BIG AG WANTS TO EXPAND THEIR SERF CLASS - MIDDLE AMERICA WILL GET THE TAX BILLS FOR THE TRUE COST - Rep. Andrew Clyde Proposes Protections for Working Class Americans in DHS Funding Bill

IN CALIFORNIA, ONE-THIRD OF ALL 'CHEAP' LABOR FARM WORERS GET WELFARE. AS SOON AS THEY ARRIVE, SO DO THE ANCHOR BABIES. 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY ALONE PUTS OUT $1.5 BILLION IN WELFARE YEARLY TO MEXICAN ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS. NO LEGAL NEVER VOTED TO BE LA RAZA'S WELFARE STATE.

NOT HARD TO DO THE MATH HERE

The state of California is home to more illegal aliens than any other state in the country. Approximately one in five illegal aliens lives in California, Pew reported.

CUT AND PASTE YOUTUBE LINKS

CA makes up third of homeless population in U.S., according to study

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OCZZF3_Yas

Immigration Studies (CIS) finds that about 72 percent of households headed by noncitizens and immigrants use one or more forms of taxpayer-funded welfare programs in California — the number one immigrant-receiving state in the U.S.

“The Democrats had abandoned their working-class base to chase what they pretended was a racial group when what they were actually chasing was the momentum of unlimited migration”.  DANIEL GREENFIELD   

Study: More than 7-in-10 California Immigrant

Welfare

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/12/04/study-more-than-7-in-10-california-immigrant-households-are-on-welfare/

 More than 7-in-10 households headed by immigrants in the state of California are on taxpayer-funded welfare, a new study reveals.

The latest Census Bureau data analyzed by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) finds that about 72 percent of households headed by noncitizens and immigrants use one or more forms of taxpayer-funded welfare programs in California — the number one immigrant-receiving state in the U.S.

Meanwhile, only about 35 percent of households headed by native-born Americans use welfare in California.

All four states with the largest foreign-born populations, including California, have extremely high use of welfare by immigrant households. In Texas, for example, nearly 70 percent of households headed by immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare. Meanwhile, only about 35 percent of native-born households in Texas are on welfare.

In New York and Florida, a majority of households headed by immigrants and noncitizens are on welfare. Overall, about 63 percent of immigrant households use welfare while only 35 percent of native-born households use welfare.

President Trump’s administration is looking to soon implement a policy that protects American taxpayers’ dollars from funding the mass importation of welfare-dependent foreign nationals by enforcing a “public charge” rule whereby legal immigrants would be less likely to secure a permanent residency in the U.S. if they have used any forms of welfare in the past, including using Obamacare, food stamps, and public housing.

The immigration controls would be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.

As Breitbart News reported, the majority of the more than 1.5 million foreign nationals entering the country every year use about 57 percent more food stamps than the average native-born American household. Overall, immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households and 44 percent more in Medicaid dollars. This straining of public services by a booming 44 million foreign-born population translates to the average immigrant household costing American taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder. 

 Rep. Andrew Clyde Proposes Protections for Working Class Americans in DHS Funding Bill

Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call

JOHN BINDER

8 Sep 20230

2:52

Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) is proposing an amendment to a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill that would protect working class Americans from Big Agriculture’s desire to flood the industry’s workforce with more foreign workers.

Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee slipped provisions in the funding bill to massively expand the number of foreign workers in the United States labor market, particularly in blue collar industries, as data shows millions of Americans are struggling to reenter and stay in the workforce.

The $91.5 billion funding bill, as currently written, loosens H-2A visa rules so that more industries related to the agricultural sector could import foreign workers. The bill rewrites the program so that jobs do not have to be seasonal or temporary.

Already, the H-2A visa program allows U.S. farms to outsource an unlimited number of agricultural jobs. Reps. Dan Newhouse (R-WA) and David Valadao (R-CA), who count agriculture special interest groups as major donors, are reportedly responsible for the provisions.

Clyde filed an amendment that would strike the H-2A provisions from the funding bill.

“Strikes Section 407, which allows certain nonimmigrants to be admitted to the U.S. in Fiscal Year 2024 to perform agricultural labor or services, regardless of whether that labor or service is temporary or seasonal,” a summary of Clyde’s amendment reads.

Increasing H-2A visas would come even as U.S. farms are repeatedly found using the program to merely import cheaper foreign workers. Last month, a Washington farm reached a $3.4 million settlement for firing its mostly female farmworkers and replacing them with mostly male foreign H-2A visa workers.

Likewise, Clyde is looking to ensure that the funding bill does not spend millions in taxpayer money to fund President Joe Biden’s proposed Release and Reporting Management (RRM) program which is in its initial stages.

