Identity Theft and Illegal Immigration

 Illegal in More Ways than One – Part II of Two Parts

Steve Malanga

Identity theft in America goes hand and hand with illegal immigration.

The gangs can afford these bribes because identity theft has become such a big business. In Phoenix, “coyotes,” the smugglers who lead illegal immigrants over our borders, have created a network of phony-document producers and safe houses where undocumented workers can wait until they get their fraudulent papers.

Americans who have their identity stolen by these gangs are in for major headaches. Among the complaints filed with the FTC is that of a Texas man arrested for a crime committed by an illegal alien who had filched his identity. In another case, highlighted by Nevada senator John Ensign in last year’s immigration-reform debate in Congress, the Internal Revenue Service hit a woman with a $1 million back-tax bill, even though she was a stay-at-home mom.

An investigation later found that 218 illegal aliens were using her Social Security number. A Los Angeles police detective—who, ironically, worked in the department’s fraud bureau—was unable to buy a home because of bills piled up by an illegal immigrant who stole his Social Security number to gain employment at a processing plant.

Then the IRS served the cop with a bill for $40,000 in back taxes; when he protested, the agency threatened to send his case to collection. Other legal residents have had their unemployment claims or workers’ compensation cases rejected after government records showed that someone with their Social Security number was working.

Despite all this, efforts to crack down on identity theft have proved controversial. Ensign offered an amendment to last year’s immigration-reform bill that would have barred illegals from Social Security benefits if they obtained work using stolen identities, but the amendment went down to defeat after critics complained that it was unfair to refuse benefit payments to those who had contributed to the Social Security system, even if they did so under a false identity.

Ultimately, the immigration bill itself was defeated, in part because of controversy over its provisions to offer amnesty to illegal aliens, including those who might have stolen identities.

Frustrated by what some see as a tepid federal response, local officials in the hardest-hit areas have stepped up antitheft efforts. In Arizona, a new law makes it a felony to use the identity of another person to obtain a job.

Local law enforcement agencies, like the Maricopa County attorney general’s office and the Phoenix Police Department, have expanded their fraud units. Even private businesses have gotten into the fight. Last year, the Arizona offices of A. G. Edwards, the national brokerage firm, held “community shred-a-thons” to give people a chance to destroy outdated financial records and other documents that might provide information to identity-theft gangs.

But many local law enforcement agencies still don’t treat the theft as a serious crime. Until they do, Americans who have had their identity stolen will pay the price in time, stress, and expensive legal bills.

Steven Malanga is senior editor of City Journal and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. He is the author of The New New Left, a collection of his City Journal essays.

Identity Theft and Illegal Immigration

Illegal in More Ways than One – Part I of Two Parts

Steve Malanga

Identity theft in America goes hand and hand with illegal immigration.

As everyone knows, America is experiencing an epidemic of identity theft. In the last five years alone, complaints to the Federal Trade Commission from U.S. residents who have had their identity stolen have skyrocketed 60 percent, to 258,427 in 2007—one-third of all consumer fraud complaints that the commission receives.

What’s less well understood, however, is how illegal immigration is helping to fuel this rash of crime. Seeking access to jobs, credit, and driver’s licenses, many undocumented aliens are using the personal data of real Americans on forged documents. The immigrants’ identity theft has become so pervasive that the need to combat it is “a disturbing front in the war against illegal immigration,” according to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The FTC’s latest statistics help show why. The top five states in terms of reported identity theft in 2007 all have large immigrant populations—the border states of Arizona, California, and Texas, as well as Florida and Nevada. People who pilfer legitimate identities in these states are much more likely than in other parts of the country to use them to gain employment unlawfully—the most common reason that illegal aliens steal personal information.

In Arizona, for instance, 36 percent of all identity theft is for employment purposes, compared with only 5 percent in Maine, a state with far fewer illegal aliens. “To many law enforcement leaders in Arizona, this suggests that Arizona’s identity-theft epidemic is directly linked to the problem of illegal immigration,” says a recent report by Identity Theft 911, an Arizona company that helps businesses and individuals protect themselves.

Government investigations have only begun to uncover the extent of the crime wave. When ICE agents raided six Swift meat-processing plants in December 2006, they found widespread evidence of fraud involving the use of real people’s identities; the feds eventually charged 148 illegal aliens in the case with crimes related to identity theft.

In the first year and a half after Arizona created a special unit to deal with identity theft, investigators said that they were able to purchase more than 1,000 phony documents that made use of real people’s identities. A so-called three-pack—a Social Security card, a driver’s license, and a permanent-resident card—costs on average just $160 in the state.

Government statistics probably grossly underestimate the size of the problem. Many local police departments don’t track identity theft accurately, and the FTC only reports complaints that it receives. By combining data on complaints with FTC consumer surveys—which show that far more people have had their identity stolen than report it—Identity Theft 911 estimates that in Arizona alone, some 1.57 million people, or a quarter of the state’s population, have been victims over the last six years.

