“The Democrats had abandoned their working-class base to chase what they pretended was a racial group when what they were actually chasing was the momentum of unlimited migration”. DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE MAGAZINE
Trump vs. Biden: Amnesty
Both favor it, neither says
it, but the difference is between 1.8 million aliens or 11 million (-plus?)
By Andrew R. Arthur on October 22,
2020
[Updated October 23, 2020]
- Both Donald Trump and Joe Biden have come out in support
of an amnesty for some number of illegal aliens in the United States —
although neither has admitted as much.
- As part of his January 2018 "Framework on
Immigration Reform & Border Security", the president proposed an
amnesty for 1.8 million aliens who are DACA recipients and aliens who
would otherwise be DACA eligible except for the temporal constraints
on that administrative action. In exchange, the president sought several
key reforms in our legal immigration system. Congress has failed to act on
Trump's proposals.
- Biden, on the other hand, has promised to work with
Congress on an amnesty leading to citizenship for nearly 11 million aliens
unlawfully present in the United States on his campaign website, with few
strings attached.
- Pursuant to his plan, those aliens would have to
register, pay any taxes due, and pass a background check. Given the fact
that the former vice president has promised a 100-day moratorium on
removals at the start of his term, and to deport only aliens who have
committed felonies in the United States thereafter, it is doubtful that
the unspecified background check would bar many aliens who are currently
removable on criminal grounds.
- A companion campaign document — the "Biden-Sanders
Unity Taskforce Recommendations" — is less clear with respect to that
amnesty, suggesting that the Biden-Harris administration would at least
initially grant an administrative amnesty to aliens unlawfully present in
the United States before seeking legislation to formally legalize those
nearly 11 million aliens.
- Given the former vice president's statements, and his
vow to curb immigration enforcement if elected, it is possible that Biden
could institute a de facto amnesty of the vast majority of aliens
illegally present in the United States, even before implementing any administrative
or legislative one.
- Left unclear is whether the Biden administration would
limit any amnesty to "nearly 11 million" illegal aliens, or
whether it would ultimately apply to a larger number, assuming that there
were more such aliens in the United States. In Thursday’s debate, he
raised the number to "over 11 million", without setting a
ceiling. Nor has Biden proposed a cut-off date for any such amnesty,
meaning that a wave of aliens could seek to enter illegally up to (and
perhaps after) the implementation of that amnesty, to take advantage of
those benefits.
As I have been examining the respective immigration positions
of the two candidates for president — the incumbent Donald Trump and the
challenger Joe Biden — one major point that I have thus far not addressed
directly is amnesty. Both Trump and Biden have proposed it (not directly, of
course, as it is a program that dare not speak its name), the former on a
"limited" basis of 1.8 million aliens, while the latter has promised
it for upwards of 11 million (and likely many more).
Amnesty Generally
"Experts" will give you different definitions of
amnesty, but here is the one that counts: The granting of immigration benefits
(residency, work authorization, and possibly access to government benefits) to
any alien removable under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) who is not
otherwise eligible for relief from removal.
Those experts and their respective candidates will elide the
subject, and contend that any program that grants those benefits is not amnesty
if it comes with strings attached: Paying back taxes, paying a
"penalty" (or what you would refer to as a "fee"),
background checks, and coming forward to apply.
Respectfully, this is all eye wash.
Every individual in the United States is required to pay any
number of taxes, including sales
tax, state and federal income taxes, property tax, Social Security and Medicare taxes (included
in the "payroll tax"), etc. These are not
optional.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1927
explained that "[t]axes are what we pay for civilized society." He
was echoing former President James Madison, who stated: "The
power of taxing people and their property is essential to the very existence of
government." So paying taxes is the baseline for everyone — citizen,
national, and alien — and not a penalty, even if you have failed to do it.
Of course, millions of people file federal tax returns, but
actually pay no tax (or receive back more than they have paid) — by one estimate more than 43 percent of all
filers. This is a "feature, not a bug" of our tax
system. "By design, the federal income tax always has excluded a
significant fraction of households through a combination of personal
exemptions, the standard deduction, zero bracket amounts, and more recently,
tax credits."
