Thursday, October 4, 2012

NARCOMEX TERRORISM ON OBAMA'S OPEN BORDERS - Authorities face tough territory in border probe | Nation & World | The Seattle Times

Authorities face tough territory in border probe | Nation & World | The Seattle Times

Romney sidesteps specifics on his immigration reform - The Hill - WOULD ROMNEY DEFEND OUR BORDERS AGAINST NARCOMEX?

Romney sidesteps specifics on his immigration reform - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com


NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED TO BE LOOTED BY MEXICO!


 

MEXICO HAS BANKRUPTED CALIFORNIA WHERE ALL THE JOB GO TO ILLEGALS, AND THESE SAME ILLEGALS ARE ELECTING STATE LEGISLATURES BY THE DROVE.

MEXICO SENDS FIVE LA RAZA SUPREMACIST TO CONGRESS. THEY ARE REPS. XAVIER BECERRA, JOE BACA, GRACE NAPOLITANO, AND THE INFAMOUS RACIST SISTERS REPS. LINDA and LORETTA SANCHEZ…. ALL ELECTED BY ILLEGALS!

WILL OBAMA SPREAD LA RAZA SUPREMACY TO ALL 49 OTHER STATES?

latimes.com

Opinion

 

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."



*

California spending annually $22 billion to support illegals
Going To the Top!

By Susan Tully

I've been at the immigration reform and enforcement table for about 20 years. I've worked with activists during all those years. But last week, in Los Angeles, I had a first-time-ever experience at an activist brain storming session.

Gathered for an update on Stop AB131, the petition drive to gather signatures to force a ballot initiative as to whether the California taxpayers should fund college grants to illegal aliens, I asked the top activist leaders from Southern California how the signature drive was going.

They started updating me with the positive response from California residents who signed the petitions, but then admitted about 500,000 more signatures were still needed. When I said there was only a little more than three weeks to go to meet the January 5th deadline, suddenly their faces dropped at once, and the room went completely silent.

It was easy to read on each of their faces; the task was nearly impossible! Without big money to pay signature gatherers or a tsunami of petitions flooding in, the taxpayers of California will be forced to give grant money to illegal aliens for college, on top of the $22 billion they are spending annually in California to support the illegal alien population.

While all of our minds were racing and searching for suggestions as to how to accomplish this daunting task of gathering signatures, Lupe Moreno, long time Hispanic leader from Santa Ana, said "Can we have a prayer?" Everyone agreed to pray.

As the prayer went around the table, people expressed their sorrow for the lack of leadership in the State of California and in the nation to protect the interest of American citizens, and asked for divine guidance in helping them understand the harm their policies are inflicting on millions of innocent people in the state. In all the years I have worked on this issue, I had not witnessed the sort of sincere emotion that was expressed in that room.

(THE FASTEST GROWING POLITICAL PARTY IN AMERICA IS THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA! AND WE ARE FORCED TO FUND IT!)

You see, the politicians in California are happy to give money the state doesn't have to illegal aliens to attend college, while they cut the budgets and slash programs for public safety, right and left. The American citizen's interests and safety are simply collateral damage for seeking and appealing to the illegal alien lobby.

These activists in California have already learned what the rest of the nation is about to learn. We the people. . . are the only ones looking out for the best interest of American citizens. With few exceptions, we have no national leadership on the issue of stopping the illegal migration flow into our nation.

American citizenship or the benefits thereof have become a commodity for politicians to pander and barter away. They will grant de facto citizenship through sanctuary policies, in-state tuition, non-compliance with Secure Communities, grants for college, etc., etc., etc. President Obama and most the Republican presidential hopefuls are peddling various versions of amnesty proposals if they are elected next year.

What do these politicians want in return? They are hoping to leverage enough votes in key states to put them over the top in 2012, no matter what it costs the American people. This is futures betting: The politicians are gambling the nation's future in hopes of winning the next election.

So while the state can't afford to pay its bills or provide decent services to citizens, these California activists watch their elected leaders lavish still more benefits for people who don't have a legal right to be in the country. And while their child might have to pay out-of-state tuition to go to college in another state, thousands of illegal aliens are going to college at in-state tuition rates in California that they are subsidizing.