About one-fifth are children—whose Social Security numbers are especially valuable targets, since the kids usually aren’t employed, making discovery of the fraud less likely. “We just don’t know how they’re getting all this information on minors,” says Maryann McKessy, bureau chief for fraud and identity-theft enforcement in the Maricopa County attorney general’s office.

One disturbing theory: health-care employees with access to children’s files are working for organized gangs that trade in illegal documents and are willing to pay richly for the data. “We have a major problem with workers in medical offices stealing patients’ identities, selling them and making a direct profit,” Sergeant James Bracke of the Phoenix Police Department told authors of the Arizona report.

Stay Tuned For Part II

Importing Poverty

IMPORTING POVERTY

by James Hopkins

http://importing-poverty.blogspot.com/

Illegal immigration is just as bad for our economy as shipping jobs overseas. It is importing poverty and taking jobs away from the poor and the middle-class Americans. If illegal aliens want to reside in the United States, they should first be forced to return to their country of origin and go to the end of the line. To hurt our economy even more, illegal aliens have sent over 200 billion U.S. dollars back home since 1996.

It is said that legal workers aren't willing to do many of the jobs given to illegal aliens. The fact of the matter is that these are jobs which Americans used to do and still would do if they were offered viable wages. However, illegal aliens coming directly from poverty are used to working for peanuts and are willing to accept much lower pay than the average American. The average middle-class worker would have to stoop down, lowering their living standards in order to accept such wages that the illegal alien accepts.

A construction company that hired a truckload of illegal aliens could easily place a much lower bid for a contract than a company that hired U.S. citizens. Because of this, more and more middle-class workers are being forced into poverty, accepting lower wages and fewer benefits. In a 1997 study, the National Research Council found that illegal immigration depresses wages for many lower-income workers by as much as 5 percent in 15 years.

It must also be acknowledged that 50 percent of illegal aliens are ex-guest workers here on expired visas. Our federal government knows this, yet refuses to do anything about it. If illegal immigrants were not offered jobs here, few of them would have reason to immigrate. Our governments at all levels need to follow the example set by Hazelton, Pennsylvania. They need to crack down on employers who hire illegal aliens, and deny all social services to illegal aliens.

There is no need for the United States to track down all of these illegal aliens. The way to put a stop to illegal immigration is to simply make it impossible for illegal aliens to find work here.
In addition to employment, illegal immigrants get a number of other perts including, but not limited to, free medical treatment, food stamps, schooling, and WIC. It is the taxpayers who end up paying for all of this. If and when illegal aliens get arrested, it's taxpayers who pay for their court services and imprisonment. Whatever illegal immigration might possibly do for the U.S. economy is easily outweighed by the burden it puts on taxpayers (over $20 billion annually).

If a parent commits a crime and goes to jail, their children don't serve as a free ticket out of jail. Likewise, anchor babies shouldn't be accepted as a pass for their parent(s) to stay here legally in the United States. As stated in the 14th amendment, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."

What is so very often ignored is the emphasized text in the amendment above which when correctly interpreted means "with respect to any and all applicable laws" which in this case would refer to the parent(s) of an anchor baby being here in the United States illegally at the time of it's birth. This alone voids any automatic citizenship on the grounds that the mother is here illegally, making the child's birth illegal here in the United States. In addition, any illegal alien mother does not hold full allegiance to the United States and is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is the child.

Amnesty is not acceptable. Amnesty just leads to more amnesty. This fact, unfortunately, has been proven time and again. If amnesty were given, most illegal aliens would become unskilled legal immigrants, having access to even more government programs, yet paying very little tax because of their low income. "If illegal aliens were given amnesty and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual net fiscal deficit would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total net cost of $29 billion."

If we want to continue anywhere near our present living standards and keep from turning into a third-world country, we cannot afford to continue importing poverty. Contact your Congressman and Senators today, and let them know where you stand on illegal immigration.

Selective Amnesty

Greetings CCII Supporters & Friends,

 

The scourge of amnesty for law breakers is always a fearful thought.

As concerned citizens, we fear some elected officials in their most infinite wisdom, will provide a way out for those in the country illegally. This is a way to express compassion for the horrendous plight of the illegal alien, those in the country illegally. After all they are only trying to make a better life for their family. By the way, it is also another way some elected officials encourage people to vote for them. I could go on for the rest of the morning, but you get my drift. You should anyway, if you have been reading the daily postings from CCII.

Amnesty to fighters of illegal immigration is an unacceptable word. We cannot and will not accept any form of amnesty for law breakers. We have written many messages with supporting attachments criticizing the Congress and Senate when they attempt to pass legislation such as the Dream Act (Development Relief Education for Alien Minors). Remember Comprehensive Immigration Reform (S1639) and the 110^th & 111^th Congress? We also condemn The Executive Branch when a memo, order or declaration of policy is issued to provide benefits to law breakers.

Our objective is to inform everyone about any form of forgiving illegal aliens for breaking the law.

