IFIRE.org

IFIRE Announcements and Discussion Forum
It is currently Mon Dec 11, 2017 5:56 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Letter: Illegal immigration tears our country to bits
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 11:06 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 8:30 pm
Posts: 2037
How true this is! Great letter with supporting documentation.


http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/-339792--.html
Published: Feb. 10, 2012 Updated: 12:32 p.m.

Afternoon letters: : Illegal immigration tears our country to bits

CORONA DEL MAR, Bill Cool:

Two news stories this week clearly illustrate why our nation is faced with an illegal immigration problem.

The first dealt with a G.O.P. proposal to require a Social Security number in order to claim the federal child tax credit ["Child tax credit turns into immigration fight," Feb. 9], which averages $1,800 per family. This would save the government billions of dollars, and prevent most illegal aliens from benefiting from the child tax credit, but Sen. Harry Reid and others want to give this money to everyone, including those living here illegally. Reid's position would, of course, provide more incentive to immigrate and remain here illegally.

The second article, "Court halts 7 deportations, presses administration" [Feb. 9], was about the inept, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which demanded the Obama administration explain whether seven illegal "immigrants can avoid deportation because of two memos released last year by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton urging prosecutors to use discretion when deciding whether to pursue immigration cases." In a case where the federal government is actually enforcing our immigrations laws, the court is using a memo, by a government employee, as an excuse to negate our immigration laws. Shouldn't judges enforce our laws over memos?

This same court is allowing a dozen Latin American countries to participate in a law-suit against the state of Arizona regarding their SB1070 immigration law. All of our recent presidents have turned a blind eye to the illegal immigration situation. This has resulted in the states passing their own laws to help solve the problems that the federal government has created.

How has the Obama administration responded? It is suing many of those states claiming only it has the right to regulate immigration, even if it chooses to do nothing.

*
http://www.ocregister.com/news/tax-1572 ... untry.html

Published: Feb. 9, 2012 12:00 a.m.
Child tax credit turns into immigration fight

By ANDREW TAYLOR

WASHINGTON Republicans are looking to deny child tax credits to those in the country illegally – refund checks averaging $1,800 a family – in an effort that has roused anger among Hispanics and some Democratic lawmakers.

The proposal, which would require people who claim the federal credit to have Social Security numbers to prove they're legal workers, is being offered as a way to help pay for extending the Social Security tax cut for most American wage-earners. It would trim federal spending by about $10 billion over a decade.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada says the proposal unfairly goes after the children of poor Hispanic workers. Such children often are U.S. citizens, even when their parents aren't, because they were born in this country.

Says Leticia Miranda, senior policy adviser of the National Council of La Raza: “People who are making close to the minimum wage and are raising children in this country – and we're asking them to pay for the payroll tax cut?” She says, “It's outrageous and it's crazy.”

On the other side, Republicans and some Democrats say what's crazy is even having a debate over whether the government should be cutting checks to people who have sneaked into the country illegally.

“We have rules about tax credits and benefits, and it seems to me they need to be applied fairly and across the board,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., who is up for re-election. “If there are rules, they need to be enforced. I think it's just that simple. I don't think it's complicated.”

People in the country illegally have been barred from other refundable tax credits – in which low-income workers not only don't owe taxes but receive payments from the government – such as the earned income tax credit. Such credits are a popular anti-poverty tool in part because a recipient has to hold a job to receive the benefit.

But a 1997 law enacting a $500-per-child tax credit doesn't specifically exclude those in the country illegally from collecting. It was significantly expanded in 2001 to gradually reach $1,000, and rules were eased so that many more people could get it on a refundable basis. It was made more generous in 2009 so that more taxpayers could claim the credit or claim a larger amount. The expanded credit is slated to expire at the end of the year along with other Bush-era tax cuts and return to $500 per child, though it's commonly assumed that it will remain up to $1,000 per child.

The Treasury Department says that for the 2010 filing year, more than $4 billion in child credit refunds went to 2.3 million people who filed returns but didn't have Social Security numbers, a fourfold increase over five years earlier.

*

http://www.ocregister.com/news/immigran ... ation.html

Published: Feb. 9, 2012 12:00 a.m.
Court halts 7 deportations, presses administration

By PAUL ELIAS

SAN FRANCISCO A federal appeals court has put the Obama administration's new immigration directive to the test by halting the deportation of seven immigrants alleged to be in the country illegally.

In a 2-1 ruling Monday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals demanded the Obama administration explain whether the immigrants can avoid deportation because of two memos released last year by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton urging prosecutors to use discretion when deciding whether to pursue immigration cases.

Morton's initial memo in June said prosecutors should take into account such factors as U.S. military service, criminal records, family ties and length of stay in the country when deciding whether to start formal deportation proceedings against undocumented immigrants. He issued another in November elaborating on how to implement the guidelines.

Since then, though, immigration advocates and lawyers have been complaining that prosecutors have been too slow to call off deportation proceedings of immigrants meeting the criteria. The advocates view the appeals court's rulings as a call to action.

“There is a real concern that the (June) memo is not being utilized to its full extent,” said Laura Lichter, next president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. “It sounded great at the time, but we are waiting for real progress.”

The court ordered the Obama administration to make a prosecution decision on seven people in five cases by March 19. The immigrants involved all appeared to have clean criminal records and appeared to meet the criteria of the memos, the appeals court judges concluded. The same three-judge panel had previously upheld deportation orders of all seven of the immigrants before Judges William Canby Jr. and Raymond Fisher agreed to reconsider the cases Monday.

*
Wikipedia article on SB1070: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_SB_1070


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group