Anti Immigration & Illegal Immigration Info - Ongoing Thread

roadreeler57 · Jan 23, 2008

New Border crossing rules except for Illegals of course

Proof of citizenship required after Jan. 31 at border crossings <SCRIPT></SCRIPT>
Even with a FAST card or a government-issued ID such as a CDL, truckers and other U.S. citizens will be required to present proof of citizenship when entering or re-entering the U.S. after Jan. 31.
The requirement for proof of citizenship is part of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative being implemented by the Department of Homeland Security.
Proof of citizenship, as defined by the DHS, is a government-issued birth certificate for U.S.-born citizens, a naturalization certificate for naturalized citizens, or a U.S. passport.
Eventually everyone will be required to have a passport when they enter the U.S., but a date has not been set for that requirement for entry by land or sea. The government has required passports since January 2007 for all air travelers entering the U.S. from other countries, regardless of their citizenship.
In a nutshell, passports are coming. But for now, the latest requirement is proof of citizenship and a form of ID that meets the requirements of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. Those approved IDs are: a driver’s license; a U.S. passport; SENTRI; NEXUS; FAST; U.S. Coast Guard Mariner Document; or, active-duty military identification.
Confused?
Land Line has put together the following list of questions and answers from government sources to help U.S. truckers and their families sort out some details of these requirements.
Q. What documents will I need to enter the U.S. at a land crossing after Jan. 31, 2008?
A. You will need two things: Proof of citizenship and an approved form of ID listed above.
Q. I have a FAST card and an electronic cargo manifest. Is that good enough?
A. Not after Jan. 31. You will need proof of citizenship and a form of ID that meets the requirements of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. Those approved IDs are: a driver’s license; a U.S. passport; SENTRI; NEXUS; FAST; U.S. Coast Guard Mariner Document; or, active-duty military identification.
Q. What happens if I don’t have the proper ID after Jan. 31?
A. Unless the government implements a grace period for enforcement, you could be turned away from crossing the border.
Q. Why is the government requiring this?
A. Congress passed the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative in 2004 to increase border security. Besides security, the government also wants to speed up processing time for trade.
Q. Will everyone need a passport to cross?
A. Eventually, but not just yet for crossings by land or sea. Sometime in the near future, Homeland Security is expected to issue a “notice of proposed rulemaking” to require a passport or passport-type card for all border traffic.
Q. What if I cross into Canada only once a year? Does this still apply?
A. Yes. It doesn’t matter how often you cross.
Q. How do I get a passport?
A. If you’ve never had a passport, you need to apply in person at one of 9,000 registered locations. Click here to find a location through the U.S. Department of State. If you are renewing a passport that is less than 10 years old, you can do it online or by mail, with a few exceptions. If your passport is too old, damaged or has been lost or stolen, you need to start over, in person, at a registered location.
Q. How much does a passport cost?
A. For adults 16 and older, it’s $97 which includes various fees. For those under 16, it’s $82.
Q. What is a “passport card?”
A. Soon, U.S. citizens will be able to obtain a wallet-sized version of a passport called a passport card. Those will start becoming available after Feb. 1, but are not mandatory. A passport card will contain a chip that carries a person’s passport information and citizenship identity.
Q. Will my spouse, team driver or any other passenger need these documents too, and what about children?
A. All adults in the vehicle will need to provide the proper ID when crossing the U.S. border. The Department of Homeland Security issued a “notice of proposed rulemaking” that outlines somewhat flexible requirements for children. It is always wise to carry identification for children, such as birth certificates, especially if you’re crossing international borders.
Q. What else does the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative require?
A.Click here to view the government site.
– By David Tanner, staff writer
david_tanner@landlinemag.com

Buster · Jan 23, 2008

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/23/texas.law/index.html?eref=ib_topstories

FARMERS BRANCH, Texas (CNN) -- Illegal immigrants cannot rent or own homes in Farmers Branch, Texas, under an ordinance the city's council passed Tuesday night.

The measure requires the Dallas suburb to check a renter's legal status with the federal government.

"The federal government will verify if the person is in the country legally," Mayor Pro Tem Tim O'Hare said. "If not, we will notify that person as well as the landlord in writing that they do not have the right to be in the country."

The City Council tried to crackdown on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants last year -- the latest among local and state governments to focus on illegal immigration. Yet immigrant advocates sued to block that law, and the city said it has spent $770,000 in attorneys' fees to defend it.

The case is still in court after a federal judge blocked that law, finding that city officials were trying to control immigration differently from the U.S. government, according to The Associated Press.

Attorneys for Farmers Branch have said they believe the new ordinance clears up any constitutional questions.

"If we were sued for this ordinance and had to defend this ordinance as well, it wouldn't surprise me," O'Hare said. "We're not in this for the short term. We're in this for the long haul -- for the upcoming years and decades."

If landlords continue to rent to illegal immigrants, the new ordinance would let the city fine tenants and landlords $500 a day.

Jose Galvez, a contractor and 16-year resident of Farmers Branch, criticized the decision.

"Basically you have to apply for a visa before you can become a resident of this city," Galvez said. "If there's a glitch where the federal government made a mistake or they don't have your proper information, you're the one who now has to prove once again you're here legally.

"There are other apartment complex owners who believe they've invested in this community before all of this and the way they're going on about this is not healthy."

In a referendum last year, residents in Farmers Branch approved the City Council's stance by a 2-to-1 margin.

Escondido, California; Hazleton, Pennsylvania; Riverside, New Jersey; and Pahrump, Nevada. have passed similar laws. Most cities said they acted out of frustration with the federal government for not enforcing immigration laws more vigorously.

"The effects of the government -- the feds -- not enforcing the law is 100 percent local," Escondido City Council member Marie Waldron said in November. "We have to deal with the overcrowding in our neighborhoods. We have to deal with the overcrowding of our schools and the diseases that our children are exposed to. Our police department has to fight the gangs."

In addition, the nation's governors are looking for compensation from the federal government for the cost of housing illegal immigrants in local jails.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California is one of a nearly dozen governors demanding that Washington pay the costs that states incur for jailing criminal illegal immigrants.

roadreeler57 · Jan 24, 2008

Thanks Buster I put it in the bigger WCNC blog also...

roadreeler57 · Jan 25, 2008

http://immigrationcounters.com/datasource.html

<TABLE height=214 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top width=444>

Data Sources

</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>

</TD></TR><TR><TD class=t11 vAlign=top>DATA COLLECTION METHODS: This site does not contain any original research, it contains research and data already released to the public so they don't need to mine the numerous reports themselves. Only the most respected sources are used. Significant effort is made to provide what is determined to be the most reliable data and as such is published in good-faith to maintain integrity of data. We find that the data used is sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this site.
The methodology; find the data as far back as available, total to the current date and project the rate of increase based on the established growth rate. Some counters are formulated with their beginning numbers that date back several years. Others, because data was not available begin more recently. The beginning year will be noted with each counter data source. Trend data from the previous years are used to set the clock update rates.
The data is reviewed periodically yet because of the nature of numbers related to illegal immigration some information on this site may contain minor inaccuracies. As new data becomes available each counter will be modified for accuracy. Information may be changed or updated without notice. ImmigrationCounters.com provides the Site as a free source of useful information to the general public. It is the only known Site that posts the totals real-time and displays this in the most basic format. More counters will be added as the data becomes available.
As a result of illegal immigration some government agencies have benefited from growth in their programs to meet the expanding demands of their services. Some businesses are temporarily benefiting from illegal hiring. However, because of the increased costs of social services, law enforcement, lost revenue due to displaced legal hires, lost revenue from tax fraud and remittances, no sound research supports a net financial gain to the country. There are no free social services, those costs are shifted over into higher taxes and insurance premiums. Non-profit services provided to illegal immigrants shifts resources that could be used for legal immigrants and citizens. The majority of research finds that illegal immigration is bad for America and often the illegal immigrants themselves. The intent of the immigration laws and that of the nation's founders are being violated on a scale few could have imagined. It may be presumptuous for the government to assume it can implement a new and expanded amnesty guest worker program when its been unable or unwilling to manage the existing immigration laws.
This site is not intended to foster hatred or discrimination towards anyone, only to provide reliable information so the public can make informed decisions on their own. The ramifications of illegal immigration goes beyond numbers and money and impacts all aspects of society. This topic is covered in greater detail through the books and links provided.
The public needs to be aware of some of the Politically Correct terms or "code words" used by activists and policy makers to avoid the stigma of the word "illegal."
Foreign-Born Workforce, Law Abiding Undocumented, Undocumented Workers, Undocumented Immigrants, Undocumented Aliens, Undocumented Migrants, Unauthorized Population, Unauthorized Workers, Foreign-Born Population, Unauthorized Migrants, First Generation, Non-Citizens.
Activists use of the term "immigrant rights" does not apply to illegal immigrants who have no legal rights in the country, only human rights.
It's also important to realise that because of massive document and I.D. fraud, when an undocumented person is caught they're actually some of the most documented people in the world, it's just all fraudulent.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN COUNTRY, Many more than 10M and many are unemployed or are dependents:
Background: The popular myth that there are "10-11M undocumented workers in the country" is misleading, disingenuous and blatantly false. That figure fails to factor in the chain migration unemployed dependent family members (wives, grandparents, migrant children, migrant girlfriends, single mothers, anchor babies), the adult unemployed, those incarcerated, transients and fugitives. After the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was directed by Congress to stop counting in 1981, even the conservative numbers of the 2000 Census Bureau (CB) estimated at that time the total illegal immigration population was about 8 million. That figure was never intended to only represent the number of workers as is incorrectly quoted today.
Because of the nature of illegal immigration only the nearest estimates are possible. Illegal immigration generally falls into one of two categories: those who entered the country illegally and those who were admitted legally as visitors or on temporary work status and overstayed their visa. The legal status of non-citizens is not routinely ascertained in censuses or surveys with sample sizes sufficient for making accurate national population estimates. An alien registration program at the INS, requiring all resident aliens to report their status annually was discontinued by Congress in 1981. It is unrealistic to expect the Census Bureau to locate the majority of illegal immigrants in the country, nor is it realistic to expect illegal immigrants to fill out census forms. By not revealing their legal status and other personal information, they seek to avoid coming to the government‘s attention. To compound the problem, government officials and researchers often underestimate the effectiveness of the communication networks and the scale of documentation fraud among the illegal immigrant population. The following article highlights how the government has failed to address document fraud.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2002/back302.html
In spite of these limitations, the Census Bureau did develop some estimates of their own. Their estimates at the time of the 2000 Census indicated that the illegal immigration population was about 8 million. Using this number, it can be reasonably estimated that the illegal-alien population grew by about half a million a year in the 1990s. This estimate is derived from a draft report given to the House Immigration Subcommittee by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) that estimated the illegal population was 3.5 million in 1990. For the illegal population to have reached 8 million by 2000, the net increase had to be 400,000 to 500,000 per year during the 1990's. The Census Bureau currently estimates a net increase of 500,000 illegal immigrants annually and a current population of about 10.5 million. This number represents one of the lower estimates and is disputed by many in the industry.
In a document by The Pew Hispanic Center, “Estimates of the Size and Characteristics of the Undocumented Population“, March 2005. They estimated about 11.1 million illegal aliens the previous year and 11.5 to 12 million as of March 2006. The March 2006 estimate found that illegal immigrants have a total of about 3.1 million children who were born in the U.S, and are now U.S. citizens, other sources place this number at 5 million. The report is provided here.
http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=44
On the high end of the spectrum are some private groups that randomly select single sources of data, such as an interview with a border patrol agent or with one elected official. Those sources have placed the numbers around 30 million. Until more data is provided, ImmigrationCounters.com does not yet side with the 30 million figure, yet notes that it may indeed be that high.
ImmigrationCounters.com subscribes to estimates from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of 700,000 per year who enter illegally (includes children) or are visa overstay fugitives. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates 700,000-800,000 per year http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/44.pdf . We also side with an independent report from Bear Stearns, “The Underground Labor Force Is Rising To The Surface," January 3, 2005. This report estimates the number to be around 20 million based on ancillary sources of data that provide evidence the rate of growth is much greater than the Census Bureau estimated. The Bear Stearns report is provided here.
http://www.bearstearns.com/bscportal/pdfs/underground.pdf
http://www.usdoj.gov/archive/ag/testimony/2002/071102agtestimony.htm
The Congressional Budget Office projects 700-900K Illegal Immigrants entering annually and 70 million in the next 20 years.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back606transcript.html

