Federal agents at the border were busy earlier this month to stop dangerous drugs from escaping into American communities.
On September 23, Nogales Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Area Port Director Michael W. Humphries announced that his port of entry had seized more than 1.5 million fentanyl pills over four days at the start of the month.
Over 1.5 million fentanyl pills seized in a 4-day period by CBP officers at the Nogales POE 9/5: About 527,065 fentanyl pills hidden throughout a car 9/6: About 1,013,814 fentanyl pills concealed throughout a car (photos) 9/8: About 54,813 fentanyl pills hidden in a car’s battery pic.twitter.com/VAF7siKUOK
— Port Director Michael W. Humphries (@CBPPortDirNOG) September 23, 2024
According to Director Humphries, the pills were discovered and apprehended on September 5 (approximately 527,000 pills in a car), September 6 (approximately 1,000,000 pills in a car), and September 8 (approximately 55,000 pills in a car battery).
Just days after these seizures, Humphries revealed that his officers had encountered over 341 pounds of illegal meth on a rail box car.
9/10: CBP officers conducting rail operations at the Nogales POE seized 341.6 lbs meth hidden in the front and rear support beams of a rail box car. Officers have recently made significant interceptions of narcotics in rail, commercial operations, cars, pedestrians and outbound. pic.twitter.com/BSftBFWFBh
— Port Director Michael W. Humphries (@CBPPortDirNOG) September 24, 2024
In Fiscal Year 2024, the Tucson CPB Field Office and Tucson Sector have interdicted more than 30,000 pounds of fentanyl, with one month left in the twelve-month calendar. Last fiscal year, over 25,000 pounds of fentanyl were apprehended in that section of the border.
These seizures are only a fraction of the drugs escaping detection from law enforcement into communities all across the nation. In 2022, The Washington Postpublished an article about the proliferation of fentanyl from Mexico to the United States, citing estimations from unnamed federal drug agents that “they are seizing 5 to 10 percent of the drugs coming from Mexico – if that much.” The article also stated that “agents say it has been nearly impossible to stop fentanyl trafficking” at the border.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
On Wednesday evening, a crowd of over 2,000 people, both at Generation Church in Mesa and in overflow seating gathered by Turning Point USA, greeted Republican Vice Presidential nominee JD Vance for a rally and vote chasing event. During the event, Vance and TPUSA’s Charlie Kirk took to the stage and made a brutal case against a Kamala Harris presidency.
In their conversation before taking questions from the audience, Vance and Kirk discussed the plagues of fentanyl and child sex trafficking and the toll they are taking on not only Arizona, but on the nation as a whole. Vance was highly critical of Harris’ border policy and attempts to co-opt the visual of the border wall constructed under President Donald Trump’s administration for her campaign ads. They addressed inflation robbing Arizonans and Americans alike of wealth, and in particular stealing from Phoenix the coveted title of ‘most affordable city.’
First and foremost however, Vance criticized Harris as “terrified of the media because she’s terrified of the American people because she knows that if she speaks off the cuff, she’s going to let them know just how completely radical she is.” He stressed, “She is exactly what she said she was. She’s exactly what she has governed as, and the reason why she only talks to the American people with a teleprompter sitting in between them is because she knows the American people can smell a fraud, and she is a fraud. And we have to remind people of it.”
Kirk and Vance brought the combined interests of Harris and Democrat Vice Presidential nominee Tim Walz to the forefront as well, recalling Harris’ donation to a bail fund for those Summer 2020 rioters who burned Minneapolis.
Vance observed, “It’s almost hard to believe Charlie, but I looked this up. It actually is true. Remember when there were rioters in the summer of 2020 that burned down the City of Minneapolis and a bunch of other cities on top of it. Now they didn’t catch a whole lot of them, but they did catch some of those rioters, and guess who was at the front of the line trying to bail them out of prison. Kamala Harris, who now says that she supports police officers. We can never let her forget it. She was bailing out the people who were attacking police officers and burning down a great American city. That is the record of Kamala Harris, and let’s have a President like Donald J. Trump who actually supports our police officers to keep us safe. It’s very simple stuff.”
Perhaps most critically though, Vance skewered Harris for the obvious discrepancy of effectively running away from her own three years as a leading figure in the self-styled Biden-Harris administration. When reminded by Kirk of the disconnect, he answered:
“Charlie, it, it takes a special level of shamelessness. Maybe I’ve only been in politics for two years, so I just haven’t reached that level, but to look at the American people, even though she’s reading off a teleprompter and to say, on day one, we’re going to make groceries and housing more affordable on day one. Kamala Harris says this, ‘We’re going to tackle the American southern border.’ Kamala, day one was 3 and a half years ago! What the hell have you been doing the whole time?”
