Sunday, January 24, 2010

OBAMA, HEALTH-CARE & ILLEGALS - An American Sees & Speaks!

OBAMA, HEALTH CARE & ILLEGALS (The Real Reasons for )

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2010-01-23, 5:13PM PST

Reply To This Post

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be fooled by President Obama, Democratic lawmakers or the media.

Congress has not done anything helpful for the American people in over 40 years, every law created by Congress has helped only an elite few and special interests. I challenge anyone reading this to make a lair out of me; in other words, tell me one law Congress has passed in the last 40 years that has improved the lives of millions of Americans.

Whenever Congressional legislation is passed that affects millinons of Americans it is ALWAYS punitive, the Healthcare "Reform" bill is no different.

Let's look at the facts, here are two we can all agree on:


1. Healthcare costs increase every year. The HMO I belong to has had double-digit percentage increases every year the last 10 years.
2. Over 90 percent of all Americans are insured. I think we can all agree that the percentage of Americans with health insurance is at a very high rate. Remember the U.S. population is over 308 million people, so who exactly are the 30 millions "people" without insurance?

If you have followed the healthcare debate the last 8 months, one every important aspect of the debate is NEVER mentioned, by either Democrats or Republicans. They NEVER discuss WHY HEALTHCARE costs have skyrocketed.

The $80 face towel you used when hospitalized for pendicitis, is priced outrageously to cover the costs of ILLEGAL ALIEN care and avarice by insurance companies, somebody has got to pay for million dollar managed heathcare executives bonuses and $300K weekend retreats.

Illegals and greed are responsible for healthcare being a mess in America, basically what happened in California now effects the entire nation, but NO LAWMAKER (Republician or Democrat) has the GUTS TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE TRUTH, if you live in California and witnessed over 80 hospitals close the last decade, emergency room waits increase expotentially, or received only cursory healthcare because the on-duty physician is overloaded with patients, then you already know the truth. Democrats tell you it's shameful and immoral to have so many "people" in American uninsured and the Republicians tell you the bill is too expensive. Either group of ASSHOLES are not telling you the whole truth.

So, who exactly are the 30 million uninsured? 12 - 20 million are illegal aliens and the 18 - 10 million are Americans. The truth of the matter is, the 10 - 18 million Americans already have a PUBLIC OPTION is called PUBLIC HEALTH CLINICS AND COUNTY HOSPITALS!

Prior to the illegal alien invasion that began over 30 years ago, rarely if ever would you hear another American complaining about subsidizing the healthcare of a fellow less unfortunate American.

The current Comprehensive Healthcare Reform bill is ALL about containment of anger towards illegal aliens for royally fucking up American healthcare. Some Americans see the "con", but many more have not connected the dots YET! Because when healthcare completely collapses in the country Americans are going to ask WHY! That is why the "rush" is on.;

Just like California, to its demise, has thrown money at the illegal alien problem, instead of getting rid of it, the federal government is attempting to do the same thing. Democratics look at illegals as future voters (that is why Amnesty is on their agenda this year) and Republicians will not betray their corporate masters by telling the American people the real truth about Comprehensive Healthcare Reform, that is why the Senate's verision of this scam of a bill is loaded with amendents having various factions of the public subsidizing healthcare - from union workers to senior citiizens. Have you heard ONE Republician complain about the replusive MANDATORY TO PURCHASE clause in either verisions the healthcare bill? Why? Because Republicians, just like Democrats have no problem with hardworking honest Americans subsidizing illegal aliens, and both House and Senate bills are filled with so many loopholes illegal aliens can purchase insurance. They won't because this bill does not penalized them for not purchasing insurance and they will continue to receive care.

FORBES - The Staggering Cost of "CHEAP" Mexican Labor - WHO REALLY PAYS?

MEXICANOCCUPATON.blogspot.com

The article below is predicated on there being 12 million illegals, the figure the government uses in their amnesty propaganda. Most sources put the figure at 38 million and breeding fast. The fastest growing political party in America today is the LA RAZA “THE (MEXICAN) RACE” which is fronted in Congress by THE CONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS. LA RAZA is funded by BIG BUSINESS (fronted by the U. S. Chamber of Commerce), the FORTUNE 500, MEXICO (we are MEXICO’S WELFARE SYSTEM and PRISON SYSTEM), and the LA RAZA CORPORATE OWNED DEMS, that have one bible: CORPORATE PROFITS CAN NOT BE HIGH ENOUGH, AND WAGES CAN NOT BE LOW ENOUGH!

