illegal immigration

Opposition To ‘Illegal Aliens’ Is Opposition To Borders

Those who are driving the effort to control and contort language in the immigration debate are not truly motivated by the notion that the term “illegal alien” is a pejorative. This is a distraction. The real goal of those demanding that media outlets, courts, and now the Library of Congress supplant accurate legal terminology with activist-created terms is to eradicate the distinction between citizen and non-citizen, between legal activity and illegal activity, between “us” and “them” so that the concept of borders and the nation state slowly slip away. Any official heading an organization or governmental agency who thinks they are being sensitive by bowing to demands to alter their use of language is being played by the open-border crowd.

The most vivid and honest example of the motivations of those demanding a change to language in the immigration debate happened last year after the Santa Barbara News-Press used the term “illegals” in a headline: “Illegals Line Up For Driver’s Licenses.” If there is any legitimate critique of this headline, it’s that the term “illegals” rings slightly crude. Using a legal term like “illegal aliens” would be preferable.

But a more accurate legal term would not have appeased the illegal aliens and their supporters who protested outside the newspaper’s headquarters. Their response revealed the true nature of this debate over language. In the middle of the night, the News-Press building was vandalized with paintball splatters and graffiti. The bold, red, spray-painted message that was left on the building is key to understanding this debate: “THE BORDER IS ILLEGAL NOT THE PEOPLE WHO CROSS IT”

No terms, adjectives, or descriptors that separate law-breaking foreigners from citizens are acceptable to the open-border crowd and they will push until the media and the courts refer to illegal aliens as simply “Americans.” This is not hyperbole — one California newspaper has done just that, while two others have referred to illegal aliens as Californians.

In 2012, the Los Angeles Times and the San Jose Mercury News described illegal aliens as “undocumented Californians” in articles about driver’s licenses. Of course, these individuals aren’t Californians any more than a citizen of Nevada who crosses the state line to visit Disneyland. Responses from the newspapers to my inquiries about why they felt foreigners who don’t even belong in the country deserve a title indicating state citizenship were lackluster.

A year later, the San Francisco Chronicle referred to an illegal alien from South Korea as “one of an estimated 2.1 million American youths” who might benefit from President Obama’s controversial Deferred Action (DACA) program. The paper never responded to my inquiry about why they consider illegal aliens registering for DACA to be “American.”

This transition didn’t happen overnight. The open-border crowd had its first success when the Associated Press decided to appease illegal aliens and their advocates by dropping “illegal alien” and warning against it in their stylebook. In 2012, the AP declared that it would use “illegal immigrant” but would not go as far as the advocates wanted, noting that terms like “undocumented” were problematic because they “can make a person’s illegal presence in the country appear to be a matter of minor paperwork.” The AP also noted that “many illegal immigrants aren’t undocumented at all,” on account of having many documents in their possession.

The AP also declared that it would not buy into the claim that the term “illegal immigrant” is offensive, noting that the AP’s writers “refer routinely to illegal loggers, illegal miners, illegal vendors” and that the language “simply means that a person is logging, mining, selling, etc., in violation of the law — just as illegal immigrants have immigrated in violation of the law.”Taking a cue from the AP, journalists with other news outlets around the country declared that they would also stop using “illegal alien” and instead use “illegal immigrant.” The reporters thought they were being righteous, not understanding that this change was but a stepping stone in the minds of open border advocates.

As soon as these journalists agreed to drop “illegal alien” the advocates moved to their next demand. Less than six months after the AP’s decision to stick with “illegal immigrant,” the AP caved, once again. This time the AP dropped “illegal immigrant” altogether, claiming that it was dropping use of labels noting that AP would use “illegal only to refer to an action, not a person: illegal immigration, but not illegal immigrant.” The AP did not acknowledge the ongoing “Drop the I-Word Campaign” by open-border advocates that clearly played a role.

Taking a cue from the AP, journalists with other news outlets around the country declared that they would also stop using “illegal alien” and instead use “illegal immigrant.” The reporters thought they were being righteous, not understanding that this change was but a stepping stone in the minds of open border advocates.

The AP now recommends journalists use “a person living in the country illegally” or “without legal permission.” Of course, one of the top rules in journalism is “be concise.” That rule is tossed out the window for illegal aliens. Why do so many journalists think foreigners who evade our Border Patrol or lie to the State Department and overstay a visa are deserving of special treatment? Is it that they’re worried their offices might be attacked by an angry mob?

Many media outlets have blindly followed the AP’s lead, marching the journalism world to a place where there is no such thing as illegal immigration. It has gotten so bad that news outlets seeking free content from people like myself feel the need to put disclaimers at the top of opinion pieces that use legally-accurate terminology, for fear that some people (read: open-border fanatics) might be offended.

The media’s bowing to illegal aliens and their supporters shows up in other areas as well. Not too long ago, everyone referred to mass legalizations of illegal aliens as amnesty. Today, the media has embraced the language of advocacy groups and regularly uses “pathway to citizenship” or “regularization of status” or “comprehensive immigration reform.” But the media still refers to tax amnesties as amnesty. It’s just another example of the media’s special treatment of illegal aliens.