FY2006 - USDOJ saw 317,000 Removal Procedings. Removal procedings and actual deportations are separate figures: http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/statspub/fy06syb.pdf

Border Patrol Agents place number of illegal immigrants closer to 20M: http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?filepath=/features/0807-01/0807-01edit.htm
Note: In FY2006, ICE increased in the number of deportations to 185,431. This counter will be lowered by this amount on 1 September 2007. The report is provided here:
http://www.ice.gov/doclib/about/ICE-06AR.pdf
Counter Data: Department of Homeland Security and Bear Stearns Report, Increase of 700,000 per year. 700k /12 months = 58,333 per month = 1,944 per day = 81 per hr = 1.35 per minute = .02 per second. Beginning Jan 05 to June 06 = 291,665. Starting number 20,291,665 and update at 1.35 per minute or .02 per second. Clock start date is 1 June 06.
Other Than Mexican (OTM) counter. The projected number of illegal immigrants in the country from countries other than Mexico.
85% of OTMs fail to show for court after released. As of July 2005, 465,000 OTMs were released back into the United States after being detained: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/26/national/main711912.shtml
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1162226345208.shtm
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/press_release_0965.shtm
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/testimony/testimony_0038.shtm
China refuses to take its people back and so American officials tend to simply release them. Some 39,000 illegal immigrants from China are living in the United States despite final deportation orders. http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?filepath=/dailyfed/0406/041406nj2.htm
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1162293386835.shtm
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/press_release_0890.shtm
In the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2001, 5,251 non-Mexicans were freed on their own recognizance from Border Patrol custody, according to statistics the agency provided. In fiscal year 2002, that rose to 5,725. Fiscal 2003: 7,972. Fiscal 2004: 34,161. Last year's number included at least 91 illegal immigrants from "special-interest" countries. Releases have soared again this year. With four months left in the fiscal cycle, 70,624 OTMs have been released on their own recognizance - or 70 percent of all non-Mexicans apprehended by the Border Patrol. That includes 50 illegal immigrants from "special-interest" countries, Border Patrol spokesman Salvador Zamora says. http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/immigration/otm.htm Since September 2004, over 20,000 OTMs returned to their native countries. http://www.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33097_20050922.pdf
The number of OTMs attempting to enter the country illegally has increased dramatically. Over 119,000 apprehensions of OTMs in 2005, a 58% increase from 2004 and 220% increase since 2003 while Mexican apprehensions have remained relatively stable over the same period. 87,948 OTMs were arrested in FY2005, 63,494 of them were then released back into the United States: http://www.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33097_20050922.pdf
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/news/national/070505_otms
75,000 OTMs released fail to appear in court. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44390
The top 25 OTM countries listed on Table 2: http://www.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33097_20050922.pdf
In 2004, over 44,000 OTMs allowed into the United States illegally: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0322/p01s01-uspo.html
http://foros.fox.presidencia.gob.mx/read.php?5,136475
In the first eight months of FY2005, over 70,000 OTMs caught trying to enter the country illegally. Fewer than 15% released on bond or their own recognizance show up for court: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0 ,2933,162199,00.html
More than 70,000 OTMs have entered the US from October 04 to July 05: http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/news/national/070505_otms
http://wwwc.house.gov/reyes/news_detail.asp?id=842
Mexican nationals caught illegally trying to enter the country are bused back to the border if they do not have a criminal record. OTMs, however, are sent to ICE detention centers, where they are released into the U.S. public if they do not have a felony conviction and do not pose a threat to national security. ICE is required by law to release illegal aliens who pose no threat. Those migrants are given a notice to appear in court, but Border Patrol agents call it "a notice to disappear." To date, according to the GovExec.com report, ICE has released about 1 million illegal aliens into the country. Out of that, about 465,000 never showed up for their court hearing, and about 85,000 have criminal records. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/6/8/223945.shtml
Illegal Aliens from Special Interest Countries (SIC) and State Sponsors of Terrorism (SST) Countries. A significant number of OTMs that are apprehended and released each year originate from SIC and SST. From FY 2001 through the first half of FY 2005, 91,516 SIC and SST aliens were apprehended of which 45,000 (49%) were later released. It is not known exactly how many of these SIC and SST aliens were ultimately issued final orders of removal and were actually removed since such data is not tracked by DRO. However, assuming SIC and SST aliens are being removed at the same rate as other apprehended and released aliens, 85 percent of the SIC and SST aliens released who eventually receive final orders of removal will abscond. http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/01/may-day-open-borders-math/
As of November 2004, the government has lost track of about 400,000 OTMs, only about 6% are captured and detained: http://www.click2houston.com/news/3927799/detail.html
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ill_pe_2006.pdf
TIME estimates, based on longtime government formulas for calculating how many elude capture, that as many as 190,000 illegals from countries other than Mexico have melted into the U.S.. population so far this year (Sept 2004). The border patrol, which is run by the Department of Homeland Security, refuses to break down OTMS by country. But local law officers, ranchers and others who confront the issue daily tell TIME they have encountered not only a wide variety of Latin Americans (from Guatemala, El Salvador, Brazil, Nicaragua and Venezuela) but also intruders from Afghanistan, Bulgaria, Russia and China as well as Egypt, Iran and Iraq. Law-enforcement authorities believe the mass movement of illegals, wherever they are from, offers the perfect cover for terrorists seeking to enter the U.S.., especially since tighter controls have been imposed at airports. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,695827-1,00.html
The Border Patrol is on pace to apprehend about 1.2 million illegal immigrants this fiscal year, which is about the same as last year. Out of that, about 12 percent are OTMs, which represent a small -- but growing -- portion of undocumented immigrants caught illegally entering the country. http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0605/060805c1.htm
COUNTER DATA: Government OTM estimates are about 400,000 OTMs for 2004, 465,000 for 2005. From 2001-2005 there was an increase of about 123,700. This is a five year average increase of around 24,700 per year bringing the 2006 total to 489,700. For 2007 the projected increase is 2,058 per month, 68 per day, 2.8 per hour, .047 per minute and .0007 per second: Starting number is 504,106 beginning August 1st, 2007.
MONEY WIRED TO MEXICO: Good For Mexico, Lost Revenue That America Needs:
Background: The term "Money Wired" represents all forms of methods used for transfer. Only officially recorded remittances are published in this counter, as much as 50% of remittances go unreported. In October 2002, Banco de Mexico issued a set of rules instructing all firms dedicated to the service of funds transfers to provide monthly information on the amounts and volume of remittance sent to Mexico, classified by Mexican recipient state. In 1993, however, the Central Bank realized that there was a lot of money flowing into Mexico that still was not being counted because it was entering the country through electronic transfers, an expanded array of banking and other financial institutions, pocket transfers, and in-kind transfers. Thus, it incorporated into its balance of payments electronic transfers of remittances (with the assistance of the relevant companies) as well as an estimate of pocket and in-kind transfers. This had a significant impact on the bank’s estimate of remittances, leading to a reported $3.69 billion in 1994, $3.67 billion in 1995, and $4.2 billion in 1996 (Migration News 1997). These are consistent with other estimates, including Lozano-Ascencio 1996 ($3.87 billion), World Bank 1997 ($3.7 billion), and the Binational Study 1997 ($2.5-$3.9 billion).
http://www.iadialog.org/publications/meyers.html
In 2003, an estimated 40 million remittance transactions carried money from the United States to Mexico. http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/28.pdf
Source: The Miami Herald, February 01, 2006 “Remittances reach US$20 billion in 2005.” “Remittances sent home by Mexicans living abroad rose to US$20 billion in 2005, a 17 percent increase over the year before, the Bank of Mexico reported on Tuesday.” The report is provided below.
http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/miami/16816.html
Source: Contrary to the popular myth that illegal immigrants are scratching out a meager living in the United States while money is sent home to their struggling families, a "Remittance Housing Market" exists where remittances are being used to buy homes in their native countries. A survey conducted by Inter-American Development Bank has identified the strong potential demand of migrant communities to purchase homes in their home countries throughout the Latin American Caribbean region. The Inter-American Development Bank (IABD) held a conference on the opportunities and challenges of this new remittance housing market. Because significant amounts of remittance are the result of tax fraud, combined with the buying power of the dollar in those developing countries, a remittance housing market exists.
http://www.iadb.org/mif/remittances/news/more.cfm?Language=English&id=36&parid=1
Source: Inter-American Development Bank, March 2006 report, “Remittance 2005”. Mexico remains the largest recipient of remittances, at over US$20 billion, followed by Brazil and Columbia which for the first time reached over US$6 and US$4 billion respectively. Central America and the Dominican Republic combined to reach over US$11 billion; and the Andean countries totaled almost US$9 billion.
http://www.iadb.org/mif/v2/files/guemez_remitforum05.pdf
As much as 50% of remittances are unreported. As published in the Development Prospect Group Briefing #3, "This amount only reflects transfers through official channels. Econometric analysis suggests that unrecorded flows through informal channels may add 50 percent or more to recorded flows. Including these unrecorded flows, the true size of remittances, is larger than foreign direct investment flows and more than twice as large as official aid received by developing countries."
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPROSPECTS/Resources/334934-1110315015165/MigrationDevelopmentBriefingNov2006.pdf
Counter Data: Based on a projected annual increase of 17% per year, this counter adjusts at that rate. Starting number is $23,900,000,000 as of 1 April 07 and update at $1,950,000,000 per month, $45,138 per minute and $752 per second. Counter start date is 1 April 07.
MONEY WIRED TO LATIN AMERICA: The Case Of The Missing Billions. People Moving North By The Millions And Money Moving South By The Billions: 

Background: The term "Money Wired" represents all forms of methods used for transfer. The United States remains the largest single source of remittances in the world, Latin America is the largest recipient. As of 2003 some 6 million immigrants from Latin America were sending money back on a regular basis. Yet, as large as the reported figures are, as much as 50% of remittances are unreported because most informal transfers are neither reported nor monitored, measuring them accurately is problematic. The scale of remittance seen today is now a significant concern because these are lost funds inherently needed within the United States to support the economy, generate tax revenue and reduce domestic poverty. Remittance contributes to the net costs of illegal immigration as published on the "Costs of Social Services" counter because these funds are diverted from offsetting the increased cost of "free" social services for illegal immigrants as well as increases in border security, law enforcement, public education, maintenance of infrastructures, etc. Remittance tends to question the illegal immigrant's commitment to living in America with a "temporary job site" lifestyle because their discretionary funds are not invested in the United States for long term purposes. As published in The University Of Iowa, Center For International Finance And Development, Briefing #3, "In the United States, it is estimated that 70% of migrant workers remit funds on a regular basis."

