Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law

By
Friday, September 24, 2010 at 8:47 am

Jan Brewer’s gubernatorial campaign and the Arizona Republican party planned protests this week outside union offices to pressure them to end an economic boycott of the state. The United Food and Commercial Workers Union was boycotting Arizona in protest of its SB 1070 immigration law, but ended its boycott yesterday.

Brewer’s campaign wanted to turn the tables on unions by using their usual protest messages against them. The protests included “Shame on UFCW/SEIU” signs because unions often use “Shame on” signs to protest companies that hire non-union workers.

The UCFW decided Thursday to call off its boycott, the Phoenix Business Journal reported:

“I hope Ms. Brewer joins the call to ‘tone it down’ and help create solutions for both border security and immigration reform,” said UFCW Local 99 President Jim McLaughlin. ”It is now time for calm, reasoned discussion that can move forward to first secure our borders, while designing a workable, humane plan to finally reform our nation’s immigration laws,” said McLaughlin.

The UFCW boycott was one of many economy-wounding boycotts in protest of SB 1070. The Service Employees International Union plans to continue its boycott of the state, and the Brewer campaign said it would turn its protest attentions toward them next.

Follow Elise Foley on Twitter


Comments

30 Comments

Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law – The Washington Independent | FinanceLogger.com
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 9:34 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration LawThe Washington IndependentThe United Food and Commercial Workers Union was boycotting Arizona in protest of its SB 1070 immigration law, but ended its boycott yesterday. …and more » [...]


Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … | American News
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 9:53 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The …
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 10:21 am

[...] is the original: Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … Post a [...]


An Analysis of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 10:24 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


4-H members making jam, rounding up money for trip | money making blog
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 10:31 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The …
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 10:49 am

[...] by on September 24, 2010 Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.Powered by WP Greet Box “I hope Ms. Brewer joins the call to ‘tone it down’ and help create solutions for both border security and immigration reform,” said UFCW Local 99 President Jim McLaughlin. ”It is now time for calm, reasoned discussion that can move … Read more from the original source: Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law – The Washington Independent | finance
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 11:05 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration LawThe Washington IndependentThe United Food and Commercial Workers Union was boycotting Arizona in protest of its SB 1070 immigration law, but ended its boycott yesterday. …and more » [...]


Where To Buy NZ Products And Choosing The Cheapest NZ Shop | Product Guide Reviews
Pingback posted September 24, 2010 @ 12:44 pm

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


Joelwisch2
Comment posted September 24, 2010 @ 7:33 pm

Thank you Governor Brewer. Let me point out that Americans did that work until the illegal aliens showed up and began doing that work for less than half the wages, and while living in very crummy barracks. And lets ask this right here: if the crop is not viable for the grower unless he hires illegal aliens, why don't we let the illegal aliens stay home, and buy the crop from THEIR country. Why isn't the Ag Department out there approving truck loads of .. for example… potatoes as they come in for the consumer?? That will put American Workers back to work, and stop the abuse provided to all of us by the growers!!


Brittanicus
Comment posted September 24, 2010 @ 8:05 pm

This November we must be on our guard, vigilant against illegal aliens violating our voting federal laws, specifically in California and Nevada, but also every other state. Absentee ballot voting is specifically vulnerable in an “honor System” that doesn't work anymore. No copyright. Copy, Paste and distribute freely.

Senator Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi is part of the Liberal-Democratic fringe, that must be unseated in November, because he has accumulated a bad record on his illegal immigration agenda.. Not just in the Silver state but crosses the whole of America with his undercurrent of financial issues, that outside of the Dream Act, if in power after November he will soak taxpayers for astronomical amounts of money to fund illegal alien amnesty. Harry Reid is a callous being, who is ruthless in forcing through another damaging amnesty, which is full of hidden costs that are not seen until taxpayers are confronted with the billions of dollars to be spent. Next in line is majority Nancy Pelosi and a whole group of politicians are thinking that if they adopt the Dream Act, a path to citizenship or amnesty for everybody who steps from a plane, or runs the flimsy gauntlet called the border fence. Attention–ALL–Nevadans’, you have seen your states serious unemployment, mass home foreclosures, that Sen. Harry Reid is directly accountable.

In the national arena why has Sen. Reid held back on tax cuts to all Americans, but used his influence to push through the De-Facto Amnesty–called the dream Act? Something I recommend is to judge those elected officials that administer to every individual county, countrywide. Investigate and find out the expenditures for illegal alien support for such locations as San Diego County, California, Broward County, Florida or Clarke County, Nevada? In most localities you will come up against a dead end, because that particular county department of Social services doesn’t keep records, or even the state agency. Other officials will refuse to talk about it, because of the amounts involved that comes out of your pocket. One place that does keep accounting is Los Angeles, California that surprises me is that any records are released at all in LOS ANGELES COUNTY?

Figures from the Department of Public Social Services show that children of illegal aliens in Los Angeles County collected nearly $22 million in welfare and over $26 million in food stamps in June, according to county Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich. Projected over a 12 month period, this would exceed $575 million. Annually the cost of illegal immigration to Los Angeles County taxpayers exceeds $1 billion dollars which includes $350 million for public safety, $400 million for health care, and $500 million in welfare and food stamps allocations. Twenty-four percent of the county's total allowance of welfare and food stamp benefits goes directly to U.S.-born children of illegal aliens. That is just one large county in the United States and the expenditures for illegal alien. Ask your families Political Representative the true cost of your counties payments in welfare and other social services–if you can get a foot in the door? Is it no wonder the “Sanctuary State” is on the edge of bankruptcy and needs more taxes to pay for this?

Old Harry ignored that hundreds of thousands of jobs being served by unscrupulous casinos, the construction industry and all manner of businesses to the illegal alien households. This man has been fixated on pleasing the illegal alien population that has lowered wages and ruined the benefit packages of US workers. But truly this cannot be blamed on just illegal immigrants, but the greed of a large majority of business owners who hunger for cheap labor. The Tea Party and moderate Conservatives believe that if we can remove the major players in the Liberal-Democratic administration, the bipartisan acceptance–will build the original Border Fences as signed into law by President Bush. Not–ONE fence, But Two, spreads its security across the region separating Mexico from the US. Sen. Harry Reid, two Texas Republicans Kay Bailey Hutchinson, John Cornyn administered the coup-de-Grace on the 2006 Secure Fence Act and nearly E-Verify.

That second 15 foot chain-link fence similar to a prison outside fence was to be wrapped with razor wire, from one end of America to the other. If the–ORIGINAL–border fence plans had been followed, it’s unlikely Governor Brewer would not be going to court, to protect the Arizona taxpayers. Another point is GOP, Republican–Tea Party candidate Sharron Angle as a new entrant to the halls of power can be shaped by public opinion, unlike Reid. We must remember that if we do not stop any form of Amnesty now, the teeming millions who want here will never stop, especially when America offers the rest of the world unlimited public benefits. We have observe this from the unlimited resources given to the babies receiving instant citizenship, starting with free pre-natal health care and then education for every child thereafter they give birth too.

Sen. Harry Reid must be forcibly retired, with–ALL INCUMBENTS–driven out by lack of votes. You can pursue your Senator or Congressman at the Washington switchboard at 202-224-3121We must wipe the slate clean and remove the corrupted political debris from every state, of–ALL–elected officials which includes Governors and Mayors. Senator Harry Reid must not get any second chance of passing the Dream act, because it is a farce and one big lie. Its AMNESTY! This November we must be on our guard, vigilant against illegal aliens violating our voting federal laws, specifically in California and Nevada, but also every other state. Absentee ballot voting is specifically vulnerable in an “honor System” that doesn't work anymore.
No copyright. Copy, Paste and distribute freely.


Beefeater
Comment posted September 24, 2010 @ 11:48 pm

Ya just gotta laugh, big burly union thugs back down from the girl. WTG Gov. Brewer.


Simple K1 Visa Guide | auto accident lawyers
Pingback posted September 25, 2010 @ 9:34 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


Facts
Comment posted September 25, 2010 @ 1:07 pm

Prison Industry Ties to Anti-Immigration Bills
Tweet Reddit Facebook StumbleUpon Yahoo! Buzz By Elise Foley 9/17/10 11:06 AM

The private detention industry stands to gain substantially from a growing immigrant detention system, so it’s no accident that a lobbying group partially funded by Corrections Corporation of America, or CCA, which operates some of the country’s largest private detention facilities, has had a hand in crafting both Arizona’s harsh SB 1070 immigration law and, now, the copycat bills springing up across the country.

Ties between Arizona lawmakers and CCA are not news, but Think Progress has a good run down of the key points: SB 1070 was drafted with help from the American Legislative Exchange Council, which helps the private sector write legislation for states. CCA, which is slated to receive $74 million for immigration detention centers in the 2010 fiscal year, helps fund the group.

CCA also has close, direct ties with Arizona lawmakers. Gov. Jan Brewer’s deputy chief of staff formerly worked as a lobbyist for CCA — his wife still works as a lobbyist there — and Brewer’s campaign chairman runs a lobbying firm that represents the prison corporation.

Similar ties can be found between CCA and lawmakers in other states who have pushed for anti-immigration laws, such as Tennessee and Colorado. (Read the full rundown for the states here.) And CCA routinely gives money to state lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans, that have direct connections to the detention business, as The Texas Independent reported last month.

Why is it important? Think Progress explains how anti-immigration bills could help the prison industry make a profit:

http://wildcat.arizona.edu/perspectives/anti-immigration-hysteria-tied-to-the-private-prison-industry-1.1572422
Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed S.B. 1070 into law, and the legislation’s principal architect, Russell Pearce, both have extensive financial ties to the private prison industry powerhouse Corrections Corporation of America, a company which stands to profit in the sum of millions if Arizona’s “papers please” legislation is enacted.

CCA, one of the leading providers of detention and correction services in the country, holds the contract to imprison all federal detainees in the state of Arizona. S.B. 1070 would lead to more arrests on federal immigration charges, causing money to pour into the gargantuan coffers of the private prison industry and directly into the bank accounts of those who are financially tied to it.

Republican state senator Pearce submitted a draft version of S.B. 1070 to the American Legislative Exchange Council for revision months before the bill was introduced to the floor of the Arizona Senate. Pearce is one of 35 Arizona legislators who belong to this organization.

Two years prior, ALEC was the recipient of millions of dollars in contributions from CCA and Geo Group, two of the largest private prison companies in the state.

Pearce’s financial records also indicate that the political action committees funded by both CCA and Geo Group have donated the maximum amount allowable to his campaign.

Gov. Jan Brewer’s deputy chief of staff, Paul Senseman, is a former CCA lobbyist. His wife Kathryn Senseman currently lobbies the state legislature on behalf of the company.

Still more damning is the fact that the governor’s leading policy advisor, J. Charles “Chuck” Coughlin, is the president of Highground Consulting, the lobbying firm which represents CCA’s interests in Arizona.

CCA also contributed a total of $10,000 dollars to the Prop 100 campaign earlier this year, an initiative, along with S.B. 1070, which set the stage for Brewer’s reelection bid.

Phoenix CBS affiliate KPHO was among the first to report on this glaring conflict of interest. In retaliation, the Brewer campaign pulled ll advertisements from the network.

The economics of immigration, Stephen C. Goss, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration and someone who enjoys bipartisan support for his straightforwardness, said that by 2007, the Social Security trust fund had received a net benefit of somewhere between $120 billion and $240 billion from unauthorized immigrants.

That represented an astounding 5.4 percent to 10.7 percent of the trust fund's total assets of $2.24 trillion that year. The cumulative contribution is surely higher now. Unauthorized immigrants paid a net contribution of $12 billion in 2007 alone, Goss said.

Previous estimates circulating publicly and in Congress had placed the annual contributions at roughly half of Goss's 2007 figure and listed the cumulative benefit on the order of $50 billion.

The Social Security trust fund faces a solvency crisis that would be even more pressing were it not for these payments.

Adding to the Social Security irony is that the restrictionists are mostly OLDER AND RETIRED WHITES from longtime American families. The very people, in other words, who benefit most from the Social Security payments by unauthorized immigrants.

THE FACTS ARE THAT JAN BREWER AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE DOING THIS TO GET REELECTED, HERE ARE FACTS.

1, HOW MUCH MONEY $$$$$$$ IS ALLOCATED TO ENFORCE THIS LAW?? NONE.

2, HOW MANY NEW POLICEMEN / WOMEN SHES HIRED TO HOLD AND PROCESS THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS? NONE.

3, HOW MANY NEW IMMIGRATION JUDGES SHES HIRED TO PROCESS THE THOUSANDS OF DEPORTATION CASES?? NONE.

4, HOW MANY NEW JAILS SHES BUILT TO HOLD THE THOUSANDS OF UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS? NONE.

5, HOW MANY BUSES / PLANES SHES BROUGHT TO DEPORT THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF THOSE WHO ARE ORDERED BY THE IMMIGRATION JUDGES TO BE DEPORTED?? NONE.

CAN ANYONE ANSWER THESE FACTS? THE REPUBLICAN STATES ARE TRYING TO MAKE THIS THEIR PLATFORM, THEY WILL LOSE BIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG TIME.
ALL ARE GODS CHILDREN. NO HUMAN IS ABOVE ANOTHER. ALL ARE CREATED BY ONE ALMIGHTY GOD WHO LOVES ALL HIS CHILDREN.
I AM NOT SAYING DON'T CLOSE THE BORDERS I AM SAYING STOP THE FOOLISH HATE AND IGNORANCE.

Moments after signing Arizona's tough new immigration law in April, Gov. Jan Brewer was asked WHAT A ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT LOOKS LIKE????

The question, posed during a news conference that was broadcast live on TV, seemed to catch Brewer off guard. After a long pause, she said, “I DON'T KNOW WHAT A ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT LOOKS LIKE. I can tell you that there are people in Arizona that ASS-U-ME they know what an illegal immigrant looks like. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY KNOW THAT FOR A FACT OR NOT.”

Her answer cut to the very heart of the controversy surrounding the law, which takes effect July 29. Although there are many people who assume they know what an illegal immigrant looks like, the fact is, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE to tell a person's immigration status by appearance, experts say.

So despite assurances to the contrary, some civil-rights groups and others fear that enforcement of the law will lead to racial profiling. Several lawsuits already raise worries of civil-rights violations, and a group of Arizona law professors concluded the law authorizes enforcement based on ethnicity. That, they allege, would mean officers would end up harassing and possibly detaining people who aren't illegal immigrants.

The vast majority of illegal immigrants are Hispanic. But most Hispanics in Arizona are not illegal immigrants – they are legal residents or U.S. citizens, many with roots dating back generations.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/07/18/20100718illegal-immigration-profiling.html#ixzz0u2wY1a1d

What both these Republicans FORGOT to Mention in their SPIN POLITICS is that

It’s all about economics! Removing undocumented workers from the U.S. would total a loss of $1.8 trillion in annual spending and $651.5 billion in annual economic output, according to a study by the economic analysis firm The Perryman Group. It would cost about $28 billion per year to apprehend illegal immigrants, $6 billion a year to detain them, $500 million for extra beds, $2 million to judicially process them and $1.6 billion to transport them home. $230 Billion is the estimated amount it would cost over the next five years to enact the scenario of the mass-deportation caucus and deport the undocumented population, according to a report by the Center for American Progress. Legalization of undocumented immigrants would significantly expand the economy—by a cumulative $1.5 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years. A deportation approach, by contrast, would have the cumulative effect of draining $2.5 trillion over 10 years from the U.S. economy. Illegal immigrants are paying their share of taxes, they pay the same taxes as you and me when they purchase anything, They don't carry a card that says Undocumented Immigrant, DON'T CHARGE TAXES
Start looking at FACTS & NUMBERS.

Who’s behind these laws?

FOLLOW THE MONEY$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Many may want them gone, but illegal immigrants in Oklahoma can be good business.

So say county officials who handle the purse strings of some sheriff's departments in the state. Millions in revenue for transporting and detaining immigrants for the federal government have financed jobs, departments and, in some cases, entire jails.

“It's a good business plan,” said Tim Albin, chief of the services division that oversees the budget for the Tulsa County Sheriffs Department. “It allows us to bank and put money back and carry over for other things.”

Read more: http://newsok.com/jailing-immigrants-adds-funds-for-some-counties/article/3489827#ixzz0yC9uF24O

The Immigration Reform Law Institute, or IRLI, the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, drafted the Arizona law and most of the copycat bills. The Southern Poverty Law Center designated FAIR a hate group because of its founder’s writings, its repeated participation with white nationalist groups, and its receipt of major funding from a racist organization.

Copycat laws frequently rely on the work of attorney Kris Kobach, who works for IRLI. Kobach’s lawyering has cost localities who have hired him millions of dollars while the laws have been found unconstitutional. The Arizona law was brought forth by State Senator Russell Pearce, who the Arizona press has described as having a history of associating with neo-Nazis and sending anti-Semitic emails.


Facts
Comment posted September 25, 2010 @ 1:09 pm

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/reagan-insider-gop-destroyed-us-economy-2010-08-10

This week, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) came out with a report entitled, The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on U.S. Taxpayers, which discusses the costs of unauthorized immigration to the United States. As usual, FAIR has put out a highly misleading fiscal snapshot of the costs allegedly imposed on U.S. taxpayers by unauthorized immigrants and completely discounts the economic contributions of unauthorized workers and consumers. Moreover, FAIR inflates their costs in a variety of ways and conveniently ignores any contributions that would offset these costs.