President Obama in his infinite wisdom to “Fundamentally transform the United States of America” ordered the United States Citizenship & Immigration Service (USCIS) to find ways and means to provide a back door approach to amnesty for illegal aliens. A year ago they suggested “deferred action and parole in place”. The broadcast media totally ignored the action. We wrote about it on a number of occasions.

Obama has recently announced a new policy called “Prosecutorial Discretion”. We can now add that back door selective amnesty to the list. This 6 page policy statement is all inclusive.

We learn how to walk a step at a time. We get smashed consuming one drink at a time. We drive hundreds of miles one mile at a time. Government has its way one policy at a time.

We are losing our national sovereignty and traditional values by government action; one selective enforcement at a time.

Are you angry yet? If not, you are not paying attention!

Get Educated!, Get Inspiried!, Get Involved!, Participate!, Save Your Country!

A Nation Divided

Greetings CCII Supporters & Friends,

The United (Untied) States of America continue down the road of division. We are divided by color such as red and blue, we are divided by historical boundaries such as north and south and we are divided by interpretation of law. Our federal government is supposed to be a unifier, but is it? I can only focus on one of many dividing elements, illegal immigration.

Some states identify themselves as a nation of immigrants, blurring the subject by including legal and illegal together, such as the northeast and western states. Some states relate to the rule of law, such as the middle and southern states. Look at this for an example: 1) Arizona, Georgia, Oklahoma, Missouri, Indiana, South Carolina and Alabama recently passed legislation to stop illegal immigration. 2) Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, California and Washington refuse to participate in voluntary employment verification and pass legislation to provide in state tuition to illegal alien students.

So this pattern of a patchwork of providers of jobs and benefits to illegal aliens and the enforcers to end the tragic national calamity continues. The immigrant population has increased 200 % in this century, just 10 years and the question remains, how many are here illegally. No one really knows the answer to that question.

The federal government intends on implementing Secure Communities nation wide by 2013, 42 states with some counties participating. 9 states are totally enrolled. Utah has 11 counties enrolled, Washington County is one of the eleven. New York and Illinois refuse to implement the criminal identification program.

Recently passed legislation to require employers use E-Verify, eliminate state benefits is opposed by the ACLU, Chamber of Commerce, advocacy groups such as LaRaza, Maldef and Lulac, etc.; the illegal alien population is on the move to states where their cheap labor is welcome, such states as New York, Illinois, Washington and Utah. 

Those in the country illegally have another advocate, the federal government. True, ICE has deported over 300,000 criminal aliens, but many are back within a few months. DHS has also audited some employers to eliminate illegal hiring practices. The federal government has also introduced a defacto amnesty program by instituting "deferred action" and "parole in place" . Look for the Dream Act to rear its ugly head again.

Join us on June 23rd at 7:00 PM at the Commission Chambers 197 E. Tabernacle as we discuss the destructive silent invasion of illegal aliens with Utah Representative Carl Wimmer who will drive from SLC to speak to us!

Best Regards,   

What's Wrong With Illegal Immigration Part III

What's Wrong With Illegal Immigration?

By John Eberhard

Part III of III

http://www.commentaryusa.com/commentary/illegal-immigration/whats-wrong-with-illegal-immigration.html

Summary

Unlimited, large-scale illegal immigration is a problem for several reasons:

a. These people are not assimilating to US culture, not learning the language and not becoming citizens, setting up a Balkanization effect that is already in progress.

b. It's an economic drain because liberal activist judges are forcing us to continue to give illegal immigrants free welfare benefits. So while those that work do contribute to the American economy, they don't pay taxes but do receive free benefits and so are by their nature a drain on the economy.

c. The bill coming out the Senate is an amnesty, which is unwanted by a large segment of the American population, but the Senate doesn't seem to care. Politicians on both sides seem terrified of angering legal Hispanic voters. Plus there is no way to enforce the bill and no incentive for illegal aliens to conform to it.

The Solution

After all the above you'd think the solution was complex. It's not. It comes down to two points:

1. Crack down on enforcement of laws against employing illegal immigrants. A few high profile busts will have a chilling effect on the employment of illegal immigrants nationwide. This doesn't require any new laws, just enforcement of existing ones.

2. Simply discontinue all welfare benefits for illegal immigrants nationwide. This will require new legislation at the national level.

Once illegal immigrants can't get a job and can't get any more free benefits, there will be much less incentive to come here, because, after all, it's probably easier to be unemployed in Mexico than it is here. Certainly it would be easier than to live in LA which has some of the highest housing costs in the nation. You won't even need a fence along the US/Mexico border, because you would have removed the incentives to come illegally.

And doing the above will put more pressure on Vincente Fox to get his house in order in Mexico, which is why he is so against any change in the status quo relating to immigration.

Unfortunately, I don't see much political will in Congress to really handle this problem.

Repeal HB116 Resolution Passes GOP Convention

Greetings CCII Supporters & Friends,

After all these years I continue to consider myself the proverbial optimist. After watching a few videos and reading press releases presented by those introducing the Repeal HB116 Resolution and those opposing the Resolution;  I thought State Delegates would approve the Resolution.

After all the Legislative Research and General Council wrote an advisory that many provisions of the legislation could be ruled as unconstitutional. According to the definition of amnesty, the legislation is amnesty for illegal alien workers in Utah before May 10, 2011. Of course the opposition squares in absolute opposition to the Resolution initiators. There is not space or time to speak to all the ramifications of the legislation.

If you are interested in Utah State politics, and I am here to say you should be, you should also be interested in which way Delegates voted and questions arise. Did they vote to represent their Precinct constituents? Did they vote to represent the rule of law? Did they vote in favor of their religious convictions? Did they vote in favor of the business community represented by the Chamber of Commerce and supposed Conservative think tanks represented by the Sutherland Institute?

I just received a message from the Convention floor, Utah State Delegates voted the RIGHT WAY! They voted to PASS the Repeal HB116 Resolution by a vote of 833 to 739, 53 % FOR with 47 % against the Resolution. A total of 1,572 Delegates remained in place to take part in the final portions of the Convention Agenda.

Happy Days happen occasionally, Jim Flohr VC CCII

Representative Stephen Sandstrom: Repeal HB116

Representative Stephen Sandstrom Calls for Repeal of HB116

OREM - At the Republican Convention this weekend, Republican delegates and elected officials will be voting on a resolution for the repeal of HB 116. I strongly encourage them to support the resolution to repeal HB116.

The state of Utah is at a major crossroads, the cultural and economic future of our state are at stake.

During the last year as I worked on my Illegal Immigration Enforcement Act, I personally received thousands of letters, calls, and emails from citizens across our state. I encourage all those who supported my enforcement legislation to contact their legislators and delegates and ask them to support the resolution calling for the repeal of this misguided piece of legislation.

I am encouraged by Arizona, Oklahoma and other states who have recently had their illegal immigration legislation validated by the United States Supreme Court. This shows that at the state level, we can effectively curb the threat of illegal immigration.

As my Illegal Immigration Enforcement Act faces its court challenge by the ACLU and La Raza, I am disgusted and appalled by the Mexican Government and several other Latin American states and their attempt to influence the US legal system in support of illegal aliens from their countries.

As I am now proceeding with a comprehensive E-Verify law for the State of Utah that will have real penalties and consequences for those that hire illegal aliens, I am troubled that the same organizations that supported HB 116 and who say that they want to end all new illegal immigration to the State of Utah and the rampant identity theft that it brings with it are now lining up to fight my proposed comprehensive E-Verify legislation.

This only shows that their previous assertions that they support the rule of law and sincerely want to end illegal immigration while protecting Utah’s children from identity theft was only political posturing and untruthful.

They want to keep the status quo in Utah that turns a blind eye to companies that want to hire illegal immigrants, to continue to sacrifice Utah children to identity theft for profits and to ensure that Utah employers have an unlimited source of poorly paid, illegal immigrant labor.  

# # # # #

Appeal for Republicans to Unite

Utah Republicans should unite against HB116

By BRANDON BECKHAM June 15, 2011
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/51976926-82/bill-republican-governor-repeal.html.csp

As expected, supporters of House Bill 116 launched a campaign to fight Republican delegates who, through their effort to repeal the law, are defending the U.S. Constitution and Republican immigration platforms. The opposition has lost the argument with little to stand on.

Utahns have spoken. They want HB116 repealed and replaced. I’ve heard this sentiment across the state. Now HB116 supporters are willing to attack character in a last-ditch effort to save this flawed bill.

Jeremy Roberts, the newly elected Utah County Republican Party secretary, claims repeal supporters are against the LDS Church, calling us racists who want to “begin rounding up brown people.” He has stepped over the line. I call for Roberts to issue a public apology after making untruthful comments about good Americans who have done nothing but help the party. If this is the type of leadership we can expect from Roberts, I would ask that he step down. I also ask that he respect differing opinions and focus on the issue, not character assassination.

Is Roberts’ goal to unite or divide our party further on this issue? I choose to unite.

As Americans, Utahns and Republican delegates, we are unapologetic for fighting illegal immigration, defending the Constitution and the principles of the Republican platform. If we don’t stand by these principles, there is no point in being Republican. Therefore, when legislation is passed that is contrary to our principles and the Constitution, we will work to navigate the misguided back on course. The repeal campaign was necessary after the Legislature narrowly passed the bill and the governor refused to veto it in the face of mounting opposition.

One hundred-plus delegates (including Roberts) met with the governor on March 8. They left work and traveled to the Capitol to civilly express their concerns about HB116 and ask for a veto. Two days later, delegates returned to the Capitol, delivering letters asking for a veto. People from all over Utah made hundreds of veto calls.