http://www.uiowa.edu/ifdebook/briefings/docs/remittance.shtml

Contrary to the popular myth that illegal immigrants are scratching out a meager living in the United States while money is sent home to their struggling families, a "Remittance Housing Market" exists where remittances are being used to buy homes in their native countries. A survey conducted by Inter-American Development Bank has identified the strong potential demand of migrant communities to purchase homes in their home countries throughout the Latin American Caribbean region. The Inter-American Development Bank (IABD) held a conference on the opportunities and challenges of this new remittance housing market. Because significant amounts of remittance are the result of tax fraud, combined with the buying power of the dollar in those developing countries, a remittance housing market exists.
NOTE: The IADB has recently pulled the links to these reports, we will try to locate these reports elsewhere.
http://www.iadb.org/mif/remittances/news/more.cfm?Language=English&id=36&parid=1
In a 2006 IABD survey conducted with Latin American migrants, one-third of those asked said they are making investments in their native countries, mainly real estate.
http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=823579
There are both positive and negative aspects to remittance. Some positive aspects of remittances is that it provides a source of income for families in the developing world who might not otherwise receive assistance. Unlike official forms of aid, it's distributed directly to those who retain full discretion to decide how it will be used. Some studies show as many in certain countries as 43% of those receiveing remittances are lifted out of extreme poverty. There can also be a positive effect on their local community. "The extra income from remittance transfers may cover the basic needs and free up money which can be spent on education and health care, thereby resulting in a more productive and healthy citizenry." Authorities in many developing countries including the World Bank are now pro-actively trying to attract remittances. However, those authorities show no concern for the negative aspects felt by the United States due to remittances received through tax fraud, criminal activities, unreported informal transfer methods and a host of other problems related to remittances.
http://www.iadb.org/mif/v2/files/keppler_remitforum05.pdf
In the last two decades, remittances between the United States and Mexico have evolved from being solely the province of individuals and household toward increasing involvement of organized hometown associations (HTAs). These associations are based on the social networks that migrants from the same town or village in Mexico establish in their new U.S. communities. Members of these associations, commonly known as clubes de oriundos, seek to promote the well-being of their hometown communities of both origin (in Mexico) and residence (in the U.S.) by raising money to fund public works and social projects.
Mexican HTAs have a long history - the most prominent were established in the 1950s. As of 2003 there were more than 600 Mexican HTAs registered in 30 cities in the United States. Mexican migrants in the United States transfer substantial sums of money to Mexico through HTAs. For example, HTAs from the Federation of Michoacano Clubs in Illinois have sent more than $1,000,000 to support public works in their localities of origin. Mexican HTAs have channeled funds for the construction of public infrastructure (e.g. roads, street and building repairs, medical equipment, etc). HTAs are getting involved in U.S. politics, including supporting programs legalizing undocumented immigrants and providing them drivers licences access. At the time of this research, the total number of Latin American HTAs in the United States is being investigated by ImmigrationCounters.com.
http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2003/thesixthsection/special_mexican.html
As much as 50% of remittances are unreported. As published in the Development Prospect Group Briefing #3, "This amount only reflects transfers through official channels. Econometric analysis suggests that unrecorded flows through informal channels may add 50 percent or more to recorded flows. Including these unrecorded flows, the true size of remittances, is larger than foreign direct investment flows and more than twice as large as official aid received by developing countries."
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPROSPECTS/Resources/334934-1110315015165/MigrationDevelopmentBriefingNov2006.pdf
Some of the most common methods over time have been checks, money orders, and transfers via telegraph. Other methods include electronic transfers, couriers, the postal service, self-carry, hand-carry by friends or family members, and in-kind remittances of clothes and other consumer goods. The preferred method varies by country; a description of some of these services follows. Most migrants remit more than once a year and usually on a regular schedule (ECLAC 1991). Additionally, migrants who have worked long enough in the United States to earn social security can have those funds sent abroad.
http://www.iadialog.org/publications/meyers.html
There are many negative aspects to remittance as well. Because the recipient developing countries are failing to create an environment for economic growth and stability, the potential exists for the receiving community to become dependant upon those remittances. It means that the Region is not producing enough employment to meet the needs of its population. An abrupt halt in the flow of remittances in such a case, can be devastating. Often times there are potentially deceptive practices on both ends of the remittance chain, such as unusually high fees or interest, as well as altering the rate of exchange in order to garner more profits. Increased government awareness of international terrorist financing has amplified concerns over the transparency of remittances. Informal remittance-service providers have been used to launder money, and fund terror or other criminal activities. (insert criminal estimates here)
When transfers are made using unofficial techniques, remitters can avoid or mitigate commissions and fees. Moreover, they can bypass official currency-exchange rates and governmental regulation. In certain countries, the use of unofficial modes of remittances, and their lack of transparency, allows the remitter to avoid taxes and may also be favored due to immigration concerns. Because most informal transfers are neither reported nor monitored, measuring them accurately is problematic, so projections for unofficial remittances are speculative. Nevertheless, experts place the total (i.e., formal and informal) amount of global remittances at over US$ 230 billion.
The World Bank actively supports remittance from the United States.

Remittance through official channels to all developing countries exceeded $200B in 2006.

In 2004, Mexico was the largest recipient of remittances, at over US$16 billion, followed by Brazil then Colombia. But growth has been widespread throughout the Region: Central America and the Dominican Republic combined reach over US$10 billion; Andean countries totaled over US$7 billion; and for the first time the Haitian remittances topped US$1 billion. At current growth rates, the projected cumulative remittances to Latin America and the Caribbean for the decade (2001-2010) will approach US$500 billion.
http://www.iadb.org/mif/remittances/markets/index.cfm?language=En&parid=1
http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=393
http://www.frbatlanta.org/invoke.cfm?objectid=9B767D06-5056-9F12-1247B8893ECF59C4&method=display_body

Source: Inter-American Development Bank Multilateral Investment Fund
The following link is a map showing the reported amounts received by the individual Latin countries, the actual amounts may be as much as 50% greater.. http://www.iadb.org/mif/remittances/

2005 Remittances to Latin America, Caribbean To Reach $55 Billion. At this Monterrey summit, President Bush and the other leaders of the Western Hemisphere set a 2008 goal of cutting the cost of sending home a remittance by 50 percent. http://usinfo.state.gov/wh/Archive/2005/Nov/03-676283.html
Press release, October 8, 2006: Migrant remittances from the United States to Latin America to reach $45 billion in 2006, says IDB: New study estimates 12.6 million immigrants are sending home more money more frequently. Latin American migrants working in the United States will send around $45 billion to their homelands this year, up from some $30 billion in 2004, according to a report released today by the Inter-American Development Bank. http://www.iadb.org/news/articledetail.cfm?Language=En&parid=2&artType=P R&artid=3348
Counter Data: Reported totals for 2001 was $23B, 2002 was $25B, 2003 was 30B, 2004 was $34B, 2005 was $44B, 2006 was $45B (One source placed 2006 at $65B): Based on a recent annual increase of $10B, beginning total since January 2001 is $201B @ $4,583,333 per month, $381,944,444 per day, $15,914,351 per hour, $4,420 per second. Clock start date is 1 April 2007.

COST OF SOCIAL SERVICES FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS: Job Security For Government Agencies:
Background: Total cost for social services including food stamps, AFDC, SSI, housing, Social Security, earned income tax credit, Medicaid, Medicare A & B, medical services in emergency rooms, increased local government services, and other programs. Includes costs of $4.3 billion annually due to unemployment payments made to American citizens who lost their jobs to illegal immigrants and the lost tax revenue and economic impact due to their unemployment. American citizens and legal immigrants who lost jobs to illegal immigrants is often due to unscrupulous employers hiring them at much lower rates than American citizens can sustain. The data does not include the totals for private charitable donations and services to illegal immigrants. This is likely over $1 billion and has repercussions that impact American citizens who otherwise could have benefited from those sources, requiring them to seek out government services to a greater extent.
Senator Jeff Sessions, (R-AL). From a panel discussion on immigration reform, June 2006; "And finally, the numbers put out by Robert Rector, the architect of welfare reform that has worked so well, his numbers say that the low-skill workers that are coming in, the parents that they’re able to bring in automatically – elderly parents who will draw on the healthcare system – in the second 10 years of the 20 years that he attempted to estimate, could cost the United States as much as $50 billion a year in welfare and those kind of programs."
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back606transcript.html
Another significant source of dollars remitted to Latin American countries is social security payments. Mexico receives the second highest social security payments worldwide, and the Dominican Republic is fourteenth on the list. Table 2 (below) shows a sample of monthly Social Security Administration data (Deller 1997).
Social Security Administration Data for September 1997*
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width="100%" border=1><TBODY><TR><TD></TD><TD>Mexico</TD><TD>Dominican Republic</TD><TD>El Salvador</TD><TD>Guatemala</TD><TD>Colombia</TD></TR><TR><TD>Recipients
(individuals)</TD><TD>51,120</TD><TD>4,485</TD><TD>678</TD><TD>918</TD><TD>2,295</TD></TR><TR><TD>Payments</TD><TD>$16.5 million</TD><TD>$2 million</TD><TD>$271,000</TD><TD>$ 409,000</TD><TD>$1 million</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<CENTER><TABLE cellPadding=0 width="90%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>*The data reported is only for the month specified and does not include total beneficiaries or amounts received in that country.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></CENTER>

Although there are temporary benefits to cheap labor, there are significant long term costs associated with circumventing the laws. The Bear Stearns report estimates the social cost at $30 billion per year. They estimate that about 5 million illegal workers are collecting wages on a cash basis and avoiding income taxes, costing the United States about $35 billion per year.
Source : Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), “The High Costs of Cheap Labor,“ August 2004, California alone has estimated that the net cost to the state of providing government services to illegal immigrants approached $3 billion during a single fiscal year. “The fact that states must bear the cost of federal failure turns illegal immigration, in effect, into one of the largest unfunded federal mandates." The report is provided here.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscal.pdf
Source FAIR: “Dr. Donald Huddle, a Rice University economics professor, published a systematic analysis of those costs as of 1996. The study also estimated the tax payments of those same aliens. At that time, the illegal alien population was estimated to be about five million persons. The estimated fiscal cost of those illegal aliens to the federal, state and local governments was about $33 billion. This impact was partially offset by an estimated $12.6 billion in taxes paid to the federal, state and local governments, resulting in a net cost to the American taxpayer of about $20 billion every year. This estimate did not include indirect costs that result from unemployment payments to Americans who lost their jobs to illegal aliens willing to work for lower wages. Nor did it include lost tax collections from those American workers who became unemployed. The study estimated those indirect costs from illegal immigration at an additional $4.3 billion annually.” The report is provided here.
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecentersf134
During the years since that estimate, the illegal alien population is estimated to have roughly doubled, so the estimated fiscal costs also will have at least doubled. Furthermore, the passage of time is accompanied by inflation in the costs of services, e.g., school budgets continue to climb.
The cost for social services does not include the costs for additional border security. In November 2005 Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff presented the Bush Administration a plan to address the nation’s immigration crisis. Known as the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), the plan is billed as a comprehensive solution that will "secure America’s borders and reduce illegal migration" within five years. The cost of SBI was projected to be $2.5 billion.
Source: Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), “The Estimated Cost of Illegal Immigration“, Current estimate for social services is $45 billion annually. The report is provided below.
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecentersf134
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/10/opinion/main2667167.shtml
Counter Data: 1996 estimate of $24.44B per year + inflation and population increase (conservative) resulting in additional $2B per year = $374.44B as of Jan 1, 2006. $374.44B = $46B per year (for 2007). $3.83B per month + Jan to Jun 06 = @ $23B = $397.44B as of June 2006. $46B per year/12 = $3.83M per month = $127,666 per day = $5.319.00 per hour = $88.65 per minute = $1.47 per second. Counter starting date is 1 June 06.
Starting number is $397.44B as of 1 June 2006 and updates at $1.47 per second.
ILLEGALS ENROLLED IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS K-12: Don't Ask, Don't Tell:
Background: In Plyler v. Doe (1982), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that all children who reside in the United States regardless of their immigration status, have the right to a free education. Public schools are not required to ask about a students legal status. Many schools have stated they also fear discrimination law suits if they did ask.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0202_ZS.html
Current government information is not sufficient to directly estimate the costs of educating illegal alien schoolchildren. Although a variety of data is available, no government source estimates the numbers of illegal alien schoolchildren for most or all states. States and local governments record data on school enrollment and costs but not on their immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security developed state-by-state estimates of the illegal alien population, but the estimates do not break out age groups and are subject to methodological limitations.
Source: In GAO Report 04-733, “Estimating Costs of Illegal Alien Schoolchildren“, June 2004. The GAO mailed a survey to 22 states to gather data on the population and costs for illegal immigrant schoolchildren. Of the 22 states surveyed, only 3 provided information. Seventeen states said they did not have such information, and 2 states (Florida and Georgia) did not respond. Of the 17 states that said they did not have information on the population or costs of schooling illegal alien children, 6 indicated that it would be illegal to ask about children’s immigration status. A link to the report is provided:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04733.pdf
Source: According to an Urban Institute report, “Children Of Immigrants: Facts and Figures,” May 2006. “Four-fifths of children of immigrants were born in the United States and are therefore citizens, while the remaining are foreign born. ImmigrationCounters.com asserts that this method tries to establish that the four-fifths born in the United States are not "technically” illegal immigrant schoolchildren and this results in artificially lower totals. There are an estimated 5 million children living with undocumented parents. ImmigrationCounters.com sides with this figure and asserts that the schoolchildren of undocumented parents are themselves illegal immigrant schoolchildren, through no fault of their own, many were born in the United States from illegal parents.
Because the bad faith intent and actions of their parents were from the outset to circumvent the immigration laws that resulted in their children enrolling in the public schools, these totals should be counted as illegally and fraudulently entering the school systems. This is not to demean or discriminate against the innocent children, only to more accurately identify the scale of the problem. It has also been a common practice to artificially lower these numbers when children born in the United States (anchor babies) are not counted as illegal. These totals are higher than most sources used for K-12 but more accurately reflect the actual numbers in K-12 resulting from illegal immigration. The reports are provided here.
http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/900955_children_of_immigrants.pdf
http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/410654_NABEPresentation.pdf
Source: The Urban Institute, “Facts and Figures“, May 16, 2006. “Mostly left out of this debate are the more than 5 million children living in unauthorized families, who, like their parents, would be greatly affected by the outcome of this debate.”
2004 Government survey finds that 7.1 million Spanish speaking children had difficulty learning English. http://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/tables.asp
Note: Some sources place the children of illegal immigrant population at 11M.
Source FAIR: Education Secretary Richard Riley in a April 2000 speech noted that “between 70 and 75 percent of the 3 million students with limited English skills speak Spanish, according to the education department.” This would place the Hispanic immigrant schoolchildren population at 2.1M. Limited English skills would indicate being new to the country.
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_researchedd8
The question to this point remains, of the 5M illegal immigrant children how many are K-12 age? 3.5M is the figure detailed in this report by FAIR.
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_media9ecd

