What is the most important issue TO YOU heading into the 2008 election?

[SupperClub 0]

What is the single most important issue to you?

[otterinbham 0]

Hacking back entitlements, which will be the single greatest obstacle to our continued fiscal growth.

[drewau02 0]

I voted for War in Iraq but it's a tossup with me between the war and illegal immigration. What's the use of "going on the offense," as President Bush so often likes to say if you're not able to secure your own borders? The Jersey terrorists were here illegaly. Crossing the U.S/Mexican border is as easy as crossing your neighbor's yard. Then again, your neighbors yard may have a guard dog so crossing the border is easier for most.

[AURaptor 1,126]

I voted for War in Iraq but it's a tossup with me between the war and illegal immigration. What's the use of "going on the offense," as President Bush so often likes to say if you're not able to secure your own borders? The Jersey terrorists were here illegaly. Crossing the U.S/Mexican border is as easy as crossing your neighbor's yard. Then again, your neighbors yard may have a guard dog so crossing the border is easier for most.

I voted the illegal immigration issue because those inside the beltway have NO CLUE how Americans feel about it, and it is a vital part of our national security. On so many levels. When Bush invited 5 conservative talk show hosts to the White House - Boortz, Medved, Ingraham, Hannity and Praeger ( i think ) , one of the things to come out of the meeting was how surprised Bush was that conservatives across the nation were upset at illegals. Both the Dems and the GOP don't WANT to tackle the issue, much like Social Security. They're simply going to ignore it and pretend there's nothing wrong at all.

[TexasTiger 13,016]

Restoring some greater measure of ethics, integrity and meaningful appreciation of the balance of powers on which our democratic republic is based. Also, having someone who is a more unifying figure than someone only concerned with appealing to enough of his/her base to get elected.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

I voted tax reform, because the current tax system is not allowing a real free market to exist. Governmental control and taxation hamper the liberty we are all entitled to. I also believe in a sound monetary policy without the existence of the Federal Reserve or the IRS. We have been oppressed by these two long enough, it's time to get rid of them both. With the Fed in charge, congress spends like a drunken sailor with money we don't have, this has to stop. Wars are started on false pretenses and people die for a rich man's lust. This has to stop. By cutting off the head of the beast (the Fed), congress and the president will have to tighten their belts. Stop it at it's source and take the money out of politics. Reduce the size of government to where we can drown it in a bathtub if need be.

Is eleven cents of every dollar too much to pay for good schools, good transportation systems, a good health system, police protection, a prison system, parks and recreation facilities, social services for the needy, and all of the other things we consider necessary for a "civilized society?"

Everyone has to make his or her own judgement about that, of course. But what's evident is that the Republican Party has been taken over by apostles of smaller government, who would reduce the size of government, in Grover Norquist's famous words, "to fit in a bathtub where we can strangle it."

Norquist, who heads a group called Americans for Tax Reform, was a beaming presence in photos from the California press conference. He's been one of the most remarkably successful figures on the political scene for the past decade, pushing his "No Tax Pledge" to the point where few Republican candidates dare run for political office without signing it. The "No Tax Pledge" has become a cornerstone of national Republican policy. Every Republican running for President this year except for Rudy Giuliani and John McCain have taken Norquist's "Pledge."

http://uspolitics.einnews.com/article.php?nid=270708

[AURaptor 1,126]

Restoring some greater measure of ethics, integrity and meaningful appreciation of the balance of powers on which our democratic republic is based. Also, having someone who is a more unifying figure than someone only concerned with appealing to enough of his/her base to get elected.

Didn't think you could reply w/ out making a generalized partisan swipe. I understand, it's your nature, it's what you do. But in all honestly, you can't think for one moment that ethics or 'appreciation of the balance of powers' is what the Democrats are in ANY way interested in come '08, can you ? From the attempts to revive the 'so called ' Fairness Doctrine which seeks to limit public speech, to the Feinsteins and Willam Jeffersons of the party, we've already seen what passes for 'ethics' with the Dems.