In addition they know that millions of other illegal alien parents are receiving food stamps, Medicaid, housing assistance and dozens of other state and local benefits for their American-born children, while they have to decide which bills will be paid this month and which will have to wait.

It's not hard to understand why the activist of California need all the help they can get. Please go to www.stopAB131.com and lend a hand to our friends and family and the people of California to do what needs to be done for the good of our children first.



OBAMA’S WAR ON AMERICAN, OUR LAWS, BORDERS AND CULTURE AS HE HISPANDERS FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES.

WHAT COULD BE MORE DANGEROUS TO THIS NATION THAN MEXICO VOTING IN OUR BORDERS TO EXPAND THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY WELFARE STATE???

The Obama administration is soft on border protection and resisting state efforts to fight voter fraud because to win, Democrats need to maximize the number of recent immigrants -- including illegal aliens -- participating in elections.

 

Listless Obama helped boost Romney's night - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com

Listless Obama helped boost Romney's night - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com

ILLEGALS WILL REELECT OBAMA BECAUSE THEY KNOW HE WILL EXPAND THE LA RAZA WELFARE STATE IN OUR BORDERS AND PUT MEXICANS IN OUR JOBS.


NOT ONE LEGAL VOTED TO BE LOOTED BY MEXICO!


 

MEXICO HAS BANKRUPTED CALIFORNIA WHERE ALL THE JOB GO TO ILLEGALS, AND THESE SAME ILLEGALS ARE ELECTING STATE LEGISLATURES BY THE DROVE.

MEXICO SENDS FIVE LA RAZA SUPREMACIST TO CONGRESS. THEY ARE REPS. XAVIER BECERRA, JOE BACA, GRACE NAPOLITANO, AND THE INFAMOUS RACIST SISTERS REPS. LINDA and LORETTA SANCHEZ…. ALL ELECTED BY ILLEGALS!

WILL OBAMA SPREAD LA RAZA SUPREMACY TO ALL 49 OTHER STATES?

latimes.com

Opinion

 

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."



*

California spending annually $22 billion to support illegals
Going To the Top!

By Susan Tully

I've been at the immigration reform and enforcement table for about 20 years. I've worked with activists during all those years. But last week, in Los Angeles, I had a first-time-ever experience at an activist brain storming session.

Gathered for an update on Stop AB131, the petition drive to gather signatures to force a ballot initiative as to whether the California taxpayers should fund college grants to illegal aliens, I asked the top activist leaders from Southern California how the signature drive was going.

They started updating me with the positive response from California residents who signed the petitions, but then admitted about 500,000 more signatures were still needed. When I said there was only a little more than three weeks to go to meet the January 5th deadline, suddenly their faces dropped at once, and the room went completely silent.

It was easy to read on each of their faces; the task was nearly impossible! Without big money to pay signature gatherers or a tsunami of petitions flooding in, the taxpayers of California will be forced to give grant money to illegal aliens for college, on top of the $22 billion they are spending annually in California to support the illegal alien population.

While all of our minds were racing and searching for suggestions as to how to accomplish this daunting task of gathering signatures, Lupe Moreno, long time Hispanic leader from Santa Ana, said "Can we have a prayer?" Everyone agreed to pray.

As the prayer went around the table, people expressed their sorrow for the lack of leadership in the State of California and in the nation to protect the interest of American citizens, and asked for divine guidance in helping them understand the harm their policies are inflicting on millions of innocent people in the state. In all the years I have worked on this issue, I had not witnessed the sort of sincere emotion that was expressed in that room.

(THE FASTEST GROWING POLITICAL PARTY IN AMERICA IS THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA! AND WE ARE FORCED TO FUND IT!)

You see, the politicians in California are happy to give money the state doesn't have to illegal aliens to attend college, while they cut the budgets and slash programs for public safety, right and left. The American citizen's interests and safety are simply collateral damage for seeking and appealing to the illegal alien lobby.

These activists in California have already learned what the rest of the nation is about to learn. We the people. . . are the only ones looking out for the best interest of American citizens. With few exceptions, we have no national leadership on the issue of stopping the illegal migration flow into our nation.

American citizenship or the benefits thereof have become a commodity for politicians to pander and barter away. They will grant de facto citizenship through sanctuary policies, in-state tuition, non-compliance with Secure Communities, grants for college, etc., etc., etc. President Obama and most the Republican presidential hopefuls are peddling various versions of amnesty proposals if they are elected next year.

What do these politicians want in return? They are hoping to leverage enough votes in key states to put them over the top in 2012, no matter what it costs the American people. This is futures betting: The politicians are gambling the nation's future in hopes of winning the next election.

So while the state can't afford to pay its bills or provide decent services to citizens, these California activists watch their elected leaders lavish still more benefits for people who don't have a legal right to be in the country. And while their child might have to pay out-of-state tuition to go to college in another state, thousands of illegal aliens are going to college at in-state tuition rates in California that they are subsidizing.

In addition they know that millions of other illegal alien parents are receiving food stamps, Medicaid, housing assistance and dozens of other state and local benefits for their American-born children, while they have to decide which bills will be paid this month and which will have to wait.

It's not hard to understand why the activist of California need all the help they can get. Please go to www.stopAB131.com and lend a hand to our friends and family and the people of California to do what needs to be done for the good of our children first.



OBAMA’S WAR ON AMERICAN, OUR LAWS, BORDERS AND CULTURE AS HE HISPANDERS FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES.

WHAT COULD BE MORE DANGEROUS TO THIS NATION THAN MEXICO VOTING IN OUR BORDERS TO EXPAND THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY WELFARE STATE???

The Obama administration is soft on border protection and resisting state efforts to fight voter fraud because to win, Democrats need to maximize the number of recent immigrants -- including illegal aliens -- participating in elections.

 

Declining US doctor visits: A product of social decay and the assault on health care - AMERICANS FORCED TO PAY OUT BILLIONS FOR MEXICAN "FREE" MEDICAL

Declining US doctor visits: A product of social decay and the assault on health care


OBAMA AND PELOSI LIED THAT ILLEGALS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN OBAMACARE. THEY RIGGED IT SO IT WOULD.

WE ARE MEXICO’S LOOTED COLONY. WE ARE MEXICO’S FREE EDUCATION, ANCHOR BABY BIRTHING CENTER, WELFARE, JOBS AND JAILS PROGRAM…. And billions spent on illegals for “FREE” HEALTHCARE as AMERICANS GO WITHOUT BECAUSE WE CAN’T AFFORD IT!

 


ON THE FLOOR OF THE SENATE, A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE YELLED AT OBAMA THAT HE WAS A LIAR FOR CLAIMING ILLEGAL WERE NOT INCLUDED IN OBAMACARE! AND YES, OBAMA LIED. HE AND LA RAZA PELOSI DEVISED IT SO ILLEGALS, WHOM ALREADY GET “FREE” MEDICAL COSTING LEGALS BILLIONS, ARE INCLUDED!

The ruling was also trumpeted by liberal publications as a great victory for health care and for ordinary people. In reality, the decision upholds legislation whose main purpose is to cut costs for corporations and the government, while slashing billions of dollars from Medicare and other social programs.

Calif. Hospitals Spend $1.25 Bil On Illegal Immigrants

July 05, 2011

While the Obama Administration halts deportations to work on its secret amnesty plan, hospitals across the U.S. are getting stuck with the exorbitant tab of medically treating illegal immigrants and some are finally demanding compensation from the federal government.The group that represents most of the nation’s hospitals and medical providers recently urged President Obama to work with Congress to reimburse them for the monstrous cost of treating illegal immigrants. Federal law requires facilities to “treat and stabilize individuals” regardless of their immigration status, but federal support for the services remains “virtually nonexistent,” according to a letter submitted by the American Hospital Association to the president.This week officials in California, the state with the largest concentration of illegal immigrants, joined the call for federal compensation after revealing that hospitals there spend about $1.25 billion annually to care for illegal aliens. The figure skyrocketed from $1.05 billion in 2007, according to California Hospital Association figures quoted in a local news report.The problem will only get worst, according to officials, who say the $1.25 billion for 2010 could actually be higher. They complain that federal law forces them to treat patients in emergency rooms regardless of immigration status yet they get stuck with the financial burden. This has forced many hospitals to curtail services or close beds and could ultimately compromise healthcare.Nationwide, U.S. taxpayers spend tens of billions of dollars annually to provide free medical care for illegal immigrants with states that border Mexico taking the biggest hit. Adding to the problem is the fact that Mexico, the country that provides the largest amount of illegal immigrants in the U.S., has long promoted America’s generous public health centers. It even operates a Spanish-language program (Ventanillas de Salud, Health Windows) in about a dozen U.S. cities that refers its nationals—living in the country illegally—to publicly funded health centers where they can get free medical care without being turned over to immigration authorities.

Read more about illegal immigration

*

Most Illegal Immigrant Families Collect Welfare

April 05, 2011

Surprise, surprise; Census Bureau data reveals that most U.S. families headed by illegal immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare programs on behalf of their American-born anchor babies.Even before the recession, immigrant households with children used welfare programs at consistently higher rates than natives, according to the extensive census data collected and analyzed by a nonpartisanWashington D.C. group dedicated to researching legal and illegal immigration in the U.S. The results, published this month in a lengthy report, are hardly surprising.Basically, the majority of households across the country benefitting from publicly-funded welfare programs are headed by immigrants, both legal and illegal. States where immigrant households with children have the highest welfare use rates are Arizona (62%), Texas, California and New York with 61% each and Pennsylvania(59%).The study focused on eight major welfare programs that cost the government $517 billion the year they were examined. They include Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for the disabled, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), a nutritional program known as Women, Infants and Children (WIC), food stamps, free/reduced school lunch, public housing and health insurance for the poor (Medicaid).Food assistance and Medicaid are the programs most commonly used by illegal immigrants, mainly on behalf of their American-born children who get automatic citizenship. On the other hand, legal immigrant households take advantage of every available welfare program, according to the study, which attributes it to low education level and resulting low income.The highest rate of welfare recipients come from the Dominican Republic (82 %), Mexico and Guatemala (75%) and Ecuador (70%), according to the report, which says welfare use tends to be high for both new arrivals and established residents.

Read more about illegal immigration

 

US Supreme Court upholds Obama’s health care law

By Kate Randall
29 June 2012

In a 5-4 US Supreme Court decision released on Thursday, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. joined with the nominally liberal wing of the high court to uphold key provisions of the Obama administration-backed health care legislation.

The decision maintains the pro-corporate provisions of the bill, including the“individual mandate” to purchase insurance from private insurers. At the same time, the court undermined the key constitutional arguments used to support corporate regulations. It also ruled that the federal government cannot withdraw existing Medicaid funding from states that decide not to participate in an expansion of eligibility for the program.

The ruling on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, passed into law in March 2010, was predictably hailed by President Obama. Coming five months before the presidential election, he said it was a “victory for people all over this country whose lives will be more secure.”Congressional Republicans and presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, meanwhile, vowed to work to repeal the legislation in November.

The ruling was also trumpeted by liberal publications as a great victory for health care and for ordinary people. In reality, the decision upholds legislation whose main purpose is to cut costs for corporations and the government, while slashing billions of dollars from Medicare and other social programs.

Every step of the way, the bill was crafted to meet the demands of the private insurers, the pharmaceutical lobby and the giant health care chains. Any vestige of what could be termed a “reform” has been stripped away—including the inclusion of a government-run option on the health care exchange.

What remains is a requirement that all but the poorest individuals purchase insurance or pay a penalty. The insurance industry will be guaranteed a new influx of tens of millions of cash-paying customers, and there will be no meaningful oversight over what they can charge for premiums. The legislation is still purposefully unclear about what “minimal” standards employers and insurers must meet for coverage.

This is under conditions of a deep budgetary crisis for virtually all US states. Along with the federal government, they have responded by slashing Medicaid and other health care programs. At the same time, corporations are dumping or slashing insurance policies as part of an attack on wages and benefits. The general impact of the law will be to shift these costs onto the backs of individuals, who will be left to the mercy of private insurers offering less and less coverage for higher premiums.

Moreover, millions will likely remain without insurance, unable to afford it given the very limited subsidies, but still forced to pay a penalty of hundreds or even thousands of dollars.

In his remarks hailing the ruling, Obama placed emphasis on certain provisions of the bill that are popular—such as proscribing lifetime limits on insurance payouts and requiring insurers to offer plans to individuals with preexisting conditions. However, the largest insurers have already modified their cost structures to maintain profit levels with these provisions, and had announced that they would leave them in even if the law were overturned.

The reactionary character of the ruling—and the law that it upholds—was underscored by the fact that the majority opinion was written by Justice Roberts, traditionally part of the four-justice right-wing bloc. He was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen G. Breyer, Elena Kagan and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had been anticipated as the “swing vote” on the court, sided with justices Samuel A. Alito, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia in their own thoroughly right-wing dissent.

While upholding the health care reform, the ruling was based on arguments that will serve to undermine corporate regulations and social programs. In particular, Justice Roberts joined with the other right-wing justices in rejecting the administration’s argument that the law was constitutional on the basis of the government’s ability to regulate commerce (the Commerce Clause of the Constitution). Instead, he based the ruling on the government’s authority to use its taxation powers (likening the penalty for those who do not purchase insurance to an additional tax).

On the Commerce Clause, Roberts wrote, “That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it.”

This ruling is highly significant because, beginning in the New Deal era of the 1930s and 1940s, Supreme Court decisions used the Commerce Clause to support the authority to prohibit child labor, regulate corporations and justify social reforms.

For the past 15 years the Supreme Court has worked to set limits on the scope of this clause when it comes to social issues. In a separate 61-page opinion, Justice Ginsburg called Robert’s arguments on the Commerce Clause “stunningly retrogressive,” noting that they harken back to the era before the New Deal “in which the Court routinely thwarted Congress’ efforts to regulate the national economy in the interest of those who labor to sustain it.”

The one provision of the health care law that the court rejected was the only measure relating to the expansion of government programs for health insurance. Under terms of the act, Medicaid, which is jointly administered by the states and federal government, would be expanded to cover all individuals under the age of 65 with incomes at 133 percent of the poverty level or less.

The move would account for some 11 million newly insured individuals—who will receive the bare-bones care provided by Medicaid. According to the legislation, the federal government would provide 100 percent of the funds to cover this expansion of Medicaid up to 2016, gradually decreasing to 90 percent thereafter.

As the bill was written, if a state did not implement this expansion, the federal government could withhold all of its funding for Medicaid to that state. The high court rejected this in the strongest terms, writing, “In this case, the financial ‘inducement’ Congress has chosen is much more than ‘relatively mild encouragement’—it is a gun to the head.”

Roberts goes on to state, “The original program was designed to cover medical services for four particular categories of the needy: the disabled, the blind, the elderly, and needy families with dependent children.” But under the health care law, he writes, “It is no longer a program to care for the neediest among us, but rather an element of a comprehensive national plan to provide universal health insurance coverage.”

In fact, the Medicaid expansion—and the health care law as a whole—has nothing in common with “universal health insurance coverage.” Nevertheless, the motive is clear: it aims to limit the ability of the federal government to impose requirements on the states to expand health coverage.

The majority ruling in its favor of the legislation is an indication of a general consensus for the Affordable Care Act within the ruling political establishment. Roberts clearly made a highly political decision aimed at ensuring that the law was not overturned.

The differences within the ruling establishment over the bill have nothing to do with improving the health and lives of ordinary Americans, and everything to do with how best to impose the type of savage cuts demanded by the financial elite in health care and other social programs.

A solution to the very real health care crisis faced by millions of working people and their families is not to be found in any of the institutions of the bourgeois state or in either big business party, Democrat or Republican. The answer lies in putting an end to the privately owned health care corporations and medicine-for-profit and the establishing of genuine, socialized medicine.

*

FAIR Legislative Update March 29, 2010
Senate Blocks Senator Sessions’ Final Attempt to Fix Immigration Loopholes in Health Care Bill
In the final round of the year-long health care debate, the Senate took up the House’s reconciliation bill last Sunday. H.R. 4782, the “Health Care and Education Affordability and Reconciliation Act,” amends the original Senate bill with “fixes” the House has negotiated with the Senate over the past several weeks. The Senate passed the bill by a 56-43 vote, and although many changes were made, lawmakers failed to fix the major immigration-related problems despite the efforts of true immigration reformers. (The Associated Press, March 26, 2010).
Senate Republicans offered dozens of amendments to the reconciliation bill, but each proposal was rejected. FAIR worked with Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) on an amendment that would significantly improve the immigration policy reflected in the bill. Last Thursday, Sessions introduced the amendment (Amendment 3701), which would ensure that Americans are not required to pay for the health benefits for illegal aliens by requiring the use of an effective eligibility verification system. The amendment would do two things:
  • It would require the use of a meaningful and effective verification system to ensure that illegal aliens will notbe able to access taxpayer-funded tax subsidies created by the bill;
  • It would maintain the 5-year waiting period in current law so that immigrants must pay into the system before they are able to receive taxpayer-funded health benefits. The 5-year waiting period is critical because it embodies the principle that immigrants should not become a public charge – or burden – to the American people.
The Senate ultimately chose not to close the significant immigration policy loopholes in the health care reconciliation bill by rejecting the Sessions amendment by a vote of 55 – 43. (Vote #95, March 25, 2010).

*

Illegals Receiving Health Care

CNN INTERVIEW OF LYING LA RAZA PELOSI ON HEALTHCARE TO ILLEGALS

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


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


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


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


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

*

THE LA RAZA DEMS AT WORK! CALL THEM TODAY! SEND THEM PACKING BACK TO MEXICO!

*

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*

The politics of Healthcare Reform

from the AP -

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

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

Lawbreaking bordercrossers and deportation fugitives would be spared.

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

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

*

QUOTE FROM JOHN EDWARDS CAMPAIGN MANAGER

"Barack Obama's kind of change is where you sit down and you cut a deal with the corporate world," Edwards Campaign Manager David Bonior said during an interview with MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough. "If you look at his record in Illinois when he had a major — sponsored a major health bill that's what he did. He watered down with the help of the corporate lobbyist and they got a weak product out of that."

Scarborough asked: "Are you saying that Barack Obama is a sellout to corporate interests?"

Bonior replied: "He was four years ago in Illinois. All you have to do is look at the legislation I'm referring to."

Bonior was referring to health care legislation that Obama was instrumental in passing when he was an Illinois state senator five years ago, in part because he worked with insurance companies to make additions to the bill that would ensure their approval of the measure.

*

WILL MEXICO BANKRUPT AMERICA LIKE IT HAS MEXIFORNIA?


 


OBAMA'S OPEN NARCOMEX BORDER - Homeland Security: Border Patrol agent killed, another wounded in Ariz. - Washington Times

Homeland Security: Border Patrol agent killed, another wounded in Ariz. - Washington Times

HURT: Obama the debater: Making Jimmy Carter look awesome - Washington Times - WITH THE VOTES OF MY PARTY BASE of ILLEGALS, I CAN CON LEGALS AGAIN AND STILL CALL IN IT "CHANGE"!

HURT: Obama the debater: Making Jimmy Carter look awesome - Washington Times

Romney attacks Obama's 'trickle down government' in first debate - Washington Times - IS OBAMA'S CON JOB OF "CHANGE" NOW OVER?

Romney attacks Obama's 'trickle down government' in first debate - Washington Times


MEXICO HAS VOWED THAT LA RAZA WILL REELECT OBAMA!

DO A SEARCH FOR OBAMA and THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA, which operates out of the Obama White House under CECILIA MUNOZ.

VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY....? LOOK AROUND YOU, HOW MANY JOBS DO YOU FIND NON-HISPANICS IN?