The governor promised to meet with us again before signing the bill. That never happened. Hours after he signed the bill, we were allowed to meet. We delivered a 4,500-signature veto petition. The governor said, “I’m uncomfortable with this bill.” We asked, “Why did you sign it?” He replied, “We have to do something. Doing nothing is not an option.”

However, doing the wrong thing isn’t an option either. We informed the governor we were going to work to repeal HB116. He replied, “If we need to repeal it, let’s do it.”

During our campaign we have maintained respect, civility and an open line of communication with those of the opposing side. We have always desired to facilitate some agreement to fix the legislation and make it constitutional. I believe that is not only reasonable, it is the right thing to do. The Repeal 116 campaign would unite the party and allow us to take up other important issues.

I respectfully ask the governor to lead the HB116 discussion toward a vetted solution. I ask that Sen. Curtis Bramble, Rep. Holly Richardson, House Speaker Rebecca Lockhart, Sen. Stuart Reid and Rep. Bill Wright make honest efforts to address our concerns and fix the law. Why would anyone want to continue the party division that HB116 created? The outcome would be only negative. It is my hope that will not be the case.

We are ready and waiting when they are.

Brandon Beckham is a Republican state delegate from Orem Precinct 40.

Lawful Employment Ordinance

Greetings CCII Supporters & Friends,

Recently I sent a message explaining the Lawful Employment Ordinance, I attached a copy of the six page document for you to read and study. It's the same document Russell Sias spoke to us about at our last public meeting, asking us to support the hard work that has been accomplished in this endeavor; to secure for those lawfully present in the U. S., the right to work free of taxpayer subsidized illegal alien competition. 

The first phase of this program commenced in filing the document with the County Clerk's Office in Salt Lake County and Washington County. It will be filed tomorrow with the Utah County Clerk's Office. It's the first step in the up hill climb to place a measure on the ballot at the 2012 general election. It's a herculian effort by citizens who are concerned about the future of our nation, concerned about the future of our children and grandchildren.

On May 26, 2011 the United States Supreme Court determined that an Arizona law enacted in 2007 allowing Arizona courts to suspend or revoke licenses to do business in Arizona if an employer knowingly or intentionally employs an unauthorized alien and requires all employers in the state to use E-verify, was not preempted by federal law. Wow! We have been waiting for that for a long time.

Today is Flag Day, a GREAT day to express patriotism. It was a wonderful day to file our document with the County Clerk, our way to express patriotism to protect citizen jobs, that's what it is all about.

Another reason today is a GREAT day is; Representative Lamar Smith (R-Texas) the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee announced he will introduce a composite bill before the House Subcommittee on Immigration. This assembled legislation brings together numerous separate E-Verify bills with the intention of passing national legislation to require all employers use E-Verify. Just exactly what our Lawful Employment Ordinance proclaims.

Yes, today was a GREAT day! 

What's Wrong With Illegal Immigraton

What's Wrong With Illegal Immigration?

By John Eberhard

Part II of III

http://www.commentaryusa.com/commentary/illegal-immigration/whats-wrong-with-illegal-immigration.html

Welfare - The Monkey Wrench in the Works

The second major problem with uncontrolled illegal immigration (along with non-assimilation), is welfare benefits for illegal immigrants. Welfare benefits for illegals creates a drain on the economy, and it attracts the wrong type of person to come to our country.

You may recall Prop 187 from 1994 in California. This proposition would have stopped all welfare benefits for illegal immigrants in California. At the time these benefits added up to over $3 billion per year. In the 12 years since then this figure has probably doubled. Prop 187 was passed by 59% of California voters, but was ruled unconstitutional by one liberal judge. I still don't get how it is unconstitutional to say that people who come here illegally from some other country, and aren't US citizens, shouldn't get free benefits - to the tune of $3 billion per year. But that's liberal judicial activism for you.

So in essence, we are being told by liberal judges that we HAVE to give illegal immigrants free welfare benefits (including health care, free education, etc.). Even in California which has been on the verge of bankruptcy for the past two years. So we can't afford it, the people don't want it, but we are forced to do it.

Then, in the face of that, we have people protesting because we want to limit the flow of illegal immigrants coming here. So we have to give them free benefits, we can't take those away, and according to the protesters, they have a right to come here and we have no right to tell them they can't or limit the flow. How many things are wrong with that?

In addition, it seems extremely obvious that welfare benefits for illegals forms an alluring carrot to attract millions more to come. And what type of person would be attracted to come to the US to receive free benefits? Is it the type of person who would work hard and help build the community? Or is it the type of person who would be a parasite on the community? We are told by the illegal immigration advocates that these people just want to work. If that is so, then why can't we take away the free welfare benefits? If someone wants to work then why does he need welfare benefits?

Clearly, the illegal immigration advocates are being disingenuous (i.e. dishonest) in the way they are promoting the issue and in the reasons they are giving. Clearly, part of their goal is the old Marxist story of socialist re-distribution of wealth.