[TexasTiger 13,016]

Restoring some greater measure of ethics, integrity and meaningful appreciation of the balance of powers on which our democratic republic is based. Also, having someone who is a more unifying figure than someone only concerned with appealing to enough of his/her base to get elected.

Didn't think you could reply w/ out making a generalized partisan swipe. I understand, it's your nature, it's what you do. But in all honestly, you can't think for one moment that ethics or 'appreciation of the balance of powers' is what the Democrats are in ANY way interested in come '08, can you ? From the attempts to revive the 'so called ' Fairness Doctrine which seeks to limit public speech, to the Feinsteins and Willam Jeffersons of the party, we've already seen what passes for 'ethics' with the Dems.

I don't think what I want is a partisan issue or the province of one party. In fact, I suspect a Bloomberg/Hagel administration would value what I mentioned above.

[otterinbham 0]

Restoring some greater measure of ethics, integrity and meaningful appreciation of the balance of powers on which our democratic republic is based. Also, having someone who is a more unifying figure than someone only concerned with appealing to enough of his/her base to get elected.

Didn't think you could reply w/ out making a generalized partisan swipe. I understand, it's your nature, it's what you do. But in all honestly, you can't think for one moment that ethics or 'appreciation of the balance of powers' is what the Democrats are in ANY way interested in come '08, can you ? From the attempts to revive the 'so called ' Fairness Doctrine which seeks to limit public speech, to the Feinsteins and Willam Jeffersons of the party, we've already seen what passes for 'ethics' with the Dems.

Actually both parties are corrupt. Don't kid yourself, Raptor.

[GalensGhost 0]

Most important to me?

Figuring out how I can help to get Rudy elected.

[aumd03 2]

I voted for War in Iraq but it's a tossup with me between the war and illegal immigration. What's the use of "going on the offense," as President Bush so often likes to say if you're not able to secure your own borders? The Jersey terrorists were here illegaly. Crossing the U.S/Mexican border is as easy as crossing your neighbor's yard. Then again, your neighbors yard may have a guard dog so crossing the border is easier for most.

I voted the illegal immigration issue because those inside the beltway have NO CLUE how Americans feel about it, and it is a vital part of our national security. On so many levels. When Bush invited 5 conservative talk show hosts to the White House - Boortz, Medved, Ingraham, Hannity and Praeger ( i think ) , one of the things to come out of the meeting was how surprised Bush was that conservatives across the nation were upset at illegals. Both the Dems and the GOP don't WANT to tackle the issue, much like Social Security. They're simply going to ignore it and pretend there's nothing wrong at all.

Are you voting for border security or national security? Personally I am more concerned with safety and terrorism than I am with illegals, although I realize they go hand in hand. I see proposals that work to register those here rather than deporting more beneficial and more realistic. I do think we need to close borders, but as an issue with national security.

Personally, I feel that people are dependent upon our welfare state and couldn't survive without the umbilical cord of social problems are much more of a drain on our country than illegals. They at least are willing to work and pull their weight. Maybe we could work out a trade to send some back across the border in exchange for hard workers. From my experieence in emergency rooms, most of the illegals will pay their medical bills or at least some part. Thats more than can be said for some citizens that end up their on an almost weekly basis.

[CCTAU 3,344]

Just keep the economy going. Too many idiots on the dim side to really resolve Iraq or fix immigration any time soon. So in the mean time, keep my retirement climbing. In the end, it will be the only thing left.

[WinCrimson 61]

Hard for me to pick just one. Here are my top 3.

1. Prevent tort reform and arbitration from growing legs.

2. Find a responsible solution to the war in Iraq.

3. Restore fiscal resonsibility to the White House and drastically reduce government spending as a whole.

With that said, Fred Thomspon 2008.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Here's my take:

Illegal Immigration Reform - numero uno, absolutely my TOP CRITERIA this year. Close the damn borders. Stop automatic "dirt under your feet" citizenship for children born to two illegal parents, or two parents who are citizens of another country. Treat "guest workers" like Americans who work in foreign countries are treated - require visas and paperwork. BUT SHUT THE DAMN BORDERS!!!!!!!!!! National security is a joke as long as the borders are not secure.

