-
Flap’s Links for February 23rd from 14:35 to 14:41
These are my links for February 23rd from 14:35 to 14:41:
- How California cities invited the death of redevelopment – Last fall, the League of California Cities, which spent $2.5 million to promote a ballot initiative, argued forcefully that property taxes should be used only to pay for essential public services.
In their official ballot argument for Proposition 22, the head of the association's Fire Chiefs Department and the president of the California Police Chiefs Association wrote that property taxes should be used "to fund vital local services like 911 response, police and fire protection."
It's the same argument that Gov. Jerry Brown is using these days as he makes his case to disband the state's 400-plus local redevelopment agencies and to instead spend the property tax revenues they now receive on bread-and-butter services for California taxpayers.
"Redevelopment funds come directly from local property taxes that would otherwise pay for schools and core city and county services such as police and fire protection and care for the most vulnerable people in our society," Brown said in his State of the State address. "I come down on the side of those who believe that core functions of government must be funded first."
+++++++
Read it all
California Redevelopment Agencies have been an abuse that has gone on for decades.
They are really an attempt to recapture local property tax revenues before they go to the state and are wasted on state spending priorities.
The State of California turned a blind eye to this money grab by local communities while taxes and spending increased.
Now, the state is broke and wants its money back.
The state is right but the repercussions to local cities and counties will be widespread but what does Jerry Brown care – that is their problem.
- Indiana lawmakers pass immigration curbs like Arizona – The Indiana senate passed a sweeping immigration bill that echoes Arizona's tougher measures on illegal immigrants and despite opposition from some of the largest employers and business groups in the state.
The measure, passed on Tuesday night by a vote of 31-18, would allow state and local police to ask a person stopped for infractions like traffic violations for proof of legal residency if the officer has a "reasonable suspicion" they may be in the country illegally.
Another provision would call for, with some exceptions, the use of English only in public meetings, on Web sites and in documents.
The bill still needs to be adopted by state's House of Representatives, where opponents say they will now turn.
++++++
Likely in more states as well.
- How California cities invited the death of redevelopment – Last fall, the League of California Cities, which spent $2.5 million to promote a ballot initiative, argued forcefully that property taxes should be used only to pay for essential public services.
-
House GOP Set to Mandate E-Verify to Crack Down on Illegal Immigration
This is what Flap’s Congressman Elton Gallegly said on Thursday.
The balance between Republican calls to reduce government regulation of business and the GOP’s campaign against undocumented workers is about to be tested by a bill that would mandate use of an illegal-worker detection system, which critics say would cripple U.S. agriculture by depriving farmers of cheap labor.
House immigration subcommittee chairman Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.) said Thursday that he plans to introduce the bill to mandate the use of E-Verify within the next month. The program is already mandatory for government agencies and contractors and used voluntarily by nearly 250,000 businesses to check the legal status of potential hires. But Gallegly said he hopes making it a requirement for all U.S. enterprises will drive out illegal workers entirely.
“If there was ever a need to do something quickly, when we have 14 million Americans who aren’t working today, I think they deserve to be put in the front of the line,” the California Republican said at a hearing on the use of E-Verify.
About damn time.
I think such a bill would have an excellent chance of passage. But, will President Obama who needs the Hispanic vote in 2012 veto the legislation?
Previous:
Businesses Fear Expansion of the Illegal Immigration E-Verify Program
-
Businesses Fear Expansion of the Illegal Immigration E-Verify Program
Protesters at a Chipotle restaurant in Minnesota, where some workers were fired after an immigration audit
Well, too bad.In an early indicator of how congressional Republicans will legislate on immigration, House GOP leaders are expanding an inquiry into an enforcement program that allows employers to check the immigration status of employees.
The E-Verify program has long been championed by Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s immigration panel, which will hold a hearing on it Thursday.