The term “alien” is not, nor has it never been a pejorative. It’s a concise, legal term that helps with straightforward communication in a very complex area of law and policy. A foreigner can be a legal alien (e.g. a tourist) or an illegal alien (e.g. a visa-overstayer). The word “alien” was recently used 26 times in the Supreme Court during oral argument for United States v. Texas, most often by the Obama administration’s solicitor general, but also by Sotomayor, Kegan, Roberts, and Ginsburg.

Use of “alien” indicates a writer supports clean writing devoid of any value judgement, something journalists should aspire to. Use of “undocumented immigrant” or some similar euphemism suggests a lack of impartiality on the part of a writer, something journalists should avoid.

Furthermore, referring to every foreigner as an “immigrant” muddies the debate and makes it difficult to draw the line between “us” and “them” — this is a goal of the open-border crowd. If we’re all immigrants (aka “a nation of immigrants”), what right do you have to tell someone else they cannot come and live here?

In reality, we’re a nation of citizens. And as citizens, we have a right to decide who gets to immigrate here, how many people get to immigrate here, and also set the conditions they must abide by if they want to stay. Anything less than that destroys the concept of citizenship and sovereignty. Media shouldn’t help the open-border crowd achieve its goal.

Jon Feere is the Legal Policy Analyst at the Center for Immigration Studies.

The Miscarriage of Justice Department

The constitutional challenge to President Obama’s executive action on immigration keeps getting more remarkable. A federal judge has now exposed how the Justice Department systematically deceived lower courts about the Administration’s conduct, and he has imposed unprecedented legal measures to attempt to sterilize this ethics rot.

On Thursday District Judge Andrew Hanen of Texas found that Obama Administration lawyers committed misconduct that he called “intentional, serious and material.” In 2015 he issued an injunction—now in front of the Supreme Court—blocking Mr. Obama’s 2014 order that rewrote immigration law to award legal status and federal and state benefits to nearly five million aliens.

When 26 states sued to block the order in December 2014, Justice repeatedly assured Judge Hanen that the Department of Homeland Security would not start processing applications until February 2015 at the earliest. Two weeks after the injunction came down, in March, Justice was forced to admit that DHS had already granted or renewed more than 100,000 permits.

Justice has also conceded in legal filings that all its lawyers knew all along that the DHS program was underway, despite what they said in briefs and hearings. One DOJ lawyer told Judge Hanen that “I really would not expect anything between now and the date of the hearing.” As the judge notes, “How the government can categorize the granting of over 100,000 applications as not being ‘anything’ is beyond comprehension.”

Justice’s only explanation is that its lawyers either “lost focus on the fact” or “the fact receded in memory or awareness”—the fact here being realities that the DOJ was required to disclose to the court. The states weren’t able to make certain arguments or seek certain legal remedies because the program supposedly hadn’t been implemented, leaving them in a weaker legal position.

More to the point, an attorney’s first and most basic judicial obligation is to tell the truth. Judge Hanen concludes that the misrepresentations “were made in bad faith” and “it is hard to imagine a more serious, more calculated plan of unethical conduct.” Many a lawyer has been disbarred for less.

As a result, Judge Hanen ordered that any Washington-based Justice lawyer who “appears or seeks to appear” in any state or federal court in the 26 states must first attend a remedial ethics seminar on “candor to the court.” He also ordered Attorney General Loretta Lynch to prepare a “comprehensive plan” to prevent such falsification. Such extraordinary judicial oversight is usually reserved for companies with a pattern of corruption or racially biased police departments. Justice is sure to appeal, and whether Judge Hanen has the jurisdiction to impose his plan is uncharted legal territory.

Yet the misconduct he has unmasked should trouble Americans of all political persuasions. Prosecutors often abuse their powers in run-of-the-mill cases. But this is a constitutional challenge with major consequences for the separation of powers, and the deceit must have required the participation and coordination of dozens of political appointees and career lawyers. That suggests a serious institutional failure, not mere rogue actors.

Main Justice may have figured that the state challenge would be tossed for lack of standing, and thus its dissembling wouldn’t matter. This would mean that President Obama’s refusal to recognize the legal limits of his executive power has spread a culture of lawlessness among his lawyers too.

AG Lynch could salvage the credibility of the Justice Department by explaining how this breakdown happened. Whether you worry about how Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump would wield government powers, everyone has an interest in an honest accounting of the facts that were denied to Judge Hanen.

Cashing in: Illegal immigrants get $1,261 more welfare than American families, $5,692 vs. $4,431

Illegal immigrant households receive an average of $5,692 in federal welfare benefits every year, far more than the average "native" American household, at $4,431, according to a new report on the cost of immigration released Monday.

The Center for Immigration Studies, in an analysis of federal cost figures, found that all immigrant-headed households — legal and illegal — receive an average of $6,241 in welfare, 41 percent more than native households. As with Americans receiving benefits such as food stamps and cash, much of the welfare to immigrants supplements their low wage jobs.

The total cost is over $103 billion in welfare benefits to households headed by immigrants. A majority, 51 percent, of immigrant households receive some type of welfare compared to 30 percent of native households, said the analysis of Census data.

Immigrants receiving the most in the study of 2012 figures come from Mexico and Central America. Their average annual taxpayer funded welfare collection is $8,251, 86 percent higher than the benefits used by native households, said the report.

