonbatiste. Another hot #T from #yrboi @matthewvolznyc
A post shared by @macdemarco on Dec 12, 2017 at 6:28pm PST
You can also check out both guests' appearances on the show down below. DeMarco joined Colbert's house band Jon Batiste & Stay Human to play "One Another" off this year's This Old Dog, while Hanks was there to promote The Post.
Pick up This Old Dog on silver vinyl via Umusic.
More Mac DeMarco
More Tom Hanks
Mac DeMarco Covers "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas"
Mac DeMarco is back with his annual Christmas cover, this time taking on Judy Garland's classic "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas."...
Julian Casablancas Is Getting His Own 'Grand Theft Auto' Radio Station
Next week, the continuously popular Grand Theft Auto Online will undergo update "The Cayo Perico Heist," which will also mark "the biggest e...
M for Montreal Details 2020 Virtual Edition, Featuring Mac DeMarco and More
In less than two weeks, the virtual edition of M for Montreal 2020 will kick off. Running from November 18 until November 20, M for Montreal...
Crowded House Teamed Up with Mac DeMarco to Release Their First New Music in over a Decade
Beloved New Zealand band Crowded House have just released their first new music in over a decade. And crazily enough, they got Mac DeMarco t...
Mac DeMarco Joins Forces with Benny Sings for Downer Anthem "Rolled Up"
Once again, Mac DeMarco is limelighting and appearing on a new track from Dutch pop artist Benny Sings. The pair have teamed up for a new si...
'Borat Subsequent Moviefilm' Speaks Truth to the Powerlessness of Trump-Era Comedy Directed by Jason Woliner
They said that Donald Trump's presidency would be good for pop culture, and while we hopefully only have to endure it for a few more months,...
Tom Hanks Is a Civil War Vet in Paul Greengrass' 'News of the World'
Tom Hanks is set to star as Captain Jefferson Kidd in Paul Greengrass' Oscar-baiting new film News of the World alongside newcomer Helena Ze...
Tom Hanks Might Play Geppetto in Disney's Live-Action 'Pinocchio'
Now that he's fully recovered from his COVID-19 diagnosis, Tom Hanks is right back on his grind, as he's now reportedly in talks to star in...
Tom Hanks Decals Are Popping Up in Toronto to Mark Your Social Distancing
At this point, the rules of living in the pandemic are clear — wash your hands, wear a mask and stay six feet apart. But here to remind you...
Tom Hanks Says He Has "No Respect" for People Who Won't Wear a Mask
Despite COVID-19 still wrecking havoc on the world, the great mask debate continues. Tom Hanks, however, has made it very clear on which sid...


He'll choose a moment when the dignitaries are assembled, preferably standing still.
I've always preferred the company of men.
Frankly, I prefer the company of nitwits.
'I mean, rejecting society, seeking the company of wild creatures.
Probably 'cause I prefer the feel of a real newspaper.
Of course I'd prefer someone in college.
I could feel you rejecting hopelessness.
There's a young man that Dorothy likes. She's very fond of him.
There's tons of rejection. No stability.
I prefer the feel of leather.
He's a gentle soul who prefers the company of animals to others.
- He prefers the company of men. - Who doesn't?
I thought you preferred the company of your magazine?
I got a rejected form.
ROBIN: Do you prefer the company of Nottingham?


In honor of Arthritis Awareness Month, we're taking a closer look at some of the types of arthritis affecting the foot and ankle. While arthritis is a general term used to describe a large group of more than 100 different kinds of joint diseases, this blog will focus on one specific type: osteoarthritis of the ankle. Along with big toe joint arthritis, ankle arthritis is another common form of arthritis treated by New York orthopedic foot and ankle surgeon, Stuart Katchis, M.D.