WSWS.org calculates that there are 40 million Americans living in poverty. Is there a connection with the fact there are 38 million Mex flag wavers in our country?

THE DEMS HAVE, AND WILL SELL US OUT TO ANY SPECIAL INTERESTS. LOOK WHAT THEY FOR THE BANKSTERS! YOU DON’T THINK THEY’D SELL US OUT TO THE ILLEGALS FOR THEIR VOTES? ALREADY IN MEX OCCUPIED CALIFORNIA, REPS. (SISTERS) LORETTA AND LINDA SANCHEZ WON THEIR SEATS WITH THE VOTES OF ILLEGALS. BOTH VOTE ONLY FOR BILLS THAT BENEFIT ILLEGALS AND EXPAND THE MEXICAN WELFARE STATE (SEARCH ON MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com)

FORBES ARTICLE
DO ILLEGALS DEPRESS WAGES?

Knowledge@Wharton

Immigration's Impact
Knowledge@Wharton 01.02.07, 2:30 PM ET

Illegal immigration into the United States has sparked heated debate in Congress, roiled the two main political parties and prompted hundreds of thousands of immigrant supporters to take to the streets recently in peaceful demonstrations nationwide.
The controversy picked up new momentum on May 15 when President George W. Bush, in a televised address to the nation, called for a comprehensive approach to immigration reform. He said he would send 6,000 National Guard troops to four states along the U.S.-Mexican border beginning in June to provide intelligence and logistical support--but not armed law enforcement--to civilian border patrol agents. In addition to securing the border, Bush also said it was necessary for the House and Senate to pass legislation that would allow illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States for a long time to remain and be able to undergo a process to become citizens.
"There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant and a program of mass deportation," the president said. "That middle ground recognizes that there are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently and someone who has worked here for many years and has a home, a family and an otherwise clean record." Meanwhile, Congressional leaders have said that they would like to send immigration-reform legislation to the president for his signature before the end of May.

HAVE YOU EVER MET A MEXICAN WITH RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW?
THE MEX CRIME RATES, FROM ANY SOURCE, SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.

EVERYDAY 12 AMERICANS ARE MURDERED BY ILLEGALS.

At stake in the debate are the lives and livelihoods of as many as 12 million undocumented workers, the companies they work for, !!!!!!! respect for the rule of law !!!!!!, and the job opportunities of millions of low-skill American citizens--both native-born and immigrants who became naturalized by going through the proper channels. The large number of illegal immigrants raises key economic questions: Do illegal immigrants depress wages paid to low-skill workers? Do they take jobs away from Americans? How dependent on undocumented workers is the U.S. economy? Should illegal immigrants be compelled by law to return to their native countries? Or should Democrats and Republicans hammer out legislation that would allow illegal immigrants to pay some type of penalty yet remain in the United States and continue working?
Wharton management professor Peter Cappelli and Vernon M. Briggs Jr., professor in the School of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., are firm in their conviction that !!!!! illegal workers exert downward pressure on wages and reduce job opportunities for low-skill U.S. citizens.!!!!! Briggs believes that the negative impact of undocumented workers on American low-skill workers and on labor standards !!!!! is so great that immigration authorities should clamp down on employers who hire illegals so that a clear message is sent to current and potential illegal workers: Illegal immigration will not be tolerated.!!!!!
However, Bernard Anderson, practice professor in Wharton's management department and an assistant secretary of labor for employment standards during the administration of President Bill Clinton, says that while illegal workers do have some effect on wages and displace some American workers, their impact is far less onerous than Cappelli and Briggs assert. In addition, Anderson says, illegal immigrants work hard, do not come to the United States to receive welfare and should be allowed to remain in the U.S. after paying penalties.

WHAT? DO NOT COME TO THE UNITED STATES TO RECEIVE WELFARE? EVER HEARD OF ANCHOR BABIES? NOW 10% OF THE US BIRTH RATE, AND 1 IN 5 IN LOS ANGELES!!!!!

Jeffrey S. Passel, a demographer and senior research associate with the Pew Hispanic Center in Washington, D.C., says Pew, which bills itself as a nonpartisan "fact tank," has taken no formal position on the immigration issue. But he does say that the data on the broad economic impact of undocumented workers does not lend particularly strong support to either side of the argument.

