Saturday, July 10, 2010



Seventh lawsuit filed over Ariz. immigration law

PHOENIX (AP) — A seventh challenge to Arizona's tough new immigration crackdown says training materials designed to teach police officers how to enforce the law give "vague and ill-defined factors" as reasons to question someone's legal status.
Officers aren't supposed to use a person's race to determine whether there's reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally.

But the lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court, says the training materials developed by state police bosses allow officers to rely on things like whether a person speaks poor English, looks nervous or is traveling in an overcrowded vehicle. They can also take into account whether someone is wearing several layers of clothing in a hot climate, or hanging out in an area where illegal immigrants are known to look for work.

That will lead to "widespread" racial profiling of Hispanics, the lawsuit says.

"It's like having a law that tells police to go out and arrest all children but to not use the fact that a person looks like a child," Los Angeles-based attorney Peter Schey, lead counsel for the plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit, said Saturday.

"Rather than training police officers about who is and who is not really deportable, the training materials focus on vague and ambiguous factors, such as a person's dress or limited ability to speak English or demeanor, whatever that means," Schey said. "An average law enforcement officer using those standards is inevitably going to focus on a person's physical appearance or race while being sure not to say that in his or her report."

Schey estimated that 2 million of the nation's roughly 12 million illegal immigrants are not eligible for deportation because they're in the process of seeking legal status.

The Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board, which developed the training materials, did not return a phone call seeking comment Saturday. Spokespeople at the office of Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the law April 23 and ordered the board to develop the training materials, also did not return a call seeking comment.

The law, set to take effect July 29, already faces legal challenges from two police officers, other groups and the U.S. Justice Department, which says the law usurps the federal government's "pre-eminent authority" under the Constitution to regulate immigration.

The law's backers say Congress isn't doing anything meaningful about illegal immigration, so it's the state's duty to step up. They object to social costs and violence they say are associated with illegal immigration.

The latest lawsuit's filers, including the League of United Latin American Citizens, expect it to be heard by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, who is hearing the six other legal challenges. Bolton said this week that she is making no promises to rule on the lawsuits before the law takes effect.

The enforcement guidelines being challenged were adopted by the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board and will be distributed to all 15,000 Arizona police officers.

Police departments will decide the best way to teach their forces. There is no requirement that all 15,000 Arizona police officers complete the training before the law takes effect.

The new law generally requires officers enforcing another law — like speeding or jaywalking — to question a person's immigration status if there's a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally.


Congressman Brian Bilbray, along with 55 other Members of Congress, is urging the leaders of the United States House of Representatives to include a method of enforcement for benefits under any new plan of nationalized health care. The text of the letter follows:
September 15, 2009
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the House
H-232 United States Capitol
Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable John Boehner
Office of the House Republican Leader
H-204 United States Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Madam Speaker and Republican Leader Boehner:
As discussion on health care reform continues, we urge you to include measures that will prevent illegal immigrants from receiving taxpayer-funded benefits in any health care reform bill considered by the House. While the House bill currently says illegal immigrants cannot get benefits, the statement is meaningless because the bill contains no verification mechanism to ensure that illegal immigrants will not receive benefits.
The non-partisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently issued some troubling information on the immigration-related provisions of the current health care bill, H.R. 3200. Specifically, the new CRS Report R40773, Treatment of Noncitizens in H.R. 3200, points out the following:
• CRS states that H.R. 3200 "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the [taxpayer-subsidized Health Insurance] Exchange."
• While section 142(a)(3) of H.R. 3200 states the responsibility of the Health Choices Commissioner to administer the "individual affordability credits under subtitle C of title II, including determination of eligibility for such credits," no specific enforcement mechanism is outlined in the bill.
• CRS also notes that "there could be instances where some family members would meet the definition of an eligible individual for purposes of the credit, while other family members would not. For example, in a family consisting of a U.S. citizen married to an unauthorized alien and a U.S. citizen child, the U.S. citizen spouse and child could meet the criteria for being a credit-eligible individual, while the unauthorized alien spouse would not meet the criteria. H.R. 3200 does not expressly address how such a situation would be treated. Therefore, it appears that the Health Choices Commissioner would be responsible for determining how the credits would be administered in the case of mixed-status families."
Our constituents find these provisions unacceptable. The Pew Hispanic Center estimated that there are almost two million families in the United States where illegal immigrant parents have U.S.-born children, and even more mixed-status families exist. If H.R. 3200 becomes law in its current form, billions in taxpayer funds could go to those who are in our country illegally.
Most of our concerns could be easily addressed by requiring individuals applying for affordability credits to undergo citizenship verification using one of the existing programs used for various social service programs. We urge you to adopt language such as the Heller amendment (offered in the House Ways & Means Committee during the markup of H.R. 3200, July 16, 2009) or the Deal amendment (offered in the House Energy & Commerce Committee markup of H.R. 3200, July 31, 2009) in the final version of any health care reform legislation to close these costly, unnecessarily loopholes.
Brian P. Bilbray
Member of Congress
Lamar Smith
Member of Congress
Phil Gingrey
Member of Congress
Dana Rohrabacher
Member of Congress
Ed Whitfield
Member of Congress
Marsha Blackburn
Member of Congress
Walter B. Jones
Member of Congress
Spencer Bachus
Member of Congress
Ed Royce
Member of Congress
Elton Gallegly
Member of Congress
Shelley Moore Capito
Member of Congress
Todd Platts
Member of Congress
John J. Duncan, Jr.
Member of Congress
David P. Roe
Member of Congress
J. Gresham Barrett
Member of Congress
Steve King
Member of Congress
Todd Akin
Member of Congress
Ted Poe
Member of Congress
Bob Goodlatte
Member of Congress
Dan Burton
Member of Congress
Patrick T. McHenry
Member of Congress
Paul C. Brown
Member of Congress
John Culberson
Member of Congress
Virginia Foxx
Member of Congress
Rodney Alexander
Member of Congress
Bill Posey
Member of Congress
Peter Hoekstra
Member of Congress Dean Heller
Member of Congress
Nathan Deal
Member of Congress
John Campbell
Member of Congress
Todd Tiahrt
Member of Congress
Howard Coble
Member of Congress
Louie Gohmert
Member of Congress
Trent Franks
Member of Congress
John Fleming
Member of Congress
Gus M. Bilirakis
Member of Congress
Adrian Smith
Member of Congress
John Boozman
Member of Congress
Gary G. Miller
Member of Congress
Jack Kingston
Member of Congress
Sue Myrick
Member of Congress
Jeff Miller
Member of Congress
Roscoe G. Bartlett
Member of Congress
Kenny Marchant
Member of Congress
Scott Garrett
Member of Congress
Cliff Stearns
Member of Congress
Robert B. Aderholt
Member of Congress
Frank R. Wolf
Member of Congress
John Sullivan
Member of Congress
Tom Price
Member of Congress
Jason Chaffetz
Member of Congress
Michael T. McCaul
Member of Congress
Wally Herger
Member of Congress
Mary Fallin
Member of Congress
Cc: House Ways & Means Committee Chairman and Ranking Member
House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman and Ranking Member
House Education and Labor Committee Chairman and Ranking Member
Illegals Receiving Health Care …."But....( of course there is!)"

“If you’re in this country illegally, should you be able to get health care?” CNN’s John King asked Mrs. Pelosi.

“No, illegal immigrants are not covered by this plan,” she replied.

Mrs. Pelosi’s remarks are downright deceptive, according to Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who points out that the proposed health care legislation “ contains gaping loopholes that will allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits .”

These loopholes, Rep. Smith maintains, are “no accident.” He maintains that the proposed legislation, despite months of debate, still contains no mechanism for verifying if applicants are legal residents or not.

The Republican members of the Ways and Means Committee attempted to address this loophole by an amendment proposed by Congressman Dick Heller (R-Nevada) which would have required applicants for government provided or subsidized health care to demonstrate eligibility through the Income and Eligibility Verification System (IEVS) and the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) systems.

But, on July 29, the Heller Amendment was soundly defeated by the following 26 Majority Members of the House Ways & Means Committee: Xavier Becerra (Calif.), Shelley Berkley (Nev.), Earl Blumenauer (Ore.), Joe Crowley (N.Y.), Artur Davis (Ala.), Danny Davis (Ill.), Lloyd Doggett (Texas), Bob Etheridge (N.C.), Brian Higgins (N.Y.), Ron Kind (Wis.), John Larson (Conn.), Sander Levin (Mich.), John Lewis (Ga.), Jim McDermott (Wash.), Kendrick Meek (Fla.), Richard Neal (Mass.), Bill Pascrell (N.J.), Earl Pomeroy (N.D.), Chairman Charlie Rangel (N.Y.), Linda Sanchez (Calif.), Allyson Schwartz (Pa.), Pete Stark (Calif.), John Tanner (Tenn.), Mike Thompson (Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (Md.), and John Yarmuth (Ky.).