The term "arthritis" means joint inflammation. When inflammation affects the ankle joints it can produce a variety of symptoms. If ankle arthritis is not properly treated, it may eventually result in debilitating pain and even a loss of joint function. The most common form of arthritis that affects the ankle is osteoarthritis; however, similar symptoms may also be caused by rheumatoid arthritis.
Osteoarthritis is a condition that results from the breakdown and gradual loss of cartilage in the joints. Cartilage, which is the connective tissue located at the ends of bones in the joints, is responsible for cushioning and protecting the bones during movement. When the cartilage is lost or deteriorates, symptoms will develop that may interfere with your ability to perform normal activities. When cartilage is lost in the ankle, it can cause pain and problems with walking.
Osteoarthritis of the ankle is due to wear and tear of the cartilage in the ankle joint, which deteriorates with repeated use and stress over time. As the cartilage in your ankle gets thinner, the bones lose their protective covering and will eventually rub together, which causes inflammation and pain. Along with gradual wear and tear, ankle arthritis may also result from an injury, such as a fracture or severe ankle sprain that damages the joint's cartilage. People with abnormal foot mechanics, such as high arches or flat feet, which place increased strain on the foot and ankle joints, are at higher risk for developing this condition.
The symptoms of ankle arthritis vary in degree depending on the severity of the degeneration. Some people with osteoarthritis may develop a bone spur, which will cause additional pain. In some situations, symptoms of ankle arthritis may also include calluses or blisters that form over the surface of the bone spur. Bone spurs in the ankle can significantly limit the movement of the ankle joint.
The first step to determining whether you have this condition and learning about your treatment options is to visit Extend Orthopedics in order to have your ankle thoroughly examined. Dr. Katchis will assess things like swelling of the joint, the degree of your pain with movement and your degree of mobility. An X-ray is sometimes necessary in order to determine the extent of the arthritis and whether there is a bone spur present.
Although there are both nonsurgical and surgical treatments, in the majority of situations, nonsurgical treatments are effective at improving symptoms.
Surgical treatment is typically recommended if the osteoarthritis has substantially progressed or if nonsurgical treatments have not produced favorable results. In some situations, surgery may be the only option to help decrease the pain and improve the function of the ankle. Two examples of surgical procedures for ankle arthritis are arthrodesis and ankle replacement. To learn more about our offerings, visit our ankle arthritis page.
If you or a loved one is suffering from symptoms of ankle arthritis, don't wait for the pain to get worse. Call Extend Orthopedics today at 212-434-4920 or fill out the form on this page to schedule an appointment with Dr. Katchis. The earlier you seek treatment, the more likely you will be able to improve your symptoms without the need for surgery.


text:
Environmental group asks City Council to stop El Paso Electric sale
Vic Kolenc
More than a dozen members of an environmental group asked the City Council on Monday to stop the proposed sale of El Paso Electric.
Dominic Chacon, an organizer for Sunrise El Paso, said the group is against the proposed $4.3 billion sale to the J.P. Morgan Chase-advised Infrastructure Investments Fund, or IIF, because the buyer would only care about making money, adding that the utility needs to be about more than that for El Pasoans.
"We don't think the utility market should be about profit-making. We believe it's a human right" to have electricity, Chacon said after the City Council meeting. "Our utility is not like another store in the mall. Our utility company is a strong component of our quality of life in El Paso" and also needs to use more solar and other renewable energy, Chacon said.
More:J.P. Morgan-tied investment fund, El Paso Electric make tentative deal with sale opponents
The group wants the City Council to hold hearings on the sale and wants the city to do a feasibility study on the possibility of El Paso Electric becoming a city-owned utility.
City Council members heard the sale protests Monday in an open session before going into a two-hour closed, executive session to discuss the proposed sale. That came after Central El Paso city Rep. Alexsandra Annello's request to let the people speak was granted by the council.
The council took no actions Monday on the proposed sale.