War in Iraq - we need to improve the situation, but anyone who wants us to totally get out would not get my vote. Yeah, sure, it's a jacked up situation, but it was jacked up before, and we cannot afford to walk away now - we are in it to win it. I genuinely, honestly believe that it can be "fixed", that a stable country can result, but the Iraquis are gonna have to get off their asses and help fight the terrorists in their midst. So the only candidates I would consider are ones who propose a new and/or improved strategy.

Abortion: Please. Could absolutely care less what some candidate's position is. Unless the entire group of Supremes dies at one time, the President will actually have very little impact on abortion law, which is initially a state by state issue. THERE ARE TOO MANY OTHER, MORE - MUCH MORE - IMPORTANT THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT. Solve the rest of the crap and then you can debate abortion until your lips fall off. This is why I will have no problem with a pro-choice Republican candidate.

Tax Reform - Nope. It is a flawed system but is better than 90+% of the world.

Economy - This time, it's NOT the economy, stupid, unless some Dem gets in and repeals all the tax cuts. Bush can be blamed for a lot, but a poorly performing economy is not one of them.

Other people may include:

Gay marriage - another "non-starter" issue for me, the least of this country's worries.

Tort Reform - It needs to happen on some level, but since no one truly understands the issue, it is another non-starter for me.

Ethics/Morals - as long as we have professional politicians, there will be corruption in Washington and in every state capital. Power corrupts, bottom line, and humans are flawed. Neither party has ANY moral high ground to stand on. Corruption is the only truly bi-partisan thing in DC.

[rexbo 104]

Here's my take:

Illegal Immigration Reform - numero uno, absolutely my TOP CRITERIA this year. Close the damn borders. Stop automatic "dirt under your feet" citizenship for children born to two illegal parents, or two parents who are citizens of another country. Treat "guest workers" like Americans who work in foreign countries are treated - require visas and paperwork. BUT SHUT THE DAMN BORDERS!!!!!!!!!! National security is a joke as long as the borders are not secure.

War in Iraq - we need to improve the situation, but anyone who wants us to totally get out would not get my vote. Yeah, sure, it's a jacked up situation, but it was jacked up before, and we cannot afford to walk away now - we are in it to win it. I genuinely, honestly believe that it can be "fixed", that a stable country can result, but the Iraquis are gonna have to get off their asses and help fight the terrorists in their midst. So the only candidates I would consider are ones who propose a new and/or improved strategy.

Abortion: Please. Could absolutely care less what some candidate's position is. Unless the entire group of Supremes dies at one time, the President will actually have very little impact on abortion law, which is initially a state by state issue. THERE ARE TOO MANY OTHER, MORE - MUCH MORE - IMPORTANT THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT. Solve the rest of the crap and then you can debate abortion until your lips fall off. This is why I will have no problem with a pro-choice Republican candidate.

Tax Reform - Nope. It is a flawed system but is better than 90+% of the world.

Economy - This time, it's NOT the economy, stupid, unless some Dem gets in and repeals all the tax cuts. Bush can be blamed for a lot, but a poorly performing economy is not one of them.

Other people may include:

Gay marriage - another "non-starter" issue for me, the least of this country's worries.

Tort Reform - It needs to happen on some level, but since no one truly understands the issue, it is another non-starter for me.

Ethics/Morals - as long as we have professional politicians, there will be corruption in Washington and in every state capital. Power corrupts, bottom line, and humans are flawed. Neither party has ANY moral high ground to stand on. Corruption is the only truly bi-partisan thing in DC.

Jenny, thanks, you just saved me about 15 minutes of typing; I agree with everything you said. (Except living over here in Florida a long way from the Rio Grande, I probably don't feel quite as strongly as you do on immigration.) You've actually done me quite a favor; I can ignore the Presidential race this time around, I just need to make sure you let me know by 1 Nov 2008 who I should vote for, I don't see how we can disagree on that...

[MDM4AU 336]

I voted not sure because I don't know what my one "single" most important issue is. I feel really strong about illegal immigration, keeping our economy growing and security. Coincidentally, all three play a part with the other.

Close the d@*$ borders.