A conservative annual increase in enrollment is 10% per year.
Counter Data: Starting number is 3,500,000 Jan 2006 + 350,000 per year = 29,166 per month + Jan to June 06 = 175,000 = starting total of 3,675,000 as of 1 June 06. 3,675,000 = 972.2 per day = 40.5 per hour = .675 per minute = .011 per second. Counter starting date is 1 June 06.
COST OF ILLEGALS ENROLLED IN K-12: Press # 2 For Spanish:
Background: The simplest approach to estimating the costs of educating illegal alien schoolchildren is to multiply average current per pupil expenditures by the estimated number of illegal alien schoolchildren.
Source: In 2004, the Federation for American Immigration Reform determined: "The total K-12 school expenditure for illegal immigrants cost states nearly $12 billion annually, and when the children born here to illegal aliens are added, the costs more than double to $28.6 billion. In 2002, about $1.4 billion of the cost for their education was paid with federal funds, leaving the states to pay somewhere in the area of $27.2 billion annually. Frighteningly, this amount doesn't include "ancillary expenses" such as special programs for non-English speaking students, representing an "additional expense of $290 to $879 per pupil depending on the size of the class," or the supplemental feeding programs instituted because over 74 percent of illegal Mexican immigrants and their children are living in or near poverty.” The report is provided here.
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_media9ecd
Data history begins 1996 at $5.85B, 1 June 2006 starting number is $13,658,218,750 and update at $2,529 per minute or $42.00 per second.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS INCARCERATED: Doing The Jobs Most Americans Won’t Do:
Background: This number includes the totals for federal and state prisons’ and local jails . It only includes data from the five largest states and five largest local jails because there was no reliable data from all states and all local jails. However, those five states represent about 80 percent of the incarcerated criminal alien population. The Center For Immigration Studies reports that the criminal alien population represents about 30 percent of the total prison population. The fact that this number is significantly large demonstrates the core motives for coming to America and the possibility of assimilation are in doubt.
Source: GAO Report 05-337R: “At the federal level the number of criminal aliens incarcerated increased from about 42,000 at the end of calendar year 2001 to about 49,000 at the end of calendar year 2004--a 15 percent increase. At the state level, the 50 states received reimbursements for incarcerating about 77,000 criminal aliens in fiscal year 2002. At the local level, in fiscal year 2003, SCAAP reimbursed about 700 local governments for incarcerating about 147,000 criminal aliens.” The report is provided here.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05337r.pdf
Source: The following GAO report is a focused case study of 55,322 criminal aliens incarcerated in federal prisons. This report gives a snap shot of the criminal history of these illegal immigrants.
GAO Report 05-646R. “Information on Certain Illegal Aliens Arrested in the United States“, May 9, 2005. “We identified a study population of 55,322 aliens that ICE in the Department of Homeland Security determined, based on information in its immigration databases, had entered the country illegally and were still illegally in the country at the time of their incarceration in federal prison during fiscal year 2003. They were arrested at least a total of 459,614 times, averaging about 8 arrests per illegal alien.
They were arrested for a total of about 700,000 criminal offenses, averaging about 13 offenses per illegal alien.” The report is provided here.
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05646r.html
Source: GAO Report 05-377R, The majority of criminal aliens incarcerated were identified as citizens of Mexico. A source of federal prison data is provided here.
http://www.bop.gov/about/facts.jsp#2
Roughly 630,000 foreign-born nationals incarcerated in prisons and jails annually: http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/press_release_0890.shtm
FY 2007 foreign-born incarcerated estimated to be 605,000: http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/01/may-day-open-borders-math/
Counter Data: Combining the federal, state and local populations: Starting numbers is 309,375 and update at .0009 per second. Counter starting date is 1 June 06.
COST FOR INCARCERATIONS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS: Exporting Criminals To America:
Background: This number includes the costs for federal, state and local prisons to incarcerate criminal aliens. It only includes data from the five largest states and five largest local jails because there was no reliable incarceration data from all states and all local jails. However, those five states represent about 80 percent of the criminal alien population. The national average to incarcerate one inmate is $69.00 per day.
The number does not yet include the cost for public safety expenditures, detention pending trial, trial proceedings, language interpretations, and public defenders.
Source: GAO Report 05-337R, March 2005. At the federal level the number of illegal immigrant inmates increased during 2001 to 2004 to about 49,000, an increase of about 15 percent. At the state level the figure was about 74,000 in fiscal year 2003. At the local level about 147,000 criminal aliens during fiscal year 2003. The report is provided here. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05337r.pdf
Counter Data: Starting numbers is $1,370,000,000 = $332,640 per day = $13,860 per hour = $231 per minute = $3.85 per second. Counter starting date is 1 June 06.
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT FUGITIVES: Who Are They, Where Are They?
Background: This figure includes foreign born criminal fugitives and immigration fugitives who failed to show for immigration court due to their temporary visa overstays and failed to comply with orders to depart the country.
Source: Department of Homeland Security, Press Release, April 28, 2006; “The exclusive mission of the initiative is to reduce the number of fugitive aliens in the U.S., which is currently estimated at more than 597,000. These fugitives, or absconders, are foreign nationals who have been ordered removed by a federal immigration judge, but failed to comply with those orders and depart from the United States.” The report is provided here.
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/press_release_0898.shtm
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/press_release_0890.shtm
Source: Department of Homeland Security: “President Discusses Border Security and Immigration Reform in Arizona“, November 28, 2005. Our border agents have used that funding to apprehend and send home more than 4.5 million people coming into our country illegally, including more than 350,000 with criminal records.
Source: Department of Homeland Security, Fact Sheet, Secure Border Initiative, Nov 2, 2005. “Currently, there are more than 450,000 absconders, and that number is growing at a rate of 40,000 per year.”
Source: Rocky Mountain News: “Fugitives“, June 11, 2006; “The first time the government estimated the number of fugitives was in 2002 it was 355,000. Each year an estimated 40,000 are added to the list that has reached 597,000. The first time the government estimated the number of fugitives was in 2002. It was 355,000. The current number of fugitives who are criminals was not available, 80,000 were criminals in 2004.”
Source: Rocky Mountain News: “Felons Slip Through Net While Agents Deport Immigrants With No Criminal Records,” June 11, 2006. “Nationally ICE admits it checks the legal status of only about 60 percent if immigrants who commit crimes serious enough to land them in prison. It recently set a goal of reaching 90 percent by 2009.”
U.S. Can’t Account for 600,000 Fugitives
March 26, 2007 - Teams assigned to make sure foreigners ordered out of the United States actually leave have a backlog of more than 600,000 cases and can’t accurately account for the fugitives’ whereabouts, the government reported Monday. The report by the Homeland Security Department’s inspector general found that the effectiveness of teams assigned to find the fugitives was hampered by “insufficient detention capacity, limitations of an immigration database and inadequate working space.” Even though more than $204 million was allocated for 52 fugitive operations teams since 2003, a backlog of 623,292 cases existed as of August of 2006, the report said. http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/01/may-day-open-borders-math/
Counter Data: 597,000 + 40,000 per year = 3,333 per month. Jan to Jun = 20,000. 597,000 + 20,000 + 617,000. 3,333 per month, 111 per day, = 4.62 per hour = .077 per minute = .001 per second. Counter starting date is 1 June 06.
ANCHOR BABIES: Failure To Uphold And Defend The Constitution
Background: The original intent of the 14th Amendment and what it has come to be used for today are two very different matters. Post-Civil War reforms focused on injustices to African Americans. The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves. It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to blacks born in the United States. http://www.cairco.org/issues/anchor_babies.htmlIn 1866, Senator Jacob Howard spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by writing:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship. It is clear the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment had no intention of freely giving away American citizenship to just anyone simply because they may have been born on American soil, something our courts have wrongfully assumed.
Source: Immigration expanded rapidly after 1965, in part because Congress shifted the legal preference system to family relations and away from employment needs and immigrant ability. http://judiciary.house.gov/legacy/106-edwa.htm
A Supreme Court ruling in Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967), where the court completely discarded the fourteenth's Citizenship Clause scope and intent by replacing it with their own invented Citizenship Clause. The court in effect, ruled that fourteenth amendment had elevated citizenship to a new constitutionally protected right, and thus, prevents the cancellation of a persons citizenship unless they assent.
Source: Much of the public does not realize that Feb 2005, HR 698 was introduced to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to deny citizenship at birth to children born in the United States of parents who are not citizens or permanent resident aliens. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR00698

@@L&summ2=m&
The bill has not received enough support from the House and Senate to take it to vote. In fact the 109th Congress has introduced numerous immigration related bills yet has accomplish little. http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/legislation_proposed109.html
Source: FAIR places the annual birth of illegal immigrant babies between 287,000 and 363,000. http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecenters4608
Source: CIS places the 2002 estimate at 380,000. http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/back1105.html
Source: Dr. Madeleine Pelner Cosman, as quoted in VDARE places the total as high as 500,000 per year. http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/050325_birthright.htm
Source: Accuracy In Media, Costs for Mexican anchor babies 6 billion dollars per year. http://www.aim.org/special_report/5511_0_8_0_C/
ImmigrationCounters.com will take the high and low estimates and average the annual increase at 393,500 per year. The earliest data available is 2002 resulting in very conservative starting totals for this counter and factors a conservative 10% annual increase.
Counter Data: 2002 to Jan 1, 2006 = 1,574,000; 1 Jan 2006 to 1 October 2006 = 324,630 at 36,070 per month with a 10% annual growth factored; Counter starting total is 1,869,630;
36,070/30=1,202 per day=50 per hour=.83 per minute=.01 per second.
Counter starting date is 1 October 2006.
SKILLED JOBS TAKEN BY ILLEGALS: Every American Job Is A Skilled Job:

After researching this statistic some myth busting is due. Unfortunately these myths sometimes shape the thinking of policy makers, activists and much of the public. The four myths are;

1. "Illegal immigrants are needed to do the jobs Americans (natives) won't do, we need more unskilled workers."

