Thread: US Immigration Reform

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

See where even Rubio has backed away from his 'gang of 8' plan?

I'd be interested in some links to the numbers and statements, thanks

Originally Posted by OckerRocker

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

See where even Rubio has backed away from his 'gang of 8' plan?

I'd be interested in some links to the numbers and statements, thanks

Beer money compared to the $31 trillion the rich stacked away in tax oases, anyway. Briefly mentioned during the Cyprus crisis, hushed up ever since. Courtesy of our moonbat & Co.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by OckerRocker

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

See where even Rubio has backed away from his 'gang of 8' plan?

I'd be interested in some links to the numbers and statements, thanks

Here you go:

Staggering Cost Of Illegal Aliens In America [at]

Revealed: How immigrants in America are sending $120 BILLION to their struggling families back home | Mail Online

Amid U.S. unemployment crisis, illegal aliens sending even more money to Mexico - National Immigration Reform | Examiner.com

Thank you for that. Having read the links, however, they don't synch with the poster/picture.

Your first link has the following ad blinking away at the top of the page:



. . . and the reporting just goes downhill from there

Your second link firmly establishes that Mexico receives 24 billion in remissions but it doesn't separate from whom it receives these funds.
Mexico lies behind India, China and the Philippines in terms of remissions . . . and US remissions from Mexico account for 5 billion, so if we deduct that from the funds heading to Mexico then Mexico lies far back as a net receipient

The third link states:

The recent figures are further evidence, that as U.S. workers are being left out of the job market in increasing numbers, illegal aliens are taking the place of their American counterparts.

This has t do with American employers who hire them, surely, and says nothing about welfare payments.

The article also refers to 21.2 billion in remissions to Mexico


Basically the poster/picture/meme is completely inaccurate and misleading

Originally Posted by OckerRocker

Basically the poster/picture/meme is completely inaccurate and misleading

I have found that misleading and inaccurate, to put it politely, are the only consistently true descriptions of BM's links.

I don't get it. The right wing is against immigration, but they don't even marry British. What else is the wife of this UKIP big shot than a potential welfare case?

The people who have lawfully and patiently waited deserve better.

Gutierrez: I’ve got 40-50 GOP votes for immigration reform

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) told Post Politics’ Ed O’Keefe in a newly released interview that the House has more than enough GOP votes — around 40 or 50 — to pass comprehensive immigration reform if it were brought to a vote.

But Gutierrez said Republicans who support the idea are staying deliberately quiet to avoid a backlash from conservative activists.

“Some of them I’ve spoken to, and they say, ‘Love to do the activity with you, I want to be able to vote for it, I really don’t need to draw attention to myself at this point,’ but we can count on it,” Gutierrez said.

Gutierrez said that Obama asked him in 2009 to find him 40 or 50 Republicans who would sign on to a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

“If they asked me today, go find those 40 or 50 Republicans, I’d tell them I found them,” Gutierrez said. “I know where they’re at. They’re here. They’re present.”

The reason the Senate-passed immigration bill hasn’t come to a vote in the House is because it doesn’t satisfy the so-called Hastert Rule – the practice of not bringing a bill to a vote unless a majority of the majority party’s members support it.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), an ally of House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), has even suggested that the Senate bill wouldn’t pass in the House if it was brought to a vote.

If Boehner didn’t enforce the Hastert Rule — something he has sworn he will do — and all 201 House Democrats backed an immigration bill, the bill would need 17 Republicans to pass.

Gutierrez said he’s got the support of at least 195 House Democrats, which would mean the effort needs 23 Republicans to pass, minus the Hastert Rule.

House Republicans have instead moved forward with a more piecemeal approach to immigration reform, moving a number of bills that deal with border security and other issues.

Analysis of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) on one-year anniversary | Latina Lista

As Congress debates the fate of the “DREAMers” — those undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States as children—the one-year anniversary of the start of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program occurs on August 15. The DACA program — an initiative of the Obama administration — does not provide permanent lawful status to applicants. However, it confers two important advantages to approved applicants: a temporary suspension of deportation and the authorization to work in the United States.

The program also provides researchers and policymakers a glimpse into the “DREAMer”

1. More than half a million people have applied for DACA through June 2013; 72 percent have been approved, while just 1 percent have been denied. The majority of the remaining applications are still under review.

2. The vast majority of applicants were born in Mexico, and 25 other countries of birth have over 1,000 applications.

3. The distribution of DACA applicants by state mirrors settlement patterns of all immigrants; applicants from East Coast states come from a more diverse set of origin countries.

4. More than one-third of DACA applicants were between 15 and 18. There are fairly even numbers of women and men, but female applicants are slightly older than males. Applicants tend to be younger in newer destination states.

5. Nearly three-quarters of DACA applicants have lived in the United States for at least ten years and nearly one-third were age five or younger at arrival.

______________________

Not all doom and gloom in immigration reform

With Congress out of town for five weeks, many predicted that immigration reform would fall by the wayside, but back at home, several Republican congressmen have voiced support for a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

Last week, Washington Republican Rep. Dave Reichert said in a radio interview with KVI that he would support a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally.