In 2016, Market Watch explained: "On average,
those in the bottom 40% of the income spectrum end up getting money from the
government." Most aliens who have entered the United States illegally, and
those nonimmigrants who entered legally and overstayed, are likely to fall
within that 40 percent. As my colleague Steven Camarota explained in 2017:
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.
As for a cash "penalty" for amnesty, those aliens
here illegally have (in almost every instance) evaded the many fees that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
charges to provide immigration benefits (including status) to aliens. Applying
for a green card will run you $1,225, for example. Not to mention skipping the
visa fees charged by the Department of State to enter as a
nonimmigrant if you entered illegally to begin with. Requiring payment in
exchange for amnesty does little more than place aliens in a position that
would have occupied had they not broken the law.
A requirement that an amnesty applicant have a clean criminal
record should require no explanation, except of course it does. If you run
afoul of the law (federal, state, or municipal) you are sanctioned with a fine
and/or jail time. That is because you have an obligation to obey the law, and
the state has an opportunity to punish you if you don't.
I say "except of course it does" because the number
of crimes that will get you removed from the United States (listed in sections 212 and 237 of the INA) is actually quite
limited. You would be surprised what aliens can get away with criminally and
remain in good standing from an immigration standpoint.
Of course, the most recent administrative amnesty (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or
"DACA"), isn't even as strict as the INA when it comes to criminal
bars. Specifically, an alien can be granted DACA so long as he or she has
"not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more
other misdemeanors."
"Significant misdemeanors" are limited to "an
offense of domestic violence; sexual abuse or exploitation; burglary; unlawful
possession or use of a firearm; drug distribution or trafficking; or, driving
under the influence", or one for which the alien was sentenced to 90 days
or more (if the sentence is suspended, even the latter doesn't count).
But under section 212 of the INA, for example, simple
possession (usually a misdemeanor) will get you removed, although you can still
get DACA, no problem. In fact, USCIS reported in 2018 that: "Of
those individuals whose DACA requests were approved and had one or more arrests
or apprehensions, 53,792 were arrested or apprehended prior to their most
recent approval." Remember all of this the next time someone refers to DACA recipients as
"law-abiding".
Trump's Position
Speaking of DACA, in January 2018, the White House released
its "Framework on Immigration Reform & Border
Security". Don't look for the word "amnesty" therein,
but the president promised to: "Provide legal status for DACA recipients
and other DACA-eligible illegal immigrants, adjusting the time-frame to
encompass a total population of approximately 1.8 million individuals." My
colleague Jessica
Vaughan, on the other hand, referred to that as what it is:
"amnesty", with a "10-year path to citizenship."
Considering the fact that, as of August 2018, there were just short of 700,000
DACA recipients, this meant that the president was offering that amnesty to an
additional 1.1 million aliens who had not yet received the ersatz DACA amnesty.
Of course, as Vaughan and I both explained at the time, there were many
important immigration fixes in Trump's framework, so it would have required a
significant amount of give-and-take from Congress for the administration to
grant that amnesty. Congress failed to take the bait, however, despite the
president's extremely generous offer.
More recently (last October), the president stated that
Congress would act on a bipartisan basis to protect DACA recipients if the
Supreme Court allowed the administration to end DACA. The Supreme Court refused to allow DHS to end
DACA (yet), so there is no incentive for Congress to act, and it has failed to
do so.
If re-elected, I have no doubt that the president would push
through on his January 2018 framework, and grant the promised amnesty to those
1.8 million aliens in exchange for at least some of the immigration fixes
therein. And, if the courts allow DHS to wind-down DACA, that would provide him
with a platform to do so.
Biden's Position
As I have previously explained, the former vice-president's
immigration proposals are threaded through two separate documents: "The Biden Plan for Securing
our Values as a Nation of Immigrants" (which features
prominently on the candidate's website); and the "Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force
Recommendations". In addition, Biden mentioned his amnesty
plans in Thursday’s presidential debate.
Biden pulls no punches when it comes to his amnesty plans
(although again, you will not find that forbidden word in either document and
he did not use it in the debate.
First, he promises on his website to work with Congress to
"[c]reate[] a roadmap to citizenship for" almost 11 million
"unauthorized immigrants" in the United States. Of course, they would
have to register for that amnesty, be "up-to-date on their taxes",
and pass "a background check" — the parameters of which he fails to
define, but, as I will explain below, would likely be significantly less
stringent than the grounds of removability in sections 212 and 237 of the INA.
The "Unity" document is similar, but a bit broader
in its scope and more ambiguous in its operation. It states that Democrats will
"provide a roadmap to citizenship for the millions of undocumented
workers", fast-tracking that process "for those workers who have been
essential to the pandemic response and recovery efforts, including healthcare
workers, farmworkers, and others."
Notably absent from that statement is "working with
Congress", or any legislative proposal to provide that amnesty. It is a
notable omission in this context because that document does state that
Democrats will: "Work with Congress to eliminate immigration barriers,
such as the 3- and 10-year bars, and remove the 10-year waiting period for
waivers to the permanent bars that keep U.S. citizens separated from their
families."
Like Supreme Court Justice nominee Amy Coney Barrett, I am a
"textualist" and believe that the differences in that carefully
crafted document between the amnesty promise and the "immigration
barriers" proposal is deliberate. Anticipate an administrative amnesty
first, followed (possibly) by a legislative one second.
This is not the first time I have made this point. On August
12, in a post captioned "With Choice of Kamala Harris, Biden's Immigration
Plans Become Clearer", I explained that I expect the
Biden-Harris administration will use a procedure called "Parole
in Place" (PIP) to grant immigration benefits (including
work authorization) to those "nearly 11 million" unauthorized
immigrants fairly quickly through executive action.
What would that administrative amnesty look like? Well, as
for the criminal grounds of removal, the former vice president has already vowed
that he will not remove any aliens
in his first 100 days in office, and after that, only those who have committed
(unspecified) "felonies" (not including DUI, which Biden does not believe is a felony,
presumably even when it is) in the
United States.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but taken at his word,
that means Biden would not deport an alien who committed an offense abroad — no
matter how heinous. Child molesters, murderers, and narco-traffickers will get
a free pass, so long as their offenses occurred abroad.
And, again, there are plenty of offenses that are not
classified as "felonies" (regardless of how you define it) that will
get you removed from the United States under the INA. But not if Biden gets his
way.
Not that Biden would even need to bother drafting a PIP
proposal to protect those aliens, as the former vice president has asserted that he will fire any ICE
officer who deports an alien who has not committed a felony in this country. In
his words: "You change the culture by saying you are going to get fired.
You are fired if, in fact, you do that. You only arrest for the purpose of
dealing with a felony that's committed."
Again, respectfully, it is not only the culture at ICE that
would be "changed" under that sweeping proposal.
Of course, all of this raises two additional questions.
First, what happens if the population of "unauthorized
immigrants" is larger than "nearly 11 million"? I note that in
addressing the issue in Thursday’s debate, he vowed to send
legislation to Congress in his first 100 days in office creating “a pathway to
citizenship for over 11 million
undocumented people” (emphasis added), so he has obviously expanded his plans.
Given this, will there be a cut-off? Given Biden's expressed distaste for immigration
enforcement, I cannot envision how there would be, or even that it would make
much difference anyway. Coupled with his promises to defang worksite enforcement, there would be no
impetus for any alien who did not make any arbitrary cut-off to leave.
Second, what about "unauthorized immigrants" who
enter illegally or overstay between now and the end of Biden's 100-day
moratorium on removals, or even the point at which amnesty is announced or
implemented? Would they also be eligible for amnesty (legislative,
administrative, or through non-enforcement)? Most amnesties have a cut-off (to
prevent a wave of new illegal entrants), but nowhere in either of Biden's
campaign documents is one mentioned, let alone listed.
Once more, I have to conclude that this omission is
deliberate. But, if it is, Border Patrol agents and CBP officers at the ports
would be left doing nothing more than patting down migrants for drugs and
weapons, and sending them on their way. Plus, we might as well fire our State
Department consular staff — unless we needed them to check whether a foreign
national abroad has committed a felony in the United States.
Biden has likely learned from DACA. That was intended as a
temporary administrative action, pending legislation to grant benefits to DACA
recipients. The subsequent legislation has never been passed, but (as Trump's
statements show) support for it has grown as nearly 700,000 aliens have been
shielded by that program. By granting an indefinite administrative amnesty to
millions of aliens in the United States, Biden would be better positioned to
push through a much broader legislative amnesty.
Summary
Both Donald Trump and Joe Biden have come out in support of
an amnesty for some number of illegal aliens in the United States — although
neither has admitted as much.
As part of his January 2018 "Framework on Immigration
Reform & Border Security", the president proposed an amnesty for 1.8
million aliens who are DACA recipients and those who would otherwise be
DACA-eligible, except for the temporal constraints on that administrative
action. In exchange, the president sought several key reforms in our legal
immigration system. Congress has failed to act on Trump's proposals.
Biden, on the other hand, has promised to work with Congress
on an amnesty leading to citizenship for nearly 11 million aliens unlawfully
present in the United States on his campaign website, with few strings
attached.
Pursuant to his plan, those aliens would have to register,
pay any taxes due, and pass a background check. Given the fact that the former
vice president has promised a 100-day moratorium on removals at the start of
his term, and to deport only aliens who have committed felonies in the United
States thereafter, it is doubtful that the unspecified background check would
bar many — if not most — criminal aliens.
A companion campaign document — the "Biden-Sanders Unity
Taskforce Recommendations" — is less clear with respect to that amnesty,
suggesting that the Biden-Harris administration would at least initially grant
an administrative amnesty to aliens unlawfully present in the United States
before seeking legislation to legalize those nearly 11 million aliens.
Given the former vice president's statements, and his vow to
curb immigration enforcement if elected, it is possible that Biden could
institute a de facto amnesty of the vast majority of aliens illegally present
in the United States, even before implementing any administrative or
legislative one.
Left unclear is whether the Biden administration would limit any amnesty to "nearly 11 million" illegal aliens, or whether it would ultimately apply to a larger number — assuming that there were more such aliens in the United States. Biden has also not proposed a cut-off date for any such amnesty, meaning that a wave of aliens could seek to enter illegally up to (and perhaps after) the implementation of any amnesty, to take advantage of those benefits.
“The Democrats had abandoned their
working-class base to chase what they pretended was a racial group when what
they were actually chasing was the momentum of unlimited migration”.
DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE
MAGAZINE
A DACA amnesty would put more citizen
children of illegal aliens — known as “anchor babies” — on federal welfare,
as Breitbart News reported, while American taxpayers would
be left potentially with a $26 billion bill.
Additionally, about one-in-five DACA
illegal aliens, after an amnesty, would end up on food stamps, while at
least one-in-seven would go on Medicaid. JOHN BINDER
THE NEW PRIVILEGED CLASS: Illegals!
This is why you work From Jan - May
paying taxes to the government ....with the rest of the calendar year is money
for you and your family.
Take, for example, an illegal alien
with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or 6.00/hour. At that
wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year,
if he files an Income Tax Return, with his fake Social Security number, he gets
an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200..... free.
He qualifies for Section 8 housing
and subsidized rent.
He qualifies for food stamps.
He qualifies for free (no
deductible, no co-pay) health care.
His children get free breakfasts
and lunches at school.
He requires bilingual teachers and
books.
He qualifies for relief from high
energy bills.
If they are or become, aged, blind
or disabled, they qualify for SSI.
Once qualified for SSI they can
qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer's expense.
He doesn't worry about car
insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.
Taxpayers provide Spanish language
signs, bulletins and printed material.
He and his family receive the
equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.
Working Americans are lucky to have
$5.00 or $6.00/hour left after Paying their bills and his.
The American taxpayers also pay for
increased crime, graffiti and trash clean-up.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/08/californias-privileged-class-mexican.html
Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up
people!
JOE LEGAL v LA RAZA JOSE ILLEGAL
Here’s how it breaks down; will make you
want to be an illegal!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/joe-american-legal-vs-la-raza-jose.html
THE TAX-FREE MEXICAN UNDERGROUND ECONOMY
IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY IS ESTIMATED TO BE IN EXCESS OF $2 BILLION YEARLY!
Staggering expensive "cheap" Mexican labor
did not build this once great nation! Look what it has done to Mexico. It's all
about keeping wages depressed and passing along the true cost of the invasion, their
welfare, and crime tidal wave costs to the backs of the American people!
AMERICA: YOU’RE BETTER
OFF BEING AN ILLEGAL!!!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/06/in-america-it-is-better-to-be-illegal.html
This
annual income for an impoverished American family is $10,000 less than the more
than $34,500 in federal funds which are spent on each unaccompanied minor
border crosser.
A study by Tom Wong
of the University of California at San Diego discovered that more than 25
percent of DACA-enrolled illegal aliens in the program have anchor babies. That
totals about 200,000 anchor babies who are the children of DACA-enrolled
illegal aliens. This does not include the anchor babies of DACA-qualified
illegal aliens. JOHN BINDER
“The
Democrats had abandoned their working-class base to chase what they pretended
was a racial group when what they were actually chasing was the momentum of
unlimited migration”. DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE
As
Breitbart News has reported,
U.S. households headed by foreign-born residents use nearly twice the welfare
of households headed by native-born Americans.
Simultaneously, illegal immigration next year is on track
to soar to the highest level in a decade, with a potential 600,000
border crossers expected.
“More than
750 million people want to migrate to another country permanently, according to
Gallup research published Monday, as 150 world leaders sign up to the controversial
UN global compact which critics say makes migration a human right.”
VIRGINIA HALE
For
example, a DACA amnesty would cost American taxpayers about $26 billion, more than the border
wall, and that does not include the money taxpayers would have to fork up to
subsidize the legal immigrant relatives of DACA illegal aliens.
Exclusive–Steve Camarota:
Every Illegal Alien Costs Americans $70K Over Their Lifetime
JOHN BINDER
Every
illegal alien, over the course of their lifetime, costs American taxpayers
about $70,000, Center for Immigration Studies Director of Research Steve
Camarota says.
During an interview
with SiriusXM Patriot’s Breitbart News Daily, Camarota said his research has revealed the
enormous financial burden that illegal immigration has on America’s working and
middle class taxpayers in terms of public services, depressed wages, and
welfare.
“In a person’s
lifetime, I’ve estimated that an illegal border crosser might cost taxpayers …
maybe over $70,000 a year as a net cost,” Camarota said. “And that excludes the
cost of their U.S.-born children, which gets pretty big when you add that in.”
LISTEN:
“Once [an illegal
alien] has a child, they can receive cash welfare on behalf of their U.S.-born
children,” Camarota explained. “Once they have a child, they can live in public
housing. Once they have a child, they can receive food stamps on behalf of that
child. That’s how that works.”
Camarota said the
education levels of illegal aliens, border crossers, and legal immigrants are
largely to blame for the high level of welfare usage by the f0reign-born
population in the U.S., noting that new arrivals tend to compete for jobs
against America’s poor and working class communities.
In past waves of mass
immigration, Camarota said, the U.S. did not have an expansive welfare system.
Today’s ever-growing welfare system, coupled with mass illegal and legal
immigration levels, is “extremely problematic,” according to Camarota, for
American taxpayers.
The RAISE Act — reintroduced in the
Senate by Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR), David Perdue (R-GA), and
Josh Hawley (R-MO) — would cut legal immigration levels in half and convert the
immigration system to favor well-educated foreign nationals, thus relieving
American workers and taxpayers of the nearly five-decade-long wave of booming
immigration. Currently, mass legal immigration redistributes the
wealth of working and middle class Americans to the country’s top
earners.
“Virtually none of that
existed in 1900 during the last great wave of immigration, when we also took in
a number of poor people. We didn’t have a well-developed welfare state,”
Camarota continued:
We’re not going to stop
[the welfare state] tomorrow. So in that context, bringing in less
educated people who are poor is extremely problematic for public coffers, for
taxpayers in a way that it wasn’t in 1900 because the roads weren’t even paved
between the cities in 1900. It’s just a totally different world. And that’s
the point of the RAISE Act is to sort of bring in line immigration policy with
the reality say of a large government … and a welfare state. [Emphasis
added]
The immigrants are not
all coming to get welfare and they don’t immediately sign up, but over
time, an enormous fraction sign their children up. It’s likely the case
that of the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, more than half
are signed up for Medicaid — which is our most expensive program.
[Emphasis added]
As Breitbart News has reported, U.S. households
headed by foreign-born residents use nearly twice the welfare of households
headed by native-born Americans.
Every year the U.S.
admits more than 1.5 million foreign nationals, with the vast majority
deriving from chain migration. In 2017, the foreign-born population reached a record high of 44.5
million. By 2023, the Center for Immigration Studies estimates that the legal
and illegal immigrant population of the U.S. will make up nearly 15
percent of the entire U.S. population.
Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM
Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.
John Binder is a
reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Another
line they cut into: Illegals get free public housing as impoverished Americans
wait
Want some
perspective on why so many blue sanctuary cities have so many homeless
encampments hovering around?
Try the reality
that illegal immigrants are routinely given free public housing by the U.S.,
based on the fact that they are uneducated, unskilled, and largely
unemployable. Those are the criteria, and now
importing poverty has never been easier. Shockingly, this comes as
millions of poor Americans are out in the cold awaiting that housing that
the original law was intended to help.
Thus, the
tent cities, and by coincidence, the worst of these emerging shantytowns are in
blue sanctuary cities loaded with illegal immigrants - Orange County, San
Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, New York...Is there a connection? At a minimum,
it's worth looking at.
The Trump
administration's Department of Housing and Urban Development is finally trying
to put a stop to it as 1.5 million illegals prepare to enter the U.S. this
year, and one can only wonder why they didn't do it yesterday.
According
to a report in the Washington
Times:
The plan would scrap Clinton-era regulations that allowed illegal
immigrants to sign up for assistance without having to disclose their status.
Under the new Trump rules, not only would the leaseholder using public housing
have to be an eligible U.S. person, but the government would verify all
applicants through the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE)
database, a federal system that’s used to weed illegal immigrants out of other
welfare programs.
Those already getting HUD assistance would have to go through a new verification,
though it would be over a period of time and wouldn’t all come at once.
“We’ve got our own people to house and need to take care of our
citizens,” an administration official told The Washington Times. “Because of
past loopholes in HUD guidance, illegal aliens were able to live in free public
housing desperately needed by so many of our own citizens. As illegal aliens
attempt to swarm our borders, we’re sending the message that you can’t live off
of American welfare on the taxpayers’ dime.”
The Times
notes that the rules are confusingly contradictary, and some illegal immigrant
families are getting full rides based on just one member being born in the
U.S. The pregnant caravaner who calculatingly slipped across the U.S.
in San Diego late last year, only to have her baby the next day, now, along
with her entire family, gets that free ride on government housing. Plus lots
of cheesy news coverage about how
heartwarming it all is. That's a lot cheaper than any housing she's going to
find back in Tegucigalpa.
Migrants
would be almost fools not to take the offering.
The problem
of course is that Americans who paid into these programs, and the subset who
find themselves in dire circumstances, are in fact being shut out.
The
fill-the-pews Catholic archbishops may love to tout the virtues of illegal
immigrants and wave signs about getting 'justice" for them, but the
hard fact here is that these foreign nationals are stealing from
others as they take this housing benefit under legal technicalities. That's not
a good thing under anyone's theological law. But hypocrisy is comfortable
ground for the entire open borders lobby as they shamelessly
celebrate lawbreaking at the border, leaving the impoverished of the U.S.
out cold.
The Trump
administration is trying to have this outrage fixed by summer. But don't
imagine it won't be without the open-borders lawsuits, the media sob stories,
the leftist judges, and the scolding clerics.
Los Angeles County Pays Over a Billion in
Welfare to Illegal Aliens Over Two Years
BY MASOOMA HAQ
In 2015 and 2016, Los Angeles County paid
nearly $1.3 billion in welfare funds to illegal aliens and their families. That
figure amounts to 25 percent of the total spent on the county’s entire needy
population, according to Fox News.
The state of California is home to more illegal aliens than any other
state in the country. Approximately one in five illegal aliens lives in
California, Pew reported.
Approximately a quarter of California’s 4 million illegal immigrants
reside in Los Angeles County. The county allows illegal immigrant parents with
children born in the United States to seek welfare and food stamp benefits.
The welfare benefits data acquired by Fox News comes from the Los
Angeles County Department of Public Social Services and shows welfare and food
stamp costs for the county’s entire population were $3.1 billion in 2015, $2.9
billion in 2016.
The data also shows that during the first five months of 2017, more than
60,000 families received a total of $181 million.
Over 58,000 families received a total of $602 million in benefits in
2015 and more than 64,000 families received a total of $675 million in 2016.
Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation senior
fellow who studies poverty and illegal immigration, told Fox the costs represent “the tip of
the iceberg.”
“They get $3 in benefits for every $1 they spend,” Rector said. It can
cost the government a total of $24,000 per year per family to pay for things
like education, police, fire, medical, and subsidized housing.
In February of 2019, the Los Angeles city council signed a resolution
making it a sanctuary city. The resolution did not provide any new legal
protections to their immigrants, but instead solidified existing policies.
In October 2017, former California governor
Jerry Brown signed SB 54 into law. This bill made
California, in Brown’s own words, a “sanctuary state.” The Justice Department
filed a lawsuit against the State of California over the law. A federal
judge dismissed that suit in July. SB 54 took effect on Jan. 1, 2018.
According to Center for Immigration Studies, “The new law does many things: It forbids
all localities from cooperating with ICE detainer notices, it bars any law
enforcement officer from participating in the popular 287(g) program, and it
prevents state and local police from inquiring about individuals’ immigration
status.”
Some counties in California have protested its implementation and joined
the Trump administration’s lawsuit against the state.
California’s campaign to provide public services to illegal immigrants
did not end with the exit of Jerry Brown. His successor, Gavin Newsom, is
just as focused as Brown in funding programs for illegal residents at the
expense of California taxpayers.
California’s budget earmarks millions of dollars annually to the One
California program, which provides free legal assistance to all aliens,
including those facing deportation, and makes California’s public universities
easier for illegal-alien students to attend.
According to the Fiscal Burden of Illegal
Immigration on United States Taxpayers 2017 report, for the estimated 12.5 million illegal
immigrants living in the country, the resulting cost is a $116
billion burden on the national economy and taxpayers each year, after
deducting the $19 billion in taxes paid by some of those illegal immigrants.
BLOG: MOST FIGURES PUT THE NUMBER OF
ILLEGALS IN THE U.S. AT ABOUT 40 MILLION. WHEN THESE PEOPLE ARE HANDED AMNESTY,
THEY ARE LEGALLY ENTITLED TO BRING UP THE REST OF THEIR FAMILY EFFECTIVELY
LEAVING MEXICO DESERTED.
New data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows that more than 22 million
non-citizens now live in the United States.
No comments:
Post a Comment