Thursday, August 3, 2017

TWITTER TRUMP COWERS TO MEX DICTATOR PENA NIETO - SAYS THE WALL WILL ONLY BE "NO TRESPASSING SIGNS PRINTED IN GERMAN"



Trump to Peña Nieto: border wall not so important – just don't say you won't pay

Report reveals leaked transcripts of phone call between US and Mexican presidents, in which Trump begs Peña Nieto not to tell press he won’t pay for wall


donald trump and enrique pena nieto
 Donald Trump also offered military aid to Mexico to deal with drug cartels, an offer first reported in February. Photograph: Yuri Cortez/AFP/Getty Images

Donald Trump suggested his demand for payment for a border wall with Mexico was merely a political ploy, and told Mexico’s president his refusal to pay should not be mentioned in public.



The news opened Trump to charges of hypocrisy and letting down his support base. A border wall paid for by Mexico was Trump’s signature issue in his run for the White House, as crowds at campaign rallies joined call-and-response routines and Trump railed against undocumented Mexican migrants for what he said was their predilection for crime.
But in a phone conversation with Enrique Peña Nieto on 27 January, a week after Trump’s inauguration as president, Trump said: “From an economic issue, it is the least important thing we were talking about.”
He added: “Psychologically, it means something.”
A White House transcript of the call was published by the Washington Post on Thursday. The Post also published a transcript of Trump’s call on 28 January with Malcolm Turnbull, the prime minister of Australia, in which he tried to wriggle out of an Obama-era deal to resettle refugees currently held on Manus Island and Nauru.
Much of the conversation with Peña Nieto focused on Trump’s acknowledgment that Mexico would not pay for the wall and his need for Peña Nieto not to say so. The Mexican president had cancelled a planned visit to Washington over the issue.
Trump said: “The fact is we are both in a little bit of a political bind, because I have to have Mexico pay for the wall – I have to.”
Referring to the Mexican president’s insistence that he would not pay, Trump said: “You cannot say that to the press. The press is going to go with that and I cannot live with that. You cannot say that to the press because I cannot negotiate under those circumstances.”
Trump even threatened to cut off relations with Peña Nieto.
The funding “will work out in the formula somehow”, he said, adding later: “It will come out in the wash, and that is OK.” But “if you are going to say that Mexico is not going to pay for the wall, then I do not want to meet with you guys any more because I cannot live with that.”



In Mexico, where Trump is reviled and Peña Nieto has been criticised for failing to fight a bully, the release of the transcript led some pundits to say that strategy of deference was not working.
“What this transcript shows is that Trump views the US-Mexico relationship like it’s employer-employee,” said Esteban Illades, editor of the magazine Nexos. “Mexico must do what he says in order to keep its job.
“The threat from the first phone call seems to have worked. Peña’s defiance of Trump is always out of earshot of the American president. He’s never there when Peña says Mexico won’t pay.”
Others saw the issue differently. “This is a boost for Peña’s image in Mexico,” said José Carreño, a columnist and commentator on foreign affairs. “All of a sudden he looks a lot stronger. But it is less about Peña than about Trump. Trump comes across less a bully than a politician who realizes he has gone too far in promises and is trying to find a way out without losing face.”
Peña Nieto has passed up repeated opportunities to publicly tell Trump Mexico will not pay for the wall. During a joint appearance last August at the presidential palace in Mexico City, he stood passively as Trump said details would be discussed at a later date. Peña Nieto had the last word. He did not rebut Trump.



Play Video
0:18
 Mexico to pay for border wall, says Trump, in front of Peña Nieto – video

At the G-20 summit in Hamburg last month, Trump again voiced approval for having Mexico pay. Peña Nieto said nothing. The Mexican foreign minister, Luis Videgaray, later told a Mexico City radio station neither he nor the president had heard Trump’s comments.
Videgaray – who proposed the Trump campaign trip to Mexico – became foreign minister in January. It was believed that he and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, had a strong relationship that could be leveraged.



Trump recognised that relationship in the White House call, telling Peña Nieto: “I did not want to meet with anybody. It was only because of a very good relationship that Jared Kushner has with Luis that these two decided to meet and discuss, but I was not really in favor for that meeting.”
Some in Mexico interpreted Peña Nieto’s passivity as an attempt to avoid unduly angering Trump over the impending renegotiation of Nafta, the key trade accord between Canada, the US and Mexico. Talks start this month.
In the transcript published by the Post, Trump also offered military aid to deal with drug cartels, an offer – or perhaps veiled threat – first reported in February.
“You have some pretty tough hombres in Mexico that you may need help with, and we are willing to help you with that big-league,” he said.
He added, of the fight against organized crime: “Listen, I know how tough these guys are – our military will knock them out like you never thought of. We will work to help you knock them out because your country does not want that.”
Trump also dwelled on his immigration promises in his conversation with Turnbull.
“This is going to kill me,” he said to Turnbull. “I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country.”
He added: “This deal will make me look terrible.”


NOW MULTIPLY THESE COSTS BY 40 MILLION!

 The NAS estimated the lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) of immigrants based on their educational attainment. Averaging those estimates and applying them to the education level of illegal immigrants shows a net fiscal drain of $65,292 per illegal — excluding any costs for their children.

Deportation vs. the Cost of Letting Illegal Immigrants Stay
By Steven A. Camarota on August 3, 2017


Steven A. Camarota is the director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.