California Republican Rep. Jeff Denham said last week that he would have supported the Senate’s Gang of Eight Bill, saying he was “frustrated” that the House was not going to take it up.

Illinois Republican Rep. Aaron Schock said at a town hall that he favored an eventual path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already in the country along the guidelines laid out in the Senate bill.

Florida Republican Rep. Dan Webster also came out for a pathway to citizenship in an interview with the Orlando Sentinel. He said he would support a pathway that roughly followed the guidelines laid out in the Senate bill, with one exception: he wanted state and local officials to help in enforcement of immigration laws.

__________________________

Watch "Serve" highlighting the incredible story of Alejandro Morales, a young undocumented immigrant who was brought to the United States when he was only seven months old. Alejandro was the highest ranking cadet in Chicago JROTC and his biggest dream is to serve his county in the U.S. Marines. He is an American; this is the only country he's ever known. He wants to serve and protect his country, but our broken immigration system prevents him from doing so because he is an undocumented immigrant.

Serve

Obama's OFA Holds A Pro-Amnesty Rally - 6, count 'em, 6 People Show Up:

Which is six more than their global warming protest in DC...

it's going to be interesting to see if boehner will stick with the so called "hastert rule" on immigration reform.

the adults in the GOP know they need to pass it, but they'll never get more than half of the GOP house caucus....so what is boehner going to do?

probably cry.

Originally Posted by OckerRocker

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

See where even Rubio has backed away from his 'gang of 8' plan?

I'd be interested in some links to the numbers and statements, thanks

This is from CBS news today:

Undocumented LA County Parents On Pace To Receive $650M In Welfare Benefits

Undocumented LA County Parents On Pace To Receive $650M In Welfare Benefits « CBS Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — A projected $650 million in welfare benefits will be distributed to illegal alien parents in 2013, county officials said Monday.

Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich announced the latest figures from the Department of Public Social Services, which showed more than $376 million in CalWORKs benefits and food stamps combined have been distributed through July to illegal alien parents for their native-born children.

$650 million is peanuts compared the BILLIONS of dollars LA County would lose if all the illegal immigrants were to up and leave.

Regardless of which side you choose in the immigration debate, there's no denying that the US is very dependent upon immigrant labor. Unauthorized immigrant labor accounts for nearly 6% of the US workforce.

L.A. County Economy Would Shrink by More Than $100 Billion If All Illegal Immigrants Were Deported, Says UCLA Report

Full article: http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...mmigration.pdf

after the Teabagger clusterfuck ends, Obama's next plan,.......Immigration reform

This should go over well with the republican brand. Most Americans see the Rethugs as crazies with their scorched earth policies (debt deniers) and after Obama is done with them; showing the American people what bigots the rethugs are, 2014/2016 might go well for the Democrats.

_______________

President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that stalled immigration reform would be a top priority once the fiscal crisis has been resolved.

"Once that's done, you know, the day after, I'm going to be pushing to say, call a vote on immigration reform," he told the Los Angeles affiliate of Spanish-language television network Univision.

The president's domestic agenda has been sidetracked in his second term by one problem after another. As he coped with the revelation of domestic surveillance programs, chemical weapons inSyria, and a fiscal battle that has shut down the U.S. government and threatens a debt default, immigration has been relegated to the back burner.

But Obama, who won re-election with overwhelming Hispanic backing, had hoped to make reforms easing the plight of the 11 million immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

Obama plans immigration push after fiscal crisis ends | Reuters

Originally Posted by S Landreth

President Barack Obama said on Tuesday that stalled immigration reform would be a top priority once the fiscal crisis has been resolved.

"Once that's done, you know, the day after, I'm going to be pushing to say, call a vote on immigration reform," he told the Los Angeles affiliate of Spanish-language television network Univision.

the day after

President Barack Obama on Thursday called on lawmakers to pass a comprehensive immigration reform package before the end of the year after the task of resolving the fiscal crisis kept parts of the U.S. government shut down for 16 days and almost caused the country to default on its debts.

"There's already a broad coalition across America that's behind this effort of comprehensive immigration reform, from business leaders to faith leaders to law enforcement," said the president.

Rubio: House Republicans ‘deserve’ to dictate immigration reform after government shutdown

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) on Sunday said that President Barack Obama must cave to House Republicans’ demands on immigration reform because he had “undermined” the effort by refusing to defund his signature health care reform law.


Translated: "We got our asses kicked when we shut down the Federal Government so America should take pity on us and give us a pass on immigration"


Rubio: House Republicans ‘deserve’ to dictate immigration reform after government shutdown | The Raw Story

^ This imbecile still thinks he can be President, so he's kissing the backside of the Tea Bags in a hope to win a primary or two. However, he should look in the mirror and realize that he isn't white enough for the racist Tea Party RethugliKKKans.


My prediction: the Tea Party House will block any attempts to pass an immigration reform bill and will thereby assure the Democrats win 80% of the Hispanic vote in 2016.