Portrait Of Illegal Immigrants
A study released in March by the Pew Hispanic Center, which is supported by the Philadelphia-based Pew Charitable Trusts, contains extensive information on the nature and extent of illegal immigration. The study uses the term "unauthorized migrant," which it defines as a person who resides in the United States, but who is not a U.S. citizen, has not been admitted for permanent residence and has no temporary status permitting longer-term residence and work.

The report, which uses data from the U.S. Census Bureau's March 2005 Current Population Survey, estimates that the U.S. is home to between 11.5 million and 12 million illegal immigrants, up sharply from 8.4 million in 2000. Unauthorized migrants accounted for 30% of all foreign-born people in the U.S. as of 2005. Most unauthorized migrants--6.2 million, or 56%--come from Mexico. About 2.5 million, or 22%, come from the rest of Latin America.
In 2005, illegal migrants accounted for about 5% of the civilian labor force, or 7.2 million workers out of a labor force of 148 million. Approximately 19% of illegal workers were employed in construction jobs, 15% in production, installation and repair, and 4% in farming. The Pew report also shows that illegal immigrants comprise 24% of all workers in farming, 17% in cleaning, 14% in construction and 12% in food preparation. Within those categories, unauthorized migrants tend to be concentrated in specific jobs: They represent 36% of all insulation workers, 29% of all roofers and drywall installers, and 27% of all butchers and other food-processing workers.
It is often said by supporters of illegal, low-skill immigrants that the U.S. economy needs such laborers because they do the kinds of work that Americans will not do. But Cappelli calls that assertion a !!!!! "complete myth." !!!!! Immigrants have been hired to do such jobs in such large numbers not because Americans refuse them, but because Americans are not willing to perform such tasks where the wages are lower than they would otherwise be, where work rules may not exist and where the working conditions may be hazardous. Many employers seek illegal workers for the simple reason that it keeps costs down and means the companies do not have to invest in equipment and other capital improvements. Relative wage levels for low-skill and unskilled American workers, according to Cappelli, have plummeted over the past generation and show no signs of rising.
Cappelli says he has witnessed the effects of immigrant workers on wages and working conditions in other parts of the world, including the Middle East. In Bahrain, for instance, where guest workers from Bangladesh are frequently used on construction sites, a visitor can see them using picks and shovels instead of machinery.
Why do illegal immigrants force down wages? "That's how markets work," responds Cappelli. "It's hard for the average person to understand that these are markets. If illegal workers left the U.S. tomorrow, what would happen? Some people think nobody would do those jobs. If that were to happen, companies would change those jobs, and wages would go up. Yes, companies would hire the people who are not necessarily doing those jobs now. This goes on in every labor market. There are no jobs that we can think of where, over time, work doesn't get done. It doesn't happen."

IF ILLEGALS LEFT THE US TOMORROW, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN? COMPANIES WOULD CHANGE THE JOBS AND WAGES WOULD, GOD FORBID, GO UP

While it is true that low-skill workers who enter the United States legally also exert downward pressure on wages, there is a significant difference between them and their undocumented counterparts. "The difference is legal immigrants are let in, at least in part, on economic judgments about where the needs are for their skills," Cappelli notes. "That's one of the criteria for being allowed to come in."

Cappelli says the United States needs legislation that "faces up to the real economic issues. If you allow more unskilled workers into the U.S., it will lower costs for employers. It will also lower wages for people who do those jobs. It's clearly a political question. If you want to benefit low-skill American workers, you reduce illegal immigration. It's important to have a very clear conversation on the choice we want to make. And we are ducking that by saying these are jobs no one wants to do."
Briggs, the Cornell professor, says turning a blind eye to illegal workers, as U.S. immigration authorities have done, can end up harming U.S. citizens and the illegal employees themselves. Undocumented workers can "displace," to use the term of labor economists, African-Americans and other minorities who are young and seeking their first jobs or older minority workers with few skills. Moreover, even if the illegal workers are earning the minimum wage of $5.15 an hour--and most are, according to Briggs--the conditions under which they work can be dangerous. Yet these people have no way to seek legal remedies because they are in the U.S. illegally.

BULLSHIT. THE COURTS ARE FILLED WITH ILLEGALS.