The findings of this analysis show that the average cost of a deportation is much smaller than the net fiscal drain created by the average illegal immigrant. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reported the average deportation cost as $10,854 in FY 2016. In FY 2012, ICE removed 71 percent more aliens with a similar budget, creating an average inflation-adjusted cost of $5,915. This compares to an average lifetime net fiscal drain (taxes paid minus services used) of $65,292 for each illegal immigrant, excluding their descendants. This net figure is based on fiscal estimates of immigrants by education level from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS).1 The total fiscal drain for the entire illegal population is estimated at $746.3 billion. Of course, simply because deportation is much less costly than allowing illegal immigrants to stay does not settle the policy questions surrounding illegal immigration as there are many factors to consider.
Deportation costs:
·         In April of this year, ICE reported that the average cost of a deportation, also referred to as a removal, was $10,854 in FY 2016, including apprehension, detention, and processing.
·         Partly due to policies adopted in the second term of the Obama administration, ICE removed nearly 170,000 fewer aliens in 2016 than in 2012, even though it actually spent 8 percent more in 2016 in inflation-adjusted dollars. The removal of so many more illegal immigrants in FY 2012 means that the average cost per removal in that year was $5,915, adjusted for inflation.
·         If the average cost of a deportation was what it had been in FY 2012, then the larger enforcement budget in FY 2016 would have allowed for 200,000 more removals without spending additional money.
Costs of illegal immigrants:
·         Researchers agree that illegal immigrants overwhelmingly have modest levels of education — most have not completed high school or have only a high school education. There is also agreement that immigrants with this level of education are a significant net fiscal drain, creating more in costs for government than they pay in taxes.
·         The NAS estimated the lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) of immigrants based on their educational attainment. Averaging those estimates and applying them to the education level of illegal immigrants shows a net fiscal drain of $65,292 per illegal — excluding any costs for their children.2
·         Based on this estimate, there is a total lifetime fiscal drain of $746.3 billion. This assumes 11.43 million illegal immigrants are in the country based on the U.S. government's most recent estimate.
·         The fiscal cost created by illegal immigrants of $746.3 billion compares to total a cost of deportation of $124.1 billion, assuming a FY 2016 cost per deportation, or $67.6 billion using FY 2012 deportation costs.
Important caveats about these estimates:
·         The NAS projects future fiscal impacts. A significant share of the current illegal population are not recent arrivals, so some of the net burden they create has already been incurred. We estimate that one-fifth ($13,058) of the average fiscal deficit the current population of illegal immigrants creates has already been incurred by taxpayers.
·         The above cost estimates are only for the original illegal immigrant, and exclude descendants. Using the NAS net cost estimates for the descendants adds $16,998 to the net fiscal drain.
·         ICE's estimate for deportation costs does not include the costs of the immigration courts run by the Department of Justice. Dividing the court's budget in 2016 by the number deportations adds $1,749 to the average cost of a removal and $770 to the 2012 cost, in 2016 dollars.
·         To create its long-term fiscal estimates, the NAS uses the concept of "net present value" (NPV), which is commonly used by economists. This approach has the effect of reducing the size of the net fiscal drain that unskilled immigrants create because costs or benefits years from now are valued less relative to more immediate costs. If the NPV concept is not used, the actual net lifetime fiscal cost of illegal immigrants is likely $120,000 to $130,000 per illegal alien, or between $1.4 and $1.5 trillion for the entire illegal alien population, excluding descendants.
Introduction
One argument made by opponents of immigration enforcement is that it would be prohibitively expensive to deport all illegal immigrants, so we have to amnesty them.3 Advocates of enforcement argue this is a false choice as it is not necessary to deport all or even most illegal immigrants. Rather, actually enforcing immigration laws would cause many illegal immigrants to return to their home countries on their own.4 It would also discourage new illegal immigrants from coming. Nonetheless, the cost of deportations vs. allowing illegal immigrants to stay is still an important question.
To answer that question, this analysis takes the cost that Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) estimates for the average deportation and compares it to the lifetime fiscal impact of the average illegal immigrant. We estimate two different deportation costs because ICE's immigration enforcement budgets have been relatively stable in recent years, but the number of deportations has varied considerably, creating very different average deportation costs. To calculate the net fiscal impact of the average illegal immigrant, we take their likely education levels and apply fiscal estimates (taxes paid minus costs) developed by the NAS for immigrants by education level. Our findings show that deportation is much less costly than allowing illegal immigrants to stay. Of course, fiscal impacts are not the only consideration when weighting the various policy options.
Methodology
The Costs of Alien Removal
ICE's Costs per Removal. Determining how much it costs to deport, or more accurately formally remove, a non-citizen from the United States is not as straightforward a question as it might seem because ICE has multiple missions and legal responsibilities. Much of what ICE does has nothing to do with immigration, such as countering the smuggling of drugs and contraband across the border; stopping the illegal export of sensitive technology; stopping weapons trafficking; preventing the production and sale of child pornography via the internet; and intercepting stolen art and antiques. In short, the budget of ICE is not a budget solely for immigration enforcement.
In April 2017, ICE estimated that the average cost per deportation was $10,854 in FY 2016. This figure includes "all costs necessary to identify, apprehend, detain, process through immigration court, and remove an alien."5 Based on this description, the estimate seems comprehensive, including the costs for both Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO), which does most of the immigration removal work, and the legal division, which provides the trial attorneys who prosecute removal cases via the Office of the Professional Legal Advisor (OPLA). These two entities comprise the overwhelming share of spending on removals.
One complicating factor when considering enforcement costs is the number of removals. ICE removed only 240,255 aliens in FY 2016 compared to 409,849 in FY 2012.6 However, the ICE enforcement budget in 2016 was actually 7.62 percent larger than in 2012, adjusted for inflation. Yet they removed about 70.59 percent more people in 2012 than in 2016.7 Based on these numbers, the average cost of a deportation in 2012 was equal to only 54.5 percent of the per-removal cost in 2016.8 Using ICE's per-removal cost figure for 2016 gives an inflation-adjusted cost per removal in 2012 of $5,915 ($10,854 * 54.5 percent).9 If costs were what they had been in 2012, adjusted for inflation, then about 200,000 more aliens could have been removed for the same amount of money in 2016.
The Immigration Courts. Based on the description provided by ICE, the estimated removal costs do not include expenditures for the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which is part of the Department of Justice.10 Though it has a few other responsibilities, the overwhelming share of EOIR's workload is for removals. In FY 2016, EOIR's budget was $420.3 million and there were 240,255 removals in that year, which would mean that EOIR's cost per removal was $1,749.11 In 2012, EIOR's budget was $315,389,590 (in 2016 dollars). If we divide this by the number of deportations in 2012, the per-capita court costs were $770.
Declining Number of Removals. It is certainly possible to remove significantly more people with the current budget. The government actually did so in 2012. If enforcement was stepped up it seems almost certain that the lower cost per removal would continue, provided that policies continue to encourage enforcement operations rather than discourage them. During the second term of the Obama administration, policies prohibiting agents from arresting aliens became increasingly stringent. A recent GAO report found that the backlog of pending cases that are carried over from the prior year in immigration court more than doubled between 2006 and 2015.12
In his analysis of the GAO report, former immigration judge Andrew R. Arthur explains that several factors have caused the pace of deportations to slow.13 In addition to ICE arresting fewer aliens, the number of continuances granted by the courts has ballooned and, as a consequence, the number of cases completed by the courts has declined. One of the biggest reasons for the recent slowdown in removals is the priorities of the Obama administration, including the decision to admit so many unaccompanied minors at the border and the burden on the courts resulting from the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.
The Trump administration has curtailed some of these policies. Moreover, the number of arrests by ICE has increased substantially in the first few months of the new administration even though the administration has yet to implement the president's directive to increase the ERO agent corps.14 The increase in arrests certainly demonstrates that the enforcement capacity of ICE, given its current staffing levels, allows for a much greater level of activity than was seen in Obama's second term. It remains to be seen if the number of removals returns to the same level as 2012. However, if the costs of deportation were what they had been in 2012 then the somewhat larger enforcement budget in 2016 would have allowed for the removal of at least 200,000 more aliens with the same budget.
The Cost of Illegal Immigration
Estimating the Costs of Illegal Immigrants. There is a good deal of agreement among researchers that the education level of immigrants is a key factor in determining their net fiscal impact. As a recent study by the NAS states, the education level of arriving immigrants is one of the "important determinants" of their fiscal impact.15 This finding is similar to a 1997 study by NAS that also examined the fiscal impact of immigrants.16This conclusion also is mirrored by a 2013 study from the Heritage Foundation.17 Referring to the education level of household heads, Heritage concluded that, "Well-educated households tend to be net tax contributors." But at the same time, "Poorly educated households, whether immigrant or U.S.-born, receive far more in government benefits than they pay in taxes." My own research has come to the same conclusion.18 The reason for this is straightforward: Those with modest levels of education tend to earn low wages in the modern American economy, and as a result tend to make low tax payments and often qualify for means-tested programs. The less-educated are a net fiscal drain, on average, regardless of legal status or if they were born in the United States or a foreign country.
Education Levels of Illegal Immigrants. In terms of the educational attainment of illegal immigrants, there is a good deal of evidence that they have modest levels of education, much lower than native-born Americans or legal immigrants. The Heritage Foundation study cited above estimated that, on average, illegal immigrants have 10 years of schooling. In an earlier analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies of illegal immigrants based on 2011 Census Bureau data, we found that 54 percent of adults have not completed high school, 25 percent have only a high school degree, and 21 percent have education beyond high school.19 The Pew Research Center estimated that 47 percent of all illegal immigrants have not completed high school, 27 percent have only a high school education, 10 percent have some college, and 15 percent have a bachelor's or more.20
We have updated our prior estimate from 2011 for adult illegal immigrants using a combined sample from the 2014 and 2015 Current Population Surveys. We find that adult illegal immigrants have become somewhat more educated since 2011, but the vast majority still have very modest levels of education. Our best estimate is that 49 percent have not graduated high school, 28 percent have only a high school education, 11 percent have some college, 9 percent a bachelor's degree, and 3 percent have a graduate degree.
It is also worth noting that illegal immigrants overall are significantly more educated than we reported in an earlier analysis, which focused only on illegal border-crossers.21 Illegal crossers tend to be the least-educated component of illegal immigration because more educated foreign nationals wishing to come to the United States can often qualify for temporary visas, which they can then overstay.22 The focus of this analysis is the overall illegal immigrant population, which includes both visa overstayers and illegal border-crossers. Even though illegal immigrants overall are more educated than illegal border-crossers and illegal immigrants have become more educated over time, as a group they remain much less educated than the native-born or legal immigrants.
Fiscal Impact by Education Level. The 2016 NAS study mentioned above projected the lifetime fiscal impact (taxes paid minus services used) of immigrants by education. These estimates are expressed as a net present value (NPV). This is a concept used in fiscal studies, and in other contexts, to express the sum total of costs or benefits over long periods of time — in this case a lifetime. NPV represents the fiscal balance (taxes paid minus costs) if we had to spend the money today. Costs or benefits in the future are discounted or reduced based on how long from now they occur. Later in this report, we discuss in more detail the concept of net present value, both its usefulness and it shortcomings.
The NAS study does not report separate estimates for illegal and legal immigrants. Rather, it simply estimates tax payments and expenditures on immigrants as they appear in Census Bureau data, primarily the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement. As a result, the estimates from the NAS are for both legal and illegal immigrants by education. The NAS fiscal projections include eight different scenarios, each with different assumptions about future spending, tax rates, and the future flow of immigrants. It is not entirely clear what set of fiscal assumptions are best, and the NAS study itself does not identify the one best scenario. In Table 1 we simply take all 8 scenarios and average them together by education level.

Fiscal Impact of Average Immigrant by Education

It should be pointed out that in every scenario from the NAS, as shown in Table 1, immigrants without a high school education are a significant net fiscal drain during their lifetimes. That is, they pay less in taxes than they use in services. Those with only a high school education are a net fiscal drain in seven of the eight scenarios. In contrast, the most educated immigrants, those with at least a bachelor's degree, are a net fiscal benefit in all eight scenarios. This is very important because the vast majority of adult illegal immigrants in the country lack a high school diploma or have only a high school education.
Calculating the Fiscal Impact of Illegal Immigrants. The first column of Table 2 reports the average fiscal effect of immigrants by education level, taken directly from the bottom of Table 1. Column 2 shows the education level of illegal immigrants in the country as discussed above. Column 3 multiplies the average cost by the share of illegal immigrants who fall into that educational category and the bottom of column 3 adds up the costs to give a weighted average. This means that, using the NAS average fiscal costs of immigrants by education and assuming the educational distribution of illegal immigrants shown in the table, the average lifetime fiscal drain is $70,788 per immigrant. However, for reasons discussed below we think this figure overstates the net fiscal costs.

Lifetime Fiscal Impact of Illegal Immigrants

As already mentioned, the NAS fiscal analysis is for immigrants overall — both legal and illegal. Although illegal immigrants do access some welfare programs and create other significant costs, it should still be the case that less-educated illegal immigrants create smaller net fiscal costs than less-educated legal immigrants. Unfortunately, the NAS study has very little discussion of how legal and illegal immigrants differ in their fiscal impact. The study does state on page 280 that, "unauthorized immigrants as a group may have a more positive fiscal impact than authorized immigrants." (Emphasis added.) We agree with their tentative conclusion and so we adjust downward the fiscal drain created by less-educated illegal immigrants relative to illegal immigrants.
To estimate the adjustment factor, we use the Heritage Foundation study mentioned above. That study has estimates for immigrants by education and legal status.23 Adjusting has the effect of reducing the fiscal costs for less-educated illegal immigrants, but it also reduces the fiscal benefits for immigrants who are more educated.24 Since highly educated illegal immigrants make up only a small share of all illegal immigrants, adjusting downward their positive fiscal impact has only a modest impact on the fiscal estimates. The right lower corner of Table 2 shows that the fiscal cost of an illegal immigrant once we include the adjustment is $62,582. Adjusting reduces the fiscal cost by $8,205. There is also the issue of inflation. The NAS fiscal estimates are reported in 2012 dollars. If we convert them to 2016 dollars so that they match the ICE 2016 deportation cost estimate, then the net lifetime fiscal drain of illegal immigrants would be $ $65,292.
One way to think about the above estimates is that for every million illegal immigrants in the country there is a lifetime fiscal drain of $65.3 billion on public coffers. If we assume there are 11.43 million illegal immigrants in the country, then the total fiscal costs they create during their lifetimes using the net present value concept is $746.3 billion.25 In short, the savings associated with removing or causing even a modest fraction of the 11 to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country to return home would be significant.
Costs Already Borne. The NAS fiscal estimates are for newly arrived immigrants during their lifetimes projected forward. Since this analysis is concerned with the existing population of illegal immigrants, some share of the net fiscal costs they create has already been incurred. Based on the age of the illegal population and their time already in the United States, we estimate that one-fifth of their costs have already been incurred. If correct, the remaining fiscal costs of illegal immigrants on average are $52,234 ($65,292 * .80).26While the full cost of illegal immigrants is important, when considering deportation costs relative to fiscal costs, the remaining fiscal impact of allowing illegal immigrants to remain is also an important comparison.
Do Net Present Values Make Sense? The concept of net present value employed by the NAS study reduces or "discounts" costs or benefits in the future based on how long in the future they take place. Page 325 of the NAS study states that they used a 3 percent annual discount rate, which is common in this kind of analysis. So, for example, the fiscal balance (whether a net drain or benefit) an immigrant creates two years after arrival is reduced by about 6 percent. After 10 years, the amount is reduced by about 26 percent and at 20 years the discount is 45 percent. This means events that occur further in the future have a smaller impact on the total cost or benefit. Comparing the net present value fiscal costs illegal immigrants create to the costs of removal can be seen as reasonable because a removal has to be paid for up front while the fiscal drain accrues over time. By using a NPV it makes the costs of removal comparable to the lifetime costs illegal immigrants create.
The primary disadvantage of using NPV for fiscal estimates is that it masks the actual size of future outlays created by less-educated illegal immigrants. For example, using a 3 percent annual discount rate, as the NAS study does, means that if an illegal immigrant creates a net fiscal burden of $10,000 in the 23rd year of the projection, only about half of this amount will be added to the total NPV. Without discounting, the actual outlays associated with illegal immigrants are much larger. If the NPV concept is not used, the actual net lifetime fiscal cost of illegal immigrants is likely $120,000 to $130,000 per illegal alien, or between $1.4 and $1.5 trillion for the entire illegal population, again assuming 11.43 million illegal immigrants are in the country.
Making Different Assumptions
Including Descendants. There are four key variables in the above calculations that potentially impact the results. The first is whether to include the children of illegal immigrants. Many of the descendants of less-educated immigrants struggle, often earning low wages themselves and making use of welfare programs and other public services. If we use the NAS study's estimates that include the progeny of immigrants, it adds $16,998 (in 2016 dollars) to the net fiscal drain, raising the total for the average illegal immigrant to $82,290. If we assume 11.43 million illegal immigrants are in the country, then the total cost of illegal immigrants and their descendants would be $940.6 billion. If the concept of net present value is not used, then the costs for illegal immigrants and their children would approach $2 trillion. But the tax payments and costs created by the descendants of immigrants in the NAS study go out 75 years. Projections of this length involve significant uncertainty.
Impact of Different Fiscal Assumptions. The second question is which fiscal scenario from the NAS study to use. (All of the scenarios are shown in Table 1 of this report.) Scenario 1 makes assumptions that are most favorable to the fiscal impact of immigrants. If we use only this scenario, then the net fiscal costs created by the average illegal immigrant drop significantly, to $8,018 in 2016 dollars. This is somewhat less than deportation costs in 2016 and somewhat more than the cost in 2012. But this scenario assumes federal spending will not conform to historical patterns and, instead, that spending will be lower and tax payments higher in the future. Further, this scenario assumes away costs for public goods, interest payments on the national debt, and other expenses. All of this seems extremely optimistic. On the other hand, scenario 8, which makes the most pessimistic assumptions about the future, shows a net fiscal impact for each illegal immigrant of $118,091 in 2016 dollars. Averaging out all the scenarios, as we do, reduces the impact of extreme assumptions and provides a realistic assessment of the likely future fiscal impact of illegal immigrants. The fiscal drain varies significantly depending on which scenario is used, but seven out of eight scenarios show a large negative lifetime fiscal impact for the average illegal immigrant.
Illegal Immigrant Education Level. The third key assumption in our estimates is the education level of illegal immigrants. As already discussed, there is widespread agreement that illegal immigrants are a relatively unskilled population. If we assume that illegal immigrants are as educated as Pew estimated, the average fiscal cost would still be very large — $60,280 in 2016 dollars. This is very similar to our estimate of $65,295. Again, Pew's figures show that about three-quarters of illegal immigrants have less than a high school education or only a high school education, and this makes them a large fiscal drain.
Legal vs. Illegal Immigrants. Finally, there is the question of the difference between the net fiscal impact of all immigrants (legal and illegal) by education level, which is what the NAS estimated, and the fiscal impact of illegal border-crossers. In Table 2 we adjust the fiscal impact of illegal immigrants significantly, reducing the costs of illegal immigrants relative to immigrants of the same education by almost 12 percent, or $8,205. If we instead used a larger discount of 50 percent for all educational categories, the net fiscal costs of illegal immigrants would still be $36,926 in 2016 dollars. Under a 50 percent reduction, every one million illegal immigrants would still create a net fiscal drain of almost $37 billion during their lifetimes.
