Wednesday, January 16, 2019

AMERICA'S OPEN BORDERS AND THE ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS FOR 18 YEARS OF WELFARE JUMPING IT IN DROVES

"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." HEATHER MAC DONALD

How much sympathy for pregnant illegal border-crossers is too 

much?



Back on November 26, Maryury Hernandez, a God-fearing pregnant migrant from Honduras, entered the country with her husband and three-year-old son in search of "better lives" for her children and "to keep them safe" (so she makes the hazardous trek north?), says journalist Ruben Navarrette, who is "extremely grateful for his citizenship."  The problem is, she entered illegally, which makes her eligible for deportation.  "I feel like a criminal," said Maryury.  She is a criminal.
A pregnant foreigner may go to the U.S. to give birth.  She doesn't violate any U.S. laws if she has a visa.  Still, U.S. Customs, strict on pregnant foreigners entering the country, may refuse her entry.  Maryury didn't bother to apply for a visa.  She caravanned north, and her handlers quickly put her in the hands of immigration agents who caringly whisked her off to an excellent environment for giving birth.  She gave birth on November 27 – a bouncing baby boy.  Just another drop in the anchor-baby bucket?  
While hosting a show on "a conservative radio station" in San Diego, citizen-journalist Navarrette listened to callers repeat "the old trope advanced by cable news hosts that babies born on U.S. soil somehow 'anchor' their parents to the United States."   
People should know that babies born on U.S. soil to foreign parents don't anchor their parents to the United States.  Apparently, Maryury's baby has become a U.S. citizen by jus soli, yet Maryury is eligible for deportation.  So it's back to Honduras for mother and child, or it's back to Honduras for mother sans child, who goes into foster care, whether mother likes it or not, though she probably likes it – at least her child has a better life.
Maryury has no right to live in this country.  She is eligible for deportation, yet, here she is, making her way through our court system, slowly, due to the excessive demands being made on it.  Meanwhile, an American woman, a volunteer, houses her in this country, and she doesn't see herself as a criminal, nor do plenty of others, for what it's worth.
What if America were to dismiss its immigration agents in one fell swoop, thus halting the enforcement of its immigration laws?  Sounds far-fetched?  Who would have thought that members of Congress would call for the end of ICE?  Imagine the influx of migrants, the chaos: conditions in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco would become worse, to the point of becoming impossible to live in, because migrants struggling to survive there would contribute as much or more to the worsening conditions (e.g., greater crime, more trash, poorer sanitation, etc.) as citizens.
The reader should not feel sorry for Maryury.  Rather, he should feel anger for her.  Look what she put her three-year old through, trekking north to the border.
Citizen-journalist Navarrette is dangerously soft-hearted (and anyone else who thinks like him).  He is a drunkard, drunk on the w(h)ine of liberalism.  His plea for Maryury – and other migrants who enter the country illegally (I presume) looking for a "better life" – is maudlin and given as a rationalization for the commission of a crime.  There can be no rationalization for crime.  Meanwhile, look what's happening in our cities. 
Citizens should not denigrate immigration agents; they should support them for the good of the immigration system and for the good of the country.
Build the wall.  A wall would help.


The surge in Mexican breeders in America’s open borders.
MEXICO'S BIGGEST EXPORTS ARE: DRUGS, POVERTY, CRIMINALS and ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS FOR 18 YEARS OF GRINGO-PAID WELFARE.

“Through love of having children, we are going to take over.”  AUGUSTIN CEBADA, BROWN BERETS, THE LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY
PREGNANT WOMEN JUMP AMERICAN BORDERS FOR THE LA RAZA WELFARE PROGRAM TO ANCHOR AND EXPAND MEXICO’S WELFARE STATE IN U.S. BORDERS


2003: Mexican population in U.S. reported to have increased 10 percent in just three years, mostly as a result of illegal immigration. Mexicans encouraged to breed at all costs. "A baby a year" Mexican pride slogan emerges …EVERY ANCHOR BABY GETS MORE WELFARE FOR 18 YEARS. THAT CHILD IS ALSO STILL A CITIZEN OF MEXICO!

The birthrate among illegals is more than double that of legal US residents. The Pew Hispanic Center calculates that within seven years, the children of immigrants, legal and illegal, will account for one in nine school-age children in the US.

Heritage: Amnestied Illegals Will Get $9.4T in Benefits; Increase Debt $6.3T'
…. LA RAZA already gets all our jobs!

what is the REAL cost of all that “CHEAP” Mexican labor? Add it up and then factor in the MEXICAN CRIME TIDAL WAVE and the fact that the MEXICAN  now operate in 2,500 American cities!

“THE AMNESTY ALONE WILL BE THE LARGEST EXPANSION OF THE WELFARE SYSTEM IN THE LAST 25 YEARS” Heritage Foundation
"The amnesty alone will be the largest expansion of the welfare system in the last 25 years," says Robert Rector, a senior analyst at the Heritage Foundation, and a witness at a House Judiciary Committee field hearing in San Diego Aug. 2. "Welfare costs will begin to hit their peak around 2021, because there are delays in citizenship. The very narrow time horizon [the CBO is] using is misleading," he adds. "If even a small fraction of those who come into the country stay and get on Medicaid, you're looking at costs of $20 billion or $30 billion per year."

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HANDS THEIR LA RAZA PARTY BASE OF HEAVY BREEDING ILLEGALS MUCHO WELFARE!

IMMIGRATION BILL TO BRING IN AT LEAST 33 MILLION PEOPLE IN ONE DECADE
 By Frosty Wooldridge


If the S744 amnesty bill passes, we can expect 33 million added immigrants within 10 years. That’s for starters. When you add their progeny, chain migration and our own population momentum of one million annually, we face the most profound explosion of humanity within our borders ever in the history of humanity.
 It’s the equivalent of adding one additional New York City, Los Angeles, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose, Jacksonville, Indianapolis, Austin, San Francisco, Columbus, Fort Worth, Charlotte, Detroit, El Paso, Memphis and Boston. If the bill passed, it would be the same as adding ALL of the Top 20 cities in the United States in a short 10 years. That of course does not include additional population growth driven by birth rates.
“The pending Senate immigration bill would bring a minimum of 33 million people into the country during its first decade of operation,” said Roy Beck, director of www.numbersusa.org. “By 2024, the inflow would include an estimated 9.2 million illegal immigrants, plus 2.5 million illegals who arrived as children — dubbed ‘Dreamers’ — plus roughly 3.4 million company-sponsored employees with university degrees, said the unreleased analysis.
“The majority of the inflow, or roughly 17 million people, would consist of family members of illegals, recent immigrants and of company-sponsored workers. The estimate is likely the first of several that will be produced by advocates as the Senate grapples with the immigration bill developed by the “Gang of Eight” senators.
“The 844-page bill was released last week, and was scheduled for debate and amendment in the Senate’s judiciary committee starting April 25. However, the amendment process was held up for a week by Republican Senators. Advocates for the bill have yet to release any estimates of the future inflow.”
“Nobody has a number that is based on the bill right now that’s accurate,” Lynn Tramonte, deputy director of the pro-immigration America’s Voice Education Fund, told the Christian Science Monitor in an April 25 article. “It’ll take a bit more [analysis] to get a specific number about how things will change.”
“An April 20-22 Fox News poll of 1,009 registered voters showed that 55 percent of respondents want a reduction in the current number of legal immigrants,” said Beck. “Currently, the country accepts 1 million immigrants and 700,000 temporary company-sponsored workers each year. The bill would boost that to roughly 3 million immigrants and 1 million company-sponsored workers per year. Forty-five percent of non-whites, 53 percent of independents and 62 percent of people without college degrees, favor a reduction in legal immigrants. Only 18 percent of Republicans and 29 percent of independents favor an increase in legal immigration, the Fox poll reported.”
The current population of the United States is 316 million. That estimate includes 40 million immigrants, both legal and illegal. Opponents of the immigration bill are already highlighting the potentially large inflow.
“I believe the interest that needs to be protected is the national interest of the United States, and that includes existing workers today, workers whose wages have been pulled down, without doubt, by a large flow of low-wage labor into the country,” Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions said during one of three hearings on the pending bill. “This bill would continue that in a way that’s very disturbing to me.”
Beck said, “Estimates of a 33 million inflow are conservative … [because they do] not attempt to project increases in these categories that are certain to occur in future years,” once many of the new immigrants seek green cards for their overseas relatives. Also, some categories of immigrants are uncapped, and the analysis does not attempt to project increases in these [family unification] categories that are certain to occur in future years.
“The pending bill allows illegal immigrants to bring their overseas spouses and children into the country. If that provision is implemented, it could more than double the [illegal immigrant inflow] number shown in the chart, bringing the total inflow to 40 million by 2024.”
The analysis shows an inflow of roughly 3.4 million university trained immigrants. That estimate does not include graduates who get green cards under the family unification route, or the uncapped inflow of doctors and PhD-carrying scientists. Roughly 1.8 million Americans graduate from college each year, including 300,000 with degrees in science and engineering. Population-growth forecasts will also contribute to the emerging fight over the bill’s cost, because the award of a green card — or the right to live in the United States — confers access to some government benefits.
“It is important to note here that each of the individuals represented in this chart becomes eligible for Obamacare on the day a green card is issued,” said Beck. “Most of those on the chart will then have to wait five years before they become eligible for all US welfare benefits … [but some] will actually become eligible for welfare immediately upon being issued a green card.” Enrollment in Obamacare is expected to spike the cost of the immigration bill, partly because federal subsidies are used to offset the annual Obamacare cost of $20,000 for a family of four. All totaled, The Heritage Foundation estimate the total cost of this amnesty from a low of $3 trillion to as high as $5 trillion.



Hispanic Family Values?


OR RUNAWAY ILLEGITIMACY paid for by 

AMERICANS?


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

City Journal
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 disproportionately.
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 QuinceaƱera 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 again.”
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 eligible.
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 multigenerational.”
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.”

CALIFORNIA'S POPULATION TO DOUBLE from ILLEGALS along with their CRIME RATES!
Times Staff Writers
July 10, 2007
Over the next half-century, California's population will explode by nearly 75%, and Riverside will surpass its bigger neighbors to become the second most populous county after Los Angeles, according to state Department of Finance projections released Monday. California will near the 60-million mark in 2050, the study found, raising questions about how the state will look and function and where all the people and their cars will go. Dueling visions pit the iconic California building block of ranch house, big yard and two-car garage against more dense, high-rise development. But whether sprawl or skyscrapers win the day, the Golden State will probably be a far different and more complex place than it is today, as people live longer and Latinos become the dominant ethnic group, eclipsing all others combined. Some critics forecast disaster if gridlock and environmental impacts are not averted. Others see a possible economic boon, particularly for retailers and service industries with an eye on the state as a burgeoning market. "It's opportunity with baggage," said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., in "a country masquerading as a state. "Other demographers argue that the huge population increase the state predicts will occur only if officials complete major improvements to roads and other public infrastructure. Without that investment, they say, some Californians would flee the state. If the finance department's calculations hold, California's population will rise from 34.1 million in 2000 to 59.5 million at the mid-century point, about the same number of people as Italy has today. And its projected growth rate in those 50 years will outstrip the national rate — nearly 75% compared with less than 50% projected by the federal government. That could translate to increased political clout in Washington, D.C. Southern California's population is projected to grow at a rate of more than 60%, according to the new state figures, reaching 31.6 million by mid-century. That's an increase of 12.1 million over just seven counties. L.A. County alone will top 13 million by 2050, an increase of almost 3.5 million residents. And Riverside County — long among the fastest-growing in the state — will triple in population to 4.7 million by mid-century. Riverside County will add 3.1 million people, according to the new state figures, eclipsing Orange and San Diego to become the second most populous in the state. With less expensive housing than the coast, Riverside County has grown by more than 472,000 residents since 2000, according to state estimates. No matter how much local governments build in the way of public works and how many new jobs are attracted to the region — minimizing the need for long commutes — Housing figures that growth will still overwhelm the area's roads. USC Professor Genevieve Giuliano, an expert on land use and transportation, would probably agree. Such massive growth, if it occurs, she said, will require huge investment in the state's highways, schools, and energy and sewer systems at a "very formidable cost."If those things aren't built, Giuliano questioned whether the projected population increases will occur. "Sooner or later, the region will not be competitive and the growth is not going to happen," she said.If major problems like traffic congestion and housing costs aren't addressed, Giuliano warned, the middle class is going to exit California, leaving behind very high-income and very low-income residents. "It's a political question," said Martin Wachs, a transportation expert at the Rand Corp. in Santa Monica. "Do we have the will, the consensus, the willingness to pay? If we did, I think we could manage the growth. "The numbers released Monday underscore most demographers' view that the state's population is pushing east, from both Los Angeles and the Bay Area, to counties such as Riverside and San Bernardino as well as half a dozen or so smaller Central Valley counties. Sutter County, for example, is expected to be the fastest-growing on a percentage basis between 2000 and 2050, jumping 255% to a population of 282,894 , the state said. Kern County is expected to see its population more than triple to 2.1 million by mid-century. In Southern California, San Diego County is projected to grow by almost 1.7 million residents and Orange County by 1.1 million. Even Ventura County — where voters have imposed some limits on urban sprawl — will see its population jump 62% to more than 1.2 million if the projections hold. The Department of Finance releases long-term population projections every three years. Between the last two reports, number crunchers have taken a more detailed look at California's statistics and taken into account the likelihood that people will live longer, said chief demographer Mary Heim. The result? The latest numbers figure the state will be much more crowded than earlier estimates (by nearly 5 million) and that it will take a bit longer than previously thought for Latinos to become the majority of California's population: 2042, not 2038. The figures show that the majority

of California's growth will be in the Latino population, said

Dowell Myers, a professor of urban planning and demography

at USC, adding that "68% of the growth this decade will be

Latino, 75% next and 80% after that."That should be a wake-up call for voting Californians, Myers said, pointing out a critical disparity. Though the state's growth is young and Latino, the majority of voters will be older and white — at least for the next decade." The future of the state is Latino growth," Myers said. "We'd sure better invest in them and get them up to speed. Older white voters don't see it that way. They don't realize that someone has to replace them in the work force, pay for their benefits and buy their house."


