Grassley Presses Budget Committee Witnesses on the Cost of Sanctuary Cities

Grassley Presses Budget Committee Witnesses on the Cost of Sanctuary Cities

WASHINGTON - Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today participated in a Senate Budget Committee hearing to examine the cost of sanctuary city policies. In response to Grassley's questioning, expert witnesses discussed the safety concerns and fiscal burdens sanctuary cities place on all Americans. Grassley is the former Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee and the current Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Grassley questioned the following witnesses:

• The Honorable Chad Wolf, Former Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and Homeland Security and Immigration Chair for America First Policy Institute

• Jessica M. Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies for the Center for Immigration Studies

• The Honorable Michael L. Chapman, Sheriff of Loudon County, Virginia

Video and excerpts of Grassley's questions follow.

VIDEO

On illegal immigrants' use of taxpayer-funded government programs:

GRASSLEY: "There are some legal limitations that prevent states from completely excluding illegal immigrants from access to some of their government programs. [Mr. Wolf], what are those limitations and what immediate steps, considering those limitations, can the federal government take to minimize the fiscal burden of sanctuary jurisdictions?"

WOLF: "When we talk about public benefits, whether they're federal or state benefits, I think… these are strong magnets of why folks decide to come to the United States illegally. There's a variety of different reasons for them to do so, but if they're able to stay in a jurisdiction that shields them from law enforcement [and] provides public benefits - particularly at the state level, but also at the federal level, both need to be looked at - that continues to incentivize those individuals to come and to stay."

On the broader cost of sanctuary city policies:

GRASSLEY: "Sanctuary jurisdictions frame their policy as squarely a matter of local policy, but we know these policies have both broader public safety and fiscal effects on areas beyond their borders. [Ms. Vaughan], what are some examples of costs to both the federal government and the state governments caused by sanctuary policies that are often forgotten or overlooked?"

VAUGHAN: "[A] forgotten cost is the cost of providing benefits, taxpayer-funded social services, to illegal alien households. Federal law currently allows states to choose to do that, if their legislature approves it, at enormous cost. Some of those dollars are federal dollars, so all of us as Americans share the cost burden of that arrangement. Congress can do something about that.

"There's also the cost of the erosion of the integrity of our immigration system… Individual states and local jurisdictions can obstruct the enforcement of federal laws that are passed by Congress without consequence, even though many of these sanctuary policies are clearly in violation of Section 1373 and 1644 of the [Illegal] Immigration [Reform and Immigrant Responsibility] Act. It's a slap in the face to legal immigrants to allow these policies that shield individuals from immigration enforcement - most of whom are criminal aliens - immigrants don't want to live with these policies either."

On Biden-era border policies and the fiscal burden of sanctuary cities' growth:

GRASSLEY: "Mr. Wolf, if you can answer this question - it's in regard to the 11 million people who came here under [President] Biden and [Vice President] Harris. Over that period of time, did illegal immigrants seek out sanctuary jurisdictions for safe harbor?

WOLF: "I think if you look historically where illegal aliens reside - they reside all across the United States - but if you were to do a heat map, you would see the majority of them in places like New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles and others that have these sanctuary jurisdictions. So yes, I do believe that illegal aliens do tend to go to these types of jurisdictions."

GRASSLEY: "Sheriff Chapman, what are some examples of state and local cost increases those jurisdictions incurred?"

CHAPMAN: "It is a cost to us. It's cost to put [law enforcement officers] out there. You're talking about more homicides… we've had our share locally here, and certainly, as Chairman [Graham] brought up, we've had them in Loudoun County. It's the human factor that is really important here. We want to keep our people safe and keep them alive."

-30-

• Print
• Email
• Like
• Tweet