Immigration

[tdslf1 0]

Should we work on immigration in light of the Arizona unconstitutional bill, right now? I just read an article in Huff post that said that they were going to introduce the climate change bill this Monday but decided to drop that and work on immigration. They hope to do both climate and immigration this year but want to do immigration first. ALso Lindsey Graham threatened to walk on his support for climate change if they did immigration first, which is not a good thing for the Republicans if they don't help in this bill.

What are people's thoughts on immigration? What impact will this have on the deficit? Should we have amnesty or kick them all out? Your thoughts

Edited April 25, 2010 by tdslf1

[Cleo's Mom 257]

With regard to the Arizona law - now that the police will be pulling over people of "color" - John Boehner (a/k/a Mr. Coppertone) had better stay out of Arizona - he's likely to be pulled over because he's orange.

On a serious note, what you will see as we get closer to election time and the republicans desperately needing the latino vote, is that they will be talking out of both sides of their mouths.

[Chris_NJ 9]

While I don't agree totally with the Arizona bill I do feel something has to be done with it. While I feel we cant just throw them all out we have to find a way to get taxes paid from them or a path to legalization.

Its like someone breaking into your home and then you having to feed them. Don't make sense to me!

[tdslf1 0]

I was thinking about this today and I heard that about taxes before. How would we get them to pay retro taxes or are you talking about current taxation?

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Another interesting view of this bill:

Beware ... they might vote!

Greg Palast at GregPalast.com claims to have uncovered the real reason Arizona passed its tough immigration law: "Don't be fooled. The way the media plays the story, it was a wave of racist, anti-immigrant hysteria that moved Arizona Republicans to pass a sick little law ... requiring every person in the state to carry papers proving they are U.S. citizens. I don't buy it. Anti-Hispanic hysteria has always been as much a part of Arizona as the saguaro cactus and excessive air-conditioning.

"What's new here is not the politicians' fear of a xenophobic 'tea bag' uprising. What moved GOP Gov. Jan Brewer to sign the Soviet-style show-me-your-papers law is the exploding number of legal Hispanics, U.S. citizens all, who are daring to vote -- and daring to vote Democratic by more than two-to-one. Unless this demographic locomotive is halted, Arizona Republicans know their party will soon be electoral toast. Or, if you like, tortillas."

[mushsbat 1]

This topic winds me up so much. My husband is from England. He is here legally. He was told to carry his card showing his status at all times. Now I realize that he is white so you would think he wouldn't be profiled so this doesn't affect him. However, he was pulled over for speeding. The cop noticed his accent and he was required to show his card. If your here legally it's not a problem. Show proof and move on. No different than showing a drivers license. If your driving legally it won't bother you. This politically correct crap is getting out of control!!! There are laws for a reason. Follow them!!!!

[mushsbat 1]

Sorry I forgot to mention taxes government help etc that illegals can get but not pay into. I could go on but it's not good for my blood pressure..lol :thumbup:

[LeighaMason 19]

Sorry I forgot to mention taxes government help etc that illegals can get but not pay into. I could go on but it's not good for my blood pressure..lol :thumbup:

I would like to point out how many illegals work using fake ss#, their employers deduct taxes out of their checks and then match it and send it to the government. They can never collect on these taxes they have paid into our Medicare and social security system as well as 941 federal taxes.

Please enlighten me on this, other than not being able to turn them away at the hospital if they need urgent care what other "government help" do they get?

[LeighaMason 19]

I also wanted to add, the so called "party of the constitution", the so called "patriots" are the ones violating our constitutional rights once again.

You either support our constitution or you don't. You either think its the basis of the greatest democracy in the world or you don't. You don't get to pick and chose the parts you want.

Edited May 2, 2010 by LeighaMason

[Cleo's Mom 257]

This topic winds me up so much. My husband is from England. He is here legally. He was told to carry his card showing his status at all times. Now I realize that he is white so you would think he wouldn't be profiled so this doesn't affect him. However, he was pulled over for speeding. The cop noticed his accent and he was required to show his card. If your here legally it's not a problem. Show proof and move on. No different than showing a drivers license. If your driving legally it won't bother you. This politically correct crap is getting out of control!!! There are laws for a reason. Follow them!!!!

Your husband was asked to show his ID after breaking the law. The way the Arizona law works is that anyone who is "suspicious" can be asked to "show me your papers". That's a little different. And I wonder if people would be supportive of this bill if ONLY white people were being asked to "show me your papers".

And remember - there was a group of people who had to wear stars of David on their outer clothing and who were singled out to "show their papers" - it was called Nazi Germany and we know what happened to them. The "star of David" for latinos is their skin color.

It never ceases to amaze me how the right wing tea baggers can protest false loss of their rights and freedom and protest "big government's" intrusion into their private life and call Pres. Obama a nazi, etc.. and yet support this bill. Oh, I know, because they're white and this bill will go after people of color. What hypocrites.

[waynooo 1]

I dont like posting political stuff on this site cause you all are so angry at each other. But there seems to be some miss communication here. The bill does not allow for LEO's to stop some one based on the color of there skin. It allows the LEO to ascertain the persons immigration status once they have been detained or involved in illegal or suspect illegal activities, this includes civil and traffic violations. I also want to comment on Leighamasons comment about fake SS#. They are not fake, they are stolen. They use this number not only to work but for medical, loans and any thing else a SS# is required. Would suck to have your # stolen by a poor illegal just wanting to work and make a living for their family wouldnt it? They dont care that it leaves you with a huge mess to clean up. Here are the highlights of the bill taken from this web site: Documents For Bill

indemnification

A. No official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may limit or restrict the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.