CALIFORNIA DRIFTS TOWARD BANKRUPTCY AD GAVIN NEWSOM EXPANDS THE LA RAZA MEXICAN WELFARE STATE

California: Record spending as tax revenue collapses by $5 billion




As California governor Gavin Newsom announced plans for a record $144.2-billion spending plan, the state controller quietly reported a $4.82-billion collapse of state tax revenues.
Gov. Newsom's Proposed 2019-2020 Budget, released on January 9, had all the characteristics of "Rainbows, Butterflies, and Unicorns."  Newsom predicted that his state budget beginning on July 1 would feature $6 billion more revenue and only a $100-million increase in spending, despite a $5.2-billion "Cradle-to-Career" education spending increase, a $1-billion earned income tax credit, and $100 million for immigrants fleeing Central America.
Key to Newsom's 2019-2020 budget dream is collecting $4.8 billion more in personal, sales, and corporate tax receipts while slashing "Government Operations" expenditures from $4.8 billion to $1.26 billion, a 76% reduction.
After he campaigned for a $100-billion "Medicare for All" health plan, the San Francisco Chronicle ran the headline: "Gov. Newsom angers no one with budget, puts off big fights for another day."  The Chronicle complimented the new governor for providing "plenty to delight his progressive backers" and working to "avoid enraging more fiscally conservative Californians."
But away from the Klieg lights and fawning media, California state controller Betty Yee reported that California's personal income tax collections for the month of December missed its 2018-2019 budget estimate by $3.45 billion.  More alarming, personal income tax revenue plunged from $11.5 billion in 2017 to just $6.76 billion in 2018.
With California's top 1% of income-earners who make over $500,000 a year paying over half of all state taxes, a portion of the grim tax collection shortfall could have been due to mail delays for filing December quarterly estimated income tax payments.  But December 2018 sales tax receipts of $1.16 billion also missed budget by $1.42 billion, and corporation tax collections of $2.09 billion were short of estimates by $179.5 million.
At the start of the July 1, 2018 fiscal year, California's had a mandatory "Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties" reserve with $8.91 billion and a discretionary "Budget Stabilization Account" reserve with $11 billion.  The non-partisan Legislative Analyst's Office's November update stated that reserve accounts were expected to grow by $3.1 billion this fiscal year and $6.4 billion in the next year.  But the LAO cautioned that with wage and job growth already falling, "the state's budget condition can change quickly."
All of this "Rainbows, Butterflies and Unicorns" contingency planning for California to survive a "moderate recession" was predicated on termed out Gov. Jerry Brown's 2018-2019 budget ending on June 30 with a $20-billion surplus.  It probably did not evaluate the cost of the PG&E utility filing for bankruptcy or 30,000 striking L.A. teachers.
If the December tax shortfall means that California is already in recession, the state may be facing a devastating crisis.



FREE HEALTH CARE FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS


Progressives combine open borders and government-funded universal health care demands.




January 11, 2019

The left-wing bastions of California and New York City are becoming more than just sanctuaries for illegal immigrants already residing there. They are being transformed into powerful magnets luring more illegal immigrants to enter the country. California Governor Gavin Newsom and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio intend to have their legal residents pay for the comprehensive health care of illegal immigrants.
Amongst New York City's roughly 600,000 uninsured who will be guaranteed government-funded health care under Mayor de Blasio’s plan are an estimated 300,000 so-called “undocumented New Yorkers" – i.e., illegal immigrants. The mayor’s proposed social experiment in universal health care, including for illegal immigrants, is estimated overall to cost $100 million per year. "We also have a way to provide direct health care to a lot of our neighbors who happen to be undocumented,” Mayor de Blasio said. “They're still part of our community. They need health care; their families need health care."
California Governor Newsom wants to extend health care benefits already offered to illegal immigrants under the age of 19 to young adults up to the age of 26. This would make California “the first state in the nation to cover young undocumented adults through a state Medicaid program,” the governor’s office boasted last Monday. The additional cost has been estimated at $250 million a year, which could rise to as much as $400 million by the 2020-2021 fiscal year. “It’s the moral thing to do … When we talk about universal health care, it means everybody,” Governor Newsom said.
The next step, if Governor Newsom and some other state Democrat politicians have their way, would be to extend state-funded health care to all uninsured illegal immigrant California residents, irrespective of age.
Out of the estimated 1.8 million people in California who are uninsured and reside in California illegally, approximately 1.2 million would qualify for Medi-Cal, which is the state’s part of the federal Medicaid program. The plan would be to fund this giveaway out of California’s own general fund to avoid the restrictions in Obamacare’s expanded Medicaid provisions that prohibit the use of federal funds for illegal aliens. The bill to California taxpayers would be an estimated $3 billion. Such a plan “means more and more illegal immigrants will come to California, which would put incredible additional pressure on California’s budget,” said Sally Pipes, president and CEO of the Pacific Research Institute.
In short, such freebies for illegal immigrants will drain state and city budgets of taxpayer funds that should be spent to improve infrastructure and the delivery of basic public services for the benefit of legal residents. Too many illegal immigrants will overwhelm the health care system and drive up health care costs while lowering the quality of service for virtually everyone.
Not to worry, say the progressives who reject the very idea that someone can be in this country illegally. To call someone an illegal immigrant, they believe, is racist. We should be a welcoming country to all migrants who want to enter no matter how, they argue. The more the merrier for both the immigrants themselves and the progressives who see a treasure trove of potential votes down the road. No wonder Speaker Nancy Pelosi tries to shut down any rational discussion of funding for physical border barriers at the U.S. border with Mexico by claiming that such barriers are “immoral.” This exercise in self-righteousness and hypocrisy is itself immoral.
Border barriers are only “immoral” to those who think sanctuary cities and states are acting morally when they shield illegal immigrants who have committed serious crimes separate and apart from their illegal entry itself.  Pelosi’s twisted moral code led her to reiterate her support for San Francisco’s liberal sanctuary policies right after the death of Kathryn Steinle at the hands of an illegal immigrant, a felon who had been previously deported five times. San Francisco authorities released this monster rather than turn him over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as the federal agency had requested.
Border barriers are also only “immoral” to those who think that illegal immigrants should be rewarded for their illegal entry with plenty of freebies. Progressives combine their moral certitude that our borders must be open with their moral certitude that comprehensive health care is a basic “universal human right.” Thus, for progressives, anyone residing in this country, regardless of immigration status, must be granted this “universal right.” Their sanctuary cities and states would become honeypots attracting more and more illegal immigrants to partake.
It is “immoral,” progressives believe, to worry about the cost of health care for all, including those who should not be in this country in the first place. It is their hidden agenda that is truly immoral. Progressives would like nothing more than to overwhelm the health care system in keeping with the so-called Cloward-Piven Strategy, first proposed in 1966 by two members of the Democratic Socialists of America, Richard Andrew Cloward and his wife Frances Fox Piven. The idea is to increasingly overload the current capitalist economic system deliberately with impossible financial demands so that it collapses from within, leading to radical change.
As Brian Joondeph wrote in American Thinker: “Think of what the current migrant caravan means in terms of Cloward-Piven.  Thousands of poor, unskilled migrants entering the US. They need health care, education, housing, food, clothing, and other basic needs which all cost money. Who pays for this?” The answer is you and I. Universal health care, including for illegal immigrants, is becoming mainstream within today’s Democrat Party.
The current battle over funding for President Trump’s border barrier is a battle not only over defense of the southern border from the surge of immigrants seeking to enter the country by any means possible. It is part of the larger battle to defend America as we know it from those who seek its radical transformation into their fantasy of a progressive utopia.

 

 

NEW CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR DOUBLES DOWN ON SANCTUARY STATE STATUS


Gavin Newsom rolls out the red carpet for illegal aliens.


January 10, 2019

Newly inaugurated Gov. Gavin Newsom has pledged to make his home state of California “a sanctuary to all who seek it” in direct defiance of President Trump’s drive to secure the nation’s border with Mexico and enforce U.S. immigration laws.
California’s grossly unconstitutional obstruction of federal immigration laws is about to get ramped up, Newsom’s speech suggests. The state already has unprecedented sanctuary laws on its books that shield its 2.4 million illegal aliens from U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE). Federal prosecutors are considering filing criminal charges against elected officials harboring illegal aliens in sanctuary jurisdictions, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told the Senate Judiciary Committee a year ago.
The Trump administration is suing California over its “sanctuary state” laws that punish compliance with federal immigration laws and provide legal cover for corrupt officials to continue brazenly flouting immigration laws and interfering with federal agents trying to enforce them.
The federal lawsuit targets three statutes curbing the power of California’s state and local law enforcement to hold, question, and transfer detainees at the request of immigration authorities, and punish employers for cooperating with those authorities. The laws also impose draconian restrictions on communication between local police and federal immigration enforcement, including information regarding when criminal aliens are scheduled to be released from local jails.
Under the longstanding doctrine in American constitutional law known as “dual sovereignty,” states cannot be compelled to enforce federal immigration laws, but they are obliged not to hinder their enforcement. The so-called sanctuary cities that form the bulk of the sanctuary movement really ought to be called traitor cities because they are in open rebellion against the United States, just like the slave states that seceded from the Union before the Civil War.
The sanctuary movement gave illegal aliens permission to rob, rape, and murder Americans by, among other things, stigmatizing immigration enforcement and characterizing it as somehow racist. Some left-wingers use the dreadful euphemism "civil liberties safe zones" to describe sanctuary jurisdictions. The phrase deliberately blurs the distinction between citizens and non-citizens by implying illegal aliens somehow possess a civil right to be present in the U.S.
But dealing with the illegal alien problem is the furthest thing from Democrat politicians’ minds. They view illegals as future Democrat voters and demonize anyone who supports enforcing federal immigration laws that could lead to the deportation of their future voter base.
“People’s lives, freedom, security, the water we drink, the air we breathe — they all hang in the balance,” the leftist politician said Monday outside the state Capitol in Sacramento.
Children should not be “ripped away from their parents” at the border or left hungry while Trump promises to expend billions of dollars on “a wall that should never be built.”
Newsom (D) became the state’s 40th governor, succeeding Jerry Brown (D) who was term-limited. Before being sworn in as governor, Newsom was the state’s lieutenant governor and before that, mayor of San Francisco.
While Newsom vowed to worsen the nation’s illegal alien crisis, another leftist, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio (D), promised this week to provide “free” health care to all his city’s residents, including illegals. The program, according to one ridiculous low-ball estimate, will cost only $100 million.
“This is the city paying for direct comprehensive care (not just ERs) for people who can’t afford it, or can’t get comprehensive Medicaid — including 300,000 undocumented New Yorkers,” de Blasio spokesman Eric Phillips wrote on Twitter Tuesday.
Newsom’s pledge came as President Trump’s negotiations with Democrats over $5 billion needed to fund construction of the border wall continued to go nowhere and the federal government continued to be partially shut down for lack of appropriated funds. Trump has vowed to keep the shutdown going as long as it takes to secure funding for the wall.
“Just left a meeting with [Senate Minority Leader] Chuck [Schumer] and [Speaker of the House] Nancy [Pelosi], a total waste of time[,]” Trump tweeted Wednesday. “I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!”
The U.S. House of Representatives voted 217 to 185 on Dec. 20 to approve a temporary spending bill after adding $5.7 billion in appropriations for the wall. The measure floundered in the Senate and the partial shutdown got underway Dec. 22. But that was back in the previous Congress. Now the Democrats control the House.
The meeting came the day after President Trump took rhetorical aim at his enemies as he delivered his first-ever prime time address from the Oval Office in a bold attempt to rally the country in favor of building a wall on the porous U.S.-Mexico border, his signature campaign promise.
Vice President Mike Pence said the White House has delivered numerous proposals and offers in three weeks of negotiations, but Democrats stubbornly refused to support any funding for the wall.
“I can give you 15 speeches [Schumer] gave, in which he talked about border security,” Trump said prior to the meeting. “The only reason they’re against it is because I won the presidency.”

  
And if he takes a pass, the two Democrats most likely to succeed Brown – Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa – favor excessive social spending and are actively courting illegal immigrant support.”

MARK ZUCKERBERG AND OTHER TECH BILLIONAIRES SAY HELL NO TO PAYING LEGALS LIVING WAGES… not when there’s boatloads of Chinese ready to take our tech jobs and work cheap!


“Nonetheless, open border advocates, such as Facebook Chairman Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the Center for Immigration Studies 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 illegal aliens were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, California, with its 2.6 million illegal aliens, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR

JUDICIAL WATCH
THE GRUESOME MS-13 GANGS FROM LOS ANGELES: THEIR MURDER, RAPE, AND CRIME TIDAL WAVE IN AMERICA’S OPEN BORDERS
The illegal stabbed her to death with a screwdriver and then ran her over with her car.


ANYONE EVER HEARD OF REP. NEWHOUSE OUT THERE HOWLING FOR JOBS FOR AMERICAN (Legals) YOUTH???

"Newhouse’s district is now more than one-quarter Hispanic, 

largely because of the many Hispanics who arrived in the 

state to work for agriculture companies, such as Newhouse’s 

operation."


JOHN BINDER

CALIFORNIA, HOME TO THE LA RAZA BARONESS NANCY PELOSI, WAR PROFITEER DIANNE FEINSTEIN, HITLERMAL KAMALA HARRIS, MAD MAXINE WATERS and HISPANDERING GAVIN NEWSOM….

MOVES CLOSER TO FINAL ANNEXATION BY MEXICO


DE FACTO CITIZENSHIP PER LA RAZA:

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

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

STEALING AMERICA!

Here’s how California surrendered to Mexico… OR WAS HANDED TO MEXICO BY NANCY PELOSI, DIANNE FEINSTEIN, KAMALA HARRIS, JERRY BROWN and GAVIN NEWSOM!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/08/california-under-mex-occupation-do-not.html

 

THIS IS WHAT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY OF THIS IS FOR REAL!
GOV CANDIDATE FOR MEXIFORNIA GOES ALL OUT HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES AND GETS WARM AND FUZZY WITH MS-13 MURDERING THUG ANIMALS!
ONLY A DEM CAN WALLOW WITH THE LOWEST INVADING VERMIN TO GET THEIR ILLEGAL VOTES!


“They kidnap. They extort. They rape and they rob,” Trump said then. “They stomp on their victims. They beat them with clubs, they slash them with machetes, and they stab them with knives. They have transformed peaceful parks and beautiful quiet neighborhoods into bloodstained killing fields. They’re animals.
And if he takes a pass, the two Democrats most likely to succeed Brown – Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa – favor excessive social spending and are actively courting illegal immigrant support.”

 CORRUPTION AND OPEN BORDERS HAS DONE TO ONE CITY!

 

"The California DMV has come to mean Deliver Mexican Votes. That will be a factor in 2020, whether or not Gavin Newsom seeks to become President McHottie. As Newsom said last June, “America’s future is still being defined by California’s present." LLOYD BILLINGSLEY

 

SAME AS THE OLD BOSS?

Or will California get worse under “governor McHottie” Gavin Newsom?



January 9, 2019

The day after Christmas, Gustavo Perez Arriaga, a false-documented illegal whose real name may be Paulo Virgen Mendoza, gunned down Newman, California, police officer Ronil Singh, a legal immigrant from Fiji. Outgoing governor Jerry Brown ordered flags flown at half-staff and issued a statement extending condolences to Corporal Singh’s wife and the “law enforcement officers across the state who risk their lives every day to protect and serve the people of California.”
No official statement emerged from California attorney General Xavier Becerra, who supports the state’s sanctuary law, SB 54, whose author Kevin de Leon was also silent. California senators Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris issued no official pronouncement and neither did incoming California Gavin Newsom. That may provide a clue about Newsom’s approach to crime and illegal immigration but for establishment media, it’s all about the optics.
“His visuals are certainly unassailable,” wrote Tad Friend in a November 5 New Yorker piece headlined, “Gavin Newsom, the Next Head of the California Resistance.” Newsom is “tall and lithe and still boyish at fifty-one, with teeth that Tom Cruise would envy and hair lacquered with Oribe gel.” In San Francisco he was known as “Mayor McHottie,” by women and gay men alike, according to wife Jennifer.
During the campaign, Newsom “sported his trademark look: a white Ermenegildo Zegna shirt with the sleeves rolled up and a blue Tom Ford tie. It was also his hero Bobby Kennedy’s look—the Bobby Kennedy who visited Cesar Chavez in the Central Valley fifty years ago, when America was breaking apart over Vietnam. Newsom seeks to embody Kennedy’s grainy glamour, to provide moral clarity in a bewildering hour.”
True to form, on June 5, 2018, fifty years after Sirhan Sirhan gunned down Bobby Kennedy in Los Angeles, Newsom said he was “inspired by his legacy.” Newsom duly quoted Kennedy that “there are people in every time and every land who want to stop history in its tracks. They fear the future, mistrust the present, and invoke the security of a comfortable past which in fact never existed.”
The same day, University of San Francisco political science professor James Taylor told the San Francisco Chronicle “Gavin Newsom’s real ambition is not California’s governor seat, it’s the presidency of the United States.” In the meantime, as governor of California, he draws inspiration from Jerry Brown, who in Newsom’s view had the greatest political mind “in our lifetime.” On the other hand, he wasn’t exactly a man of the people.
During his first term, Californians were literally being taxed out of their homes and in 1978 they responded with the “People’s Initiative to Limit Property Taxation,” also known as Proposition 13. Brown opposed the measure in apocalyptic terms but after it passed in a landslide he proclaimed himself a “born-again tax cutter.”
That was never true, despite Brown’s talk of a flat tax during one of his three failed presidential runs. In his final terms, Brown showed he was a born-again tax hiker, leaving California with the nation’s highest income and sales taxes. And from the start Brown was champion of big government.
He backed powerful unelected bodies like the Coastal Commission, which managed to combine Stalinist regulation and mafia-style corruption. Brown empowered the government employee unions that now shout “this is our house!” outside the state capitol.
During the 1990s Brown supported “single payer” health care but he now finds that plan too expensive for California. Newsom, on the other hand, sees “no reason to wait around on universal healthcare and single-payer in California.” So with its high taxes, volatile revenue system, bloated bureaucracy and massive pension debt, the state could easily wind up as Calizuela, with higher rates of violent crime.
In 1976, governor Jerry Brown refused to extradite AIM militant Dennis Banks, who fled to California after a courthouse gun battle in South Dakota. So it was Jerry Brown who pioneered the sanctuary state, and before he left office he showed his true colors on crime.
During his final weeks in office, the state Supreme Court denied seven of Brown’s clemency requests as an “abuse of power.” In late September, Brown ignored testimony from victims and signed SB 1391, which bars prosecution of juveniles as adults, whatever the gravity of their crime.  Under this law, juvenile murders will serve only until age 25. This will be a huge incentive to criminals, particularly MS-13, which has already murdered 14 in one California town.
Gavin Newsom’s silence over the shooting of Ronil Singh shows how “governor McHottie,” with his Tom Cruise teeth and Ermenegildo Zegna shirts, might deal with violent criminal illegals. Another Brown legacy item will be easier.
The state DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles) has registered more than one million false-documented illegals to vote but won’t say how many actually showed up at the polls in November. DMV boss Jean Shiomoto has conveniently retired and Democrats tasked the audit to the department of finance, controlled by the governor, with results due in March, 2019.
The California DMV has come to mean Deliver Mexican Votes. That will be a factor in 2020, whether or not Gavin Newsom seeks to become President McHottie. As Newsom said last June, “America’s future is still being defined by California’s present.”


CALIFORNIA'S POPULATION TO DOUBLE from ILLEGALS along with their CRIME RATES!
Times Staff Writers
July 10, 2007
Over the next half-century, California's population will explode by nearly 75%, and Riverside will surpass its bigger neighbors to become the second most populous county after Los Angeles, according to state Department of Finance projections released Monday. California will near the 60-million mark in 2050, the study found, raising questions about how the state will look and function and where all the people and their cars will go. Dueling visions pit the iconic California building block of ranch house, big yard and two-car garage against more dense, high-rise development. But whether sprawl or skyscrapers win the day, the Golden State will probably be a far different and more complex place than it is today, as people live longer and Latinos become the dominant ethnic group, eclipsing all others combined. Some critics forecast disaster if gridlock and environmental impacts are not averted. Others see a possible economic boon, particularly for retailers and service industries with an eye on the state as a burgeoning market. "It's opportunity with baggage," said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., in "a country masquerading as a state. "Other demographers argue that the huge population increase the state predicts will occur only if officials complete major improvements to roads and other public infrastructure. Without that investment, they say, some Californians would flee the state. If the finance department's calculations hold, California's population will rise from 34.1 million in 2000 to 59.5 million at the mid-century point, about the same number of people as Italy has today. And its projected growth rate in those 50 years will outstrip the national rate — nearly 75% compared with less than 50% projected by the federal government. That could translate to increased political clout in Washington, D.C. Southern California's population is projected to grow at a rate of more than 60%, according to the new state figures, reaching 31.6 million by mid-century. That's an increase of 12.1 million over just seven counties. L.A. County alone will top 13 million by 2050, an increase of almost 3.5 million residents. And Riverside County — long among the fastest-growing in the state — will triple in population to 4.7 million by mid-century. Riverside County will add 3.1 million people, according to the new state figures, eclipsing Orange and San Diego to become the second most populous in the state. With less expensive housing than the coast, Riverside County has grown by more than 472,000 residents since 2000, according to state estimates. No matter how much local governments build in the way of public works and how many new jobs are attracted to the region — minimizing the need for long commutes — Housing figures that growth will still overwhelm the area's roads. USC Professor Genevieve Giuliano, an expert on land use and transportation, would probably agree. Such massive growth, if it occurs, she said, will require huge investment in the state's highways, schools, and energy and sewer systems at a "very formidable cost."If those things aren't built, Giuliano questioned whether the projected population increases will occur. "Sooner or later, the region will not be competitive and the growth is not going to happen," she said.If major problems like traffic congestion and housing costs aren't addressed, Giuliano warned, the middle class is going to exit California, leaving behind very high-income and very low-income residents. "It's a political question," said Martin Wachs, a transportation expert at the Rand Corp. in Santa Monica. "Do we have the will, the consensus, the willingness to pay? If we did, I think we could manage the growth. "The numbers released Monday underscore most demographers' view that the state's population is pushing east, from both Los Angeles and the Bay Area, to counties such as Riverside and San Bernardino as well as half a dozen or so smaller Central Valley counties. Sutter County, for example, is expected to be the fastest-growing on a percentage basis between 2000 and 2050, jumping 255% to a population of 282,894 , the state said. Kern County is expected to see its population more than triple to 2.1 million by mid-century. In Southern California, San Diego County is projected to grow by almost 1.7 million residents and Orange County by 1.1 million. Even Ventura County — where voters have imposed some limits on urban sprawl — will see its population jump 62% to more than 1.2 million if the projections hold. The Department of Finance releases long-term population projections every three years. Between the last two reports, number crunchers have taken a more detailed look at California's statistics and taken into account the likelihood that people will live longer, said chief demographer Mary Heim. The result? The latest numbers figure the state will be much more crowded than earlier estimates (by nearly 5 million) and that it will take a bit longer than previously thought for Latinos to become the majority of California's population: 2042, not 2038. The figures show that the majority

of California's growth will be in the Latino population, said

Dowell Myers, a professor of urban planning and demography

at USC, adding that "68% of the growth this decade will be

Latino, 75% next and 80% after that."That should be a wake-up call for voting Californians, Myers said, pointing out a critical disparity. Though the state's growth is young and Latino, the majority of voters will be older and white — at least for the next decade." The future of the state is Latino growth," Myers said. "We'd sure better invest in them and get them up to speed. Older white voters don't see it that way. They don't realize that someone has to replace them in the work force, pay for their benefits and buy their house."