2. "America needs to relieve the poverty of neighboring countries by providing jobs for them because so many are un-employed in their native countries."
3. "There aren't enough Americans or legal immigrants to fill those kinds of jobs."
4. "The lower the formal education level the lower the skill level, Americans are too educated for those kinds of jobs."
To lay the foundation, a renewed appreciation for two important facts is due; That native born citizens and legal immigrants must have the first priority for filling jobs. Second, in every form of employment every job is a skilled job, it does not take illegal immigrants to fill them. As of March 2005 between the ages of 18-65 there was 4M unemployed native born U.S. citizens with High School or less searching for work, 65M native born Americans who have no more than a high school education and 19M unemployed not in the labor market nor looking for work. These resources can to a significant degree fill those jobs if they weren't being undercut by illegal workers and unscrupulous employers. To fill those same jobs with legal employees the employers would in many cases need to increase the their wages but not to the degree that some employers claim would hurt their business, most certainly if their competitors were also doing legal hiring. There is also little evidence that the saving from depressed wages are passed on to the consumers, the business are pocketing the gains. The self-serving business lobby has unfortunately reached many policy makers.
The myth that jobs taken by illegal immigrants are too demeaning for anyone else to fill is also false. With the American work ethic that built the country, every job has high importance to the employee, the employer, the Nation and is as important as the any of the 473 occupations the Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks. Every job and the ability to perform it brings skills, importance, and dignity. Except in a few cases there's no data to support that the jobs illegal workers are filling are so menial that citizens and legal immigrants won't do them, so long as they're paid legal market wages. Any Nation or individual that thinks itself too advanced to value the dignity and importance of an honest days work is deceiving itself, has abandoned its work ethic and is forgetting its own humble beginnings.
Myth #1:
Source: CIS, "As Immigration Grows, Working-Age Natives Leave Labor Market." March, 2006. Within the primary working ages of 18-64, America has 65M native born Americans who have no more than a high school education in the United States as of 2005. 4M of that group are unemployed but seeking and 19M are not in the labor market or looking for work. The data shows a significant pool of workers available to fill these jobs.
The research goes on to state..."Another reason why immigrants might crowd out natives is that they may possess more efficient networks of hiring and employment. In the old days, an employer may have put the ad in the newspaper and put up a poster at the local supermarket indicating that, hey, he’s got another job or two, but once maybe he hires a foreign-born foreman, that foreman kind of takes over that function. He just tells everyone – the employer tells him and then that foreign-born foreman just tells everyone in his apartment building. The foreman just tells his brother-in-law and his cousin about the new jobs. And in that situation, the natives kind of get shut out because they’re still looking in the newspaper, which the immigrants are too, and they’re looking in the Penny Saver and the posters in the supermarket, but in that situation you would have – the immigrants would have a leg up through a kind of well developed network."
The idea that there are jobs that American won't do is false. Looking at the five occupations with the highest numbers of illegal immigrants, there is 22M native-born Americans in those same occupations.The graphs are provided here;
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/laborforcetranscript.html
Source: Numbers USA. This table shows significant percentages of skilled jobs filled by Americans that are being taken by illegal immigrants. http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/Share%20of%20native%20workers%20by%20occup%20-%202003.pdf
Source: The Boston Globe, "Two Kinds of Immigration." Between 2000 and 2005 the total number of employed workers 16 and older increased by 4.8M. Over the same period, the number of new immigrants entering the nation and finding work was estimated to be 4.13M. This means that new immigrants accounted for 86% of the total gain. Analysis suggests that close to two-thirds of these new immigrants were illegal. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/16/two_kinds_of_immigration/
Source: "Latino Labor Report, First Quarter, 2004." The Pew Hispanic Center. "Between the first quarter of 2003 and the first quarter of 2004 the economy added a net total of 1.3M new jobs. Non-citizens captured 378,496 or 28.5% of those jobs. Employment for non-citizens grew twice as quickly as their population growth nationwide, non-citizens are benefiting disproportionately from the turnaround in the labor market. Employment gains for the most recently arrived immigrants exceeded even the total increase of 704,779 for all Hispanic workers combined, which suggests that there were job losses among native-born Hispanics. Thus, one cannot rule out the possibility that recently arrived immigrants are competing directly with, and displacing, other immigrant and native-born Hispanic workers." http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/PewLatinoLabor604.pdf
Source: CIS, "Immigrant Job Gains and Native Job Losses 2004-2005." "Between March 2000 and March 2004 the number of unemployed adult natives increased by 2.3M, but at the same time the number of employed immigrants increased by 2.3M."http://www.cis.org/articles/2005/sactestimony050405.htm "Business will continue to say that, "immigrants only take jobs Americans don't want." But what they really mean is that given what they would like to pay, and how they would like to treat their workers, they cannot find enough Americans."
Source: The Hutchinson Report, "Is Illegal Immigration Impacting Black Joblessness?" Illegal immigrants take jobs from black Americans. http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site.aspx/bawnews/stateof/hutchinson602
Source: PEW Hispanic Center, "The Labor Force Status of Short-Term Unauthorized Workers." "The (2005) estimates show that there are a total of 7.2M unauthorized workers in the U.S. and more than 2.5M of them, or 35%, arrived between 2000 and 2005. Unauthorized workers as a whole make up nearly 5% of the U.S. labor force. http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/16.pdf

At the core of the problem are those who hire illegals. Fewer workers are being reported on payrolls, thus employers don't need to account for benefits or taxes. One business owner states, "Do you know how much I'd have to charge on bids if my guys were on an official payroll?" However, if every business hired legally it would place the competition on level terms. Business that increase their profits from hiring off-the-books rarely pass the savings on to consumers and simply pocket the profits.
From 2000 to 2005, 50% of new immigrants to the United States were illegal. The inflow if illegal workers is contributing to the "fundamental breakdown in the nation's labor laws and labor standards."
Source: Think & Ask, Non-Profit News. "Immigration Workforce Displaces Younger Workers." September 2006. http://www.thinkandask.com/2006/092206-worker.html
"Undocumented immigrants are gaining a larger share of the job market, and hold approximately 12 to 15 million jobs in the United States (8% of the employed)"
Source: Bear Stearns. "The Underground Labor Force Is Rising To The Surface," January, 2005. http://www.bearstearns.com/bscportal/pdfs/underground.pdf
Myth #2:
Only 5% of illegal aliens from Mexico were unemployed before they came to the United States.
Source: Numbers USA. http://www.numbersusa.com/hottopic/2454talkingpts.html
This video demonstrates the impossibility of America trying to fix the poverty of other countries. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5871651411393887069
Mexico's economy is ranked 10-14th in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico
Mexico's economy is ranked 3rd in North America, ahead of 20 other countries in the northern continent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_countries_by_GDP_PPP
Mexico is ranked above 129 other countries in Gross Domestic Product. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita
Myth #3:
Source: CIS, "As Immigration Grows, Working-Age Natives Leave Labor Market." March, 2006. Within the primary working ages of 18-64, America has 65M native born Americans who have no more than a high school education in the United States as of 2005. 4M of that group are unemployed but seeking and 19M are not in the labor market or looking for work. The data shows a significant pool of workers available to fill these jobs. http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/laborforcetranscript.html
"Jobs Americans Can't Do If The Senate Gives Them Away." H-2B visa system originally created to fill temporary shortages until U.S. workers can be found is being abused. Almost 80,000 H-2B visas granted in 2003.
Source: Numbers USA.http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/Mikulski%20H-2Bs%20-%202pgr.pdf

The Bureau of Labor Statistics calculates that more than 500,000 jobs lost to illegal immigrants. Native minorities and the middle class feel the impact.

Source: The Hutchinson Report, June, 2006.

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site.aspx/bawnews/stateof/hutchinson602

Myth #4:
Every job is a skilled job. The concept that somehow Americans and legal immigrants are too "skilled" to fill the jobs illegal immigrants are taking is false. Americans for decades have filled those same jobs. There needs to be a renewed appreciation for the kinds of job skills that build and maintain the nation, yet have somehow been deemed unskilled. All of those jobs are important must be filled by citizens and legal immigrants first.
Source: Numbers USA. Table shows significant percentages of skilled jobs filled by Americans that are being taken by illegal immigrants. http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/Share %20of%20native%20workers%20by%20occup%20-%202003.pdf
Looking at the five occupations with the highest numbers of illegal immigrants, there is 22M native-born Americans in those same occupations.
Source: CIS, "As Immigration Grows, Working-Age Natives Leave Labor Market." March, 2006. http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/laborforcetranscript.html
There is an estimated 19,700,000 total immigrants in the work force. The lower estimates for the number of illegal workers are between 1.4M and 5.8M. The lower estimate for the growth rate of illegal workers is 400,000 per year.
The higher estimates for the number of illegal workers are between 12M and 15M. The higher estimates of growth rate are between 2.5M from 2000 to 2005 @ 35% (500K) to a high estimate of 700K annual growth rate. ImmigrationCounters.com will take the high and low estimates of 5.8M to 15M and average it at 9.2M. The average growth rate is 550,000 per year. These totals are likely conservative.
Counter Data: 9,200,000 as of 1 Jan 2006; 550,000 per year = 45,833 per month = 1,527 per day = 63 per hour = 1.06 per minute = .0175 per second. Counter starting date of 5 December 2006 = 9,704,163. http://immigrationcounters.com/datasource.html
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

roadreeler57 · Jan 25, 2008

Myth #4:

Every job is a skilled job. The concept that somehow Americans and legal immigrants are too "skilled" to fill the jobs illegal immigrants are taking is false. Americans for decades have filled those same jobs. There needs to be a renewed appreciation for the kinds of job skills that build and maintain the nation, yet have somehow been deemed unskilled. All of those jobs are important must be filled by citizens and legal immigrants first.
http://smartbusinesspractices.com/pilot

roadreeler57 · Jan 25, 2008

I stand 1/2 corrected

roadreeler57 said:
Subject: Fw: George Carlin's Solution to Saving Gasoline and Illegal
Immigrants ...

> Bush wants us to cut the amount of gas we use. The best way to stop using
> so much gas is to deport 30 million illegal immigrants! That would be 30
> million less people using our gas. The price of gas would come down. _____________________________________________
>
> Bring our troops home from Iraq to guard the border. When they catch an
> illegal immigrant crossing the border, hand him a canteen, rifle and some
> ammo and ship him to Iraq. Tell him if he wants to come to America then he
> must serve a tour in the military. Give him a soldier's pay whil e he's
> there and tax him on it. After his tour, he will be allowed to become a
> citizen since he defended this country. He will also be registered to be
> taxed and be a legal patriot.
>
> This option will probably deter illegal immigration and provide a solution
> for the troops in Iraq and the aliens trying to make a better life for
> themselves. If they refuse to serve, ship them to Iraq anyway, without the
> canteen, rifle or ammo. Problem solved. If you think this is a good
> solution to both the problems, forward it to your friends.
> Viva la Red, White & Blue!

Found out from a Poster on the bigger blog that according to http://snopes.com that George Carlin apparently did not write this & it originally came off an E-mail or a post that they Think originated from A Tennesee Citizen as a Letter to an Editor at a Newspaper in Tennessee :monsters-

G.K.TEMUJIN · Jan 25, 2008

Report From Occupied America: Mexifornian Pols, Schwarzenegger, Bankrupt California

By Brenda Walker

Here on the Left Coast, we have seen the Mexifornia future and it doesn't work. An economy built on the "cheap" labor of millions of illegal aliens who are kept afloat by billions of tax dollars in welfare is not a viable system. California's deepening budget hole from berserk spending simply cannot be papered over any longer. The massive costs of supporting a massive unskilled foreign population now threaten basic services.

The long-expected budget crisis has formed up in detail over the last while in the capital of Mexifornia. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has tapdanced his way to the end of the fantasy budget road. He managed to sidestep a lot of potholes, but his luck ran out: the subprime mortgage meltdown punctured the housing bubble and revealed the disastrous extent of California's shaky finances and a history of irresponsible choices.

Californians are being told by the suits in Sacramexico that the situation is dire. The press dutifully repeats the warnings; here are some recent headlines from the San Francisco Chronicle for a sampling of the tone:
bullet The governor's budget cuts nearly every state department

bullet Governor's deep cuts could mean hardship for millions

bullet Prisons: 22,000 prisoners could be set free early to save millions

bullet Education: Parents, teachers outraged at proposed $5 billion cut

Apparently the Democratic legislature hopes the public's response will be "Tax me, please!"—Speaker Fabian Nunez has said as much, that the Dems want tax increases. There is sure to be at least one proposed cut that pushes everyone's button. I'll admit I cringed when I saw the map of 48 parks slated for closure.

Incidentally, as salt in the wound, the riff-raff legislators who got us into this mess are scheming to have their careers extended. Proposition 93 would eviscerate the 1990 initiative-based law that launched term limits for pols in Sacramento. In particular, Prop 93 would allow Speaker Nunez (a loyal pal of Mexicans everywhere) and Senate President Don Perata (under investigation by the FBI for receiving kickbacks) to remain in power.

See Stop Prop 93 for more details about what's being called a "naked power grab." No problema to the Governator, though; he supports the measure and continued dysfunction in state government.

You may remember that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger got into office because of the similar financial mismanagement of his predecessor Gray Davis, who was removed via a celebrated recall election. It was quite the people's uprising at the time. Arnold was elected as a Republican who would bring fiscal discipline to a town famous for its lack, and citizens hoped for some improvement in state government.

But if anything, the Governator has taken political huckstering to a worse level than before. He initially talked reform but quickly fell into the Sacramexico style of wheeling and dealing. He became friends with lowlife Speaker Nunez, who has recently come under scrutiny for his extravagant lifestyle on the taxpayer's tab, particularly his fondness for expensive wine purchased in France.

It's not like the looming budget disaster came as a surprise. State Senator Tom McClintock, a serious financial realist, warned the Governor that extreme spending could not continue:

“Republican state Sen. Tom McClintock recalls a meeting with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger one year ago. The veteran Thousand Oaks lawmaker tried to warn the governor that he was traipsing down the same deficit trail as his recalled predecessor.

“In fact, McClintock cautioned, Schwarzenegger's path was even more risky than that of Gray Davis.

“McClintock showed the governor a chart he had drawn. It illustrated that spending under Davis had increased an average of 7% a year. Under Schwarzenegger, it was climbing at a 10% rate. Similarly, he pointed out, the deficit—the billions being spent over the revenue coming in—was larger than under Davis.” [Taking off the budget blinders, finally, By George Skelton, Los Angeles Times, Jan 10, 2008]

As recently as early January, the Governor was said to be considering $5 billion in increased education programs for non-English speakers, even though the overall budget shortfall has been known for months. Can we at least hope the H-bomb of entitlements, universal healthcare for citizens and illegal aliens, is now off the table?

No, if the Governor's State of the State address of January 8 is to be taken seriously. He continued to sell his socialized medicine plan, saying, "sometimes you have to be daring, because the need is so great."

But free medical care for foreigners would be the mother of all illegal alien magnets. After a year or so after implementation, there would be not a single sick child left in Mexico, and to a lesser extent beyond. Many Mexicans already come for "free medical care they say they can't get back home."

A new California program with the imprimatur of the famous movie-star governor would be enormous news throughout the Third World and would have huge drawing power. Coyotes would certainly market illegal border crossing with an additional pitch regarding the healthcare opportunities for the kiddies. Heck, you would be a bad Mexican parent if you didn't smuggle your sick munchkin into California.

To be clear, coverage for illegal alien children is what's being discussed now…now. But the Mexicans in the legislature would never stop there. One-Bill Gil Cedillo recently introduced his ninth version of drivers licenses for illegal aliens, just as a measure of how important the well being of invader Mexicans remains in Sacramento.

Even a budget crisis of this magnitude has not caused the Governor to consider basic cost-cutting measures. By comparison, Assembly Member Chuck DeVore (R-Irvine) has legislation (AB1758) that would end taxpayer-subsidized tuition for illegal immigrants. It is estimated that 18,000 illegal aliens are enrolled in California's higher education system, from community colleges to UC, at a cost of around $117 million per year.

Illegal foreigners receive a lot of our tax money. A 2004 FAIR study reckoned that the cost several years ago for California was $9 billion annually. No one would imagine that number has decreased.

The situation of Los Angeles County is indicative of the worsening financial bloodletting to taxpayers: Illegal Aliens Receive $37 Million From County In November [KHTS, Jan 8, 2008].

“Twenty five percent of the all welfare and food stamps benefits is going directly to the children of illegal aliens. Illegals collected over $20 million in welfare assistance for November 2007 and over $16 million in monthly food stamp allocations for a projected annual cost of $444 million.

“ ‘This new information shows an alarming increase in the devastating impact Illegal immigration continues to have on Los Angeles County taxpayers,’ said [Supervisor Michael] Antonovich. ‘With $220 million for public safety, $400 million for healthcare, and $444 million in welfare allocations, the total cost for illegal immigrants to County taxpayers far exceeds $1 billion a year – not including the millions of dollars for education.’ ”

That's one rather large county with 10 million residents. Think about those cost figures multiplied to the state level, where there are now nearly 38 million residents. Now imagine what could be done if a governor or legislature were willing to remove the many enticements and to encourage illegal foreigners to leave—as Oklahoma has done so successfully.

With such ongoing defiance of the simple necessity to operate within budgets, it's hard to imagine a workable solution coming out of the California capital. The Governor promises no new taxes, but plans a massive new spending program of socialized medicine.

As Sen. McClintock said on the John and Ken radio show Jan 8, [MP3]"There's no substitute for a governor who can pronounce the word NO." And the Senator has remarked more than once, "You can't finance socially liberal programs with fiscally conservative policies."

But the SacraMexicans continue to try, to the harm of all Americans in California.

Brenda Walker (email her) lives in Northern California and publishes two websites, LimitsToGrowth.org and ImmigrationsHumanCost.org. She is heartbroken to see the California paradise paved over and turned into a Mexican slum.

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/

http://www.limitstogrowth.org/

roadreeler57 · Jan 26, 2008

<TABLE class=contentpaneopen><TBODY><TR><TD class=contentheading width="100%">ACLU Furthering ‘Sanctuary City’ Protection for Illegals </TD><TD class=buttonheading align=right width="100%">

</TD><TD class=buttonheading align=right width="100%"> </TD><TD class=buttonheading align=right width="100%"> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=contentpaneopen><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top align=left width="70%" colSpan=2>Written by Nedd http://stoptheaclu.org</TD></TR><TR><TD class=createdate vAlign=top colSpan=2>Tuesday, 15 May 2007 </TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top colSpan=2>
If you love America and can't stand the illegal immigration crisis here and want to do something to stop the ACLU, I encourage you to read the following critical piece.

Reprinted from Family Security Matters

The feds are making it tough for cities to enforce immigration law. FSM Contributing Editor Michael Cutler focuses on the concept of "sanctuary" cities, which is an important issue in light of what this reveals about how immigrant populations are moving into major cities.

ACLU Furthering ‘Sanctuary City’ Protection for Illegals
By Michael Cutler
Several weeks ago I had the privilege of testifying at the civil trial as a defense witness for the city of Hazelton, PA. The case resulted from a lawsuit filed by the ACLU in an effort to block the city of Hazelton from enacting ordinances that would penalize employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens and landlords who rented apartments to them. Clearly the federal government has attempted to avoid getting the job done, while merely providing the illusion that the job is getting done. More and more illegal aliens enter our country each and every day and among them are criminals and potentially, terrorists.

In an effort to do the job the federal government won’t do, some local governments have promulgated laws and regulations that would address this crisis, as did the Mayor of Hazelton and his town’s city council. These ordinances penalize employers of illegal aliens and landlords who rent rooms to aliens who are illegally present in the United States. Small American towns like Hazelton are attempting to push back the growth of the “Sanctuary City” concept.

In a May 6 Washington Post article, Annabelle Garay discusses how Attempts to Curb Illegal Immigration Prove Costly. The author uses Farmer’s Branch, Texas as a glaring example of this growing crisis:

“As cities across the United States spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend against lawsuits and other challenges to their ordinances enacted to keep out illegal immigrants, some groups are warning that their communities are risking financial disaster.
“Dozens of cities and counties have proposed or passed laws that prohibit landlords from leasing to illegal immigrants, penalize businesses that employ undocumented workers or train police to enforce federal immigration laws.”

Garay’s article goes on to discuss the strategy now being used by the ACLU and other similarly oriented organizations of filing lawsuits against any city or town taking the initiative to combat illegal immigration by passing such ordinances. According to the article, the ACLU and other such groups are using litigation and the resulting huge legal costs that mounting a defense entails for the cities and towns being sued. This tactic is obviously also intended to intimidate not only the towns and cities but others who might otherwise follow their lead in utilizing local ordinances to combat the establishment of “Sanctuary Cities.”

Recall that Thomas "Tip" O’Neill a former Speaker of the House of Representatives stated that, "All politics are local." This familiar quote applies to efforts that localities can make to discourage illegal immigration by penalizing employers of illegal aliens and landlords who provide them with housing. If this method is used in a significant number of communities around the country, it can have the desired effect of deterring illegal immigration. It is also very important to note that these efforts on the local level are not about singling out a particular group of individuals according to race, religion or ethnicity. They deal purely and solely with the immigration status of these aliens irrespective of nationality, ethnicity, religion or other factors.

The illegal immigration crisis is growing by leaps and bounds. This can be readily illustrated by examining two factors; the ever-increasing amounts of money wired out of the United States to various countries all over the world, and the huge increase in the number of aliens who have failed to show up for deportation hearings or, having been ordered deported, have failed to surrender to immigration authorities. In fact this number has nearly doubled since September 11, 2001, to the point where there are now more than 600,000 such fugitive aliens or "absconders." Significant percentages of this disturbing total have serious criminal histories.

In his most recent Wall Street Journal article -- The Realignment of America -- Michael Barone offers troubling demographic statistics reflecting the severe impact that the illegal immigration flood has on our largest cities whose native populations are picking up stakes and moving out, as “undocumented workers” move in and take up residence.

“Start[ing] with the Coastal Megalopolises: New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Chicago (on the coast of Lake Michigan), Miami, Washington and Boston, [there] is a pattern you don’t find in other big cities: Americans moving out and immigrants moving in, in very large numbers, with low overall population growth. Los Angeles, defined by the Census Bureau as Los Angeles and Orange Counties, had a domestic outflow of 6% of 2000 population in six years--balanced by an immigrant inflow of 6%. The numbers are the same for these eight metro areas as a whole.”

