I’m not sure why this article was felt needed to draft. I guess people were pushing for prioritizing IML over other areas? Even if this was the case, I think a simple “its on our list of to-dos but we want to prioritize these other areas first would suffice.”
Reading through this article simply made me feel like it was an attempt to guilt trip or make me feel bad because I’d like to see IML dealt with. And i shouldn’t feel that way about this, particularly from NARSOL who above all understands the amount of guilt and shame tactics thrown at registrants. I want IML dealt with. I also want all the other stuff that cause registrants to go homeless, not get jobs, not be able to get an education, not be able to kids to parks etc dealt with to. It all needs dealt with.I’d like to take my kids to a park. Guess what? i’d also like to take them on a trip to mexico, or to Canada, or on a cruise. Are those things splurges? Sure. They are also part of the American dream, which I may never get to do if stuff like IML goes unchecked. I’m not one that is currently facing homelessness, i do have a good job, so i recognize i’m one of the luckier ones. Absolutely prioritize the areas that are necessity, but lets not guilt and shame people for wanting IML attacked as well. I remember in some of our talks on the matter that IML didn’t just hurt vacationers, but people that have International travel as part or the main aspect of their work too.
That was a whole lot to say ‘i didn’t appreciate the guilt/shame nature of the article’, sorry bout that. I do appreciate what NARSOL is doing.