Democrats and Republicans are working on plans for what politicians call “immigration reform,” but the impact of the liberal party’s plans could prove expensive for the U.S. taxpayer. There are also concerns about national security.
One issue up for debate involves entitlements. Should illegal aliens who get a green card via the new legislation gain access to taxpayer funded health care like Medicaid or the Affordable Care Act?
Low information Democrat voters may want to pay attention—most experts agree that healthcare facilities and doctors will be strained as the ObamaCare (Tax) Bill begins to be fully implemented.
There is already a law designed to keep new immigrants from primary reliance on welfare. That law is never enforced, according to border patrol agents.
Criticism has already streamed forth from various sectors in the “immigration” debate. The union representing Immigrations and Customs Enforcement has consistently criticized the Obama administration, even issuing a formal vote of no confidence in ICE head John Morton.
On Friday, the ICE agents’ union, the National ICE Council, issued a statement that suggested the last matter on Democrats’ minds has to do with the taxpayer or U.S. citizens:
“Too often in the immigration debate, no one speaks up for the rank and file law enforcement officers and the citizens we protect. Large business groups and political advocacy groups are invited to the White House and other secret meetings. But those tasked with enforcing the law have no voice in the process.”
Recent testimony by Morton, who admitted he released far more detainees than he previously claimed, demonstrated risk to the American public. Morton confirmed that a number of those released were multiple DUI offenders. Americans also learned the detainees were released before the sequester’s automatic spending cuts took effect.
After Morton’s testimony, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) expressed concern about the “more than 2,200 illegal immigrants who had been released, including up to 10 ‘level one’ offenders, which includes some of the most violent offenders.”
Threats from de facto lobby groups
Advocacy groups like La Raza issued a political threat of sorts. According to Roll Call:
Immigration reform advocates, including National Council of La Raza, said Friday they would be monitoring what they contend to be any anti-immigrant votes and put members of both parties on notice that their votes would be remembered come election day.
Democrats, however, have a greater risk because most Hispanics are supporters of the liberal party.
Although Roll Call describes La Raza as an “immigration reform advocate,” a more accurate description would be an organization lobbying to increase power and influence in the business sector, the immigration law sector and those the council describes as “Hispanic Americans.”
Such groups have received millions of taxpayer dollars from the U.S. government and President Barack Obama actually hired a former corporate officer from the group to serve as director of intergovernmental affairs. Obama, said Judicial Watch, issued an “ethics waiver” to hire the lobbyist. Since the lobbyist joined the Obama administration, millions more in U.S. tax dollars have gone to “advocacy groups” that are de facto lobbyists.
Border security and DHS
Obama’s chief of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano has frequently met with advocates for illegal aliens, immigrants and others—mainly Hispanic—and she has admitted the border is not secure while at the same time taking credit for her agency’s policy. Morton implemented that policy, even redecorating detainee centers to make them more attractive.
Conservative groups like Numbers USA shed light on that policy and it’s likely most Americans don’t know about it:
“Last year, DHS opened up the Karnes County Detention Facility in Texas that reporters described as a ‘college-like setting in which detainees are housed in dorms or suites that hold eight.’ The reports said each suite had a private bathroom and television, and the complex had several recreation areas including soccer fields and basketball courts and had computer labs with Internet access and legal resources.”
Politicians have pandered to large corporate interests in the name of immigration reform before, with the Amnesty of 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act. Congress included border security in that law but failed to maintain it. Americans were told federal law would be enforced but that was not the case. No politician talks about the financial impact on the federal government for expenditures in law enforcement, education, healthcare and welfare.
The U.S. president has also failed to file the required report mandated by IRCA.
A principal architect in the failed 1986 IRCA law was Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and he will be a major influence on any amnesty Congress passes now.
Impact on welfare
A government report issued in 2010 reflected sharp differences in welfare usage among those who come to the U.S.:
Among the top sending countries, welfare use is highest for households headed by immigrants from Mexico (57 percent), Guatemala (55 percent), and the Dominican Republic (54 percent); and lowest for those from Canada (13 percent), Germany (10 percent), and the United Kingdom (6 percent).
Amnesty will largely benefit Democrat Party politics when it comes to Hispanics who respond to liberal policies on redistributing U.S. taxpayer dollars. Republicans, however, have signaled a willingness to cooperate on immigration reform although it would deliver few benefits politically.
Whether either party realizes the greatest problems are within the federal bureaucracy, with agencies either refusing to let workers do their jobs as with the border patrol agents, is unknown at this time.
Furthermore, current bureaucratic practices cause those who want to immigrate legally more money, time and resources to do so.
It is not likely that any legislation now in progress will actually reform the bureaucracy,
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Al.) pointed out that not adopting a welfare amendment he introduced “will dramatically accelerate the insolvency of our entitlement programs and is unfair to American workers and taxpayers.”
Meanwhile, Democrats continue to call for tax hikes because any amnesty bill will carry a price tag and ObamaCare is currently underfunded due to bipartisan repeals of some tax provisions and waivers granted largely to union workers who lobbied for passage of the bill.
Advocacy groups for black U.S. citizens appear to be on board with Democrats regarding amnesty despite high levels of unemployment among low skilled U.S. workers.
At present, it isn't clear whether Americans will be able to read and debate the bill before its passage.
(Commentary by Kay B. Day/March 25, 2013)
Read more about the amnesty act passed in 1986 in archives at The US Report.
Help indie blogs fight legacy search engines and big media by sharing and commenting on our articles. We can make a difference.