Many business owners believe that Gallegly and other House Republicans want to make E-Verify, currently a voluntary program for companies, mandatory. Critics of such a move, many of them farmers, warn that it could destabilize the agricultural economy, which is heavily dependent on undocumented immigrants, and jeopardize millions of jobs held by American citizens that are upstream and downstream of farm labor.
The fact is that agricultural mega-business have been using cheap, illegal aliens for most of their labor for decades at great cost to American taxpayers.
Why?
Well, it is way cheaper than hiring native born Americans or mechanizing their farming/manufacturing operations. Hence, more profits. But, the taxpayers are picking up the tab for the illegal aliens and their American born (and american citizen) children e.g. public education, medicaid, criminal justice et. al..
E-Verify is a sensible reform and if the large agricultural companies cannot obtain enough labor then there is always a guest worker program for which they can apply.
Let’s get the illegal aliens and their hidden costs out of the shadows and back to their home countries while supplying jobs for Americans.
I will gladly pay a bit more for my lettuce and grapes.
-
Sen. Lindsey Grahamnesty Tries His Hand Again at Immigration Reform
South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham
You would have thought that Senator Graham would have learned from the last time he tried for some illegal immigration amnesty.
Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) have rekindled their alliance on immigration reform, taking some early steps to test the political will for addressing the contentious issue this year.
Their call list hasn’t focused so much on House and Senate members who’ve been reliable pro-immigration votes in the past. Instead, they’re looking to a strange-bedfellows mix of conservative and liberal constituencies that can provide a “safety net” of support, as Graham put it, once the issue heats up.
“It’s in the infant stage,” Graham told POLITICO. “I don’t know what the political appetite is to do something.”
For all the groups getting a call from the pair, it is the presence of Graham himself who elevates the odds — however bleak — that the Senate could move on a comprehensive, bipartisan overhaul bill. Graham abruptly departed the talks last spring and took with him any hope of getting a bill in the past Congress.
Now, conservative evangelicals, the AFL-CIO, the Service Employees International Union, business organizations and immigrant advocacy groups say they have gotten word from Schumer’s office that a renewed effort is under way. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce confirmed that it is back in the mix, after a hasty exit last year when Schumer proposed a legislative framework with a temporary worker program that favored labor unions.
And Schumer and his staff have quietly begun reaching out to some unlikely players in the Senate, including Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who has professed a newfound freedom since winning reelection last year without the Republican Party’s help.
I agree with Stacy that this is probably just a shakedown for campaign cash from the open borders crowd and U.S. Chamber of Commerce. But, like Michelle, do not trust Graham. The only saving grace is the House GOP.
Hey! Senator Graham – how about enforcing the immigration laws and securing the borders first?
Can someone PLEASE run against Grahamnesty in a South Carolina GOP primary.
-
Illegal Immigration in the United States Remains Unchanged – Due to Recession?
The Pew Hispanic Report does not spell out the reasons behind the illegal immigration numbers stabilization but you don’t have to be a brain donor to understand.After two years of declines, the number of illegal immigrants living in the U.S. was virtually unchanged last year, according to a report released Tuesday by the Pew Hispanic Center.
The annual report, relied upon by both sides in the contentious immigration debate, found 11.2 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S., statistically identical to the 11.1 million estimated in 2009. The number peaked in 2007 at 12 million and dropped steadily as the economy collapsed.
“It seems the decline has halted as of 2010,” Jeffrey Passel, one of the report’s authors, said in a conference call with reporters.
The center’s findings do not include reasons for the decline or for the stabilization in the illegal immigrant population, which has widely been attributed to the sluggish economy and tougher enforcement.
“Common sense suggests both of them are, in fact, factors,” said Paul Taylor, the center’s director.
The stabilization seems to stem largely from a dwindling number of people making the often perilous journey into the U.S. from Mexico.
“People in Mexico look at the U.S. economy, they look at the U.S. as a potential source of employment, and they see that the opportunities aren’t here,” Passel said. “They weigh that against the cost of hiring somebody to get them across the border and the risks of getting across the border.”