B. For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. Any person who is arrested shall have the person's immigration status determined before the person is released. The person's immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States code section 1373(c). A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution. A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:

1. A valid Arizona driver license.

2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.

3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.

4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local government issued identification.

C. If an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States is convicted of a violation of state or local law, on discharge from imprisonment or on the assessment of any monetary obligation that is imposed, the United States immigration and customs enforcement or the United States customs and border protection shall be immediately notified.

D. Notwithstanding any other law, a law enforcement agency may securely transport an alien who the agency has received verification is unlawfully present in the united states and who is in the agency's custody to a federal facility in this state or to any other point of transfer into federal custody that is outside the jurisdiction of the law enforcement agency. a law enforcement agency shall obtain judicial authorization before securely transporting an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States to a point of transfer that is outside of this state.

E. Except as provided in federal law, officials or agencies of this state and counties, cities, towns and other political subdivisions of this state may not be prohibited or in any way be restricted from sending, receiving or maintaining information relating to the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual or exchanging that information with any other federal, state or local governmental entity for the following official purposes:

1. Determining eligibility for any public benefit, service or license provided by any federal, state, local or other political subdivision of this state.

2. Verifying any claim of residence or domicile if determination of residence or domicile is required under the laws of this state or a judicial order issued pursuant to a civil or criminal proceeding in this state.

3. If the person is an alien, determining whether the person is in compliance with the federal registration laws prescribed by title II, chapter 7 of the federal immigration and Nationality act.

4. Pursuant to 8 United States Code section 1373 and 8 United States Code section 1644.

F. This section does not implement, authorize or establish and shall not be construed to implement, authorize or establish the REAL ID act of 2005 (P.L. 109-13, division B; 119 Stat. 302), including the use of a radio frequency identification chip.

G. A person who is a legal resident of this state may bring an action in superior court to challenge any official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state that adopts or implements a policy or practice that limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law. If there is a judicial finding that an entity has violated this section, the court shall order that the entity pay a civil penalty of not less than one thousand dollars and not more than five thousand dollars for each day that the policy has remained in effect after the filing of an action pursuant to this subsection.

H. A court shall collect the civil penalty prescribed in subsection G of this section and remit the civil penalty to the state treasurer for deposit in the gang and immigration intelligence team enforcement mission fund established by section 41‑1724.

I. The court may award court costs and reasonable attorney fees to any person or any official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state that prevails by an adjudication on the merits in a proceeding brought pursuant to this section.

J. Except in relation to matters in which the officer is adjudged to have acted in bad faith, a law enforcement officer is indemnified by the law enforcement officer's agency against reasonable costs and expenses, including attorney fees, incurred by the officer in connection with any action, suit or proceeding brought pursuant to this section in which the officer may be a defendant by reason of the officer being or having been a member of the law enforcement agency.

K. This section shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens.

[LeighaMason 19]

These "stolen" SS#s are sold to them, usually from government officials. They are mostly from deceased people. When they try and get credit such as a car loan the SS# comes back as belonging to a deceased person and the loan is not granted. I see this every week on the car lot, where I see everyones credit unless they pay cash. If they take them into a federal office they risk being arrested so no they don't try and get food stamps, housing, etc. with them.

And by the way if an illegal is working under your SS# the withholdings are deposited into your SS file like you paid them in which increases your benefits when you retire. (This happened to my father in law)

[tdslf1 0]

My question is this...If this is the same law that is already on the books from the FEDS, why would they have a need to sign it into law, YET AGAIN, in Arizona?

[waynooo 1]

Leigha, in some cases I am sure in others more than likely stolen. I could see where working in the buiseness you would see alot. Not trying to start a fight, just pointing out where they get them.

Tdslf1, If I was to guess it is because currently local LEO can not enforce the law on the federal level. The state adopts the law on the state level and they can enforce it. I DO NOT condone racial profiling. But I have to say that people have used that as a plat form to shout about, saying they will pull you over cause your brown. They cant, if you break the law, any color, then they have every right to. It is very hard to support and not support this bill. In one hand there is the law, they have come here illegally. There are legal means in which to get a work visa and be legal. On the hand it is splitting my great state! People are angry on both sides. I dont think a law should do that.

There was a news report the week that this report broke. Ranch Markets in Phoenix was audited by ICE and had to fire 300 employees that did not have the proper or some one elses identifaction on file. Thats 300 super market jobs, decent paying jobs with benifits. The story that evening was all the legal U.S workers of every race applying for those jobs.

Anyway, I will bow out of this discusion as they seem to get heated and causes bad blood. I come to this site to learn how to use my band and make friends. Sorry about the spelling, I am the worlds worst!

Edited May 3, 2010 by waynooo

[Cleo's Mom 257]

waynoo - no reason not to post here if you like. It only gets heated when some fling personal insults. I post to correct a lot of the misinformation and outright lies that are posted here. I won't let them go unchallenged. We all have our opinions, too, and you are welcome to share yours.

And don't worry about your spelling, you are not the world's worst - that would be my adult daughter - it is a family joke.

One thing about your post that I am curious about. Why did that market hire 300 illegals when they could have hired 300 legals?