Senate to Consider Increasing U Visas this Week
The U.S. Senate is widely anticipated to take up the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (VAWA) this week. Although VAWA was initially passed in 1994 to increase protections for women suffering domestic violence and abuse, it has become the latest vehicle for the open-borders lobby to increase visas and grant amnesty to illegal aliens.The version currently before the Senate, S. 1925 introduced by Senate Judiciary Chair Pat Leahy (D-VT), contains provisions that could increase the number of U-visas by 34,000. It does this by increasing the number of U visas granted annually from 10,000 (the current ceiling) to 15,000, until all unused U visas since 2006 are recaptured. (S. 1925 at § 805)
Congress created the U nonimmigrant visa in 2000 to allow aliens who have suffered substantial physical or mental abuse as a victim of domestic violence, rape, or certain other crimes to obtain temporary legal status if they help law enforcement prosecute those crimes. (INA § 101(a)(15)(U); see also FAIR Legislative Update, Feb. 6, 2012) An alien can obtain a U visa regardless of legal status, remain in the country for four-years at a time, receive work authorization, and become eligible for a green card after three years. (INA § 214(p); USCIS Website on U visas)
Spearheaded by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Republicans plan to introduce alternative legislation that would strike the U visa and other immigration-related provisions from the bill. (See Des Moines Register Op-Ed by Sen. Hutchison; Apr. 5, 2012) "Violence against women except for these additions is noncontroversial. I'm afraid what they're doing here is they want a political issue — you know, 'war on women' — and they are going to end up with another one-year extension," said Sen. Grassley of Democrats' use of VAWA to increase immigration.
S. 1925, however, already has 61 co-sponsors, giving Sen. Leahy's bill a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Acknowledging this, Sen. Grassley has stated he will not try to extend debate, but expects Democratic leaders to at least allow his alternative to be voted on. (Roll Call, Apr. 18, 2012) "We're not going to extend this debate," Grassley commented. "There won't be a cloture vote necessary, and they'll surely let us have a vote on our substitute," he stated. (Id.)
If the Senate passes S. 1925, it goes to the Republican-controlled House where it is expected to face an uphill battle. (Id.)
Alabama House Votes to Strip Language from HB 56
Last Thursday, the Alabama House of Representatives voted 64-34 to make major revisions to the State's immigration enforcement law, HB 56. (Montgomery Advertiser, Apr. 19, 2012) The changes were adopted through the passage of HB 658, introduced by Rep. Micky Hammon, also the House author of HB 56. House passage of HB 658 comes only two weeks after the bill's introduction, during which time the bill was heard and amended by the Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee. (See Alabama House Bill Status for HB 658)HB 658 weakens HB 56 in several ways. It limits the circumstances under which law enforcement officers check immigration status, weakens the penalties for knowingly hiring illegal aliens, eliminates the prohibition on renting apartments to an individual a landlord knows is an illegal alien, and eliminates the requirement that schools collect immigration data on their students for inclusion in state reports. (See HB 658 as engrossed; FAIR Legislative Update, Apr. 9, 2012) With regard to the last provision, however, HB 658 still requires that the state prepare a report on the cost of educating the children of illegal aliens and expressly allows the state to contract with scholars, economists, or public research institutions to complete it.
Debate on the Alabama House floor was long and contentious. Opponents said the bill did not go far enough, calling for an outright repeal. (See, e.g. Letter to House Speaker Hubbard and Senate President Pro Tem Marsh) Early on, the House Legislative Black Caucus led a filibuster, saying the law had led to discrimination and other unintended consequences. (Montgomery Advertiser, Apr. 19, 2012) Rep. Hammon, however, promoted the changes as merely clarifying HB 56, particularly for law enforcement. "We've had a year to examine our law and talk to people who work with the law every day," said Hammon. "We have put together some clarifications and simplifications and few language changes in the law." (Montgomery Advertiser, Apr. 19, 2012)
The Alabama Senate will soon be considering companion legislation to HB 658. The companion bill, SB 541, was introduced by Senator Scott Beason on April 19, the same day the House passed HB 658. However, in contrast to HB 658, SB 541 is much smaller in scope regarding the revisions it makes to HB 56.
OBAMA HAS SUED AZ TO STOP E-VERIFY AND EASE MORE OF HIS PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS INTO OUR JOBS!
THERE ARE ONLY EIGHT (8) STATES WITH A POPULATION GREATER THAN LOS ANGELES COUNTY WHERE HALF OF ALL JOBS GO TO ILLEGALS USING STOLEN SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS!
Supreme Court to Hear Oral Arguments on SB 1070
This Wednesday, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Arizona's immigration enforcement law, SB 1070. The Arizona legislature passed SB 1070 in April of 2010 and within months, the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued the State in an attempt to strike down the law. (See FAIR Legislative Update, June 21, 2010)At issue before the Supreme Court are four sections of SB 1070:
- Section 2: Requires state and local law enforcement officers, during a lawful stop, arrest or detention, to inquire about immigration status if the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the individual is an illegal alien.