The Federal for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) believes the legislation is now purposefully self-contradictory in order to ensure that the millions of illegal Latinos will receive coverage. FAIR points out that while one provision of the proposed health care reform bill states illegal immigrants will not be eligible for benefits, the legislation remains without any system of verification for determining if a patient is a legal or illegal U. S. resident.

Moreover, Fair insists, the bill leaves open the possibility that if one citizen family member is eligible for benefits, then the entire family — including illegal immigrants — is also eligible for the benefits.

“At a time when the federal government is running trillion dollar deficits, and the projected costs of the proposed health care overhaul seem to grow with each passing day, the committee that writes our tax laws wants Americans to pay for the health care costs of illegal aliens,” says FAIR President Dan Stein. “Given the opportunity to close loopholes that would cost the public billions of dollars each year, Democrats on the committee unanimously rejected an amendment that would bar illegal aliens from a national health care program.”

The cost of treating illegal aliens amounts to nearly $11 billion a year, according to calculations done by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a non-profit group that opposes illegal immigration. And that cost is not expected to go away if a health insurance reform bill becomes law.

According to FAIR’s Director of Special Projects Jack Martin, illegal immigrants presently cost U. S. taxpayers $10.7 billion a year for health care. The numbers are contained in a report that FAIR plans to publish in the near future.

“The current health care bill is looking as if it is leaving a very large loophole for medical coverage being provided to illegal aliens,” Martin said.

So again, yes, the speaker of the House can say: "We've made no provision for Health Care for Illegal Aliens". But, is she in fact telling you the WHOLE truth or only half a truth. I am an independent voter and I, at this point, have my opinion. You be the judge for your own opinion.
The politics of Healthcare Reform

from the AP -

"Immigration analyst James R. Edwards Jr. reported last week in National Review that "no health legislation on the table requires federal, state or local agencies -- or private institutions receiving federal funds -- to check the immigration status of health-program applicants, so some of the money distributed via Medicaid and tax credits inevitably would go to illegal aliens." Moreover, the Senate Finance Committee plan creates a preference for illegal aliens by exempting them from the mandate to buy insurance.

That's right. Lawabiding, uninsured Americans would be fined if they didn't submit to the ObamaCare prescription.

Lawbreaking bordercrossers and deportation fugitives would be spared.

For years, advocates of uncontrolled immigration have argued that illegals aren't getting free health care, and that even if they were, they'd not be draining government budgets. The fiscal crisis in California gives lie to those talking points. In March, the Associated Press reported that Sacramento and Contra Costa counties were slashing staff and closing clinics due to the prohibitive costs of providing nonemergency health services for illegals.

"The general situation there is being faced by nearly every health department across the country, and if not right now, shortly," Robert M. Pestronk of the National Association of County and City Health Officials, told the AP."


Become a blog follower. Cut, paste, and post!

"ObamaCare: Magnet for Illegal Immigration" by Rep. Ed Royce

Washington, Mar 26 -
The following oped by Rep. Ed Royce appeared in today's FlashReport:

This weekend, Congress held a marathon session debating health care reform. The Democrat Leadership's goal was to get a health care bill through at any cost, making backroom deals and abusing the legislative process to get it done.

One faction of the Democrat Party held off on supporting the health care legislation in order to get an amnesty bill to the House floor. After meeting with pro-amnesty legislators, President Barack Obama pledged to do everything in his power to get immigration legislation moving in Congress. This pledge coincided with the release of an amnesty legislation outline pushed by Senators Charles Schumer and Lindsey Graham. And open borders activists congregated on the steps of the Capitol building the Sunday of the vote to remind the President of his promise.

President Obama claims his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants but how can you promise illegal immigrants won't be covered if the bill doesn't contain enforcement mechanisms to verify whether an individual is here illegally? The answer, you can't.

California's health care system is already heavily impacted by the cost of illegal immigration. Roughly $1.4 billion a year in taxpayer dollars goes toward providing health care to illegal immigrants in our state. Expanding government control of our health care system only compounds the problems of illegal immigration and health care costs. Additionally, there is nothing in the bill to monitor whether illegal immigrants are using our health care system. Most government programs use the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program to prevent access. But once again, there is no enforcement mechanism in the legislation. Illegal immigrants will be able to access all the services provided by this health care bill.

Although the bill bars illegal immigrants from using the health exchange, there is no requirement to check anyone's immigration status. Without any enforcement, it becomes as ineffective as our immigration laws.

The government takeover of healthcare also vastly expands the number of people eligible for Medicaid. While illegal immigrants are theoretically barred from this program, last year the Democrat Leadership eroded the Medicaid verification process. Under S-CHIP reauthorization, a person now only has to provide a Social Security number and name in order to get benefits. Before this change, documentation like birth certificates and driver's licenses were required to ensure that the person enrolling was the same person whose Social Security number and name was being submitted. I supported an effort to stop this change but it was defeated.

The Social Security Administration receives about 8 million mismatches from the IRS every year, for reports filed under names that do not match the Social Security numbers. This is why I supported efforts requiring the use of identity documents under the House health care bill, but again this was defeated by the Democrat Majority.

So what does this all mean? It means that the health care legislation the Democrats just passed will be a magnet for more illegal immigration. It means that amnesty will be pushed with as much vigor as the health care bill, creating another inducement to cross U.S. borders. At the time of the passage of the 1986 amnesty, the number of illegal immigrants who took advantage of it went from what was thought to be only 1.5 million to a total 4 million. This time around we are talking about legalizing around 12 million who are here illegally, but in the end how many will it be?


There are already 38 million illegals in the country. La Raza, the Mexican supremacist party for expansion of the Mexican welfare state, is actively fighting against illegals participating in the census. They do this through the Mexican media, and through the Catholic church. The Senate has joined in this fight. BOTH LA RAZA ENTITIES DO NOW WANT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO KNOW HOW BAD THE MEXICAN INVASION AND OCCUPATION IS!

Where in this country is it NOT Mexican occupied?

Judicial Watch
Mexicans Say Amnesty Will Boost Illegal Immigration
last Updated: Wed, 10/14/2009 - 3:02pm
If President Obama keeps his promise of giving the nation’s 12 million illegal aliens amnesty it will encourage more Mexicans to enter the United States, according to residents of the struggling Latin American country who are undoubtedly rooting for the commander-in-chief’s plan.
The majority of illegal immigrants in the U.S. are from Mexico therefore the president’s reprieve project will greatly affect that nation. Two-thirds of Mexicans say they know someone living in the United States and around one-third have an immediate member of their household or close relative living in the U.S.
A majority of those residing south of the border say legalizing their undocumented countrymen will inspire more Mexicans to head north, according to a recent survey conducted by an internationally known polling and market research company. A vast majority of Mexicans with a relative in the United States said a legalization program would make people they know more likely to go to America illegally.
The results of the survey were made public this week by a research organization dedicated to studying the economic, social, fiscal and demographic impacts of immigration in the U.S. It reveals that nearly one-third of Mexican residents (nearly 40 million people) would like to live in the U.S. and if there was an amnesty a large number would come illegally with the hope of qualifying for a future exoneration.
An amnesty, therefore, would stimulate more illegal immigration which is the last thing this country needs. Furthermore, rewarding those who have violated our nation’s laws with coveted U.S. residency and possibly citizenship demeans the system, especially for those who follow the appropriate steps to come lawfully.
It’s bad enough that U.S. taxpayers annually dish out billions of dollars to educate, medically treat and incarcerate illegal aliens who are, in many cases, depleting local governments. Los Angeles County alone spends more than $1 billion a year, including $48 million a month in welfare costs, to provide services for illegal aliens. The crisis is hardly limited to border states, which have traditionally been the most impacted. Georgia’s skyrocketing illegal population costs taxpayers nearly $2 billion a year.
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."