"While it is important for Americans to understand the rate of welfare use among immigrants, expressing that use in dollar terms offers a more tangible metric that is tied to current debates over fiscal policy. With the nation facing a long-term budgetary deficit, this study helps illuminate immigration's impact on the problem," wrote the report's author Jason Richwine, a Harvard educated analyst of immigration data.

The new report follows another that found President Obama seeking $17,613 for every new illegal minor, more than Social Security retirees get.

Did you miss Saturday's OFIR meeting?

OFIR hosted their quarterly meeting Saturday afternoon, May 7th.  If you were unable to attend, you missed a packed house and a great meeting!

Dr. Bud Pierce, GOP candidate for Governor was the featured speaker.  Several other candidates also dropped in to introduce themselves to our members and guests.

Oregon's new representative for the Remembrance Project gave a presentation about the national organization.

Oregon Abigail Adams Voter Education Project was there to explain the questionnaire they send to all candidates.

David Olen Cross explained how important your words are - in print!  He encouraged members to write letters to the editor and guest opinions for publication in newspapers across the state.

There was ample time for questions and candidates stayed well after the meeting to distribute campaign materials and meet with OFIR members.

 

 

Say it in a letter - more than just song lyrics

Does it seem like our country is coming completely unraveled with the lack of enforcement of our immigration laws? 

Everyday we hear another story more horrific than the day before - murders, drugs, gangs, ID theft, tax fraud and even American citizens being laid off their jobs only to be replaced by VISA workers - which they are required to train -  and the list goes on and on.

American citizens are continually being thrown under the bus, so that politicians can flood the country with low-skill, cheap labor supposedly with the potential of a big, future voting block.

Businesses that rely on cheap, illegal labor or even the excessive use of VISA workers have apparently bought off our elected officials and convinced them this is the only way to go.  Meanwhile, citizens get to enjoy being displaced from jobs at all skill levels and even get to pay excessive taxes to support overwhelmed entitlement programs and over-crowded classrooms. 

Our need for evermore housing is causing an environmental creep that is sickening to watch as cheap apartment complexes and ticky-tacky housing developments swallow up our beautiful farmland.

Do you have something to say?  Get it off your chest in a Letter to the Editor.  Elected officials do read them - although it wouldn't seem so.  So - we need to write even more letters to the editor like these collected from across the country. 

Read the rules for submitting your letters to each newspaper and don't overlook small, weekly papers which are often read cover to cover!  Get started today with this inspiring collection of letters:

--------------------

THE ORANGE COUNTY
REGISTER
 
Follow the law on immigration

April 24, 2016

Re: “Obama actions split high court” [Front page, April 19]: You need to look no further than the two quotes the Register published on the Supreme Court’s recent hearing of Obama’s executive action on illegal immigrants. The Supreme Court’s sole job is to interpret the laws. Justice Kennedy gets it when he identifies the issue as whether Obama has used his executive power to usurp Congress’ constitutional authority to make the laws. On the other hand, liberal activist Justice Sotomayor focuses on the economic impact of illegal immigrants, which has nothing to do with the issue of executive overreach. This is why it is so critical to get a Republican president in November so we can get a new justice who knows their constitutional duty, and will follow it.

Greg Woodard
Mission Viejo

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/laws-713209-people-court.html

--------------------

THE ORANGE COUNTY
REGISTER

Follow the law on immigration

April 24, 2016

Once again the president has over-stepped laws and we need the Supreme Court to make a ruling. I can only pray the court has the wisdom to do what is right for our country and not businesses and immigrant rights organizations that are willing to overlook our laws. I cannot see the good in allowing people to break our laws to come here and when they are caught say, “I only want a better life” or “my children were born here.” The parents made the choice to break the law – period.

According to the Register, the court decision will affect 3.5 million people. These are people we must help with food, health care and education, just to name a few freebies. How many of the jobs they do could be done by our returning servicemen and women? Wouldn’t it be better to spend the money we spend on the illegals on our deserving service men and women? We shouldn’t need organizations like Robin Hvidston’s “We the People Rising” to protest the injustice of our broken immigration laws. We do not need more laws for the president to ignore, we need to enforce the laws we have. If you start taking the illegals’ cases one by one, we will never solve this problem and they will just keep coming.

Secure our border and enforce our laws. Problem solved.

Elaine Proko
Anaheim

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/laws-713209-people-court.html

--------------------

THE ORANGE COUNTY
REGISTER

Follow the law on immigration

April 24, 2016

I must take some exception to your statement in regard to the applicability of the rules in question and under review with the Supreme Court. You state that these rules could affect about 100,000 people in Orange County. The main article states that this affects close to 4 million people. I disagree with both counts. This issue affects more than 300 million people, all living here in the United States. Immigration, legal or otherwise, impacts all of us. It particularly impacts us all in a negative way when current laws are ignored and the government goes out of its way to provide for those who have chosen to break our laws. People make choices that they must deal with. If I choose to not pay federal income taxes, there will be ramifications as a result of that choice that affect me and my family. I do not expect a pass. But executive orders at a federal level and state drivers licenses and Medi-Cal coverage only undermine our ability to discourage illegal immigration and to adequately manage and balance legal immigration.

