Let me help you out. From your PolitiFact article:
"There’s not even a legal definition of what a sanctuary city is here in the state of Florida or quite frankly anywhere."
In other words, it's a term like "socialism." MAGAhats don't know what it is, but they know they hate it. And whatever Donny Dodger tells them is bad, they instantly and automatically hate. Like Senator Captain John S. McCain.
House Democratic leaders scrambled Monday night to rally support for their border funding bill amid a liberal outcry over the Trump administration's treatment of migrant children - and questions over whether the Democrats' proposal would do enough to protect them.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other top leaders huddled in Pelosi's Capitol office late into the night with members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC), the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) and the senior appropriators who have championed the border bill.
Lawmakers leaving the meeting said they expected changes to the $4.5 billion package to ensure stricter standards for the facilities housing migrant children, which have been overcrowded with reportedly unsanitary conditions. Democratic leaders are still aiming for a floor vote on Tuesday.
In short, the liberals simply don't trust the administration to treat the migrants humanely, even if Congress approves ample funding for their care. They want the bill to include - or be accompanied by - a new set of behavioral standards governing the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Multiple lawmakers pointed to a bill authored by Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.) that would establish humanitarian and health standards for migrants in the custody of CBP - things like having guaranteed access to enough water, toilets, bathing facilities and toiletries.
"There's a difference between funding items that they say they need versus changing behaviors by creating some humanitarian standards within CBP," Ruiz said leaving Pelosi's office. "We still need to pass the humanitarian standards bill that I've introduced in order to change behaviors. Otherwise you're going to fund a system that is treating women and children subhuman and inhumane, and that's not going to change simply because you have more supplies."
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), in impassioned remarks, summarized the liberal opposition to the House legislation - unveiled just a day earlier by House Democratic leaders - emphasizing she wants to ensure migrant children aren't detained in such conditions to begin with.
"I'm not interested in ... making sure that caged children are getting warmer burritos. I'm trying to make sure that they're not getting caged in the first place," Ocasio-Cortez said.
After nearly three hours, Ocasio-Cortez emerged from Pelosi's office describing the discussions as "just a really delicate situation."
"This administration has manufactured a crisis in this specific vote and in this specific moment. It's a rock and a hard place," Ocasio-Cortez said.
Ocasio-Cortez entered the meeting saying that she opposed the border aid package that had been unveiled by the House Appropriations Committee on Friday. But after leaving the meeting with Democratic leaders, she said it's possible she could vote for it depending on the changes.
Pelosi herself had endorsed the proposal on Sunday, saying that it "protects families" and "does not fund the administration's failed mass detention policy."
Recent stories describing horrific treatment of migrant children at federally run detention centers along the border have sparked outrage among liberal Democrats.
"We cannot continue to throw money at a dysfunctional system," said Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.). "With this crisis they were not equipped. And we cannot try to help them get out of this situation without having a full comprehensive plan to deal with the humanitarian crisis we're seeing."
Omar said she won't be satisfied with minor tweaks, but wants a drastic reconfiguration to ensure the childrens' protections are ensured.
"We are not just asking for simple changes to be made into this bill, but to go back to the drawing board and really address this from a humanitarian [angle]," she said.
Other Democrats have cautioned that the House bill, while not perfect, is the best chance they have to address the humanitarian crisis in a timely fashion.
"We all have ideas about how to make improvements," said Democratic Rep. Veronica Escobar, a freshman who represents a Texas border district. "The question is timing. We're running out of time."
Escobar said there were conference calls over the weekend with members of both the CHC and CPC. Monday's meeting in Pelosi's office was set up to allow those members to hear directly from appropriators.
"We have the highest expectations that we will treat people in a humanitarian and dignified way," she said.
Some Democrats were optimistic that a deal would be reached this week.
"It's going to be fine," said Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas), another border Democrat.
House Democrats plan to move their own bill while the Senate considers its own competing proposal this week to respond to the Trump administration's $4.5 billion request.
Lawmakers are trying to approve the border funding as soon as possible before the Office of Refugee Resettlement, which is operated by the Department of Health and Human Services, doesn't run out of funding in the coming weeks.
But the two parties aren't in agreement in the House, making it hard to reach a bipartisan, bicameral deal in the next few days.
"Instead of Pelosi putting a group together, Republicans and Democrats, to solve the problem, look at what she's doing. She's got maybe her most hardcore, left groups trying to figure out how to jam the president," House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) said.
The White House issued a veto threat on Monday against the House version, calling it a "partisan bill that underfunds necessary accounts and seeks to take advantage of the current crisis by inserting policy provisions that would make our country less safe."
The Senate bill, meanwhile, is bipartisan, although the White House expressed displeasure that neither measure includes funding for more Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention beds.
Both bills would provide hundreds of millions of dollars for processing facilities as well as supplies for migrants. But the House measure includes more restrictions on how funds can be used, including conditions for the treatment of migrant children.
And while the Senate bill would require members of Congress to give advance notification of two business days to visit facilities housing unaccompanied children, the House version wouldn't make lawmakers give notice ahead of time.
LANSING, Mich. — Michigan's attorney general sued Thursday to shut down twin 66-year-old oil pipelines in the Great Lakes, saying they pose an "unacceptable risk" and the state cannot wait five to 10 years for Enbridge Inc. to build a tunnel to house replacement pipes running through the Straits of Mackinac.
Democrat Dana Nessel's move came the same day she also sought to dismiss the Canadian company's request for a ruling on the legality of a deal it struck last year with former Republican Gov. Rick Snyder to encase a new segment of its Line 5 in the proposed tunnel.
"I have consistently stated that Enbridge's pipelines in the Straits need to be shut down as soon as possible because they present an unacceptable risk to the Great Lakes," Nessel said.
Nessel said she acted after it became clear talks between Enbridge and Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer had broken down. Whitmer was pushing to finish the tunnel in two years, while Enbridge was insisting it could not be done before 2024, when it would decommission the existing pipes.
"The continued operation of Line 5 presents an extraordinary, unreasonable threat to the public because of the very real risk of further anchor strikes, the inherent risks of pipeline operations and the foreseeable, catastrophic effects if an oil spill occurs at the Straits," Nessel said.
The pipelines are part of Enbridge's Line 5, which carries 23 million gallons (87 million litres) of crude oil and propane daily between Superior, Wisconsin, and Sarnia, Ontario.
Enbridge spokesman Ryan Duffy said decommissioning the pipes would result in a "serious disruption" to the energy market, saying the line meets 55% of Michigan's propane needs, including 65% used in northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula. Refineries served by Line 5 also supply a large portion of the aviation fuel at Detroit Metro Airport.
"We remain open to discussions with the governor, and we hope we can reach an agreement outside of court," he said. "Enbridge is deeply committed to being part of Michigan's future. We believe the Straits tunnel is the best way to protect the community and the Great Lakes while safely meeting Michigan's energy needs."
Enbridge insists the dual pipes, which have been in place since 1953, are in sound condition and could operate indefinitely. But the company, based in Calgary, Alberta, said it is willing to install a tunnel in bedrock 100 feet beneath the lakebed and foot the estimated $500 million bill to eliminate virtually any possibility of a leak.
Opponents contend Enbridge's refusal to shut down the pipelines until the tunnel is completed means the Straits area would be endangered for at least another five years. They point to a vessel anchor strike in April 2018 that dented both pipes while damaging three nearby electric cables, which leaked 800 gallons of insulating mineral oil.
Nessel's suit, which was applauded by environmental groups and criticized by Republican lawmakers, identifies a potential anchor strike as the most significant risk to Line 5. It asks an Ingham County judge to rule that the operation of the Straits pipelines under a state easement violates the public trust doctrine, is a public nuisance and violates the Michigan Environmental Protection Act because it is likely to cause pollution and destroy water and other natural resources.
Earlier this year, Whitmer ordered her administration not to implement the tunnel plan after Nessel said authorizing legislation enacted in December violated the state constitution.
"Although the governor remains willing to talk with Enbridge, her commitment to stopping the flow of oil through the Great Lakes as soon as possible — and Enbridge's decision to sue the governor rather than negotiate — will at some point require her to take legal action, as well," said spokeswoman Tiffany Brown.
Whitmer directed the Department of Natural Resources to review Enbridge's compliance with the 1953 easement.
Enbridge said Thursday it asked Whitmer last week to resume talks, offering to suspend the lawsuit it filed earlier this month and jointly appoint an independent moderator to help facilitate discussions. The company also pointed to safety actions that have been taken to prevent anchor strikes.
Alaska Homelessness StatisticsNot a lot of homeless in Barrow, I doubt.
Now isn't that a case for proper fire arms training reducing hospital bills.56 people were shot in Chicago over the weekend, including four fatally
Does Alaska have a meth problem by any chance?Alaska Homelessness Statistics
As of January 2018, Alaska had an estimated 2,016 experiencing homelessness on any given day, as reported by Continuums of Care to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Of that Total, 193 were family households, 132 were Veterans, 163 were unaccompanied young adults (aged 18-24), and 357 were individuals experiencing chronic homelessness.