NEW YORK TIMES July 18, 2007
Editorial Observer
Trying Times Ahead: The Prospect of 60 Million Californians
Recently, the California Department of Finance projected that there will be some 60 million people living in the state by 2050. At present there are 36 million. The numbers in themselves are frightening enough, but what I find terrifying is the bland assumption that a two-thirds increase in population is inevitable and that the main problem will be creating the infrastructure necessary to house, feed, educate, transport and govern all those people. To me, the main problem is how to keep them from showing up in the first place. Somehow the numbers in themselves don’t really suggest the sobering weight of this projection. To say that for every three Californians now there will be five in 2050 doesn’t capture the scale of change. If you said that for every three houses now there will be five in 2050, or for every three cars, ditto, you might be getting a little closer to the visceral feel of the thing. But when it comes to houses and cars, California is a land of loaves and fishes, always multiplying in the most unexpected ways. To live in the state is to live with unrelenting change, whether you like it or not, and it has been that way for decades. But this population increase will mean more than filling up San Bernardino, Riverside and Kern Counties and paving the entire midsection of the state and creating impromptu day-schools and conference centers in stopped traffic. We tend to talk about humans as if they were interchangeable — as if the Californian of 1957 were somehow equivalent to the Californian of 2007. But today’s Californian consumes far more, if you consider consumption in its broadest sense. Draw pictures of those two Californians to the scale of their consumption, and the present-day resident would dwarf his ancestor. There’s a chance that a mid-21st-century Californian will look back in horror at the enormous consumption footprint of someone living in the state right now. That sense of horror would be good news — a sign that the coming generations had taken to heart that the way we live now, even in its current dimensions, is unsustainable. The trouble, of course, is that a population projection like this one more or less takes it for granted that not much will have changed by 2050. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be 60 million people in the state. 60 million Californians by mid-century Riverside will become the second most populous county behind Los Angeles and Latinos the dominant ethnic group, study says.By Maria L. La Ganga and Sara LinTimes Staff Writers July 10, 2007 Over the next half-century, California's population will explode by nearly 75%, and Riverside will surpass its bigger neighbors to become the second most populous county after Los Angeles, according to state Department of Finance projections released Monday. California will near the 60-million mark in 2050, the study found, raising questions about how the state will look and function and where all the people and their cars will go. Dueling visions pit the iconic California building block of ranch house, big yard and two-car garage against more dense, high-rise development. But whether sprawl or skyscrapers win the day, the Golden State will probably be a far different and more complex place than it is today, as people live longer and Latinos become the dominant ethnic group, eclipsing all others combined. Some critics forecast disaster if gridlock and environmental impacts are not averted. Others see a possible economic boon, particularly for retailers and service industries with an eye on the state as a burgeoning market. "It's opportunity with baggage," said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., in "a country masquerading as a state." Other demographers argue that the huge population increase the state predicts will occur only if officials complete major improvements to roads and other public infrastructure. Without that investment, they say, some Californians would flee the state. If the finance department's calculations hold, California's population will rise from 34.1 million in 2000 to 59.5 million at the mid-century point, about the same number of people as Italy has today. And its projected growth rate in those 50 years will outstrip the national rate — nearly 75% compared with less than 50% projected by the federal government. That could translate to increased political clout in Washington, D.C. Southern California's population is projected to grow at a rate of more than 60%, according to the new state figures, reaching 31.6 million by mid-century. That's an increase of 12.1 million over just seven counties. L.A. County alone will top 13 million by 2050, an increase of almost 3.5 million residents. And Riverside County — long among the fastest-growing in the state — will triple in population to 4.7 million by mid-century. Riverside County will add 3.1 million people, according to the new state figures, eclipsing Orange and San Diego to become the second most populous in the state. With less expensive housing than the coast, Riverside County has grown by more than 472,000 residents since 2000, according to state estimates. USC Professor Genevieve Giuliano, an expert on land use and transportation, would probably agree. Such massive growth, if it occurs, she said, will require huge investment in the state's highways, schools, and energy and sewer systems at a "very formidable cost." If those things aren't built, Giuliano questioned whether the projected population increases will occur. "Sooner or later, the region will not be competitive and the growth is not going to happen," she said. If major problems like traffic congestion and housing costs aren't addressed, Giuliano warned, the middle class is going to exit California, leaving behind very high-income and very low-income residents. I.E. MILLIONS OF ILLITERATE MEXICANS. The Department of Finance releases long-term population projections every three years. Between the last two reports, number crunchers have taken a more detailed look at California's statistics and taken into account the likelihood that people will live longer, said chief demographer Mary Heim. The result? The latest numbers figure the state will be much more crowded than earlier estimates (by nearly 5 million) and that it will take a bit longer than previously thought for Latinos to become the majority of California's population: 2042, not 2038. 75% OF THE GROWTH WILL BE LATINO The figures show that the majority of California's growth will be in the Latino population, said Dowell Myers, a professor of urban planning and demography at USC, adding that "68% of the growth this decade will be Latino, 75% next and 80% after that." That should be a wake-up call for voting Californians, Myers said, pointing out a critical disparity. Though the state's growth is young and Latino, the majority of voters will be older and white — at least for the next decade. "The future of the state is Latino growth," Myers said. "We'd sure better invest in them and get them up to speed. Older white voters don't see it that way. They don't realize that someone has to replace them in the work force, pay for their benefits and buy their house."

1126 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
202-785 1670
Get on La Raza’s email list to find out what this fascist party is doing to expand the Mexican occupation.
LA RAZA is the virulently racist political party for ILLEGALS (only Mexicans) and the corporations that benefit from illegals, and the employers of illegals. IT IS ILLEGAL TO HIRE AN ILLEGAL.
However LA RAZA does like the AMERICAN WELFARE SYSTEM. The welfare system in the country is so good that Mexico has dumped 38 million of their poor, illiterate , criminal and frequently pregnant over our border.
Do a search for Mexican gangs, or go to “Mexico Under Siege”
“THE DRUG WAR AT OUR BORDERS” …ask yourself why the LA RAZA DEMS want these borders OPEN!
Cut and paste articles and post email all over the country!

Report Illegals & Employers Toll Free... (866) 347-2423
INS National Customer Service Center Phone: 1-800-375-5283.
You can contact President Obama and let him know of your opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens:
Obama soft on illegals enforcement

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.
Here is the Department of Homeland Security's Hotline for reporting suspected illegal employees and employers: 866-347-2423 (YOU MAY BE WASTING YOUR TIME HERE. HISPANDERING OBAMA SELECTED LA RAZA JANET NAPOLITANO TO HEAD “HOMELAND SECURITY = PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP” FOR OPEN AND UNDEFENDED BORDERS)
Immigration Enforcement Group Defends Against Amnesty Push

Here is the Department of Homeland Security's Hotline for reporting suspected illegal employees and employers: 866-347-2423



Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.


206 Most wanted criminals in Los Angeles. Out of 206 criminals--183 are hispanic---171 of those are wanted for Murder.

Why do Americans still protect the illegals??

The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave
Heather Mac Donald

Some of the most violent criminals at large today are illegal aliens. Yet in cities where the crime these aliens commit is highest, the police cannot use the most obvious tool to apprehend them: their immigration status. In Los Angeles, for example, dozens of members of a ruthless Salvadoran prison gang have sneaked back into town after having been deported for such crimes as murder, assault with a deadly weapon, and drug trafficking. Police officers know who they are and know that their mere presence in the country is a felony. Yet should a cop arrest an illegal gangbanger for felonious reentry, it is he who will be treated as a criminal, for violating the LAPD’s rule against enforcing immigration law.


“It’s all part of the Obama Administration’s plan to pass a “compassionate” and “comprehensive” immigration overhaul that aims to legalize an estimated 12 million undocumented aliens. The legislation is currently being drafted by the chairman of a key congressional task force, Illinois Democrat Luis Gutierrez, and promises to offer undocumented immigrants U.S. citizenship and humane treatment in prisons.” JUDICIAL WATCH
WHY WE NEED a BORDER FENCE, by Heather Mac Donald
The Arizona law has the salutary purpose of increasing the chance that any given illegal alien will be lawfully detected and deported, but the record suggests that a huge percentage of individuals apprehended under the law will simply illegally reenter.

This ICE press release boasts of success stories from the Secure Communities program, which under the Obama administration focuses on identifying and deporting only the most serious criminal aliens. It presents 26 cases in which violent or otherwise serious offenders were apprehended since late 2008; a full 13 of them had already been deported, many multiple times.

The record for reentry goes to a Mexican aggravated felon apprehended in Florence, Ariz., on May 22, 2009, who had been deported nine times, following 51 documented arrests under 16 different aliases. The runner-up is a Mexican arrested for assault causing bodily injury on June 9, 2009, in Starr County, Texas, who had been deported five times and was convicted of attempted murder in 2005. More typical is a Guatemalan drug dealer apprehended in Dallas on Aug. 7, 2009, who has been deported twice, and whose lengthy criminal history includes aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (legalese for shooting someone); a Honduran MS-13 gang member booked on March 8, 2009, in Boston, who had previously been removed once; and a Mexican gang member arrested for strong arm aggravated assault in Maricopa County, Ariz., who had been previously convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and deported once.

The logic of the Arizona law is that by increasing the chance of detection, it will discourage illegal aliens from entering in the first place and encourage those already in the country to leave on their own. Undoubtedly, many people will respond to the law as intended; the deterrent effect would be even greater if more states followed Arizona’s lead and discarded their actual or de facto sanctuary policies. But for other illegal aliens, the threat of detection and deportation is apparently not particularly meaningful. I don’t know whether the rate of illegal reentry (which is a felony) is higher for serious criminal aliens compared with illegal aliens who do not commit other crimes. But clearly, better interior enforcement, while a necessary part of restoring the immigration rule of law, cannot succeed in the absence of a truly secure border. The only reason for not creating a border fence that I can see is ambivalence about whether we really want to prevent illegal entry.
Audit looks at migrant re-arrests
McClatchy Newspapers
Jan. 9, 2007 12:00 AM
WASHINGTON - Some illegal immigrants are being released from prison only to be arrested on new charges despite government efforts to deport them and keep them out of the country.

The findings are part of an audit by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine that suggest authorities are still struggling to deport illegal immigrants who commit crimes, even though most state and local authorities are notifying immigration authorities of the imminent release of prisoners.

Fine's office analyzed the cases of 100 immigrants who had served time in prison and found 73 of them were rearrested after being released.

On average, each immigrant was rearrested six times, ranging from traffic violations to assault.

Fine's office couldn't determine how many illegal immigrants had been rearrested overall because immigration authorities don't keep track.

If the sample was any indication, "The rate at which released criminal aliens are rearrested is extremely high," the report said.

Last year, Homeland Security's inspector general said immigration authorities expected that most of the 300,000 illegal and legal immigrants eligible to be deported would be released.

Federal officials said they would need 34,000 additional beds at a cost of $1.1 billion to detain and remove all of them.
Illegal Aliens Abscond Under “Humane” ICE Program
Last Updated: Wed, 10/28/2009 - 2:57pm
Touted by the Obama Administration as key to overhauling the nation’s immigration detention system, a program that monitors illegal aliens instead of jailing them regularly loses track of offenders and the government distorts records to cover it up.
Operated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the intensive monitoring program allows illegal aliens to check in by phone, wear ankle monitors and obey a curfew rather than go to prison while they wait for court appearances. ICE claims the alternatives-to-detention program is a huge success and Obama assures it’s a great model for his plans to create a more humane immigration detention system.
But records and statistics obtained by a Houston newspaper under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) tell a much different story. Nearly one in five illegal immigrants who participated in the tracking project absconded while under supervision during the last five years, according to the records. Authorities were unable to locate nearly 20% of 6,373 illegal aliens enlisted in the program during that time. About 5% were subsequently rearrested for other matters.
ICE brags about a near perfect success rate because it simply erases those who absconded from the records as if they never existed. The Department of Homeland Security’s largest investigative agency, with about 20,000 employees and 400 offices worldwide, includes only active participants when it calculates its heavily altered statistics.
Based on the blatantly misleading data, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is working to expand the alternatives-to-detention program, which currently has about 20,000 participants. The former Arizona governor, who has a documented history of opposing immigration enforcement, will submit a proposal to Congress before year’s end in hopes of accomplishing that goal.
It’s all part of the Obama Administration’s plan to pass a “compassionate” and “comprehensive” immigration overhaul that aims to legalize an estimated 12 million undocumented aliens. The legislation is currently being drafted by the chairman of a key congressional task force, Illinois Democrat Luis Gutierrez, and promises to offer undocumented immigrants U.S. citizenship and humane treatment in prisons.

Illegal Aliens Sue ICE Over Arrests

Last Updated: Fri, 10/30/2009 - 11:04am
A group of illegal immigrants recently spared deportation by a sympathetic Connecticut judge are suing the federal agents that arrested them, claiming their constitutional rights were violated in the raids that led to their apprehension.
The illegal aliens, who live in New Haven, assert in a federal lawsuit that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents violated their rights during an early-morning fugitive operation in 2007 that led to the arrest of 30 people. Seventeen of them were subsequently charged with being in the U.S. illegally and a group of law students from a nearby Ivy League university represented them pro bono.
In August a federal judge (Michael Straus) in Connecticut blocked the deportation of four of the illegal aliens, ruling that their constitutional rights were “egregiously violated” because immigration agents entered their apartments without a warrant, probable cause or consent. Besides terminating removal proceedings, the judge suppressed any evidence gathered by federal agents because the illegal aliens’ constitutional protections to due process were violated.
Evidently emboldened by the ruling, the illegal immigrants are now suing the agents who conducted the raids, their supervisors and senior ICE officials. Weapons drawn, agents entered the illegal aliens’ homes without cause, consent or search warrants, according to the complaint filed this week. It further says that authorities had not previously determined that most of the arrested were in violation of immigration law and therefore had no reason to assume that they lacked legal status.
The lawsuit also declares that the feds deliberately conducted raids in New Haven to retaliate against the city for its well-known efforts to accommodate illegal immigrants. A few years ago New Haven became the nation’s first to offer illegal aliens official identification cards so that they can enjoy public services and integrate into the community. San Francisco followed its lead and began offering illegal immigrants ID cards this year.

Some Illegal Immigrants Have Been Arrested and Re-Arrested 6 Times

Some Illegal Immigrants have been arrested and Re-Arrested 6 Times - Illegal Immigrants arrested for being in the United States illegally may have been charged up to six more times, for more serious crimes, after they were released by local authorities. Additionally, the number of illegal immigrants deported after being declared a felon is on the rise.

The Justice findings by department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine examined the criminal histories of 100 illegal immigrants arrested and then released by local and state authorities in 2004, the latest complete data available. Of the sample group of 100, according to the audit, 73 immigrants were later arrested a collective 429 times - on charges ranging from traffic tickets to weapons and drug charges.

The data suggest "the rate at which released criminal aliens are re-arrested is extremely high," the audit noted. The report, parts of which were redacted, was required by Congress in 2005 and looked at how local and state authorities that receive Justice Department funding are working with the Homeland Security Department.

For years, the government was forced to release thousands of illegal immigrants who were caught in the United States because of not enough jail space and other resources. But last fall, with immigration as a key election-year priority, Homeland Security declared it would detain 99 percent of non-Mexican illegal immigrants until they could be returned to their home nations. The policy generally does not apply to Mexicans, who are almost immediately returned to Mexico after being stopped by Border Patrol agents.

The Justice audit, however, only looked at immigrants who were arrested and released by local and state authorities before they could be turned over to Homeland Security to be detained or deported. In all, 752 cities, counties and states participating in the program received $287 million in 2005, the audit noted.

Five states - California, New York, Texas, Florida and Arizona - received the bulk of the money, together pulling in more than $184 million.

Assistant Attorney General Regina B. Schofield, who oversees the Office of Justice Programs that controlled the funding, declined comment on the audit, noting that it does not contain any recommendations.

A separate report by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University showed that the number of immigrants who were deported as "aggravated felons" doubled over the last 15 years, from 10,303 in 1992 to an estimated 23,065 in 2006.

But TRAC, which obtained the data from the Justice Department's Executive Office of Immigration Review, noted concerns that some of those immigrants never committed felonies.

"An individual can be declared an aggravated felon on the basis of a conviction on misdemeanor charges such as shoplifting," the TRAC report concluded.

Lou Dobbs Tonight
And there are some 800,000 gang members in this country: That’s more than the combined number of troops in our Army and Marine Corps. These gangs have become one of the principle ways to import and distribute drugs in the United States. Congressman David Reichert joins Lou to tell us why those gangs are growing larger and stronger, and why he’s introduced legislation to eliminate the top three international drug gangs.
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, September 28, 2009

And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.
Obama soft on illegals enforcement

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday. Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans' jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). Mr. Smith, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said a period of economic turmoil is the wrong time to be cutting enforcement and letting illegal immigrants take jobs that Americans otherwise would hold.



April 4, 2007
Executive Summary: The Fiscal Cost of Low-Skill Households to the U.S. Taxpayer
by Robert E. Rector, Christine Kim and Shanea Watkins, Ph.D.
Executive Summary #12