Do not raise taxes, and stop spending. Stop the pork. Avoid universal healthcare (I think this is an economical nightmare.)

Bring a reasonable end to the war in Iraq and stop playing around with rogue nations. Either stand up strong or get out of the way and let in someone who will.

[MDM4AU 336]

Another thing I want is a leader that will honestly look for alternatives to our dependency on foreign oil. Drill ANWR, Coal-to-oil, Nuclear Power...something! Build more refineries to ease the gas prices until we can find a solution.

[AURaptor 1,126]

aumd03 wrote :

Are you voting for border security or national security? Personally I am more concerned with safety and terrorism than I am with illegals, although I realize they go hand in hand. I see proposals that work to register those here rather than deporting more beneficial and more realistic. I do think we need to close borders, but as an issue with national security.

Personally, I feel that people are dependent upon our welfare state and couldn't survive without the umbilical cord of social problems are much more of a drain on our country than illegals. They at least are willing to work and pull their weight. Maybe we could work out a trade to send some back across the border in exchange for hard workers. From my experience in emergency rooms, most of the illegals will pay their medical bills or at least some part. Thats more than can be said for some citizens that end up their on an almost weekly basis.

We can't have an effective war on Islamic Fascism if we don't secure the border. I'm not even talking about CLOSING the border, but we must wake up and take a harder look at ALL ports of entry to our country, not just the southern border with Mexico.

Growing up in Atlanta, I've seen first hand the population explosion of illegals in this city. Scores and scores of men standing around Home Depot , or walking up and down Buford Highway, looking for day labor jobs. Which is fine, if only they were here LEGALLY, which, sadly, most aren't. And don't think all these folks don't put a strain on the social services. These folks are here w/ no incentive to adapt to US culture, with little need to learn English as they've set up their own culture, with no real desire to become citizens, only residents.

[aumd03 2]

aumd03 wrote :

Are you voting for border security or national security? Personally I am more concerned with safety and terrorism than I am with illegals, although I realize they go hand in hand. I see proposals that work to register those here rather than deporting more beneficial and more realistic. I do think we need to close borders, but as an issue with national security.

Personally, I feel that people are dependent upon our welfare state and couldn't survive without the umbilical cord of social problems are much more of a drain on our country than illegals. They at least are willing to work and pull their weight. Maybe we could work out a trade to send some back across the border in exchange for hard workers. From my experience in emergency rooms, most of the illegals will pay their medical bills or at least some part. Thats more than can be said for some citizens that end up their on an almost weekly basis.

We can't have an effective war on Islamic Fascism if we don't secure the border. I'm not even talking about CLOSING the border, but we must wake up and take a harder look at ALL ports of entry to our country, not just the southern border with Mexico.

Growing up in Atlanta, I've seen first hand the population explosion of illegals in this city. Scores and scores of men standing around Home Depot , or walking up and down Buford Highway, looking for day labor jobs. Which is fine, if only they were here LEGALLY, which, sadly, most aren't. And don't think all these folks don't put a strain on the social services. These folks are here w/ no incentive to adapt to US culture, with little need to learn English as they've set up their own culture, with no real desire to become citizens, only residents.

I don't think its the strain you make it out to be. Sure its a strain when you compare it to them not being here at all, but when you compare it other social groups as far as strain, these people are not reliant of govt support. They pay for food, housing, and don't live in an entitlement world beyond their financial means.

Personally I tend to be a bit of a libertarian when it comes to language. The market will dictate things. If mcdonalds thinks its worth it to cater to spanish speaking people, they will do so. Its not a huge financial burden on hospitals or government to provide translators.

I think the biggest issue is the tax issue. If we went to a sales tax system, all consumers would be taxed, so they would contribute their fair share. I was in your shoes and was gung ho about exporting all aliens. Then a relative of mine explained that Uncle Sam would get his. What the contractor saves in cheap labor, he pockets and probably pays more being in a higher tax bracket. He may invest it, which stimulates the economy further. Like I said, I see the real issues being tax contribution and safety. I think the market will dictate the language issue. Its capitalism at its best.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

I don't think its the strain you make it out to be. Sure its a strain when you compare it to them not being here at all, but when you compare it other social groups as far as strain, these people are not reliant of govt support. They pay for food, housing, and don't live in an entitlement world beyond their financial means.