HOME TO DIANNE FEINSTEIN, NANCY PELOSI, KAMALA HARRIS AND GAVIN NEWSOM
Adios, Sanctuary La Raza Welfare State of California       
A fifth-generation Californian laments his state’s ongoing economic collapse.
By Steve Baldwin
American Spectator, October 19, 2017
What’s clear is that the producers are leaving the state and the takers are coming in. Many of the takers are illegal aliens, now estimated to number over 2.6 million. 
The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates that California spends $22 billion on government services for illegal aliens, including welfare, education, Medicaid, and criminal justice system costs. 
                                                                                          
BLOG: MANY DISPUTE CALIFORNIA’S EXPENDITURES FOR THE LA RAZA WELFARE STATE IN MEXIFORNIA JUST AS THEY DISPUTE THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS. APPROXIMATELY HALF THE POPULATION OF CA IS NOW MEXICAN AND BREEDING ANCHOR BABIES FOR WELFARE LIKE BUNNIES. THE $22 BILLION IS STATE EXPENDITURE ONLY. COUNTIES PAY OUT MORE WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY LEADING AT OVER A BILLION DOLLARS PAID OUT YEARLY TO MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS. NOW MULTIPLY THAT BY THE NUMBER OF COUNTIES IN CA AND YOU START TO GET AN IDEA OF THE STAGGERING WELFARE STATE MEXICO AND THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAVE ERECTED SANS ANY LEGALS VOTES. ADD TO THIS THE FREE ENTERPRISE HOSPITAL AND CLINIC COST FOR LA RAZA’S “FREE” MEDICAL WHICH IS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT $1.5 BILLION PER YEAR.

Liberals claim they more than make that up with taxes paid, but that’s simply not true. It’s not even close. FAIR estimates illegal aliens in California contribute only $1.21 billion in tax revenue, which means they cost California $20.6 billion, or at least $1,800 per household.

Nonetheless, open border advocates, such as
Facebook Chairman Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the Center for Immigration Studies 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 illegal aliens were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, California, with its 2.6 million illegal aliens, would be booming.
Furthermore, the complexion of illegal aliens has changed with far more on welfare and committing crimes than those who entered the country in the 1980s. 
Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has testified before a Congressional committee that in 2004, 95% of all outstanding warrants for murder in Los Angeles were for illegal aliens; in 2000, 23% of all Los Angeles County jail inmates were illegal aliens and that in 1995, 60% of Los Angeles’s largest street gang, the 18th Street gang, were illegal aliens. Granted, those statistics are old, but if you talk to any California law enforcement officer, they will tell you it’s much worse today. The problem is that the Brown administration will not release any statewide data on illegal alien crimes. That would be insensitive. And now that California has declared itself a “sanctuary state,” there is little doubt this sends a message south of the border that will further escalate illegal immigration into the state.
"If the racist "Sensenbrenner Legislation" passes the US Senate, there is no doubt that a massive civil disobedience movement will emerge. Eventually labor union power can merge with the immigrant civil rights and "Immigrant Sanctuary" movements to enable us to either form a new political party or to do heavy duty reforming of the existing Democratic Party. The next and final steps would follow and that is to elect our own governors of all the states within Aztlan." 
Indeed, California goes out of its way to attract illegal aliens. The state has even created government programs that cater exclusively to illegal aliens. For example, the State Department of Motor Vehicles has offices that only process driver licenses for illegal aliens. With over a million illegal aliens now driving in California, the state felt compelled to help them avoid the long lines the rest of us must endure at the DMV. 
And just recently, the state-funded University of California system announced it will spend $27 million on financial aid for illegal aliens. They’ve even taken out radio spots on stations all along the border, just to make sure other potential illegal border crossers hear about this program. I can’t afford college education for all my four sons, but my taxes will pay for illegals to get a college education.
https://spectator.org/adios-california/?utm_source=American+Spectator+Emails&utm_campaign=6e1b467cf4



If Immigration Creates Wealth, Why Is California America's Poverty Capital?




California used to be home to America's largest and most affluent middle class.  Today, it is America's poverty capital.  What went wrong?  In a word: immigration.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau's Official Poverty Measure, California's poverty rate hovers around 15 percent.  But this figure is misleading: the Census Bureau measures poverty relative to a uniform national standard, which doesn't account for differences in living costs between states – the cost of taxes, housing, and health care are higher in California than in Oklahoma, for example.  Accounting for these differences reveals that California's real poverty rate is 20.6 percent – the highest in America, and nearly twice the national average of 12.7 percent.

Likewise, income inequality in California is the second-highest in America, behind only New York.  In fact, if California were an independent country, it would be the 17th most unequal country on Earth, nestled comfortably between Honduras and Guatemala.  Mexico is slightly more egalitarian.  California is far more unequal than the "social democracies" it emulates: Canada is the 111th most unequal nation, while Norway is far down the list at number 153 (out of 176 countries).  In terms of income inequality, California has more in common with banana republics than other "social democracies."

More Government, More Poverty
High taxes, excessive regulations, and a lavish welfare state – these are the standard explanations for California's poverty epidemic.  They have some merit.  For example, California has both the highest personal income tax rate and the highest sales tax in America, according to Politifact.

Not only are California's taxes high, but successive "progressive" governments have swamped the state in a sea of red tape.  Onerous regulations cripple small businesses and retard economic growth.  Kerry Jackson, a fellow with the Pacific Research Institute, gives a few specific examples of how excessive government regulation hurts California's poor.  He writes in a recent op-ed for the Los Angeles Times:
Extensive environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions make energy more expensive, also hurting the poor.  By some estimates, California energy costs are as much as 50% higher than the national average.  Jonathan A. Lesser of Continental Economics ... found that "in 2012, nearly 1 million California households faced ... energy expenditures exceeding 10% of household income."
Some government regulation is necessary and desirable, but most of California's is not.  There is virtue in governing with a "light touch."
Finally, California's welfare state is, perhaps paradoxically, a source of poverty in the state.  The Orange Country Register reports that California's social safety net is comparable in scale to those found in Europe:
In California a mother with two children under the age of 5 who participates in these major welfare programs – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), housing assistance, home energy assistance, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children – would receive a benefits package worth $30,828 per year.
... [Similar] benefits in Europe ranged from $38,588 per year in Denmark to just $1,112 in Romania.  The California benefits package is higher than in well-known welfare states as France ($17,324), Germany ($23,257) and even Sweden ($22,111).
Although welfare states ideally help the poor, reality is messy.  There are three main problems with the welfare state.  First, it incentivizes poverty by rewardingthe poor with government handouts that are often far more valuable than a job.  This can be ameliorated to some degree by imposing work requirements on welfare recipients, but in practice, such requirements are rarely imposed.  Second, welfare states are expensive.  This means higher taxes and therefore slower economic growth and fewer job opportunities for everyone – including the poor.
Finally, welfare states are magnets for the poor.  Whether through domestic migration or foreign immigration, poor people flock to places with generous welfare states.  This is logical from the immigrant's perspective, but it makes little sense from the taxpayer's.  This fact is why socialism and open borders arefundamentally incompatible.

Why Big Government?
Since 1960, California's population exploded from 15.9 to 39 million people.  The growth was almost entirely due to immigration – many people came from other states, but the majority came from abroad.  The Public Policy Institute of California estimates that 10 million immigrants currently reside in California.  This works out to 26 percent of the state's population.


This figure includes 2.4 million illegal aliens, although a recent study from Yale University suggests that the true number of aliens is at least double that.  Modifying the initial figure implies that nearly one in three Californians is an immigrant.  This is not to disparage California's immigrant population, but it is madness to deny that such a large influx of people has changed California's society and economy.

Importantly, immigrants vote Democrat by a ratio higher than 2:1, according to a report from the Center for Immigration Studies.  In California, immigration has increased the pool of likely Democrat voters by nearly 5 million people, compared to just 2.4 million additional likely Republican voters.  Not only does this almost guarantee Democratic victories, but it also shifts California's political midpoint to the left.  This means that to remain competitive in elections, the Republicans must abandon or soften many conservative positions so as to cater to the center.

California became a Democratic stronghold not because Californians became socialists, but because millions of socialists moved there.  Immigration turned California blue, and immigration is ultimately to blame for California's high poverty level.

"The California DMV has come to mean Deliver Mexican Votes. That will be a factor in 2020, whether or not Gavin Newsom seeks to become President McHottie. As Newsom said last June, “America’s future is still being defined by California’s present." LLOYD BILLINGSLEY



"Most Californians, who have seen their taxes increase while public services deteriorate, already know the impact that mass illegal immigration is having on their communities, but even they may be shocked when they learn just how much of a drain illegal immigration has become." FAIR President Dan Stein

The reason that high-tax rate and potentially insolvent states like California, Illinois, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Maryland have continued to have access to massive new borrowing is Wall Street's ability to sell general obligation municipal bonds to high-income individuals who can benefit from receiving federally tax exempt interest. 

SAME AS THE OLD BOSS?


Or will California get worse under “governor McHottie” Gavin Newsom?




The day after Christmas, Gustavo Perez Arriaga, a false-documented illegal whose real name may be Paulo Virgen Mendoza, gunned down Newman, California, police officer Ronil Singh, a legal immigrant from Fiji. Outgoing governor Jerry Brown ordered flags flown at half-staff and issued a statement extending condolences to Corporal Singh’s wife and the “law enforcement officers across the state who risk their lives every day to protect and serve the people of California.”
No official statement emerged from California attorney General Xavier Becerra, who supports the state’s sanctuary law, SB 54, whose author Kevin de Leon was also silent. California senators Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris issued no official pronouncement and neither did incoming California Gavin Newsom. That may provide a clue about Newsom’s approach to crime and illegal immigration but for establishment media, it’s all about the optics.
“His visuals are certainly unassailable,” wrote Tad Friend in a November 5 New Yorker piece headlined, “Gavin Newsom, the Next Head of the California Resistance.” Newsom is “tall and lithe and still boyish at fifty-one, with teeth that Tom Cruise would envy and hair lacquered with Oribe gel.” In San Francisco he was known as “Mayor McHottie,” by women and gay men alike, according to wife Jennifer.
During the campaign, Newsom “sported his trademark look: a white Ermenegildo Zegna shirt with the sleeves rolled up and a blue Tom Ford tie. It was also his hero Bobby Kennedy’s look—the Bobby Kennedy who visited Cesar Chavez in the Central Valley fifty years ago, when America was breaking apart over Vietnam. Newsom seeks to embody Kennedy’s grainy glamour, to provide moral clarity in a bewildering hour.”
True to form, on June 5, 2018, fifty years after Sirhan Sirhan gunned down Bobby Kennedy in Los Angeles, Newsom said he was “inspired by his legacy.” Newsom duly quoted Kennedy that “there are people in every time and every land who want to stop history in its tracks. They fear the future, mistrust the present, and invoke the security of a comfortable past which in fact never existed.”
The same day, University of San Francisco political science professor James Taylor told the San Francisco Chronicle “Gavin Newsom’s real ambition is not California’s governor seat, it’s the presidency of the United States.” In the meantime, as governor of California, he draws inspiration from Jerry Brown, who in Newsom’s view had the greatest political mind “in our lifetime.” On the other hand, he wasn’t exactly a man of the people.
During his first term, Californians were literally being taxed out of their homes and in 1978 they responded with the “People’s Initiative to Limit Property Taxation,” also known as Proposition 13. Brown opposed the measure in apocalyptic terms but after it passed in a landslide he proclaimed himself a “born-again tax cutter.”
That was never true, despite Brown’s talk of a flat tax during one of his three failed presidential runs. In his final terms, Brown showed he was a born-again tax hiker, leaving California with the nation’s highest income and sales taxes. And from the start Brown was champion of big government.
He backed powerful unelected bodies like the Coastal Commission, which managed to combine Stalinist regulation and mafia-style corruption. Brown empowered the government employee unions that now shout “this is our house!” outside the state capitol.
During the 1990s Brown supported “single payer” health care but he now finds that plan too expensive for California. Newsom, on the other hand, sees “no reason to wait around on universal healthcare and single-payer in California.” So with its high taxes, volatile revenue system, bloated bureaucracy and massive pension debt, the state could easily wind up as Calizuela, with higher rates of violent crime.
In 1976, governor Jerry Brown refused to extradite AIM militant Dennis Banks, who fled to California after a courthouse gun battle in South Dakota. So it was Jerry Brown who pioneered the sanctuary state, and before he left office he showed his true colors on crime.
During his final weeks in office, the state Supreme Court denied seven of Brown’s clemency requests as an “abuse of power.” In late September, Brown ignored testimony from victims and signed SB 1391, which bars prosecution of juveniles as adults, whatever the gravity of their crime.  Under this law, juvenile murders will serve only until age 25. This will be a huge incentive to criminals, particularly MS-13, which has already murdered 14 in one California town.
Gavin Newsom’s silence over the shooting of Ronil Singh shows how “governor McHottie,” with his Tom Cruise teeth and Ermenegildo Zegna shirts, might deal with violent criminal illegals. Another Brown legacy item will be easier.
The state DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles) has registered more than one million false-documented illegals to vote but won’t say how many actually showed up at the polls in November. DMV boss Jean Shiomoto has conveniently retired and Democrats tasked the audit to the department of finance, controlled by the governor, with results due in March, 2019.
The California DMV has come to mean Deliver Mexican Votes. That will be a factor in 2020, whether or not Gavin Newsom seeks to become President McHottie. As Newsom said last June, “America’s future is still being defined by California’s present.”