Democracy's 'Seamier Side'
"Many [illegal immigrants] are working under conditions that are appalling," Briggs says. "Some are paid in violations of hours laws; some are children working in jobs they shouldn't be. It's one of the seamier sides of democracies. ... Some are working basically as slaves." Illegal immigrants are typically males ages 18 to 30 who are very ambitious, Briggs adds, and they will take any job, including those that make them vulnerable to abuse.
"Illegal immigration is an issue that takes everything down to its crudest level and makes it vile to discuss," he says. "The illegal immigrants will always win in jobs competition with U.S. citizens. This doesn't mean there's anything wrong with U.S. citizens; it just means there is a contrast" between the U.S. and the illegal immigrants' countries of origin. "No matter how bad things are in the U.S., it's better than the country [these workers] are coming from. If it means crowding into apartments or working weekends, they will do it, and they won't complain about sexual discrimination or racial discrimination. Tragically, many employers, if given a choice between illegal immigrants or U.S. citizens, will always take the illegal immigrant."
Briggs acknowledges that there is scant data to support his concerns about the plight of many illegal workers. But he is firm in his belief that "if we don't get serious about enforcing [immigration laws], people are going to continue to be hurt. These are the most vulnerable members of society."

THE ONLY EFFECTIVE WAY TO REDUCE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS TO TAKE EMPLOYER SANCTIONS SERIOUSLY.....


REMINDS ME WHEN BUSH FINALLY SHOWED UP AT KATRINA. HE CAME WITH AN ARM LOAD OF NO-BID DEALS FOR CHENEY-HALLIBURTON, CANCELLED MINIMUM WAGE FOR AMERICANS AND INVITED THE ILLEGALS IN SO HALLIBURTION COULD MAKE EVEN GREATER PROFITS.
THE NEXT TWO ARTICLES I READ ON NEW ORLEANS WAS ON THE SURGE OF MEXICAN GANG VIOLENCE IN NEW ORLEANS, AND THE SURGE IN MEXICAN BIRTHS.
WHERE THE MEXICANS HAVE INVADED IS IT EVER DIFFERENT?

In Briggs' view, the only effective way to reduce illegal immigration is to take employer sanctions seriously and actively enforce them at work sites. "That means [instituting] heavy penalties on employers who hire immigrants and making it clear that illegal immigrants are not going to work. They are not supposed to be here; they are not supposed to be working. You have to make it impossible for them to work. They will gradually get the idea they have to go back, that there's not much hope they are going to get legalized status."
Briggs says it may be useful to require immigrant workers to carry a "job identification" card that they would have to present to prospective employers in order to obtain work and to apply for government services. Briggs opposes building "massive walls" along the U.S.-Mexico border, but adds that "physical barriers" of some kind in strategic locations along the border may help. "We could possibly build more electronic fences that give signals when people cross them and tell [authorities] where they are."
Anderson, the Wharton labor economist, disagrees with Briggs' view of illegal immigration, saying the situation "is not as bad as Briggs says it is. ... One line of argument as to why it's necessary to protect the borders is that the failure to do so subjects the United States to an intolerable risk of terrorism, not that there's been any evidence at all that terrorists have come through the southern border. The other question is what impact there is on wages, economic status and employment for American workers. That's where you get a clear divide in the economic literature. The evidence produced by economists who have studied this question is mixed."
Anderson says there is indeed much anecdotal evidence that Hispanics now do many of the jobs once performed by African-Americans, such as service jobs in the hotel industry. Anderson says he himself has witnessed such changes across the American South during his travels over the past 30 years. "No one will convince me that there has not been labor displacement," he says. Nonetheless, there also is evidence that many African-Americans no longer perform low-skill service jobs--not because illegal immigrants have taken those jobs from them, but because they have moved on to take better-paying jobs or have grown older and retired from the labor force.
"There has been substantial [improvement] in the economic status of minorities in this country as a result of the civil rights movement," Anderson says. "There is no question that African-Americans have benefited in their occupational status as a result of that." He says that 70% of black workers today hold white-collar and service-sector jobs, while others are working in the many auto-manufacturing plants that have sprung up across the South.

*
Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million

Study: Illegal alien population may be as high as 38 million A new report finds the Homeland Security Department "grossly underestimates" the number of illegal aliens living in the U.S. Homeland Security's Office of Immigration Studies released a report August 31 that estimates the number of illegal aliens residing in the U.S. is between 8 and 12 million. But the group Californians for Population Stabilization, or CAPS, has unveiled a report estimating the illegal population is actually between 20 and 38 million. Four experts, all of whom contributed to the study prepared by CAPS, discussed their findings at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington Wednesday. James Walsh, a former associate general counsel of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said he is "appalled" that the Bush administration, lawyers on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and every Democratic presidential candidate, with the exception of Joe Biden, have no problem with sanctuary cities for illegal aliens. "Ladies and gentlemen, the sanctuary cities and the people that support them are violating the laws of the United States of America. They're violating 8 USC section 1324 and 1325, which is a felony -- [it's] a felony to aid, support, transport, shield, harbor illegal aliens," Walsh stated. Walsh said his analysis indicating there are 38 million illegal aliens in the U.S. was calculated using the conservative estimate of three illegal immigrants entering the U.S. for each one apprehended. According to Walsh, "In the United States, immigration is in a state of anarchy -- not chaos, but anarchy."