It is important to keep in mind that, mathematically, any reduction in costs for less-educated illegal immigrants means that the costs of less-educated legal immigrants must be correspondingly higher so that they average out to the NAS estimates for all immigrants. Immigrants in the Census data used by the NAS can only be either legal or illegal. So, for example, we estimate that 47 percent of all immigrants in the United States who lack a high school education are in the country illegally and 53 percent are legal immigrants. The average cost estimate from the NAS study for immigrants with this education level (legal and illegal) is $173,375, as shown in Table 1. Our estimation method, as explained above, reduces this amount by multiplying it by 67.6 percent (a 32.4 percent reduction). As a result, illegal immigrants with this education level create a lifetime fiscal drain of $117,236. This means that legal immigrants who have not graduated high school must create a drain of $223,159 for this to average out to the drain of $173,375 from the NAS study. If we increased the discount for illegal immigrants, thereby lowering their costs, and multiply the NAS estimate by, say, 50 percent, then the costs for illegal immigrants without a high school education would be $86,688, a good deal less than we report. But, the cost for legal immigrants without a high school education would have to grow to $250,249 so that it again averages out to the overall NAS estimate of $173,375 for all immigrants, legal and illegal, with this level of education. This drain for the least-educated legal immigrants seems implausibly large.
It is worth noting that because less-educated legal immigrants create a larger fiscal deficit than less-educated illegal immigrants, amnesty (legalization) for illegal immigrants would almost certainly increase the net fiscal costs to taxpayers, as illegal immigrants would become costly legal immigrants. Of course, this is only true for the less-educated illegal immigrants. The modest share of illegal immigrants who are well educated would be a significant fiscal benefit if legalized.
Conclusion
Overall, different assumptions can affect the results. But because the overwhelming share of illegal immigrants residing in the country have not completed high school or have only a high school education, it would require highly implausible assumptions to avoid a substantial net fiscal drain from this population. In short, illegal immigrants are a large net fiscal drain because of their education levels and this fact drives the results. Deportation, on the other hand, is not that costly relative to the fiscal costs illegal immigrants create. Of course, there are many other factors to consider when deciding on the best course of action than just the fiscal balance between removal and allowing illegal immigrants to remain. That said, deporting a large share of illegal immigrants can be justified from a fiscal point of view.


End Notes
1 Francine D. Blau and Christopher Mackie, eds., The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, September 22, 2016, p. 286.
2 Please see the methodology section of this report for an explanation of how we adjust downward the NAS fiscal cost estimates, which are for both legal and illegal immigrants, to reflect the costs for illegal immigrants only.
3 Philip E. Wolgin, "What Would It Cost to Deport 11.3 Million Unauthorized Immigrants?", Center for American Progress, August 2015.
4 William W. Chip "Mass Deportations vs. Mass Legalization: A False Choice", Center for Immigration Studies, March 2017.
5 Rafael Carranza, "How much does it cost to deport someone?"USA TODAY, April 28, 2017.
6 "FY 2016 ICE Immigration Removals", Immigration and Customs Enforcement, undated.
7 The 2016 ICE budget, including ERO and OPLA, can be found in this document on page 87. Their combined budgets in 2016 were $3,498,536,000. The FY 2012 budget can be found here. In FY 2012, the combined costs for these entities were $3,115,900,000, or $3,250,818,470 adjusted to 2016 dollars. Using the combined ERO and OPLA budgets and dividing by the number of deportations would produce a higher per-removal estimate than ICE reported to USAToday. However, ICE actually has detailed budget and operations figures that allow them to add up only removal costs excluding expenditures not related to deportation. This allows them to calculate the actual cost of the average deportation.
8 Calculating this percentage can be done simply by multiplying 1/1.7059 by 1/1.0762.
9 The most recent estimate from the U.S. government is that there are 11.43 million illegal immigrants in the country. Multiplying this figure by the deportation costs would create a total cost for deporting all illegal immigrants of $124.1 billion assuming a FY 2016 cost per deportation, or $67.6 billion using FY 2012 deportation costs. See Bryan Baker and Nancy Rytia, "Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2012", Department of Homeland Security, March 2013.
10 In addition to the courts themselves, EOIR also consists of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), an appellate tribunal that reviews orders of removal, denials of relief from removal, and denial of certain immigration benefits applications outside the arena of the deportation process.
11 "FY 2016 ICE Immigration Removals", Immigration and Customs Enforcement, undated.
13 Andrew R. Arthur, "The Massive Increase in the Immigration Court Backlog, Its Causes, and Solutions", Center for Immigration Studies, July 2017.
14 "ICE ERO Immigration Arrests Climb Nearly 40%", Immigration and Customs Enforcement, May 2017.
15 Francine D. Blau and Christopher Mackie, eds., The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, September 22, 2016, p. 286.
16 James P. Smith and Barry Edmonston, The New Americans: Economic, Demographic, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration,Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, 1997.
17 Robert Rector and Jason Richwine, "The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer", Heritage Foundation, May 6, 2013, p. v.
18 Steven A. Camarota, "The High Cost of Cheap Labor: Illegal Immigration and the Federal Budget", Center for Immigration Studies, August 2004.
19 Steven A. Camarota, "Immigrants in the United States, 2010, A Profile of America's Foreign-Born Population", Center for Immigration Studies, 2012, p. 69.
20 Jeffrey S. Passel and D'Vera Cohn, "A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States", Pew Hispanic Center, April 14, 2009, Figure 16, p. 11.
21 Steven A. Camarota, "The Cost of a Border Wall vs. the Cost of Illegal Immigration", Center for Immigration Studies, February 2017.
22 In contrast, a person with few years of schooling, a low-paying job, and no property in his or her home country is not likely to qualify for a tourist visa or other temporary visitor visa. Such persons would be seen as "intending immigrants", the terminology of the U.S. consular service; and the visa would be denied. As a result, the overall illegal immigrant population, which includes large numbers of overstayers, is significantly more educated than we previously estimated for new illegal new border-crossers.
23 The Heritage Foundation reports the average fiscal impact for illegal immigrant and legal immigrant households by education level. They also report the number of households by education and legal status. With this information it is a relatively straightforward matter to calculate the average fiscal impact of all immigrant households (legal and illegal) by education. We then divide this amount by the estimated costs for illegal households by education to create an adjustment factor. So, for example, among illegal high school dropout households, the net fiscal impact is -$20,485 a year, and for households headed by a legal immigrant who is a dropout, the drain is a good deal more: -$36,993. In Heritage's estimate, illegal immigrants create a net fiscal cost that is about 55 percent that of the burden created by households headed by high school dropout legal immigrants. But this is not the proper comparison, as the NAS estimates are for all immigrants, not just legal immigrants. Given the number of households Heritage reports, the fiscal impact for all immigrant households (legal and illegal) headed by a dropout must be -$30,294. As this equals .676 of the estimated costs of illegal dropout households reported in the Heritage study, this becomes the adjustment factor. We do the same for the other educational categories. As the Heritage study does not show separate estimates for those with only a bachelor's degree and those with a graduate education, we use the same adjustment factor for both. Taken together, this approach reduces the net fiscal drain of illegal immigrants by almost 12 percent.
24 This reflects the fact that while higher-skilled illegal immigrants are assumed to create a fiscal surplus, they often are unable to find work commensurate with their education level because of their legal status and so have to work at lower-paying jobs. They are also more likely to be paid "under the table" by their employers, reducing their tax contributions relative to their legal counterparts. As a result, they do not have as large a positive impact on public coffers as high-skilled legal immigrants.
25 The most recent government estimate of the illegal immigrant population is 11.43 million. See Bryan Baker and Nancy Rytia, "Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2012", Department of Homeland Security, March 2013.
26 The biggest limitation of this approach is that the NAS report does not include detailed fiscal balances by years in the United States and education making it difficult to know what share of the costs has already been incurred. Table 8-11 on page 338 of the study reports mortality and emigration assumptions. We do not change these.


L.A.County's $48 (DATED) Million Monthly Anchor Baby Tab
Last Updated: Wed, 08/12/2009 
Taxpayers in the nation’s most populous county dished out nearly $50 million in a single month to cover only the welfare costs of illegal immigrants, representing a whopping $10 million increase over the same one-month period two years ago.

In June 2009 alone Los Angeles County spent $48 million ($26 million in food stamps and $22 million in welfare) to provide just two of numerous free public services to the children of illegal aliens, which will translate into an annual tab of nearly $600 million for the cash-strapped county.

The figure doesn’t even include the exorbitant cost of educating, medically treating or incarcerating illegal aliens in the sprawling county of about 10 million residents. Los Angeles County annually spends more than $1 billion for those combined services, including $400 million for healthcare and $350 million for public safety.

The recent single-month welfare figure was obtained from the county’s Department of Social Services and made public by a county supervisor (Michael Antonovich) who assures illegal immigration continues to have a “catastrophic impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers.” The veteran lawmaker points out that 24% of the county’s total allotment of welfare and food stamp benefits goes directly to the children of illegal aliens—known as anchor babies—born in the United States.

A former fifth-grade history teacher who has served on the county’s board for nearly three decades, Antonovich has repeatedly come under fire for publicizing statistics that confirm the devastation illegal immigration has had on the region. Antonovich represents a portion of the county that is roughly twice the size of Rhode Island and has about 2 million residents.
Numerous other reports have documented the enormous cost of illegal immigration on a national level. Just last year a renowned economist, who has thoroughly researched the impact of illegal immigration, published a book breaking down the country’s $346 billion annual cost to educate, jail, medically treat and incarcerate illegal aliens throughout the U.S.


WELFARE COSTS FOR CHILDREN OF ILLEGAL ALIENS IN L.A. COUNTY OVER $48 MILLION IN JUNE

August 11, 2009—Figures from the Department of Public Social Services show that children of illegal aliens in Los Angeles County collected nearly $22 million in welfare and over $26 million in food stamps in June, announced Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich. 

Projected over a 12 month period – this would exceed $575 (THE FIGURES ARE NOW IN EXCESS OF A BILLION PER YEAR) million dollars.
Annually the cost of illegal immigration to Los Angeles County taxpayers exceeds over $1 billion dollars, which includes $350 million for public safety, $400 million for healthcare, and $500 million in welfare and food stamps allocations. Twenty-four percent of the County’s total allotment of welfare and food stamp benefits goes directly to the children of illegal aliens born in the United States.

“Illegal immigration continues to have a catastrophic impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” said Antonovich. “The total cost for illegal immigrants to County taxpayers exceeds $1 billion a year – not including the millions of dollars for education.”

County Spends $600 Mil On Welfare For Illegal Immigrants

Last Updated: Thu, 03/11/2010 - 3:14pm
For the second consecutive year taxpayers in a single U.S. county will dish out more than half a billion dollars just to cover the welfare and food-stamp costs of illegal immigrants.

Los Angeles County, the nation’s most populous, may be in the midst of a dire financial crisis but somehow there are plenty of funds for illegal aliens. In January alone, anchor babies born to the county’s illegal immigrants collected more than $50 million in welfare benefits. At that rate the cash-strapped county will pay around $600 million this year to provide illegal aliens’ offspring with food stamps and other welfare perks.

THE EXORBITANT FIGURE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ENORMOUS COST OF EDUCATING, MEDICALLY TREATING, OR INCARCERATING ILLEGALS ALIENS. THIS COSTS THE COUNTY AN ADDITIONAL ONE BILLION DOLLARS.

The exorbitant figure, revealed this week by a county supervisor, doesn’t even include the enormous cost of educating, medically treating or incarcerating illegal aliens in the sprawling county of about 10 million residents. Los Angeles County annually spends more than $1 billion for those combined services, including $500 million for healthcare and $350 million for public safety.

About a quarter of the county’s welfare and food stamp issuances go to parents who reside in the United States illegally and collect benefits for their anchor babies, according to the figures from the county’s Department of Social Services. In 2009 the tab ran $570 million and this year’s figure is expected to increase by several million dollars.

Illegal immigration continues to have a “catastrophic impact on Los Angeles County taxpayers,” the veteran county supervisor (Michael Antonovich) who revealed the information has said. The former fifth-grade history teacher has repeatedly come under fire from his liberal counterparts for publicizing statistics that confirm the devastation illegal immigration has had on the region. Antonovich, who has served on the board for nearly three decades, represents a portion of the county that is roughly twice the size of Rhode Island and has about 2 million residents.

His district is simply a snippet of a larger crisis. Nationwide, Americans pay around $22 billion annually to provide illegal immigrants with welfare benefits that include food assistance programs such as free school lunches in public schools, food stamps and a nutritional program (known as WIC) for low-income women and their children. Tens of billions more are spent on other social services, medical care, public education and legal costs such as incarceration and public defenders.

Anchor Baby Power

La Voz de Aztlan has produced a video in honor of the millions of babies that have been born as US citizens to Mexican undocumented parents. These babies are destined to transform America. The nativist CNN reporter Lou Dobbs estimates that there are over 200,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year whereas George Putnam, a radio reporter, says the figure is closer to 300,000. La Voz de Aztlan believes that the number is approximately 500,000 "Anchor Babies" born every year.

The video below depicts the many faces of the "Anchor Baby Generation". The video includes a fascinating segment showing a group of elementary school children in Santa Ana, California confronting the Minutemen vigilantes. The video ends with a now famous statement by Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez of the University of Texas at Austin.


CALIFORNIA MOVES CLOSER TO FINAL ANNEXATION BY MEXICO


DE FACTO CITIZENSHIP PER LA RAZA:

NO TEST, NO BACKGROUND CHECKS ON CRIMINALITY, NO BACK TAXES, NO 

FINES.... JUST JUMP STRAIGHT TO VOTING BOOTHS! AND VOTE OFTEN!!!

 

  

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/07/john-binder-californias-surrender-to.html

 


In 2013, California lawmakers passed legislation that allowed illegal aliens to obtain driver’s licenses if they can prove to the Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) their identity and state residency. The plan was one of the largest victories to date by the open borders lobby.… JOHN BINDER – BREITBART.com

THE LA RAZA PLAN: California’s final surrender to fly the 

Mexican flag within 4 years.


"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."

  -- - EXCELSIOR --- national newspaper of Mexico


They claim all of North America for Mexico!


(WARNING! THE BELOW LINK IS GRAPHIC ON MEXICAN HATRED OF LEGALS)

WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL, THE LA RAZA-OCCUPIED COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES HANDS ILLEGAL MEXICAN MORE THAN A BILLION IN WELFARE FOR BREEDING ANCHOR BABIES…. AMERICA’S NEXT GENERATION OF STAGGERINGLY EXPENSIVE “CHEAP” LABOR

IF THE MAPS OF LA RAZA-OCCUPIED AMERICA DO NOT SHOW, GO TO THIS LINK:

http://036a063.netsolhost.com/aztlanimage.bmp
http://036a063.netsolhost.com/AztlanMap.jpg

email a link to this article to AZTLAN! TELL THEM WE ARE NOW AWAKE!

http://036a063.netsolhost.com


Aztlan.Net is going through major reconstruction. If 

you are interested in viewing a particular prior article

or page. write to us at info@aztlan.net


LA RAZA FACISM:
Ethnic Cleansing By Mexicans Occupying California…. Where Mexico loots first!

THE FACE OF MEXICAN FASCISM

FORMER LOS ANGELES MAYOR AND MEX FASCIST 
ANTONIO “Taco Runt” VILLARAIGOSA

 DECLARES MEXIFORNIA’S SURRENDER TO LA RAZA SUPREMACY
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/11/la-raza-fascist-antonio-taco-runt.html
“Taco Runt” is a member of the Mexican Fascist Movement of M.E.Ch.A. and a racist (yes, Mexicans think of themselves as a unique “race”) LA RAZA supremacist.

He is proud of the fact that he FAILED California’s State Bar test more than any other illiterate Mexican on earth and that qualifies him to operate California’s Mexican Welfare State for LA RAZA.
                                                                                                                                    
BELOW LINK IS TO THE LA RAZA “THE RACE” MEXICAN FASCIST AND RACIST ANTI-AMERICAN SEPARATIST MOVEMENT M.E.Ch.A.  Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan

MEXICAN HEROIN POURS OVER THE NARCOMEX-U.S. BORDER

 http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/05/while-these-filthy-politicians-cant.html


Americans die young, poor and addicted while politicians angle for more amnesty and wider open borders with the LA RAZA cartels.


California: The sick man of the United States….

A STATE UNDER MEX OCCUPATION!


PUS-SPEWING CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL XAVIER BECERRA…. Is what happens when illegals vote LA RAZA FASCISM.



“As one attorney general, Kamala Harris, steps down to replace Barbara Boxer, another attorney general is secreted out of the glands of selfsame power in the form of pus-spewing Xavier Becerra.

It didn’t stop Becerra, a prominent Latino rights  advocate who has 

served in Congress since 1993, from pushing for the dealer’s 

release at the request of his father, Horacio. The elder Vignali, a 

rich Los Angeles businessman, contributed thousands of dollars 

to Becerra’s various campaigns and a favor was in order. 

“Through love of having children, we are going to take over.”  


YEP, THEY BREED LIKE CATHOLIC BUNNIES!

AUGUSTIN CEBADA, BROWN BERETS, THE LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY CALIFORNIA UNDER LA RAZA SIEGE:

                  
Mexico’s looting and ethnic cleansing of a once American state.

                                                      
LEGALS AND BUSINESS FLEE CALIFORNIA…. Where Mexico loots first

CA HAS THE HIGHEST TAXES IN THE 

NATION, THE LARGEST ILLEGAL MEXICAN

POPULATION, THE LARGEST MEX 

WELFARE STATE and HALF THE MURDERS 

IN CA ARE NOW BY MEXICAN GANGS.

LA RAZA MEXICO’S TRILLION DOLLAR LOOTING OF AMERICA

The staggering cost of all that “cheap” Mexican labor:
MEXICANS SUCK IN MORE WELFARE THAN LEGALS!

“The lifetime costs of Social Security and Medicare benefits of illegal immigrant beneficiaries of President Obama’s executive amnesty would be well over a trillion dollars, according to Heritage Foundation expert Robert Rector’s prepared testimony for a House panel obtained in advance by Breitbart News.”

THE STAGGERING  COST OF AMNESTY: non-enforcement is another form of AMNESTY!
Legals to pay trillions for open borders and Mexico’s looting
Between one-quarter and one-third of the 1.5 million new arrivals in 2014 were illegal aliens, meaning that a conservative estimate is that 1,000 illegal aliens a day are moving to the United States.

ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS ORDERS 

CALIFORNIA TERMINATED.



MEXICO IMMEDIATELY DENOUNCED THE DECREE AND 

FIRED SESSIONS.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions: Emergency Intervention Needed in California NOW!


MEXICO’S BIGGEST EXPORTS TO U.S.: poverty, anchor baby breeders for welfare, criminals, unregistered dems and HEROIN!


By Arthur Schaper

Townhall.com

In California, illegals can vote: it’s possible and very likely. California’s automatic motor-voter law all but assures that illegals seeking driver’s licenses will get a ballot along with their license.

Miscreants from any corner of the world can register to vote in California online, too. No vetting, no assurance, no integrity.

Voter fraud in broken inner city hellholes like Detroit and New York City cannot compare with the ballot stuffing throughout the once Golden State.


OPEN BORDERS: The Democrat Party’s Weapon of Mass Destruction on the American Worker



http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-la-raza-mexican-crime-tidal-wave.html


"Los Angeles saw all crime rise in 2015: violent crime up 19.9 percent, homicides up 10.2 percent, shooting victims up 12.6 percent, rapes up 8.6 percent, robberies up 12.3 percent, and aggravated assault up 27.5 percent," Landry said.”


IMAGES of  LA RAZA CRIMINALS  IN LOS
ANGELES ALONE: 

200 MOST WANTED (MURDER) CRIMINALS IN LA RAZA-OCCUPIED LOS ANGELES:


“Mexican drug cartels are the “other” terrorist threat to America. Militant Islamists have the goal of destroying the United States. Mexican drug cartels are now accomplishing that mission – from within, every day, in virtually every community across this country.” 

ROBERT RECTOR:

Importing poverty…. 

WE ALSO IMPORT ALL THEIR CRIMINALS


“The lifetime costs of Social Security and Medicare benefits of illegal immigrant beneficiaries of President Obama’s executive amnesty would be well over a trillion dollars, according to Heritage Foundation expert Robert Rector’s prepared testimony for a House panel obtained in advance by Breitbart News.”

MEXICO’S BIGGEST EXPORTS TO U.S.: poverty, anchor baby breeders for welfare, criminals, unregistered dems and HEROIN!

BILLIONAIRES FOR BORDERLESS AMERICA

….It’s all to keep wages DEPRESSED.

 “This nation no longer is a democratic republic...rather it has become a tool of the super-rich members of the above mentioned elite who pre-select our presidents based on their cooperation and complicity with the elite’s ultimate goals. Obama has, in their opinion done superbly carrying out the plans well laid out for him by his backers.”        


“The principal beneficiaries of our current 

immigration policy are affluent Americans who 

hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end 

work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates 
that American workers lose $190 billion annually (DATED FIGURES) in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end.”   --- Christian Science Monitor

JOE LEGAL v LA RAZA JOSE ILLEGAL

Here’s how it breaks down; will make you want to be an illegal!

…. which one has it good under the Dems??? NOT YOU, STUPID LEGAL!!!




While the declining job market in the United States may be 

discouraging some would-be border crossers, a flow of illegal 

aliens continues unabated, with many entering the United 

States as drug-smuggling “mules.”



California must stem the flow of illegal immigrants

The state should go after employers who hire them, curb taxpayer-funded benefits, deploy the National Guard to help the feds at the border and penalize 'sanctuary' cities.

“Illegal immigration is another matter entirely. With the state budget in tatters, millions of residents out of work and a state prison system strained by massive overcrowding, California simply cannot continue to ignore the strain that illegal immigration puts on our budget and economy. Illegal aliens cost taxpayers in our state billions of dollars each year. As economist Philip J. Romero concluded in a 2007 study, "illegal immigrants impose a 'tax' on legal California residents in the tens of billions of dollars."


Is it too late for America?

for 8 years no one accused Barack Obama of doing anything for BLACK AMERICA.... WHY WOULD THEY?

 Obama's  Legacy of the 'Hispanicazation' of America



January 10, 2011

By: James Walsh
Casting a shadow on economic recovery efforts in the United States

is the cost of illegal immigration that consumes U.S. taxpayer 

dollars for education, healthcare, social welfare benefits, and 

criminal justice. Illegal aliens (or more politically correct, 

“undocumented immigrants”) with ties to Mexican drug cartels are 

contributing to death and destruction on U.S. lands along the 

southern border.


While the declining job market in the United States may be discouraging some would-be border crossers, a flow of illegal aliens continues unabated, with many entering the United States as drug-smuggling “mules.”





CALIFORNIA UNDER LA RAZA SIEGE:

Mexico’s looting and ethnic cleansing of a once American state.



BARCK OBAMA and the MEXICAN DRUG  CARTELS: A PARTNERSHIP

Feds make secret alliance with Sinaloa drug cartel




What does the US Department of Justice, the Sinaloa drug cartel, and the spy corporation Stratfor have in common? According to CIA documents leaked by WikiLeaks, they’re all at the center of the new US strategy in the War on Drugs. In 2012, Whiteout Press exposed the shocking alliance in the article, ‘Secret US Alliance with Sinaloa Cartel exposed’.

THE INVADING CRIMINALS:

HOW MANY IN YOUR COUNTY?

A county by county chart:        




OBAMA’S INVASION OF ILLEGALS IS WORKING!

They’re already signed up to vote LA RAZA SUPREMACY DEM!



“According to Immigration and Customers Enforcement data first obtained by the Associated Press this week, about 70 percent of the 40,000 migrant family members arrested at the border since May did not follow up their arrest with a necessary visit to an immigration office.”

The NARCOMEX drug cartels now operate in all major 

American cities and haul back to NARCOMEX between $40 

top $60 BILLION from sales of HEROIN!



MEXICANS ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA, 

XAVIER BECERRA AND KEVIN  de Leon and 

ethnic cleansing of NON-HISPANICS from 

California prior to annexation by Mexico.

THE REAL FACE OF CALIFORNIA UNDER MEXICAN OCCUPATION:

“The California-Mexico border would surely be opened wide, prompting a spike in unfettered immigration by desperately poor people, drug dealers, and gang members to what is already a virtually lawless and out-of-control welfare state.”

Lou Dobbs Tonight
In California, League of United Latin American Citizens has adopted a resolution to declare "California Del Norte" a sanctuary zone for immigrants. The declaration urges the Mexican government to invoke its rights under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo "to seek thirdnation neutral arbitration of disputes concerning immigration laws and their enforcement." We’ll have the story.

BELOW LINK IS TO THE LA RAZA “THE RACE” MEXICAN FASCIST SEPARATIST MOVEMENT (WARNING! GRAPHIC!)
They claim all of North America for Mexico!
THE LA RAZA MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS
BEFORE AND AFTER BARACK OBAMA’S 8 YEARS OF SABOTAGE OF AMERICAN’S HOMELAND SECURITY

MEXICO WILL DOUBLE AMERICA’S POPULATION
THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ALONE HANDS MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS MORE THAN ONE $$$$ BILLION U.S. DOLLARS PER YEAR…. MORE THAN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY OF MEXICO HANDS THEIR OWN!


IMMIGRANT SHARE OF ADULTS QUADRUPLED IN 232 COUNTIES


"More than 728,000 illegal immigrants have been shielded from being deported and 

 

granted work permits through President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive amnesty 

 

program, according to the Migration Policy Institute."



MEXICO ANNOUNCES CONTROL OF CALIFORNIA ACCOMPLISHED.


De Léon, who introduced the bill, made his remarks at a hearing in Sacramento on SB54, the bill to make California a “Sanctuary State.


California State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Léon (D-Los Angeles) said last Tuesday that “half his family” was in the country illegally, using false documents, and eligible for deportation under President Trump’s new executive order against “sanctuary” jurisdictions.


"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."  --- EXCELSIOR --- national newspaper of Mexico

OPEN BORDERS and HEROIN: AMERICAN POLITICIANS PARTNER WITH THE LA RAZA MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS!

CAUTION!

HERE IS THE MEXICO POURING OVER OUR OPEN AND UNDEFENDED BORDERS AND HAULING BACK BILLIONS FROM HEROIN SALES!

GRAPHIC IMAGES of America coming under Mex Occupation

The NARCOMEX drug cartels now operate in all major American cities and haul back to NARCOMEX between $40 top $60 BILLION from sales of HEROIN!




THE DEMOCRAT PARTY PLATFORM:

NO DAMNED LEGAL NEED APPLY!

VIVA LA RAZA FASCISM? THEN VOTE DEM!

"Republicans should call for lower immigration to stop the Democrat voter recruitment.  But more importantly, all Americans should call for lower immigration in order to offer a better opportunity of finding jobs for those millions of their fellow Americans of all political persuasions who would like to work."

UNDER THE LA RAZA SUPREMACIST OBAMA, THE MEX DRUG CARTELS NOW OPERATE BORDER TO UNDEFENDED BORDER

Mexican cartel smugglers have taken full advantage of the system in order to maximize their profits from human smuggling as well as the smuggling of illegal aliens. In 2014, Mexico’s Gulf Cartel was able to make approximately $38 million in a matter of months off human smuggling alone.