Each year, families and individuals pay taxes to the government and receive back a wide variety of services and benefits. When the benefits and services received by one group exceed the taxes paid, a distributional deficit occurs, and other groups must pay for the services and benefits of the group in deficit. Each year, government is involved in a large-scale transfer of resources between different social groups.
This paper provides a fiscal distribution analysis of households headed by persons without a high school diploma. The report refers to these households as “low-skill households.” The analysis measures the total benefits and services received by these households compared to total taxes paid. The difference between benefits received and taxes paid rep_resents the total resources transferred by government on behalf of this group from the rest of society.
The size and cost of government are far larger than many people imagine. In fiscal year (FY) 2004, federal, state, and local expenditures combined amounted to $3.75 trillion. One way to grasp the size of government more readily is to calculate average expenditures per household. In 2004, there were some 115 million households (multi-person families and single persons living alone) in the U.S. Government spending thus averaged $32,706 per household across the U.S. population.
Government expenditures can be divided into six categories. The first four, which can be termed “immediate benefits and services,” are: Direct benefits, which include Social Security, Medicare, and a few smaller transfer programs; Means-tested benefits, including cash, food, housing, social services, and medical care for poor and near poor individuals; Public educational services, which include the governmental cost of primary, secondary, vocational, and post-secondary education; Population-based services, which are government services made available to a general community including police and fire protection, highways, sewers, food safety inspection, and parks.
Two additional spending categories are: Interest and other financial obligations resulting from prior government activity, including interest payments on government debt and other expenditures relating to the cost of government services provided in earlier years; and Pure public goods, which include national defense, international affairs and scientific research, and some environmental expenditures.
On average, low-skill households receive more government benefits and services than do other households. In FY 2004, low-skill households received $32,138 per household in immediate benefits and services (direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services). If public goods and the cost of interest and other financial obligations are added, total benefits rose to $43,084 per low-skill household. In general, low-skill households received about $10,000 more in government benefits than did the average U.S. household, largely because of the higher level of means-tested welfare benefits received by low-skill households.
In contrast, low-skill households pay less in taxes than do other households. On average, low-skill households paid only $9,689 in taxes in FY 2004. Thus, low-skill households received at least three dollars in immediate benefits and services for each dollar in taxes paid. If the costs of public goods and past financial obligations are added, the ratio rises to four to one.
Strikingly, low-skill households in FY 2004 had average earnings of $20,564 per household. Thus, the $32,138 per household in government immediate benefits and services received by these households not only exceeded their taxes paid, but also substantially exceeded their average household earned income.
A household’s net fiscal deficit equals the cost of benefits and services received minus taxes paid. If the costs of direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services alone are counted, the average low-skill household had a fiscal deficit of $22,449 (expenditures of $32,138 minus $9,689 in taxes). The average net fiscal deficit of a low-skill household actually exceeded the household’s earnings.
If interest and other financial obligations relating to past government activities are added, the average deficit per household rose to $27,301. In addition, the average low-skill household was a free rider with respect to government public goods, receiving public goods costing some $6,095 per household for which it paid nothing.
Receiving, on average, at least $22,449 more in benefits than they pay in taxes each year, low-skill households impose substantial long-term costs on the U.S. taxpayer. Assuming an average adult life span of 50 years for each head of household, the average lifetime costs to the taxpayer will be $1.1 million for each low-skill household for immediate benefits received minus all taxes paid. If the cost of interest and other financial obligations is added, the average lifetime cost rises to $1.3 million per low-skill household.
In 2004, there were 17.7 million low-skill households. With an average net fiscal deficit of $22,449 per household, the total annual fiscal deficit (total benefits received minus total taxes paid) for all of these households equaled $397 billion (the deficit of $22,449 per household times 17.7 million households). This sum includes direct and means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services. If the low-skill households’ share of interest and other financial obligations for past activities is added, their total annual fiscal deficit rises to $483 billion. Over the next ten years the total cost of low-skill households to the taxpayer (immediate benefits minus taxes paid) is likely to be at least 3.9 trillion dollars. This number would go up significantly if changes in immigration policy lead to substantial increases in the number of low-skill immigrants entering the country and receiving services.
Politically feasible changes in government policy will have little effect for decades on the level of fiscal deficit generated by most low-skill households. For example, to make the average low-skill household fiscally neutral (taxes paid equaling immediate benefits received and the appropriate share of interest on government debt), it would be necessary to eliminate Social Security, Medicare, all 60 means-tested aid programs and cut the cost of public education in half. It seems certain that, on average, low-skill households will generate deep fiscal deficits for the foreseeable future. Policies that reduce the future number of high school dropouts and other policies affecting future generations could reduce long-term costs.
Policies that would expand Medicaid and other entitlements will increase the size of future deficits of low-skill households at the margin. On the other hand, policy changes that curtailed medical inflation could reduce costs at the margin in future years. Policies which would halt the growth of out-of-wedlock childbearing or increase real educational attainments of future generations could also limit the growth of future deficits somewhat. However, these policy changes would be dwarfed by any alteration in immigration policy that would substantially increase the future inflow of low-skill immigrants; such a policy would dramatically increase the future fiscal burden to taxpayers.
Robert Rector is Senior Research Fellow in Domestic Policy Studies and Christine Kim is a Policy Analyst in Domestic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. Shanea Watkins, Ph.D., is Policy Analyst in Empirical Studies in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation.
By Frosty Wooldridge
Anyone understand why Mexicans fail at a successful civilization? Ever wonder why millions of them invade the United States in search of a better life? Have you noticed that once they arrive, they create the same kind of ‘society’ in the United States ? Unconsciously, they create the same conditions they left behind. You can take the boy out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the boy. For example, in Denver in December, illegal alien Navi dragged his girlfriend to death behind his car. Illegal alien Cruz shot his girlfriend dead in the back because she wouldn’t reconcile with him. Illegal alien Ruizz ran over and killed Justin Goodman, but Ruizz drove away from the scene leaving Goodman to die. In Greeley , Colorado they suffered 270 hit and run accidents in one year. Over 80 percent of hit and run wrecks in Denver involve illegal aliens. Denver boasts the drug smuggling capital of the West as well as the people smuggling mecca of the country. Illegals cheat, distribute drugs, lie, forge documents, steal and kill as if it’s a normal way of life. For them, it is. Mexico ’s civilization stands diametrically opposed to America ’s culture. Both countries manifest different ways of thinking and operating. With George Bush’s push to create the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” by dissolving our borders with Mexico , he places all Americans at risk. Would you become friends with neighbors who throw their trash on city streets and parks, create ghettoes wherever they enclave their numbers, promote corruption, deal in violence, encourage drug use, manifest poverty, endorse sexism and downgrade education? America ’s culture and Mexico ’s culture remain diametrically opposed to one another. America ’s fought Mexico and won. Today, Mexico invades America with sheer numbers of poor. However, cultures rarely change and neither do their people. As you can see from the ten points below, everything about Mexico degrades everything about America . For further information, you may visit and where you will find a plethora of information by a brilliant journalist Brenda Walker. Her original report may be viewed on on January 17, 2007 under the title: “Ten Reasons Why America Should Not Marry Mexico .” I suggest you read more of her work. She exemplifies incisive, sobering and shocking information. These ten point stem directly from Brenda Walker’s work. Let’s examine why America must not entangle itself by merging with Mexico . The legal age of sexual consent in Mexico is 12 years old. Sex with children at this age and younger is socially acceptable in Mexico . For example: A Mexican Lopez-Mendez pleaded guilty to sexual assault on a 10 year old girl in West Virginia . His excuse: sex with young girls was common with his people. He said, “I was unaware that it was a crime.” Mexicans remain the most sexist males next to Islamic men. Both boast the most misogynous cultures in the world. Rape and other violence toward women are not treated as serious crimes. In Mexico , a custom known as “rapto” whereby men kidnap women for sex is regarded as harmless amusement. Mexican society regards women little more than objects. Crime and violence remain mainstays of Mexican culture. Drug cartels and the Mexican army coordinate their massive efforts to promote drug distribution not only in Mexico but into the USA . Mexico City suffers the second highest crime rate in Latin America . Kidnapping remains second only to Columbia for ransom money. Beheadings, killings and gun fire erupt at drug distribution points on the US/Mexican border. Spontaneous hanging continues in Mexico . A mob beat up and burned to death two policemen on live television in 2004 in Mexico City . As Brenda Walker wrote, “Mexicans do not have the same belief as Americans that the law is central to the equitable functioning of a complex nation. It’s the Third World .” Mexicans abhor education. In their country, illiteracy dominates. As they arrive in our country, only 9.6 percent of fourth generation Mexicans earn a high school diploma. Mexico does not promote educational values. This makes them the least educated of any Americans or immigrants. The rate of illiteracy in Mexico stands at 63 percent. Drunk driving remains acceptable in Mexico . As it stands, 44,000 Americans die on our nation’s highways annually. Half that number stems from drunken drivers. U.S. Congressman Steve King reports that 13 American suffer death from drunken driving Mexicans each day. Alcoholism runs rampant in Mexican culture. They suffer the most DUI arrests. Mexicans set the benchmark for animal cruelty. Mexicans love dog fighting, bullfighting, cock fighting and horse tripping. Those blood sports play in every arena and backyard in Mexico . They expand into America as more Mexicans arrive. They also engage in “steer-tailing” where the rider yanks the animal’s tail in an attempt to flip it to the ground. In horse tripping, they run the animals at full gallop around a ring, then, use ropes to trip them at full speed. It’s a death sentence as the horses break their legs, teeth, shoulders and necks—all to the delight of the cheering Mexican fans. As La Raza confirms, Mexicans maintain the most racist society in North America . “For the Hispanic race, everything; for anyone outside the race, nothing!” Guadalupe Loaeza, a journalist, said, “Mexican society is fundamentally racist and classist. The color of your skin is a key that either opens or shuts doors. The lighter your skin, the more doors open to you.” Corruption becomes a mechanism by which Mexico operates. Corruption remains systemic. The Washington Post wrote, “ Mexico is considered one of the most corrupt countries in the hemisphere.” They feature drug cartels, sex slave trade, people smuggling, car theft cartels, real estate scam cartels, murder for money and, you must bribe your mail man to get your mail. Last, but not least, Mexicans are Marxists. They promote a one party government. As with any kind of Marxism, brutal totalitarian rule keeps the rich in power and everyone else subservient. As we allow millions of Mexicans to colonize our country, we can’t help but be caught up in these ten deadly cultural traits of Mexicans. With over 12 million Mexicans here today, the predictions grow to as many as 20 even 40 million Mexicans in a few decades as they come here for a better life. The fact remains, as they come to America for a better life, they make our lives a living hell.
ALIEN NATION: Secrets of the Invasion

May 2006 – ALIEN NATION: Secrets of the Invasion – Why America's government invites rampant illegal immigration

It's widely regarded as America's biggest problem: Between 12 and 20 million aliens – including large numbers of criminals, gang members and even terrorists – have entered this nation illegally, with countless more streaming across our scandalously unguarded borders daily.