The federal government sets immigration policies. However, local law enforcement officials can enroll their police officers in an established federal program under Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to be given appropriate training so that they can make determination as to the immigration status of people whom they encounter during the routine performance of their official duties. Police officers often enforce laws that blur the distinction between local and federal jurisdiction when they pursue criminals who have engaged in a variety of crimes such as; bank robberies, narcotics trafficking, kidnapping and other such crimes.

I spent roughly half of my career at the former INS working in conjunction with the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force, the Organized Crime Task Force and the Joint Terrorism Task Force. When I was assigned to the Unified Intelligence Division (UID) of DEA in New York City, I worked with a number of law enforcement officers from many agencies including the FBI, US Customs, ATF, IRS, the RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police), British Customs, members of the New York City Police Department and the New York State Police.

To accept the premise that immigration law enforcement should not be dealt with on the local level is absurd. Yet the ACLU and other such organizations have been spreading this nonsense at every opportunity along with the use of language to obfuscate the situation. Such usage is evidenced when they insist that we refer to illegal aliens as "Undocumented Workers," "Trans-national employees," "Migrants" or other such terms, which obviously are designed to ignore the difference between being here lawfully or unlawfully. Senator Ted Kennedy simply refers to illegal aliens as, "The Undocumented!" This avoids recognizing the fact that we are dealing with illegal aliens!

In my judgment, this is a dangerous perversion of the judicial system by those who have little regard for the harm that they may well be doing to the citizens of our nation and the residents of the towns against which they launch their litigious attacks.

I can tell you from my experience in investigating drug trafficking organizations, terrorists and various criminal organizations, that enterprises that spring up to service illegal alien communities such as money wire services, telephone arcades, mail drop services and phony identity document vendors are also of great value to those criminals and terrorists who operate "under the radar." Large communities of illegal aliens also provide greater opportunities for terrorists and criminals to embed themselves in those communities and "hide in plain sight," thereby threatening the safety and security of our nation and all Americans!

This is one of many reasons why the effort of the ACLU to thwart the rising opposition to “sanctuary cities” is so insidious and utterly outrageous! The intimidation tactics being carried out to against the leaders of cities and towns around the country are obvious. It is equally obvious to see what the effect may well be.

My question is, "Why?" Why would any organization want to prevent the immigration laws from being enforced? The answer is that greed, corruption and the thirst for political power drive these abuses of our communities, our cities and our legal system.

Finally, if the President and all those politicians had their way and created a Guest Worker Amnesty Program, then the efforts of the mayors of towns across the country who are seeking to pass ordinances in support of immigration law enforcement will be all but irrelevant. Most of the millions of illegal aliens will be transformed -- nearly overnight -- into non-citizens with the same right to live and work in the United States as legal Americans enjoy. Desperate people all over the world, among them criminals and terrorists who would want to come here for their diverse reasons, would be encouraged. They would see that the current crop of millions of illegal aliens is actually being rewarded for violating our nation’s borders. Millions more would be prompted to head for our nation’s borders, at any cost, seeking to benefit from perceived American leniency.

If many aliens are able to get away with committing immigration benefit fraud now, what would happen to any sort of remaining efforts to combat fraud in the overworked, understaffed and generally failed bureaucracy at USCIS, the agency that would be responsible for administering the Guest Worker Amnesty Program? Our borders and immigration bureaucracy are under attack from all directions. The local governments that have decided to help our nation with this critical situation are now, themselves, being attacked by the organizations that are litigating against these municipalities, their mayors and other leaders.

Lead, follow or get out of the way!

# #

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Michael Cutler is a Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies and a well-respected authority on immigration and border security issues.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

roadreeler57 · Jan 27, 2008

Romney grills McCain on Amnesty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6EPVyw9GU8

roadreeler57 · Jan 27, 2008

Grassfires video ads on Candidates stances on Amnesty

http://www.grassfire.org/27042/offer.asp?PID=

roadreeler57 · Jan 27, 2008

Stolen from Joe Contrarian

<HR style="COLOR: #fdde82" SIZE=1> 
Open borders advocate Juan Hernandez has joined the McCain campaign Updated

posted at 8:00 am on January 25, 2008 by Bryan
<SMALL>Send to a Friend | printer-friendly </SMALL>

John McCain says that he has heard the American people and now understands that we need to secure the border before enacting any “comprehensive” immigration reform. But John McCain has also said that he hasn’t changed his position. He supported amnesty in 2003 by name, proposed it in 2006 and 2007 without calling it amnesty, and says that anyone who says that he ever supported amnesty is a liar. He has insulted Americans who advocate border security and has cursed at the thought of building a border fence. Which of all of these is the real John McCain? The presence of Juan Hernandez in the background of the McCain campaign tells me that John McCain is as weak on border security now as he ever was.

Old school Hot Air readers might remember Dr. Juan Hernandez. He’s a dual citizen of the US and Mexico, was a member of Vicente Fox’s government, and is as open borders as you can get. In December 2006, Michelle hosted the Factor and the producers decided to see what it would be like to put her and Hernandez on the show together. “Chummy” does not describe the atmosphere.

At the time of this argument, SeeDubya caught Hernandez telling a whopper about illegal aliens and identity theft.

Here’s a photo of him, found on McCain’s daughter Meghan’s blog. It’s from the December 10, 2007 blog entry titled “Univision Debate Gallery,” 7th photo down.

That’s Hernandez, Meghan McCain and adviser Mark McKinnon in the photo. He apparently joined the McCain campaign without much fanfare in November 2007.
Of Mexicans who move to the US, Hernandez has said:

“I want the third generation, the seventh generation, I want them all to think ‘Mexico first.’”

These are Americans that Hernandez is talking about. Does John McCain agree that they should always “think ‘Mexico first?’” That’s the man who began serving as John McCain’s “Hispanic Outreach Directo” last year. Is there any reason that anyone should think open borders fanatic Dr. Hernandez wants President McCain to secure the border? Is there any reason that anyone should trust a man to secure the border if he is getting his “Hispanic Outreach” advice from Dr. Juan Hernandez?
Update: Michelle has a lot more on this story.

Dr. Juan Hernandez, McCain Hispanic outreach director: “We must not only have a free flow of goods and services, but also start working for a free flow of people.”

(photo copyright Heather Brand)

roadreeler57 · Jan 27, 2008

roadreeler57 · Jan 27, 2008

Video: Michelle throws down with Juan Hernandez over immigration (UPDATE)

posted at 10:23 pm on December 26, 2006 by Allahpundit
<SMALL>Send to a Friend | printer-friendly</SMALL>

So I turn on the Factor about 45 minutes in to see what’s happening tonight — and guess who’s hosting.
The employees are always the last to know.
Here she is, looking appropriately quizzical in the face of Hernandez’s flamboyant insincerity, as they try to piece out how, precisely, illegal aliens are “the new American pioneers.”

UPDATE BY SEE-DUBYA: Hernandez lied when he says this isn’t identity theft, suggesting that one could just make up a random ten-digit social security number and this employer, Swift Meats, would have accepted it.
Swift Meats was participating in the “Basic Pilot” program, which verified that a Social Security number supplied by a potential applicant was a real, working SSN. If you submit a random series of digits, odds are Basic Pilot would catch you.
The catch: Basic Pilot only checks whether a number is active or not. So it is easily defeated by giving it a valid SSN of an American citizen–thereby stealing his identity. As one developer of more advanced software points out,

“An extremely high percentage of Social Security numbers are appearing to be multiple users these days,” Douglas said. “My best guess at this point is that you’re looking at a good 30 percent of Social Security numbers that are attached to multiple users. We’re seeing a lot of activity in that area. … It’s just become a geometric growth pattern in the last 10 years.”
Basic Pilot has been in use since 1997 and is now housed under the Department of Homeland Security. It’s been touted as one of the best ways to catch fraudulent documentation, but it is failing in catching the more sophisticated fraud seen at Swift. Basically, it’s a case of the criminals beating the system by stealing genuine documentation.
“What you have to realize is you’re talking about very complex forms of fraud, where an individual completely assumes another’s identity,” said Chris Bentley, spokesman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services division of DHS.

Exit question: who’s using your SSN? http://www.dhs.gov/E-Verify

roadreeler57 · Jan 27, 2008

Swift officials complained about Basic Pilot four months ago

<SCRIPT language=JavaScript> function createQString(s) { return escape(s); } var Heading = "Swift%20officials%20complained%20about%20Basic%20Pilot%20four%20months%20ago"; var tempTitle = createQString(Heading); var Title = "&t="+tempTitle; var storytitle = "Swift officials complained about Basic Pilot four months ago"; </SCRIPT><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=310 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=5>

</TD><TD vAlign=top align=middle width=300><SCRIPT src="http://ads.swiftnews.com/index.php?section=serve&id=71&keyword=300x250_news_art&output=js"></SCRIPT>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Sharon Dunn, (Bio) sdunn@greeleytribune.com
December 15, 2006

Comments

Print

Email

The only check-and-balance more than 12,000 employers nationwide use to verify the legal status of employees is taking a beating, but it's nothing new.

Four months ago, Swift & Co. officials complained the Basic Pilot online system, which cross-checks employees' Social Security numbers and birth dates with other information through the Department of Homeland Security, wasn't working.

The program provides almost instantaneous results to verify an employee's documentation rather than the monthly results from the Social Security Administration. The voluntary program, however, couldn't catch the identity theft ring that resulted in the arrests of 261 employees this week in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid of Swift meat packing plants in Greeley and 2,000 others across the country.

While company spokesman Sean McHugh touted the program last week as the company's stopgap that showed Swift was "going above and beyond requirements of determining worker authorization," the company lobbied a congressional committee in September to change the program because it couldn't catch the sophisticated rings of identity theft going on now.

"This program, along with increased employer sophistication in processing identity documents, was reasonably effective in helping to eliminate the use of counterfeit paperwork," Jack Shandley, Swift's vice president of Human Relations told the House Committee on Education and the Workforce when it came to Loveland Sept. 1. "However, over time, weaknesses in the Basic Pilot program came to light. As currently structured, the Basic Pilot program cannot detect duplicate active records in its database."

That is to say that the system as designed cannot red-flag multiple uses of Social Security numbers, the crux of everyone's identity.

This fall, however, the company had some idea about more than 400 employees, regardless of the Basic Pilot program.

"There was a period of time this fall where the company itself conducted interviews of suspect employees," said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff in a Wednesday press conference about the ICE raids.

He said that more than 400 employees were terminated, quit or did not show up for work as a result of the interviews. The company, however, did not tell Homeland Security about those employees, who are likely still running around with stolen identities.

Identify theft is a problem that's growing, said Chuck Douglas, an owner of H4B Inc., a Denver-area company that markets its services to ensure an employees' legal rights to work by checking for multiple uses of Social Security numbers. Douglas developed his own system to comply with Colorado's new employment verification law that becomes effective in January.

"An extremely high percentage of Social Security numbers are appearing to be multiple users these days," Douglas said. "My best guess at this point is that you're looking at a good 30 percent of Social Security numbers that are attached to multiple users. We're seeing a lot of activity in that area. ... It's just become a geometric growth pattern in the last 10 years."

Basic Pilot has been in use since 1997 and is now housed under the Department of Homeland Security. It's been touted as one of the best ways to catch fraudulent documentation, but it is failing in catching the more sophisticated fraud seen at Swift. Basically, it's a case of the criminals beating the system by stealing genuine documentation.

"What you have to realize is you're talking about very complex forms of fraud, where an individual completely assumes another's identity," said Chris Bentley, spokesman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services division of DHS. "What Basic Pilot does extremely well is (catching) someone trying to pass a phony document as their own. In the vast majority of instances, Basic Pilot is not only a great tool, it is the only tool. But it's not designed to handle these complex schemes."

