Right On, Frank Holtz

By Loudoun Insider

Frank Holtz, who is running for Leesburg Town Council (see Leesburg Today article about kick-off), wrote a great letter to the editor printed in yesterday’s Washington Post Loudoun Extra (link here). For all those who say that all illegal immigrants are perfect hard working law abiding citizens, Holtz recounts several recent notable crimes committed in the Leesburg-Loudoun community by illegals, including murder, prostitution, and large-scale drug trafficking. That drug case involved drugs disguised as candy of all things!Â

I realize that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are basically good hearted people, but this points out all too well why we absolutely must have control over our borders. We must know who is coming into this country and have some kind of record of those who remain. Allowing the bad apples to roam unencumbered and unregistered makes us all less safe – legal and illegal citizens. Frank Holtz definitely deserves a seat on the Leesburg council, and will certainly be a voice for law and order.


  • Mark Kay says:

    Was there ever any doubt that this is what most sensible people consider to be the solution? This is how it’s been done, legally, since the beginning:)

  • Mark Kay says:

    BTW, we’ve taking in 2,000,000 LEGAL immigrants per year in recent years.

  • Laura V says:

    “The U.S. immigration rate rose from around 2.0 per 1,000 residents in the 1950s – 1960s to about 3.5 per 1,000 residents by 2000. In earlier periods of our history the immigration rate has been as high as 16 per 1,000, or five times higher than today. The average immigration rate over the past 150 years has been about 5 per 1,000 residents.

    Today, more than 25 million Americans — or about one in ten — is foreign born. This is somewhat lower than the historical average of about one in eight Americans being foreign born. Our historical experience thus suggests that increasing immigrant quotas would not cause unprecedented immigration.”
    Stephen Moore- Center for Immigration Studies

  • Laura V says:

    “This is how it’s been done, legally, since the beginning:) ”
    Another example of revisionism, but if it makes you feel better, nostalgic…

  • Mark Kay says:

    So Laura, since you claim not to be an “illegal alien advocate”, what’s your take on the “gum ball” video and what’s YOUR solution?

  • Laura V says:

    “Your conspiracy concern that the immigrant population should continue to be of European extraction is misplaced.”
    “Secondly, who would you suppose is managing this immigrant population control? The government, the Knights Templar, the Vatican; how about the Matrix?”

    To Jose- I was speaking specifically about Numbers USA, an organization I am very familiar with, and an organization who has no direct control but would rather seek to influence policy through public pressure on legislators.
    I know their positions about population control – whether or not they are concerned about the race or geographic origin of immigrants is not something that they (as a formal position) have stated, though when they refer to limits of immigration they do generally refer to Latin Americans. I was careful to phrase that as a hypothesis, not a conclusion. Visit their website if you need more information. Give me more credit than that.

    And Mark Kay, the gumball video was not about illegal immigration, it was about LEGAL immigration. The birth rate in the U.S. today is below replacement levels. For many industrialized nations, low birth rates are a huge long-term demographic problem. I’ve heard much reported on this, European nations that are doing everything they can to encourage more children per family. The problem with the video is that it also includes the descendents of immigarnst in teh calculations. Presumably, as all major studies indicate, children of immigarnts fully integrate inot our society, and if they don’t, their children surely do. So whats the problem? That is the very nature of our nation.
    If we are to worry about population we should be more worried about sustainability, energy, food consumption (and not how much we consume but rather what we consume), etc.

  • The gum ball video… I don’t know much about NumbersUSA or Roy Beck, but I watched the video and I have to say my BS meter pinged a few times. Maybe it’s a style thing.

    Is there a correlation between these growth rates and our GDP? Productivity? I would love to see a debate and not a stage show.

    Guys that use devices (gum balls that spill out of a jar, the color red for the immigration numbers set against the green for “all the rest of us”) that dramatize (not just support) their points only brings out the cynic in me.

    After sitting through more that a few statistical presentations I can tell you that for every chart and gum ball this guy can pull out, there is some other guy with his chart and bag of gum balls who could make an argument for increased population and prosperity or an analysis of immigration and innovation (Richard Florida has done some work here minus the gum balls).

    This issue can be sliced a hundred different ways and it’s more complicated than any of us can imagine. There are a lot of questions to ask and a lot of gum balls to consider.

    My biggest concern is that the many and difficult questions will not be asked or considered, but rather this issue will be boiled down and framed by people with little patience and even less willingness to look past their own interests, preconceptions, nationalist tendencies, or personal anecdotes.

  • Mark Kay says:

    Laura, the bottom line is the red area in the graphs of the “gumball video”. We cannot sustain population at those levels no matter how the increase is attained.

    What do you propose to maintain a reasonable population level?

  • Mark, what does “can not sustain” mean? Food? Housing? Employment?

  • Laura V says:

    I gotta tell ya Mark, I am no expert in population levels. When I think of population I tend to think of it on a global scale and in terms of sustainability. That is to say, there are surely differences in what is a sustainable population based on use of resources, food supplies, etc. In other words, if we use resources in a particular way and consume particular foods grown/raised in a particular way for a certain amount of time the world can support a certain number of people whereas the number would change if we use resources differently (less, more, differently – whatever). The same would be true for a sustainable US population. I reject the Bubblegum Video and the premis of “us” vs “them” (as we are all descendents of immigrants) in the video and don’t care to comment further on it as it is, as Edmund stated, “a stage show” that could be challenged in a multitude of ways by a well informed and intelligent thinker.
    What is more interesting is how this conversation has shifted from criminal illegal aliens (illegal aliens. a civil offense like it or not, who have also commited crimes) who should surely and inarguably be deported, why teh WP did not give that sufficient attention, and to the larger issue of a porous border and dreadfully mismanaged system, to a conversation relating to population control and to reducing LEGAL immigration. Just goes to show that while many people purport that they are only concerned about ILLEGAL immigration, at least some of them have issues with legal immigration as well. Your solution of immigarnst coming here legally as being teh logical solution has some holes in it, economically speaking, when you fail to include that you also feel that the number of opportunities for legal immigration should be drastically reduced.

    To Mr. Holtz, I don’t think that anyone felt that you were discriminating against any particular group. No worries.

  • Mark Kay says:

    Edmund: Refer to the video. I can’t explain it any better than that.

    Obviously, there’s an upper limit to viability of almost anything. Population is one of those things.

  • Mark Kay says:

    Laura, you’re always there to poke holes in proposals but never there to make proposals of your own.

    Yes, we’re a nation of LEGAL immigrants. Yes, we have always invited immigrants to our country. We’ve been bringing in about 2 Million LEGAL immigrants per year in recent years.

    No intelligent person continues doing the same things today as they have for the previous 10, 20 or 50 years if conditions have changed and it no longer makes sense to continue doing those things.

    We can see right here in Loudoun how expanding population has caused growing pains. Schools, roads, water, healthcare…to name a few. Think of this situation on a national level and, if you’re sensible, you’ll understand the point to keeping control over immigration.

  • Laura V says:

    In Loudoun we have poorly managed growth. We can’t very well close the doors to Loudoun and say no more people. But we can manage development so that it is more sustainable. There is a way to manage growth and to manage resources. I just heard a report about how the world cannot possibly produce enough grain to feed the world’s population because we compete with livestock in grain consumption. Perhaps if the diets of developed nations did not depend on so much meat there would be enough grain to feed the world, kum bah ya, or whatever. Again, that is not my area of expertise.
    You are asking me to solve a problem that I am not convinced even exists. Sorry your Number USA You Tube videos do not convince me.

    I have (to the point of boredom, I’m sure) given plenty of specific examples of how I think that our immigration system can be fixed, starting with securing the borders and including development projects, and as my good friend Joe B. suggested, applying conditions on aid) in countries where the largest number of immigrants originate from.

  • G. Stone says:

    The socialist nitwits in Europe are finally admitting they made severe errors in judgement reflected in years of poor public policy regarding immigration. We have those in America who want to replicate those assisine decisions. Some people are simply enamored with the concept of thinking with their heart in lieu of their brain, chained to leftist dogma the truth be dammed or are just dumb as a bag of hammers. Pick one.

    Dutch lawmaker: U.S. should see language as common national bond
    By Jon Gambrell
    The Associated Press, February 27, 2008

    Little Rock, AR (AP) — The anti-immigrant sentiment that swept Europe from French slums to the Netherlands likely will come to the United States unless the government can find ways to address it, a Dutch lawmaker said Tuesday.

    Martijn van Dam, a member of parliament for the Dutch Labor Party, acknowledged his nation’s immigrants many Muslims from Turkey and Africa offered different challenges than the Latin Americans coming to the United States. Speaking in Little Rock Tuesday, he said residents should expect a similarly sharpened debate.

    The Netherlands, a country of 16 million people along the North Sea, long has offered its country as a refuge for political refugees. However, van Dam said many of the new immigrants took advantage of a system offering a high minimum wage and good social security benefits.

    Some European politicians have taken a hard-line approach against immigrants. Those in the Netherlands looked at the issue as the ‘lid of a garbage can’ something that could leave the stink of racism, van Dam said. However, he said that alienated lower and middle-class citizens who thought the government didn’t want to take any action.