Richard Bonart, an El Paso activist who served on the El Paso Public Service Board and unsuccessfully ran for the City Council in 2018, told the council that IIF's promise to pay $100 million over five years for regional economic development if the sale is completed amounts to a bribe to approve the sale. He's made the same point in testimony he filed with the Public Utility Commission of Texas, or PUC, as an intervenor in the PUC's review of the sale.
Several Sunrise El Paso members also told the City Council that it should be wary of J.P. Morgan's ties to the proposed sale because of its past problems in the energy industry.
J.P. Morgan in 2012 was found by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, to have allegedly "manipulated electric power markets," and the bank agreed in 2013 to pay $410 million to settle the case.
Others have voiced concerns over sale
The El Paso residents aren't the only ones who've found problems with the proposed sale. Consultants for the city, the PUC staff, and others concluded in documents filed in the PUC case that the sale as proposed would not be in the public interest, which is required for PUC approval.
However, IIF and El Paso Electric announced last week that they reached a tentative agreement on sale terms with the Texas PUC staff and most of the intervenors in the case. The city is one of the intervenors, but city officials have not discussed the city's status in the proposed agreement.
A PUC hearing on the proposed sale was canceled last week after the agreement was made. A hearing could be held in January if a unanimous agreement can't be reached.
"I'm actually surprised so few people" came to speak, Annello said after the City Council's closed-door meeting.
More:El Paso Electric, J.P. Morgan-tied investment fund close to final deal with sale opponents
"I think people in this community should really be concerned about what's happening and what the long-term repercussions and fallbacks are."
Annello conceded, "We haven't done a great job of reaching out to the public on this issue."
It's difficult to have hearings while negotiations are ongoing, she added.
However, the council has asked city staff to allow the public to comment on the proposed sale at the Dec. 10 City Council meeting, she said.
Council's closed door meeting was held to discuss El Paso Electric's request to transfer its city franchise agreement to IIF after the sale is complete and to discuss the Texas PUC's ongoing review of the sale.
Want more news like this?Click here to subscribe to elpasotimes.com.
Mayor Dee Margo said after Monday's meeting that the city continues to negotiate with IIF and El Paso Electric to "try to make it a better deal for the citizens and the city of El Paso."
"Our initial advisers and experts all testified against it" through filings with the PUC, Margo noted. "So, to say we haven't taken a stance is incorrect. From that point forward, we've been in negotiations."
Margo also said it would not be possible for the city to buy the electric utility because the city lost its ability to use eminent domain, or condemnation, to acquire utility assets in 2004 City Charter revisions.
The city would have to buy the utility, and the going price is $4.3 billion, he noted.
More:El Paso Electric sale draws more opposition; utility, J.P. Morgan-tied buyer defend deal
"That's an onerous burden I don't believe any taxpayer in El Paso would want to take on," Margo said.
Adrian Ordonez, an El Paso Sunrise member, disputed that claim. He said after the meeting that his research shows Texas law would allow the city to use condemnation to acquire the utility.
Howard Pearlmutter, an El Paso businessman and energy market expert involved in Sunrise El Paso, said municipalizing the utility isn't the only option.
"They (city) can use the (El Paso Electric) franchise agreement as a sword. They have to wield it on behalf of the citizenry" and allow multiple sources of electricity, he said.
Vic Kolenc may be reached at 546-6421; vkolenc@elpasotimes.com; @vickolenc on Twitter.
El Paso Times reporter Aaron Montes contributed to this story.
Man dies in East El Paso stabbing; one wounded in Lower Valley shooting Burges grad Savannah Marenco makes impact on high-ranked Odessa College volleyball team Human remains found in Castner Range near Border Patrol Station in Northeast El Paso El Paso Times sports scoreboard for March 19


Please join us for our 29th year! An annual West Michigan event, take in the autumn color while touring 8 studios between South Haven, Saugatuck and Fennville.
Each site will feature original artwork, refreshments, and most artists will offer various demonstrations. Please sign in at each studio, and add yourself to our contact lists!