Guest Worker Legistration

Illegals granted Social Security

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 19, 2006

The Senate voted yesterday to allow illegal aliens to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal employment -- even if the job was obtained through forged or stolen documents.
    "There was a felony they were committing, and now they can't be prosecuted. That sounds like amnesty to me," said Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican who offered the amendment yesterday to strip out those provisions of the immigration reform bill. "It just boggles the mind how people could be against this amendment."
    The Ensign amendment was defeated on a 50-49 vote.
    "We all know that millions of undocumented immigrants pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for years and sometimes decades while they work to contribute to our economy," said Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican.
    "The Ensign amendment would undermine the work of these people by preventing lawfully present immigrant workers from claiming Social Security benefits that they earned before they were authorized to work in our community," he said. "If this amendment were enacted, the nest egg that these immigrants have worked hard for would be taken from them and their families."
    Mr. Ensign was among 44 Republicans and five Democrats who voted to block such payouts.
    "It makes no sense to reward millions of illegal immigrants for criminal behavior while our Social Security system is already in crisis," said Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican. "Why in the world would we endorse this criminal activity with federal benefits? The Senate missed a big opportunity to improve this bill, and I doubt American seniors will be pleased with the result."
    Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat, said it would be unfair to deny illegals the benefits.
    "We should not steal their funds or empty their Social Security accounts," he said. "That is not fair. It does not reward their hard work or their financial contributions. It violates the trust that underlies the Social Security Trust Fund."
    Within hours, the vote had become an issue in this fall's elections, raised by a Republican challenger to Sen. Debbie Stabenow, Michigan Democrat.
    "Instead of protecting the retirement security of Americans who are earning an honest living and abiding by the laws of our country, Debbie Stabenow sided with people who are here illegally and abuse our Social Security system," Oakland County, Mich., Sheriff Michael Bouchard said in a press release. "Allowing illegal immigrants to use their illegal work history as credit towards receiving Social Security benefits shows that Debbie Stabenow has forgotten who she is supposed to be working for in the U.S. Senate."
    The Senate also yesterday approved an amendment to adopt English as the nation's official language, while reversing course from the day before on protections for U.S. workers who will face new competition from unskilled immigrant labor under the Senate bill. In addition, senators voted last night to kill an amendment that would have specified that the guest-worker program will not provide visas that would provide a path to citizenship.

(a) Activities prohibited It is unlawful for any person or entity knowingly - (1) to forge, counterfeit, alter, or falsely make any document for the purpose of satisfying a requirement of this chapter or to obtain a benefit under this chapter, (2) to use, attempt to use, possess, obtain, accept, or receive or to provide any forged, counterfeit, altered, or falsely made document in order to satisfy any requirement of this chapter or to obtain a benefit under this chapter, (3) to use or attempt to use or to provide or attempt to provide any document lawfully issued to or with respect to a person other than the possessor (including a deceased individual) for the purpose of satisfying a requirement of this chapter or obtaining a benefit under this chapter, (4) to accept or receive or to provide any document lawfully issued to or with respect to a person other than the possessor (including a deceased individual) for the purpose of complying with section 1324a(b) of this title or obtaining a benefit under this chapter, ...

submitted, or ... (b) Exception This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a State, or a subdivision of a State, or of an intelligence agency of the United States, or any activity authorized under chapter 224 of title 18. (c) Construction Nothing in this section shall be construed to diminish or qualify any of the penalties available for activities prohibited by this section but proscribed as well in title 18..... . (C) Issuance of orders If the administrative law judge determines, upon the preponderance of the evidence received, that a person or entity has violated subsection (a) of this section, the administrative law judge shall state his findings of fact and issue and cause to be served on such person or entity an order described in paragraph (3). (3) Cease and desist order with civil money penalty With respect to a violation of subsection (a) of this section, the order under this subsection shall require the person or entity to cease and desist from such violations and to pay a civil penalty in an amount of - (A) not less than $250 and not more than $2,000 for each document that is the subject of a violation under subsection (a) of this section, or (B) in the case of a person or entity previously subject to an order under this paragraph, not less than $2,000 and not more than $5,000 for each document that is the subject of a violation under subsection (a) of this section. In applying this subsection in the case of a person or entity composed of distinct, physically separate subdivisions each of which provides separately for the hiring, recruiting, or referring for employment, without reference to the practices of, and not under the control of or common control with, another subdivision, each such subdivision shall be considered a separate person or entity. .... (6) Enforcement of orders If a person or entity fails to comply with a final order issued under this section against the person or entity, the Attorney General shall file a suit to seek compliance with the order in any appropriate district court of the United States. In any such suit, the validity and appropriateness of the final order shall not be subject to review. .... (e) Criminal penalties for failure to disclose role as document preparer (1) Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the Service, knowingly and willfully fails to disclose, conceals, or covers up the fact that they have, on behalf of any person and for a fee or other remuneration, prepared or assisted in preparing an application which was falsely made (as defined in subsection (f) of this section) for immigration benefits, shall be fined in accordance with title 18, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, and prohibited from preparing or assisting in preparing, whether or not for a fee or other remuneration, any other such application. (2) Whoever, having been convicted of a violation of paragraph (1), knowingly and willfully prepares or assists in preparing an application for immigration benefits pursuant to this chapter, or the regulations promulgated thereunder, whether or not for a fee or other remuneration and regardless of whether in any matter within the jurisdiction of the Service, shall be fined in accordance with title 18, imprisoned for not more than 15 years, or both, and prohibited from preparing or assisting in preparing any other such application. (f) Falsely make For purposes of this section, the term ''falsely make'' means to prepare or provide an application or document, with knowledge or in reckless disregard of the fact that the application or document contains a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or material representation, or has no basis in law or fact, or otherwise fails to state a fact which is material to the purpose for which it was submitted.

California Senate Votes Against America

Posted by Bobby Eberle
April 28, 2006 at 6:38 am

The planned boycott of American businesses on Monday by groups who support “rights” for illegal aliens has gained a new ally: the California Senate. In a mind-boggling move, the legislative body passed a resolution which supports the “Great American Boycott 2006.” In other words, the California Senate is siding with illegal aliens and against the overwhelming will of the American people.

As noted by the Associated Press, “California’s state senators on Thursday endorsed Monday’s boycott of schools, jobs and stores by illegal immigrants and their allies…”

The California Senate vote was along party lines, 24-13, but it really makes you wonder what these people, even though they are Democrats, are thinking. This is America, right? The Monday boycott is by ILLEGAL aliens and their supporters, right? What’s going on here?

As noted in the news story, the resolution describes the boycott as a way to educate the country “about the tremendous contribution immigrants make on a daily basis to our society and economy.” There are several things dreadfully wrong with this picture. First, we are talking about illegal aliens — people who broke the law to get into the country, and in cases where they are using false Social Security cards and other forged documents, they are still breaking the law. Second, the whole definition of “immigrant” has been distorted.

Immigrants are those who have left their country of origin not only to live in America, but also to be American. That’s the key. An immigrant wants to be an American — to adopt our culture, to adopt our language, to share in the vast opportunities and responsibilities that go with being an American. Many of these people we have seen protesting are not immigrants at all. They have no desire to “be an American.” They wave their own country’s flag and demand rights, while never embracing what it means to be an American.

And now, the California Senate has played right into their hands. How pathetic. As the story notes, “Opponents said the nonbinding resolution was misleading because it failed to mention a goal of the boycott was pressuring Congress to legalize millions of undocumented people.” How true. Rewarding illegal behavior is the goal.

When America granted amnesty in 1986, it only caused more illegal activity. We have no will to enforce our immigration laws; we pour millions of dollars into taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal aliens; and now we are supposed to grant citizenship to those who have no desire to embrace the American way?

It’s time to bring some common sense and political backbone into this equation. We cannot reward illegal activity. If someone wants to be a true guestworker — temporarily work in America and then return to his/her home country — then in the context of immigration reform, I’m sure that can be addressed. But the program cannot be a path to citizenship.

If we need more legal immigrants (in the true sense of the word), then we need to look at reforming our existing immigration limits and guidelines. But we can’t take people who are guestworkers and make them citizens simply because we didn’t have the will over the last 20 years to enforce our immigration laws. If we just grant amnesty again, we will end up right back where we started in another 20 years.

Legislative bodies, whether they are controlled by Democrats or Republicans, should have more sense than to embrace this boycott. It is an anti-American demonstration by groups who favor rights without responsibilities and those who value cheap labor over what’s best for America. That is simply wrong.

_____________________________________________________________

1500 Volunteers Turn out to Help

MINUTEMEN CONTINUE BUILDING BORDER FENCE

Illegals granted Social Security

California Senate Votes Against America

Senate Judiciary Committee Resumes Consideration of Amnesty Guest Worker Legislation (Wed. March 8)

Committee Action this Morning (Wed. March 8)

FAIR Exclusive: Blow-by-blow of Today's Committee Markup