Robert Filacchione
Fullerton

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/laws-713209-people-court.htm

--------------------

THE ORANGE COUNTY
REGISTER


Follow the law on immigration

April 24, 2016

Months before a presidential election, Obama’s executive order for deferring deportation of approximately 4 million illegal immigrants without criminal records, but with lawfully resident children and allowing them to work, obtain driver’s licenses, gain entrance into Social Security with other welfare benefits, is before the Supreme Court.

The plan was first introduced just after the House of Representatives declined a Senate-passed immigration update in 2014. Congress had (restructured) work permits and benefits as a deterrent to unlawful immigration, whereas the administration appeared to be an enabler inciting further transgressions. This was egregious in that it inferred the parents of citizen children were using their children as illegal pawns to gain lawful admittance for themselves.

President Obama promised to transform America. In addition to packing the courts, he’s packing the nation, not only with illegal immigrant adults, but also unattended Central American children, Middle Eastern refugees and released drug traffickers to circulate in our communities, all under the Constitution’s Preamble mandate “To promote the general welfare.”

Jack A. Watkins
Corona del Mar

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/laws-713209-people-court.html

--------------------

SN StarNews    

Letters to the Editor, April 23

Published: Sunday, April 24, 2016

Different walls

Contrary to what some people may think, there is a difference between the Berlin Wall at which President Reagan said “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall” and the wall that Mr. Trump wants to build along our southern border.

The Berlin Wall was built by communist East Germany to keep their people from escaping. Trump wants a wall to keep people out that want to come here illegally. I agree with Trump — stringent action must be taken to stop the flow of illegal aliens coming in.

James A. Torrance
Wilmington

http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20160424/ARTICLES/160429842/-1/TOPIC0171

--------------------

DentonRC.com
Denton  Record - Chronicle

Published: 23 April 2016 10:35 PM

Immigration issue

A study published by the Center for Immigration Studies reports 61 million immigrants and their American-born minor children living in the United States.

Between 1970 and 2015, the proportion of immigrants to population increased by 353 percent — six times faster than the general U.S. population, which grew by 59 percent. Some states watched their numbers of immigrants rise much more steeply: in Georgia, 3,058 percent; in Virginia, 1,150 percent; and in Texas, 1,084 percent.

A survey conducted by the consulting firm A.T. Kearney and previewed by Bloomberg Business Week finds that 61 percent of Americans polled say “continued immigration into the country jeopardizes the United States.”

The immigration issue isn’t simply about numbers. It’s whether the nation will remain moored to its founding values or be transformed into a place unrecognizable. A majority of Americans understands that an American identity cannot survive open borders.

The liberal aim is to eliminate all vestiges of America’s heritage to establish a new nation easily integrated into a global village without borders (Washington Times, March 14).

Thomas Sowell’s column (DRC, March 15) states: “Historians of the future, when they look back on our times, may be completely baffled when trying to understand how Western civilization welcomed vast numbers of people hostile to the fundamental values of Western civilization — meaning people who had been taught that they have the right to kill those who do not share their beliefs.”

Europe is reaping the results of its “open door” immigration policy. Will Americans have the same harvest?

Alice Gore,
 Denton

http://www.dentonrc.com/opinion/letters-headlines/20160423-letters-to-the-editor-april-24.ece

--------------------

Lompoc Record

Mailbag

Growers houses
April 23, 2016

Let growers build houses

I have to agree with a recent letter writer. There is a very high level of unemployment in this area.

How about 20-30 percent? Since growers feel a need to import more workers, why doesn't the grower build near his own house? Because he doesn't want to turn his neighborhood into a slum.

If you bring a couple hundred either illegal or legal, unskilled, single guys in, it will become a slum.

Robert Jones
Santa Maria

http://lompocrecord.com/news/opinion/mailbag/porter-experience-growers-houses/article_d330c7ff-1054-58c4-9e9a-4c652889271e.html

--------------------

Journal Inquirer.com
NORTH-CENTRAL CONNECTICUT’S HOMETOWN NEWSPAPER

April 23-24 letters

Immigration concerns

This concerns the all-important issue on immigration. Yes, there always are two sides but I’ll give the side why illegal immigration is not in American interests — just use some common sense here.

Here is a quote from former Rep. Ron Paul on the subject: “This mass migration from the Middle East and beyond is a direct result of the neocon foreign policy of regime-change, invasion, and pushing ‘Democracy’ at the barrel of a gun.” He also had this to say, “This is a man-made crisis and it is a government-made crisis.”

I believe the United States is admitting some 250,000 Muslim immigrants each year. President Barack Obama is allowing Syrian refugees by the thousands into America, despite the fact that it is impossible to check those with sinister plans of terrorism, for example.

Sen. John McCain should be exposed for being a leading supporter of the policies that brought on the refugee crisis.

Obama and EU leaders are fully aware of what brought on a refugee crisis in the Middle East.

They are playing on the compassion for the refugee civilians (children included), a situation brought on by the “globalists.” The bottom line is, illegal immigration is a threat to Western civilization.

There are those who dislike freedom and America. I say, “Get out.”

Harry Lo Giudice
Rocky Hill

http://www.journalinquirer.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/april---letters/article_9ebbbe82-07ac-11e6-9a85-17f2c64555d8.html

--------------------

The Jamestown Sun

Third-party presence is needed in the U.S.