California admits it has no idea whether non-citizens voted in last primary




After a hard-fought battle to obtain records by the Sacramento Bee, we now learn that California's electoral officials are admitting that they have no idea how many illegals and other non-citizens voted in the last primary, based on the state's motor-voter registration, which has been shown to have registered thousands of non-citizen voters. The Bee reports:
California officials still can’t say whether non-citizens voted in the June 2018 primary because a confusing government questionnaire about eligibility was created in a way that prevents a direct answer on citizenship.
Apparently, tens of thousands of foreign nationals and other ineligible voters, maybe 16 year olds, got registered to vote at the DMV when they applied for their drivers licenses whether they asked for it or not.
Investigators can see that people marked themselves as ineligible to vote or declined to answer eligibility questions, but they can’t tell why. 
“We can’t assume why they declined to answer eligibility questions or why they said they were not eligible,” the Secretary of State’s Office wrote in an internal memo on Oct. 8, 2018.
That email and other documents The Sacramento Bee obtained through the Public Records Act shed light on why the Secretary of State has been unable to say clearly whether non-citizens voted last year. The Bee filed a legal complaint for the records when the Secretary of State initially withheld most of them.
The email shows that, for months, California officials have been examining whether non-citizens voted last year. On Thursday, Secretary of State Alex Padilla confirmed for the first time that his office has an active internal investigation into the matter.
“The Secretary of State’s office does not comment on the details of ongoing investigations,” the office said in a statement. “Determining whether ineligible individuals who were erroneously registered to vote by the DMV cast ballots requires a complete review. The Secretary of State’s office is doing its due diligence by conducting a thorough investigation.”
Spokesmen for the office declined to say how the department could otherwise determine citizenship of those registered.
This doesn't even include the undoubtedly significant numbers of voters who answered that they were eligible to vote when they were not. Could that have happened when the ballot-harvestors were out patrolling illegal immigrant neighborhoods in search of votes? At a minimum, it most certainly was possible, especially, since claims to voter-eligibility on drivers license forms are never checked in California (it's the honor system), according to voter-integrity activists. It also doesn't help that California sneakily had residents sign to certify on their yellow mail-in ballots that they were California residents(rather than voting-eligible citizens) so as to prevent for illegals any potential perjury charges in addition to vote-fraud charges.
If California has no idea who's a citizen, and has resisted every effort out there to get that information (it has defied cooperation with President Trump's electoral integrity commission), well, then what we can conclude is that they don't want to know if a non-citizen is voting and now the word is out that they don't. Apparently, Democratic interests in 'counting all the ballots' as they say, means counting illegal ones, too.
They don't know, they don't want to know, and they aren't about to clean this up. Keep after them, Sacramento Bee. In this case, the Bee is a newspaper that's doing its actual job.

Ballot-harvesting gets just a little harder in California, thanks to 

Judicial Watch





Judicial Watch has forced the state of California and Los Angeles county to end its practice of keeping 'inactive' voters on the voter rolls as is required by federal law. Here's the news from the legal watchdog:
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it signed a settlement agreement with the State of California and County of Los Angeles under which they will begin the process of removing from their voter registration rolls as many as 1.5 million inactive registered names that may be invalid. These removals are required by the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
The NVRA is a federal law requiring the removal of inactive registrations from the voter rolls after two general federal elections (encompassing from 2 to 4 years). Inactive voter registrations belong, for the most part, to voters who have moved to another county or state or have passed away.
Los Angeles County has over 10 million residents, more than the populations of 41 of the 50 United States. California is America’s largest state, with almost 40 million residents.
The state of California, run completely by Democrats, of course, resisted this (at least until the midterm was over). They decided that cleaning up inactive voters from the rolls wasn't in their interest and federal laws were for other states, little states. And as a result, nearly a quarter of California's counties had more voters registered than actual eligible voters. And surprise, surprise, the state has suddenly turned solid blue.
L.A. county's approximately 1.5 million inactive voters on those rolls (112% of age-eligible citizens alone) had been perfect fodder for ballot-harvestors, not this last time at midterms (all of the Democratic ballots harvested in the last midterm have made their voters active voters), but for upcoming elections. That rich bank of potential Democratic votes from ballot-harvesting is now gone with this Judicial Watch agreement.
Ballot-harvesting is a disturbing phenomenon so prone to abuse it's illegal in most states. In California, where it's not, Democratic operatives selectively pay visits to the homes of indifferent voters who don't want to go to the polls or mail in their ballots, engage those voters, and then "help" them fill out their ballots in the way Democrats want. That's why conservative areas such as Orange County were suddenly flipped blue and popular candidates such as Young Kim, who had been winning by large margins on election night - suddenly saw their results flipped. Democrats learned that by extending the election count for weeks, turning in harvested ballot after harvested ballot, they could win any election. 
But the harvest had been incomplete, and with many inactive voters, Democrats would need that bank of more potential votes, which likely explains why California's Democrats resisted any cleanup of voter rolls. California may have mailed these people ballots whether they liked it or not or asked for it or not, as they did with all of us, and well, Democratic ballot-harvestors could have easily gotten hold of those unasked for ballots in the mailboxes of dead, moved-away, or incapacitated voters and saw to it that they somehow got cast.
(Judicial Watch is investigating that one, too.)
The state's chief vote counter, Secretary of State Alex Padilla, insists that not a single voter will be disenfranchised, given all his 'safeguards.' His official plan is to mail in a confirmation form to inactive voters and strike their names if they don't respond, but somehow, I suspect the ballot-harvestors will be paying visits to these inactive residents, who may be indifferent and incapacitated voters, and somehow will get them to mail those forms in, too, thereby subverting the process.
That said, Judicial Watch's victory is a great one and frees them up to focus on other areas of abuse that are rife in California, such as non-citizen registrations (the state still says it has no idea how many there are), illegal immigrant votes already cast, ballot harvestors using coercion, foreign ballot-harvestors, gerrymandering, straight out fraud, and the whole cavalcade of Democrat tricks that have disenfranchised conservative voters in the state.
It's a welcome glimmer of light from a one-party state.







Gavin Newsom’s First Act as California Governor: More Healthcare for Illegal Aliens



Gavin Newsom swearng in (Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)
Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press
2:32


California Governor Gavin Newsom’s first act in office was to propose extending state healthcare benefits to more illegal aliens.

On Tuesday, shortly after being sworn in, Newsom — who ran on the proposal of providing healthcare to everyone in California, though he struggled to explain how he would pay for it — signed an executive order taking steps in that direction.
In his first executive order, Newsom directed the state to create a single government purchaser for prescription drugs to increase negotiating leverage with pharmaceutical companies. Alongside the order, Newsom proposed extending Medi-Cal — the state’s version of Medicaid — to illegal aliens up to the age of 26, rather than 19.
The governor’s forthcoming budget, his office said, “will make California the first state in the nation to cover young undocumented adults through a state Medicaid program.”
That would cover 138,000 “young people in the country illegally,” according to the Associated Press.
“Undocumented young adults should not have to worry about losing their health coverage when they turn 19,” the governor’s office added, saying that the budget proposals, to be presented later this week, would defend Obamacare from “recent federal attacks” and “bring the state closer toward the goal of health care for all.”
In his inaugural address, Newsom promised “sanctuary to all who seek it” — a reference to California’s status as a “sanctuary state” for illegal aliens that refuses to help enforce federal immigration law.
That policy continues to be a lightning rod for national criticism after the murder last month of Corporal Ronil Singh, a legal immigrant and police officer who was allegedly shot and killed by an illegal alien during a traffic stop.
In addition, Newsom’s new budget “proposes increasing the size of the subsidies for families who already receive it, and it would make California the first state to make subsidies available to middle income families,” his office said.
To pay for the expansion of those benefits, Newsom is proposing that California restore the individual mandate to purchase health insurance, which was canceled by President Donald Trump at the federal level.
Schumer also sent a letter to President Trump and to congressional leaders asking for legislative changes that he argues would make it easier for states, including California, to develop a single-payer healthcare system.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.


Sheriff David Clarke (Ret.)

Enabling Criminal Aliens

Source: AP Photo/Noah Berger
  
The murder of Newman California Police Corporal Ronil Singh allegedly by an illegal alien with a criminal past is the latest high-profile killing of an American citizen that contains nearly every element in our illegal immigration discourse.

Singh, 33, legally immigrated to the United States, became a U.S. citizen, and then became one of Newman’s finest citizens serving as a police officer for twelve years. Singh’s legal entry into the U.S. added value to our country. Sadly, this husband and father of a 5-month-old son was allegedly murdered by an illegal criminal alien gang member on Christmas Eve.
This tragedy was preventable. 
Singh’s suspected murderer had “prior criminal activity that should have been reported to ICE,” Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson had said. “Law enforcement was prohibited because of sanctuary laws and that led to the encounter with (Cpl.) Singh… the outcome could have been different if law enforcement wasn’t restricted or had their hands tied because of political interference.”
California is a state that provides a safe harbor for people illegally in the country. California boasts its status as a sanctuary state in violation of federal law and the supremacy clause in Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. California cities have passed laws prohibiting local law enforcement agencies from cooperating with law enforcement officers from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with the apprehension of illegal immigrants even after they have committed a crime. Many of these illegal criminals continue on to murder, rape and rob U.S. citizens post-release from a local jail under the catch-and-release policies before notifying ICE officials.
Currently, the threshold for immediate deportation proceedings is set too low. Catch-and-release instead of being detained pending an immigration hearing is like unleashing a dangerous animal into a public space. Eventually, we’ll be dealing with an avoidable catastrophe.
Typically the definition to detain involves only crimes such as murder, rape, and armed robbery. That’s about it. Serious drug dealing or gun possessions are not considered crimes of violence under this strict definition. Neither does burglary or the severe crime of driving under the influence of alcohol. As we have seen over and over through the cost of American lives, many additional crimes pose equally great risks to our communities should these illegal criminal aliens be released without detaining for ICE.
Burglary is a felony and as far as I am concerned a crime of violence. It’s not merely a property crime that results in minor victimization. It involves forced entry. It is a category Part I crime by FBI statistics. Part I crimes are serious felonies. Anybody whose home has been broken into suffers a traumatic mental experience. I have seen it when investigating burglaries. People who once felt safe in their homes lose that sense of security after their home is burglarized. Their kids have nightmares; adults sleep with one eye open and every little noise in the house startles them. It takes a long time to heal. Burglary costs Americans an estimated 4 billion in property loss every year, but this does not include the psychological damage. The fact that many states allow residents to use deadly force to stop intruders means that a burglary could end violently for the intruder. It will if it happens at my home and I am there.
Another offense that is marginalized by sympathetic lawmakers is driving under the influence. It is not merely a traffic offense. Tens of thousands of people are killed and maimed by impaired drivers every year. I have arrived on the scene of crashes involving impaired drivers. Seeing lifeless and mutilated bodies is not pretty. This is why most states take it so seriously that a first offense is a crime punishable by imprisonment. Many make a second and third offense a felony. It’s worth mentioning that the illegal alien who allegedly murdered Cpl. Singh had two prior arrests for DUI and was being stopped by Cpl. Singh for suspected driving under the influence again.
A recent Pew Research study on crimes committed by illegal aliens indicates it’s time to take this seriously. The study shows that the bulk of those arrested in 2016 and 2017 had prior criminal convictions. It indicates that in 2017 illegal immigrants with past criminal convictions accounted for 74% of all arrests made by ICE which is a 30% increase from the year before. The study points out that those with no previous conviction increased by 146% compared to a 12% increase of those with a past criminal conviction. They have demonstrated a propensity to victimize. This conviction rate includes nearly 60,000 arrested for drunk driving and approximately 58,000 arrested for dangerous drug dealing (opioids). The other classification of convictions are as follows:
Assaults: 48,454
Larceny: 20,356
General Crimes: 17,325
Obstructing Police: 14,616
Burglary: 12,836
These numbers are not insignificant. Nobody takes the time to point out to the criminal alien apologists that the cost associated with these crimes include police and court costs, incarceration costs, property loss and damage, medical costs, psychological trauma, lost work time and increased insurance rates adding up to billions of dollars. Therefore, the policy on when to deport and for what reasons also needs to reflect these costs to the American people. The time to deport is before they go on to serious offenses, not after. 
Redefining what constitutes deporting a criminal alien is needed. By changing the definition from what is considered a ‘violent act’ to a ‘serious act’ would be more inclusive of the dangerous crimes I have highlighted in this article. Our laws need to reflect the protection of the American people not sympathy for criminal aliens.
Is it not asking too much for people in the country illegally to obey all of our laws, not just a select few? Neither you nor I would be granted this courtesy if we were even lawfully in a foreign country with a valid passport and committed a misdemeanor crime not involving violence. Deportation would be certain and swift with no release pending a deportation hearing.
It is time for U.S. policy to change. The American people should not have to accept such great risks when they don’t have to. They should not have to stand by idly before a criminal illegal alien victimizes another American citizen.
It is bad enough that our criminal justice system is soft on crime when it comes to people legally in the country but when that same leniency is granted to criminal aliens it’s a problem, and it’s time to recalculate our generosity.
The position of most politicians in Washington D.C., except for a few Democrats who are sympathetic to all illegal migrants, is that concerning deportations we should deal with the criminal aliens first. An overwhelming majority of Americans agree. Nobody wants to be victimized by a criminal, nonetheless, ones who should have been deported.
When we water down the standard for what is criminal behavior, we are heading toward a very dark place. Crime is crime. Period. This should be the standard for automatic deportation for criminal aliens.
Once we get the criminal illegals out, a wall is required to prevent these thugs from running back in and continuing to victimize Americans like Cpl. Singh who hours before his death stopped home to visit his family on Christmas Eve, kissing his wife and child for the last time. The picture of him with his family taken just hours before his death should serve as a grave reminder to all who want to hug a criminal illegal alien that at any moment they can lash out and kill an American, and that it could have been avoided if Congress had its priorities straight and put politics aside to do what’s right.