Vance recovered from the momentary slip of profanity in the Church setting, mentioning that the pastors on hand were “going to have to forgive me because I do sometimes talk like my Mamaw, and she was a woman of a very serious Christian faith, but she did love the f-word every now and then.”
Pressing into the issue of fentanyl, Vance discussed his mother’s struggle with addiction and remarked that when she nearly died from an overdose during his childhood, surely, fentanyl would have killed her. He also addressed the child sex trafficking crisis noting, “This is what our government leaders have done. 320,000 kids, and we know, by the way, a lot of those kids have lost their lives.”
He continued, “A lot of those kids are being sex trafficked by some of the most evil people in the world. This is the wages of Kamala Harris’s disastrous border policy, and it’s happening every day in this country.
We have to remember that they told us that Kamala Harris was the compassionate person when it came to the border. Remember when they said Donald Trump is the person who wanted to separate families? Now the way that you keep families together is to send a message that if you want to come through to this country, you’ve got to come through the proper channels. When you empower these cartels, when you tell everybody that they can come across illegally, that’s what causes family separation on an industrial scale. Never let them tell you that Kamala Harris’s border policies are compassionate. There are 320,000 voices of children crying out telling us, Kamala Harris is not compassionate. She is a disaster, and we cannot promote her to the Oval Office.”
A border security ballot measure might be headed for victory this coming November if numbers from a recent poll hold up.
This week, Noble Predictive Insights (NPI) released a poll, showing that Proposition 314 (the Secure the Border Act) was receiving 63% support for passage. Only 16% of respondents indicated that they were opposing the measure at the ballot box.
According to a press release issued by NPI, “Not all components of the expansive Prop 314 are equally popular. According to the poll, supporters of the measure most strongly back two of its planks: holding drug dealers responsible for the death of a person who consumes a drug containing fentanyl (77% support), and requiring employers to verify the immigration status of workers (75% support). Their feelings are more mixed (56% support) about reforms surrounding how migrants obtain public benefits. Among those who oppose Prop 314, 31% oppose the punishments for fentanyl dealers, 47% are against immigration status verification in the workplace, and 64% oppose the portion determining how migrants obtain public benefits.”
“Opponents will have trouble pushing the argument ‘people are only supporting this because of the fentanyl stuff, they don’t care about the immigration’ – that’s what voters like most about Prop 314,” said Mike Noble, NPI Founder & CEO. “Prop 314 is popular across party lines, and that is a difficult trend to disrupt with only a couple of months until Election Day.”
Proposition 314 was referred to the ballot by Republicans in the Arizona Legislature after Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs and left-wing legislators rebuffed most efforts from conservative lawmakers to pass legislation over the past two years to help secure the border and give law enforcement more tools to protect their communities. After the measure was transmitted to the Arizona Secretary of State, progressive interest groups opposed to the efforts challenged the legislation in court in an attempt to keep it from the ballot. However, multiple state courts rejected those lawsuits and gave the greenlight for voter consideration of Prop 314 in the November General Election.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen, who was instrumental in making sure Prop 314 made the ballot, reacted to the news of the NPI polling, telling AZ Free News, “The polling goes hand in hand from what I am hearing from my constituents. They are worried about border security. I think it shows how out of touch our democratic legislators are at the Capitol. Every single Democrat voted ‘no’ on this measure. I’m glad the voters will get to decide this.”
House Speaker Ben Toma, who was the sponsor of the legislative vehicle for the measure, added, “The polling is consistent with what we’ve been hearing from Arizonans all along—they are frustrated with the open border policies of the Biden-Harris administration and are demanding change. They want a secure border and safer communities. Proposition 314 offers meaningful, commonsense reforms to protect our communities, and I am confident it will pass in November.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
A radical Democrat state representative is attempting to return to her middle-of-the-road legislative district for a new term in office.
State Representative Lorena Austin is running for reelection in Arizona Legislative District 9, which covers the city of Mesa. According to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, the district is likely one of the most competitive in the state, with a 2.6% vote spread in the Commission’s nine focus elections. Democrats are slightly favored in the district, having won in five of those nine focus elections.
Despite her district being more moderate in its political makeup, Austin has demonstrated a propensity to become one of the most extreme leftist members of the Arizona Legislature on almost every issue.
In a struggling state and national economy, where many families are struggling to get by in life, keep their jobs, and save for their children’s futures, Austin showed no mercy with her votes. This year, she was one of a handful of members to vote against HCR 2002, which stated that the legislature recognizes, encourages, and continues to support Arizona’s beef producing farmers, ranchers, and families. Last year (2023), she voted no on SB 1131, which would have prohibited a county, city, or town from levying a tax on rental property.
Austin is also opposed to individual property rights, as her votes have indicated. In 2023, she was one of 14 members to vote against final passage of a bill prohibiting protestors from targeting people in their own homes by protesting on their residential property (SB 1023).
This latest legislative session (2024), Austin voted no on SB 1129, which would have allowed a property owner or the owners’ agent to request from law enforcement the immediate removal of a person who is unlawfully occupying a residential dwelling. She also opposed SB 1073, which would have established a new form of the existing offense of obstructing a highway or other public thoroughfare and classified this new form of the offense as a class 6 felony (which was introduced in response to protestors blocking traffic).
Austin’s legislative record extends, too, into bouts of radical socialism. In 2023, she co-sponsored HB 2610, which would have created a state-owned bank. Additionally, she co-sponsored HB 2653, which would have established that “restaurants and other food service establishments in this state may only serve water and disposable straws to customers on request.” Earlier this year, Austin voted no on HB 2629, which would have established November 7 of each year as Victims of Communism Day and required the State Board of Education to create a list of recommended resources for mandatory instruction on the topic in certain public school courses.
The Democrat lawmaker has refused to support solutions to help her state end the border crisis affecting almost every community in Arizona – not to mention elsewhere in the nation. In 2023, Austin co-sponsored HB 2604, which would have permitted the Arizona Department of Transportation to issue a driver’s license or nonoperating ID to a person without legal status in the United States. And in this most recent legislative session, she voted no on HB 2621, which would have deemed that the trafficking of fentanyl across Arizona’s border is a public health crisis and directed the Arizona Department of Health Services to do everything within its power to address the crisis. She also opposed SCR 1042, which proclaimed the legislature’s support for the people and government of the state of Texas in its efforts to secure our nation’s southern border.
Austin has an awful record in office on crimes against children. In 2023, she voted against SB 1028, which would have prohibited a person or business from engaging in an adult cabaret performance on public property or in a location where the performance could be viewed by a minor. She also voted no on SB 1583, which would have mandated that a level one sex offender who commits specified sexual offenses is required to register on the internet sex offender website if the offender was sentenced for a dangerous crime against children.
This most recent legislative session (2024), Austin continued her spree of opposing legislation that would have protected more Arizona children from horrific crimes committed against them. She voted no on SB 1236, which would have specified that any offender who was convicted of or adjudicated guilty except insane for sexual crimes against children, whether completed or preparatory, and was 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense, must be included on the internet sex offender website. She also opposed HB 2835, which would have established knowingly observing a nude minor for the purpose of engaging in sexual conduct for a person’s sexual gratification as a form of criminal sexual exploitation of a minor. And Austin voted no on a ballot referral (SCR 1021), which would statutorily require an adult who is convicted of a class 2 felony for any child sex trafficking offense to be sentenced to natural life imprisonment.
As with many of her fellow Democrats running for the state legislature, Austin promotes endorsements from left-leaning organizations for her campaign for the Arizona House of Representatives, including Moms Demand Action, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona, Save Our Schools Arizona, Progressive Turnout Project, HRC in Arizona, AEA Fund for Public Education, NARAL Pro-Choice Arizona, Stonewall Democrats of Arizona, Arizona Education Association, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Emily’s List, and Human Rights Campaign PAC.
There is one endorsement for Austin that appears to be absent from her website, from the Jane Fonda Climate PAC. Austin’s support from this PAC may be one of the most concerning for voters researching her record and determining which direction they want to see for their district. This PAC asserts that “major solutions are stopped cold: the Green New Deal, Build Back Better, clean energy investments, ending billions in tax subsidies to the fossil fuel industry – all because of politicians backed by Big Oil.”
The Green New Deal pushed by the Jane Fonda Climate PAC is the same championed by New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is one of the most progressive lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The district is currently represented by two Democrats in the state House of Representatives. Austin and her fellow Democrat incumbent, Seth Blattman, ran unopposed in the recent primary election. Austin received 10,353 votes, and Blattman obtained 8,741 votes. They will face off against Republicans Mary Ann Mendoza and Kylie Barber, who also ran unopposed in the primary election. Mendoza garnered 10,429 votes, and Barber received 10,136 votes.