Biden’s DHS is hoping to use RRM to release more border crossers and illegal aliens into the U.S. interior instead of detaining them. The program would see left-wing non-governmental organizations (NGOs) secure lucrative contracts to provide social services to released illegal aliens.

“Prohibits funds to be used to implement the ‘Release and Reporting Management’ Program and prohibits community and social services in any ‘Alternatives to Detention’ Program,” Clyde’s amendment reads.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.

Breitbart Business Digest: Bidenomics Is Pushing Down Wages by Flooding the Country with Migrants

298

Shawn Thew/EPA/Bloomberg via Getty Images, AP Photo/Moises Castillo

JOHN CARNEY

8 Sep 20230

4:26

The Secret Sauce to Lowering Wages: Biden’s Loose Border Policy

Walmart is cutting wages for new employees stocking shelves and packing online orders.

This is a surprising turn of events given what appears to be a tight labor market. The ratio of job vacancies to unemployed people remains at an extremely high 1.5 to one. The unemployment rate is 3.8 percent nationwide, with the median among states as low as three percent. Consumer spending rose in July an astonishing 0.8 percent. Retail sales at general merchandise stores, the category that includes Walmart, rose by the same 0.8 percent.

How is Walmart able to reduce wages in an environment of low unemployment and rising demand?

It’s very likely that a hidden-in-plain sight program of Bidenonomics is putting downward pressure on wages: uncontrolled migration.

A new report from Fitch Ratings details that higher levels of migration into the U.S. in 2022 and 2023 has increased the labor supply, driven up labor force participation, eased labor shortages that were pushing wages higher, and allowed companies like Walmart to keep growing payrolls.

“Labor supply has increased, largely on the supply and participation of immigrants, and an uptick in the participation of prime aged workers between ages 25-54,” said Olu Sonola, Head of U.S. Regional Economics.

The border crossers not only add to the total number available to be hired, they tend to have a higher work force participation rate.

Erasing the Wage Gains of the Post-Pandemic Era

Fitch points out that year-over-year wage growth of all private industry employees is declining. Last year, wages rose around six percent, and now they are rising at a five percent annual rate, according to Fitch. Wage growth in the leisure and hospitality space—a prime employer for foreign workers—has declined significantly, Fitch writes.

The average hourly wage of retail workers has generally risen this year—but at a slower pace than last year. Wages are up 4.2 percent from a year ago, a slowdown from the five percent increase last summer.

If we set aside managers and supervisors, the average hourly wage in retail is up 4.1 percent compared with last August. A year ago, these employees were sitting on a 5.7 percent wage gain.

As the chart below indicates, the average hourly earnings gain (blue line) is now running lower than it was for most of the last year of the Trump presidency. What’s more, these gains are worth far less to workers because inflation (red line) is so much higher.

Open Borders Does Not Provide Relief from Inflation

While this is being celebrated in some circles as evidence that inflation will continue to decline, there’s good reason to doubt that. Wage growth was not the primary driver of inflation in the post-pandemic period. So, reducing the pace of wage growth might not have all that big of an effect on inflation.

What’s more, if wages are falling because more workers are entering the country, this could have the opposite effect. When wages fall because demand for labor has cooled, this can put downward pressure on inflation, especially if the total income of the working population is shrinking because of this. But when wages fall because newcomers are added to the population, this does not diminish demand for goods and services. It increases it.

Border crossers do not just contribute to the supply of labor. They contribute to demand for goods, especially groceries and shelter. In July, one of the biggest increases in spending on goods came from the grocery category. For services, it was housing. The consumer price index for shelter was up 7.7 percent year over year in July, making it one of the worst inflation afflicted areas of the economy. Grocery prices were up 3.6 percent, which partly reflects the fact that grocery prices rose so fast last year.

In other words, Bidenomics may be accomplishing something many economists view as almost impossible: sustained inflation amid falling working-class wages.

Liberal California Emigrants are Toxic

By R. Quinn Kennedy

When Arizona, a state that has historically leaned conservative, was won by Joe Biden and now-senator Mark Kelly this week, very few were taken by surprise. Extensive polling indicated Arizona was ripe for swinging liberal and in this instance, at least, the polling was correct.

The question is why? Why has a state that held two elected Republican senators as recently as 2018 and which held a dependable stable of electoral votes for GOP presidential candidates become a purple state on its way to becoming solidly blue? Have Arizona residents suddenly awaked to the idea that liberal policies and doctrines are more sensible than conservative ones? Hardly.