The report also found that illegal immigrants in 2010 were parents of 5.5 million children, 4.5 million of whom were born in the U.S. and are citizens. Because illegal immigrants are younger and more likely to be married, they represented a disproportionate share of births — 8% of the babies born in the U.S. between March 2009 and March 2010 were to at least one illegal immigrant parent.
The entire report can be viewed or downloaded here (Pdf).
Some summary points:
- The number of unauthorized immigrants decreased from 2007 to 2010 in Colorado, Florida, New York and Virginia. The combined population in three contiguous Mountain West states-Arizona, Nevada and Utah-also declined.
- In contrast to the national trend, the combined unauthorized immigrant population in three contiguous West South Central states-Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas-grew from 2007 to 2010.
- Although the number of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. is below 2007 levels, it has tripled since 1990, when it was 3.5 million and grown by a third since 2000, when it was 8.4 million.
With the hiatus or stabilization of illegal alien migration from Mexico, it is imperative that the Congress enact an enforceable employer verification system for employees. It is obvious that when the economy improves the pressure on the Mexican border will increase.
Since it is unlikely that the Obama Administration will increase the enforcement of existing immigration laws or increase border security, it will fall to the states and the Congress – probably setting up a Presidential election year confrontation.
It is not surprising that California which has the highest number of illegal immigrants, also is one of the states most financially impacted by the recession. You see social welfare, medical and education expenses continue for the children born of the illegal immigrants, year after year.
Also, Nevada is feeling the impacts.
Nevada has the largest share of illegal workers in the nation, with roughly 10 percent of its work force not authorized by the federal government, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group.
The report published Tuesday shows a slight jump in illegal workers as Nevada’s job market has shrunk amid record unemployment. Nevada’s population of illegal workers was 9.4 percent in 2009. The Silver State’s unemployment rate has since climbed to 14.5 percent, the highest in the nation.
Nevada also has the largest share of illegal immigrants at 7.2 percent. Only 3.7 percent of people in the United States are illegal immigrants.
Nevada’s illegal immigrants are far from the mightiest immigrant community in the United States. California’s 1.85 million illegal workers, for example, are the largest in the nation. But they represent only 9.7 percent of the Golden State’s work force.
Nevada’s illegal workers soared in 2007 before the recession hit, climbing to 240,000 employees. That number dropped to 190,000 in 2010.
But, while the numbers MAY have stabilized, the babies born from the illegal immigrants remain. All are American citizens who are entitled to social welfare and education.
Can the states and federal government, any longer afford neglecting this issue?
-
Why California Rep. Elton Gallegly was a Solid Choice for Immigration Subcommittee Chair
Representative Elton Gallegly, R-Simi Valley and Flap, January 15, 2010, Thousand Oaks, California
NumbersUSA has a great piece on my Congressman Elton Gallegly who was recently appointed Chairman of the House Immigration Subcommittee.Rep. Gallegly is among an elite group of Immigration-Reduction Champions. Only two other House Members have taken more constructive actions in their careers to reduce the flow of both illegal and legal immigration. The No. 3 champion Gallegly will be serving under the No. 1 champion, House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith.
Gallegly has earned a Career “A” Grade from NumbersUSA. He has a perfect score in 5 of our 9 categories, and only one category is less than 92%.
Last Congress, Gallegly sponsored 3 of our “5 Great Immigration-Reduction Bills” – the SAVE Act, the CLEAR Act, and the Visa Lottery elimination bill. He also introduced his own legislation – the Enforce Immigration Law Act of 2009 that would have required information sharing between the Department of Homeland Security and the IRS to help root out illegal aliens in the workplace.
But to understand the real commitment Rep. Gallegly has to reducing immigration, one can look back to the 1996 debate that resulted in the passing of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.
Read all of the piece here and you will understand why the appointment of the 16 years more of seniority Gallegy was a very solid choice to fight illegal immigration and lead this subcommittee.