By Mark Schuttenhelm from Jamestown

The corruption that permeates our political parties is on display this primary season. On the Democrat side, it doesn’t matter how many votes Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt., amasses; the super delegates will ensure Hillary Clinton gets the nomination. Everyone knows it. Similar shenanigans are happening on the right with Donald Trump. Only difference is Sanders is willing to eat the dirt sandwich being handed to him by party elites. He will take one for the team, but Trump won’t. He continues to expose the Republican Party corruption, and because of that, and his desire to take its cheap labor and free trade deals away, the party apparatchiks despise him. Is our political system salvageable, or is it too far gone?

Many would say it’s too far gone, that short of another American Revolution, we are doomed to deal with these two corrupt entities. I think the presence of a strong third party — a party that would appeal to disaffected Democrats and Republicans — is what’s needed. Not the lunatic fringes of either party, but thoughtful Democrats and Republicans who are sick and tired of holding their noses while voting for the latest pathetic candidate their party has trotted out for them.

The party should feature a simple platform, focusing on the economic health of the middle class and the security of our citizens. Here are a few suggestions:

1. Borders. Open borders are a security and economic nightmare. Our borders must be secured by whatever means necessary — walls, drones, satellites, border patrol, National Guard, etc. Sanctuary cities are unacceptable. Local politicians and law enforcement who refuse to cooperate with the feds will be dealt with harshly, as will businesses that employ illegal aliens.

2. Immigration. Ninety-three million Americans are out of the workforce. Many are looking for work, many have given up. Accordingly, there will be a moratorium on new immigration for five years, at which point the issue will be revisited. When the time comes, potential immigrants will need to be free of communicable diseases, be able to make a case that they will be an asset to our nation and be prepared to learn English.

3. Trade. No more trade deals that benefit big business and/or foreign countries at the expense of American workers. Flawed existing trade deals need to be renegotiated.

4. Corruption in government. U.S. senators and representatives will be limited to two terms and barred from becoming lobbyists when they leave office.

5. H1-B and H2-B visas. These programs are regularly abused by U.S. companies willing to throw American workers under the bus in favor of lower-paid foreigners. These programs will be shelved until a time when an actual labor shortage arises.

http://www.jamestownsun.com/letters/4016437-third-party-presence-needed-us

--------------------

Portland Press Herald

April 23, 2016

Letter to the editor: Support Trump to keep our families safe from terrorists

Radical Muslim terrorists in Pakistan bombed a park frequented by Christian families on Easter Sunday, killing 72 and injuring more than 300. Many of the dead were women and children. Muslim terrorists celebrated after the attack and promised more to come.

Meanwhile, the president of the U.S. emphasizes his goal of bringing thousands more refugees from primarily Muslim countries into the U.S. As Jim Comey, director of the FBI, has stated, it is often impossible to check on the background of these individuals, since they are not in any database.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you like the daily bombings occurring throughout the world and don’t mind if that activity becomes common here also, then please support the approach to immigration favored by President Obama, Hillary Clinton and U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree.

On the other hand, if you believe that our kids and families are precious, then I hope you’ll support Donald Trump, who has promised a temporary ban on allowing questionable individuals into the U.S. until we can do so safely.

Ethan Jones
Bath

http://www.pressherald.com/2016/04/23/letter-to-the-editor-support-trump-to-keep-our-families-safe-from-terrorists/

--------------------

MONTEREY
HERALD

Peninsula readers' letters: April 22

By From Daily News Group readers

Cheap labor

Dear Editor: The Democrats are very good at pointing out cases in which a company reaps private profits while dumping on the rest of the society its risks and the damages caused while making these profits. This is exactly what those who employ illegal immigrants are doing: They are reaping the benefits of employing cheap and compliant labor while the costs of having this labor in our country are dumped on all of us. Our builders are making huge profits, while the rest of us pay for the schooling and welfare of children who should not be here. If our companies are to be made to pay the true costs of their profits, then the employers of illegal immigrants should pay the true costs of their cheap labor force.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. The reality is that many illegal immigrants are purposefully imported to work in illegal businesses set up by their families. These businesses pay wages that are way under the legal minimum and pay no taxes. How is any legitimate American business to compete under such unfair conditions? This is why legitimate American businesses in certain fields have been decimated and many more will go bankrupt as minimum wages are increased.

If you want to have a good laugh at comical duplicity, observe how stringent our unions are regarding any intrusion by illegal Latino labor while voting Democrat. Unfortunately, the joke is on all of us.

Virgil Stevens,
San Carlos

http://www.montereyherald.com/general-news/20160422/peninsula-readers-letters-april-22

--------------------

Miami Herald

April 20, 2016 10:49 PM

Democracy in peril

I’m an avid reader of the news. I constantly see references to and complaints about the tax code, our dysfunctional immigration system, crumbling infrastructure, healthcare and money spent on political campaigns, in addition to many other problems that the wealthiest country in the world should easily be able to fix.

I’m convinced that the reason these problems persist is because the plutocrats who comprise the top 1 percent of the country in wealth and income and who own half of its assets profit from the status quo. This harms the well-being of the other 99 percent and in the long run is a serious danger to our democracy.

The tax code and lobbying laws that greatly benefit the top 1 percent should be revised.

This could provide a more even distribution of wealth, which would improve the standard of living for the rapidly shrinking middle class.

If the middle class disappears, the United States may end up poor and corrupt like many of its southern neighbors.

