How Much Does It Cost?

Charity is a wonderful thing when it is voluntary–not so much when it is coerced. Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article that illustrates how charity can be coerced.

The article reports:

Amnesty for illegal immigrants like a program proposed by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton would require an immediate tax hike of $1.2 trillion, a $15,000 hit on every household in America, according to a new analysis of immigration reform.

…”The findings in the report indicate that if amnesty for illegal immigrants were enacted, the government would have to raise taxes immediately by $1.29 trillion and put that sum into a high-yield bank account to cover future fiscal losses generated by the amnesty recipients and their children,” said Robert Rector, Heritage’s senior domestic research fellow.

“To cover the future cost, each U.S. household currently paying federal income tax would have to pay, on average, an immediate lump sum of over $15,000,” he added.

So why is the Democratic Party so intent on amnesty? There are a number of reasons. The most obvious is to create an underclass of Democratic voters. The demographics of the Democratic voter have changed in recent years as the party has moved dramatically to the left. People in the working middle class are no longer willing to blindly follow the Democrats–they have watched Democratic politicians take bigger and bigger chunks of money out of their paychecks to support social programs that do not reduce poverty and do destroy families. The legalization of unskilled illegal aliens would create a permanent underclass to replace the middle class voters.

But there is also another reason. Our politicians in Washington have not always represented us well. They have avoided the hard decisions in order to be re-elected. One of those hard decisions is the reform of Social Security, which is rapidly going bankrupt. One reason for that bankruptcy is the lack of new workers coming into the workforce to support the payments to retirees. One of the reasons for the lack of new workers is the number of babies that have been aborted since 1973. According to the Guttmacher Institute, more than one million babies have been aborted every year since 1975. Some years the number has been as high as 1,500,000, some years it has been about 1,000,000. These are workers who would have been entering the workforce over the past twenty years that would have kept Social Security solvent. An influx of workers that were formerly under the table would fund Social Security for a few more years. By the time the new workers retire, the current members of Congress may no longer be in Washington to be held accountable. Congress would rather kick the can down the road than solve the Social Security funding problem. Amnesty is one way to do that.

Listening To Judges Only When It Is Convenient

The Washington Times posted an article yesterday about the Obama Administration’s failure to rescind the work permits issued to illegal aliens in violation of a court order. In May I wrote an article about the fact that the Obama Administration had continued to grant work permits to illegal aliens after a judge had issued an injunction against the permits in February halting the President’s amnesty program. There were about 2,000 applications for work permits approved, and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has not been able to get the three-year permits back. Previously two-year permits had been issued.

The article reports:

But Judge Hanen was shocked to learn that USCIS issued the 2,000 three-year amnesties even after he’d issued his injunction.

“I expect you to resolve the 2,000; I’m shocked that you haven’t,” Judge Hanen (Judge Andrew S. Hanen) told the Justice Department at a hearing last week, according to the San Antonio Express-News. “If they’re not resolved by July 31, I’m going to have to figure out what action to take.”

Homeland Security says it’s changed the duration of the work permits from three years to two years in its computer systems, but getting the cards returned from the illegal immigrants themselves is tougher.

The office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is leading the lawsuit challenging the amnesty and who won the February injunction against the policy, didn’t respond to a request for comment on the outstanding permits.

If I remember correctly, one of the reasons the Judge issued the injunction was that he said that once amnesty was granted, it would be very difficult to undo what had been done. What has happened with the 2,000 work permits that were illegally issued illustrates his point. We are supposed to be a nation of laws–not a nation of men. It would be nice if the Obama Administration would remember that.

Will Someone Please Read The Consitituion

President Obama stated many times that he did not have the power to grant amnesty to illegal aliens–then he did it. A number of states sued the government to stop the move, stating that it would be damaging to their states. A judge in Texas blocked President Obama’s amnesty program from being implemented.

The Hill posted an article yesterday updating the situation:

The Department of Justice on Wednesday said it will not make an emergency request to the Supreme Court to lift an order blocking President Obama’s executive action on immigration.

…The decision by DOJ means that a Texas federal judge’s order to temporarily block Obama’s controversial immigration executive orders will remain in place, at least for now.

On Tuesday, a panel on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 against lifting that hold, with the majority opinion written by two Republican-appointed judges arguing that the “public interest favors maintenance of the injunction.”

In July, the 5th Circuit will hear the appeal of the Obama Administration.

The article points out:

The same 5th Circuit is also reviewing a separate challenge on the injunction and will hear oral arguments in that case during the first full week of July. The administration will try to persuade the judges to lift the injunction during that argument.

The injunction stems from a larger suit filed by 26 states on whether Obama’s executive actions are constitutional.

President Obama has brought executive orders to a whole new level. Hopefully the courts will stop this, as Congress has not exercised its proper role.

The Cost Of Executive Amnesty

One of the talking points of the Obama Administration regarding executive amnesty is that it will be good for the American economy. That is debatable considering the number of legal Americans currently unable to find jobs, but what it is about to do to the American taxpayer is definitely destructive.

Judicial Watch posted an article on its website today detailing the cost of President Obama’s executive amnesty.