 

NY Times: ’40-Year’ Flood of Immigration Turns Orange County Blue



Frederic J. Brown/AFP/Getty Images
2 Jan 20191,184
4:50

The New York Times admits a “40-year rise in the number of immigrants” living in Orange County, California has transformed the region from a “fortress of conservative Republicanism” to a Democrat electoral sweep.

The Times notes in a piece titled “In Orange County, a Republican Fortress Turns Democratic” that the rapid demographic changes of the county — which now has a more than 30 percent foreign-born population — has swiftly handed the region over to Democrats. 
Breitbart News reported that Orange County’s booming foreign-born populations of mostly Asian immigrants and migrants from Central America coincided with Democrats sweeping the midterm elections in an area that gave birth to President Richard Nixon.

The Times now acknowledges the demographic changes are at least partially responsible for the diminishing Republican representation in Orange County:
There was a steady decrease in white voters in the seven congressional districts that are in and around Orange County between 1980 and 2017, according to census data. In 1980, whites made up 75 percent of the population in the district where Mr. Cisneros won. By 2017, that number dropped to 30 percent. [Emphasis added]
The county’s immigrant population grew five times as fast as the general population between 1980 and 2000, and while the pace of immigration has slowed, the Latino and Asian populations continues to increase, driven by the children of immigrant families born in the United States. [Emphasis added]
“You went from a solid Republican county to one in which Republicans were just barely the majority, and it fell pretty quickly in the past two years,” said Ms. Godwin. “You have had continued demographic changes. This is a county that went from majority-white to having a majority that are Latino and Asian-American. So that has gone hand-in-hand — particularly with the rising Asian-American population — to voting more Democratic.” [Emphasis added]
In a series of charts, Times reporters Robert Gebeloff and Jasmine C. Lee. reveal that while Orange County has become less and less Republican, the foreign-born population has grown significantly, the share of college graduates has peaked, and the white American population has fallen drastically.



HOME TO DIANNE FEINSTEIN, NANCY PELOSI, KAMALA HARRIS AND GAVIN NEWSOM
Adios, Sanctuary La Raza Welfare State of California        
A fifth-generation Californian laments his state’s ongoing economic collapse.
By Steve Baldwin
American Spectator, October 19, 2017
What’s clear is that the producers are leaving the state and the takers are coming in. Many of the takers are illegal aliens, now estimated to number over 2.6 million. 
The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates that California spends $22 billion on government services for illegal aliens, including welfare, education, Medicaid, and criminal justice system costs. 
                                                                                          
BLOG: MANY DISPUTE CALIFORNIA’S EXPENDITURES FOR THE LA RAZA WELFARE STATE IN MEXIFORNIA JUST AS THEY DISPUTE THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS. APPROXIMATELY HALF THE POPULATION OF CA IS NOW MEXICAN AND BREEDING ANCHOR BABIES FOR WELFARE LIKE BUNNIES. THE $22 BILLION IS STATE EXPENDITURE ONLY. COUNTIES PAY OUT MORE WITH LOS ANGELES COUNTY LEADING AT OVER A BILLION DOLLARS PAID OUT YEARLY TO MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS. NOW MULTIPLY THAT BY THE NUMBER OF COUNTIES IN CA AND YOU START TO GET AN IDEA OF THE STAGGERING WELFARE STATE MEXICO AND THE DEMOCRAT PARTY HAVE ERECTED SANS ANY LEGALS VOTES. ADD TO THIS THE FREE ENTERPRISE HOSPITAL AND CLINIC COST FOR LA RAZA’S “FREE” MEDICAL WHICH IS ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT $1.5 BILLION PER YEAR.

Liberals claim they more than make that up with taxes paid, but that’s simply not true. It’s not even close. FAIR estimates illegal aliens in California contribute only $1.21 billion in tax revenue, which means they cost California $20.6 billion, or at least $1,800 per household.

Nonetheless, open border advocates, such as 
Facebook Chairman Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the Center for Immigration Studies 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 illegal aliens were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, California, with its 2.6 million illegal aliens, would be booming.
Furthermore, the complexion of illegal aliens has changed with far more on welfare and committing crimes than those who entered the country in the 1980s. 
Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has testified before a Congressional committee that in 2004, 95% of all outstanding warrants for murder in Los Angeles were for illegal aliens; in 2000, 23% of all Los Angeles County jail inmates were illegal aliens and that in 1995, 60% of Los Angeles’s largest street gang, the 18th Street gang, were illegal aliens. Granted, those statistics are old, but if you talk to any California law enforcement officer, they will tell you it’s much worse today. The problem is that the Brown administration will not release any statewide data on illegal alien crimes. That would be insensitive. And now that California has declared itself a “sanctuary state,” there is little doubt this sends a message south of the border that will further escalate illegal immigration into the state.
"If the racist "Sensenbrenner Legislation" passes the US Senate, there is no doubt that a massive civil disobedience movement will emerge. Eventually labor union power can merge with the immigrant civil rights and "Immigrant Sanctuary" movements to enable us to either form a new political party or to do heavy duty reforming of the existing Democratic Party. The next and final steps would follow and that is to elect our own governors of all the states within Aztlan." 
Indeed, California goes out of its way to attract illegal aliens. The state has even created government programs that cater exclusively to illegal aliens. For example, the State Department of Motor Vehicles has offices that only process driver licenses for illegal aliens. With over a million illegal aliens now driving in California, the state felt compelled to help them avoid the long lines the rest of us must endure at the DMV. 
And just recently, the state-funded University of California system announced it will spend $27 million on financial aid for illegal aliens. They’ve even taken out radio spots on stations all along the border, just to make sure other potential illegal border crossers hear about this program. I can’t afford college education for all my four sons, but my taxes will pay for illegals to get a college education.
https://spectator.org/adios-california/?utm_source=American+Spectator+Emails&utm_campaign=6e1b467cf4



If Immigration Creates Wealth, Why Is California America's Poverty Capital?




California used to be home to America's largest and most affluent middle class.  Today, it is America's poverty capital.  What went wrong?  In a word: immigration.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau's Official Poverty Measure, California's poverty rate hovers around 15 percent.  But this figure is misleading: the Census Bureau measures poverty relative to a uniform national standard, which doesn't account for differences in living costs between states – the cost of taxes, housing, and health care are higher in California than in Oklahoma, for example.  Accounting for these differences reveals that California's real poverty rate is 20.6 percent – the highest in America, and nearly twice the national average of 12.7 percent.

Likewise, income inequality in California is the second-highest in America, behind only New York.  In fact, if California were an independent country, it would be the 17th most unequal country on Earth, nestled comfortably between Honduras and Guatemala.  Mexico is slightly more egalitarian.  California is far more unequal than the "social democracies" it emulates: Canada is the 111th most unequal nation, while Norway is far down the list at number 153 (out of 176 countries).  In terms of income inequality, California has more in common with banana republics than other "social democracies."

More Government, More Poverty
High taxes, excessive regulations, and a lavish welfare state – these are the standard explanations for California's poverty epidemic.  They have some merit.  For example, California has both the highest personal income tax rate and the highest sales tax in America, according to Politifact.

Not only are California's taxes high, but successive "progressive" governments have swamped the state in a sea of red tape.  Onerous regulations cripple small businesses and retard economic growth.  Kerry Jackson, a fellow with the Pacific Research Institute, gives a few specific examples of how excessive government regulation hurts California's poor.  He writes in a recent op-ed for the Los Angeles Times:
Extensive environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions make energy more expensive, also hurting the poor.  By some estimates, California energy costs are as much as 50% higher than the national average.  Jonathan A. Lesser of Continental Economics ... found that "in 2012, nearly 1 million California households faced ... energy expenditures exceeding 10% of household income."
Some government regulation is necessary and desirable, but most of California's is not.  There is virtue in governing with a "light touch."
Finally, California's welfare state is, perhaps paradoxically, a source of poverty in the state.  The Orange Country Register reports that California's social safety net is comparable in scale to those found in Europe:
In California a mother with two children under the age of 5 who participates in these major welfare programs – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), housing assistance, home energy assistance, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children – would receive a benefits package worth $30,828 per year.
... [Similar] benefits in Europe ranged from $38,588 per year in Denmark to just $1,112 in Romania.  The California benefits package is higher than in well-known welfare states as France ($17,324), Germany ($23,257) and even Sweden ($22,111).
Although welfare states ideally help the poor, reality is messy.  There are three main problems with the welfare state.  First, it incentivizes poverty by rewardingthe poor with government handouts that are often far more valuable than a job.  This can be ameliorated to some degree by imposing work requirements on welfare recipients, but in practice, such requirements are rarely imposed.  Second, welfare states are expensive.  This means higher taxes and therefore slower economic growth and fewer job opportunities for everyone – including the poor.
Finally, welfare states are magnets for the poor.  Whether through domestic migration or foreign immigration, poor people flock to places with generous welfare states.  This is logical from the immigrant's perspective, but it makes little sense from the taxpayer's.  This fact is why socialism and open borders arefundamentally incompatible.

Why Big Government?
Since 1960, California's population exploded from 15.9 to 39 million people.  The growth was almost entirely due to immigration – many people came from other states, but the majority came from abroad.  The Public Policy Institute of California estimates that 10 million immigrants currently reside in California.  This works out to 26 percent of the state's population.

This figure includes 2.4 million illegal aliens, although a recent study from Yale University suggests that the true number of aliens is at least double that.  Modifying the initial figure implies that nearly one in three Californians is an immigrant.  This is not to disparage California's immigrant population, but it is madness to deny that such a large influx of people has changed California's society and economy.

Importantly, immigrants vote Democrat by a ratio higher than 2:1, according to a report from the Center for Immigration Studies.  In California, immigration has increased the pool of likely Democrat voters by nearly 5 million people, compared to just 2.4 million additional likely Republican voters.  Not only does this almost guarantee Democratic victories, but it also shifts California's political midpoint to the left.  This means that to remain competitive in elections, the Republicans must abandon or soften many conservative positions so as to cater to the center.
California became a Democratic stronghold not because Californians became socialists, but because millions of socialists moved there.  Immigration turned California blue, and immigration is ultimately to blame for California's high poverty level.



California, the Shithole State and Getting Worse by the Day.

By Wayne Allyn Root

Gateway Pundit, 

California is Exhibit A. It’s filled with immigrants. Ten million to be exact. Many of them illegal. Guess which state has the highest poverty rate in the country? Not Mississippi, New Mexico, or West Virginia, but California- where nearly one out of five residents is poor. That’s according to the Census Bureau.

While California accounts for 12% of America’s population, it accounts for one third of America’s welfare checks. California leads the country in food stamp use. California has more people on welfare than most countries around the world.
. . .
If immigration is so great for our country and illegal aliens “contribute a net positive” to society…how do you explain what’s happening in California?

I haven’t even gotten to the taxes. The income taxes, business taxes, sales taxes and gas taxes are all the highest in the nation. Why do you think that is? To pay the enormous costs of illegal immigration. To pay for the education costs, healthcare costs, police, courts, lawyers, prisons, and hundreds of different welfare programs for millions of California’s illegal aliens and struggling legal immigrants too.

But you haven’t heard the worst yet. California- the immigrant capital of America- is filthy. Perhaps the filthiest place on earth. Filthier than the slums of Calcutta. Filthier than the poorest slums of Brazil and Africa.

NBC journalists recently conducted a survey of San Francisco. They found piles of smelly garbage on the streets, used needles, gallons of urine and piles of feces- all near famous tourist attractions, fancy hotels, government buildings and children’s playgrounds.


http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/04/wayne-allyn-root-california-shthole/



Bienvenidos a Mexico: California's ballot-harvesting, sure enough, is borrowed from Mexico



In an extraordinary investigative piece on how ballot-harvesting works by Steve Miller, published on Real Clear Investigations, we learn an amazing amount of information about how ballot-harvesting works and why it's so closely connected to election fraud, skewing elections in directions they normally wouldn't go. Themust-read piece is focused on how Texas is dealing with the seedy issue, enforcing the law, prosecuting more than twice as many cases of electoral fraud as California, even hampered as Texas is by weak penalties for violators. But a little detail stands out much deeper into the piece: Ballot-harvesting, which is at the root of considerable fraud of all kinds, is a practice specifically borrowed from Latin America, with a very impressive Latino analyst, K.B. Forbes, who has electoral experience in both countries, citing Mexico. Here's the passage:
The practice has its roots in Latin America, said K.B. Forbes, a political consultant and Hispanic activist who has served as an elections observer in Sonora, Mexico. “In the Latin culture, they have colonias, which is ‘little colony,’ literally,” he said. “In these, they sometimes have the equivalent of a precinct boss, and that’s how people move up. The [politiqueras] deliver the vote and when the candidate moves in, the theory is that they get a good post inside the government.”
That brings up California, where ballot-harvesting is perfectly legal, and normal voters have to wonder how the heck that happened. Ballot-harvesting has been a disaster for Republicans in California, with all conservatives now shut out from any representation in once-red Orange County. Most congressional elections there showed Republican candidates in the lead on election night in the last midterm, but all of them flipped to Democrats as the Democrat-led ballot-harvesting brought in votes and votes and votes from supposed precincts, harvested by their political operatives, until the result went the other way. (This by the way, didn't happen in districts where Democrats held a small lead, nothing flipped in their cases and ballots did not keep rolling in).
If ballot harvesting is a practice imported from Mexican politics, what does that say about California politics, whose legislators would embrace Mexican electoral practices over the U.S. standard? As I mentioned earlier, Mexico has been called "a perfect dicatorship" by none other than Nobel Prize-winning literary lion Mario Vargas Llosa, owing to the continuous power of the Mexican Partido Revolucionario Institucional (or P.R.I.), which up under a decade or two ago, had a hammerlock monopoly on Mexican politics, winning every single election in what was then a one-party state. That's a system so bad people emigrated illegally from that country to get away from it. Now, the cultural practice is right there waiting for them in California, albeit, virtually nowhere else.
And like the P.R.I.'s Mexican electoral practice of ballot-harvesting, it's noteworthy that the ruling Democrats of California also are famous for doling out the goodies to the loyal voters. They've promised amazing things to California's illegal immigrant population, with the latest thing free heath care. California's insurance commissioner, the respected non-partisan Steve Poizner, was, conveniently, ballot-harvested out of office after an election-night lead several days after midterm by utterly leftist Democrat Ricardo Lara who openly declared his support and big plans for free health care for illegals. He's tried it before in the legislator and now he's going to do it this time through the executive. California's incoming governor, of course, is all in for the goody-slinging. In Mexico, they used to pass out bags of beans for votes. In California, the prizes are considerably higher, and they go well beyond free health care.  I've already noted the weird similarities to how California is run, and P.R.I-style politics here.
Any wonder California is going way out of its way to welcome illegal immigrants? "You're all welcome here," as Gov. Jerry Brown famously said. California already hosts a quarter of the nation's illegals, and with middle class families now moving out due to high living costs and punitive taxation, the California P.R.I. likes new bodies coming in who have a lot of needs, which keeps the congressional seats numerous and the federal funds flowing.
It all makes a normal person wonder about the weird closeness of California officials and their Mexican counterparts, too. Newsom has already paid a visit to Mexico to discuss the caravan with the Mexican government in Mexico City (not Tijuana, where he would have gotten a earful from the generally conservative and more dissident-oriented Tijuana locals), and he has declared he plans to withdraw National Guard troops from the U.S. border. With his party now embracing the P.R.I's style of governance and having some unnaturally close ties to Mexican officials (I've seen it myself at Los Angeles functions as a guest of the Mexican government), it looks like a growing merger of Mexican and California politics.
Mexico knows how bad the system is, and its citizens did rebel against it with a Trump-like leftist president, Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador, who won on a vow to end corruption. One can safely take that as a sign that Mexicans are trying to move away from that kind of politics, which of course would include ballot harvesting. California, on the other hand, is moving toward it, embracing what Mexico is trying to reject. That speaks pretty poorly for the sorry state of affairs in California. It's only great for the rulers and those they patronize, until the money runs out.
 Until then, clarification about California's Mexico borrowings need to stand as an incentive to other states about what not to do.

 

40 MILLION ILLEGALS.... handed us a homelessness, housing crisis, wages depression and jobs crisis!


THE NEW PRIVILEGED CLASS: Illegals (unregistered democrats)!



This is why you work From Jan - May paying taxes to the government ....with the rest of the calendar year is money for you and your family.



Take, for example, an illegal alien with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or 6.00/hour. At that wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year, if he files an Income Tax Return, with his fake Social Security number, he gets an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200..... free.



He qualifies for Section 8 housing and subsidized rent.


He qualifies for food stamps.

He qualifies for free (no deductible, no co-pay) health care.

His children get free breakfasts and lunches at school.

He requires bilingual teachers and books.

He qualifies for relief from high energy bills.

If they are or become, aged, blind or disabled, they qualify for SSI.

Once qualified for SSI they can qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer's expense.

He doesn't worry about car insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.

Taxpayers provide Spanish language signs, bulletins and printed material.

He and his family receive the equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.

Working Americans are lucky to have $5.00 or $6.00/hour left after Paying their bills and his.

The American taxpayers also pay for increased crime, graffiti and trash clean-up.



Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up people! 

 THE GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY TO SERVE THE RICH,
BANKSTERS AND EXPAND THE MEX WELFARE STATE IN AMERICA
TO KEEP THEM COMING

Greenspan, Schumer, Pelosi and their cohorts are determined to create a $15.00 per hour “standard wage” to be paid to all workers irrespective of education or the nature of their jobs.  This is called Communism! 

BILLIONAIRES FOR wider OPEN BORDERS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED and AMERICA FLOODED WITH FOREIGNERS.
But Benioff’s cheap-labor importation plan would also shrink the income and careers sought by millions of American college graduates, many of whom will vote in 2020 for or against Trump. 
*
The nation’s workforce now includes roughly 1.5 million foreign college-graduate contract-workers who are imported via the H-1B, L-1, OPT, O-1, J-1, and other visa programs. These outsourcing workers are not immigrants, but instead, they are contract workers hired for one to six years, at lower wages, to take jobs that would otherwise go to American graduates.
*
The Americans’ salary loss, however, would be a gain for the CEOs who see their profits rise and their stock options spike as middle-class salaries decline. 

LA RAZA SUPREMACIST DEMOCRAT PARTY HOOKS AND CROOKS AMERICA TO DOUBLE THE “CHEAP” LABOR POPULATION


TRILLION DOLLAR WELFARE HANDOUT TO NARCOMEX!

 

Clinton amnesty plan would cost taxpayers $1.2 trillion



Hillary Clinton's plan to bring 11 million illegal aliens
"out of the shadows" would cost American households an immediate tax increase of $1.2 trillion, or $15,000 per household, according to a study by the National Academy of Sciences.

 

 

THE BILLIONAIRES’S GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY FOR WIDER OPEN BORDERS

 

THE TRUE COST OF ALL THAT “CHEAP” LABOR IS PASSED ALONG TO THE MIDDLE CLASS.

 

"This doesn't include the costs of illegal immigration to society, which provides health care, housing, education, child care, and legal services to illegal aliens.  Even though immigration advocates claim that illegal aliens do indeed pay taxes, the dollar amount pales in comparison to the cost of the many services they receive."

https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-globalist-democrat-party-for-wider_29.html

 

Meanwhile, despite the highest taxes in the nation, California is $1.3 trillion in debt – unemployment is at a staggering 11%.  California's wacko giveaways to illegals include in-state tuition, amounting to $25 million of financial aid.  Nearly a million illegals have California driver's licenses.  L.A. County has 144% more registered voters than there are residents of legal voting age.  Clearly, illegals are illegally voting

DEMOCRAT PARTY CORRUPTION 

"This is how they will destroy America from within.  The leftist billionaires who orchestrate these plans are wealthy. Those tasked with representing us in Congress will never be exposed to the cost of the invasion of millions of migrants.  They have nothing but contempt for those of us who must endure the consequences of our communities being intruded upon by gang members, drug dealers and human traffickers.  These people have no intention of becoming Americans; like the Democrats who welcome them, they have contempt for us." PATRICIA McCARTHY


THE INVASION SPONSORED BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY
Congressional Democrats are apparently fine with catch-and-release policies because they see the likely electoral benefits. According to Customs and Border Protection (CPB), of the 94,285 Central American family units apprehended last year, 99 percent of them remain in the country today. CPB also reports that 98 percent of the 31,754 unaccompanied minors from the Northern Triangle of Central America remain in the country. CAL THOMAS

 

STAGNANT WAGES and the Dem Party’s obsession with open borders, amnesty and no damned legal need apply!
THE LA RAZA SUPREMACY PARTY for OPEN BORDERS, AMNESTY, NON-ENFORCEMENT, NO E-VERIFY and no Legal need apply!!!

The Democratic Party used to be the party of blue collar America- supporting laws and policies that benefited that segment of the U.S. population.  Their leaders may still claim to be advocates for American working families, however their duplicitous actions that betray American workers and their families, while undermining national security and public safety, provide clear and incontrovertible evidence of their lies…. MICHAEL CUTLER …FRONTPAGE mag

 

  

 

WE COULD END MEXICO’S INVASION IF WE PUT EMPLOYERS OF ILLEGALS IN JAIL

 

NumbersUSA’s Rosemary Jenks:

 

E-Verify Ignored in DACA Negotiations Because ‘Members of Congress Know It Will Work’


Members of Congress broadly oppose a legislative nationwide E-Verify mandate for employers because “they know it will work,” said NumbersUSA’s Rosemary Jenks, explaining why E-Verify is not being pushed in congressional negotiations for an amnesty deal for recipients of the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Jenks further noted that both parties are beholden to special interests supportive of “mass migration.”

E-VERIFY – Why both parties hate the word!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/08/mark-krikorian-wheres-e-verify-dont.html

Putting employers of illegals in prison would end the foreign invasion today!

WEST HOLLYWOOD WELCOME MAT FOR ILLEGALS… Not a single employer of illegals ever prosecuted in this LA RAZA SANCTUARY CITY where they print voting ballots in Spanish so illegals can vote for more!