Further complicating the matter is that current law prohibits the Social Security Administration from sharing information with Homeland Security on instances of multiple use, Chertoff said Wednesday. He called on Congress to change that system this upcoming session.

But the Basic Pilot program may get better by summer with $110 million in planned enhancements, Bentley said.

"This year, the Basic Pilot program received a significant infusion of money in the president's budget which will allow us to add photographs, data mining of potential work-site fraud and employer misuse and do more outreach," Bentley said.

He said there wasn't an actual timeline for system upgrades to be made, but the fiscal 2007 year ends next summer.

For Douglas, whose company began with background investigations for business clients, the federal program is still rather faulty.

"I think the public needs to be very aware of the fact that what's available to people like Swift or the county Social Services at the federal level is falling way short," he said. "It's not meeting their needs or their requirements."

Swift suggestions

Swift & Co., vice president of Human Relations Jack Shandley testified before a congressional committee in September in Loveland to complain about the Basic Pilot program. Here are his suggestions to improve the system:

* Create enhancements to federally-endorsed programs that aid employers in their efforts to determine the work eligibility of new hires. Do this by improving the Basic Pilot program to create a tamper-proof, biometric national identification card.

* Reconcile policy tension that exists for employers when managing the boundaries between employee verification and nondiscrimination.

* Be diligent in guarding against unintended consequences. Employer verification processes that do not safeguard against fraud may in fact create or support fraud.

* and finally, "Swift proposes that an industry advisory panel of subject matter experts be convened by the Department of Homeland Security to establish a forum in which the government's legitimate worksite enforcement responsibility can be achieved through action-oriented collaboration rather than conflicted policy and initiatives."

Source: Shandley's testimony before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, held Sept. 1 in Loveland.

roadreeler57 · Jan 27, 2008

OnFaith wrote: 1m ago

The Founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin was a Communist, he explains in his book, "Liberity Uner the Soviets.

http://www.nodnc.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=268

"No matter what the ACLU's announced aims, it must be known by its deeds. Its history reveals a group of radicals little different from Al Queda in its animosity toward the founding principles of the United States. Just as Islam proclaims that it is dedicated to peace, while doing the opposite, the ACLU supports only causes intended to further moral relativism and to undercut the Constitution".

The ACLU is, and has always been since the founding of its immediate predecessor organizations just before American entry into World War I, dedicated to furthering the cause of radical socialism. This necessarily means being opposed to the structure of government laid down by the Constitution and opposed to the moral principles upon which the nation was founded.

It is not coincidental that the ACLU came into existence the same year as the Soviet Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. All of the initial members of what later became the ACLU were active supporters of the Socialist International's program to sabotage the Allies war preparations; many of them were members of the Socialist Party, notably Socialist party head Norman Thomas.

The ACLU's principal founder and driving force for many years was Roger Baldwin, who among other things was a member of the Socialist Party and a devoted follower of anarchist Emma Goldman. She was an advocate of propaganda of the deed, what today is called terrorist bombing. One of her followers assassinated President William McKinley in 1901. Baldwin supported her all the way.

He also was a member and active defender of the I.W.W., the radical labor group that assassinated former Governor of Idaho George Steunenberg with a dynamite bomb in 1905, because he had opposed an illegal I.W.W. mining strike. In 1910, I.W.W. members bombed the Los Angeles Times building, killing twenty one workmen.

More than a hundred socialist and anarchist newspapers around the country, defended by the ACLU, regularly featured articles describing how to make dynamite bombs and how to plant them to inflict the maximum number of deaths.

Compare the ACLU's present-day efforts to thwart identifying terrorists with the identical avowed aim enunciated in 1917:

Thus supporting the ACLU is the equivalent of contributing to Osama Bin Ladin for the purpose of destroying the United States.

Unquote http://stoptheaclu.org

roadreeler57 · Jan 28, 2008

<TABLE class=media-innerbuffer cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=markerTEXTblueMAJOR colSpan=3>Illegal Immigration Documentary is Eye-Opening </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXTred colSpan=3>Human Events : January 23 , 2008 -- by Ned Rice </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=markerTEXTblueMINOR vAlign=top height="100%">"We meet American ranchers whose property has been destroyed by migrants, doctors whose border-town hospitals are overrun by the undocumented indigent, and native-born American workers whose livelihoods have been lost to illegal immigrant labor ... But the most compelling, real-life characters in Border are the Americans of various ages, ethnicities and backgrounds who came from all over the U.S. to volunteer their services in defense of our borders." </TD><TD width="2%"> </TD><TD vAlign=top><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>What's the one-word theme of the 2008 presidential primaries? According to the media it's "change." Hillary Clinton recently claimed that she's been an agent of change for the past 35 years, which struck some of us as being even more contradictory than her position on Iraq. But the real key to this year's presidential race may prove to be immigration. According to a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, illegal immigration ranks just behind the Iraq War as the most important problem facing the U.S. Three out of four Republican voters describe illegal immigration as a "very serious" problem, according to another Times/CBS poll. Meanwhile, 27% of independent voters say that a candidates' position on illegal immigration could be a deal-breaker for them. Maybe that's why Huckabee, Romney, and Giuliani are hardening their positions on illegal immigration just as fast as their little flip-floppers will flip-flop them -- I mean, which is why the top-tier Republican candidates have been so busy refining and clarifying their evolving positions on illegal immigration as of late.
</TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>As luck would have it, a new documentary on illegal immigration has just been released. It's required viewing for anyone who seeks a fuller understanding of this complicated issue. The film, "Border", is the work of director Chris Burgard, an independent filmmaker (please don't call him an "indie") whose journey from Wisconsin to Hollywood by way of the rodeo circuit is a tale unto itself. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>The genesis of this film dates back to 2005 when activist Chris Simcox founded the Minute Men Civil Defense Corps. After Simcox's group announced plans to spend October of 2005 monitoring and reporting illegal border crossings along the U.S./Mexican border, Burgard paid them a visit, and before long, he decided to document their efforts on film. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>"Border" is set in the parts of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California where most of the illegal crossings take place. Here we meet illegal immigrants who, despite their lawlessness, are clearly more victims than villains of the status quo. We meet American ranchers whose property has been destroyed by migrants, doctors whose border-town hospitals are overrun by the undocumented indigent, and native-born American workers whose livelihoods have been lost to illegal immigrant labor. We also encounter the obligatory ACLU spokesman who predictably claims that the real problem here is American racism. But the most compelling, real-life characters in Border are the Americans of various ages, ethnicities and backgrounds who came from all over the U.S. to volunteer their services in defense of our borders. Armed mostly with lawn chairs, binoculars and walkie-talkies, these brave men (and women) become the eyes and ears of our undermanned Border Patrol, not to mention an embarrassment to the agencies and officials whose jobs they're doing. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Despite its serious subject matter, "Border" is a briskly paced, highly entertaining feature with moments of genuine humor and pathos, not to mention excellent production values. Indeed, some of the sequences -- like the after-dark thermal footage of armed coyotes passing mere yards from Burgard's hidden camera -- would not seem out of place in a big-budget Hollywood thriller. Burgard's unaffected charm and sly wit permeate the film through his occasional narration and on-camera appearances. But unlike the works of some other documentarians we could mention, Burgard's movie is never about him. Instead, Burgard lets the film's powerful visuals, and the people he meets, tell the story. Moreover, Burgard's use of animation to graphically depict dynamic situations and statistical graphics that put the film's visual content into context are both first-rate. While its overall message is alarming, I'm happy to report that Border ends on an optimistic note, even offering suggestions as to how this multi-faceted problem might be addressed. Whether you agree with these ideas or not, you really can't see this film without acquiring a deeper understanding of America's illegal immigration problem and a renewed determination to do something about it. On that basis alone, I strongly urge every American who cares about the future of this country to see "Border" whether you happen to be running for President at the moment or not. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

roadreeler57 · Jan 28, 2008

Get up off your Duff-It's FREE make the calls & send the faxes

http://www.numbersusa.com/actionbuffet

roadreeler57 · Jan 28, 2008

In reality they need your help if you can afford it

https://www.numbersusa.com/donate

roadreeler57 · Jan 30, 2008

McCain's an asshole

<TABLE class=media-innerbuffer cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=markerTEXTblueMAJOR colSpan=3>John McCain Defends Amnesty & Open Borders Juan Hernandez </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXTred colSpan=3>Americans for Legal Immigration PAC via YouTube : January 29 , 2008 </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=3> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=markerTEXTblueMINOR vAlign=top height="100%"><EMBED src=""http://www.youtube.com/v/tIK9ZawRMlg&rel=1 width=200 height=167 type=application/x-shockwave-flash wmode="transparent"></EMBED></TD><TD width="2%"> </TD><TD vAlign=top><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Editor's Note: NumbersUSA does not endorse candidates. The content provided below is for informational purposes only. We encourage voters to become informed of where the candidates stand on immigration issues by visiting our Presidential Candidates website containing assessments of the candidates' stances by Roy Beck, president and CEO of NumbersUSA. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>John McCain has deployed Open Borders advocate Juan Hernandez as the National Director of Hispanic Outreach for his Presidential campaign. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Juan Hernandez used to work for Mexican President Vicente Fox, he has dual US and Mexican citizenship, and is a regular guest on major news networks where he advocates amnesty for illegal aliens and the free flow of people across the US and Mexican border. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Juan Hernandez worked for the Mexican government as the head of the "Presidential Office for Mexicans Abroad". </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Hernandez has been a flagrant advocate for giving amnesty, US driver licenses, and banking services to illegal aliens. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>He is the author of a book titled "The New American Pioneers: Why Are We Afraid of Mexican Immigrants?" where he compares illegal aliens in the US with the original European pioneers on this continent. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Juan Hernandez has stated to the media that he advocates a "Mexico First" philosophy for Mexican Americans (legal and illegal) living in the United States! </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Juan Hernandez advocates the free flow of people across US Borders to "establishing a new North American market combining the U.S. Mexico" </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Hernandez has also defended illegal alien identity thieves and other illegal alien criminals that have harmed Americans. </TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2> </TD></TR><TR><TD class=discussionTEXT colSpan=2>Please contact John McCain's campaign and ask him why he has Juan Hernandez on his staff!</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

roadreeler57 · Jan 30, 2008

House Stimulus Package Would Reward Illegal Aliens with Millions of Dollars

The new stimulus bill which recently passed the House could possibly give tax rebates to illegal aliens. Under the House plan, illegal aliens classed as "nonresident aliens" -- essentialy those illegal aliens who are known to the IRS -- will receive rebate checks like every other legal American, even if they haven't paid any taxes. Make sure this doesn't happen by phoning and faxing your Senators today! "This package will stimulate one thing for certain: more illegal immigration," said Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.). "It’s just the latest unfortunate example of American workers footing the bill for illegal aliens."

More Members Sign on to SAVE Act

Rep. Heath Shuler’s (D-N.C.) SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification Enforcement [H.R. 4088]) now has 142 bipartisan signers in the House, with two versions also in the Senate. The SAVE Act will require all employers to use the electronic verification system to keep illegal aliens out of U.S. jobs. NumbersUSA believes that this legislation originating on the Democratic side of the House is just the vehicle to give us a chance to actually pass immigration legislation through a Democratic-controlled Congress that would significantly improve the lives of most Americans. "It's the one [immigration] bill that will pass this Congress," said Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus Chairman Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.) in an interview with The Hill. "We have to make this about illegal employment and crack down on employers."
Click here to view list of signers and to read more information about the SAVE Act. http://numbersusa.com/video

Anti Immigration & Illegal Immigration Info - Ongoing Thread

Member

2009 RX Death Pool Champion

Member

Member

Member

Member

New member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Forum statistics

Share this page