The article reports:

The U.S. government will spend nearly half a billion dollars, expand its workforce by 3,100 and open a 280,000-square-foot compound in Virginia to carry out President Obama’s amnesty order, according to detailed government figures provided to Judicial Watch.

The numbers are breathtaking and include a $647,590 monthly rent bill for a new facility at 2200 Crystal Drive in Arlington Virginia. It will be the processing headquarters for two Obama amnesty plans—Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA)—that will allow millions of illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S. Last month a federal court in Texas blocked the amnesty order, but records show the administration is ready to pull the trigger if it succeeds in appealing the ruling.

The article goes on to break down the administrative costs of executive amnesty–both the initial cost and the ongoing cost. This is an unbelievably bad deal for all Americans. We do need to streamline our immigration policies, but we cannot successfully assimilate three thousand people in a matter of months without bankrupting federal and state governments.

Executive amnesty is a nightmare waiting to happen.

This Might Be A Good Place To Cut The Federal Budget

Fox News reported yesterday that the illegal immigrants that President Obama has granted amnesty will be eligible for retroactive tax refunds.

The article reports:

Byron York explained on “America’s Newsroom” that illegal immigrants will be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is actually a government grant of up to $5,000 to working families.

“Illegal immigrants affected by the president’s edict will not only be eligible for those tax credits going forward, but three years retroactively,” York said. “So they’ll be able to collect quite a bit of money from the treasury.”

York explained that the IRS has issued taxpayer identification numbers to people who are in the U.S. illegally, but working, so that they can pay taxes.

Illegal immigrants who filed taxes that way over the past three years can now go back and amend those previous tax forms to claim the Earned Income Tax Credit.

Unbelievable.

Did The Election Of 2014 Mean Anything?

We are about to find out if the election of 2014 meant anything at all in Washington, D.C. The election was a resounding victory for Republicans at all levels of government. It was also an expression of voter dissatisfaction with the current status quo.

Brietbart.com posted an article today pointing out that it would only take 29 conservatives to unseat John Boehner as Speaker of the House. Recent polls have shown that as many as 60 percent of Republicans would like to see John Boehner replaced as Speaker of the House.

The article reports:

At this critical juncture, the few dozen conservatives in the House have two options.

They can allow themselves and the 2014 electorate to remain disenfranchised, helplessly standing by while Boehner passes crucial legislation on amnesty, budget bills, Obamacare, and debt ceiling increases with Democrat support. Or they can seize control of their own destiny by using the first vote of this Congress – the only vote for which Boehner cannot rely on Democrat support – to veto the Speaker himself and preempt a disastrous two years of lawmaking.

Despite misinformation some Republican members and incoming freshmen have given constituents, the selection of John Boehner for Speaker, unlike the election of the other party leaders, has not been cemented. And in fact, on Tuesday, if every Republican who claims to be frustrated and even appalled by Boehner’s behavior would vote for any other name, they can deny him reelection as Speaker.

The article concludes:

By joining together and organizing a move to deny Boehner the majority, these 29 conservatives can create such an opportunity. This would force a second or third ballot and Republicans would have to reconvene a conference. They would finally be compelled to negotiate with conservatives who would only agree to give their votes for someone who commits to certain fundamental principles and ironclad concessions.

Although this is arguably not a perfect plan, as these members stand before their constituents and gratuitously utter the words “John Boehner,” they will have sealed their own fate for the next two years because they have offered no alternative plan to reestablish a modicum of conservative control over the conservative party. Those self-described conservatives who are reluctant to join this effort have an obligation to put forth other ideas for reestablishing a voice within the party.

On Tuesday, choose wisely and fear no man.

If the Democrats and the Republicans are ignoring the will of the American people, it is time to replace them both.

Illegal Immigration In 2014

On Friday, the Washington Times posted an article about the illegal immigration numbers for 2014.

The part of the article that caught my attention was:

Mr. Johnson (Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson), in a statement releasing the figures, blamed this summer’s surge of illegal immigrant children for the poor results.

“This year’s statistics are informed by a number of complex and shifting factors, most notably the 68 percent increase in migration from countries other than Mexico, predominately from Central America, and a 14 percent drop in Mexican migration since fiscal year 2013,” he said.

An administration official said this is the first time on record that border authorities have caught more non-Mexicans than Mexicans at the border, underscoring the changing demographics.

It is interesting to note that in order for illegal immigrants to come to America from Central America they usually have to cross through Mexico. It seems to me that we should be putting some pressure on the Mexican government concerning that. The number of ‘other than Mexicans (OTM’s)’ is also a concern. How many of these OTM’s are from countries that sponsor terrorism? This is no way to run a country.

The statistics on immigration and deportation for last year were listed in the article:

Apprehensions on the border, which Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson says is a yardstick for overall illegal immigration, rose 16 percent in fiscal year 2014, while deportations from within the interior of the U.S. — the measure of how much the administration is going after long-time illegal immigrants — fell 24 percent.

I am not against immigration, but it seems to me that a government that wants to control what children eat for lunch should be able to control its borders.