While the publication is long and deals with a wide range of issues that warrant more dissection by credible economic experts, the trade publication Education Week has already begun the deconstruction with an item that sheds light on their misleading claims about providing English language services in schools.

Another argument FAIR makes, which makes it hard to glean what their solution would be is the high cost of deporting undocumented workers which FAIR blames on the immigrants themselves. It's a somewhat circular argument to say that the cost of undocumented immigrants includes the cost of failing law enforcement efforts. So, in essence, FAIR is saying that the deport-them-all approach costs too much money and doesn't work. Yet their “solution” is to spend even more money on enforcement.

FAIR's data is meant only to reinforce their vision of “attrition through enforcement.” It is not rooted in an effort to move the immigration debate forward. Therefore, passing comprehensive immigration reform – which would yield a cumulative $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over 10 years – is the only sound economic decision the United States can make.

SOURCE Immigration Policy Center

Who’s behind these laws?

The Immigration Reform Law Institute, or IRLI, the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, drafted the Arizona law and most of the copycat bills. The Southern Poverty Law Center designated FAIR a hate group because of its founder’s writings, its repeated participation with white nationalist groups, and its receipt of major funding from a racist organization.

Copycat laws frequently rely on the work of attorney Kris Kobach, who works for IRLI. Kobach’s lawyering has cost localities who have hired him millions of dollars while the laws have been found unconstitutional. The Arizona law was brought forth by State Senator Russell Pearce, who the Arizona press has described as having a history of associating with neo-Nazis and sending anti-Semitic emails.


Facts
Comment posted September 25, 2010 @ 1:09 pm

Before you Scream and show Ignorance and Hate at least read the Immigration Law regarding Undocumented Immigrants.

THE UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS ARE PAYING MORE TAXES THAN YOU THINK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Eight million Undocumented immigrants pay Social Security, Medicare and income taxes. Denying public services to people who pay their taxes is an affront to America’s bedrock belief in fairness. But many “pull-up-the-drawbridge” politicians want to do just that when it comes to Undocumented immigrants.

The fact that Undocumented immigrants pay taxes at all will come as news to many Americans. A stunning two thirds of Undocumented immigrants pay Medicare, Social Security and personal income taxes.

Yet, nativists like Congressman Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., have popularized the notion that illegal aliens are a colossal drain on the nation’s hospitals, schools and welfare programs — consuming services that they don’t pay for.

In reality, the 1996 welfare reform bill disqualified Undocumented immigrants from nearly all means tested government programs including food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid and Medicare-funded hospitalization.

The only services that illegals can still get are emergency medical care and K-12 education. Nevertheless, Tancredo and his ilk pushed a bill through the House criminalizing all aid to illegal aliens — even private acts of charity by priests, nurses and social workers.

Potentially, any soup kitchen that offers so much as a free lunch to an illegal could face up to five years in prison and seizure of assets. The Senate bill that recently collapsed would have tempered these draconian measures against private aid.

But no one — Democrat or Republican — seems to oppose the idea of withholding public services. Earlier this year, Congress passed a law that requires everyone who gets Medicaid — the government-funded health care program for the poor — to offer proof of U.S. citizenship so we can avoid “theft of these benefits by illegal aliens,” as Rep. Charlie Norwood, R-Ga., puts it. But, immigrants aren’t flocking to the United States to mooch off the government.

According to a study by the Urban Institute, the 1996 welfare reform effort dramatically reduced the use of welfare by undocumented immigrant households, exactly as intended. And another vital thing happened in 1996: the Internal Revenue Service began issuing identification numbers to enable illegal immigrants who don’t have Social Security numbers to file taxes.

One might have imagined that those fearing deportation or confronting the prospect of paying for their safety net through their own meager wages would take a pass on the IRS’ scheme. Not so. Close to 8 million of the 12 million or so illegal aliens in the country today file personal income taxes using these numbers, contributing billions to federal coffers.

No doubt they hope that this will one day help them acquire legal status — a plaintive expression of their desire to play by the rules and come out of the shadows. What’s more, aliens who are not self-employed have Social Security and Medicare taxes automatically withheld from their paychecks.

Since undocumented workers have only fake numbers, they’ll never be able to collect the benefits these taxes are meant to pay for. Last year, the revenues from these fake numbers — that the Social Security administration stashes in the “earnings suspense file” — added up to 10 percent of the Social Security surplus.

The file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year. Beyond federal taxes, all illegals automatically pay state sales taxes that contribute toward the upkeep of public facilities such as roads that they use, and property taxes through their rent that contribute toward the schooling of their children.