-
House Republicans Name California’s Rep. Elton Gallegly to Lead Immigration Subcommittee
California GOP delegation could have sway on immigration issues in Congress
This is a good appointment for my Congressional district and for California.Signaling their approach to immigration reform this year will be hawkish but not rhetorically extreme, House Republicans have chosen a Southern California congressman to head the group of lawmakers that drafts and introduces immigration policy.
The solidly pro-enforcement Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Simi Valley, was named Friday morning to lead the immigration subcommittee in the House of Representatives, which falls under the judiciary committee. House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, surprised many when he chose Gallegly over outspoken Iowa Republican Steve King, who was widely considered to have the job. King will instead be vice chairman.
Groups that work to halt illegal immigration praised news of the duo’s leadership, but liberal groups interpreted Gallegly’s higher position as a snubbing of King’s harsh tone.
“The answer to illegal immigration is fairly simple,” Gallegly said in a news release Friday. “First, we must enforce our laws and secure the border. Second, we must remove the magnets that encourage illegal immigration. Finally, we must remove the benefits that make it easy for them to stay.”
Gallegly said he would oppose any form of amnesty, and he pledged to quickly hold hearings to scrutinize the Obama administration’s approach to work site enforcement and to expand the use of E-Verify, a program for employer screening of workers’ immigration status.Missing from Gallegly’s statements Friday was any mention of revoking birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants, a hot-button cause that has been a pet issue for King and other immigration hawks. King introduced a bill earlier in the week that would end automatic citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents.
I am glad Elton has been appointed to this chairmanship. He is tough, but fair on illegal immigration.
And, he will actually get something done, meaning legislation will be written in the Congress. Getting it through the U.S. Senate will probably be difficult and past President Obama’s veto pen more than difficult – but that is another story.
Look for movement on E-Verify, employer sanctions and Congressional hearings if the Justice Department will NOT enforce existing immigration law.
-
The DREAM Act Fails in the United States Senate – Now Lets Secure the Mexican Border
Undocumented college students and supporters watch the Senate’s cloture vote on the Dream Act at the UCLA Downtown Labor Center in Los Angeles, Saturday, Dec. 18, 2010. The Dream Act would give provisional legal status to illegal immigrants brought to the country as children
Any type of amnesty for illegal aliens is not going to happen until the southern border with Mexico is secured. The U.S. Senate made it clear today.The weeks of rallies, hunger strikes and sit-ins and the thousands of phone calls placed to Senate offices didn’t pay off for immigration activists.
The decade-old DREAM Act once again failed to break a filibuster in the Senate on Saturday morning, effectively killing the bill this year and shutting the door on what perhaps was the last chance for pro-immigration reform legislation until at least the 2012 election.
Senate Democrats came up five votes short of the 60 needed to advance the House-passed bill, which would provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants brought to the country as children if they attend college or join the military for two years.
The 55-41 vote was mostly along party lines, though a handful of Democrats — perhaps fearful of their 2012 election outlook — also voted against the DREAM Act.
Mickey Kaus has the politics of the vote here.
Swing votes: Lincoln—yes …Brownback—no … Scott Brown—no … Tester— no … Snowe—no … Nelson—no … Kirk—no … Sherrod Brown—yes … Lemieux—no … Baucus—no … Webb—yes … Voinovich—no … McCaskill—yes … Hagan—no … Murkowski—yes … Hutchison—no … Collins—no …
Final vote: 55 yes, 41 no … DREAM fails to get cloture. It looks like a close thing. My side’s line will (not implausibly) be that the DREAMers fell five votes short of the 60 they needed … The four senators who ducked having to vote include Manchin, who seems a bit cowardly for that. Maybe he has an excuse. [Update: Politico says he put out a statement opposing DREAM.] Also Hatch, Gregg, and Bunning. At least those last two seem like “no” votes, and none of the three was a sure yes … All in all, five Dems voted no (Tester, Baucus, Pryor, Ben Nelson, Hagan) … Semi-surprise “yes” vote: Dorgan, retiring Democrat who has on occasion been a “comprehensive reform”-skeptic from the old-school union, anti-cheap labor point of view. During the informative (only 50% cheerleading) lo-fi Numbers USA live feed, Rosemary Jenks attributes this to Dorgan’s desire to take a university position when he retires. I guess you can’t be a college president and oppose DREAM …
The fact is the DREAM Act has been languishing in the Congress for a decade and with GOP regaining control of the House, it will be DEAD for at least two years.