 

Watch The Shiny Thing Over Here

Last night President Obama gave a speech outlining his executive action on immigration. Analyses of the speech are all over the internet. I chose My Way News as my reference point for this article. USA Today has the text of the speech.

There are three things to keep in mind about the President’s immigration order:

1. It is unconstitutional, but he knew that. The video of the President making the case against executive amnesty is poster here. However, making this speech shortly after a thumping in the mid-term election elevates the President to some degree of relevancy.

2. The President said, “This deal does not apply to anyone who has come to this country recently. It does not apply to anyone who might come to America illegally in the future. It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive – only Congress can do that.” (What happens to the people who came here four years and eleven months ago since five years is the cutoff date?) Some time in the next year or so, Congress will say, “These people are paying taxes and are not allowed to vote. That is taxation without representation. We can’t have that. We have to let them vote.” This will create millions of new Democrat voters.

3. Hugh Hewitt on Salem Radio last night made a very astute observation. The Iranian nuclear talks are about to conclude. It is very possible that President Obama will make a deal with Iran that allows Iran to make nuclear weapons. What you heard last night was to distract the American people from what is going on in Iran.

The speech last night was all about politics. Its purpose (among other things) was to goad the Republicans into doing something really stupid (that trick has worked occasionally in the past). Note that the pundits are saying in panic, “Don’t shut down the government by defunding anything.” That convinces me that defunding may be the way to go.

At any rate, get out the popcorn, the show has only begun.

Numbers USA

Tonight I had the privilege of hearing Jim Robb of NumbersUSA speak at Stanly Hall in New Bern about immigration in America. NumbersUSA promotes moderate immigration levels. One of the comments Mr. Robb made about immigration in America today was, “Nineteenth Century Immigration Policy is incompatible with the Twenty-first Century Welfare State. I had never looked at immigration that way, but he is right.

When talking about President Obama’s declared move toward amnesty for five million people here illegally, Mr. Robb mentioned that Congress had three possible (if not probable) ways to stop amnesty. The most obvious way would be to simply defund the government agencies that would handle the amnesty. The second way to stop amnesty would be to impeach President Obama for violating the Constitution, but that is highly unlikely. The third way to stop amnesty would be to take the issue to the Supreme Court as a violation of the Constitution, but the Supreme Court would probably not be interested in hearing the issue unless Congress had already acted by defunding the measure.

Mr. Robb explained that there are a few problems that would be caused by amnesty. Under amnesty the average time to get a work VISA is six minutes. There is no time for proper background checks or screening. The new workers would be taking jobs in airports, companies that control electric grids, nuclear security, etc. without being properly screened. There would be a national security risk and a risk of endangering Americans. Other problems would be the increase in students our schools would have to educate, the increased drain on healthcare facilities, and the increased drain on social welfare programs.

Mr. Robb explained that there is another problem with providing six million green cards to new workers in America–we already have twenty  million legal Americans who can’t find full-time jobs.

The NumbersUSA website explains, “NumbersUSA favors an immigration policy that includes spouses, minor children, fair share of refugees, people with extraordinary skills and gives preferential treatment to American workers and those that come here legally.” That makes sense.

After the program, I was taking with a legal immigrant who had come to America as a child in 1949. The immigrant reminded me that during that time immigrants who came to America had sponsors, were expected to find work, and expected to receive no government aid of any kind. Unfortunately, that is no longer the case.

NumbersUSA is working to keep immigration at a manageable level. As an organization, they have built up the connections in Washington to represent the majority of Americans who do not favor amnesty for people who are here illegally. When you move someone who is here illegally to the front of the line, you deny the rights of someone who is pursuing immigration in the correct way. That is not something we want to do.

 

Ted Cruz On The Immigration Bill

One of Ted Cruz‘s websites has some interesting details about the immigration bill working its way through Congress:

  • The Schumer/Hoeven/Corker amendment is nearly 1,200 pages long, was just filed Friday afternoon, and will be voted on this Monday. We saw with Obamacare what happens when Congress rushes to pass such unwieldy legislation.
  • The Schumer/Hoeven/Corker “border security” amendment to the deal doesn’t require that the border actually be secured, nor does it require any security enhancements before legalization occurs.
  • This legislation makes the same mistake of the 1986 amnesty — legalization today for the false promise of border security tomorrow. It will encourage more illegal immigration and must be stopped.

There is also a video posted on YouTube explaining Senator Cruz’s objections to the bill:

We need to fix our immigration system. This is not the way to do it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Illegal Is Now Legal

Breitbart.com is reporting today that the Obama Administration is already granting amnesty to illegal aliens who were to be deported even if they don’t meet the standards announced last month.

The article reports:

According to ICE documents Smith {Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX)} reviewed, ICE officers are encouraged to search for those who are “apparently eligible” to not be deported, under the directive, and grant them tentative status, according to the report. 

President Obama is granting amnesty to illegal immigrants behind Americans’ backs,” Smith said, per the Times. “Although administration officials told congressional offices that it would take 60 days to implement the president’s amnesty plan, internal ICE documents show that illegal immigrants have already benefited from it, even though there are no standards in place.”

This administration can’t even follow the policies they put in place!

Enhanced by Zemanta