The answer regarding Arizona’s swing lies in its neighbor to the west, California. Since 2012, California has overwhelmingly sent more transplants to Arizona than any other state. When surveyed, escaping Californians cite high taxes, high crime rates, unaffordable housing, out-of-control homelessness, and high unemployment rates as their top reasons for fleeing.

Who is responsible for creating such an alarming living environment within the state? California liberals. A November, 2020 report produced by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University stated that California has 395,608 regulatory restrictions. The sheer volume and scope of California regulations creates such a compliance nightmare that they kill entire industries, send housing prices to unattainable heights, and restrict even commonplace liberties for which conservative leaning states are known.

Piled onto California’s endless river of regulations are its nonsensical laws and policies. Twenty major metropolitan cities or counties in California have established laws, ordinances, regulations, or other practices that shield illegal immigrants from prosecution after committing a crime. These counties brazenly safeguard illegal immigrant criminals against deportation either through noncompliance or by refusing to hand them over to federal agencies such as ICE. With over $1.5 trillion in state and local government debt, California effectively has little money to spare for conveniences such as criminal incarceration. What do sanctuary cities and counties see as the alternative to handing illegal immigrant criminals over for deportation? Release them back into the general population, of course.

Consider this: Between 2014 and 2017, the FBI reported that 49 states saw an average increase in crime annually of around 3%. After implementing “humane” alternatives to criminal prosecution, California crime increased more than 12% per year over the same time period. With irrational sanctuary policies that send a clear message of little to no consequence for offenses, is it any wonder California’s crime rate is now spiraling out of control?

Arizona is not the only beneficiary of the California exodus. The Colorado State Demography Office has published an active flow map of people moving into the state from 2010 on. Disturbingly, the state sending the most movers to Colorado since then has consistently been California. As recently as 2004, Colorado had the political trifecta of a Republican governor and a Republican-controlled House and Senate. A short ten years later, all three had turned irrevocably Democrat. The subsequent consequence? A drastic increase in state and local regulations, a dramatic increase in violent crimes, a severe shortage of home inventory and affordable housing, and a staggering increase in homelessness. Do these newfound troubles sound familiar to any other state mentioned here? The only safeguard against out-of-control tax hikes in Colorado is the TABOR Amendment passed by voters 1992, prior to the influx of California residents, that requires taxpayer approval for any new tax. Not surprisingly, emboldened liberals in Colorado are vigorously resolute in repealing this tax hike protection. As of the most recent election they are unsuccessful, yet remain undeterred.

What has coincided with Colorado’s decline? The mass inflow of Californians to the state. Californians have brought with them all the very same liberal doctrines and ideologies that forced their flight from California in the first place. Does this dissuade liberal Californians from shaping Colorado into the very image of California? Not in the least.

If there is any hope for Arizona, it is that they might learn from the resulting ruin of Colorado, however unlikely.

In the 2020 election, Texas was startlingly considered in play for liberals. Since 2015, which state has contributed the most emigrants into Texas? Not surprisingly, the state of California. The hope for liberals is that they can turn Texas into the next purple soon-to-be blue state. The coveted prize is Texas’ electoral votes. Even more insidious, if liberals are able to capture Texas as they have done in Colorado and Arizona, they will force the state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. They will then achieve their ultimate goal of a Democrat president reigning over the United States for endless generations until the point our country experiences the same collapse as other great civilizations throughout world history.

The obvious question is this: How can Texas avoid the same fate as states such as Colorado and Arizona? Simple. By being proactive.

It is much easier for liberals to enact new legislation than to argue for the removal of existing laws. With this in mind, Texas should take advantage of their current Republican-controlled Senate, House, and governor’s office by making haste and passing laws that would limit the future incursion of liberal meddling. Texas can presently enact laws that prohibit sanctuary cities, require voter approval to remove the state’s mandated balanced budget, require that any new regulation must necessitate the removal of an existing one, and compel voter approval of each new local or state tax including non-user fees. While such laws may only serve to stem the liberal takeover of the state, they would be roadblocks making it much more difficult for ideological infiltration in areas that affect inhabitant’s liberties and quality of life.

It would be absurd to suppose Californians have malintent. Rather, they are simply following the course with which they are most familiar while being blissfully ignorant of the negative unintended consequences their political ideology brings. To suggest that any act of suppression, aggression, or intimidation towards Californians moving into red states is acceptable would simply be un-American and subject to the same type of hypocrisy liberals practice. If conservatives stoop to their level, we have lost the battle and, perhaps, the war.

However, by taking aggressive legislative action in states that have not yet succumbed to liberal infiltration, Conservatives will effectively be planting our flag in a defiant refusal to hand over our institutions and our liberty.