IT’S ALSO THE NEXT GENERATION AFTER GENERATION OF “CHEAP” (FOR EMPLOYERS) MEXICAN LABOR......!

http://www.capsweb.org/action/activist_tool_kit.html


*
US Census Bureau report: 40 million living in poverty
By Kate Randall
30 September 2009
The overall poverty rate in the US rose to 13.2 percent in 2008, as workers across all sectors of the economy became jobless and increasing numbers of families were forced into destitution, according to a new government report. Real median household income also declined by 3.6 percent.
The report released Tuesday, part of the US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, is the most recent to measure the recession’s impact on working class families and the poor. Based on the changes between 2007 and 2008, the first full year of the recession, its findings do not reflect increases in poverty and joblessness this year as the consequences of the crisis have become even more acute.
The official poverty rate of 13.2 percent in 2008 was up from 12.5 percent in 2007. This figure translates into 39.8 million people in poverty across America. The official poverty level is set at $22,000 annually for a family of four with two children or $12,000 for an individual, an absurdly low threshold. This means that far more people than indicated by the survey do not have adequate resources to pay for food, shelter, medical care and other basic necessities.
The poverty rate rose across virtually all demographic groups. Poverty among Hispanics climbed from 21.5 percent in 2007 to 23.2 percent in 2008. Non-Hispanic whites saw poverty rise from 8.2 percent in 2007 to 8.6 percent in 2008, while poverty among Asians was up from 10.2 percent in 2007 to 11.8 percent in 2008. African-Americans were the only group where poverty remained statistically unchanged at a staggering 24.7 percent, or about one in four people.
The Census Bureau reported a rise in poverty in 31 states and the District of Columbia. Two of the four most populous states—California and Florida—saw poverty rates rise by 1 percent, to just over 13 percent in each state.
Connecticut saw the largest increase in poverty, rising to 9.3 percent, with an additional 1.4 percent of the state’s population living in poverty. Connecticut’s proximity to Wall Street, the center of the financial collapse, contributed to the state’s poverty as spending cuts by bankers and other financial employees in the New York City suburbs were reflected in declines in income for the lowest paid workers.
William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, commented in an interview, “People don’t go from being a CEO or a hedge fund manager into poverty, but there is a trickle-down effect when these groups of people start to cut back on their spending. In many places, the first people to go when things get tight are the lowest-earning workers.”
Michigan, which has been devastated by the collapse of the auto industry, is the only state that has seen poverty increase for two years in a row, with the rate now standing at 13 percent. The industrial states of Pennsylvania and Indiana also saw significant increases in poverty, along with Oregon and Hawaii.
The South remained the most impoverished, at 14.3 percent, up slightly from 14.2 percent in 2007. Mississippi, with 21.2 percent in poverty, saw the highest rate of any state, while poverty in Kentucky, West Virginia and Arkansas hovered around 17 percent.
The Midwest poverty rate rose to 12.4 percent from 11.1 percent the previous year. The West saw the largest increase in poverty, up by 1.5 percent, rising from 12 percent in 2007 to 13.5 percent. The Northeast, which saw an increase in poverty in 2007, saw the rate remain statistically unchanged, at 11.6 percent in 2008.
The rate of poverty among America’s children is alarming, with 19 percent—14.1 million children—affected in 2008, up a full percentage point from a year earlier. This rate increased in 26 states and in Washington, DC. Children in families headed by a single female suffered the highest rates of poverty: 43.5 percent of those under 18 years of age live in poverty, while 53.3 percent of children under 6 years are poor.
Increasing numbers of families, both the jobless and workers facing shrinking hours and paychecks, are turning to food pantries and the Food Stamp program. Food Stamp use in 2008 jumped 13 percent to nearly 9.8 million US households, led by Louisiana, Maine and Kentucky. Two cities—Pharr, Texas, and the former General Motors production center, Flint, Michigan—each had more than a third of their residents on food stamps. Families with two or more workers accounted for 28.4 percent of food stamp recipients in 2008, up 1.5 percent from 2007.
Following three years of annual income increases, real median income declined in the US by 3.6 percent between 2007 and 2008, falling from $52,163 to $50,303. The Midwest and South saw the biggest declines in median income, 4 percent and 4.9 percent respectively.
The gap between the richest and poorest Americans is also widening as the economic crisis ravages household budgets. An Associated Press analysis of the Census Bureau statistics shows that the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans, those making $138,000 or more a year, earned 11.4 times the $12,000 made by individuals living below the poverty line in 2008. In 2007, the richest 10 percent made 11.2 times more.
The jump in poverty and income inequality comes as the job market continues to shrink, even as government and economic analysts speak of a turnaround. According to US Labor Department figures from July, job seekers now outnumber openings six to one, with only 2.4 million full-time, permanent jobs open while 14.5 million people are officially unemployed and looking for work.
Many companies remain cautious about hiring new workers in the uncertain economic environment. Having trimmed back workers’ hours and laid off temporary workers, even if businesses do expand in the future they are likely to increase output by increasing the workload on existing employees.
Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute, told the New York Times, “They have tons of room to increase work without hiring a single person. For people who are out of work, we do not see signs of light at the end of the tunnel.”
From December 2007 through July 2009, job openings have declined in every area of the country: 45 percent in the West and South, 36 percent in the Midwest, and 23 percent in the Northeast. According to the Times, since the end of 2008 virtually every sector of the economy has been hit by the collapse in job openings, which have shrunk 47 percent in manufacturing, 37 percent in construction, 22 percent in retail, and 21 percent in education and health services.
While it is estimated that the government could spend in excess of $23 trillion to bail out the banks, and hundreds of billions to pursue its military conquests in Iraq and Afghanistan, nothing of any substance is being done to help the millions of Americans being plunged into joblessness and poverty.
The National Employment Law Project, an advocacy group, estimates that 400,000 Americans nationwide could exhaust their unemployment benefits by the end of September and 1.4 million long-term unemployed could stop receiving checks by the end of the year.
In some states, such as California, where the unemployment rate hit 12.2 percent in July—the highest level since 1940—workers laid off early in the recession have received three extensions on the regular 26 weeks of benefits, bringing them to a maximum of 79 weeks of payments.
The US House recently passed a $1.4 billion bill to provide another 13 weeks of jobless benefits in high unemployment states like California. The legislation still faces a vote in the Senate. The extension in benefits, however, would not cover many of the newly unemployed, or those yet to lose their jobs.
In California, for instance, hundreds of thousands who filed claims after June 14 of this year would be eligible for no more than 39 weeks of benefits. A House bill that would have provided longer extensions through 2010 was scrapped because it would have cost $70 billion, a price tag the lawmakers were unwilling to authorize.
*

Weighing all the available evidence, and noting that the data are mixed, Anderson concludes that "there has been some displacement and some depression of wages" among U.S. citizens as a result of illegal immigration. "But it has not, in the main, had a significant effect in reducing the earnings and employment opportunities of American workers, including minority-group workers. Immigration, including illegal immigration, has not been terribly detrimental to employment opportunities for African-Americans. I firmly believe this. It is for that reason that you don't find African-American political leaders lining up with the opponents of immigration."
When you look at opponents of illegal immigration, Anderson adds, "you find the same right-wing, reactionary scoundrels who have opposed progressive legislation, who have opposed the minimum wage and efforts to improve the economic opportunities of minorities."

THE SAME RIGHT-WINGERS THAT OPPOSE MINIMUM WAGE ALSO WANT THE BORDERS OPEN FOR “CHEAP” MEX LABOR.

WHY DOES THIS PERSON THINK ILLEGALS ARE NOT HERE FOR WELFARE? THE COST OF THAT WELFARE IS BILLIONS.
What kind of an immigration bill would Anderson like to see emerge from Congress? "We must secure the borders. That has to be part of any legislation. We have to recognize that the huge numbers [of undocumented workers in the U.S.] are not here to receive welfare; they are here to work. If there were no employment opportunities for them, they wouldn't be coming. But we should not have an immigration system that allows immigrant workers to reduce the wages and diminish the working conditions of American workers. Therefore, I say protect the borders to significantly reduce the inflow. We should then move toward the legalization of those who are already here. If we legalize them [after requiring them to pay a penalty], then we let them out of the box they are imprisoned in and set in motion a process for improving wages and working conditions."