“Mexican drug cartels are the “other” terrorist threat to America. Militant 

Islamists have the goal of destroying the United States. Mexican drug cartels

are now accomplishing that mission – from within, every day, in virtually

every community across this country.” JUDICIAL WATCH



AMERICA: NO LEGAL NEED APPLY

REPORT: The assault to finish off the American middle-class is NOT over


“The report noted that many illegals don't have jobs or have difficulty in landing good jobs because of local laws.”

“However, it identified several states that have begun easing employment laws so that illegals can get a job.”


HEROIN!

MEXICO INVADES, LOOTS AND EXPANDS ITS HEROIN MARKETS IN AMERICA’S OPEN AND UNDEFENDED BORDERS


JUDICIAL WATCH:
“The greatest criminal threat to the daily lives of American citizens are the Mexican drug cartels.”

Much more here:

“Mexican drug cartels are the “other” terrorist threat to America. Militant Islamists have the goal of destroying the United States. Mexican drug cartels are now accomplishing that mission – from within, every day, in virtually every community across this country.” JUDICIALWATCH


REMITTANCES ….. are only part of Mexico’s 

looting… and billions for anchor  baby breeders,

billions for heroin sales and then do the numbers!


Mexicans abroad sent home nearly $2.4 billion in transfers in November, 24.7 percent higher than a year earlier, marking their fastest pace of expansion since March 2006, according to Mexican central bank data on Monday…

ONE OF THE MOST DISTURBING BOOKS OUT THERE ON MEXICO’S INVASION, OCCUPATION AND LOOTING of CALIFORNIA
MEXIFORNIA: The Shattering of the American Dream

MILLIONS of JOBS and BILLIONS in WELFARE and they commit most of the MURDERS
SANCTUARY CITIES AND STATES:  AMERICA FALLS TO LA RAZA SUPREMACY!

“What we're seeing is our Congress and national leadership dismantling our laws by not enforcing them. Lawlessness becomes the norm, just like Third World corruption. Illegal aliens now have more rights and privileges than Americans. If you are an illegal alien, you can drive a car without a driver's license or insurance. You may obtain medical care without paying. You may work without paying taxes. Your children enjoy free education at the expense of taxpaying Americans.” 



ILLEGALS & WELFARE
70% OF ILLEGALS GET WELFARE!
“According to the Centers for Immigration Studies, April '11, at least 70% of Mexican illegal alien families receive some type of welfare in the US!!! cis.org”
CIS
So when cities across the country declare that they will NOT be sanctuary, guess where ALL the illegals, criminals, gang members fleeing ICE will go???? straight to your welcoming city. So ironically the people fighting for sanctuary city status, may have an unprecedented crime wave to deal with along with the additional expense.
$17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
$12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school 
education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of 
English.
$22 billion is spent on (AFDC) welfare to illegal aliens each year.
$2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as 
(SNAP) food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.
$3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.
30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.Does not include local jails and State Prisons.
2012 illegal aliens sent home $62 BILLION in remittances back to their 
countries of origin. This is why Mexico is getting involved in our 
politics.
$200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States.
Sources:

Center for Immigration Studies.
Federation for American Immigration Reform.
House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Investigations.
Inter-American Development Bank.
Violent Crimes Institute.
Federation for American Immigration Reform.
Immigration Studies Program.
Illegal Alien Crime Report. 
Memorial to victims of Illegal Alien Crime.


REVOLUTION IN MEXICO
 Will It Spread Over America’s Open Borders?
“Over the last decade, the Mexican ruling class has carried out a ruthless drive to intensify the exploitation of its labor and natural resources, mainly by American banks and corporations.”….sounds like what Wall Street has done to us!
LOS ANGELES: Mexico’s Second Largest City, First Place for Billion Dollar Mexican Welfare, Number 1 for Mexican Murder and Western Gateway For the LA RAZA Mexican Drug Cartels
“Part of the problem, Santorum said, has been the arrival of millions of unskilled immigrants — legal and illegal — in the United States. "American workers deserve a shot at [good] jobs," Santorum said. "Over the last 20 years, we have brought into this country, legally and illegally, 35 MILLION  mostly unskilled workers. And the result, over that same period of time, workers' wages and family incomes have flatlined." SEN. RICK SANTORUM


MEX WITH 37 CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS FINALLY DEPORTED… wonder if he’s back looting already???

more at this link:


In FY 2012, ICE says it removed 409,849 illegal aliens. Fifty-

five percent of them (or 225,390) were convicted criminal

aliens, the largest number of criminal aliens removed in

agency history, ICE said.


MICHELLE MALKIN: another brutal murder by

another illegal criminal long on the loose in our

open borders!
  

VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY?

"The American Southwest seems to be slowly 

returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico 

without firing a single shot."  --

EXCELSIOR --- national newspaper of 

Mexico


REMITTANCES ….. are only part of Mexico’s 

looting… and billions for anchor  baby breeders, 

billions for heroin sales and then do the numbers!


Mexicans abroad sent home nearly $2.4 billion in transfers in 

November, 24.7 percent higher than a year earlier, marking their 

fastest pace of expansion since March 2006, according to Mexican 

central bank data on Monday…


Vice President Mike Pence swears into office USTR Robert Lighthizer, May 15, 2017.

USA Completes 270 Straight Months of Merchandise Trade Deficits With Mexico





By Terence P. Jeffrey | May 19, 2017 | 10:46 AM EDT


Vice President Mike Pence swears into office USTR Robert Lighthizer, May 15, 2017. (Screen Capture)
(CNSNews.com) - The United States ran a $7,032,600,000 merchandise trade deficit with Mexico in March, making it the 270th straight month that the United States has run a merchandise trade deficit with its southern neighbor, according to data release this month by the Census Bureau.
The last time the United States ran a monthly merchandise trade surplus with Mexico was September 1994—in the first year under the North American Free Trade Agreement, which the Trump administration officially notified Congress yesterday it will renegotiate.
In September 1994, the United States exported $4,381,200,000 in goods to Mexico and imported $4,376,500,000—running a surplus of $4,700,000.
The $7,032,600,000 merchandise trade deficit that the U.S. ran with Mexico this March was 1,496 times larger than the $4,700,000 surplus it ran in September 1994.
NAFTA was signed by President Georg H.W. Bush in December 1992—just one month before he left office. Congress approved it by simple majority votes in both houses of Congress—rather than by the two-thirds Senate majority needed to ratify a treaty—in 1993. In December 1993, President Bill Clinton signed it.
In the three years leading up to approval of NAFTA (1991, 1992, 1993), the United States ran merchandise trade surpluses with Mexico. In 1991, it ran a surplus of $2,147,600,000. In 1992, it ran a surplus of $5,381,200,000. And in 1993, it ran a surplus of $1,663,300,000.
The U.S. also ran a merchandise trade surplus with Mexico in 1994, the first full calendar year NAFTA was in effect. That year, the bilateral U.S. merchandise trade deficit with Mexico was $1,349,800,000.
But September 1994 was the last time the U.S. ran a monthly merchandise trade surplus with Mexico. In every single month since then, the U.S.  has run a trade deficit with Mexico.
On Thursday, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer--who was sworn into office on Monday--officially notified Congress that the Trump administration will be renegotiating NAFTA.
“The United States seeks to support higher-paying jobs in the United States and to grow the economy by improving U.S. opportunities under NAFTA,” Lighthizer wrote in a letter to Congress.
“We are committed to concluding these negotiations with timely and substantive results for U.S. consumers, businesses, farmers, ranchers, and workers consistent with U.S. priorities and the negotiating objectives established by the Congress in statute,” Lighthizer wrote.







No comments: