Friday, June 1, 2012

DREAM Act: Yes you can, Mr. President - The Hill's Congress Blog - NO ONE AMERICAN CITIZEN VOTED TO BE LOOTED BY MEXICO!

DREAM Act: Yes you can, Mr. President - The Hill's Congress Blog


Why the illegals must go!

April 19, 2007
by William Gheen
President, Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC)
www.alipac.us

Today, Americans face an unprecedented illegal immigration crisis facilitated by multi-billion dollar drug and human importing cartels as well as corporations which are inducing the invasion by aiding and abetting illegal aliens and using their influence on the Executive Branch and elections to paralyze existing immigration laws supported by over 80% of the American citizenry.






INVESTORS.com

Dream Act Makes Children Pawns

Posted 12/07/2010 06:59 PM ET

Immigration: Congress is expected to vote on the Dream Act on Wednesday, providing a path to citizenship to millions of illegal immigrant youth. It's a bad precedent that uses kids, costs taxpayers and invites new amnesties.

After years of failing to sell mass amnesty to voters, the open-borders lobby has turned to tugging at Americans' heartstrings, presenting treacly stories of illegal immigrants brought here as children who then bettered themselves here.

Somehow legalizing this group ahead of all the other people awaiting immigration visas legally is supposed to specially benefit all of us, even though the most obvious beneficiaries are the individuals themselves. But out of guilt, or because we "owe" them "justice," the case is being made for passing the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act.

That act provides a path to citizenship for some 2.1 million illegals who have lived here continuously for five years, avoided felony convictions, came to the U.S. before they turned 16 and completed two years of college or U.S. military service within six years.

Now, in the lame-duck session of Congress, the open-borders lobby has lawmakers right where it wants them. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has filed Senate cloture to bring the Dream Act to a vote as soon as Wednesday, and the House may vote even sooner.

It's a scam, using children unethically to achieve an open-borders political agenda that opens the door to perverse incentives.

The Dream Act is an effort to mimic the benefits illegals derive from having anchor babies in the U.S., a tactic used by millions as an "insurance policy" to avoid deportation and achieve legal status.

The awfulness of that incentive can be seen in the case of Edgar Jimenez Lugo, the 14-year-old U.S. "citizen" who was arrested in Mexico after a rather spectacular career beheading rivals and innocent people for $2,500 each on behalf of a Mexican cartel enforcer.

Cronica, a Mexican newspaper, reported that the throwaway kid was born in San Diego and then spent his life with Mexican parents who took him back to Morelos, Mexico, and "wandered around." Apparently the child's birth in San Diego was the same gambit millions of other immigrants use to game the system for U.S. entry. And he's only facing three years in jail in Mexico, so he'll soon become our problem — not Mexico's.

The Dream Act makes every baby an anchor baby, commodifying children, as young Jimenez seems to have been. It extends the incentive for parents to use their kids to beat immigration laws.

Under the Dream Act it may take 10 years for an illegal to achieve full U.S. citizenship, but there's little doubt he will. And as soon as he does achieve citizenship, he will sponsor the parents who brought him into the country illegally — thus achieving the original intention of the law-breaking parents.

This bill is really an amnesty bill. The 1986 amnesty signed by President Reagan provided amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. Now, 24 years on, we have 12 million illegals to amnesty.

Columnist Michelle Malkin points to six successive amnesties since the 1986 act. Each has raised anticipation of new ones for illegals. For them, no need to hurry for the amnesty train — the next one will be along in just a moment.

Worse, the Dream Act will cost a lot. By some estimates it's a $6.2 billion bill for taxpayers, but it may be even more. Judges over the years have already ruled that children of illegals are entitled to "free" U.S. public education through the 12th grade, plus "free" medical care, bankrupting hospital emergency rooms.

The Dream Act will give them even more.

With a treasured U.S. green card as motivation, all they have to do is clog up community college enrollments with no minimum performance standards, crowding out legitimate students who are interested in learning, or else sign up for diploma-mill trade schools with government loans they aren't under any obligation to repay.

For every Harvard valedictorian the illegal immigration lobby presents as a poster boy, there will be thousands of gang members who will qualify because the cops haven't caught them yet.

Worst of all is the entitlement mentality this bill creates.

Suddenly the U.S. taxpayer "owes" all this, as the brazen illegal students parading around in graduation robes for cameras without fear of apprehension make clear. This entitlement mentality is no success ethic. And it won't stop at the Dream Act.

It just underscores the disgusting ethic of special interests playing grievance and identity politics by using children as pawns.

The only good answer to this is no.


*

Here’s one teacher’s report on the illegals in our schools.

TEACHER’S POSTING ON CRAIGSLIST:

Subject: Cheap Labor This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent  From a California school teacher.

"As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:  I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.  Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title 1 schools.  Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud. The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)  I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least moderately overweight. About 75% or more DO have cell phones. The school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the inconvenience of having to arrange for babysitters or having family watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)  I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in America. (OUR TAX DOLLARS A T WORK)  I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here in the country less then 3 months who raised so much hell with the female teachers, calling them "Putas" whores and throwing things that the teachers were in tears.  Free medical, free education, free food, day care etc., etc., etc. Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but to demand rights, privileges and entitlements? To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes: spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.

Morning Bell: You Have To Pass This Amnesty To Find Out What Is In It

Posted December 8th, 2010 at 9:39am in Protect America, Rule of Law with 26 comments  Print This Post

The nation’s unemployment rate stands at 9.8 percent, a post–World War II record 19th month that unemployment has been over 9 percent. President Barack Obama is 7.3 million jobs short of what he promised his failed stimulus would deliver. The American people are staring down the barrel of the largest tax hike in American history. So what do Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–CA) have Congress voting on today? Amnesty. Specifically, the House and Senate will be voting on the fourth and fifth versions of the DREAM Act, which would legalize anywhere between 300,000 and 2.1 million illegal immigrants.

Supporters of the DREAM Act claim the bill would provide citizenship only to children who go to college or join the military. But all any version of the legislation requires is that an applicant attend any college for just two years. And if President Obama wants to reward non-citizen service members with citizenship, he already has the power to do so. The Secretary of Defense already has the authority under 10 U.S.C. § 504 (b) to enlist illegal immigrants in the military if “such enlistment is vital to the national interest,” and 8 U.S.C. § 1440 allows such immigrants to become naturalized U.S. citizens, with their applications handled at accelerated rates. The military component of the DREAM Act is a complete red herring.

Neither of these bills has gone through their respective committees, and only one has been scored by the Congressional Budget Office. As a result, they are chock full of loopholes designed by open border advocates to make an even wider amnesty possible.

One bill would even grant Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano the power to waive the college and military requirements if the illegal immigrant can demonstrate “compelling circumstances” and the immigrant’s removal would cause a hardship to the them, their spouse, their parents, or their children. When exactly would removal from this country not cause a hardship? What other loopholes are in these bills? As Speaker Pelosi might say: “You have to pass this amnesty so that you can find out what is in it.”

The DREAM Acts are also an invitation for fraud. All of the bills would make it illegal for any information in an amnesty application to be used to initiate removal proceedings against an applicant. Law enforcement agencies would be forced to prove that any information they used to find, detain, and try to remove an illegal immigrant was already in their files before an application was received or was not derived from the application. If an illegal immigrant lies about his age to qualify for the program, and the lie is never detected, he gets amnesty. And if the lie is found out, no worries—law enforcement is forbidden from using that lie against him.

The real goal of the DREAM Act is to make it even harder for our nation’s law enforcement agencies to enforce any immigration laws. And Congress is not the only forum where amnesty advocates are working to undermine the rule of law today. Right across the street from the Capitol, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments over an Arizona immigration enforcement law. This is not a hearing on the controversial SB 1070 law that passed earlier this year. This case, supported by the usual amnesty suspects (La Raza, the SEIU, the Chamber of Commerce, etc.), challenges Arizona’s 2007 E-Verify law, which penalizes employers who do not verify the legal status of their employees. This challenge by amnesty advocates to even common-sense immigration enforcement measures should send a clear measure to anyone wavering on the DREAM Act: Any enforcement mechanisms that DREAM Act supporters agree to today will be immediately challenged in court tomorrow. Enforcement is fickle; amnesty is forever.

Our country does need immigration reform. We need smarter border security, stronger interior enforcement, and a more efficient naturalization system. But amnesty plans like the DREAM Act undermine real reform. The DREAM Act encourages people to ignore our borders, undermines our law enforcement across the country, and makes fools of law-abiding immigrants who play by the rules.

*

Is Illegal Immigration Moral?

By Victor Davis Hanson

11/25/2010



We know illegal immigration is no longer really unlawful, but is it moral?

Usually Americans debate the fiscal costs of illegal immigration. Supporters of open borders rightly remind us that illegal immigrants pay sales taxes. Often their payroll-tax contributions are not later tapped by Social Security payouts.

Opponents counter that illegal immigrants are more likely to end up on state assistance, are less likely to report cash income, and cost the state more through the duplicate issuing of services and documents in both English and Spanish. Such to-and-fro talking points are endless.

So is the debate over beneficiaries of illegal immigration. Are profit-minded employers villains who want cheap labor in lieu of hiring more expensive Americans? Or is the culprit a cynical Mexican government that counts on billions of dollars in remittances from its expatriate poor that it otherwise ignored?

Or is the engine that drives illegal immigration the American middle class? Why should millions of suburbanites assume that, like 18th-century French aristocrats, they should have imported labor to clean their homes, manicure their lawns and watch over their kids?

Or is the catalyst the self-interested professional Latino lobby in politics and academia that sees a steady stream of impoverished Latin American nationals as a permanent victimized constituency, empowering and showcasing elite self-appointed spokesmen such as themselves?

Or is the real advocate the Democratic Party that wishes to remake the electoral map of the American Southwest by ensuring larger future pools of natural supporters? Again, the debate over who benefits and why is never-ending.

But what is often left out of the equation is the moral dimension of illegal immigration. We see the issue too often reduced to caricature, involving a noble, impoverished victim without much free will and subject to cosmic forces of sinister oppression. But everyone makes free choices that affect others. So ponder the ethics of a guest arriving in a host country knowingly against its sovereign protocols and laws.

First, there is the larger effect on the sanctity of a legal system. If a guest ignores the law -- and thereby often must keep breaking more laws -- should citizens also have the right to similarly pick and choose which statutes they find worthy of honoring and which are too bothersome? Once it is deemed moral for the impoverished to cross a border without a passport, could not the same arguments of social justice be used for the poor of any status not to report earned income or even file a 1040 form?

Second, what is the effect of mass illegal immigration on impoverished U.S. citizens? Does anyone care? When 10 million to 15 million aliens are here illegally, where is the leverage for the American working poor to bargain with employers? If it is deemed ethical to grant in-state tuition discounts to illegal-immigrant students, is it equally ethical to charge three times as much for out-of-state, financially needy American students -- whose federal government usually offers billions to subsidize state colleges and universities? If foreign nationals are afforded more entitlements, are there fewer for U.S. citizens?

Third, consider the moral ramifications on legal immigration -- the traditional great strength of the American nation. What are we to tell the legal immigrant from Oaxaca who got a green card at some cost and trouble, or who, once legally in the United States, went through the lengthy and expensive process of acquiring citizenship? Was he a dupe to dutifully follow our laws?

And given the current precedent, if a million soon-to-be-impoverished Greeks, 2 million fleeing North Koreans, or 5 million starving Somalis were to enter the United States illegally and en masse, could anyone object to their unlawful entry and residence? If so, on what legal, practical or moral grounds?

Fourth, examine the morality of remittances. It is deemed noble to send billions of dollars back to families and friends struggling in Latin America. But how is such a considerable loss of income made up? Are American taxpayers supposed to step in to subsidize increased social services so that illegal immigrants can afford to send billions of dollars back across the border? What is the morality of that equation in times of recession? Shouldn't illegal immigrants at least try to buy health insurance before sending cash back to Mexico?

The debate over illegal immigration is too often confined to costs and benefits. But ultimately it is a complicated moral issue -- and one often ignored by all too many moralists.

Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.










THE SITUATION OF LA RAZA SUPREMACY IS MUCH WORSE THAN THIS AUTHOR COVERS IN HIS ARTICLE ON DREAM ACTS.

THERE ARE ONLY EIGHT (8) COUNTIES WITH A POPULATION GREATER THAN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, WHERE HALF OF ALL JOBS GO TO ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS. LEAD BY LA RAZA SUPREMACIST LIKE GIL CEDILLO, THE STATE PASSED A LAW QUICKLY SIGNED BY LA RAZA DEM JERRY BROWN (ELECTED BY ILLEGALS) THAT MAKES IT ILLEGAL FOR EMPLOYERS TO USE E-VERIFY.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY PAYS OUT $600 MILLION TO ILLEGALS ON WELFARE (source: JUDICIAL WATCH). NOT A SINGLE LEGAL VOTED TO BE MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BIRTHING CENTER, OR WELFARE LOOTING STATE!

ONE-THIRD OF THE DRIVERS IN MEXIFORNIA ARE ILLEGALS DRIVING ILLEGALLY WITHOUT LICENSES, INSURANCE AND FREQUENTLY IN CARS REGISTERED IN NOMINEE’S NAMES TO AVOID BEING IMPOUNDED WHEN CAUGHT. LA RAZA SUPREMACIST GIL CEDILLO AND THE LA RAZA FACTION IN SACRAMENTO ARE PUSHING TO END THAT. HEY. THEY’RE ILLEGALS, INVITED HERE TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED FOR THE PAYMASTERS OF THE LA RAZA DEMS, LIKE CONGRESSWOMAN ZOE LOFGREN. NEARLY 95% OF THE CAMPAIGN BRIBES THIS ADVOCATE FOR OPEN BORDERS, CHAIN MIGRATION, AMNESTY OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT, ARE FROM EMPLOYERS THAT BENEFIT FROM SOME OF THIS STAGGERINGLY EXPENSIVE “CHEAP” MEX LABOR.



WHO BENEFITS?

LA RAZA DEM, AND ADVOCATE FOR OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN HAS LONG HIRED ILLEGALS AT HER S.F. HOTEL, JUST MILES FROM HER $16 MILLION DOLLAR WAR PROFITEER’S MANSION!



LA RAZA DEM, AND ADVOCATE FOR  OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY CONGRESSWOMAN NANCY PELOSI HIRES ILLEGALS AT HER  RESTAURANTS AND HER ST. HELENA, NAPA WINERY.



BARBARA BOXER, ONE OF THE MOST CORRUPT POLITICIANS IN CA HISTORY, WAS REELECTED BY ILLEGALS BASED ON HER PLATFORM OF CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT AND NO E-VERIFY!



NOT ONCE, BUT THREE TIMES….!!! ON BEHALF OF THEIR BIG AG BIZ DONORS, BOXER AND FEINSTEIN HAVE PUSHED FOR A “SPECIAL AMNESTY” FOR 1.5 MILLION ILLEGAL FARM WORKERS…… DESPITE THE FACT THAT ONE-THIRD OF THESE FARM WORKERS COME TO GROW ANCHOR BABIES AND COLLECT WELFARE!

*

SOMETHING ELSE THE OCCUPIED LEGALS SHOULD KNOW: ACCORDING TO CA ATTORNEY GEN. KAMALA HARRIS (AN OPEN BORDERS LA RAZA DEM), NEARLY HALF OF ALL MURDERS IN MEXIFORNIA ARE BY MEXICAN GANGS!!!

*

THE STATE OF CA OPERATES DEFICITS OF $28 MILLION AND STILL PAYS OUT $20 BILLION IN SOCIAL SERVICES TO ILLEGALS!

NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED FOR ANY OF THIS!

BUT THEN THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA IS DOES NOT INCLUDE  LEGALS!

Lloyd Billingsley
The DREAM and the Nightmare
In California, students are better off being illegal immigrants than legal.
30 March 2012

Last year, Governor Jerry Brown signed the California DREAM Act, which makes students in the country illegally eligible for grants and waivers to attend one of the state’s public colleges or universities. The students must have attended school in the state for three years, “affirm that they are in the process of applying to legalize their immigration status,” and show both financial need and academic achievement. Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, the Los Angeles Democrat who authored the DREAM Act, hails the legislation as a victory for those “in the country through no fault of their own.” Opponents such as Republican assemblyman Tim Donnelly—a first-term legislator not given to understatement—called Cedillo’s legislation the “California Nightmare Act,” said it is “morally wrong,” and would create “a new entitlement that is going to cause tens of thousands of people to come here illegally from all over the world.”

Poster children for the DREAM Act abound. Mandeep Chahal, for example, was six years old when her parents brought her to the United States from India. Chahal wants to be a doctor; her fellow students at Los Altos High School near Palo Alto voted her the person “Most Likely to Save the World.” That’s a tall order, but to deny such a person the opportunity seems unreasonable. “Many parents of these children pay taxes for many services they cannot get,” argues Cedillo.

Cedillo’s point implies that illegal immigrants are the only ones subject to this dynamic. But consider: my taxes subsidize the Medi-Cal system, which provides medical care for low-income state residents, but I couldn’t “get” health care that way, even in the year my income was so low that my daughter qualified for a Pell Grant. Likewise, the taxes of, say, a California welder help pay for top-drawer pensions and benefits for state government employees, but he can’t enjoy those benefits himself. Neither is he entitled to get a government job merely because his taxes help pay the salaries and benefits of workers at the Department of Motor Vehicles, CalTrans, the California Air Resources Board, the Franchise Tax Board, California’s Department of Education, the State Board of Equalization, the Coastal Commission, and on and on.

The taxes of a fast-food worker help subsidize the University of California at Berkeley, but nothing guarantees that taxpayer admission to Berkeley. The state’s Master Plan for Higher Education does guarantee everyone a place in the system, whether at a community college, a state university, or within the UC system. But no one is promised a place at the top, and the system grants no special favors to legal immigrants. When I came to the United States, legally, in 1977, I had been studying at the University of Windsor, a four-year school in my hometown of Windsor, Ontario. I wanted to continue my studies at San Diego State University but was not allowed to transfer because I hadn’t attended high school in California. SDSU administrators suggested I try the state’s community college system, which seemed a step down from what I had in mind. But eventually, I put two children through San Diego State. They’re now working in productive careers, a tax burden to no one. No legislation rewards parents for that achievement or for coming to the United States with proper documents.

Cedillo’s law, by contrast, rewards those who came to California illegally. Will the law, therefore, encourage more people to enter the state illegally, as Donnelly and other critics assert?

(IN FACT THERE ARE MORE THAN 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN SOUTHERN CA ALONE! NOW NEARLY 40% OF CA ARE ILLEGALS, 33% OF NEVADA AND 24% OF COLORADO. MOST  NON LA RAZA PROPAGANDA SOURCES BUT THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS AT 40 MILLION AND BREEDING LIKE BUNNIES!)

Recall how Congress passed and President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which gave amnesty to several million undocumented immigrants. A quarter of a century later, the number of illegal immigrants stands at 11.5 million. It seems clear that the 1986 act didn’t discourage foreign nationals from entering the United States without signing the guest book. One of those who obtained citizenship under the Act was Alfredo Quinones-Hinojosa, who made his way through UC Berkeley and Harvard Medical School and is now associate professor of neurosurgery and oncology at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center in Baltimore. Quinones-Hinojosa and others who have spoken out in support of the DREAM Act often give the impression that their cases are typical of illegal aliens. Not exactly. Amnesty measures, however well-intentioned, usually bring unintended consequences.

THE REALITY OF LA RAZA’S LOOTING OF CA:

Consider Ignacio Mesa Viera, subject of a recent front-page story in the Sacramento Bee. He came to the United States illegally in 1979 to work and help his family, as he explained, but was convicted on a drug offense in 1995. He was deported but returned to the United States, whereupon he was busted for another drug offense in 2008. Before his recent deportation, the U.S. government was paying for Viera’s kidney dialysis, a treatment that can cost more than $60,000 a year. “I imagine that the reason they don’t want to let me stay in this country,” Viera told the Bee, “is they don’t want to be paying for this.”

Cedillo and his colleagues need to know that everybody’s taxes pay for services they and their children “cannot get”—including kidney dialysis and other expensive medical treatments courtesy of the federal government. Meantime, as a University of California report noted last year, tens of thousands of middle-class, taxpaying legal residents are being squeezed out of an affordable college education even as the legislature contrives to provide scholarships for the children of illegal aliens. The lawmakers’ solution is to create yet another entitlement in the form of a new $1 billion scholarship program for students whose families earn less than $150,000 a year. Such is life in the Golden State, even with a DREAM Act in place.

Lloyd Billingsley is the author of Hollywood Party: How Communism Seduced the American Film Industry in the 1930s and 1940s and the former editorial director of the Pacific Research Institute.

*

*

OBAMA HAS PROMISED HIS LA RAZA “THE RACE” PARTY BASE of ILLEGALS AMNESTY, NO E-VERIFY, NO I.D. FOR REQUIRED OF ILLEGALS VOTING… OR AT LEAST CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT!

OBAMA HANDS MASSIVE WELFARE TO ILLEGALS, ALONG WITH OUR JOBS TO BUY THE ILLEGALS' ILLEGAL VOTES!






The truth about the DREAM Act






Published March 20, 2012



| FoxNews.com



·Text Size



The DREAM Act has become a rallying cry for President Obama, members of his administration, and liberal Democrats everywhere. President Obama has vowed to “keep fighting for the DREAM Act,” which would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.



It’s true when listeners or those polled don’t know the facts that the DREAM Act has some appeal. After all, we are all naturally sympathetic when children are involved.



But the descriptions of the DREAM Act voiced by President Obama and his cohorts are not accurate. And the consequences are never told.



DREAM Act supporters claim that only children would benefit from such a bill, but the facts tell another story. Under most DREAM Act proposals, amnesty would be given to individuals up to the age of 30—not exactly children. And some other proposals don’t even have an age limit.



These supporters also maintain that illegal immigrants can’t go college without the DREAM Act. But the truth is that illegal immigrants can already go to college in most states.



And ultimately, most versions of the DREAM Act actually don’t even force illegal immigrants to comply with all the requirements in the bill, such as going to college or joining the military. The administration can waive requirements because of “hardship”at its complete discretion.



DREAM Act proposals are also a magnet for fraud. Many illegal immigrants will fraudulently claim they came here as children or that they are under 30. And the federal government has no way to check whether their claims are true or not.



Such massive fraud occurred after the 1986 amnesty for illegal immigrants who claimed they were agricultural workers. Studies found two-thirds of all applications for the 1986 amnesty were fraudulent.



(ANYONE THAT THINKS THERE ARE ONLY 11 MILLION ILLEGALS IN OUR BORDERS SHOULD COME VISIT CA! LOOK AROUND AND TRY TO FIND A NON-HISPANIC ENGLISH SPEAKING LEGAL! CA IS NOW 40% ILLEGAL. NEVADA IS NOW 33% ILLEGAL. COLORADO IS NOW 20% ILLEGAL. AND LA RAZA IS NOW MOVING INTO THE AMERICAN SOUTH)



And this amnesty did nothing to stop illegal immigration. In 1986, there were about three million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. Today, there are an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. and about seven million of them work here, unfairly taking jobs from unemployed Americans.



While DREAM Act supporters claim that it would only benefit children, they skip over the fact that it actually rewards the very illegal immigrant parents who knowingly violated our laws. Once their children become U.S. citizens, they can petition for their illegal immigrant parents and adult siblings to be legalized, who will then bring in others in an endless chain.



This kind of chain migration only encourages more illegal immigration, as parents will bring their children to the U.S. in hopes of receiving citizenship.



President Obama tried to get the DREAM Act passed during a lame duck session about a year ago but it faced bipartisan opposition in Congress. This hasn’t stopped the administration from passing its agenda. The Obama administration does everything it can to let illegal immigrants stay here, which compounds the problem.



Political appointees at the Department of Homeland Security recently issued new deportation guidelines that amount to backdoor amnesty and strike another blow at millions of unemployed U.S. workers.



Under the administration’s new deportation policy, DHS officials review all incoming and most pending cases before an immigration court to determine if the illegal immigrant can remain in the U.S. Since the administration has made clear that many illegal immigrants are not considered priorities for removal, including potential DREAM Act beneficiaries, this could open the door to allow millions of illegal immigrants to live and work in the U.S. without a vote of Congress.



The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers. And the list goes on and on – this administration has a pattern of ignoring the laws and intent of Congress.



The United States is based on the rule of law but the Obama administration already has dirty hands by abusing administrative authority to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants. The DREAM Act doesn’t stop illegal immigration—it only encourages more of it by rewarding lawbreakers.



Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee









The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers.



THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!



"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. "President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws."



MEXICO PROCLAIMS A VICTORY OVER ILLEGALS IN MEX-OCCUPIED MEXIFORNIA!

NO MORE E-VERIFY!!!

ILLEGALS USING STOLEN AMERICAN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS GET THE JOBS FIRST! AN ILLEGAL WORKING IN OCCUPIED MEXIFORNIA WILL MAKE APPROXIMATELY 8XS TIMES MORE THAN HE/SHE WOULD IN MEXICO, AND CAN GET 18 YEARS FOR EACH “FREE” ANCHOR BABY THEY BREED, AS WELL AS UNLIMITED “FREE” MEDICAL AT HOSPITAL EMERGENCY ROOMS, AND A LOOOOOOOG MENU OF EVER EXPANDING DREAM ACTS!

VIVA LA RAZA! THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION IS NOW EXPANDING TO ALL OTHER 49 STATES!

HERE’S HOW NO E-VERIFY BREAKS DOWN:



Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal

 CA MAKES E-VERIFY ILLEGAL! COURTESY THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA!

Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal

Here is an example of why hiring illegal aliens is not economically productive for the State of California...


You have 2 families..."Joe Legal" and "Jose Illegal". Both families have 2 parents, 2 children and live in California.