Washington state (my home state) has been advertising for a few year for illegals to come.

Please come.

And they are.

We must remember they are a "minority" and "undocumented workers" even though they are running illegal businesses, advertising these business in the newspaper and competing the jobs in which unemployment in 2 counties is from 7 to 10%.

Immigration. That's a war the Republicans can afford, right?

Supreme Court Rules: States Cannot Prevent Illegal Aliens from Voting in U.S. Elections
Kyle Becker
June 17, 2013

In a stunning ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down an Arizona law requiring voters to present citizenship proof to register in state and federal elections.

The law clears the way to illegal alien (undocumented immigrants) voting in national elections without substantive means of preventing it for many states. The highest court in the land ruled 7-2 that federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” as Justice Scalia wrote.

Professor Tom Caso of the Chapman University School of Law in California told the Associated Press that the decision “opened the door” to noncitizen voting. “The court’s decision ignores the clear dictates of the Constitution in favor of bureaucratic red tape,” Caso said.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling. The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas wrote in his dissent.

It will be interesting to see how the Democrats who argue that requiring proof of citizenship is a needless burden on their “vulnerable” constituents will be able to maintain that mendacious line when Obamacare documentation requirements are added to IRS reporting next year. Is that not a burden on “vulnerable” constituencies?

This is not to mention the labyrinthine maze of tax requirements and small business regulations that Washington D.C. has implemented over the years. Are not those who run businesses in this struggling economy a “vulnerable” constituency?

And how insulting and patronizing is it that the Democrats imply their constituents are too stupid and incompetent to get proper identification to vote in national elections, but they are fit to select their representatives in Washington D.C.?

Providing proof of citizenship is no more burdensome than presenting a birth certificate or other official identification to get a driver’s license, acquire a passport, enter a federal building or apply for college. If all of these ID requirements are so burdensome, why don’t we ban identification card requirements altogether?

And for anyone who think it’s just impossible that an illegal alien undocumented worker can vote in our national elections, “Elwood” is going to be your guide on how it can be done:

Correction: Some states still have voter ID laws (for now) and so could potentially prevent voter fraud by making prospective voters produce visual ID at the polls. Many more states are being blocked from enforcing photo ID laws until the Department of Justice clears these laws as in compliance with Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Although minority turnout was at an all-time high in 2012, even in states with strict photo ID laws, the DOJ is unlikely to clear these laws.

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/06/5994...u-s-elections/

Tit for tat, isn't it? The GOP moved all the boundaries around to get control of the House without the majority of the vote. So now the illegal martians can bring the balance back.

Oooooh Fox will be going mad over this one.

Originally Posted by barbaro

Supreme Court Rules: States Cannot Prevent Illegal Aliens from Voting in U.S. Elections
Kyle Becker
June 17, 2013

In a stunning ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down an Arizona law requiring voters to present citizenship proof to register in state and federal elections.

The law clears the way to illegal alien (undocumented immigrants) voting in national elections without substantive means of preventing it for many states. The highest court in the land ruled 7-2 that federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” as Justice Scalia wrote.

Professor Tom Caso of the Chapman University School of Law in California told the Associated Press that the decision “opened the door” to noncitizen voting. “The court’s decision ignores the clear dictates of the Constitution in favor of bureaucratic red tape,” Caso said.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court’s ruling. The Constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied,” Thomas wrote in his dissent.

It will be interesting to see how the Democrats who argue that requiring proof of citizenship is a needless burden on their “vulnerable” constituents will be able to maintain that mendacious line when Obamacare documentation requirements are added to IRS reporting next year. Is that not a burden on “vulnerable” constituencies?

This is not to mention the labyrinthine maze of tax requirements and small business regulations that Washington D.C. has implemented over the years. Are not those who run businesses in this struggling economy a “vulnerable” constituency?

And how insulting and patronizing is it that the Democrats imply their constituents are too stupid and incompetent to get proper identification to vote in national elections, but they are fit to select their representatives in Washington D.C.?

Providing proof of citizenship is no more burdensome than presenting a birth certificate or other official identification to get a driver’s license, acquire a passport, enter a federal building or apply for college. If all of these ID requirements are so burdensome, why don’t we ban identification card requirements altogether?

And for anyone who think it’s just impossible that an illegal alien undocumented worker can vote in our national elections, “Elwood” is going to be your guide on how it can be done:

Correction: Some states still have voter ID laws (for now) and so could potentially prevent voter fraud by making prospective voters produce visual ID at the polls. Many more states are being blocked from enforcing photo ID laws until the Department of Justice clears these laws as in compliance with Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Although minority turnout was at an all-time high in 2012, even in states with strict photo ID laws, the DOJ is unlikely to clear these laws.

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/06/5994...u-s-elections/

^ Bum link dude...

BTW, I'm still waiting for you to substantiate your claim in post #195 (permalink (US Immigration Reform) that Washington State has been

Originally Posted by barbaro

advertising for a few year for illegals to come.