Personally I tend to be a bit of a libertarian when it comes to language. The market will dictate things. If mcdonalds thinks its worth it to cater to spanish speaking people, they will do so. Its not a huge financial burden on hospitals or government to provide translators.

NOT A STRAIN???????????? Let me tell you something, bubba, it costs a hospital in Houston a hell of a lot more than money for TRANSLATORS. Just ask some of your medical bretheren here in Texas...

The impact of immigration on our public health is often overlooked. Although millions of visitors for tourism and business come every year, the foreign population of special concern is illegal residents, who come most often from countries with endemic health problems and less developed health care. They are of greatest consequence because they are responsible for a disproportionate share of serious public health problems, are living among us for extended periods of time, and often are dependent on U.S. health care services.

Because illegal immigrants, unlike those who are legally admitted for permanent residence, undergo no medical screening to assure that they are not bearing contagious diseases, the rapidly swelling population of illegal aliens in our country has also set off a resurgence of contagious diseases that had been totally or nearly eradicated by our public health system.

According to Dr. Laurence Nickey, director of the El Paso heath district “Contagious diseases that are generally considered to have been controlled in the United States are readily evident along the border ... The incidence of tuberculosis in El Paso County is twice that of the U.S. rate. Dr. Nickey also states that leprosy, which is considered by most Americans to be a disease of the Third World, is readily evident along the U.S.-Mexico border and that dysentery is several times the U.S. rate ... People have come to the border for economic opportunities, but the necessary sewage treatment facilities, public water systems, environmental enforcement, and medical care have not been made available to them, causing a severe risk to health and well being of people on both sides of the border.”

“The pork tapeworm, which thrives in Latin America and Mexico, is showing up along the U.S. border, threatening to ravage victims with symptoms ranging from seizures to death. ...

[snip]

"By default, we grant health passes to illegal aliens. Yet many illegal aliens harbor fatal diseases that American medicine fought and vanquished long ago, such as drug-resistant tuberculosis, malaria, leprosy, plague, polio, dengue, and Chagas disease."

What is unseen is their [illegal aliens] free medical care that has degraded and closed some of America’s finest emergency medical facilities, and caused hospital bankruptcies: 84 California hospitals are closing their doors.

[snip]

Immigrants are often uninsured and underinsured. Forty-three percent of noncitizens under 65 have no health insurance. That means there are 9.4 million uninsured immigrants, a majority of whom are in the country illegally, constituting 15 percent of the total uninsured in the nation in the mid-1990s.6 The cost of the medical care of these uninsured immigrants is passed onto the taxpayer, and strains the financial stability of the health care community.

Another problem is immigrants’ use of hospital and emergency services rather than preventative medical care. For example, utilization rate of hospitals and clinics by illegal aliens (29 percent) is more than twice the rate of the overall U.S. population (11 percent).7

As a result, the costs of medical care for immigrants are staggering. The estimated cost of unreimbursed medical care in 2004 in California was about $1.4 billion per year. In Texas, the estimated cost was about $.85 billion, and in Arizona the comparable estimate was $.4 billion per year.

One of the frequent costs to U.S. taxpayers is delivery of babies to illegal alien mothers. A California study put the number of these anchor baby deliveries in the state in 1994 at 74,987, at a cost of $215 million. At that time, those births constituted 36 percent of all Medi-Cal births, and they have grown now to substantially more than half or the annual Medi-Cal budget. In 2003, 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in San Joaquin General Hospital’s maternity ward were anchor babies. Medical in 2003 had 760,000 illegal alien beneficiaries, up from 2002, when there were 470,000.

[SupperClub 0]

For me personally, I vote with my wallet. I will NEVER, EVER vote for a candidate who is open about raising taxes, repealing tax cuts, or 'investing' in new social programs. I understand that the president alone can not pass legislation regarding tax reform, but I will stand behind any candidate who is for meaningful change in our tax system. I'm tired of our current system, which punishes achievement, and if a candidate comes out and openly supports tax reform (hmm...say the FairTax?) he'll have my support.