    ‘What developed was what we had were black neighborhoods and black schools, something we didn’t have before,’ van Dam told the Arkansas Committee on Foreign Relations. ‘We didn’t know what it was and all of a sudden, it was there.’

    Van Dam said legislators responded to the complaints by limiting immigration by marriage and requiring immigrants to learn several thousand Dutch words.

    ‘Perhaps if you did them here, that would put you in the corner of the right-wing politicians,’ van Dam said. ‘We did it because we are convinced it is the only way to secure our society that is based on the values of tolerance.’

    He said the immigration debate particularly struck him as he toured a fence lining the U.S. border to Mexico near San Diego. He said he also spent time talking to a member of the Minuteman Project, a group of volunteers that patrol the border.

    After the Sept. 11 terror attacks, the Netherlands now faces a complicated threat as Muslim students who were once agnostic now search for answers in Islam, van Dam said. He said about 5 percent of those students could become ‘radicalized,’ while 1 percent could be a ‘danger to the society.’

    Van Dam said about a thousand of those people remain under surveillance of Dutch security forces.

    ‘The biggest threat of terrorism isn’t coming from abroad anymore,’ van Dam said. ‘It’s coming from inside.’

    Those touting the European model on how to handle immigration both legal and illegal need their heads examined. Wake up people!

  • G. Stone says:

    Some local lawmakers actually ‘get-It’ when it comes to illegals. Sadly, our newly elected here in Loudoun do not. Prince William has some positive movement. We however, are retreating in the face of mounting evidence that local action can be effective.

    Prince William police eye start of illegal immigrant crackdown

    By the Associated Press

    February 26, 2008


    Prince William County police will begin enforcing a crackdown on illegal immigrants next week.

    The entire 530-member police force is amid training to understand their new duties under the policy, which was put in place by the county’s board of supervisors.

    The new policy that takes effect Monday has received national attention as one of the most aggressive in the U.S. It directs police to check the immigration status of anyone who is detained if the officer has probable cause to believe the person is an illegal immigrant.

    Opponents of the measure say that despite police assurances, the policy will lead to racial profiling.

    Copyright © 2008, Newport News, Va., Daily Press

  • Ed Myers says:

    Malthusian chicken littles (we are all going to starve to death because people we don’t like are breeding like rabbits and will take all the natural resources unless we impose population control) has been around since at least the 1800s. Those prophets of doom have so far been false ones.

    If there are excess jobs here that people are willing to leave family and friends and move here to work then that says we must be doing something right. If people are leaving, that is when we have more painful problems. Migrants vote with their feet.

    Ref: (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9050380/Thomas-Robert-Malthus) and

  • Laura V says:

    Greg – Prince William County is also looking at an 8% increase in taxes due to a budget deficit and had to raid their rainy day funds to fund this measure. In the end they will spend more money to fund these measures than they were able to even guess illegal immigrants were costing the county.
    Sure, if there are no holds barred and an unlimited amount of money to spend I guess there is a lot local jurisdictions can do to combat this problem, meanwhile the federal government does nothing.

  • It will be interesting to see how the PWC measures play out, their effects, and how much they cost. I also hope Loudoun can keep G. Stone from moving to PWC.

    Mark, I said I watched your video. Your buddy Roy does not define sustainability. Maybe he mentions it during some part of his show that isn’t up on YT.

    His remarks touch on income, which as you know, can be measured many different ways set against GDP, inflation, etc…

    He mentions “effects on the American people”. That’s certainly vague.

    He mentions school-building. Ok…

    He also states our government supports immigration to “rescue the third world”. I have never heard that as a policy goal.

    He does mention, erroneously I believe, that our government has a policy role as “safety-valve to Mexico.” I believe that may be Mexico’s thinking, but not ours.

    He mentions standards of living without quantitative measures, social fabric without defining it (good luck with that), and environmental resources, without quantifying that.

    He may have valid points, he just didn’t make them buy supporting them with additional facts or data.

    I’m wondering, while watching this little video, did you ever question the size of the jar he dramatically overfills?

  • Mark Kay says:

    Ed, I really don’t have the energy to defend something that seems obvious: That there’s an upper limit, somewhere, to how many people any country, state or local area can support in terms of infrastructure, etc. I won’t be around when things get really bad. If you feel compelled to leave a cesspool to your offspring, have at it.

    If what has happened to Loudoun, and the associated tax increases aren’t enough proof for you, I don’t imagine any facts I present can change your mind. The proof is right before your eyes if you choose to see it.

    G. Stone:
    While I don’t support the immigration policies of the new dem board, maybe they don’t feel that they should have to clean up the mess created by big business pandering Republicans (the “cheap labor party”) who created this mess.

    Until the R’s stop the denial about who created this mess and put their representatives on notice, they’ll be looking at continued sell outs in the future.