How the Parties View Illegal Immigration

Neither party has really tackled the issue of illegal immigration solidly or honestly.

The Republican Party has stayed away from better enforcement of the immigration laws, it is reported on radio talk shows, because they view illegal immigrants as a cheap labor source. Apparently top Republicans feel that having a "cheap labor source" is good for business, especially certain industries such as agriculture.

In case, you haven't followed the issue, "cheap labor source" is a code phrase for "we don't have to pay them minimum wage." In other words, since these people are in the country illegally, and they are hired under the table and paid cash, they can be hired for less than minimum wage.

Some Republicans have been saying that illegal immigrants will "do the jobs that Americans won't do." I don't buy this, period. I consider it an insult to Americans.

On the Democratic Party side, we have people like Teddy Kennedy saying that illegal immigration is a "right" and that this is a civil rights struggle. Getting past the point of how ridiculous this is (it's like saying some stranger has a "right" to my wallet), my bet is that their true motivations are twofold:

a. They see that block of 11-12 million illegal immigrants, if they give them enough welfare giveaways, as natural future Democratic Party voters.

b. It's part of the old, tired, Marxist idea of redistribution of wealth, meaning they want tons of immigrants to come here illegally so they can take yours and my tax money and give them all kinds of welfare, and in the face of this we have the Senate working right now on a compromise bill, that is basically a guest-worker amnesty. Lots of Senators are insisting that it is not an amnesty, but let's face facts. It removes the major penalty that is currently supposed to be imposed on someone who comes here illegally, which is deportation.

The other problem with any proposal of this type is that there is no way to enforce it and no real incentive for the illegal immigrants to come forward and go through the new steps being proposed; pay a fine, learn English, get on the track to citizenship, etc. If we don't have enough manpower now to deport illegal immigrants (we deported 200,000 last year) then how would we have enough manpower to enforce and manage this new, complicated guest-worker amnesty system?

Recent polls show on amnesty show differing amounts of support, from about half the population to be against any kind of amnesty, to 99% against amnesty.

(See the last Section very soon Part III)

Illegal Immigraton Consequences

Greetings CCII Supporters & Friends,

There are dozens of interesting news items from coast to coast written about the nation's most devastating problem, illegal immigration. Some writers think it's the cat's meow, but most consider the consequences as the destruction of America as we know it. I tend to believe the majority, and if we as a nation do not come to grips with this national calamity, the present adult generation and those generations following us, will live in a nation totally transformed from an independent, freedom and liberty loving people to a third world diluted, regulated and oppressed society. 

Millions of vibrant young men and women graduated from college recently. Some found a decent job but most are settling with second and third rate employment if they are fortunate to find it. Read this Washington Post article about how highly skilled temporary and permanent immigrants in the United States now outnumber lower-skilled ones, marking a dramatic shift in the foreign-born workforce. Yet, the government continues to legally allow 3.1 million foreign-born workers into the country via the numerous Visa programs.This WP article is alarming and if it does not spur your frustration, nothing will.

The recent SCOUS ruling on the Arizona 2007 Legal Workers Act has created a footing to encourage many states to introduce and pass similar legislation, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Texas come to mind. It also brings the proverbial ACLU and Chamber of Commerce to challenge most laws passed by states to require employment verification (E-Verify). Representative Steve Sandstrom intends to introduce a similar bill at a proposed special session in September. Read this Deseret News article. 

The ACLU functions nation wide. If you wonder where their funding comes from, check out this Fox News Link. Most of ACLU operating capital comes from large foundations including the Ford Foundation and the Soros Open Society Institute

Whenever we get a good bill passed, invariably it is challenged by the ACLU, Hispanic advocacy groups (LaRaza, Maldef), Southerland Institute and the Chamber of Commerce. HB497 is no exception. Click on this link to read more about Sandstrom's bill. The ACLU is joined by Mexico and 13 other South American Countries in the law suit.

Here's a reminder to attend the Re-Districting Committee meeting in St. George on Saturday, I sent it a couple of days ago.

Saturday June 11th at 3:00 PM, the State Committee on Re-Districting will conduct a seminar at the Eccles Fine Arts Center on the DSC Campus, (Corner of 700 E & 100 S). If you are interested in re-districting (And you should be) please attend this important meeting. Utah State Representative Don Ipson (Dist 75 Washington County) is on the Committee.

I realize this message is loaded with information and supporting links. It's time to spend MORE time on fighting this destructive national problem. So, Get Educated!, Get Inspired!, Get Involved!, Participate! - Save Your Country!  It's up to us, we are serving, the ball is in our court, it's the final quarter.

Best Regards,

What's Wrong With Illegal Immigration? by John Eberhard

What's Wrong With Illegal Immigration?

By John Eberhard

Part I of III

http://www.commentaryusa.com/commentary/illegal-immigration/whats-wrong-with-illegal-immigration.html

There has been a great deal of controversy recently about illegal immigration, which was initiated by Congress's considering several bills attempting to reform the area.

Latinos in the Los Angeles area have been protesting, waving Mexican flags, students have been cutting school, and various politicians have been weighing in on the issue. Teddy Kennedy made a speech recently, which compared the issue of illegal immigration to earlier civil rights struggles by blacks and women. In other words, he was saying that illegal immigrants have a right to come here illegally and efforts to limit their illegal immigration are an infringement on those rights. Other immigration supporters have chimed in with this line.

I've decided to weigh in on this issue. There are a couple of things wrong with illegal immigration.

The Problems of Non-Assimilation

Since the United States is the most prosperous country on Earth, it is a privilege to move here. It is not a right. Trying to compare illegal immigration to earlier civil rights struggles is ridiculous.

The United States has, as does every country in the world, a right to limit immigration and control immigration. There are a variety of reasons why the US and every country has this right and should have this right.

One reason we have the right to limit the number of people who immigrate here, is because we want to make sure they assimilate to our culture and way of life. There is, naturally, a limit to how many people could assimilate into a country at any one time.

Why do we want them to assimilate or why do we have the right to demand that they assimilate?

First of all, we have a tradition in America where people moving here from other countries have assimilated; they have learned the language, learned our laws, become citizens, paid taxes, and so on. We have never required them to leave their own customs behind, but we do require that in general they become part of the group here. And you'll notice that despite many different peoples here with many customs and backgrounds, most Americans get along pretty well. The last major civil strife occurred 141 years ago.

There is a phenomenon that has been observed in some countries, which some smart person has named "Balkanization." "Balkanize" is defined by the Miriam Webster Online Dictionary as "to break up (as a region or group) into smaller and often hostile units." The term comes, of course, from the Balkans, the countries occupying the Balkan Peninsula; Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Greece, & Turkey. You may have heard of a lot of fighting and unrest in that region over the past 15 years, based largely on differing customs, languages, ethnic hatreds and so on.

We have also seen a Balkanization effect in Canada, where the French-speaking people of Quebec have tried several times to secede.

We are seeing a definite Balkanization in France, caused by large-scale Arabic immigration in recent years, and by the French government foolishly permitting the Arab immigrants to set up isolated enclaves where police aren't even allowed in. This recently erupted in full-scale riots in Paris.

Now in America, with massive amounts of illegal immigrants, most from Mexico, we are seeing a true Balkanization effect. The bilingual educational program has allowed the youth of this group to continue to speak Spanish and not to learn English. And how many times have you called some company you deal with and heard "for English, press 1..."? Many companies have worked hard to court the non-assimilating Hispanic population, and in so doing have made it easier for them to be here. Some banks are now even giving home loans to illegal immigrants.

Many of these people have no intentions of assimilating to America. They aren't learning the language, learning the laws, or becoming legal so they can pay taxes or get a driver's license. Some are even staying here only temporarily so they can send money home to family in Mexico (no wonder Vincente Fox wants things to stay as they are).

If you look at past generations of immigrants to America (mine from Germany in the early 1900s), and the way those generations adapted to life here, it is totally different from what the current illegal immigrants are doing. The current illegal immigrants, most of them from Mexico, have no respect for our laws, our customs, our way of life. Note that recent demonstrators have been waving the Mexican, not the American flag.

Several authors have written books recently on this Balkanization of America and how this alone could potentially destroy the country.

Many illegal immigration advocates say that any hostility towards illegal aliens is a symptom of racism. I saw a column in the paper recently that made that claim. What they are not willing to confront is that Americans have played by the assimilation rules for hundreds of years, and that it is actually natural to feel hostility towards someone who comes in, breaks the law, doesn't play by the rules, doesn't learn the language, and has no respect for the country or the system, and collects $5-6 billion in free services per year in California, paid for by his taxes.

(See the next section very soon – Part II).

Benefits for Illegal Aliens

Greetings CCII Supporters & Friends,

America! Such a Country!  Benefits galore for law breakers? You asked the right question. Take a look at this:

*  Take a look at the attached article about Earned Income Tax Credit for the illegal alien. Remember the power point we showed at one of our public meetings last year about the subject? I attached it for your review again.

*  Then take a look at the WSJ article about New Mexico and the subject of driver license. Only 2 states provide a driver license to illegal aliens, Washington and New Mexico. (Utah provides a Driver Privilege Card). Illegal aliens flock to those two states to obtain a driver license, no questions asked and use it to obtain millions of dollars of benefits, buy houses, open bank accounts, identification of most anything,

America! Such a Country!. Yet, we have near 20 million unemployed, a national debt of $14.4 trillion and a yearly national debt of over $1.5 trillion and we continue to lose near a half million jobs every week.

Please review these attached documents. 

WSJ New Mexico Driver License 6-11.doc

http://tinyurl.com/3cxn78p

Illegal Aliens & EITC IRS.doc

http://tinyurl.com/3rfpcgc

EITC Analysis

http://tinyurl.com/4yc2ts2

My final question. When is this insanity going to stop?

Get Educated!, Get Inspired!, Get Involved!, Participate! - Save Your Country!

Best Regards, 

http://www.Facebook.com/CitizensCouncil 

http://www.Twitter.com/CCII4America

http://www.cciiwc.com/

Rasmussen Statistics

                                                       Greetings CCII Supporters & Friends,

Rassmusen Poll takes a general run of the mill survey and publishes a wide variety of statistics. The article covers a lot of the subjects associated with illegal immigration including employment verification, renting to illegal aliens, sanctuary cities and border security. If you have time to check out the identified links,

The DMN article talks about how Utah is coping with its Hispanic population growth. There are some interesting numbers that may interest you. With a few states passing legislation to counter their illegal immigration population and Utah encouraging law breakers to migrate here, we will continue to feel the devastating consequences associated with this national tragedy.

 Another DMN article describes Utah farmer's plight with migrant labor. After reading the article, I wonder if the farm owners who say they need foreign labor to do the work Americans refuse to do and end up paying near $14 per hour including wages, transportation & housing, considered paying Americans a decent wage of $14 per hour. I'll bet they would find plenty of legal workers to do their menial tasks if they paid them a proper wage.

Tomorrow is a special tribute to the 222nd and 213th deployment at the Burns Arena on Thursday June 2nd at 6:30 PM. This City link will lead you to a link to explain details.

Plan to attend and demonstrate your support for our troops. Best Regards, Jim Flohr VC CCII

U. S. Chamber of Commerce Deserves our Thanks

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Deserves Our Thanks

By Ronald W. Mortensen, May 31, 2011

http://www.cis.org/mortensen/chamber-deserves-our-thanks

Now that the Supreme Court has upheld Arizona's mandatory E-Verify program, the U.S. Chamber deserves a huge vote of thanks.

If the U.S. Chamber had not challenged Arizona's law, opponents of mandatory employment verification would have been able to continue to tell the states that they could not mandate the use of E-Verify.

However, that argument no longer holds up and the Chamber has actually opened the flood gates for all states to implement a mandatory E-Verify program. Now all a state has to do is to copy the Supreme Court-certified Arizona law, pass it and, voila, employers are required to enroll in E-Verify.

How long will it take for legislators to act? Well, Utah state Rep. Steven Sandstrom has already opened a bill file to enact the Utah version of the Arizona E-Verify/employer sanctions law. And, he has called on the governor to call a special session of the legislature in September.

In addition, thanks to the U.S. Chamber, employers and apologists for illegal aliens are now relegated to arguing that E-Verify is a failed system, that it is not advantageous for employers to use it, and that it discriminates against minorities. Their media shills are already helping them push out this argument.

However, once again, thanks to the Chamber, none other than the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court has directly addressed and shot down each of these arguments. According to Chief Justice Roberts:

The Federal Government reports that "E-Verify's successful track record….is borne out by findings documenting the system's accuracy and participants' satisfaction." Brief for United States Amicus Curiae 31. Indeed, according to the Government, the program is "the best means available to determine the employment eligibility of new hires." U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, E-Verify User Manual for Employers 4 (Sept. 2010).

In addition, a footnote in the opinion states that:

Statistics from Fiscal Year 2010, however, indicate that of the 15,640,167 E-Verify cases submitted, 98.3% were automatically confirmed as work authorized, 0.3% were confirmed as work authorized after contesting and resolving an initial nonconfirmation – an avenue available to all workers – and 1.43% were not found work authorized….As JUSTICE BREYER notes, the initial mismatches (the 0.3%) are frequently due to "incorrectly spelled [names] in government databases or on identification documents." Post, at 19. Such a hazard is of course not unique to E-Verify. Moreover, JUSTICE BREYER's statistical analysis underlying his conclusion that E-Verify queries, at least initially, wrongly "suggest[] that an individual [i]s not lawfully employable" "18% of the time>/i>" needs to be understood for what it is. Post, at 8. If E-Verify initially indicated that two individuals were not found work authorized, and later revealed that one of those determinations was incorrect, JUSTICE BREYER would be able to exclaim that the error rate was 50%. [link added]

Chief Justice Roberts also lets employers know that it is in their best interest to use E-Verify because "both the federal and Arizona law accord employers a rebuttable presumption of compliance with the law when they use E-Verify to validate a finding of employment eligibility."

Finally, the Court's opinion shoots down the assertion that Arizona's E-Verify and employer sanctions law will lead to employment discrimination by pointing out that both federal and state anti-discrimination provisions protect workers. This, of course, was previously confirmed by an independent evaluation of the E-Verify program that found that use of E-Verify actually reduces discrimination in the hiring process against foreign-born workers and that workers' privacy and civil rights have been strengthened.

So, in its desperate effort to provide its members with an unlimited supply of illegal labor, the U.S. Chamber ended up shooting itself in the foot and giving E-Verify and employer sanctions a huge boost.

All I can say to the U.S. Chamber is: Thanks.