Now, is the time for the Congress to vote to secure the border with Mexico and stop the influx of illegal aliens. It is out of control in California and will have REAL political effects for the GOP and America, if the diluge is NOT stopped and stopped now.
Thanks to those Senators who opposed this illegal alien amnesty – now get to work to close off that border!
-
The DREAM ACT: 2.1 Million Future Democrat Voter Recruitment Drive is Coming to a Vote in the U.S. Senate – Melt the Phones
Seriously, this is an American nightmare.The open-borders progressives’ “DREAM Act” is an electoral nightmare. It’s not just an illegal alien student bailout. It’s a 2.1 million future Democrat voter recruitment drive. The “path to citizenship” dangled by Obama is a superhighway to generations of big government-birthed, identity politics-nursed dependents.
Misguided Republicans have supported illegal alien amnesties dating back to the Reagan era. And they have paid a steep, lasting price. As bankrupt, multiculti-wracked California goes, so goes the nation. The progs’ plan has always been to exploit the massive population of illegal aliens to redraw the political map and secure a permanent ruling majority.Patriots, call these fence-sitting Senators and tell them to VOTE No on the DREAM ACT.
REPUBLICANS:
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN 202-224-2235; 480-897-6289: Staff says he “hasn’t made a public statement” and “hasn’t made up his mind.” He talked a tough border security game to get re-elected, while promising illegal alien activists he would “resolve their issues.” (Refresh your memories here.)
SEN. OLYMPIA SNOWE 202-224-5344; 207-874-0883: Staff says she “hasn’t released a statement.”
SEN. SUSAN COLLINS 202-224-2523; 207-945-0417: Staff says she “hasn’t released a public statement.”
SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI 202-224-6665; 907-271-3735: Staff says she’s “still reviewing the bill.”
DEMOCRATS:
SEN. JIM WEBB OF VIRGINIA 202-224-4024; 703-573-7090. Staff says “he hasn’t made a public statement.”
SEN. KENT CONRAD OF NORTH DAKOTA 202-224-2043; 701-258-4648. Staff says “he hasn’t released a statement.” Conrad has voted against the DREAM Act in the past.
SEN. BYRON DORGAN OF NORTH DAKOTA 202 224-2551. He voted against the DREAM Act in the past. Staff says he “hasn’t taken a public position.”
SEN. MARK PRYOR OF ARKANSAS 202-224-2353; 501-324-6336. He voted no on the DREAM Act cloture vote in September. Staff says he is “likely” to vote no again, though he hasn’t made an official public statement yet.
SEN. JON TESTER OF MONTANA 202 224-2644. Staff says he has voted against the DREAM Act in the past and “he will probably vote against any bill that has amnesty in it.”
SEN. MAX BAUCUS OF MONTANA 202-224-2651. He has opposed the DREAM Act in the past and is a “likely no” again in this session.
SEN. CLAIRE MCCASKILL OF MISSOURI 202-224-6154. She opposed the DREAM Act in the past and staff says she has made no statement changing her position otherwise.
The vote will be coming up after the Thanksgiving recess but call today and call often.
Investors Business Daily pretty much nails the issue in its editorial: Lame-Duck Amnesty
This is an amnesty bill. Under it, illegal aliens who enter this country before the age of 16 and have successfully evaded the law for five years are given conditional green-card status that can later be converted to regular green cards. They are required to complete two years of college or military service.
Then green cards can be acquired for the parents who brought their children here illegally. And once they’ve been granted citizenship, they can bring all their relatives to the U.S. Those who’ve waited patiently, and legally, for their green cards will still have to wait while the open-border parade passes them by.
These are not children who were born here after their parents sneaked past the Border Patrol; the argument there is that birthright citizens shouldn’t be punished for the sins of their parents. No, these are children who were born elsewhere and smuggled in before their 16th birthday.
To reward this illegal behavior would encourage more to come, and there is no shortage of human smugglers in Mexico who would be happy, for a fee, to assist. The smuggled and their families, of course, would be eternally grateful.
“A lot of this is about demographics,” says Sen.-elect Rand Paul, R-Ky. “If you look at immigrants from Mexico, they register 3-to-1 Democrat, so the Democratic Party is for easy citizenship and allowing them to vote.” But what about the people who wait patiently overseas and break no laws to get here? No citizenship for you!
Yeah, California Republicans know all about the demographics.
-
The DREAM ACT is Coming Up for a Stand Alone Vote in the U.S.Senate – Melt The Phones
Melt the Phones, Patriots
Nevada U.S. Senator and Democratic Majority Leader is bringing up the Dream Act for a stand alone vote in the current lame duck session of the Senate.According to the Majority Leader’s office, Senator Harry Reid now plans to bring the Dream Act up for a vote as a stand-alone measure after Thanksgiving recess.
UPDATE [8:30 PM EST]: The New York Times’ Caucus blog notes:
During his re-election campaign in Nevada, Mr. Reid said he would try again to pass the legislation, known as the Dream Act. And in a Twitter message on Wednesday evening, his office said he would try to do so in the current session as a stand-alone bill.
Michelle Malkin has a list of squishy Republican Senators who continue to say they have not decided upon the bill. Call them and urge them to vote NO:
I’ve polled Republican Senate offices and you should know that many open-borders squishes remain on the fence about this Obama/Reid down payment on blanket illegal alien amnesty. That’s right. The following GOP Senators haven’t made up their mind on whether they should oppose a bill that amounts to a 2.1 million future Democrat voter recruitment drive. Know your fence-sitters:
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN 202-224-2235; 480-897-6289: Staff says he “hasn’t made a public statement” and “hasn’t made up his mind.” He talked a tough border security game to get re-elected, while promising illegal alien activists he would “resolve their issues.” (Refresh your memories here.)
The others:
- SEN. OLYMPIA SNOWE 202-224-5344; 207-874-0883: Staff says she “hasn’t released a statement.”
- SEN. SUSAN COLLINS 202-224-2523; 207-945-0417: Staff says she “hasn’t released a public statement.”
- SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI 202-224-6665; 907-271-3735: Staff says she’s “still reviewing the bill.”
- SEN. SAM BROWNBACK 202-224-6521; 785-233-2503 Staff says he “hasn’t had a chance to look at it” and remains non-committal.
- SEN. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON 202-224-5922; 214-361-3500: Staff says she “hasn’t released a statement,” but will probably do so later today.
- SEN. GEORGE LEMIEUX 202-224-3041; 904-398-8586: Recorded message informs callers that he’s “in a meeting.” He has yet to publicly state his position as open-borders extremists step up pressure.
Why is the Dream Act so dangerous – from GOP Senator Jeff Sessions:
Ten Things You Need To Know About S.3827, The DREAM Act
1. The DREAM Act Is NOT Limited to Children, And It Will Be Funded On the Backs Of Hard Working, Law-Abiding Americans
Proponents of the DREAM Act frequently claim the bill offers relief only to illegal alien “kids.” Incredibly, previous versions of the DREAM Act had no age limit at all, so illegal aliens of any age who satisfied the Act’s requirements—not just children—could obtain lawful permanent resident (LPR) status. In response to this criticism, S.3827 includes a requirement that aliens be under the age of 35 on the date of enactment to be eligible for LPR status. Even with this cap, many aliens would be at least 41 years old before obtaining full LPR status under the Act—hardly the “kids” the Act’s advocates keep talking about.
The DREAM Act requires that DHS/USCIS process all DREAM Act applications (applications that would require complex, multi-step adjudication) without being able to increase fees to handle processing. This mandate would require either additional Congressional appropriations, or for USCIS, a primarily fee-funded agency, to raise fees on other types of immigration benefit applications. This would unfairly spread the cost of administering the DREAM Act legalization program among applicants and petitioners who have abided by U.S. laws and force taxpayers to pay for amnesty. Taxpayers would also be on the hook for all Federal benefits the DREAM Act seeks to offer illegal aliens, including student loans and grants.
2. The DREAM Act PROVIDES SAFE HARBOR FOR ANY ALIEN, Including Criminals, From Being Removed or Deported If They Simply Submit An Application
Although DREAM Act proponents claim it will benefit only those who meet certain age, presence, and educational requirements, amazingly the Act protects ANY alien who simply submits an application for status no matter how frivolous. The bill forbids the Secretary of Homeland Security from removing “any alien who has a pending application for conditional status” under the DREAM Act—regardless of age or criminal record—providing a safe harbor for all illegal aliens. This loophole will open the floodgates for applications that could stay pending for many years or be litigated as a delay tactic to prevent the illegal aliens’ removal from the United States. The provision will further erode any chances of ending the rampant illegality and fraud in the existing system.
3. Certain Criminal Aliens Will Be Eligible For Amnesty Under The DREAM ActCertain categories of criminal aliens will be eligible for the DREAM Act amnesty, including alien gang members and aliens with misdemeanor convictions, even DUIs. The DREAM Act allows illegal aliens guilty of the following offenses to be eligible for amnesty: alien absconders (aliens who failed to attend their removal proceedings), aliens who have engaged in voter fraud or unlawfully voted, aliens who have falsely claimed U.S. citizenship, aliens who have abused their student visas, and aliens who have committed marriage fraud. Additionally, illegal aliens who pose a public health risk, aliens who have been permanently barred from obtaining U.S. citizenship, and aliens who are likely to become a public charge are also eligible.
4. Estimates Suggest That At Least 2.1 Million Illegal Aliens Will Be Eligible For the DREAM Act Amnesty. In Reality, We Have No Idea How Many Illegal Aliens Will Apply
Section 4(d) of the DREAM Act waives all numerical limitations on green cards, and prohibits any numerical limitation on the number of aliens eligible for amnesty under its provisions. The Migration Policy Institute estimates that the DREAM Act will make approximately 2.1 million illegal aliens eligible for amnesty. It is highly likely that the number of illegal aliens receiving amnesty under the DREAM Act will be much higher than the estimated 2.1 million due to fraud and our inherent inability to accurately estimate the illegal alien population. Clearly, the message sent by the DREAM Act will be that if any young person can enter the country illegally, within 5 years, they will be placed on a path to citizenship.
5. Illegal Aliens Will Get In-State Tuition Benefits
The DREAM Act will allow illegal aliens to qualify for in-state tuition, even when it is not being offered to U.S. citizens and legally present aliens living just across state lines. Section 3 of the DREAM Act repeals Section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1623) which prohibits giving education benefits to an unlawfully present individual unless that same benefit is offered to all U.S. citizens.
6. The DREAM Act Does Not Require That An Illegal Alien Finish Any Type of Degree (Vocational, Two-Year, or Bachelor’s Degree) As A Condition of Amnesty
DREAM Act supporters would have you believe that the bill is intended to benefit illegal immigrants who have graduated from high school and are on their way to earning college degrees. However, the bill is careful to ensure that illegal alien high school drop-outs will also be put on a pathway to citizenship – they simply have to get a GED and be admitted to “an institution of higher education,” defined by the Higher Education Act of 1965.
Under the Higher Education Act, an “institution of higher education” includes institutions that provide 2-year programs (community colleges) and any “school that provides not less than a 1-year program of training to prepare students for gainful employment” (a vocational school). Within 8 years of the initial grant of status, the alien must prove only that they finished 2 years of a bachelor’s degree program, not that they completed any program or earned any degree.
If the alien is unable to complete 2 years of college but can demonstrate that their removal would result in hardship to themselves or their U.S. citizen or LPR spouse, child, or parent, the education requirement can be waived altogether.
7. The DREAM Act does not require that an illegal alien serve in the military as a condition for amnesty, and There is ALREADY A Legal Process In Place For Illegal Aliens to Obtain U.S. Citizenship Through Military ServiceDREAM Act supporters would have you believe that illegal aliens who don’t go to college will earn their citizenship through service in the U.S. Armed Forces. However, the bill does not require aliens to join the U.S. Armed Forces (the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard); instead it requires enlistment in the “uniformed services.” This means that aliens need only go to work for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or Public Health Service for 2 years to get U.S. citizenship. If the alien is unable to complete 2 years in the “uniformed services,” and can demonstrate that their removal would result in hardship to themselves or their U.S. citizen or LPR spouse, child, or parent, the military service requirement can be waived altogether. Such claims will likely engender much litigation and place a huge burden on DHS.
Furthermore, under current law (10 USC § 504), the Secretary of Defense can authorize the enlistment of illegal aliens. Once enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces, under 8 USC § 1440, these illegal aliens can become naturalized citizens through expedited processing, often obtaining U.S. citizenship in six months.
8. Despite Their Current Illegal Status, DREAM Act Aliens Will Be Given All The Rights That Legal Immigrants Receive—Including The Legal Right To Sponsor Their Parents and Extended Family Members For Immigration
Under current federal law, U.S. citizens have the right to immigrate their “immediate relatives” to the U.S. without regard to numerical caps. Similarly, lawful permanent residents can immigrate their spouses and children to the U.S. as long as they retain their status. This means illegal aliens who receive amnesty under the DREAM Act will have the right to immigrate their family members—including the parents who sent for or brought them to the U.S. illegally in the first place—in unlimited numbers as soon as they become U.S. citizens (6 to 8 years after enactment) and are 21 years of age.
Additionally, amnestied aliens who become U.S. citizens will be able to petition for their adult siblings living abroad to immigrate to the U.S., further incentivizing chain migration and potentially illegal entry into the United States (for those who don’t want to wait for the petition process overseas). When an adult brother or sister receives a green card, the family (spouse and children) of the adult sibling receive green cards as well.
9. Current Illegal Aliens Will Get Federal Student Loans, Federal Work Study Programs, and Other Forms of Federal Financial Aid
Section 10 of the DREAM Act allows illegal aliens amnestied under the bill’s provisions to qualify for federal student assistance under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.) in the form of federal student loans (Stafford Loans, Perkins Loans, Federal Direct Stafford/Ford Loans), federal work-study programs, and other federal education services such as tutoring and counseling.
10. DHS Is Prohibited From Using the Information Provided By Illegal Aliens Whose DREAM Act Amnesty Applications Are Denied To Initiate Their Removal Proceedings or Investigate or Prosecute Fraud in the Application Process
When an illegal alien’s DREAM Act amnesty application is denied, the bill states that the alien will revert to their “previous immigration status,” which is likely illegal or deportable. The bill, however, prohibits using any of the information contained in the amnesty application (name, address, length of illegal presence that the alien admits to, etc) to initiate a removal proceeding or investigate or prosecute fraud in the application process. Thus, it will be extremely hard for DHS to remove aliens who they now know are illegally present in the U.S., because illegal aliens will be able to claim that the legal action is a product of the amnesty application, and DHS will have the nearly impossible task of proving a negative.
Let your voice be heard – No on the Dream Act.