The issue polarizes the nation, robs citizens of jobs, bleeds taxpayers, threatens America's national security and dangerously balkanizes the country into unassimilated ethnic groups with little loyalty or love for America's founding values. Indeed, the de facto invasion is rapidly transforming America into a totally different country than the one past generations have known and loved.

And yet – most Americans have almost no idea what is really going on, or why it is happening.

While news reports depict demonstrations and debates, and while politicians promise "comprehensive border security programs," no real answers ever seem to emerge.

But there are answers. Truthful answers. Shocking answers.

In its groundbreaking May edition, WND's acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine reveals the astounding hidden agendas, plans and people behind America's immigration nightmare.

Titled "ALIEN NATION," the issue is subtitled "SECRETS OF THE INVASION: Why government invites rampant illegal immigration." Indeed, it reveals pivotal secrets very few Americans know. For example:

Did you know that the powerfully influential Council on Foreign Relations – often described as a “shadow government" – issued a comprehensive report last year laying out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter"?
Roughly translated: In the next few years, according to the 59-page report titled "Building a North American Community," the U.S. must be integrated with the socialism, corruption, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada. As Phyllis Schlafly reveals in this issue of Whistleblower: "This CFR document asserts that President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin 'committed their governments' to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America' and assigned 'working groups' to fill in the details. It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American Summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet 'vigilantes' on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona."

The CFR report – important excerpts of which are published in Whistleblower – also suggests North American elitists begin getting together regularly, and presumably secretly, "to buttress North American relationships, along the lines of the Bilderberg or Wehrkunde conferences, organized to support transatlantic relations." The Bilderberg and Wehrkunde conferences are highly secret conclaves of the powerful. For decades, there have been suspicions that such meetings were used for plotting the course of world events and especially the centralization of global decision-making.

Did you know that radical immigrant groups – including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA) and the National Council of La Raza (La Raza) – not only share a revolutionary agenda of conquering America's southwest, but they also share common funding sources, notably the Ford and Rockefeller foundations?
''California is going to be a Hispanic state," said Mario Obeldo, former head of MALDEF. "Anyone who does not like it should leave." And MEChA's goal is even more radical: an independent ''Aztlan,'' the collective name this organization gives to the seven states of the U.S. Southwest – Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas and Utah. So why would the Rockefeller and Ford foundations support such groups? Joseph Farah tells the story in this issue of Whistleblower.

Why have America's politicians – of both major parties – allowed the illegal alien invasion of this nation to continue for the last 30 years unabated? With al-Qaida and allied terrorists promising to annihilate major U.S. cities with nuclear weapons, with some big-city hospital emergency rooms near closure due to the crush of so many illegals, with the rapid spread throughout the U.S. of MS-13, the super-violent illegal alien gang – with all this and more, why do U.S. officials choose to ignore the laws of the land and the will of the people to pursue, instead, policies of open borders and lax immigration enforcement?

The answers to all this and much more are in Whistleblower's "ALIEN NATION" issue.

Is there hope? Or is America lost to a demographic invasion destined to annihilate its traditional Judeo-Christian culture, and to the ever-growing likelihood that nuclear-armed jihadists will cross our porous borders and wreak unthinkable destruction here?

There most definitely is hope, according to this issue of Whistleblower. Although most politicians of both major political parties have long since abdicated their responsibility for securing America's borders and dealing effectively with the millions already here illegally, there are a few exceptions – most notably Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo.

May's Whistleblower includes an exclusive sneak preview of Tancredo's forthcoming blockbuster book, "In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America’s Border and Security." In an extended excerpt, Whistleblower presents Tencredo's expert and inspired analysis of exactly how to solve the nation's most vexing problem.

Hispanic Family Values - CARLOS AGUIRRE 10 COUNTS OF RAPE

Wilmington man convicted on 10 counts of rape

A Long Beach jury finds that Carlos Aguirre, 25, preyed on his underage niece and her friends. He also is found guilty of child pornography and drug charges. Prosecutors say he could face life in prison.

By Howard Blume, Los Angeles Times

July 10, 2010

Young, charismatic Carlos Aguirre used his status as a party host and key contributor to a family business in Wilmington to prey on dates, girls he met, his underage niece and her friends.

After 90 minutes of deliberation, a Long Beach jury this week convicted Aguirre, 25, on 10 counts of rape in attacks on one niece and two of her friends. Jurors also found him guilty of a child pornography charge and a drug charge.

Aguirre's attorney argued that the victims' testimony was inconsistent and that the girls continued to associate with Aguirre. And the father of one girl testified that he didn't notice anything wrong.

But the evidence against Aguirre included an 18-minute video in which Aguirre, then 19, and a 12-year-old boy rape an unconscious, 14-year-old girl 10 times.

The first victim to come forward was Aguirre's niece, who had decided when she turned 18 that she would stay silent no longer. She told a school counselor, who notified authorities.

"It was something that needed to be done," the young woman, now 20, said Friday, two days after the trial ended. "I would see it happen to too many girls, and I wanted to stop it from happening to anybody else."

Investigators suspect there could be other victims. Three additional women came forward to testify in the eight-day trial.

Aguirre had previous rape convictions. At 14, he served 2 1/2 years in juvenile camp for raping another niece, who was five years his junior.

At this week's trial, that niece testified on behalf of Aguirre, saying she believes he learned his lesson from the earlier episode.

But upon his release from custody, witnesses said, Aguirre resumed his predatory habits.

He was the school photographer as a senior in high school; while there he allegedly drugged and raped a prom princess, who came forward to testify.

He also allegedly attempted to drug and rape a prom date; she also testified. Aguirre was not on trial for those alleged crimes, but jurors indicated that they believed the testimony and weighed it in their verdicts.

The niece who testified against him this week said the attacks on her began when she was 6 years old.

"I'd come out of school and Carlos would be there," she said. "My heart would drop, and I knew what would happen. I was numb, and I accepted that this was my life."

She was afraid to tell her mother, who was bound by a court order to share custody with her ex-husband, who is Aquirre's half brother.

Many attacks occurred in the closeted background of an alluring social scene.

Aguirre's mother runs a business that sells and rents formal wear, and provides alterations, decorations, flowers, entertainment, limousines and photo/video services. A hall upstairs is used for weddings, quinceaneras and communions.

Los Angeles County Deputy Dist. Atty. Carol Rose said Aguirre would use his mother's second-floor banquet hall for parties at which underage teens could get alcohol, marijuana and Ecstasy. For the some of the girls who wanted in, submission to abuse was part of the deal, Rose said.

"He had a power over girls," she said. "He had what they called a death stare … and they were very afraid of him. He had a gun, and hand grenades that were probably fake, but he showed them to victims."

Aguirre specialized in photography and videography for events planned and hosted by his mother. He also used his skills to add a soundtrack to the rape tape.

Attempts to contact Aguirre's mother and other family members by phone and at the family business were unsuccessful.

"He was really well-known and popular and knew everyone in Wilmington," said the niece who testified against him. "Everyone just saw him as this amazing person. I knew the truth but I didn't think I would be believed."

Sentencing is scheduled for August; the multiple convictions could keep Aguirre behind bars for the rest of his life, Rose said.

The mother of the 20-year-old victim praised the work of detectives and prosecutors, but said the girls who came forward deserve special credit.

"These three girls are heroes," she said, echoing a juror's comment.

The mother added: "We feel safe again. Now, we have a lot of work to do on healing."
City Journal Hispanic Family Values?
Runaway illegitimacy is creating a new U.S. underclass.
Heather Mac Donald
Autumn 2006

Unless the life chances of children raised by single mothers suddenly improve, the explosive growth of the U.S. Hispanic population over the next couple of decades does not bode well for American social stability. Hispanic immigrants bring near–Third World levels of fertility to America, coupled with what were once thought to be First World levels of illegitimacy. (In fact, family breakdown is higher in many Hispanic countries than here.) Nearly half of the children born to Hispanic mothers in the U.S. are born out of wedlock, a proportion that has been increasing rapidly with no signs of slowing down. Given what psychologists and sociologists now know about the much higher likelihood of social pathology among those who grow up in single-mother households, the Hispanic baby boom is certain to produce more juvenile delinquents, more school failure, more welfare use, and more teen pregnancy in the future.
The government social-services sector has already latched onto this new client base; as the Hispanic population expands, so will the demands for a larger welfare state. Since conservative open-borders advocates have yet to acknowledge the facts of Hispanic family breakdown, there is no way to know what their solution to it is. But they had better come up with one quickly, because the problem is here—and growing.
The dimensions of the Hispanic baby boom are startling. The Hispanic birthrate is twice as high as that of the rest of the American population. That high fertility rate—even more than unbounded levels of immigration—will fuel the rapid Hispanic population boom in the coming decades. By 2050, the Latino population will have tripled, the Census Bureau projects. One in four Americans will be Hispanic by mid-century, twice the current ratio. In states such as California and Texas, Hispanics will be in the clear majority. Nationally, whites will drop from near 70 percent of the total population in 2000 to just half by 2050. Hispanics will account for 46 percent of the nation’s added population over the next two decades, the Pew Hispanic Center reports.
But it’s the fertility surge among unwed Hispanics that should worry policymakers. Hispanic women have the highest unmarried birthrate in the country—over three times that of whites and Asians, and nearly one and a half times that of black women, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Every 1,000 unmarried Hispanic women bore 92 children in 2003 (the latest year for which data exist), compared with 28 children for every 1,000 unmarried white women, 22 for every 1,000 unmarried Asian women, and 66 for every 1,000 unmarried black women. Forty-five percent of all Hispanic births occur outside of marriage, compared with 24 percent of white births and 15 percent of Asian births. Only the percentage of black out-of-wedlock births—68 percent—exceeds the Hispanic rate. But the black population is not going to triple over the next few decades.
As if the unmarried Hispanic birthrate weren’t worrisome enough, it is increasing faster than among other groups. It jumped 5 percent from 2002 to 2003, whereas the rate for other unmarried women remained flat. Couple the high and increasing illegitimacy rate of Hispanics with their higher overall fertility rate, and you have a recipe for unstoppable family breakdown.
The only bright news in this demographic disaster story concerns teen births. Overall teen childbearing in the U.S. declined for the 12th year in a row in 2003, having dropped by more than a third since 1991. Yet even here, Hispanics remain a cause for concern. The rate of childbirth for Mexican teenagers, who come from by far the largest and fastest-growing immigrant population, greatly outstrips every other group. The Mexican teen birthrate is 93 births per every 1,000 girls, compared with 27 births for every 1,000 white girls, 17 births for every 1,000 Asian girls, and 65 births for every 1,000 black girls. To put these numbers into international perspective, Japan’s teen birthrate is 3.9, Italy’s is 6.9, and France’s is 10. Even though the outsize U.S. teen birthrate is dropping, it continues to inflict unnecessary costs on the country, to which Hispanics contribute disproportionately.
To grasp the reality behind those numbers, one need only talk to people working on the front lines of family breakdown. Social workers in Southern California, the national epicenter for illegal Hispanic immigrants and their progeny, are in despair over the epidemic of single parenting. Not only has illegitimacy become perfectly acceptable, they say, but so has the resort to welfare and social services to cope with it.
Dr. Ana Sanchez delivers babies at St. Joseph’s Hospital in the city of Orange, California, many of them to Hispanic teenagers. To her dismay, they view having a child at their age as normal. A recent patient just had her second baby at age 17; the baby’s father is in jail. But what is “most alarming,” Sanchez says, is that the “teens’ parents view having babies outside of marriage as normal, too. A lot of the grandmothers are single as well; they never married, or they had successive partners. So the mom sends the message to her daughter that it’s okay to have children out of wedlock.”
Sanchez feels almost personally involved in the problem: “I’m Hispanic myself. I wish I could find out what the Asians are doing right.” She guesses that Asian parents’ passion for education inoculates their children against teen pregnancy and the underclass trap. “Hispanics are not picking that up like the Asian kids,” she sighs.
Conservatives who support open borders are fond of invoking “Hispanic family values” as a benefit of unlimited Hispanic immigration. Marriage is clearly no longer one of those family values. But other kinds of traditional Hispanic values have survived—not all of them necessarily ideal in a modern economy, however. One of them is the importance of having children early and often. “It’s considered almost a badge of honor for a young girl to have a baby,” says Peggy Schulze of Chrysalis House, an adoption agency in Fresno. (Fresno has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in California, typical of the state’s heavily Hispanic farm districts.) It is almost impossible to persuade young single Hispanic mothers to give up their children for adoption, Schulze says. “The attitude is: ‘How could you give away your baby?’ I don’t know how to break through.”
The most powerful Hispanic family value—the tight-knit extended family—facilitates unwed child rearing. A single mother’s relatives often step in to make up for the absence of the baby’s father. I asked Mona, a 19-year-old parishioner at St. Joseph’s Church in Santa Ana, California, if she knew any single mothers. She laughed: “There are so many I can’t even name them.” Two of her cousins, aged 25 and 19, have children without having husbands. The situation didn’t seem to trouble this churchgoer too much. “They’ll be strong enough to raise them. It’s totally okay with us,” she said. “We’re very close; we’re there to support them. They’ll do just fine.”
As Mona’s family suggests, out-of-wedlock child rearing among Hispanics is by no means confined to the underclass. The St. Joseph’s parishioners are precisely the churchgoing, blue-collar workers whom open-borders conservatives celebrate. Yet this community is as susceptible as any other to illegitimacy. Fifty-year-old Irma and her husband, Rafael, came legally from Mexico in the early 1970s. Rafael works in a meatpacking plant in Brea; they have raised five husky boys who attend church with them. Yet Irma’s sister—a homemaker like herself, also married to a factory hand—is now the grandmother of two illegitimate children, one by each daughter. “I saw nothing in the way my sister and her husband raised her children to explain it,” Irma says. “She gave them everything.” One of the fathers of Irma’s young nieces has four other children by a variety of different mothers. His construction wages are being garnished for child support, but he is otherwise not involved in raising his children.
The fathers of these illegitimate children are often problematic in even more troubling ways. Social workers report that the impregnators of younger Hispanic women are with some regularity their uncles, not necessarily seen as a bad thing by the mother’s family. Alternatively, the father may be the boyfriend of the girl’s mother, who then continues to stay with the grandmother. Older men seek out young girls in the belief that a virgin cannot get pregnant during her first intercourse, and to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.
The tradition of starting families young and expand- ing them quickly can come into conflict with more modern American mores. Ron Storm, the director of the Hillview Acres foster-care home in Chino, tells of a 15-year-old girl who was taken away from the 21-year-old father of her child by a local child-welfare department. The boyfriend went to jail, charged with rape. But the girl’s parents complained about the agency’s interference, and eventually both the girl and her boyfriend ended up going back to Mexico, presumably to have more children. “At 15, as the QuinceaƱera tradition celebrates, you’re considered ready for marriage,” says Storm. Or at least for childbearing; the marriage part is disappearing.
But though older men continue to take advantage of younger women, the age gap between the mother and the father of an illegitimate child is quickly closing. Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino Counties tries to teach young fathers to take responsibility for their children. “We’re seeing a lot more 13- and 14-year-old fathers,” says Kathleen Collins, v.p. of health education. The day before we spoke, Scott Montoya, an Orange County sheriff’s deputy, arrested two 14-year-old boys who were bragging about having sexual relations with a cafeteria worker from an Olive Garden restaurant. “It’s now all about getting girls pregnant when you’re age 15,” he says. One 18-year-old in the Planned Parenthood fathers’ program has two children by two different girls and is having sex with five others, says health worker Jason Warner. “A lot of [the adolescent sexual behavior] has to do with getting respect from one’s peers,” observes Warner.
Normally, the fathers, of whatever age, take off. “The father may already be married or in prison or doing drugs,” says Amanda Gan, director of operations for Toby’s House, a maternity home in Dana Point, California. Mona, the 19-year-old parishioner at St. Joseph’s Church, says that the boys who impregnated her two cousins are “nowhere to be found.” Her family knows them but doesn’t know if they are working or in jail.
Two teen mothers at the Hillview Acres home represent the outer edge of Hispanic family dysfunction. Yet many aspects of their lives are typical. Though these teenagers’ own mothers were unusually callous and irresponsible, the social milieu in which they were raised is not unusual.
Irene’s round, full face makes her look younger than her 14 years, certainly too young to be a mother. But her own mother’s boyfriend repeatedly forced sex on her, with the mother’s acquiescence. The result was Irene’s baby, Luz. Baby Luz has an uncle her own age, Irene’s new 13-month-old brother. Like Irene, Irene’s mother had her first child at 14, and produced five more over the next 16 years, all of whom went into foster care. Irene’s father committed suicide before she was old enough to know him. The four fathers of her siblings are out of the picture, too: one of them, the father of her seven-year-old brother and five-year-old sister, was deported back to Mexico after he showed up drunk for a visit with his children, in violation of his probation conditions.
Irene is serene and articulate—remarkably so, considering that in her peripatetic early life in Orange County she went to school maybe twice a week. She likes to sing and to read books that are sad, she says, especially books by Dave Pelzer, a child-abuse victim who has published three best-selling memoirs about his childhood trauma. She says she will never get married: “I don’t want another man in my life. I don’t want that experience again.”
Eighteen-year-old Jessica at least escaped rape, but her family experiences were bad enough. The large-limbed young woman, whose long hair is pulled back tightly from her heart-shaped face, grew up in the predominantly Hispanic farming community of Indio in the Coachella Valley. She started “partying hard” in fifth grade, she says—at around the same time that her mother, separated from her father, began using drugs and going clubbing. By the eighth grade, Jessica and her mother were drinking and smoking marijuana together. Jessica’s family had known her boyfriend’s family since she was four; when she had her first child by him—she was 14 and he was 21—her mother declared philosophically that she had always known that it would happen. “It was okay with her, so long as he continued to give her drugs.”
Jessica originally got pregnant to try to clean up her life, she says. “I knew what I was doing was not okay, so having a baby was a way for me to stop doing what I was doing. In that sense, the baby was planned.” She has not used drugs since her first pregnancy, though she occasionally drinks. After her daughter was born, she went to live with her boyfriend in a filthy trailer without plumbing; they scrounged food from dumpsters, despite the income from his illegal drug business. They planned to get married, but by the time she got pregnant again with a son, “We were having a lot of problems. We’d be holding hands, and he’d be looking at other girls. I didn’t want him to touch me.” Eventually, the county welfare agency removed her and put her in foster care with her two children.
Both Jessica and her caddish former boyfriend illustrate the evanescence of the celebrated Hispanic “family values.” Her boyfriend’s family could not be more traditional. Two years ago, Jessica went back to Mexico to celebrate her boyfriend’s parents’ 25th wedding anniversary and the renewal of their wedding vows. Jessica’s own mother got married at 15 to her father, who was ten years her senior. Her father would not let his wife work; she was a “stay-at-home wife,” Jessica says. But don’t blame the move to the U.S. for the behavior of younger generations; the family crack-up is happening even faster in Latin America.
Jessica’s mother may have been particularly negligent, but Jessica’s experiences are not so radically different from those of her peers. “Everybody’s having babies now,” she says. “The Coachella Valley is filled with girls’ pregnancies. Some girls live with their babies’ dads; they consider them their husbands.” These cohabiting relationships rarely last, however, and a new cohort of fatherless children goes out into the world.
Despite the strong family support, the prevalence of single parenting among Hispanics is producing the inevitable slide into the welfare system. “The girls aren’t marrying the guys, so they are married to the state,” Dr. Sanchez observes. Hispanics now dominate the federal Women, Infants, and Children free food program; Hispanic enrollment grew over 25 percent from 1996 to 2002, while black enrollment dropped 12 percent and white enrollment dropped 6.5 percent. Illegal immigrants can get WIC and other welfare programs for their American-born children. If Congress follows President Bush’s urging and grants amnesty to most of the 11 million illegal aliens in the country today, expect the welfare rolls to skyrocket as the parents themselves become eligible.
Amy Braun works for Mary’s Shelter, a home for young single mothers who are homeless or in crisis, in Orange County, California. It has become “culturally okay” for the Hispanic population to use the shelter and welfare system, Braun says. A case manager at a program for pregnant homeless women in the city of Orange observes the same acculturation to the social-services sector, with its grievance mongering and sense of victimhood. “I’ll have women in my office on their fifth child, when the others have already been placed in foster care,” says Anita Berry of Casa Teresa. “There’s nothing shameful about having multiple children that you can’t care for, and to be pregnant again, because then you can blame the system.”
The consequences of family breakdown are now being passed down from one generation to the next, in an echo of the black underclass. “The problems are deeper and wider,” says Berry. “Now you’re getting the second generation of foster care and group home residents. The dysfunction is multigenerational.”
The social-services complex has responded with barely concealed enthusiasm to this new flood of clients. As Hispanic social problems increase, so will the government sector that ministers to them. In July, a New York Times editorial, titled young latinas and a cry for help, pointed out the elevated high school dropout rates and birthrates among Hispanic girls. A quarter of all Latinas are mothers by the age of 20, reported the Times. With the usual melodrama that accompanies the pitch for more government services, the Times designated young Latinas as “endangered” in the same breath that it disclosed that they are one of the fastest-growing segments of the population. “The time to help is now,” said the Times—by which it means ratcheting up the taxpayer-subsidized social-work industry.
In response to the editorial, Carmen Barroso, regional director of International Planned Parenthood Federation/Western Hemisphere Region, proclaimed in a letter to the editor the “urgent need for health care providers, educators and advocates to join the sexual and reproductive health movement to ensure the fundamental right to services for young Latinas.”
Wherever these “fundamental rights” might come from, Barroso’s call nevertheless seems quite superfluous, since there is no shortage of taxpayer-funded “services” for troubled Latinas—or Latinos. The schools in California’s San Joaquin Valley have day care for their students’ babies, reports Peggy Schulze of Chrysalis House. “The girls get whatever they need—welfare, medical care.” Advocates for young unwed moms in New York’s South Bronx are likewise agitating for more day-care centers in high schools there, reports El Diario/La Prensa. A bill now in Congress, the Latina Adolescent Suicide Prevention Act, aims to channel $10 million to “culturally competent” social agencies to improve the self-esteem of Latina girls and to provide “support services” to their families and friends if they contemplate suicide.
The trendy “case management” concept, in which individual “cases” become the focal point around which a solar system of social workers revolves, has even reached heavily Hispanic elementary and middle schools. “We have a coordinator, who brings in a collaboration of agencies to deal with the issues that don’t allow a student to meet his academic goals, such as domestic violence or drugs,” explains Sylvia Rentria, director of the Family Resource Center at Berendo Middle School in Los Angeles. “We can provide individual therapy.” Rentria offers the same program at nearby Hoover Elementary School for up to 100 students.
This July, Rentria launched a new session of Berendo’s Violence Intervention Program for parents of children who are showing signs of gang involvement and other antisocial behavior. Ghady M., 55 and a “madre soltera” (single mother), like most of the mothers in the program, has been called in because her 16-year-old son, Christian, has been throwing gang signs at school, cutting half his classes, and ending up in the counseling office every day. The illegal Guatemalan is separated from her partner, who was “muy malo,” she says; he was probably responsible for her many missing teeth. (The detectives in the heavily Hispanic Rampart Division of the Los Angeles Police Department, which includes the Berendo school, spend inordinate amounts of time on domestic violence cases.) Though Ghady used to work in a factory on Broadway in downtown L.A.— often referred to as Little Mexico City—she now collects $580 in welfare payments and $270 in food stamps for her two American-born children.
Christian is a husky smart aleck in a big white T-shirt; his fashionably pomaded hair stands straight up. He goes to school but doesn’t do homework, he grins; and though he is not in a gang, he says, he has friends who are. Keeping Ghady and Christian company at the Violence Intervention Program is Ghady’s grandniece, Carrie, a lively ten-year-old. Carrie lives with her 26-year-old mother but does not know her father, who also sired her 12-year-old brother. Her five-year-old brother has a different father.
Yet for all these markers of social dysfunction, fatherless Hispanic families differ from the black underclass in one significant area: many of the mothers and the absent fathers work, even despite growing welfare use. The former boyfriend of Jessica, the 18-year-old mother at the Hillview Acres foster home, works in construction and moonlights on insulation jobs; whether he still deals drugs is unknown. Jessica is postponing joining her father in Texas until she finishes high school, because once she moves in with him, she will feel obligated to get a job to help the family finances. The mother of Hillview’s 14-year-old Irene used to fix soda machines in Anaheim, California, though she got fired because she was lazy, Irene says. Now, under court compulsion, she works in a Lunchables factory in Santa Ana, a condition of getting her children back from foster care. The 18-year-old Lothario and father of two, whom Planned Parenthood’s Jason Warner is trying to counsel, works at a pet store. The mother of Carrie, the vivacious ten-year-old sitting in on Berendo Middle School’s Violence Intervention Program, makes pizza at a Papa John’s pizza outlet.
How these two value systems—a lingering work ethic and underclass mating norms—will interact in the future is anyone’s guess. Orange County sheriff’s deputy Montoya says that the older Hispanic generation’s work ethic is fast disappearing among the gangbanging youngsters whom he sees. “Now, it’s all about fast money, drugs, and sex.” It may be that the willingness to work will plummet along with marriage rates, leading to even greater social problems than are now rife among Hispanics. Or it may be that the two contrasting practices will remain on parallel tracks, creating a new kind of underclass: a culture that tolerates free-floating men who impregnate women and leave, like the vast majority of black men, yet who still labor in the noncriminal economy. The question is whether, if the disposition to work remains relatively strong, a working parent will inoculate his or her illegitimate children against the worst degradations that plague black ghettos.
From an intellectual standpoint, this is a fascinating social experiment, one that academicians are—predictably—not attuned to. But the consequences will be more than intellectual: they may severely strain the social fabric. Nevertheless, it is an experiment that we seem destined to see to its end. Tisha Roberts, a supervisor at an Orange County, California, institution that assists children in foster care, has given up hope that the illegitimacy rate will taper off. “It’s going to continue to grow,” she says, “until we can put birth control in the water.”