[aumd03 2]

I don't think its the strain you make it out to be. Sure its a strain when you compare it to them not being here at all, but when you compare it other social groups as far as strain, these people are not reliant of govt support. They pay for food, housing, and don't live in an entitlement world beyond their financial means.

Personally I tend to be a bit of a libertarian when it comes to language. The market will dictate things. If mcdonalds thinks its worth it to cater to spanish speaking people, they will do so. Its not a huge financial burden on hospitals or government to provide translators.

NOT A STRAIN???????????? Let me tell you something, bubba, it costs a hospital in Houston a hell of a lot more than money for TRANSLATORS. Just ask some of your medical bretheren here in Texas...

The impact of immigration on our public health is often overlooked. Although millions of visitors for tourism and business come every year, the foreign population of special concern is illegal residents, who come most often from countries with endemic health problems and less developed health care. They are of greatest consequence because they are responsible for a disproportionate share of serious public health problems, are living among us for extended periods of time, and often are dependent on U.S. health care services.

Because illegal immigrants, unlike those who are legally admitted for permanent residence, undergo no medical screening to assure that they are not bearing contagious diseases, the rapidly swelling population of illegal aliens in our country has also set off a resurgence of contagious diseases that had been totally or nearly eradicated by our public health system.

According to Dr. Laurence Nickey, director of the El Paso heath district “Contagious diseases that are generally considered to have been controlled in the United States are readily evident along the border ... The incidence of tuberculosis in El Paso County is twice that of the U.S. rate. Dr. Nickey also states that leprosy, which is considered by most Americans to be a disease of the Third World, is readily evident along the U.S.-Mexico border and that dysentery is several times the U.S. rate ... People have come to the border for economic opportunities, but the necessary sewage treatment facilities, public water systems, environmental enforcement, and medical care have not been made available to them, causing a severe risk to health and well being of people on both sides of the border.”

“The pork tapeworm, which thrives in Latin America and Mexico, is showing up along the U.S. border, threatening to ravage victims with symptoms ranging from seizures to death. ...

[snip]

"By default, we grant health passes to illegal aliens. Yet many illegal aliens harbor fatal diseases that American medicine fought and vanquished long ago, such as drug-resistant tuberculosis, malaria, leprosy, plague, polio, dengue, and Chagas disease."

What is unseen is their [illegal aliens] free medical care that has degraded and closed some of America’s finest emergency medical facilities, and caused hospital bankruptcies: 84 California hospitals are closing their doors.

[snip]

Immigrants are often uninsured and underinsured. Forty-three percent of noncitizens under 65 have no health insurance. That means there are 9.4 million uninsured immigrants, a majority of whom are in the country illegally, constituting 15 percent of the total uninsured in the nation in the mid-1990s.6 The cost of the medical care of these uninsured immigrants is passed onto the taxpayer, and strains the financial stability of the health care community.

Another problem is immigrants’ use of hospital and emergency services rather than preventative medical care. For example, utilization rate of hospitals and clinics by illegal aliens (29 percent) is more than twice the rate of the overall U.S. population (11 percent).7

As a result, the costs of medical care for immigrants are staggering. The estimated cost of unreimbursed medical care in 2004 in California was about $1.4 billion per year. In Texas, the estimated cost was about $.85 billion, and in Arizona the comparable estimate was $.4 billion per year.

One of the frequent costs to U.S. taxpayers is delivery of babies to illegal alien mothers. A California study put the number of these anchor baby deliveries in the state in 1994 at 74,987, at a cost of $215 million. At that time, those births constituted 36 percent of all Medi-Cal births, and they have grown now to substantially more than half or the annual Medi-Cal budget. In 2003, 70 percent of the 2,300 babies born in San Joaquin General Hospital’s maternity ward were anchor babies. Medical in 2003 had 760,000 illegal alien beneficiaries, up from 2002, when there were 470,000.

Some of the numbers in this study may be misleading. It says they use hospitals and ER's more often. But it says nothing of total visits. So they may be using it as a percentage of total medical visits more often, but "citizens" are actually consuming much more medical resources using both systems. My point is, I've never seen anyone I suspected might be illegal in our ER for a tummy ache. Or 43 visits in the last year for the same complaint. Or an ambulance ride to the hospital because the baby has an earache. (both seen in the last two days) I don't see them in for drug overdoses. Trust me, you could sew up 100 illegals or deliver 10 babies for the cost of one person going into an intensive care unit for a couple of days after a drug overdose. I realize my evidence is anecdotal, but i just haven't seen the "strain" here. Its also myopic to think just about houston and texas when it comes to strain. I'll admit my view is somewhat myopic because we don't have the immigrant strain that texas and california do. My point is, I don't think health care needs is justification. Some of fine citizens that contribute little to nothing to the working force, and nothing in taxes, and pay $1 for their "insurance" are just as much of a strain.

As for fatal diseases. People from all over the world can harbor diseases. There are areas in the southwest where rodents carry plague. Look at the CDC website on plague (Yersenia pestis) and notice that mexico isn't an endemic area, whereas the western US is. Who's giving it to whom? http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/plague/index.htm

As for TB. Grady Memorial hospital in Atlanta has a floor dedicated to TB patients. This is due mostly to the homeless population in the southeast and the weather being humid which is friendly to TB. Remember the old sanatoriums were in dry, usually cold climates. In Tombstone, Doc Holliday was in the west because of his TB.

Its a little dismissive for the author of this article to say tourism is ok even though we have no health check on those coming into the country, even when people come to this country from areas where there are epidemics. But illegals are the root of all evil.

I'll admit that illegals consume health resources. And they consume social services. But I think they tend to be demonized on this, when other groups consume more with little contribution to society. But no one will speak out against them because they retain their right to vote.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

It's not just Texas - note that California provided nearly $2BILLION in health care to uninsureds, the vast majority of whom are illegals or at least not US residents.

But I highlight Texas because (a) I hear about this on the news all the time and ( b ) it's a border state, so of COURSE the border states are going to face a greater problem than wherever you are - at least for the moment. The numbers are staggering - and in a town like Houston, we are able to specifically identify the dollars spent on care for illegal aliens.

A study ordered by commissioners in Harris County, which includes Houston, found that about one-fifth of the patients in its health system last year were immigrants without documents, most of them from Mexico. Their numbers had increased 44 percent in three years, the study found, and their care had cost the county $97.3 million, about 14 percent of the health system's total operating costs.

That $97.3 million dollars is what the local property taxpayer (Meaning ME) subsidized the district budget for undocumented immigrant care in 2005.

In California, hospitals spent at least $1.02 billion last year on health care for illegal immigrants that was not reimbursed by federal or state programs, according to federal government estimates. Hospital officials there said the ailing health care system was being pushed to its limit.

Link

Further, it's not just emergent care: The Feds will reimburse the hospitals for some of the costs related to emergent care. But one investigation by the TX AG's office in 2001 showed that Harris Country Hospital District funded $330 MILLION in health care costs for illegals over a 3 yr period - and since 2/3 of all the visits were NON-EMERGENT, the money was not reimbursable, and the Harris County taxpayer (meaning ME) paid those costs.

Link

I agree that welfare cases are a drain on the system too - and they annoy me to no end. But a line has to be drawn - those welfare cases are citizens of this country, and like it or not, my tax dollars support my fellow citizens. I have a real problem with paying for health care for people who are in this country illegally.

When I was in the hospital having Spencer, he was the only white baby out of the twelve babies in the nursery. There was one Asian baby, one black baby, and the rest were Hispanic. I got ZERO attention that first night except at shift change when they came in to check vitals. I had to ring repeatedly for basic stuff like pain meds, which considering I had a c-section, were pretty important. I was NOT ringing for pillow fluffing and ice chips. It took forever. One nurse actually said "We are so busy tonight- you are my favorite patient because you are low maintenance. And you speak English."

[CCTAU 3,344]

It's very simple actually. I believe a legal citizen has a right to those services provided to him by the country of HIS residence. I believe an illegal has NO right to these services.