- Section 3: Provides that it is a violation of state law for an illegal alien to be in violation of the federal alien registration statutes.
- Section 5: Creates a misdemeanor offense that prohibits illegal aliens from applying for work, soliciting work in public places, or performing work in Arizona.
- Section 6: Authorizes state and local police officers to conduct a warrantless arrest of an individual if the officer has probable cause to believe the person has committed a removable offense.
WIKILEAKS EXPOSES OBAMA'S AGENDA OF LA RAZ SUPREMACY AND AN ILLEGAL
IN EVERY AMERICAN JOB TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED. THE LEGALS GET THE TAX BILLS FOR
THE MEX WELFARE AND CRIME TIDAL WAVE.
AT A TIME OF UNEMPLOYMENT CRISIS, OBAMA HAS SUED
THE STATE OF ARIZONA FOR IMPLEMENTING E-VERIFY! OBVIOUSLY IF OBAMA DIDN'T KNOW
THAT E-VERIFY KEPT ILLEGALS OUT OF AMERICAN JOBS, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BOTHERED.
THE MAN WILL DO ANYTHING TO BUILD IS PARTY BASE OF ILLEGALS!
The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers.
*
THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!
"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. "President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws."
VIVA LA RAZA! THE INVASION AND OCCUPATION IS NOW EXPANDING TO ALL OTHER 49 STATES!
*
HERE’S HOW NO E-VERIFY BREAKS DOWN:
*
Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal
CA MAKES
E-VERIFY ILLEGAL! COURTESY THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA!
Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal
Here is an example of why hiring illegal aliens is not economically productive for the State of California...
You have 2 families..."Joe Legal" and "Jose Illegal". Both families have 2 parents, 2 children and live in California.
"Joe Legal" works in construction, has a Social Security Number, and makes $25.00 per hour with payroll taxes deducted...."Jose Illegal" also works in construction, has "NO" Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table".
Joe Legal...$25.00 per hour x 40 hours $1000.00 per week, $52,000 per year
Now take 30% away for state and federal tax
Joe Legal now has $31,231.00
Jose Illegal...$15.00 per hour x 40 hours $600.00 per week, $31,200.00 per year
Jose Illegal pays no taxes...
Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00
Joe Legal pays Medical and Dental Insurance with limited coverage
$1000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal now has $19,231.00
Jose Illegal has full Medical and Dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00
Joe Legal makes too much money is not eligible for Food Stamps or welfare
Joe Legal pays for food
$1,000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal now has $ 7,231.00
Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for Food Stamps and Welfare
Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00
Joe Legal pays rent of
$1,000.00 per month
$12,000.00 per year
Joe Legal is now in the hole... minus (-) $4,769.00
Jose Illegal receives a $500 per month Federal rent subsidy
Jose Illegal pays rent
$500.00 per month
$6,000.00 per year
Jose Illegal still has $25,200.00
Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.
Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.
Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored lunch.
Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal's children go home.
Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same Police and Fire Services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.
Don't vote/support any politician that supports illegal aliens...
Its WAY PAST time to take a stand for America and Americans!
*
OBAMA
HAS PROMISED HIS LA RAZA “THE RACE” PARTY BASE of ILLEGALS AMNESTY, NO
E-VERIFY, NO I.D. FOR REQUIRED OF ILLEGALS VOTING… OR AT LEAST CONTINUED
NON-ENFORCEMENT!
OBAMA
HANDS MASSIVE WELFARE TO ILLEGALS, ALONG WITH OUR JOBS TO BUY THE ILLEGALS'
ILLEGAL VOTES!
The
truth about the DREAM Act
By Rep. Lamar
Smith
The
DREAM Act has become a rallying cry for President Obama, members of his
administration, and liberal Democrats everywhere. President Obama has vowed to
“keep fighting for the DREAM Act,” which would grant amnesty to millions of
illegal immigrants.
It’s
true when listeners or those polled don’t know the facts that the DREAM Act has
some appeal. After all, we are all naturally sympathetic when children are
involved.
But
the descriptions of the DREAM Act voiced by President Obama and his cohorts are
not accurate. And the consequences are never told.
DREAM
Act supporters claim that only children would benefit from such a bill, but the
facts tell another story. Under most DREAM Act proposals, amnesty would be
given to individuals up to the age of 30—not exactly children. And some other
proposals don’t even have an age limit.
These
supporters also maintain that illegal immigrants can’t go college without the
DREAM Act. But the truth is that illegal immigrants can already go to college
in most states.
And
ultimately, most versions of the DREAM Act actually don’t even force illegal
immigrants to comply with all the requirements in the bill, such as going to
college or joining the military. The administration can waive requirements
because of “hardship”at its complete discretion.
DREAM Act proposals are
also a magnet for fraud. Many illegal immigrants will fraudulently claim they
came here as children or that they are under 30. And the federal government has
no way to check whether their claims are true or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment