A few million more people added to America here and a few million more added there, and pretty soon, your kids face another 50 million foreign-born legal immigrants within 40 years. We already feature 45,000,000 (million) foreign-born in America today. In other words, our country isn’t our country while it becomes everybody else’s country.
The total population load with 140 million people by 2050. Is that okay with you and your kids? Have you asked them?
In this ongoing interview with executive director David Durham of www.Balance.org , you might get the queasy feeling that your country won’t make it through another 50 million legal immigrants.
Aren’t we already packed into our overloaded, over-crowded, over gridlocked, over-air polluted, over-congested, and over-crime-ridden cities in 2019? Aren’t our National Parks overwhelmed? Aren’t our skies filled with too many planes creating too many chem-trails? Aren’t our factories belching out enough air pollution to give all of us a case of cancer? Aren’t our soils overwhelmed with crops? Anybody facing water shortages in California and Florida?
“Legal Immigration will add over 50 Million Immigrants to U.S. population by 2060,” said Durham. “About three times more than Illegal, given current trends (U.S. Census/CIS analysis, S. Camarota, “Immigration to Add 75 Million by 2060”) with all the Negative Environmental and Budgetary Consequences BALANCE has documented.
“But if we intensify our efforts NOW, we can get reductions just after the 2020 election. After all, candidates are already running hard for the 2020 Election.
“Important to note that the recently passed funding Bill will likely increase both legal and illegal immigration, because it gives illegal immigrants the right to stay in the U.S.A. if they bring in or house — i.e., “sponsor” — an unaccompanied minor child (UAC).”
“Specifically, section 224 of that act states:
(a) None of the funds provided by this Act or any other Act, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States derived by the collection of fees available to the components funded by this Act, may be used by the Secretary of Homeland Security to place in detention, remove, refer for a decision whether to initiate removal proceedings, or initiate removal proceedings against a sponsor, potential sponsor, or member of a household of a sponsor or potential sponsor of an unaccompanied alien child (as defined in section 462(g) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g)) based on information shared by the Secretary of Health and Human Service. ‘Think about the Children.’” [Emphasis Added] Andrew R. Arthur, cis.org 2/16/19
(b) This provision is de facto an incentive to Trafficking UACs (“The Worst Provision in the Funding Bill; Think about the children,” A. Arthur, cis.org).
“The Bill adds additional Legal Immigration “Slots” which are yet another incentive to continued Mass Illegal Immigration,” said Durham. “That is why it is essential to push for ending illegal immigration and for a Zero-Net Moratorium on Legal simultaneously.
“Though the Funding Bill was a setback for BALANCE’s U.S. Population Stabilization Advocacy, it is essential we keep pushing our Initiative! We reiterate, the Politicians are already involved in pushing to be elected or re-elected in 2020 and we can influence them.”
So please contact Representatives and Candidates NOW, and demand funding for The Wall, an end to Catch and Release and Chain Migration and Anchor Baby citizenship, implementation of e-Verify, and above all, enactment of an all-Categories-included Zero-NET MORATORIUM (i.e., where Immigration equals Emigration) on Legal Immigration!
Do you want your children to face the ominous ecological, sociological and cultural clashes they will encounter with an added 50 million legal immigrants? Do you want your kids to face 100 different languages in your schools? In Denver, my city, we must contend with 173 different languages in our classrooms. Do you want to pay ever-increasing amounts of your taxes toward housing, feeding, medicating, educating and caring for 50 million foreign-born immigrants who lack any qualifications, any cultural affinity, and/or any educational abilities to contribute to our first world economy and society?
If you think the future will be pretty for your kids, just look at what’s happening in Detroit-istan, Minneapolis-istan, Miami-istan, Los Angeles-Mexico or the murder capital of America—Chicago. If you think the 60,000 plus homeless living in tent cities in Los Angeles and 11,000 homeless in San Francisco can’t be solved, how do you think we will solve millions of immigrants from Africa, Indochina, India, Mexico and heaven knows where else in the world?
It’s time for a total shutdown of all immigration for 20 years or more. It’s time to take a stand. Find out how you can empower yourself by joining www.Balance.org.
More than 7-in-10 households headed by immigrants in the state
of California are on taxpayer-funded welfare, a new study reveals.
latest Census Bureau data analyzed by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)
finds that about 72 percent of households headed by noncitizens and immigrants
use one or more forms of taxpayer-funded welfare programs in California — the
number one immigrant-receiving state in the U.S. JOHN BINDER
Two groups of Central American migrants made separate
marches on the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana Tuesday, demanding that they be processed
through the asylum system more quickly and in greater numbers, that
deportations be halted and that President Trumpeither let them into the country or pay them $50,000
each to go home. MONICA SHOWALTER
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
"According to various estimates, American taxpayers spend
from 110 to 260 billion dollars a year to support illegal
aliens. This large discrepancy is due to exactly how to count, and
who exactly counts." GARY GINDLER
“We have to act now because both parties
failed in the past. Many Democrats
want open borders because they see illegal aliens as future voters. Many
donor-class Republicans have tolerated illegal immigration because of business
demand for cheap labor. That is why both parties have overlooked the laws they
voted to pass and ignored the wishes of the American people.” Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News
border wall will cost upwards of $25 billion. Democrats have the audacity to
say that the wall is too expensive. Meanwhile, Democrats shower illegal aliens
with $135 billion annually in
giveaways. How can Democrats, with a straight face, tell us that $25 billion is
too much?”LLOYD MARCUS / AMERICAN THINKER
All of us have to thank Nancy Pelosi. She turned out to
be not only the speaker of the House of Representatives, but also an excellent
salesperson. Thanks to her ill conceived tricks, the advertisement
of the annual presidential State of the Union (SOTU) address to the Congress
reached unprecedented heights.
If earlier such traditional performances were simply routine, and
only a few people outside Washington were interested, then this year, the
situation (thanks to Pelosi) was significantly different. She
invited Trump to speak on January 3, 2019, then "canceled" her
invitation on January 16. Then the partial government shutdown
ended, and the SOTU was rescheduled to February 5.
Pelosi's request for a cancelation of this traditional
presidential address was an unprecedented and unheard of scandal, which ignores
a hundred-year-old tradition. She was successful in postponing the
presidential address, but that was a classic example of a Pyrrhic victory (hat
tip: Ronald Cherry). Trump could have used this opportunity for his
advantage. He talked about the economy, record low unemployment numbers,
legal immigration, and foreign policy. What he spent less time on
than he should have is the State of Illegalia.
Unfortunately, most Americans are not aware of such a
state. No, it is not the 51st state in the Union; instead, it is a
satellite substate within every legitimate state of the Union.
For example, in the state of California alone, there are
about 1.2 million children born out of "tourism" of pregnant illegal
aliens. These are official hospital data. For comparison,
the population of the legitimate state of Wyoming is about 600,000 people.
That is, inside the state of California, there is a substate — the
State of Illegalia — whose population is twice the state of Wyoming.
California's State of Illegalia is not alone. All
states of the Union contain within them, hidden from prying eyes, substates of
Illegalia. In Illinois, there are 174,000 illegal
children. For comparison, the popular among legal immigrants Chicago
North Shore area contains just half of Illegalia's population —
86,000. In the state of New York, there are 224,000 such
children. For comparison, only 36,000 people live in the popular
among legal immigrants Brighton Beach area of New York City.
This confrontation is obviously a losing matter for the Democrats. They
openly position themselves as a party that protects illegal aliens and distance
themselves from the protection of American citizens. Pelosi did not
want to give Trump the podium, which he could and did use to once again turn to
the common sense of the American people. Whenever Trump speaks, he
speaks directly to American citizens, and not through the filter of mass
After the Democrats attempted to destroy a hundred-year-old
tradition, Trump could have made some unconventional moves, too. In
order to emphasize this talk about the States of Illegalia, he could have
invited some non-traditional guests to the SOTU address.
The composition of these guests would be the main headache of the
Imagine guest seats filled with parents of those American children
who were killed by the citizens of the State of Illegalia — by illegal
aliens. Some of them were murdered directly, and some indirectly —
with the help of drugs transported across the border with Mexico in tons.
Also, several crying 15-year-old girls from South America could be
invited, who were secretly brought by human-traffickers across the southern
border for underground brothels in the State of Illegalia. Moreover,
President Trump could end the tradition of the one-man-show and give the floor
to them all in turn.
Trump could also give the floor to American doctors, who will tell
the public what diseases they face in the states of Illegalia. Many
of these diseases were practically eliminated in America soon after the Second
World War — measles, scarlet fever, lice, tuberculosis,
syphilis. However, these diseases are returning to America, and they
are penetrating — initially through the open border with Mexico, and then
through the States of Illegalia. Also, there are numerous cases of
AIDS and hepatitis, plus widespread rape of women of all ages.
The U.S. Border Patrol guards would then be invited to the
podium. They would bring with them a few rugs — the rugs Muslims use
to pray. Recently, border guards have been finding more and more
such rugs in the border zones of Arizona and Texas. Why should
representatives of the "peaceful religion" get into America through
the State of Illegalia? Why resort to such
infiltration? What is the level of cooperation between sharia states
and the State of Illegalia?
Trump could also go to extremes and order a baker's dozen
handcuffed MS-13 gang members, with the most evil faces, entirely covered with
scary tattoos, to be seated right next to Democrats' guests for the
SOTU. These bandits — citizens of the State of Illegalia — could
play an excellent backdrop to Trump's pitch for the country's sovereignty.
According to various estimates, American taxpayers spend from
110 to 260 billion dollars a year to support illegal aliens. This
large discrepancy is due to exactly how to count, and who exactly counts. However, regardless of who makes the
estimates and how, all calculations are one in one: the balance is
negative. That is, illegal aliens receive more from American society
than they give, at least 100 billion dollars a year. This number is
the budget of the State of Illegalia.
The Democrats have long represented the interests of the states of
Illegalia, and not the citizens of the states of the Union. We must
hope that Pelosi will play her role to the end.
“Through love of having
children, we are going to take over.”
Hispanic Family Values?
Runaway illegitimacy is creating a new U.S. underclass.
By Heather Mac Donald
Unless the life chances
of children raised by single mothers suddenly improve, the explosive growth of
the U.S. Hispanic population over the next couple of decades does not bode well
for American social stability. Hispanic immigrants bring near–Third World
levels of fertility to America, coupled with what were once thought to be First
World levels of illegitimacy. (In fact, family breakdown is higher in many Hispanic
countries than here.) Nearly half of the children born to Hispanic mothers in
the U.S. are born out of wedlock, a proportion that has been increasing rapidly
with no signs of slowing down. Given
what psychologists and sociologists now know about the much higher likelihood
of social pathology among those who grow up in single-mother households, the
Hispanic baby boom is certain to produce more juvenile delinquents, more school
failure, more welfare use, and more teen pregnancy in the future.
The government social-services sector has already latched
onto this new client base; as the Hispanic population expands, so will the
demands for a larger welfare state. Since conservative open-borders advocates
have yet to acknowledge the facts of Hispanic family breakdown, there is no way
to know what their solution to it is. But they had better come up with one
quickly, because the problem is here—and growing.
The dimensions of the
Hispanic baby boom are startling. The Hispanic birthrate is twice as high as
that of the rest of the American population. That high fertility rate—even more than unbounded
levels of immigration—will fuel the rapid Hispanic population boom in the
coming decades. By 2050, the Latino population will have tripled, the Census
Bureau projects. One in four Americans will be
Hispanic by mid-century, twice the current ratio. In states such as California
and Texas, Hispanics will be in the clear majority. Nationally, whites will drop from
near 70 percent of the total population in 2000 to just half by 2050. Hispanics
will account for 46 percent of the nation’s added population over the next two
decades, the Pew Hispanic Center reports.
But it’s the fertility surge among unwed Hispanics that
should worry policymakers. Hispanic women have the highest unmarried birthrate
in the country—over three times that of whites and Asians, and nearly one and a
half times that of black women, according to the Centers for Disease Control. Every 1,000 unmarried Hispanic women bore 92 children in 2003 (the
latest year for which data exist), compared with 28 children for every 1,000
unmarried white women, 22 for every 1,000 unmarried Asian women, and 66 for
every 1,000 unmarried black women. Forty-five percent of all Hispanic births occur outside of
marriage, compared with 24 percent of white births and 15 percent of Asian
births. Only the percentage of black out-of-wedlock births—68 percent—exceeds
the Hispanic rate. But the black population is not going to triple over the
next few decades.
As if the unmarried Hispanic birthrate weren’t worrisome
enough, it is increasing faster than among other groups. It jumped 5 percent
from 2002 to 2003, whereas the rate for other unmarried women remained flat.
Couple the high and increasing illegitimacy rate of Hispanics with their higher
overall fertility rate, and you have a recipe for unstoppable family breakdown.
The only bright news in this demographic disaster story
concerns teen births. Overall teen childbearing in the U.S. declined for the
12th year in a row in 2003, having dropped by more than a third since 1991. Yet
even here, Hispanics remain a cause for concern. The rate of childbirth for
Mexican teenagers, who come from by far the largest and fastest-growing
immigrant population, greatly outstrips every other group. The Mexican teen
birthrate is 93 births per every 1,000 girls, compared with 27 births for every
1,000 white girls, 17 births for every 1,000 Asian girls, and 65 births for
every 1,000 black girls. To put these numbers into international perspective,
Japan’s teen birthrate is 3.9, Italy’s is 6.9, and France’s is 10. Even though
the outsize U.S. teen birthrate is dropping, it continues to inflict
unnecessary costs on the country, to which Hispanics contribute
To grasp the reality behind those numbers, one need only talk
to people working on the front lines of family breakdown. Social workers in
Southern California, the national epicenter for illegal Hispanic immigrants and
their progeny, are in despair over the epidemic of single parenting. Not only has illegitimacy become perfectly acceptable, they say, but so
has the resort to welfare and social services to cope with it.
Dr. Ana Sanchez delivers babies at St. Joseph’s Hospital in
the city of Orange, California, many of them to Hispanic teenagers. To her
dismay, they view having a child at their age as normal. A recent patient just
had her second baby at age 17; the baby’s father is in jail. But what is “most
alarming,” Sanchez says, is that the “teens’ parents view having babies outside
of marriage as normal, too. A lot of the grandmothers are single as well; they
never married, or they had successive partners. So the mom sends the message to
her daughter that it’s okay to have children out of wedlock.”
Sanchez feels almost personally involved in the problem: “I’m
Hispanic myself. I wish I could find out what the Asians are doing right.” She
guesses that Asian parents’ passion for education inoculates their children
against teen pregnancy and the underclass trap. “Hispanics are not picking that
up like the Asian kids,” she sighs.
Conservatives who support open borders are fond of invoking
“Hispanic family values” as a benefit of unlimited Hispanic immigration.
Marriage is clearly no longer one of those family values. But other kinds of
traditional Hispanic values have survived—not all of them necessarily ideal in
a modern economy, however. One of them is the importance of having children
early and often. “It’s considered almost a badge of honor for a young girl to
have a baby,” says Peggy Schulze of Chrysalis House, an adoption agency in
Fresno. (Fresno has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in California,
typical of the state’s heavily Hispanic farm districts.) It is almost
impossible to persuade young single Hispanic mothers to give up their children
for adoption, Schulze says. “The attitude is: ‘How could you give away your baby?’
I don’t know how to break through.”
The most powerful Hispanic family value—the tight-knit
extended family—facilitates unwed child rearing. A single mother’s relatives
often step in to make up for the absence of the baby’s father. I asked Mona, a
19-year-old parishioner at St. Joseph’s Church in Santa Ana, California, if she
knew any single mothers. She laughed: “There are so many I can’t even name
them.” Two of her cousins, aged 25 and 19, have children without having
husbands. The situation didn’t seem to trouble this churchgoer too much.
“They’ll be strong enough to raise them. It’s totally okay with us,” she said.
“We’re very close; we’re there to support them. They’ll do just fine.”
As Mona’s family suggests, out-of-wedlock child rearing among
Hispanics is by no means confined to the underclass. The St. Joseph’s
parishioners are precisely the churchgoing, blue-collar workers whom
open-borders conservatives celebrate. Yet this community is as susceptible as
any other to illegitimacy. Fifty-year-old Irma and her husband, Rafael, came
legally from Mexico in the early 1970s. Rafael works in a meatpacking plant in
Brea; they have raised five husky boys who attend church with them. Yet Irma’s
sister—a homemaker like herself, also married to a factory hand—is now the
grandmother of two illegitimate children, one by each daughter. “I saw nothing
in the way my sister and her husband raised her children to explain it,” Irma
says. “She gave them everything.” One of the fathers of Irma’s young nieces has
four other children by a variety of different mothers. His construction wages
are being garnished for child support, but he is otherwise not involved in
raising his children.
The fathers of these illegitimate children are often
problematic in even more troubling ways. Social workers report that the
impregnators of younger Hispanic women are with some regularity their uncles,
not necessarily seen as a bad thing by the mother’s family. Alternatively, the
father may be the boyfriend of the girl’s mother, who then continues to stay
with the grandmother. Older men seek out young girls in
the belief that a virgin cannot get pregnant during her first intercourse, and
to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.
The tradition of starting families young and expand- ing them
quickly can come into conflict with more modern American mores. Ron Storm, the
director of the Hillview Acres foster-care home in Chino, tells of a
15-year-old girl who was taken away from the 21-year-old father of her child by
a local child-welfare department. The boyfriend went to jail, charged with
rape. But the girl’s parents complained about the agency’s interference, and
eventually both the girl and her boyfriend ended up going back to Mexico,
presumably to have more children. “At 15, as the Quinceañera tradition
celebrates, you’re considered ready for marriage,” says Storm. Or at least for
childbearing; the marriage part is disappearing.
But though older men continue to take advantage of younger
women, the age gap between the mother and the father of an illegitimate child
is quickly closing. Planned Parenthood of Orange and San Bernardino Counties
tries to teach young fathers to take responsibility for their children. “We’re
seeing a lot more 13- and 14-year-old fathers,” says Kathleen Collins, v.p. of
health education. The day before we spoke, Scott Montoya, an Orange County
sheriff’s deputy, arrested two 14-year-old boys who were bragging about having
sexual relations with a cafeteria worker from an Olive Garden restaurant. “It’s
now all about getting girls pregnant when you’re age 15,” he says. One
18-year-old in the Planned Parenthood fathers’ program has two children by two
different girls and is having sex with five others, says health worker Jason
Warner. “A lot of [the adolescent sexual behavior] has to do with getting
respect from one’s peers,” observes Warner.
Normally, the fathers, of whatever age, take off. “The father
may already be married or in prison or doing drugs,” says Amanda Gan, director
of operations for Toby’s House, a maternity home in Dana Point, California.
Mona, the 19-year-old parishioner at St. Joseph’s Church, says that the boys
who impregnated her two cousins are “nowhere to be found.” Her family knows
them but doesn’t know if they are working or in jail.
Two teen mothers at the Hillview Acres home represent the
outer edge of Hispanic family dysfunction. Yet many aspects of their lives are
typical. Though these teenagers’ own mothers were unusually callous and
irresponsible, the social milieu in which they were raised is not unusual.
Irene’s round, full face makes her look younger than her 14
years, certainly too young to be a mother. But her own mother’s boyfriend
repeatedly forced sex on her, with the mother’s acquiescence. The result was
Irene’s baby, Luz. Baby Luz has an uncle her own age, Irene’s new 13-month-old
brother. Like Irene, Irene’s mother had her first child at 14, and produced
five more over the next 16 years, all of whom went into foster care. Irene’s
father committed suicide before she was old enough to know him. The four
fathers of her siblings are out of the picture, too: one of them, the father of
her seven-year-old brother and five-year-old sister, was deported back to
Mexico after he showed up drunk for a visit with his children, in violation of
his probation conditions.
Irene is serene and articulate—remarkably so, considering
that in her peripatetic early life in Orange County she went to school maybe
twice a week. She likes to sing and to read books that are sad, she says,
especially books by Dave Pelzer, a child-abuse victim who has published three
best-selling memoirs about his childhood trauma. She says she will never get
married: “I don’t want another man in my life. I don’t want that experience
Eighteen-year-old Jessica at least escaped rape, but her
family experiences were bad enough. The large-limbed young woman, whose long
hair is pulled back tightly from her heart-shaped face, grew up in the
predominantly Hispanic farming community of Indio in the Coachella Valley. She
started “partying hard” in fifth grade, she says—at around the same time that
her mother, separated from her father, began using drugs and going clubbing. By
the eighth grade, Jessica and her mother were drinking and smoking marijuana
together. Jessica’s family had known her boyfriend’s family since she was four;
when she had her first child by him—she was 14 and he was 21—her mother
declared philosophically that she had always known that it would happen. “It
was okay with her, so long as he continued to give her drugs.”
Jessica originally got pregnant to try to clean up her life,
she says. “I knew what I was doing was not okay, so having a baby was a way for
me to stop doing what I was doing. In that sense, the baby was planned.” She
has not used drugs since her first pregnancy, though she occasionally drinks.
After her daughter was born, she went to live with her boyfriend in a filthy
trailer without plumbing; they scrounged food from dumpsters, despite the
income from his illegal drug business. They planned to get married, but by the
time she got pregnant again with a son, “We were having a lot of problems. We’d
be holding hands, and he’d be looking at other girls. I didn’t want him to
touch me.” Eventually, the county welfare agency removed her and put her in
foster care with her two children.
Both Jessica and her caddish former boyfriend illustrate the
evanescence of the celebrated Hispanic “family values.” Her boyfriend’s family
could not be more traditional. Two years ago, Jessica went back to Mexico to
celebrate her boyfriend’s parents’ 25th wedding anniversary and the renewal of
their wedding vows. Jessica’s own mother got married at 15 to her father, who
was ten years her senior. Her father would not let his wife work; she was a
“stay-at-home wife,” Jessica says. But don’t blame the move to the U.S. for the
behavior of younger generations; the family crack-up is happening even faster
in Latin America.
Jessica’s mother may have been particularly negligent, but
Jessica’s experiences are not so radically different from those of her peers.
“Everybody’s having babies now,” she says. “The Coachella Valley is filled with
girls’ pregnancies. Some girls live with their babies’ dads; they consider them
their husbands.” These cohabiting relationships rarely last, however, and a new
cohort of fatherless children goes out into the world.
Despite the strong family support, the prevalence of single
parenting among Hispanics is producing the inevitable slide into the welfare
system. “The girls aren’t marrying the guys, so they are married to the state,”
Dr. Sanchez observes. Hispanics now dominate the federal Women, Infants, and
Children free food program; Hispanic enrollment grew over 25 percent from 1996
to 2002, while black enrollment dropped 12 percent and white enrollment dropped
6.5 percent. Illegal immigrants can get WIC and other welfare programs for
their American-born children. If Congress follows President Bush’s urging and
grants amnesty to most of the 11 million illegal aliens in the country today,
expect the welfare rolls to skyrocket as the parents themselves become
Amy Braun works for Mary’s Shelter, a home for young single
mothers who are homeless or in crisis, in Orange County, California. It has
become “culturally okay” for the Hispanic population to use the shelter and welfare
system, Braun says. A case manager at a program for pregnant homeless women in
the city of Orange observes the same acculturation to the social-services
sector, with its grievance mongering and sense of victimhood. “I’ll have women
in my office on their fifth child, when the others have already been placed in
foster care,” says Anita Berry of Casa Teresa. “There’s nothing shameful about
having multiple children that you can’t care for, and to be pregnant again,
because then you can blame the system.”
The consequences of family breakdown are now being passed
down from one generation to the next, in an echo of the black underclass. “The
problems are deeper and wider,” says Berry. “Now you’re getting the second
generation of foster care and group home residents. The dysfunction is
The social-services complex has responded with barely
concealed enthusiasm to this new flood of clients. As Hispanic social problems
increase, so will the government sector that ministers to them. In July, a New
York Times editorial, titled young latinas and a cry for help, pointed out the
elevated high school dropout rates and birthrates among Hispanic girls. A
quarter of all Latinas are mothers by the age of 20, reported the Times. With
the usual melodrama that accompanies the pitch for more government services,
the Times designated young Latinas as “endangered” in the same breath that it
disclosed that they are one of the fastest-growing segments of the population.
“The time to help is now,” said the Times—by which it means ratcheting up the
taxpayer-subsidized social-work industry.
In response to the editorial, Carmen Barroso, regional
director of International Planned Parenthood Federation/Western Hemisphere
Region, proclaimed in a letter to the editor the “urgent need for health care
providers, educators and advocates to join the sexual and reproductive health
movement to ensure the fundamental right to services for young Latinas.”
Wherever these “fundamental rights” might come from,
Barroso’s call nevertheless seems quite superfluous, since there is no shortage
of taxpayer-funded “services” for troubled Latinas—or Latinos. The schools in
California’s San Joaquin Valley have day care for their students’ babies,
reports Peggy Schulze of Chrysalis House. “The girls get whatever they
need—welfare, medical care.” Advocates for young unwed moms in New York’s South
Bronx are likewise agitating for more day-care centers in high schools there,
reports El Diario/La Prensa. A bill now in Congress, the Latina Adolescent Suicide
Prevention Act, aims to channel $10 million to “culturally competent” social
agencies to improve the self-esteem of Latina girls and to provide “support
services” to their families and friends if they contemplate suicide.
The trendy “case management” concept, in which individual
“cases” become the focal point around which a solar system of social workers
revolves, has even reached heavily Hispanic elementary and middle schools. “We
have a coordinator, who brings in a collaboration of agencies to deal with the
issues that don’t allow a student to meet his academic goals, such as domestic
violence or drugs,” explains Sylvia Rentria, director of the Family Resource
Center at Berendo Middle School in Los Angeles. “We can provide individual
therapy.” Rentria offers the same program at nearby Hoover Elementary School
for up to 100 students.
This July, Rentria launched a new session of Berendo’s
Violence Intervention Program for parents of children who are showing signs of
gang involvement and other antisocial behavior. Ghady M., 55 and a “madre
soltera” (single mother), like most of the mothers in the program, has been
called in because her 16-year-old son, Christian, has been throwing gang signs
at school, cutting half his classes, and ending up in the counseling office
every day. The illegal Guatemalan is separated from her partner, who was “muy
malo,” she says; he was probably responsible for her many missing teeth. (The
detectives in the heavily Hispanic Rampart Division of the Los Angeles Police
Department, which includes the Berendo school, spend inordinate amounts of time
on domestic violence cases.) Though Ghady used to work in a factory on Broadway
in downtown L.A.— often referred to as Little Mexico City—she now collects $580
in welfare payments and $270 in food stamps for her two American-born children.
Christian is a husky smart aleck in a big white T-shirt; his
fashionably pomaded hair stands straight up. He goes to school but doesn’t do
homework, he grins; and though he is not in a gang, he says, he has friends who
are. Keeping Ghady and Christian company at the Violence Intervention Program
is Ghady’s grandniece, Carrie, a lively ten-year-old. Carrie lives with her
26-year-old mother but does not know her father, who also sired her 12-year-old
brother. Her five-year-old brother has a different father.
Yet for all these markers of social dysfunction, fatherless
Hispanic families differ from the black underclass in one significant area:
many of the mothers and the absent fathers work, even despite growing welfare
use. The former boyfriend of Jessica, the 18-year-old mother at the Hillview
Acres foster home, works in construction and moonlights on insulation jobs;
whether he still deals drugs is unknown. Jessica is postponing joining her
father in Texas until she finishes high school, because once she moves in with
him, she will feel obligated to get a job to help the family finances. The
mother of Hillview’s 14-year-old Irene used to fix soda machines in Anaheim,
California, though she got fired because she was lazy, Irene says. Now, under
court compulsion, she works in a Lunchables factory in Santa Ana, a condition
of getting her children back from foster care. The 18-year-old Lothario and
father of two, whom Planned Parenthood’s Jason Warner is trying to counsel,
works at a pet store. The mother of Carrie, the vivacious ten-year-old sitting
in on Berendo Middle School’s Violence Intervention Program, makes pizza at a
Papa John’s pizza outlet.
How these two value systems—a lingering work ethic and
underclass mating norms—will interact in the future is anyone’s guess. Orange
County sheriff’s deputy Montoya says that the older Hispanic generation’s work
ethic is fast disappearing among the gangbanging youngsters whom he sees. “Now,
it’s all about fast money, drugs, and sex.” It may be that the willingness to work
will plummet along with marriage rates, leading to even greater social problems
than are now rife among Hispanics. Or it may be that the two contrasting
practices will remain on parallel tracks, creating a new kind of underclass: a
culture that tolerates free-floating men who impregnate women and leave, like
the vast majority of black men, yet who still labor in the noncriminal economy.
The question is whether, if the disposition to work remains relatively strong,
a working parent will inoculate his or her illegitimate children against the
worst degradations that plague black ghettos.
From an intellectual standpoint, this is a fascinating social
experiment, one that academicians are—predictably—not attuned to. But the
consequences will be more than intellectual: they may severely strain the
social fabric. Nevertheless, it is an experiment that we seem destined to see
to its end. Tisha Roberts, a supervisor at an Orange County, California,
institution that assists children in foster care, has given up hope that the
illegitimacy rate will taper off. “It’s going to continue to grow,” she says,
“until we can put birth control in the water.”
"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!
Speaking at a naturalization ceremony in Texas on March 18, former President George W. Bush said immigration to America “is a blessing and a strength.” He also said that “borders need to be respected,” and praised the work of border patrol agents, but that’s not what the media seized upon.
The Washington Post inserted “blessing and strength” into the lead of its story, headlined “George W. Bush: ‘May we never forget that immigration is a blessing and a strength’,” also working into the first sentence the following dig at Donald Trump: “a message that sharply contrasts with President Trump’s rhetoric on the issue.”
CNN Politics covered the speech, making sure to note “the rhetoric and policy positions from Bush came in contrast to much of the modern Republican Party and President Donald Trump.” The BBC said, “Mr Bush’s comments were seen as an implicit rebuke to President Donald Trump’s administration.”
And on and on. CBS News: “Bush urges politicians to ‘dial down rhetoric’ on immigration.” The Boston Globe: “described immigration as ‘a blessing and a strength,’ a message that sharply contrasts with President Trump’s rhetoric on the issue.” People: “it was a soft rebuke of the prevailing anti-immigrant position of some members of the Republican Party, including President Donald Trump.”
Get it? George W. Bush has won his grim battle with history. Various photos showed him inviting dozens of new citizens up to the podium, including Muslims in headscarves, Hispanics, and Africans. Apparently including anyone of European descent would have been bad optics.
And never mind that if Bush II hadn’t bombed, invaded and occupied Iraq, the Middle East might be relatively stable today. Iraq, for all its problems, would nonetheless provide a strategic counterweight to Iran. We would have saved trillions of dollars and spared millions of lives, and additional millions of refugees would have stayed home.
What’s Really Happening The problem with all this media-spun anti-Trump “wisdom” from Bush is simple: President Trump is right, and the spin is wrong.
It is true that America was enriched in the past by waves of new immigrants. It is true that in the past, these waves of new immigrants benefited the economy. And it is true that even now, if immigration were brought under control, reduced somewhat, and reformed so that only highly skilled immigrants with a commitment to learning English were vetted and admitted, it would again be beneficial to our economy and enrich our culture. But that’s not what’s happening.
According to CarryingCapacity.org, the United States “now accepts over one million legal immigrants each year, which is more than all of the other industrialized nations in the world, combined.” Additionally, according to ImmigrationCounters.com, nearly 28 million illegal immigrants currently live in the United States.
Attempting to quantify the costs and benefits of immigration into the United States is not easy. According to a study conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, the cost to America taxpayers to provide illegal immigrants government funded education, health care, justice and law enforcement, public assistance, and general government services is estimated at $135 billion per year. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “63% of non-citizen households access welfare programs compared to 35% of native households.”
Statistics abound—and for every study suggesting that America’s immigration is creating a burden on the economy, there is another that concludes the opposite, that immigrants continue to provide a net economic benefit to the economy. So rather than provide yet another regurgitation of battling statistics, it is important to note some crucial qualitative differences between immigration trends in America today, compared with past centuries in America.
Why Immigration to America Today Is Different
Immigrants today are not coming from nations of equal or greater economic achievement. In the past, immigrants from Europe, for the most part, were emigrating from nations that were as advanced as the United States was, if not more so. Today the overwhelming majority of immigrants are coming from developing nations.
Immigrants in the past came primarily from European nations which had cultural values—educational, religious, and political—that were, if not nearly identical to American cultural values, at shared a similar trajectory towards achieving those values. Immigrants today come from nations that, relatively speaking, have far fewer cultural similarities to America than past waves of immigrants.
Immigrants today, for the most part, are coming from nations that are rapidly increasing in population and, in aggregate, dwarf the United States in population. Related to this is the fact that in the past, the people already in America were themselves rapidly increasing in population, but this is no longer the case, except among populations of recently arrived immigrants.
Immigrants today arrive via 10-hour hops on an airliner. In the past, waves of immigrants spent 10 months traversing land and sea in a journey of staggering expense and significant dangers. While this isn’t universally true, particularly for the overland migrants that cross America’s southern border, the general point stands: coming to America today does not require the commitment it required in the past.
Similarly, in the past, immigrants pretty much renounced their countries of origin. They made a one-way trip and they adopted the language and values of America. Today, retaining cultural unity with one’s country of origin is a few clicks on the internet, a cheap telephone call, an affordable airfare. Technology has greatly eroded the forces that used to impel immigrants to become Americans.
Immigrants in the past arrived in an America that had a voracious need for unskilled workers. Today the American economy is relentlessly automating jobs that used to require unskilled labor, and the American population already has a surplus of unskilled workers.
Immigrants today are arriving in a welfare state, where they are assured of food, shelter, and medical care that are, in general, orders of magnitude better than anything available to them in their native countries. This creates a completely different incentive to today’s immigrants. In past centuries, immigrants came to America to find freedom and to work. Today they are offered a smorgasbord of taxpayer-funded social services.
Immigrant students today—especially in the coastal urban centers where most of them settle—enter a public education system that teaches them with a reverse-racist, anti-capitalist bias. They are taught in our public schools not to assimilate, but to “celebrate diversity”; not to earn opportunities through hard work, but through fighting discrimination. They are taught, often in their native language, that they have arrived in a nation dominated by racist and sexist white males, who exploit the world to amass evil profits.
Recipes for Disaster These final three points are the most troublesome. If immigration reform advocates made those a priority and addressed them decisively with new policies, the other concerns might be manageable. But we must address the problems caused by immigrants with low job-skills, who encounter the welfare state, and are subjected to anti-Western cultural messaging.
To suggest Americans should resist competing with highly skilled immigrants, for example, is not only xenophobic, but it smacks of an entitlement mentality. Allowing immigrants into the United States who are qualified to join our ranks of scientists, engineers, researchers and doctors will only help our economy and overall standard of living. Allowing unskilled immigrants into this country, however, when we already have tens of millions of unskilled workers who are either in our prisons or unemployed and collecting welfare—who themselves could perform this work—is much more likely to constitute a drain on our economy.
Similarly, it is a recipe for disaster to allow immigrants into an America where the curricula in K-12 schools and universities—beholden to powerful left-wing teachers and faculty unions—indoctrinates immigrants to resent the alleged evils of capitalism and the incorrigible racist, sexist core of our American culture. This is particularly true when accompanying this siren song of corruption is easy access to social services of all kinds, including welfare. If new immigrants are taught the cards are stacked against them, and at the same time they are offered a free ride that provides a standard of living many times greater than what they knew in the countries they came from, why work?
Clearly an increasing population, all else held equal, does cause overall economic expansion. It isn’t clear at all, however, that this is the optimal way to create economic expansion. First of all, global human population is destined to level off by 2050 anyway, so rather than expanding the population through immigration, economic policy needs to search for the answer as to how to continue to experience economic growth despite a stable, aging population. In Japan, they have already made this policy decision—with zero net immigration and the oldest population on earth, Japan leads the world in the development of androids that will, presumably, become caregivers to the elderly. Economic growth oriented towards improving the quality of life for the elderly is one example of a sustainable growth sector—economic growth dependent on an immigrant-fueled population expansion is not sustainable.
There is another factor, of course, that makes immigration today far more problematic than it was in previous generations. Now more than ever, mass immigration of unskilled economic migrants and political refugees has become a strategy to move America sharply to the Left by dramatically transforming the electorate.
What the establishment uniparty is doing in America today is a deliberate devaluation of American votes, and a deliberate thwarting of the political rule of Americans who have lived and worked in America for generations. Trump’s bellicosity may scare the soccer moms, but they along with everyone else who loves America ought to reflect on his actions instead of his tone. He is the only major politician in modern times who has tried to do anything to stop this. George W. Bush, God bless him, should stop letting the media use his words as weapons in their war against Trump.
Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact email@example.com.
Edward Ring is a Senior Fellow of the Center for American Greatness. He is a co-founder of the California Policy Center, a free-market think tank based in Southern California, where he served as their first president. He is a prolific writer on the topics of political reform and sustainable economic development. Ring, a fifth-generation Californian, has an undergraduate degree in political science from UC Davis, and an MBA in finance from the University of Southern California.
Gaffney: 'You Can't Assimilate Vast Numbers of People Who Don’t Want to be Part' of U.S.A.
Frank Gaffney. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
During a discussion about the need for immigrants to assimilate into American society and the spectre of sharia (Islamic law) in U.S. communities, Center for Security Policy Chairman Frank Gaffney said it is imperative to keep in mind "that you cannot assimilate vast numbers of people who simply don’t want to be part of your society." Gaffney, a former assistant secretary for Defense in the Reagan administration, added that Judge Jeanine Pirro is being suppressed because she dared to ask a question about the origins of the anti-Israel views expressed by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
When asked about assimilation during a March 20 interview on Breitbart News Daily, Gaffney said to host Alex Marlow, This topic "reminds me of the old story that conservatives are liberals who’ve been mugged by reality, and the thing you're describing, Alex, is being mugged by the reality that you cannot assimilate vast numbers of people who simply don’t want to be part of your society."
"They want to transform it into something very different and ultimately, at some point, you either resist or you submit," he said. "Submission is going to be pretty ugly, and it’s happening in parts of Europe already, and there’s more in the offing, I’m afraid. [Garbled] This rising tide of sharia supremacism, it’s chilling.”
He continued, "The trouble is, it’s not simply a problem in its own right, it’s a foretaste of what the Ilhan Omars and the Keith Ellisons and the André Carsons, Rashida Tlaibs, and so on, would have in mind for America, too, if they had their way. This is the really vexing problem of our time.”
“Again, not all Muslims want to live under sharia," said Gaffney. "They don’t want to impose it on the rest of us. But enough of them do and the authorities of the [Islamic] faith certainly do."
As for Judge Jeanine Pirro, whose program on the Fox News Channel has been suspended for a second week, Gaffney said, "Jeanine Pirro, who is a friend of mine and much-admired former public servant and now, extraordinary resource, on her program, Justice w/Judge Jeanine, was suspended last week and may be again this week, and maybe – who knows – indefinitely."
Jeanine Pirro. (Photo by Stephen Chernin/Getty Images)
“The faux-Fox [News Channel] is suppressing Jeanine Pirro explicitly – as you know, Alex – because she dared, even in a question, to connect the dots between what Ilhan Omar is doing with anti-Semitism, on the one hand, and the traditions, teachings, and practices of sharia, as we’ve come to know it," said Gaffney.
On her March 9 program, Jeanine Pirro said, “This is not who your party is" in reference to the Democrat Party. “Your party is not anti-Israel, [Omar] is. Think about this. She’s not getting this anti-Israel sentiment doctrine from the Democrat Party. So if it’s not rooted in the party, where is she getting it from? Think about it. Omar wears a hijab, which according to the Quran 33:59, tells women to cover so they won’t get molested."
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
“Is her adherence to this Islamic doctrine indicative of her adherence to sharia law, which in itself is antithetical to the United States Constitution?” said Pirro.
Comments and tweets made by Rep. Omar have been condemned by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) as "anti-Semitic" and "deeply offensive."
THE AZTLAN INVASION & THE LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY FOR MEXICAN SUPREMACY
“The radicals seek nothing less than secession from the United States whether to form their own sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification with Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost" territories in the American Southwest.”
MULTICULTURALISM, IMMIGRATION AND AZTLAN
By Maria Hsia Chang Professor of Political Science, University of Nevada Reno
One of the standard arguments invoked by those in favor of massive immigration into the United States is that our country is founded on immigrants who have always been successfully assimilated into America's mainstream culture and society. As one commentator put it, "Assimilation evokes the misty past of Ellis Island, through which millions entered, eventually seeing their descendants become as American as George Washington."1 Nothing more vividly testifies against that romantic faith in America's ability to continuously assimilate new members than the events of October 16, 1994 in Los Angeles. On that day, 70,000 people marched beneath "a sea of Mexican flags" protesting Proposition 187, a referendum measure that would deny many state benefits to illegal immigrants and their children. Two weeks later, more protestors marched down the street, this time carrying an American flag upside down. Both protests point to a disturbing and rising phenomenon of Chicano separatism in the United States — the product of a complex of forces, among which are multiculturalism and a generous immigration policy combined with a lax border control. The Problem Chicanos refer to "people of Mexican descent in the United States" or "Mexican Americans in general." Today, there are reasons to believe that Chicanos as a group are unlike previous immigrants in that they are more likely to remain unassimilated and unintegrated, whether by choice or circumstance — resulting in the formation of a separate quasi-nation within the United States. More than that, there are Chicano political activists who intend to marry cultural separateness with territorial and political self-determination. The more moderate among them aspire to the cultural and political autonomy of "home rule". The radicals seek nothing less than secession from the United States whether to form their own sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification with Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost" territories in the American Southwest.
Whatever their goals, what animates all of them is the dream of Aztlan. According to legend, Aztlan was the ancestral homeland of the Aztecs which they left in journeying southward to found Tenochtitlan, the center of their new civilization, which is today's Mexico City. Today, the "Nation of Aztlan" refers to the American southwestern states of California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, portions of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, which Chicano nationalists claim were stolen by the United States and must be reconquered (Reconquista) and reclaimed for Mexico. The myth of Aztlan was revived by Chicano political activists in the 1960s as a central symbol of Chicano nationalist ideology. In 1969, at the Chicano National Liberation Youth Conference in Denver, Rodolfo "Corky" Gonzales put forth a political document entitled El Plan de Aztlan (Spiritual Plan of Aztlan). The Plan is a clarion call to Mexican-Americans to form a separate Chicano nation: In the spirit of a new people that is conscious not only of its proud historial heritage, but also of the brutal "gringo" invasion of our territories, we, the Chicano inhabitants and civilizers of the nothern land of Aztlan from whence came our forefathers ...declare that the call of our blood is...our inevitable destiny.... Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops, and not to the foreign Europeans. We do not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent.... Brotherhood unites us, and love for our brothers makes us a people whose time has come .... With our heart in our hands and our hands in the soil, we declare the independence of our mestizo nation. We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan.
How Chicanos are Unlike Previous Immigrants Brent A. Nelson, writing in 1994, observed that in the 1980s America's Southwest had begun to be transformed into "a de facto nation" with its own culture, history, myth, geography, religion, education, and language. Whatever evidence there is indicates that Chicanos, as a group, are unlike previous waves of immigrants into the United States. In the first place, many Chicanos do not consider themselves immigrants at all because their people "have been here for 450 years" before the English, French, or Dutch. Before California and the Southwest were seized by the United States, they were the lands of Spain and Mexico. As late as 1780 the Spanish crown laid claim to territories from Florida to California, and on the far side of the Mississippi up to the Great Lakes and the Rockies. Mexico held title to much of Spanish possessions in the United States until the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American war in 1848. As a consequence, Mexicans "never accepted the borders drawn up by the 1848 treaty."
That history has created among Chicanos a feeling of resentment for being "a conquered people," made part of the United States against their will and by the force of arms. Their resentment is amply expressed by Voz Fronteriza, a Chicano student publication,
which referred to Border Patrol officers killed in the line of duty as "pigs (migra)" trying to defend "the false frontier."
Chicanos are also distinct from other immigrant groups because of the geographic proximity of their native country. Their physical proximity to Mexico gives Chicanos "the option of life in both Americas, in two places and in two cultures, something earlier immigrants never had." Geographic proximity and ease of transportation are augmented by the media. Radio and television keep the spoken language alive and current so that Spanish, unlike the native languages of previous immigrants into the United States, "shows no sign of fading."
A result of all that is the failure by Chicanos to be fully assimilated into the larger American society and culture. As Earl Shorris, author of Latinos: A Biography of the People, observed: "Latinos have been more resistant to the melting pot than any other group. Their entry en masse into the United States will test the limits of the American experiment...." The continuous influx of Mexican immigrants into the United States serve to continuously renew Chicano culture so that their sense of separateness will probably continue "far into the future...." There are other reasons for the failure of Chicano assimilation. Historically, a powerful force for assimilation was upward social mobility: Immigrants into the United States became assimilated as they rose in educational achievement and income. But today's post-industrial American economy, with its narrower paths to upward mobility, is making it more difficult for certain groups to improve their socioeconomic circumstances. Unionized factory jobs, which once provided a step up for the second generation of past waves of immigrants, have been disappearing for decades. Instead of the diamond-shaped economy of industrial America, the modern American economy is shaped like an hourglass. There is a good number of jobs for unskilled people at the bottom, a fair number of jobs for the highly educated at the top, but comparatively few jobs for those in the middle without a college education or special skills. To illustrate, a RAND Corporation study forecasts that 85 percent of California's new jobs will require post-secondary education. For a variety of reasons, the nationwide high-school dropout rate for Hispanics (the majority of whom are Chicano) is 30 percent — three times the rate for whites and twice the rate for blacks. Paradoxically, the dropout rate for Hispanics born in the United States is even higher than for young immigrants. Among Chicanos, high-school dropout rates actually rise between the second and third generations. Their low educational achievement accounts for why Chicanos as a group are poor despite being hardworking. In 1996, for the first time, Hispanic poverty rate began to exceed that of American blacks. In 1995, household income rose for every ethnic group except Hispanics, for whom it dropped 5 percent. Latinos now make up a quarter of the nation's poor people, and are more than three times as likely to be impoverished than whites. This decline in income has taken place despite high rates of labor-force participation by Latino men, and despite an emerging Latino middle class. In California, where Latinos now approach one-third of the population, their education levels are far lower than those of other immigrants, and they earn about half of what native-born Californians earn. This means that, for the first time in the history of American immigration, hard work is not leading to economic advancement because immigrants in service jobs face unrelenting labor-market pressure from more recently arrived immigrants who are eager to work for less. The narrowing of the pathways of upward mobility has implications for the children of recent Mexican immigrants. Their ascent into the middle-class mainstream will likely be blocked and they will join children of earlier black and Puerto Rican migrants as part of an expanded multiethnic underclass. Whereas first generation immigrants compare their circumstances to the Mexico that they left — and thereby feel immeasurably better off — their children and grandchildren will compare themelves to other U.S. groups. Given their lower educational achievement and income, that comparison will only lead to feelings of relative deprivation and resentment. They are unlikely to be content as maids, gardeners, or fruit pickers. Many young Latinos in the second and third generations see themselves as locked in irremediable conflict with white society, and are quick to deride successful Chicano students as "wannabes." For them, to study hard is to "act white" and exhibit group disloyalty. That attitude is part of the Chicano culture of resistance — a culture that actively resists assimilation into mainstream America. That culture is created, reinforced, and maintained by radical Chicano intellectuals, politicians, and the many Chicano Studies programs in U.S. colleges and universities. As examples, according to its editor, Elizabeth Martinez, the purpose of Five Hundred Years of Chicano History, a book used in over 300 schools throughout the West, is to "celebrate our resistance to being colonized and absorbed by racist empire builders." The book calls the INS and the Border Patrol "the Gestapo for Mexicans."
For Rodolfo Acuna, author of Occupied America: The Chicano's Struggle Toward Liberation, probably the most widely assigned text in U.S. Chicano Studies programs, the Anglo-American invasion of Mexico was "as vicious as that of Hitler's invasion of Poland and other Central European nations...." The book also includes a map showing "the Mexican republic" in 1822 reaching up into Kansas and Oklahoma, and including within it Utah, Nevada, and everything west and south of there
"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!
MULTI-CULTURALISM and the creation of a one-party globalist country to serve the rich in America’s open borders.
“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR
WILL DOUBLE U.S. POPULATION
OF THE LA RAZA OCCUPATION:
IMMIGRANT SHARE OF ADULTS QUADRUPLED IN
There are now an unprecedented nearly 62
million immigrants and their United States-born children residing in the
country, new analysis from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) finds.
Newly released analysis from CIS
researchers based on Census Bureau data reveals that there are about 61.6
million immigrants and their U.S.-born children — given birthright citizenship
— living across the country. There were 17.1 million U.S.-born minor children
of immigrants in the country as of 2017.
Immigrants and their U.S.-born
children now represent about one in five residents in America, a population
that is expected to increase should current legal immigration levels continue
unchanged and uncontrolled.
The U.S. is nearly alone in granting birthright
citizenship to the children of foreign nationals. For example, the U.S. and
Canada are the two only developed nations with
birthright citizenship. On the other hand, countries such as France, the United
Kingdom, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, Italy, and Germany all have either
outlawed birthright citizenship or never had such a policy to begin with.
Between 2010 and 2017, about 9.5
million immigrants resettled in the U.S. The total foreign-born population is
now 44.5 million, a 108-year record high, making up nearly 14 percent of the total
In 1970, the total foreign-born
population was 9.5 million.
Every year, the U.S. admits more
than 1.5 million immigrants. By 2023, CIS researchers estimate that the legal
and illegal immigrant population of the U.S. will make up nearly 15
percent of the entire U.S. population.
John Binder is a reporter for
Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
The US should think long and hard about the high number of
By Lawrence Harrison
It's not just a
short-run issue of immigrants competing with citizens for jobs as unemployment
approaches 10 percent or the number of uninsured straining the quality of
healthcare. Heavy immigration from Latin America threatens our cohesiveness as
MEXICO WILL DOUBLE U.S.
By Tom Barrett
At the current rate of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also
through Canada) the United States will be completely over run with illegal
aliens by the year 2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants who follow US
law to become citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion,
ILLEGAL aliens and their offspring will be the dominant population in the
“The percentage of
foreign-born workers in the U.S. labor force has more than tripled over the last
four decades and while the U.S. represents just 5 percent of the world’s
population it attracts 20 percent of the world’s immigrants, according to a new
Open the floodgates of our welfare
state to the uneducated, impoverished, and unskilled masses of the world and in
a generation or three America, as we know it, will be gone.
Those most impacted are middle class
and lower middle class. It is they whose jobs are taken, whose raises are
postponed, whose schools are filled with non-English speaking children that
absorb precious resources for remedial English, whose public parks are trashed
and whose emergency rooms serve as the local clinic for the illegal
“Currently, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 million legal and
illegal immigrants every year, with more than 70 percent coming to the country
through the process known as “chain migration” whereby newly naturalized
citizens can bring an unlimited number of relatives to the U.S. In the next 20
years, the current U.S. legal immigration system is on track to import 15
million new foreign-born voters. Between 7 and 8 million of those foreign-born
voters will arrive in the U.S. through chain migration.” JOHN BINDER
Over 4M Foreigners Resettled in U.S. from Refugee-Producing
Countries Since 2000
In less than two decades, more than 4.1 million foreigners have legally
immigrated to the United States from countries that produce large numbers of
released by the White House on Monday revealed the mass legal immigration
levels at which the U.S. has admitted more immigrants than any other country in
As Breitbart News reported,
President Trump will reduce the number of refugees allowed to enter the U.S.
for Fiscal Year 2019 to no more than 30,000 admissions. This is merely a
cap for refugee resettlements and does not represent the number of refugees
that the administration seeks to resettle. For example, less than 20,000 foreign
refugees have been resettled in the country.
top of the more than 1.5 million foreign refugees resettled in the U.S. since
2000 — outpacing the population of Philadelphia — there have been more than 4.1
million legal immigrants admitted to the U.S. from refugee-producing countries.
t0tal, there have been nearly 11 million foreign
nationals admitted and resettled in the U.S. in the last decade. This is nearly
three million people larger than the population of New York City.
The latest data from
the U.S. Census Bureau marks a nearly 108-year record high of immigration to
the country. In 2017, the foreign-born population boomed to 13.7 percent,
encompassing 44.5 million immigrants.
last time the U.S. foreign-born population was this high was in 1910 when
immigrants made up 14.7 percent of the total country’s population.
country’s last immigration boom — between 1900 and 1920 — was eventually met
with a near 16. Between
1925 and 1966, the yearly U.S. legal immigration level did not exceed 327,000
admissions, a four-decades-long near moratorium that allowed the massive
inflows of immigrants from before 1925 the ability to assimilate.
year, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 foreign nationals, with the vast majority
deriving from family-based chain migration. 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.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on
Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
The immigrant percentage of the U.S.
population has hit 13.7 percent, near the 1910 record of 14.7 percent,
according to the latest release by the Census Bureau.
In 2017, 13.7 percent of people (one
in 7.3 people) in the United States were immigrants, up from 13.5 percent in
2016, and up from 5 percent (one in 20 people) in 1970, according to the
The rising share means 44.5 million
people in a population of 325.7 million people were born abroad. That 44.5
million includes roughly 22 million naturalized citizens, 11 million
other residents, including more than 1.5 million foreign temporary
visa-workers, plus roughly 11 million illegal immigrants, according to the
The millions of migrants are
concentrated in the coastal metropolises, such as Los Angeles and New
York, but many are migrating into interior states. According to the New York Times:
New York and California, states with
large immigrant populations, both had increases of less than six percent since
2010. But foreign-born populations rose by 20 percent in Tennessee, 13 percent
in Ohio, 12 percent in South Carolina and 20 percent in Kentucky over the same
The recent inflow includes
a rising percentage of Asians from China, Vietnam, India, said the New York Times.
Brookings Institution analysis of
that data shows that 41 percent of the people who said they arrived since 2010
came from Asia. Just 39 percent were from Latin America. About 45 percent were
college educated, the analysis found, compared with about 30 percent of those
who came between 2000 and 2009.
The Asian inflow
include includes many college graduates because many of them are
immigrating via the various business-backed programs for college-graduate
The Census Bureau may have
undercounted the number of illegal immigrants, ensuring the immigrant
population now exceeds the 1910 percentage, NBC News reported:
Illegal immigrants can be more
difficult for surveyors to locate due to informal living arrangements, and some
may avoid being included in surveys for fear of being reported to the
government, researchers say.
Jeffrey Passel, a demographer at Pew
Research Center, has estimated that the actual immigrant population is likely 3
percent to 5 percent higher than the number in the Census Bureau’s American
A chart by the Washington Post suggests that
this huge wave of migrants has changed politics by giving Democrats’
identity-politics ideology an electoral lock in counties where
immigrants comprise more than 20 percent of the population:
The New York Times report, however, demurely ignored
the political and economic impact of this huge wage of workers,
consumers, and renters.
Some economic impacts are obvious,
for example, immigrants expand the economy by working, consuming and renting
real-estate. Some also raise the productivity of Americans by inventing new
products, importing new goods, or develop novel services that allow Americans
to produce more wealth or enjoyment per hour.
But many less-skilled migrants play
their largest role by simply shifting small slices of wealth from person to
person, for example, by competing up rents in their neighborhood or by
competing down wages in their workplace. The crudest examples can be seen in
European farms tend to buy
labor-saving machines from well-paid European manufacturing workers because
their farmworkers’ wages are high, but many U.S. farm companies simply use
cheap legal and illegal immigrant labor while sharing the savings from not
buying machines between profit-seeking investors and penny-counting consumers.
Of course, that cheap-labor business
practice leaves Americans taxpayers to carry the off-work costs of immigrants,
such as welfare programs, civic turmoil, Diversity, education costs for
migrants’ children, and the occasional murder of an Iowa jogger, a massacre in
a Florida nightclub, or the destruction of the Twin Towers in 2011.
But the immigration is not happening
in a vacuum — it is happening as a vast wave of technology allows companies and
investors to move products and assets (such as cheap migrant labor) around the
world, at very low cost. This technological change has liberated societies to
vastly enrich themselves — see China for example — even as it also seems to
centralize power and wealth.
There is plenty of data to suggest that this
combination of technological change and Congress’ passage of the 1965
immigration law have together since shifted a huge volume of wealth from
younger, working Americans towards the older Americans who
own real-estate, stocks, or companies.
That wage-pressure process began
first among the interchangeable, blue-collar, unskilled Americans — such as
farm workers — but it is shifting up the economic ladder to hit
interchangeable, college-educated Americans. In President Donald Trump’s
economy, blue-collar Americans are gaining amid modest restrictions on
immigration while middle-class Americans are seeing slower gains as companies import more cheap college-graduates and also
export their jobs to expanding foreign populations of
clever, hardworking college-graduates.
This economic shift is reflected in
another important economic change — the declining importance of Americans’
wages and salaries compared to other Americans’ dividends and stock prices. As
the New York Times noted
Data from the Federal Reserve show
that over the last decade and a half, the proportion of family income from
wages has dropped from nearly 70 percent to just under 61 percent. It’s an
extraordinary shift, driven largely by the investment profits of the very
wealthy. In short, the people who possess tradable assets, especially stocks,
have enjoyed a recovery that Americans dependent on savings or income from
their weekly paycheck have yet to see. Ten years after the financial crisis,
getting ahead by going to work every day seems quaint, akin to using the phone
book to find a number or renting a video at Blockbuster” …
In 2016, net worth among white
middle-income families was 19 percent below 2007 levels, adjusted for
inflation. But among blacks, it was down 40 percent, and Hispanics saw a drop
of 46 percent. For many, old-fashioned hard work has simply not been a viable
path out of this hole. After unemployment peaked in the fall of 2009, it took
years for joblessness to return to pre-recession levels. Slack in the labor
market left the employed and unemployed alike with little leverage to demand
raises, even as corporate profits surged.
Maybe it was inevitable that when
half the population watches its wages stagnate while the other half gets rich
in the market, the result is President Donald Trump and Brexit.
Unsurprisingly, many legislators are
under severe pressure from donors to preserve the current national economic
strategy of growth-by-immigration. In February 2018, for example, a loose
alliance of business-first Republicans, pro-migration Democrats, and
progressive media blocked President Donald Trump’s “Four Pillars” immigration
reforms which would shift the United States back towards a
Economists, investors, talking heads
and political advocates in the Democratic and Republican parties are deeply reluctant to draw any
connection between the immigration inflow of consumers, workers, and
renters, and the economic shift from wages to stocks.
But the linkage is often hinted at.
For example, Noah Smith, a pro-immigration, pro-diversity writer
for Bloomberg News empire, wrote a column in July 2018 saying that the
1924 immigration cutbacks helped create the 1929 crash:
The housing crash of the mid-1920s
might well have been a direct result of the curtailment of immigration. And if
the Great Depression and/or the stock crash of 1929 was caused or exacerbated
by that housing crash, there’s a clear and direct link between immigration
restriction and the U.S.’s worst economic crisis of the 20th century. The
reduction in agglomeration effects reported by Ager and Hansen probably also
contributed to lower corporate earnings and sapped vitality in American cities.
Yet Smith is silent about the
flip-side of immigration cuts — the impact of the 1965
immigration expansion law, which has added up to 44.5 million consumers,
workers and renters to the United States’ marketplace.
Four million young Americans will
join the workforce this year, but the federal government will also
import 1.1 million legal immigrants, and allow an army of at least 2
million visa-workers to work U.S. jobs, alongside asylum-claiming migrants and
that giving amnesty to 12 to 30 million illegal aliens in the U.S. would have
an immediate negative impact on America’s working and middle class — specifically
black Americans and the white working class — who would be in direct
competition for blue-collar jobs with the largely low-skilled illegal alien population."
"Additionally, under current legal immigration
laws, if given amnesty, the illegal alien population would be allowed to bring
an unlimited number of their foreign relatives to the U.S. This population
could boost already high legal immigration levels to an unprecedented high. An
amnesty for illegal aliens would also likely triple the number of
border-crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border." JOHN BINDER
“At the current rate of
invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also through Canada) the United States
will be completely over run with illegal aliens by the year 2025. I’m not
talking about legal immigrants who follow US law to become citizens. In less
than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion, ILLEGAL aliens and their
offspring will be the dominant population in the United States”…. Tom
Census: Population to 420 million in 2060,
2/3rds immigrants, 79 million
immigrant woman from Honduras carries her baby inside the Catholic Charities of
the Rio Grande Valley on Saturday, June 23, 2018, in McAllen, Texas. Families,
who have been processed and released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
wait inside the facility before continuing their journey to cities across the
A new analysis of the impact on
unrestricted immigration into the United States shows that the nation’s
population will jump to 420 million by 2060, driven by an explosion in
immigrants and their offspring.
Using Census Bureau data, the
Population Growth said
that current policies suggest that 79 million immigrants will boost the
population during the period.
“Under current immigration policy
U.S. population will rise to 420 million in 2060, versus 341 million if no
immigration was allowed over the 2012 to 2060 period. This implies that
immigrants arriving over the next 45 years, and their U.S. born children and
grandchildren, will add 79 million to U.S. population by 2060. More than
two-thirds of U.S. population growth over this period will be due to
immigration,” said the new analysis.
The report reviews some of the costs
of legal and illegal immigration on the country and taxpayers and makes the
case for a national population policy that considers that impact.
It highlights, for example, the 1965
reforms to the Immigration and Nationality Act which were to limit immigration
but actually fed it through so-called “chain migration,” where one new
immigrant, in an example shown, could bring in some 19 relatives.
The report also puts a spotlight on
the children of illegal immigrants born in the United States who automatically
become citizens. It describes those babies as “deportation insurance.” The
The U.S.-born baby is, of course, a
U.S. citizen, whose illegal alien parents are eligible to receive, on the
baby’s behalf, food stamps, nutrition from the Women, Infants, and Children
(WIC) program, and numerous tax benefits, including the EITC.
Most importantly, the newborn is
deportation insurance for its parents. Illegal aliens facing deportation can
argue that to deport one or more parents would create an “extreme hardship” for
the new baby. If an immigration officer agrees, we’ve added a new adult to the
nation’s population. At age 21 the former birthright citizen baby can formally
apply for green cards for parents and siblings, and they, in turn, can start
their own immigration chains.
Back in 2010, when the investing community was still eager about
the emerging economies, there was the BRIC ETF you could buy (still can), which
represented a basket of investible companies in Brazil, Russia, India, and
China. The theory was that with the former two, natural resources
would be pillaged in low-regulation environments, and the latter two had to do
with an economic growth model being inextricably linked to booming
The theory was that the two production economies of Brazil and
Russia, mainly oil, would be balanced out by two emerging consumption
economies. The problem was that shortly thereafter, the government
of Brazil took possession of Petrobras in a thuggish move, and investors got
scared of these economies of socialist and oligarchic fiat (read:
Venezuela). In addition, the price of oil eventually dropped as U.S.
production ramped up and an oil glut kept prices eternally low.
So all the ETF had at that point was India and China, the two
behemoth nations in terms of robust breeding and the emerging consumer
story. But that theory has not born out. What we are
instead seeing is that human population growth stories are not automatically
investible winners. Not anymore. Technology and
automation are increasingly making dense population countries unstable, as
low-skilled manual jobs are not as necessary as they once
were. China is more worried about pacifying an open revolt if its
1.4 billion people ever get hungry enough to engage in another Tiananmen Square
demonstration, where easily over 10,000 people were slaughtered. And
India can't seem to get out of its own clumsy way long enough to make any
traction with its GDP – partially because it is addicted to smothering
regulations, but also, it has so much exposure to cultural poverty due to its
inundated population zones without concomitant employment.
Population growth stories are supposedly consumption-based
economic models but instead are saddled with relatively higher welfare demands
placed on the subject countries in order to pacify the
poverty. Consumption does not produce prosperity any more than
eating a dozen Krispy Kremes produces a handsome physique. Effort is
required for that. Production is required for wealth
creation. Consumption means only that subsistence is reached. Nothing
more. And no real wealth accrued beyond subsistence.
And yet, here at home, we have Democrats who preach that we need
more immigrants and refugees for our economic growth. What planet
are they living on? Okay: We know they are being their usual
disingenuous selves and that they want foreign mercenaries hired by welfare to
vote for them, but their base buys the low-information agit-prop as if it were
something that should be taught in college.
No, wait – maybe
it actually is.
Consumption-based economies are all the rage in Democrat
circles. "Supply-siders," aka production economies, that
require investment (read: tax cuts) are all about those evil
Republicans. To the left, you don't need capital accumulation or
savings to produce growth. All you need is government
What we are seeing is that further immigration into the U.S. from
Mexico is creating greater drains on our welfare rolls as well as
infrastructure, our schools, and our emergency rooms and
hospitals. It also removes low-skilled jobs from American
citizens. Citizens then go out and apply for unemployment insurance
because they can't find employment due to illegals occupying those low-skilled
spaces, a double-whammy, and all of it just to help Democrats get
No, immigration does not automatically convert to a nation's
wealth. It can do quite the opposite, in fact, and drain it that
much faster and liquidate the treasury, a treasury that the Democrats are all
too eager to pillage in order to buy votes from other foreign nationals who
walk across our border and give them the vote as fast as possible.
Brief: Steven Camarota Details the Immigrant Population CIS Video, January 9, 2018
The number of United States-born children who
were given birthright citizenship despite at least one of their parents being
an illegal alien living in the country now outnumbers one year of all American
A new Congressional Budget Office
(CBO) report reveals the booming number of
U.S.-born children to illegal aliens who are given automatic citizenship,
forever anchoring their families in the U.S.
These children are commonly known as “anchor babies,” as they
are able to eventually bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the
U.S. through the process known as “chain migration.” Every two new immigrants
to the U.S. brings an estimated seven foreign relatives with them.
A group of Indian visa-workers is offering to pay the federal government
$1,500 per family to jump the line for green cards, according to a
friendly report by the McClatchy news bureau.
The proposed trade would send just
$1,500 from each Indian family to the federal treasury in exchange for a
fast-track to the hugely valuable prize of citizenship for at least 100,000
outsourcing-workers and their family members.
That small payment would save the
Indians from paying lawyers’ fees, allow them to compete directly against
American professionals for jobs, and allow them to quickly begin the
chain-migration process for their many parents and siblings. The money could
be used to fund the Federal Emergency Management Agency, say the
advocates, who are also hoping their proposal will be supported by their ally,
Kansas GOP Rep. Kevin Yoder.
“It goes from insulting to
preposterous to propose such a thing,” countered Jessica Vaughan, policy
director at the Center for Immigration Studies. She continued:
It is insulting for them to think
they should get to jump in line ahead of others for paying a
ridiculously low sum of money, and it is preposterous [for them] to
think they somehow are preferred immigrants over millions of others who have
been sponsored and are waiting their turn in line.
Immigration lobbyists are pitching a
plan to pay for disaster relief bycharging high-skilled workers
from India and China a fee to obtain green cards.
And they’re leaning hard on Rep.
Kevin Yoder, R-Kansas, to help …
under this proposal green card
applicants from certain countries could pay an additional fee to bypass the
green card backlog. The money would be would be earmarked for disaster relief,
which [the group’s lawyer also] said would increase the chances of passing
green card policy reforms.
An additional $1,500 green card fee
for all employment-based Chinese and Indian immigrants would raise $1.5 billion
over 10 years, according to an analysis by Immigration Voice. A fee of $2,500
would raise another $1 billion …
In January, the group said their
funds could be used to pay for a border wall, said McClatchy:
Mexico refuses to pay for President
Donald Trump’s wall, but advocates representing another group of foreign
workers legally in the U.S. say they would eagerly raise billions for the
barrier if it’d help them get green cards faster.
Who? Under the proposal, Indian and
Chinese tech workers would step up and kick in $2,500 each or more in fees if
it meant they could get their green cards after five or six years instead of
waiting decades as some do now.
“The Indian high-skilled workers
will gladly, enthusiastically and happily pay for the wall if given an
opportunity to do so in order to get fair treatment on green card waiting
times,” said Leon Fresco, an attorney for Immigration Voice, an advocacy group
working with members of Congress on the measure.
The Immigration Voice group says it
represents up to 300,000 Indian outsourcing workers, plus up to 300,000 family
members, who are waiting for green-cards that have been sponsored by their
employers. The group is already working closely with Yoder to pass a fast-track
green-card bill in the 2019 appropriations bills.
Indian advocates say some Indians
visa-workers face a waiting line of up to 150 years to get a green card. The
problem, they say, is the so-called “country caps” on the distribution of the
140,000 employer-based visas awarded each year. Those caps theoretically limit
nationals of each country to just 7 percent of the annual 140,000 visas,
chiefly to ensure a wide distribution of the visas to diverse countries.
But most of the Indians get through
the green-card line in several years, partly because the complex visa rules
allow roughly 23,000 Indian workers and families get green cards every year.
That actual inflow is far higher than the notional 9,800-per-year limit set by
the 7 percent country cap.
There are roughly 300,000 Indians in
the green-card line because brand-name U.S. companies, hospitals,
banks, and universities have outsourced millions of U.S. jobs to Indian
subcontractors, such as Infosys, Cognizant or Wipro. Most of the 300,000
Indians in the line were imported for temporary U.S. jobs via the L-1 and
H-1B visa-worker programs and were later rewarded when their employers
sponsored them for the huge prize of green cards.
the U.S. government helps companies keep a population of roughly 1.5 million
visa-workers in American white-collar jobs. The various visa programs — H-1B, L-1, J-1, H4 EAD, OPT, TN — allow
employers to hire cheap foreign doctors, therapists,
programmers, engineers, accountants, designers,
architects, managers, recruitment specialists, P.R. experts, and many
other professionals. These huge labor programs boost the stock market
by lowering salaries for
many American college graduates and also push many Americans into
lower-tech, lower-wage careers, such as journalism.
example, Northwestern University is using the H-1B program to hire roughly 170
foreign graduates each year to fill science and teaching jobs for just $65,000
a year, according to government data provided by MyVisaJobs.com. U.S.
science grads — whether young or old, male or female, Asian, Latino,
African-American, or European-American — were not offered those university
university is paying its H-1Bs workers just above Chicago’s “living wage” of
$59,215, as estimated by CNBC.
July, Yoder worked with the Indian group to win initial approval for a bill that would abolish
the country caps.
If the country caps are removed by
Yoder’s bill late this year, U.S. Fortune 500 companies and Indian outsourcing
firms will be able to offer fast-track green cards to roughly five times more
Indian hires each year. That giveaway will help investors greatly accelerate
the organized outsourcing of middle-class healthcare and technology jobs to
lower-wage Indian employees, so boosting the investors’ stock values.
The new green-cards-for-cash plan is
being offered to Yoder because he chairs the House homeland
defense appropriations committee, which oversees immigration and emergency
management. Immigration Voice’s political advisor, Leon Fresco, told McClatchy:
“At the end of the day, Yoder has a
massive hand here because he needs to write the FEMA legislation,” said Leon Fresco,
the strategist and general counsel for Immigration Voice. “One way or another
there’s no way this doesn’t go through Yoder.”
Fresco notes that Yoder plan to
eliminate the country caps will not raise the annual distribution of green
cards to H-1B workers.
But Yoder’s plan will allow U.S. and
Indian companies to recruit and import more workers via the L-1 visa program.
The program has no cap and it allows visa-workers to be paid minimum wages,
even for white-collar jobs.
State Department is already issuing almost 80,000 multi-year L-1 visas each
year, creating a resident population of perhaps 400,000 L-1 workers. Some L-1
visa-workers are used to set up new businesses in the United States, but many
are used for outsourcing work, alongside H-1B visa-workers.
dive into the middle-class outsourcing controversy comes as he faces a
difficult election campaign in a district that voted for Hillary Clinton in
2016. His district already includes employers who have outsourced white-collar
jobs to 1,400 H-1B workers, according to H-1BFacts.com.
GOP Rep. Kevin Yoder
tells his Kansas voters he's moderate b/c he is pushing a law to help CEOs
& investors outsource families' blue-collar and white-collar jobs. But many
polls show voters want fedl. immigration policy to put working Americans before
Yoder’s office did not dismiss the
cash-for-green-cards plan. According to McClatchy:
“We are still in the early stages of
looking into this specific proposal, but we remain committed to ensuring that
(a green card bill) gets across the finish line and becomes law,” Yoder’s
spokesman C.J. Grover said in an email.
Yoder is expected to push his
country-caps plan in the must-pass homeland defense budget, during the
lame-duck session after the voters have cast their votes and as retiring
legislators look for lobbying jobs with business.
GOP estb. is using
the $5 billion border-wall fight to hide up to four blue/white-collar
cheap-labor programs in lame-duck DHS budget. Donors are worried that salaries
are too damn high, & estb. media does not want to know.
reports show high levels of corruption in the H-1B program,
reflecting the high levels of corruption in the home countries. For example,
corruption in India is ranked as the 81st most corrupt country, partly
because of caste vs. caste hostility, according to Transparency International.
The corruption debilitates the
country’s economic growth, say critics.
The home-country corruption has
ensured numerous arrests of Indian executives in the United States, plus a
series of lawsuits against large Indian outsourcing companies. The lawsuits
charge the Indian companies with discriminating against Americans to ensure the
placement of more Indian workers in U.S. jobs.
“The most objectionable result of
lifting the country caps would be to reward the [American] companies that have
used the [temporary] guest-workers to replace Americans,” said Vaughan. “It
completes the process for them … it institutionalizes this in a way
that will cause permanent harm to Americans who aspire to white-collar jobs.”
“guest-worker visas are not meant to be a stepping stone for green cards,”
she added. But for Indian visa-workers, “that was their expectation, and it was
wrong, and now they are demanding their expectations be filled … They
think adding a little money to the discussion might be enough to grease the
way, but that is not the way Americans see their immigration system,” she
“Americans value fairness in our
immigration system,” along with the need for some diversity, minimal corruption
and a first-come-first-served policy, she said.
Also, the Indians’ offer to pay for
approval by Yoder and other legislators to jump the line “shows the disdain
they have for other categories” of would-be immigrants, said Vaughan.
“To suggest for a mere $1,500 they should be allowed to jump in line, that
they are somehow more worthy … in the way you would try to buy off a
police officer for not writing a ticket — it smacks of the same kind of
mentality,” said Vaughan.
The $1,500 payment is also trivial,
she said, because the acceleration of green cards would be extremely valuable,
she said. It would allow the visa-workers to quit their low-wage outsourcing
jobs sooner, and also accelerate the arrival of their elderly parents via
chain-migration rules, she said. Parents “are one of the most expensive
demographic groups [for taxpayers] because of their likely need for health care
benefits, and the fact that they have not contributed over a lifetime to Social
Security or any other social welfare program through taxes,” she said.
The promised payment of $1.5 billion
is enough to keep the federal government operating for four hours. In 2017, the
federal government’s budget was $3,664 billion.
But the Indian lobby has managed to
win sponsorship from more than 80 percent of the House for Yoder’s H.R. 392
bill to remove the country caps. Their lobbying campaign relies on frequent
group visits to member’s district offices, plus the persuasive power of the
Indian doctors from local hospitals and the wives of visa-workers, Fresco told
Yoder’s bill might get passed this
Fall, Vaughan said. “I don’t think most members of Congress understand the
implications [of the country cap removal] and they are attracted [to
the argument] that it is somehow more fair to do away with the per-country
caps,” she said.
“Per-country caps ensure a diverse
flow of immigrants from many countries,” said RJ Hauman, government
relations director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform. He
Without those caps in place, India
will consume the lion’s share of the permanent skilled visas, creating a
discriminatory system that favors a single foreign nation. H.R. 392 shreds any
pretense that programs like the H-1B and L visa [programs] are anything but a
track for intending immigrants – not a short-term foreign labor program. No one
promised [these Indian] temporary guest workers that they would ever have the
chance to immigrate permanently.
“Allowing temporary guest workers
the opportunity to pay for green cards – no matter where the money goes –
completely undermines the integrity of our immigration system,” said Hauman,
The last thing we need is another
pay-for-play route to citizenship like the fraud-ridden EB-5 program.
Four million young Americans will
join the workforce this year, but the federal government will also
import 1.1 million legal immigrants, and allow an army of at least 2
million visa-workers to work U.S. jobs, alongside asylum-claiming migrants and illegal
There are at least 4.5 million anchor babies in the U.S. under
the age of 18-years-old, according to the CBO. This estimate does not include
the potentially millions of anchor babies who are older than 18-years-old, nor
does it include the anchor babies who are living overseas with their deported
The 4.5 million anchor babies estimate exceeds the four million
American children born every year. In the next decade, the CBO estimates that there
will be at least another 600,000 anchor babies born in the U.S., which would
put the anchor baby population on track to exceed annual American births —
should the U.S. birth rate not increase — by more than one million anchor
Already, the anchor baby population exceeds the entire
population of Los Angeles, California and is roughly half of the population of
New York City.
As Breitbart News reported, a decade of
chain migration, allowing newly naturalized immigrants to bring an unlimited
number of foreign relatives with them, has exceeded two years of all American
births. Altogether, chain migration since 2005 has imported roughly 9.3 million
foreign nationals to the U.S.
Every year, the U.S. admits more than 1.5 foreign nationals,
with the vast majority deriving from family-based chain migration. In 2016, the
legal and illegal immigrant population reached a record high of 44 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.
Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Chief of the Population Estimates Branch Luke Rogers said in a
statement that domestic migration of Americans is the reason behind Idaho’s
population growth between July 2016 and July 2017.
“Domestic migration drove change in the two fastest-growing
states, Idaho and Nevada, while an excess of births over deaths played a major
part in the growth of the third fastest-growing state, Utah,” Rogers said.
The U.S. Census Bureau found that net international migration to
the U.S. has continued growing the country’s population –with 1.1 million foreign
nationals being admitted over the last year – with the overall U.S. population
growing by 2.3 million individuals.
year, 1.5 million foreign nationals arrive in the U.S. The foreign-born
population, most recently, has reached historic levels, with now more than 44
million immigrants residing in the country, as Breitbart News reported.
Mexico has the largest group of
legal and illegal foreign nationals in the U.S., with 1.1 million immigrants
from the country arriving in the U.S. between 2010 and 2016. Mexican nationals
make up roughly one in eight new arrivals to the U.S.
The largest increases from 2015 to 2016 to immigration to the
U.S. have come from the Middle East, the Carribean, Central America, and
The booming foreign-born population
is largely due to family-based chain migration, which was established by the
1965 immigration legislation allowing new arrivals to the U.S. to bring an
unlimited number of foreign relatives with them.
Immigrant Population in U.S. Booms to 44M, Majority from Mexico
WASHINGTON, D.C. — There is now a record level of immigrants living in
the United States – standing at roughly 44 million people nationwide –
who entered the U.S. both illegally and legally from a
Research conducted by the Center for
Immigration Studies’ Steven Camarota reveals the massive scope of the U.S.
immigrant population, which has contributed to keeping American wages stagnant
while driving up costs of social services.
Camarota’s research reveals that in 2016, there were between 43
and 45 million immigrants in the U.S., nearly quadruple the immigrant
population in 2000.
Mexico, as noted by Camarota, has the largest group of legal and
illegal foreign nationals in the U.S., with 1.1 million immigrants from the
country arriving in the U.S. between 2010 and 2016. Mexican nationals make up
roughly one in eight new arrivals to the U.S.
Legal and illegal immigrants now make up close to 14 percent of
the entire U.S. population, or roughly one out of every eight American
residents. Camarota says this is the largest percentage in 106 years.
The largest increases from 2015 to 2016 to immigration to the
U.S. have come from the Middle East, the Carribean, Central America, and
The booming foreign-born population is largely due to
family-based chain migration, which was established by the 1965 immigration
legislation allowing new arrivals to the U.S. to bring their foreign family
members, spouses, children, and extended family to the U.S.
as Breitbart News has reported, on
average, for every new legal immigrant from Mexico, the immigrant brings six
relatives to the U.S. years later when they obtain U.S. citizenship.
Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, most recently, have called for an end to chain
migration, slamming it for its negative impact on American workers and the
country’s working-class, who are often forced to compete with new arrivals for
“A merit-based system, by definition, would be safer than a
lottery or even extended family-based immigration,” Sessions said during a
speech in New York City, New York. “We want the best and the brightest in
America. The President’s plan is essential to protecting our national
security, while also banning drunk drivers, fraudsters, gang members, and child
University economist George Borjas, an immigration expert, recently said the current
family-based chain migration system is “really hard to justify as a rational
Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Mexico, a nation that has benefited enormously from
American generosity is now working to destabilize our country.
At the current rate
of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also through Canada) the United
States will be completely over run with illegal aliens by the year 2025. I’m
not talking about legal immigrants who follow US law to become citizens. In
less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion, ILLEGAL aliens and their
offspring will be the dominant population in the United States.
According to US Border
Control (see LINK below). “They will have made such inroads into the
political and social systems that they will have more influence than our
Constitution over how the U.S. is governed. The ugly consequence of an
ignored U.S. Constitution is already taking place.” The millions upon
millions of illegal aliens streaming into the US are the foundation for what
could be another attempt at secession by several US states. Many of them will
use ill-conceived programs that reward illegal immigration to become US
citizens. Other illegals will simply go to the polls and vote without
taking the trouble to apply for citizenship. Together, these groups
could form a voting block that could tear our nation apart. Those of you who read
the email version of this column should go to www.ConservativeTruth.org to
see the map posted there. It shows the borders of a new nation proposed by
influential Mexican nationals and Hispanic US Citizens. (See LINK below:
Professor Predicts 'Hispanic Homeland'.) It includes six northern states of
Mexican, as well as Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, and southern
Colorado. The idea of a Hispanic Homeland could be ignored as the pipe dream
of crackpots if a substantial majority of Mexican citizens did not support
it. A Zogby poll of Mexicans done in June 2002 revealed that a substantial
majority of Mexican citizens believe that southwestern America properly
belongs to Mexico. They said that Mexicans do not need the permission of the
U.S. to enter this territory. 58 percent of Mexican citizens agreed with this
statement: "The territory of the United States' southwest rightfully
belongs to Mexico." Only 28 percent disagreed with the statement. Listen
to what some Mexican government officials and US leaders (including
politicians and Professors at taxpayer-funded Universities) have to say on
this subject. Jose Angel Gutierrez, professor, University of Texas, Arlington
and founder of La Raza Unida political party screams at rallies: "We
have an aging white America. They are dying. They are shitting in their pants
with fear! I love it! We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by
that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him!" (See
LINK below.) Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council "They’re afraid
we’re going to take over the governmental institutions and other
institutions. They’re right. We will take them over. Mario Obledo, California
State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Jerry Brown, who was
awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton, says, “California
is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn’t like it should leave."
Proposition 187 was the California initiative supported by a majority of
Californians that denied taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens.
Speaking at a Latino gathering in response to Proposition 187’s passage in
1995, Art Torres, the Chairman of the California Democratic Party, said:
"Power is not given to you. You have to take it. Remember, 187 is the
last gasp of white America in California." The national newspaper of
Mexico, Excelsior: "The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning
to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot." Gloria
Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor: "We are politicizing every single
one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country...I
gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, "I’m
going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back." Jose
Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General: “We are practicing ‘La Reconquista’
in California." "Reconquista" means the reconquest of the US
southwest by Mexico. (See LINK below.). These people are serious! They think
they are going to take US territory. The Mexican President declared it here
in our country, and Bill Clinton signed a Presidential Executive Order that
paves the way for at least part of Mexico’s dream. Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo
said in Chicago on July 23, 1997, "I have proudly affirmed that the
Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders and that
Mexican migrants are an important – a very important – part of this. For this
reason, my government proposed a constitutional amendment to allow any
Mexican with the right and the desire to acquire another nationality to do so
without being forced to first give up his or her Mexican nationality."
Translation: It is next to impossible to receive Mexican citizenship unless
you can prove you are of Mexican descent. But Mexico knows that the US has
soft immigration laws and will grant citizenship to almost anyone. (After
all, we grant citizenship every day to immigrants from countries who have
sworn to destroy us.) So Mexico wants
to take advantage of this ridiculous situation by encouraging their citizens
to apply for US citizenship while keeping Mexican citizenship. That way the
Mexican government can influence the political process here in the US.
Executive Order 13122, signed on May 25, 1999, by the most treasonous
president this nation has ever been cursed with, Bill Clinton, established an
Interagency Task Force on the Economic Development of the Southwest Border.
Part of the Order reads, "The Southwest Border or Southwest Border
region is defined as including the areas up to 150 miles north of the United
States-Mexican border in the States of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and
California." According to experts on international law, this sets the
stage for a 150-mile-wide “Border Zone” that will neither belong to Mexico or
the US. This could then become the first area of a Hispanic Nation that would
eventually encompass the areas shown in the map of the proposed Republica del
Norte (The Northern Republic). Our government, pushed by liberal Democrats,
has been systematically laying the groundwork for such a breakaway republic.
Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non European countries can
come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education, and government
contracts? It’s called affirmative action or racial privilege. Some time ago
a vote was taken in the U.S. Congress to end this practice. It was defeated.
Every single Democratic senator except Ernest Hollings voted to maintain
special privileges for Hispanic, Asian and African immigrants. They were
joined by thirteen Republicans. Bill Clinton and Al
Gore have repeatedly stated that they believe that massive immigration from
countries like Mexico is good.They have also backed special privileges for
these immigrants. Mexico, a nation that has benefited enormously from
American generosity is now working to destabilize our country. Is
“destabilize” too strong a word? I don’t think so. Whether or not Mexican
leaders think they can actually create enough hatred against “gringos” to
accomplish the creation of a new republic made up of mainly US territory,
they know that pushing that agenda will cause huge political problems here
and allow Mexico to accomplish many of their goals. Is the government of Mexico
behind this? You have seen quotes from a Mexican President and a Mexican
Consul General in support of it. They have everything to gain and little to
lose by pushing it. The Mexican government is also pushing illegal
immigration, which destabilizes our economy. The US Border Control website
(see LINK below) shows an illustration from a Mexican government publication
showing their citizens how to best illegally enter the US. Why? It takes the
strain of taking care of unemployed Mexicans off the Mexican treasury and
puts it on the US treasury. And when the illegals get on welfare, they send
some of their money home, which helps the Mexican economy. All this talk by
Mexican and US officials about the US illegally occupying Mexican territory
does nothing but breed racial hatred. The sad thing is that none of this is
about race. It is about the things that all wars and conflicts are about:
Greed, power and money. I don’t like to talk about a problem without offering
a solution. The US politicians and professors who advocate taking US
territory are guilty of sedition. Remove them from their offices and
(hopefully) put them in a federal penitentiary where they can consider the
error of their ways. The Mexican politicians who do the same are guilty of
inciting sedition. This is very close to an act of war. Immediately cut of
all economic aid to Mexico until its government publicly disavows this
lunatic plan. Finally, we must realize that we can’t stop this by marching US
troops into Mexico. We should use troops to guard our borders, because the US
Border Patrol cannot cover the huge US-Mexico border without help. And we
need to use pass laws that will stop the government from rewarding illegal
immigrants at the expense of those who follow the law. We have a huge immigration
problem in this country. This ridiculous Hispanic Homeland idea is just a
symptom of the problem. INTERNET RESEARCH: Professor Predicts 'Hispanic
Homeland' 1. http://www.aztlan.net/homeland.htm Professor Predicts 'Hispanic
Homeland' ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A University of New Mexico Chicano Studies
professor predicts a new, sovereign Hispanic nation within the century,
taking in the Southwest and several northern states of Mexico. Charles
Truxillo suggests the “Republica del Norte,” the Republic of the North, is
“an inevitability.” He envisions it encompassing all of California, Arizona,
New Mexico, Texas and southern Colorado, plus the northern tier of Mexican
states: Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León and
Tamaulipas. Along both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border “there is a growing
fusion, a reviving of connections,” Truxillo said. “Southwest Chicanos and
Norteño Mexicanos are becoming one people again.” Truxillo, 47, has said the
new country should be brought into being “by any means necessary,” but
recently said it was unlikely to be formed by civil war. Instead, its
creation will be accomplished by the electoral pressure of the future
majority Hispanic population in the region, he said.
(October 2, 2017) – A new report by the Center for Immigration Studies
finds that fertility rates have declined much more rapidly among immigrants
than the native-born. As a result, immigration's modest impact on slowing
the aging of America is becoming even smaller. Immigration increases the
size of the country's population significantly, but the impact on the
overall fertility rate in the country is small because the difference
between immigrants and natives is modest.
Dr. Steven Camarota, director of research and author of the report, said,
"Many commentators claim that the high immigrant fertility will
'rebuild the demographic pyramid,' but this view is mistaken.
Declining immigrant fertility means that the modest impact immigration once
had is now even smaller." He continued, "If present trends
continue, the Total Fertility Rate of immigrants may even drop below 2.1 in
the next few years, the level necessary to replace the existing
The birth rate for women in
their reproductive years (ages 15-50) declined more than twice as much
for immigrants as natives between 2008 and 2015. Between 2008 and 2015
the fertility of immigrant women feel from 76 to 60 births per
thousand. In contrast, native fertility declined from 55 births per
thousand to 49 births per thousand — a decline of six births per
Although still higher than
that of natives, immigrant fertility has only a small impact on the
nation's overall birth rate. The presence of immigrants raises the
birth rate for all women in their reproductive years by just two
births per thousand (3.6 percent).
Even if the number of
immigrant women 15 to 50 doubled along with births to this population,
it would still only raise the overall national birth rate for women by
2.5 percent above the current level.
In addition to births per
thousand, fertility is often measured using the total fertility rate
(TFR). The TFR reports the number of children a woman can be expected
to have in her lifetime based on current patterns.
Like the birth rate, the TFR
of immigrants has declined more rapidly than the TFR for natives. In
2008, immigrant women had a TFR of 2.75 children; by 2015 it had
fallen to 2.16 — a .6-child decline. For natives it declined
from 2.07 to 1.75 — a .33-child decline.
The presence of immigrants in
the country has only a small impact on the nation's overall TFR. In
2015, immigrants only increased the nation's overall TFR by .08
children (4.3 percent).
Although immigration has only
a small impact on overall fertility and aging, it has a significant
impact on population size. For example, new immigrants and births to
immigrants between 2000 and 2015 added 30.2 million people to the
country — equal to 76 percent of U.S. population growth over this time
Another Dirty Little Secret About Massive Immigration About to Be Exposed –
Are you ever
tied up in a traffic jam and start to wonder, “Where are all these
people coming from?” Have you tried to go camping only to find out the
campgrounds have long since been “filled up?” Have more and more acres in
your area that once produced food, now only produce urban heat pads? Has your
state had to divert more and more water from agricultural usage to human
consumption? And in general, has the population footprint
on the environment in your area been enlarged by population growth?
Does water run downhill?
Then the answer to the question
asked in the first sentence is immigration — both legal and illegal. In
fact, according to both the Federation
for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and the Pew Hispanic Center, new immigrants and their U.S.-born children account for 75 to 80
percent of our annual population growth.
You don’t have to be a tree
hugger to recognize that massive population increases have negatively affected
the environment. Everything from water scarcity to urban sprawl can be
attributed to population increases and, as I said, population increases in the
U.S. can almost completely be attributed to immigration. So, beyond the
negative impact of massive immigration on housing costs, schools, hospitals,
energy, incarceration rates, and the breakdown of assimilation that the left
and the media refuse to acknowledge — add environmental impact.
Congress passed a law in 1969
known as NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) and it has been used
extensively and with a heavy hand to regulate development in almost every area
of our economy. A central feature of the law is the provision requiring
that any proposed governmental action that affects the environment be examined
through public comment and hearings to assure its benefits outweigh any adverse
impact on the environment. Federal agencies must conduct “Environmental Impact
Assessments” before implementing any new action or program.
Even the Pentagon and every
branch of the military has to comply with NEPA in its programs and operations.
And yet, since 1970, not one federal agency — not the predecessor to the U.S.
Customs and Immigration Service, the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS), nor the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, the Centers
for Disease Control, the Federal Highway Administration, nor the Public Health
Service — not a single federal agency has ever complied with the mandates of
the NEPA with respect to its immigration-related programs and activities.
There is no secret as to the
lack of interest in applying NEPA requirements to immigration. You see, the law
requires that BEFORE you undertake a project you must go through an extensive
review and that means no new immigration, or very little, until the review can
be completed. Holy scare the living heck out of the open borders crowd,
Batman!! And then what if the review shows the real damage being done to
the environment is substantial (and it would be hard not to)? What
would the remedy be? Too horrible for both the “borders mean nothing”
crowd or the crony capitalists to contemplate.
Well now, the good news.
Finally, in 2017, 48 years after NEPA was enacted, that bipartisan “blind-eye”
toward immigration is being challenged.
A coalition of non-profit
organizations led by the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), an affiliate
of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), has filed a lawsuit to force
federal agencies to follow the requirements of NEPA and examine the impact of
mass immigration on the environment. The lawsuit was filed in October of 2016
in federal district court against the Department of Homeland Security, but, if
successful, it would lead to changes in many other federal agencies as well.
The 85-page Preliminary
Statement filed by nine plaintiffs in the U.S. Federal Court for the District
of Southern California opens with this statement of a claim against the federal
Homeland Security agency:
Like its predecessor agency,
the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”), DHS has turned a blind eye
regarding the environmental impacts, including the cumulative impacts, of its
actions concerning foreign nationals who enter and settle into the United
States pursuant to the agency’s discretionary actions. The resulting
environmental impacts from these actions are significant and an analysis of
these impacts by DHS is required pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act (“NEPA”), see 42
U.S.C. § 4331 et seq. (2016),
and its implementing regulations. But DHS, like INS before it, undertakes no
such NEPA review. Accordingly, DHS is acting in contravention of its legal
The lawsuit was the subject of
a September 23, 2017, presentation at the annual meeting of the Writers
Workshop in Washington, DC, which can be viewed here.
Full and equitable enforcement
of the National Environmental Policy Act is 48 years overdue. Citizens who want
immigration policy to reflect national priorities and not “global citizenship”
should support the new lawsuit and demand the same of our elected officials.
MEXICO CONQUERED AMERICAN BY BREEDING BABIES FOR
WELFARE…. LA RAZA DOUBLED U.S. POPULATION AND VOTED TO SURRENDER AMERICAN
BORDERS FOR EASY PLUNDERING BY NARCOMEX.
Augustin Cebada, Information Minister of
militant para-military soldiers of
Aztlan shouting at U.S. citizens at an Independence Day rally in Los
of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit.
Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President
Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million
according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”
immigration population hits record 60 million, 1-of-5 in nation
A huge boom in
immigration, legal and illegal, over the past 16 years has jumped the immigrant
population to over 43 million in the United States, according to a
And when their
U.S.-born children are added, the number grows to over 60 million, making the
immigrant community nearly one-fifth of the nation's population, according to
federal statistics reviewed by the Center for Immigration Studies.
Center's director of research and co-author of the report, said, "The
enormous number of immigrants already in the country coupled with the
settlement of well over a million newcomers each year has a profound impact on
American society, including on workers, schools, infrastructure, hospitals and
the environment. The nation needs a serious debate about whether continuing
this level of immigration makes sense."
Concerns about the
explosion of immigration, especially of illegals, helped Donald Trump win the
presidency and has prompted his administration to crack down on illegal
immigration and refugees.
The new report does not
break down the percentage of legal and illegal immigrants in the U.S., although
there are an estimated 12 million undocumented aliens in the country.
It found that since
2000, the U.S. immigrant population has increased 8 million and a sizable
number came from Mexico and Latin America, the source of most illegal
nation's immigrant population (legal and illegal) hit a record 43.7
million in July 2016, an increase of half a million since 2015, 3.8
million since 2010, and 12.6 million since 2000.
share of the U.S. population, immigrants (legal and illegal) comprised
13.5 percent, or one out of eight U.S. residents in 2016, the highest
percentage in 106 years. As recently as 1980, just one out of 16 residents
2010 and 2016, 8.1 million new immigrants settled in the United States.
New arrivals are offset by the roughly 300,000 immigrants who return home
each year and annual natural mortality of about 300,000 among the existing
foreign-born population. As a result, growth in the immigrant population
was 3.8 million 2010 to 2016.
addition to immigrants, there were slightly more than 16.6 million
U.S.-born minor children with an immigrant parent in 2016, for a total of
60.4 million immigrants and their children in the country. Immigrants and
their minor children now account for nearly one in five U.S. residents.
immigrants (legal and illegal) were by far the largest foreign-born
population in the country in 2016. Mexico is the top sending country, with
1.1 million new immigrants arriving from Mexico between 2010 and 2016, or
one out of eight new arrivals. However, because of return migration and
natural mortality among the existing population, the overall Mexican-born
population has not grown in the last six years.
states with the largest numerical increases in the number of immigrants
from 2010 to 2016 were Texas (up 587,889), Florida (up 578,468),
California (up 527,234), New York (up 238,503), New Jersey (up 171,504),
Massachusetts (up 140,318), Washington (up 134,132), Pennsylvania (up
131,845), Virginia (up 120,050), Maryland (up 118,175), Georgia (up
95,353), Nevada (up 78,341), Arizona (up 78,220), Michigan (up 74,532),
Minnesota (up 73,953), and North Carolina (up 70,501).
Paul Bedard, the
Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be
contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org
The Mexican Invasion & Occupation