 

https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/does-reformation-hardware-in-west.html

 

Simultaneously, illegal immigration next year is on track to soar to the highest level in a decade, with a potential 600,000 border crossers expected.
“More than 750 million people want to migrate to another country permanently, according to Gallup research published Monday, as 150 world leaders sign up to the controversial UN global compact which critics say makes migration a human right.”  VIRGINIA HALE

THIS IS FOR REAL!



GAVIN NEWSOM HISPANDERS



WITH MS-13 MURDERING THUG ANIMALS!


ONLY A DEM CAN WALLOW WITH THE LOWEST INVADING VERMIN TO GET THEIR ILLEGAL VOTES!
“They kidnap. They extort. They rape and they rob,” Trump said then. “They stomp on their victims. They beat them with clubs, they slash them with machetes, and they stab them with knives. They have transformed peaceful parks and beautiful quiet neighborhoods into bloodstained killing fields. They’re animals.
And if he takes a pass, the two Democrats most likely to succeed Brown – Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa – favor excessive social spending and are actively courting illegal immigrant support.”
MARK ZUCKERBERG AND OTHER TECH BILLIONAIRES SAY HELL NO TO PAYING LEGALS LIVING WAGES… not when there’s boatloads of Chinese ready to take our tech jobs and work cheap!


“Nonetheless, open border advocates, such as Facebook Chairman Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the Center for Immigration Studies 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 illegal aliens were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, California, with its 2.6 million illegal aliens, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR

JUDICIAL WATCH
THE GRUESOME MS-13 GANGS FROM LOS ANGELES: THEIR MURDER, RAPE, AND CRIME TIDAL WAVE IN AMERICA’S OPEN BORDERS
The illegal stabbed her to death with a screwdriver and then ran her over with her car. 

THE INVASION SPONSORED BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY
Congressional Democrats are apparently fine with catch-and-release policies because they see the likely electoral benefits. According to Customs and Border Protection (CPB), of the 94,285 Central American family units apprehended last year, 99 percent of them remain in the country today. CPB also reports that 98 percent of the 31,754 unaccompanied minors from the Northern Triangle of Central America remain in the country. CAL THOMAS

California admits it has no idea whether non-citizens voted in last primary



After a hard-fought battle to obtain records by the Sacramento Bee, we now learn that California's electoral officials are admitting that they have no idea how many illegals and other non-citizens voted in the last primary, based on the state's motor-voter registration, which has been shown to have registered thousands of non-citizen voters. The Bee reports:
California officials still can’t say whether non-citizens voted in the June 2018 primary because a confusing government questionnaire about eligibility was created in a way that prevents a direct answer on citizenship.
Apparently, tens of thousands of foreign nationals and other ineligible voters, maybe 16 year olds, got registered to vote at the DMV when they applied for their drivers licenses whether they asked for it or not.
Investigators can see that people marked themselves as ineligible to vote or declined to answer eligibility questions, but they can’t tell why. 
“We can’t assume why they declined to answer eligibility questions or why they said they were not eligible,” the Secretary of State’s Office wrote in an internal memo on Oct. 8, 2018.
That email and other documents The Sacramento Bee obtained through the Public Records Act shed light on why the Secretary of State has been unable to say clearly whether non-citizens voted last year. The Bee filed a legal complaint for the records when the Secretary of State initially withheld most of them.
The email shows that, for months, California officials have been examining whether non-citizens voted last year. On Thursday, Secretary of State Alex Padilla confirmed for the first time that his office has an active internal investigation into the matter.
“The Secretary of State’s office does not comment on the details of ongoing investigations,” the office said in a statement. “Determining whether ineligible individuals who were erroneously registered to vote by the DMV cast ballots requires a complete review. The Secretary of State’s office is doing its due diligence by conducting a thorough investigation.”
Spokesmen for the office declined to say how the department could otherwise determine citizenship of those registered.
This doesn't even include the undoubtedly significant numbers of voters who answered that they were eligible to vote when they were not. Could that have happened when the ballot-harvestors were out patrolling illegal immigrant neighborhoods in search of votes? At a minimum, it most certainly was possible, especially, since claims to voter-eligibility on drivers license forms are never checked in California (it's the honor system), according to voter-integrity activists. It also doesn't help that California sneakily had residents sign to certify on their yellow mail-in ballots that they were California residents(rather than voting-eligible citizens) so as to prevent for illegals any potential perjury charges in addition to vote-fraud charges.
If California has no idea who's a citizen, and has resisted every effort out there to get that information (it has defied cooperation with President Trump's electoral integrity commission), well, then what we can conclude is that they don't want to know if a non-citizen is voting and now the word is out that they don't. Apparently, Democratic interests in 'counting all the ballots' as they say, means counting illegal ones, too.
They don't know, they don't want to know, and they aren't about to clean this up. Keep after them, Sacramento Bee. In this case, the Bee is a newspaper that's doing its actual job.

Ballot-harvesting gets just a little harder in California, thanks to 

Judicial Watch





Judicial Watch has forced the state of California and Los Angeles county to end its practice of keeping 'inactive' voters on the voter rolls as is required by federal law. Here's the news from the legal watchdog:
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it signed a settlement agreement with the State of California and County of Los Angeles under which they will begin the process of removing from their voter registration rolls as many as 1.5 million inactive registered names that may be invalid. These removals are required by the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
The NVRA is a federal law requiring the removal of inactive registrations from the voter rolls after two general federal elections (encompassing from 2 to 4 years). Inactive voter registrations belong, for the most part, to voters who have moved to another county or state or have passed away.
Los Angeles County has over 10 million residents, more than the populations of 41 of the 50 United States. California is America’s largest state, with almost 40 million residents.
The state of California, run completely by Democrats, of course, resisted this (at least until the midterm was over). They decided that cleaning up inactive voters from the rolls wasn't in their interest and federal laws were for other states, little states. And as a result, nearly a quarter of California's counties had more voters registered than actual eligible voters. And surprise, surprise, the state has suddenly turned solid blue.
L.A. county's approximately 1.5 million inactive voters on those rolls (112% of age-eligible citizens alone) had been perfect fodder for ballot-harvestors, not this last time at midterms (all of the Democratic ballots harvested in the last midterm have made their voters active voters), but for upcoming elections. That rich bank of potential Democratic votes from ballot-harvesting is now gone with this Judicial Watch agreement.
Ballot-harvesting is a disturbing phenomenon so prone to abuse it's illegal in most states. In California, where it's not, Democratic operatives selectively pay visits to the homes of indifferent voters who don't want to go to the polls or mail in their ballots, engage those voters, and then "help" them fill out their ballots in the way Democrats want. That's why conservative areas such as Orange County were suddenly flipped blue and popular candidates such as Young Kim, who had been winning by large margins on election night - suddenly saw their results flipped. Democrats learned that by extending the election count for weeks, turning in harvested ballot after harvested ballot, they could win any election. 
But the harvest had been incomplete, and with many inactive voters, Democrats would need that bank of more potential votes, which likely explains why California's Democrats resisted any cleanup of voter rolls. California may have mailed these people ballots whether they liked it or not or asked for it or not, as they did with all of us, and well, Democratic ballot-harvestors could have easily gotten hold of those unasked for ballots in the mailboxes of dead, moved-away, or incapacitated voters and saw to it that they somehow got cast.
(Judicial Watch is investigating that one, too.)
The state's chief vote counter, Secretary of State Alex Padilla, insists that not a single voter will be disenfranchised, given all his 'safeguards.' His official plan is to mail in a confirmation form to inactive voters and strike their names if they don't respond, but somehow, I suspect the ballot-harvestors will be paying visits to these inactive residents, who may be indifferent and incapacitated voters, and somehow will get them to mail those forms in, too, thereby subverting the process.
That said, Judicial Watch's victory is a great one and frees them up to focus on other areas of abuse that are rife in California, such as non-citizen registrations (the state still says it has no idea how many there are), illegal immigrant votes already cast, ballot harvestors using coercion, foreign ballot-harvestors, gerrymandering, straight out fraud, and the whole cavalcade of Democrat tricks that have disenfranchised conservative voters in the state.
It's a welcome glimmer of light from a one-party state.

NEW CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR DOUBLES DOWN ON SANCTUARY STATE STATUS


Gavin Newsom rolls out the red carpet for illegal aliens.




Newly inaugurated Gov. Gavin Newsom has pledged to make his home state of California “a sanctuary to all who seek it” in direct defiance of President Trump’s drive to secure the nation’s border with Mexico and enforce U.S. immigration laws.
California’s grossly unconstitutional obstruction of federal immigration laws is about to get ramped up, Newsom’s speech suggests. The state already has unprecedented sanctuary laws on its books that shield its 2.4 million illegal aliens from U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE). Federal prosecutors are considering filing criminal charges against elected officials harboring illegal aliens in sanctuary jurisdictions, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told the Senate Judiciary Committee a year ago.
The Trump administration is suing California over its “sanctuary state” laws that punish compliance with federal immigration laws and provide legal cover for corrupt officials to continue brazenly flouting immigration laws and interfering with federal agents trying to enforce them.
The federal lawsuit targets three statutes curbing the power of California’s state and local law enforcement to hold, question, and transfer detainees at the request of immigration authorities, and punish employers for cooperating with those authorities. The laws also impose draconian restrictions on communication between local police and federal immigration enforcement, including information regarding when criminal aliens are scheduled to be released from local jails.
Under the longstanding doctrine in American constitutional law known as “dual sovereignty,” states cannot be compelled to enforce federal immigration laws, but they are obliged not to hinder their enforcement. The so-called sanctuary cities that form the bulk of the sanctuary movement really ought to be called traitor cities because they are in open rebellion against the United States, just like the slave states that seceded from the Union before the Civil War.
The sanctuary movement gave illegal aliens permission to rob, rape, and murder Americans by, among other things, stigmatizing immigration enforcement and characterizing it as somehow racist. Some left-wingers use the dreadful euphemism "civil liberties safe zones" to describe sanctuary jurisdictions. The phrase deliberately blurs the distinction between citizens and non-citizens by implying illegal aliens somehow possess a civil right to be present in the U.S.
But dealing with the illegal alien problem is the furthest thing from Democrat politicians’ minds. They view illegals as future Democrat voters and demonize anyone who supports enforcing federal immigration laws that could lead to the deportation of their future voter base.
“People’s lives, freedom, security, the water we drink, the air we breathe — they all hang in the balance,” the leftist politician said Monday outside the state Capitol in Sacramento.
Children should not be “ripped away from their parents” at the border or left hungry while Trump promises to expend billions of dollars on “a wall that should never be built.”
Newsom (D) became the state’s 40th governor, succeeding Jerry Brown (D) who was term-limited. Before being sworn in as governor, Newsom was the state’s lieutenant governor and before that, mayor of San Francisco.
While Newsom vowed to worsen the nation’s illegal alien crisis, another leftist, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio (D), promised this week to provide “free” health care to all his city’s residents, including illegals. The program, according to one ridiculous low-ball estimate, will cost only $100 million.
“This is the city paying for direct comprehensive care (not just ERs) for people who can’t afford it, or can’t get comprehensive Medicaid — including 300,000 undocumented New Yorkers,” de Blasio spokesman Eric Phillips wrote on Twitter Tuesday.
Newsom’s pledge came as President Trump’s negotiations with Democrats over $5 billion needed to fund construction of the border wall continued to go nowhere and the federal government continued to be partially shut down for lack of appropriated funds. Trump has vowed to keep the shutdown going as long as it takes to secure funding for the wall.
“Just left a meeting with [Senate Minority Leader] Chuck [Schumer] and [Speaker of the House] Nancy [Pelosi], a total waste of time[,]” Trump tweeted Wednesday. “I asked what is going to happen in 30 days if I quickly open things up, are you going to approve Border Security which includes a Wall or Steel Barrier? Nancy said, NO. I said bye-bye, nothing else works!”
The U.S. House of Representatives voted 217 to 185 on Dec. 20 to approve a temporary spending bill after adding $5.7 billion in appropriations for the wall. The measure floundered in the Senate and the partial shutdown got underway Dec. 22. But that was back in the previous Congress. Now the Democrats control the House.
The meeting came the day after President Trump took rhetorical aim at his enemies as he delivered his first-ever prime time address from the Oval Office in a bold attempt to rally the country in favor of building a wall on the porous U.S.-Mexico border, his signature campaign promise.
Vice President Mike Pence said the White House has delivered numerous proposals and offers in three weeks of negotiations, but Democrats stubbornly refused to support any funding for the wall.
“I can give you 15 speeches [Schumer] gave, in which he talked about border security,” Trump said prior to the meeting. “The only reason they’re against it is because I won the presidency.”