Paul Alberts, Miami

http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/article73001427.html

--------------------

JEWISH JOURNAL
Connect. Inform. Inspire.

Posted on Apr. 20, 2016

Immigration Affects Health Care

I wanted to comment on Rob Eshman’s assertion that there is “no illegal immigration crisis” (“Haters, Meet Najia,” April 15). As a primary care physician working with indigent patients including illegal immigrants, I can attest that there is a crisis in L.A. County health care. This is manifested by the long wait times for uninsured residents (legal and illegal) for specialist consultations and by the ability of the consultants to treat only certain problems, as they are overwhelmed by demand. That demand is exacerbated by illegal immigration. California’s generosity toward illegal immigrants keeps drawing them to the state, making planning social services difficult.

Alex Fridman Jr. via email

http://www.jewishjournal.com/letters_to_the_editor/article/letters_to_the_editor_cigars_simone_zimmerman_and_more

--------------------

rrstar.com

Letter: Illegal immigration is detrimental to US economy

By Wally Haas
Opinion editor

Posted Apr. 20, 2016

Scott Reeder’s recent article supported the GOP establishment, leftists who despise America, ethnic advocates like La Raza, the Democratic party and selfish businessmen.

Am I a fascist supporting ethnic cleansing because I respect the law? The Balkan disaster resulted from Yugoslavia, a “multicultural,” secular state, falling apart. Ethnic cleansing followed.

Economic benefits? Is he referring to legal immigrants as entrepreneurs or illegal immigrants as criminals? If our economy grew 6 percent it may be due to 52 percent of legal immigrants being on welfare. Add to that 11-20 million current illegal immigrants. Reflect on family reunification policies and add tens of millions more. Go economy!

The U.S. Government Accountability Office, reported that there were 296,000 incarcerated illegal immigrant in state prisons in 2011. I guess our economy grew as we built new prisons and hired more guards, lawyers and judges. Migrants make up 25 percent of federal prisoners. If Americans hired Americans, wages would probably be higher, thus growing our economy.

I was “accidentally” born to a janitor father. Does that give me the right to take money from a child born of a more prosperous neighbor?

Abuse of H-1B visas, manipulation of guilt and compassion, deceptive terms like nation of immigrants cannot be discussed here. Sorry.

“E pluribus unum”? More like, “E unum pluribus.”

— Daniel King, Roscoe

http://www.rrstar.com/article/20160420/OPINION/160429993

--------------------

THE DAILY
Evergreen

Letter to the editor: College Republicans are not hateful

BY JAMES ALLSUP | (President of WSU College Republicans | Students for Trump Sr Advisor) [April 20, 2016]

In a recent letter to the editor, Hayley Hohman wrote to condemn College Republicans and the decision to host a pro-Trump table in the CUB. Hohman, you are wrong to call those concerned about illegal immigration "fear mongers."

We support legal immigration. We disavow hate. And we support the American Dream – for Americans and those who come here legally.

You are welcome to support moderate policies. I personally believe in the rule of law and strict enforcement of immigration policy, bringing in people who seek to contribute to our economy, and barring those who would break our laws, leech off our system, or do us harm – and the Republican platform agrees with me.

It is not hateful to defend our borders. It is not hateful to want to protect American interests first, nor to refuse to bend over backward for open-borders globalism and allow illegal immigrants to flood our labor market, putting Americans out of work.

I challenge you to demonstrate how defending American sovereignty is "hateful."

I question how you can state that the pro-security "movement" is not Republican. The leading candidates, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, both support building the wall. As WSU College Republicans (WSUCR) president, I work to increase awareness of all Republican candidates. Our board comprises supporters of many former Republican candidates.

Since the event, we have seen an influx of interest. Dozens of students have come out of the shadows, thanking WSUCR for standing up for free speech and voicing support for conservatism on campus.

http://www.dailyevergreen.com/opinion/article_42526fcc-0687-11e6-9973-877ce88dfd81.html

-------------------

The World

We've failed to enforce Immigration laws

April 20, 2016

I find the hypocrisy interesting that the media, the federal government and so many others are “outraged” at the recent events in Eastern Oregon involving the “Bundy Bunch” occupation of a wildlife refuge, while there is such limited “outrage” over President Obama’s absolute failure to enforce our immigration laws with equal vigor.

Let’s look at the facts. Did the Bundy Bunch break the letter of the law with their occupation? Yes. Did it result in costs to the public? Yes. Were any public innocents killed? No. What was the size of terror? Limited.

Let’s look at the Obama administration’s neglect to enforce our immigration laws in comparison. Was the letter of the law broken when Obama directed his agencies to not enforce existing immigration law? Yes. Did it result in costs to the public? Billions of dollars when you total up private as well as direct public costs. Were any public innocents killed? Thousands, when all the murders and vehicle accident casualties are counted, caused by the influx of illegal immigrants. This doesn’t even take into account the rapes and other criminal activity, nor does it include the casualties or costs caused by diseases brought into this country wholesale by the uncontrolled mass influx of illegals in recent years. Was terror created? Absolutely.

While I don’t approve of anarchy in any form, whether by citizens revolting against the law, or the government itself failing to enforce the law, I hope whoever sits on the jury trials for the Bundy Bunch will take a page from our pre-Revolutionary history and refuse to find the Bundy Bunch guilty, just as our forefathers refused to convict people charged with crimes against King George’s laws.