"Joe Legal" works in construction, has a Social Security Number, and makes $25.00 per hour with payroll taxes deducted...."Jose Illegal" also works in construction, has "NO" Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table".


Joe Legal...$25.00 per hour x 40 hours $1000.00 per week, $52,000 per year
Now take 30% away for state and federal tax


Joe Legal now has $31,231.00


Jose Illegal...$15.00 per hour x 40 hours $600.00 per week, $31,200.00 per year
Jose Illegal pays no taxes...

 
Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00


Joe Legal pays Medical and Dental Insurance with limited coverage
$1000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal now has $19,231.00


Jose Illegal has full Medical and Dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00


Joe Legal makes too much money is not eligible for Food Stamps or welfare
Joe Legal pays for food
$1,000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal now has $ 7,231.00


Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for Food Stamps and Welfare
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00


Joe Legal pays rent of
$1,000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal is now in the hole... minus (-) $4,769.00


Jose Illegal receives a $500 per month Federal rent subsidy
Jose Illegal pays rent
$500.00 per month
$6,000.00 per year
Jose Illegal still has $25,200.00


Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.


Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.


Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored lunch.


Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal's children go home.
Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same Police and Fire Services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.


Don't vote/support any politician that supports illegal aliens...
Its WAY PAST time to take a stand for America and Americans!


*

*

LA RAZA, THE RACIST MEXICAN SUPREMACIST FASCIST PART  FOR “THE RACE” DEMANDS EVEN MORE GRINGO WELFARE.



FAIR Legislative Update - June 22, 2009

La Raza Demands Obama's Health Reform Plan Cover Illegal Aliens

On Monday, June 15, the National Council of La Raza (La Raza), an open borders advocacy group, issued a statement calling upon Congress to ensure that illegal aliens are given health benefits if and when Congress considers health care reform.

La Raza's statement "strongly urge[d] President Obama and Congress to make every effort to ensure that health care reform reaches all communities" in the United States, and stressed that "one out of every three uninsured persons and roughly 40% of all uninsured children [in the United States] are Latino," and demanded "health care reform that makes coverage affordable and accessible for everyone — all families and all children."


SINCE WHEN HAVE THE MEXICAN FLAG WAVERS EVER “ACCEPTED THEIR RESPONSIBILITY”  FOR ANYTHING? THEY’RE HERE TO PILLAGE ONLY.


La Raza President and CEO Janet MurguĂ­a used the statement to emphasize that "everyone in the U.S. should contribute to a new health system," and that "Latinos [would] accept their responsibility" to contribute to a new health care system and "will pay their fair share for the health coverage they need." While the statement does not reference illegal immigration specifically, or distinguish between legal and illegal aliens, it does express concern that adding new, expensive verification and documentation procedures for immigrants would "severely restrict access to health care coverage." (La Raza Press Release, June 15, 2009).

Specific research has shown that many illegal aliens lack health insurance and represent a disproportionate share of the United States' uninsured population. The Pew Hispanic Center's recent report, A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States, found that 59% of illegal aliens in the United States had no form of health insurance in 2007, and that 45% of illegal alien children were also without health coverage in 2007. It also found that even the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens were insured at the low rate of 25%, and that there was a significant disparity between the volume of uninsured illegal aliens and the volume of uninsured U.S. citizens and other legal residents. (Pew Hispanic Center Report, April 14, 2009).

Pew's information has support in federal statistics: data collected by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Census Bureau for the same time frame show that approximately 33.2% of the foreign-born population in the United States (a category which does not differentiate between newly naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, and illegal aliens) were uninsured in 2007, and that almost 10 million foreign-born non-citizens lacked health insurance in 2007. (DHS Fact Sheet, February 2009).

(For more information on how illegal immigration is financially impacting the U.S. health care system, see FAIR's Legislative Updates for April 13, 2009, and April 20, 2009).

Democrats on House Approps Committee Kill Another E-Verify Amendment
Last week, during a House Appropriations Committee mark-up for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration Appropriations spending bill, Committee Democrats rejected an amendment to require federal contractors to use E-Verify if they received federal contracts funded by the bill. (Appropriations Summary).

The week before, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) had offered a similar amendment to the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations spending bill. His amendment was subsequently rejected by the Appropriations Committee. (FAIR's Legislative Update, June 15, 2009). This week, Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) offered the amendment to the Agriculture Spending bill. Calvert's amendment was rejected entirely on a party-line basis with 23 Republicans supporting and 34 Democrats rejecting the amendment.

The Agriculture spending bill spends almost $23 billion in taxpayer dollars. Over $4 billion dollars alone will be allocated to the Food and Drug Administration and Food Safety and Inspection Service, two important organizations in protecting America's food and drug supply. In addition, the bill provides billions more for programs like the Nutrition for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and International Food Aid. The bill will also provide funding for rural development, conservation projects, and oversight and enforcement.

With so many American jobs and tax dollars at stake, many Americans are frustrated that Congress refuses to demand that federal contractors use E-Verify. (To learn more about E-Verify, see FAIR's Fact Sheet.). This vote marks the third time in two weeks that Democratic Leadership has rejected amendments requiring federal contractors to use E-Verify.

Pressure Mounting on Obama to Extend TPS Status to All Haitians, Including Illegal Aliens
The Haitian community and other open borders advocates are engaging in a full-court press to have the Obama Administration extend Temporary Protected Status to all Haitians in the United States, including extending legal status to nearly 30,000 illegal aliens, under the premise that environmental and economic conditions in Haiti mandate such a policy.

Under § 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) may extend Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to individuals — including illegal aliens — from specific nations if that nation is experiencing conditions that create serious risks to health or safety, including armed conflicts, disasters, or other extraordinary but temporary circumstances. TPS, by its nature, was never intended to create a permanent immigration status change, but rather only a temporary one, with DHS making the final decision about when TPS ends. (USCIS Fact Sheet, April 30, 2009).

The Bush Administration rejected appeals by the Haitian government to extend TPS to Haiti as recently as January 2009. Since then, several members of Congress have continued to seek a reversal of that decision including Reps. Eliot Engel (D-NY) and Gregory Meeks (D-NY). Engel and Meeks have been working with international organizations to lobby for TPS status for Haitians. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) has introduced legislation during the 111th Congress that would formalize TPS for Haitians. Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) have also expressed support for the idea. (Washington Times, March 18, 2009; Dominica News Online, May 26, 2009; South Florida Caribbean News, June 19, 2009).

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano had initially rejected the idea of extending TPS to Haitians, but Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton recently commented that the Administration is contemplating the idea. (Associated Press, May 28, 2009). Lobbying groups have seized upon the Obama Administration's indecision, and have made themselves seen and heard in Washington in an effort to force the change in policy. (Id.). These groups include the Haitian Coalition for TPS, the Haitian Citizen United Task Force, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. These groups have reached out to the White House and federal officials to press for the policy shift, arguing that the United States has a humanitarian obligation to do so. (Dominica News Online, May 26, 2009; South Florida Caribbean News, June 19, 2009).

Advocates for extension of TPS to Haitians point to recent economic and weather-related devastation in the small Caribbean nation as justification for the change in policy. (Palm Beach Post, May 21, 2009; Miami Herald, May 26, 2009). AFSC recently declared in a statement that "TPS is the most immediate form of humanitarian assistance the United States government can provide" in light of the current "devastating and overwhelming conditions in Haiti." This same AFSC statement stated that it was not unusual for the United States to extend TPS to foreign nationals of countries experiencing "significant hardship and suffering." (Id.).

Critics of TPS say that the U.S. government has a poor track record of terminating the temporary status, even long after the original justification for TPS existed and despite conditions having improved in the TPS country. For instance, TPS was first extended to Salvadoran nationals in March 2001, but since then TPS status has been extended seven times and still remains in effect. Likewise, Honduras was originally designated for TPS status in January 1999 but has since been extended 13 times with TPS still in effect. Somalia and Sudan were both designated for TPS in the mid-1990s and are still under TPS. (U.S. House Judiciary Committee Hearing, March 4, 1999; DOJ Virtual Law Library).

The idea of extending Temporary Protected Status to Haiti raises the concern that such a move would create an unmanageable wave of refugees coming from Haiti to the United States. In an effort to discourage this possibility, a DHS spokesman said in March: "let me be clear: No one living in Haiti right now should be attempting to come to the United States in hopes that they will be granted TPS." (Washington Times, March 18, 2009). Daniel Erikson, of the Washington think tank Inter-American Dialogue has said TPS "what Haiti needs most is a long-term nation-building effort, not short-term stop-gap measures [like TPS]." (Id.). Erikson also said that: "Granting TPS to Haiti is merely a Band-Aid that cannot heal a deeply wounded country and may raise the risks of a new wave of migration." (Id.).

Senators introduce Legislation to Weaken Secure Driver's License Standards
Last week, Senator Daniel Akaka introduced legislation entitled PASS ID (S. 1261), a bill that would gut the REAL ID Act. Congress passed the REAL ID Act in the wake of the September 11th Terrorist Attacks in order to improve the security of U.S. issued driver's licenses. (Bill Text).

After the 9/11 attacks, the 9/11 Commission found that lax security standards had enabled the hijackers to obtain "13 driver's licenses (two of which were duplicates) and 21 USA or state-issued identification cards (usually used for showing residence in the U.S. or a state)." (9/11 Fact Sheet).

With these findings, the Commission recommended that Congress enact requirements for secure identification, stating: "Secure identification should begin in the United States. The federal government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification, such as driver's licenses.... At many entry points to vulnerable facilities, including gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification are the last opportunity to ensure that people are who they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists." (Commission Report, p. 390). Congress responded to the Commission's recommendation by passing the REAL ID Act, a law that takes steps towards a secure form of identification in the United States.

REAL ID's provisions include the following: (1) a requirement that individuals present proof of lawful presence when applying for a driver's license or ID card; (2) a requirement that states "verify" the documents presented by an applicant to prove his or her identity; and (3) a requirement that driver's licenses expire on the same date as an alien's immigration status expires.

Since the enactment of REAL ID, however, illegal alien advocates have sought to undo the law in order to allow illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses. Akaka's bill scales back the purposes for which a secure ID will be needed in the U.S., thereby undermining security. The PASS ID Act also strips the requirement that states "verify" the identification presented, thereby making it easier for illegal aliens, identity thieves and criminals to fraudulently obtain driver's licenses. Finally, PASS ID also dramatically expands eligibility for persons who may obtain a secure ID. For example, under the bill, an illegal alien need only file an application for asylum and receive temporary work authorization in order to be eligible for a secure ID. (Section 242(c)(2)).

Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has endorsed the Akaka bill, stating: "Today's introduction of Pass ID… in the U.S. Senate brings us closer to greater compliance with federal standards for secure driver's licenses…. I am committed to supporting this important bill and it is my hope that Congress will pass it into law as quickly as possible." (DHS Press Release).


*



Newsmax



Obama's 'Hispanicazation' of America



Monday, January 10, 2011 08:28 AM




*


Immigrating America Into a Colony of Mexico

Article by Frosty Wooldridge

2004

Published on The Washington Dispatch.

America faces a greater and more dangerous threat from within than from without. While our armed forces secure Afghanistan and Iraq, our own borders stand unguarded 24 hours a day. Al-Qaeda insurgents plan their next attacks somewhere inside our country. They advocate a violent overthrow of America.

We’ve got an even more ominous enemy within our borders that promotes “Reconquista of Aztlan” or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas into the country of Mexico. With 9.2 million Mexicans now living in America, their goal of colonizing our country back into Mexico moves forward. A more sobering reality stems from the evidence that it’s Mexican-American citizens in the forefront of this disintegration of our country.

What is the evidence? Because of massive immigration from south of the border, more Mexican flags brazenly fly in Los Angeles and surrounding cities than Old Glory. More Spanish speaking radio stations broadcast than English speaking. More people speak foreign languages than English in the City of Angels. More school kids can’t speak our national language in California. It’s so bad in the Golden Bear State, last year 800,000 Americans fled abrasive conditions growing like a cancer in southern California. Worse, the “18th Street Gang” in Los Angeles features 20,000 members with 60 percent of them being illegal aliens. They coordinate drug traffic, robberies and extortion. Finally, the corruption is so great, ‘Special Order 40,’ augmented by the Los Angeles Police Department, makes it impossible to arrest, detain or deport illegal aliens. Little wonder more than three million operate in California.

But as their numbers grow and their allegiance remains with Mexico, this country is at risk of an internal coup. But the worst danger comes from our own citizens of Mexican heritage. They want our southwestern United States back. Will they take it by violence? Use an army? No! They are colonizing us by sheer numbers. They are the fastest growing ethnic group in America, but they have no allegiance to our country.

They are organized, too. The following are two speeches from a dozen others: Augustin Cebada, Information Minister of Brown Berets, militant para-military soldiers of Aztlan shouting at U.S. citizens at an Independence Day rally in Los Angeles: "Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets, we're here today to show LA, show the minority people here, the Anglo-Saxons, that we are here, the majority. We do the work in this city, we take care of the spoiled brat children, we clean their offices, we pick the food, we do the manufacturing in the factories of LA, we are the majority here. We're here in Westwood, this is the fourth time we've been here in the last two months, to show white Anglo-Saxon Protestant LA, the few of you who remain, that we are the majority, and we claim this land as ours, it's always been ours, and we're still here, and none of the talk about deporting. If anyone's going to be deported it's going to be you! Go back to Simi Valley, you skunks! Go back to Boston! To back to the Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You're old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you, leave like beaten rats. You old white people, it is your duty to die. Right now we're already controlling those elections by violence or nonviolence. Through love of having children we're going to take over." Other demonstrators: "Raza fuerza (brown race power), this is Aztlan, this is Mexico. They're the pilgrims on our land. Go back to the Nina, the Pinta, the Santa Maria."

If you don’t think he’s serious about taking over our border states, try this guy on for size: Jose Angel Gutierrez, Professor, University of Texas at Arlington, founder La Raza Party at UC Riverside: "The border remains a military zone. We remain a hunted people. Now you think you have a destiny to fulfill in the land that historically has been ours for forty thousand years. And we're a new Mestizo nation. And they want us to discuss civil rights. Civil rights. What law made by white men to oppress all of us of color, female and male. This is our homeland. We are not immigrants that came from another country to another country. We are migrants, free to travel the length and breadth of the Americas because we belong here. We are millions. We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. It's a matter of time. The explosion is in our population."

For a sleepy American public and a politically correct Congress, the colonization of America by a foreign country proceeds quietly, pervasively, methodically and perversely. Forty-six Mexican consulates operate and dictate in major cities across our country. Mexico’s President Fox visits and makes demands. They’re pouring over our borders like water over a broken dam.

Our resources are being drained at $56 billion annually. Immigrants send $15 billion back to Mexico. They send $25 billion back to South America and $16 billion back to Asia. Our annual trade deficit exceeds $400 billion. Over $100 billion in cash flows out of our borders for drugs. We pay billions for illegals in our medical systems, schools and ESL classes. According to Professor Borgas of Harvard, American workers lose $133 billion in wages to illegal aliens taking over American jobs.

“Immigrant advocacy groups no longer promote legal immigration, citizenship, learning English or any other assimilation into this country. Hispanic-rights groups talk of reoccupation and repatriation of the southwestern United States,” wrote Linda Bentley in “Paving the Way to Aztlan: With Propaganda, Politics, Racism.”

Do you want America to be split up? Do you want Texas to become a state of Mexico? Do you want America to become as corrupt as Mexico? Do you want the filth, squalor and diseases of Mexico to become a part of America’s reality? Do you want to give up California to Aztlan? Do you want America to become a part of the Third World?

Keep doing nothing about this immigration invasion and you’ll get your wish.








No comments: