out of five prisoners in American jails isnan illegal alien. This costs the publicnmoney in arrests, trials, public defenders,nand incarceration, let alone in thenopportunity costs entailed.nThose who try to get hard figures onnuses of public money for illegal aliensnare usually stonewalled.’ “We don’tnkeep our records that way.” In manyncases, agencies that provide money andnservices have been forbidden to keepnrecords of the alienage status of thosenthey service, or even to ask their status,nin some cases as a result of courtndecisions. However, some figures arenknown. The net loss to L.A. County’nfor subsidized medical care for illegalsnand for use of the criminal justicensystem to apprehend illegals is estimatednat $276.1 million. AFDC costs tontaxpayers in L.A. County are alreadyn$249 million, a sum expected to reachn$ 1 billion by the turn of the century.nOverall, Los Angeles and L.A. Countynin fiscal year 1990-1991 spent $1.6nbillion for services rendered to illegalnaliens.nThe most accurate figures seem tonbe from L.A. County, because theirnBoard of Supervisors — unlike those innSan Diego and other counties, wherenthey shy from talking about costs to thenpublic — is actually interested in findingnthe costs. Many local city andncounty governments care little aboutnalienage, except to try to be reimbursednby the federal government fornany known expenses. They tend tonlook at federal money as “free” moneyn— it doesn’t come from their budgets.nWhen a California state senator triednto get figures on a statewide level, thenprotests from immigrants’ rights groupsnwere deafening, and he was denouncednas “racist.” At last report, henwas still trying to find hard figures.nCalifornia has illegal aliens from allnover the world, though its geographynmeans most are from south of thenborder. They all cost the taxpayer, notnonly in giveaway programs but in thentaking of jobs that could and wouldnhave been filled by American citizens.nThose who do menial labor, includingnworking in the fields, take jobs fromnnative migrant workers. Those withnmore skills are often in constructionnwork, happily accepting a lesser wagenthan citizens normally get. However,nlaw enforcement professionals find thatnin the last ten years, this profile of thendiligent illegal alien has changed. Mostnillegals used to be desperate, hardworking,nuneducated, and docile and wouldngo home after a growing season. Suchnpeople still enter, but their percentagenis decreasing, as more enter to panhandle,nrob, steal, and deal drugs.nHow do you levy the cost to landownersnwho find a few or a greatnnumber of illegals living on their property?nHow do you levy the cost tonbusinesses that have large clusters ofnillegals hanging around their entrances,nwaiting for day work, frighteningnpassersby, and scaring away regularncustomers? Local police are of littlenhelp to them because of the assortedncourt and bureaucratic decisionsnspurred by immigration advocates whonhave deemed illegal aliens a federal,nand not a local, problem. There is angrossly insufficient number of federalnagents to handle the sheer volume ofnillegals who should be deported. Thesenillegals are living in holes in the groundnlined with plastic sheets, or in hovelsnbuilt from scrap lumber, with no cookingnor plumbing facilities, as they waitnfor work. Result: the areas inundatednwith illegals become instant sewers,nand more than one large fire hasnstarted from their open-air cooking.nPerhaps some day it will be politicallynfashionable to do the paperworknneeded to assess the cost of allowingnillegal aliens in our country — the costnof illegals using government programsnto which they are not entitled, the costnof losing jobs to illegal noncitizens, thencost of sending the illegals home. Perhapsnsome day politicians will realizenthat our borders are out of control andndo something constructive about it,nsuch as hiring adequate numbers ofnBorder Patrol and INS agents to cutnthe problem off at the source. Perhapsnsome day citizens from all over thencountry will realize how great a proportionnof their taxes go for thesenpurposes and that, although Californianhas the greatest problem with thisnissue, similar conditions and expensesnare occurring all over the nation. Atnthat point, the people will give Congressna mandate: fix the problem, andnfix it now.nBarbara McCarthy is editor of ElevennNinety-Nine, the publication of thenStamp Out Crime Council of SannDiego, California.nnnLetter From thenLower Rightnby John Shelton ReednClassnDismissednLast month, I wrote that Southernnmanners have taken the edge off classnconflict in the South. Let’s explore thatnproposition a bit more.nFifty years ago, a North Carolinanjournalist named W.J. Cash publishednwhat quickly became a classic treatmentnof Southern history and culture. ThenMind of the South. In that book. Cashndid not deny that there are class distinctionsnin the South. Indeed, he emphasizednthem, as an aspiring I930’s intellectualnshould. But he insisted thatnthere had been an “almost completendisappearance of economic and socialnfocus on the part of the masses.”nThat’s typically Cashian overstatement,nbut can we agree that therenhasn’t been anywhere near as muchnclass consciousness in the South as younmight expect?nCash argued that the “essential kernel”nof “the famous Southern manner”nwas simply the “kindliness andneasiness” of Southern backcountry life,nand he observed that the Southernnetiquette of class has softened the distincfionnbetween rich and poor, just asnthe old etiquette of race continuallynemphasized the gulf of caSte. Thenmanners governing relafions betweennthe classes, he wrote, have served as “anbalance wheel in the Southern socialnworld and … a barrier against thendevelopment of bitterness” — or, youncould as easily say, against the developmentnof class consciousness.nIn the Old South, Cash maintained,nthe yeoman seldom encountered “nakednhauteur.” The gendeman “patronizen[d] him in such fashion that . . .nhe seemed not to be patronized at allnbut actually deferred to.” The Civiln.War, in Cash’s view, meant only thatn”the captains knew [even] better hownto handle the commoner, to steer expertlynabout his recalcitrance, to manipulatenhim without ever arousing hisnjealous independence.” And the rise ofnindustry meant merely that “the oldnpersonal easy relations” of the countrysidenwere brought indoors:nFEBRUARY 1992/37n