When government picks and chooses which laws to enforce, and against whom, we are no longer a free government of the people, but closer to the tyranny of King George.

In my opinion, our Congress and federal attorney general are derelict to their oath of office for not finding our president guilty of not performing his duties as chief law enforcement officer under the Constitution regarding protecting our country’s borders, causing death, facilitating the spread of disease, and costing individual citizens and the public generally billions of dollars.

JohnShank
Coos Bay

http://theworldlink.com/news/opinion/mailbag/we-ve-failed-to-enforce-immigration-laws/article_48f3d96c-b749-512a-a1c8-5494334c65c4.html

Not certain how your candidate stacks up on immigration issues?

Alert date: 
2016-05-07
Alert body: 

On the radio the other day, I heard Michael Medved touting to his audience that only a tiny portion of the American public is actually concerned about illegal immigration.  I disagree with him!  Often, if given a choice about concerns that voters have, illegal immigration will not be the first words out of their mouths.

But, voters will say they are concerned about terrorism, national security, JOBS, stagnant wages, over-crowded schools, high taxes, drugs, gangs, crime, the culture of corruption, the environmental impact on our environment of increased population and on and on.  Every one of their concerns is directly impacted by - hold on to your hat - illegal immigration and excessive legal immigration.

This election cycle, it's more important than ever before, to fully understand your candidate's position on the issue of illegal immigration and excessive legal immigration.  If you aren't asking, you may be surprised - and disappointed.

OFIR encourages our members to visit a candidate's website and discover if a detailed statement is posted about immigration,  If there is not, please contact that candidate and ask them to make a public statement on their website.  If, after a few pokes and reminders, there is still nothing posted, that might give you a clue as to their commitment to solving the problem.

OFIR has prepared, and now updated, information about Presidential candidates that may be useful to you. Information about candidates in state-wide races  may be helpful to you in approaching those candidates at upcoming events.  If you have more, credible information that can be substantiated, please share with OFIR.  As always, OFIR strives to be as accurate as possible in any information that we provide.

Another source of information is the Abigail Adams Candidate Comparison Guide

OFIR encourages you to learn more about the candidates from many sources.  OFIR invites candidates to let us know if there is anything they would like to add in our postings.

18,000 Illegal Aliens Caught in 5 Months — In Single Texas Sector

Border Patrol agents assigned to the Laredo Sector had an impressive first five months of the current fiscal year which began in October 2015. 17,945 apprehensions were made of illegal aliens who had crossed the border from Mexico...  In addition, large quantities of drugs were seized and 33 bodies of illegal immigrants were found.

The Laredo Sector covers 101 counties in Texas. This area represents 86,793 square miles of the Lone Star State. It covers a distance of 171 miles of the Rio Grande River border with Mexico and runs northward from Laredo through Dallas to the Oklahoma border on the Red River.

Highlighting the accomplishments of the sector during that period, Border Patrol officials reported the seizure of 41,188 pounds of marijuana, 341.17 pounds of cocaine, and 863.17 pounds of heroin. Unfortunately, 33 bodies of illegal immigrants who died while entering the U.S. were found by these agents. Additionally, 184 rescues were carried out.

“These statistics represent the hard work, commitment, honor and dedication that the men and women of the U.S. Border Patrol provide everyday while securing our Nation’s borders,” Laredo Sector Chief Mario Martinez said in the statement obtained by Breitbart Texas...

“We are very proud of our Border Patrol agents and grateful for the hard work these numbers represent,” Garza continued. “Unfortunately, what we do not know is how many people successfully crossed the border undetected...

The report was sent out by officials late Friday afternoon...  The report does not disclose how many of the 17,945 people apprehended were returned to their country of origin or how many of those people were released into the United States, with or without a notice to appear for an immigration hearing...

The sector is also in the process of adding an additional all-weather road to allow agents to more quickly access sections of the river area and respond to situations where either people or drugs are crossing the border.

Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for Breitbart Texas and is a member of the original Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX.

So what, another Earth Day comes and goes

Oregonians for Immigration Reform was founded 16 years ago by just a handful of people that were very concerned about the impact on our environment of unfettered illegal immigration and excessive legal immigration. 

The roots of many organizations across the country working to stop illegal immigration and slow legal immigration to a more sustainable level often start with concerns about the environment and the impact of more and more people coming to the US.

OFIR has since expanded it's membership to include thousands of members across the state with those same concerns and many more, i.e. national security, terrorism, jobs, stagnant wages, over-crowded schools, crime, drugs, disease, a culture of corruption, gangs and on and on.

CAIRCO's Fred Elbel wrote of his experiences with the Sierra Club, a group that chose to ignore the impact of immigration on our fragile environment and our own quality of life.  They made that choice - for money.  He included an informative article written by Ian Smith and published in the Daily Caller that explains just how it happened.

NOTE:  The CAIRCO website is a treasure trove of information for anyone wanting to learn more about immigration.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yesterday was Earth Day. 

I once was a member of the Sierra Club in the mid-1990s, back when their population policy included addressing mass immigration as the root cause of US Population growth. At that time, environmentalists had a lot of common sense. 