November’s General Election will be the second time that Mendoza has been pitted against Austin and Blattman. In 2022, Austin and Blattman defeated Mendoza and her running mate, Kathy Pearce, to assume their offices for the 2023 Arizona legislative session.
Correction: A previous version of this article listed the incorrect vote totals for the candidates. The totals have now been updated with the latest results from the Arizona Secretary of State website.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
A recent report from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) suggests that the ongoing illegal immigration surge at the southern border will reduce the federal deficit by a staggering $897 billion over the next decade.
At first glance, this figure might seem like a silver lining to this national crisis. However, a closer examination reveals a more complex and concerning picture and reveals this report to be another example of the government trying to conceal the truth from American citizens.
While the CBO projects an increase in revenues of $1.175 trillion and an increase in mandatory spending and spending on net interest of $278 billion over the next 10 years, these numbers fail to capture the full scope of the situation. The report’s limitations and glaring omissions paint an incomplete picture that may lead to misguided policy decisions if Congress does not understand the actual fiscal impacts of the border crisis. By publishing such an incomplete report, CBO is playing a role in covering up the Biden-Harris border crisis and not giving Congress the information it needs to fix the problem.
One glaring omission is the exclusion of discretionary spending impacts. The CBO acknowledges that the immigration surge will likely put pressure on many programs funded through discretionary appropriations. In fact, CBO estimates that increased discretionary funding as a result of the border surge could total around $200 billion over the 2024-2034 period. This substantial sum is mentioned but not factored into the deficit reduction calculation because, as CBO says, “no clear basis exists for projecting how the immigration surge will affect [congressional] funding decisions.”
Moreover, the report “does not include estimates of the surge’s effects on state and local budgets.” The CBO itself admits that “[r]esearch has generally found that increases in immigration raise state and local governments’ costs more than their revenues, and CBO expects that finding to hold in the case of the current immigration surge.” New York City alone spent $4.3 billion from July 2022 to March 2024 to accommodate immigrants and comply with existing housing policies. Extrapolating this to other cities over a decade paints a sobering picture of the financial burden on local communities.
The state of Texas was forced to take action on its own. First with Operation Lone Star (OLS), a response to the border crisis triggered by the Biden-Harris administration’s failure to enforce federal laws along the border. OLS has cost Texans about $11 billion and that’s just to secure the border. That does not include costs to the state’s health care, education, and criminal justice systems — which increase with the addition of aliens who have been let in by the Biden-Harris administration. The CBO report does not adequately assess or include these costs and they can be found in every state.
The revenue calculations assume lower tax compliance rates among the population who entered the nation via the border crisis. This raises questions about the accuracy of the projected $1.2 trillion in additional revenue.
Beyond the fiscal impacts, the report hints at broader economic consequences. The illegal immigration surge is expected to lead to lower productivity, reduce average wage growth (particularly for non-college educated workers), higher interest rates, and increased medical and food prices. These factors could have far-reaching effects on the American economy and the well-being of citizens.
Perhaps most concerning is the CBO’s own admission that its “estimates of the budgetary effects of the immigration surge are highly uncertain.” The report lists numerous “[m]ajor sources of uncertainty,” including the number of aliens who have entered the country, the duration of the border crisis itself, the changing immigration status of individuals, and their impact on productivity. Essentially, many metrics crucial to the estimate are shrouded in uncertainty and the authors of the report knew it and still published these estimates that claim mass illegal immigration is good for the deficit.
Making policy decisions based on such questionable projections, where the political left has clearly put its thumb on the scale, could have disastrous consequences and exacerbate existing problems. We must demand a more comprehensive analysis that accounts for all costs — both seen and unseen. Not a report that is politically appealing to the left’s narrative on illegal immigration.
The border crisis is not just about numbers on a balance sheet. As we debate immigration policy, we must consider not just the potential fiscal benefits but also the hidden costs and societal impacts. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated there were 74,702 fentanyl overdose deaths in the United States last year — a drug we know flows in through our open southern border.
Human trafficking and smuggling into the United States is a booming multi-billion dollar business for Mexican cartels. We must end this crisis now. When comparing the fiscal impacts to the human toll, money seems secondary and that is true, but understanding the monetary effects is important to solving the larger problem.
The CBO report should be seen as deficient and, overall, as a liability since it does not give Congress the information it needs to take action. The future of our nation depends on getting this right.
With an honest and complete assessment, we can get good legislation like the Secure the Border Act signed into law, force strong executive actions from future presidents, and keep Americans safe. These policies will ensure our nation knows who is coming in, and what the impacts of that are to U.S. citizens. But we need the CBO and Washington to stop playing politics with vital information.