  • Mark, you do have enough energy to post platitudes and buy in to a back-of-an-envelope equation that by 2050 we’ll all be standing side by side by side fighting for water or a place to pee.

    What about technology advancements in Roy’s equation?

    Beck might have great numbers but his presentation seems more drama than hard information. That dilutes his argument.

    Does the planet face a population crisis? Yes. Can our environment sustain human at present growth rates? Not likely — without a technology breakthrough.

    You can’t look at population numbers in a vacuum and sustainability doesn’t know borders.

  • Ed Myers says:

    It’s a big country. Do you ever look out the window when flying cross-country? Ever drive through Kansas, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota? There is room for 1000 times the population we have now and still let everyone go hunting with rifles.

    Loudoun has a tax structure problem in that we spread the cost of all child care on every taxpayer instead of requiring parents to pay for all the frills. If parents weren’t subsidized so heavily by taxpayers for afterschool care, sports, and half-utilized school buildings we wouldn’t have a budget problem. Schools are 70% of the county budget.

    We’d also have more singles and childless families stay in Loudoun and fewer families with kids would move here. If the people are coming to Loudoun for the schools and the state won’t allow us to charge impact fees on new developments to finance all the new schools then we need to look creatively at reducing school building costs. I’ve made proposals elsewhere on this blog on how to more than double the classroom capacity of middle and high schools. It requires scheduling changes (all-year school) that some people might not like but if it was applied to new developments maybe the builder would pony up money to build the school for a marketing edge. If they didn’t then new subdivision would get the least desirable school schedule.

    Since the old-timers in Loudoun have been supporting local schools for a long time the new migrants (whether from Fairfax, DC, MD, or Mexico) should end up paying extra to catch up since they are also the ones who expect to immediately have brand new schools to go with their brand new homes. The easiest way to give them what they want is to add the cost of the infrastructure into the price of a new home.

    Mark, the issue is not as monochromatically obvious as you assert. Blaming all our ills on illegal immigrants is too simplistic an answer.

  • Sanity says:

    The problem is that we have no economic model that assumes zero population growth (ZPG). Assume for a minute that we have reached ZPG. What does that do to, say, housing starts? Well, housing starts would be replacement only. That industry would, effectively, die. Forget Starbucks growth. No where else to put them, unless it’s replacement of one coffee drink with another. Long-term retirement benefits? No chance. Have to up the retirement age to about 70+ or massively cut benefits. The list goes on and on. The math just doesn’t add up to have a sustainable economy long term with ZPG.

    At present, the U.S. is nowhere near a maximum population that can be sustained here. However, with some commodities worldwide reaching the “tipping point”, we will certainly have to scale back our standard of living expectations, especially with our reliance on debt to sustain it.

    On a tactical note, in my research, it seems most towns/counties that enact significant illegal immigrant controls have seen their revenue go down and their expenses go up, and seen a lot of empty retail. This seems to be happening in PW county, much faster than even I expected. Good luck PW. If you’d rather be pure and poor, go for it! It’s sad when blind bigotry and hatred caused people to hurt themselves so much.

  • G. Stone says:

    You live in Loudoun Co, your gov’t is doing nothing and your taxes are going up.
    Don’t try to hang PW’s tax increase on it’s response to illegals. PW ‘s taxes are going up for the very same reasons yours are.

  • G. Stone says:


    Put your R’s and D’s away for a minute. Sound public policy is sound public policy. Your contention that public policy via spite might be acceptable is wrong. The previous board is gone. It is this boards responsibility to govern in the best intrest of Loudouns citizens. On the subject of illegals in Loudoun they are failing.

    It is what it is. This currents boards policies to date are counter productive! If they continue, I and others will continue to take them to task for their collective stupidity.

  • Laura V says:

    Greg – it is not good public policy to spend millions on a new program, particularly when the amount spent is significantly more than what the problem that they are supposed to be fixing was “estimated” to be costing. Particularly ill advised was the raiding of the rainy day fund, especially when the economic forecasters are predicting a monsoon.

  • Mark Kay says:

    “It is what it is. This currents boards policies to date are counter productive! If they continue, I and others will continue to take them to task for their collective stupidity.”

    I agree and I started off by saying that I don’t approve of their policies. I also don’t approve of R’s giving their elected R officials a free pass for creating the illegal employment (and hence, the illegal problem in general) situation.

  • Mark Kay says:

    “On a tactical note, in my research, it seems most towns/counties that enact significant illegal immigrant controls have seen their revenue go down and their expenses go up, and seen a lot of empty retail.”

    Yeah, it’s really sad to see those check cashing and “payday loan” establishments going out of business 😉

Leave Comment