Some environmentalists still do, but most environmental organizations today are feel-good social justice corporate profit centers. Take the Sierra Club as a case in point. They sold out to immigration political correctness to the tune of $100 million!

This excellent article by Ian Smith explains the gory details. It's a good read.

Earth Day: A Time To Remember When Tightening The Border Topped The Green Agenda, The Daily Caller, April 22, 2016.

I was a member and a director of SUSPS, which in the late 1990s fought to reinstate the Sierra Club's long-standing, sensible immigration policy:

"Since 1996, leaders of the Sierra Club have refused to admit that immigration driven, rapid U.S. population growth causes massive environmental problems. And they have refused to acknowledge the need to reduce U.S. immigration levels in order to stabilize the U.S. population and protect our natural resources. Their refusal to do what common sense says is best for the environment was a mystery for nearly a decade.

Then, on Oct. 27, 2004, the Los Angeles Times revealed the answer: David Gelbaum, a super rich donor, had demanded this position from the Sierra Club in return for huge donations! Kenneth Weiss, author of the LA Times article that broke the story, quoted what David Gelbaum said to Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope:

"I did tell Carl Pope in 1994 or 1995 that if they ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me."

In 1996 and again in 1998, the Club's leaders proved their loyalty to Gelbaum's position on immigration, first by enacting a policy of neutrality on immigration and then by aggressively opposing a referendum to overturn that policy. In 2000 and 2001, Gelbaum rewarded the Club with total donations to the Sierra Club Foundation exceeding $100 million. In 2004 and 2005, the Club's top leaders and management showed their gratitude for the donations by stifling dissent and vehemently opposing member efforts to enact an immigration reduction policy...

Read more at SUSPS.

Here is a formal Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on United States Immigration Policy. Immigration driven US population growth really does have environmental consequences - which most politicians gladly ignore in exchange for support from their donor base.

 

Sincerely,
 

Fred Elbel
Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform

 

People smuggler sentenced to jail after 24th arrest

A convicted people smuggler who had been arrested 24 times dating back to 1999 was sentenced to prison for the first time on Friday.

Efrain Delgado-Rosales, 35, was sentenced to five years in jail by a federal judge in San Diego for bringing an illegal alien into the U.S. for financial gain.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, Border Patrol agents spotted Delgado-Rosales leading a group of four illegal immigrants through California's Otay Mountains this past November. The men told the agents that Delgado-Rosales had picked them up from a stash house in Tijuana, brought them to the U.S.-Mexico border and left them on the Mexico side for several hours.

During their wait, the men said theives robbed them of their money and cell phones. When Delgado-Rosales returned, his indifference to their situation led the four men to believed he had been involved in the robbery.

After the men crossed into the U.S., they claimed, three of them dropped back, unable to keep up with Delgado-Rosales' pace. The smuggler only turned back for the stragglers when the fourth man begged him to do so.

Delgado-Rosales was identified as the guide in a similar incident in August 2014, during which one of the men being smuggled died.

According to the U.S. Attorney's office, Delgado-Rosales was first arrested on July 19, 1999. On 23 of the 24 occasions he was arrested, Delgado-Rosales was accompanied by at least two and as many as 46 illegal immigrants. In 2003, he was arrested in Los Angeles with 61 illegal immigrants.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexandra Foster told CNN that after each of his previous arrests, Delgado-Rosales was deported to his home country of Mexico.

Tax payments by illegal aliens do not justify their employment

The pro open-borders lobby touts payment of taxes by illegal aliens as a positive contribution to our economy, but closer examination of the facts shows how shallow and erroneous the claim is.  Even discounting the overall damage that violation of immigration law causes a society, it’s ridiculous to think that the tax payments of illegal aliens make illegal immigrants valuable to the country. 

In this brief commentary, a researcher at the Federation for American Immigration Reform, demolishes the argument of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a group which claims its “mission is to ensure that elected officials, the media, and the general public have access to accurate, timely, and straightforward information that allows them to understand the effects of current and proposed tax policies. …”
 
Think again, ITEP! 
 
 
March 15, 2016 By Jack Martin, Federation for American Immigration Reform
 
The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) has updated its estimate of the “contribution” of illegal aliens to the economy. In The Nation, Michelle Chen writes on March 14 that ITEP credits illegal aliens with adding $11.6 billion annually in tax payments – nearly $7 billion in sales and excise taxes and $3.6 billion in property taxes. Note that neither of those amounts are ones that can be avoided by working ‘off-the-books’, which allows them to avoid payments for income taxes, Social Security, and unemployment insurance.
 
But is this significant? The answer is that the ITEP estimate is irrelevant because it ignores that the same amount, or more, would be contributed by legal workers if the illegal workers were unavailable. Legal workers would be much less likely to be working off-the-books and would, therefore, be contributing to the other programs that illegal workers often evade. In addition, because legal workers are much less likely to be sending remittances out of the country, their spending in the United States would be greater and generate more sales tax receipts. Further, if employers did not have a ready supply of exploitable illegal workers, they would have to offer higher wages to attract legal workers. The result would reduce legal worker unemployment, social assistance dependence and poverty.
 
So when you hear someone citing the ITEP estimate, think about how it documents the failure of the country’s immigration enforcement operations and the social and fiscal consequences that result from that failure. 
 

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - illegal immigration