The non-partisan National Research Council found that when the taxes paid by the children of low-skilled immigrant families — most of whom are illegal — are factored in, they contribute on average $80,000 more to federal coffers than they consume. Yes, many illegal migrants impose a strain on border communities on whose doorstep they first arrive, broke and unemployed.

To solve this problem equitably, these communities ought to receive the surplus taxes that federal government collects from immigrants. But the real reason border communities are strained is the lack of a guest worker program.

Such a program would match willing workers with willing employers in advance so that they wouldn’t be stuck for long periods where they disembark while searching for jobs. The cost of undocumented aliens is an issue that immigrant bashers have created to whip up indignation against people they don’t want here in the first place.

With the Senate having just returned from yet another vacation and promising to revisit the stalled immigration bill, politicians ought to set the record straight: Illegals are not milking the government. If anything, it is the other way around.

The Undocumented Immigrants pay the exact same amount of taxes like you and me when they buy Things, rent a house, fill up gas, drink a beer or wine, buy appliances, play the states lottery and mega millions . Below are the links to just a few sites that will show you exactly how much tax you or the Undocumented Immigrant pays , so you see they are NOT FREELOADERS, THEY PAY TAXES AND TOLLS Exactly the same as you, Now if you take out 10% from your states /city Budget what will your city/state look like financially ?

Stop your folly thinking , you are wise USE YOUR WISDOM to see the reality. They pay more taxes than you think, Including FEDERAL INCOME TAX using a ITN Number that is given to them by the IRS, Social Security Taxes and State taxes that are withheld form their paychecks automatically.

Taxes, paid by You & the Undocumented are the same in each state check your state : http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/sales.html

GAS Taxes paid by you & the Undocumented are the same. Go to and check out your states tax; http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp

Cigarette Taxes paid by you & the Undocumented are the same, check this out in : http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/cigarett.html

Clothing Sales Taxes, are the same paid by you & the Undocumented Immigrant; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States

City Taxes, are the same paid by you or the Undocumented, since he pays rent and the LANDLORD pays the city : http://www.town-usa.com/statetax/statetaxlist.html

Beer Taxes, are the same paid by you or the Undocumented: http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/beer.html

TAX DATA : http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/245.html


Facts
Comment posted September 25, 2010 @ 1:11 pm

Ignorance is Bliss: Those who have NO CLUE or QUALIFICATIONS about Immigration are those who show their IGNORANCE :)

There is NO SUCH WORD AS 'ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT” in Blacks Law Dictionary, or In Merriam Websters Dictionary. Get Educated .

“Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Wednesday that the claim by some conservative activists that illegal immigration is to blame for all of the state's fiscal problems is ignorant and bigoted.”

Arturo E. Ocampo of Tracy has been a practicing attorney since 1985, In the 20-plus years I have spent studying, lecturing and litigating immigration issues, two things have always amazed me. The first is the amount and intensity of hate spewed against undocumented workers. The second is the amount of misinformation that is published about them.

On this second point, the quote from Mark Twain is illustrative. “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” I suppose this may be true in part because misinformation, like a lie, requires no accuracy, validation or research; all of which are time-consuming practices.

The recent letters alleging that all undocumented workers are “criminals,” and specifically Veronica Suarez, whose plight was written about in the Tracy Press recently, is a criminal are factually incorrect.

According to the facts (as stated in Sharon Franceschi’s Sept. 7 commentary) Saurez entered the U.S. on a valid visa, overstayed her visa when it expired, resulting in her unlawful immigration status. None of these acts, as stated by Franceschi, constitute a crime under federal or state law. Overstaying a valid visa under the Immigration and Naturalization Act is a civil violation of the law, not a criminal violation. Being in the U.S. in under undocumented status is not a criminal violation, but a civil violation of the INA.

The facts, as stated by Franceschi, do not indicate that Suarez has committed any crime. To call her a criminal is erroneous at best, and libelous at worst.

Furthermore, it is an Americanism that a person is innocent until proven guilty. So until Suarez (or any other undocumented person) is charged and found guilty of a crime, it would be inappropriate to call them “criminals.”

It is important to note that there is a very large difference between civil and criminal violations of law. The distinction is so important that the law makes the erroneous allegation that one has committed a crime of slander or libel, (which means liability is automatic even without proof of damages). One who violates the civil law is no more a criminal than someone who has breached a contract or accidentally damaged another’s property.

It is true that entering the United States without inspection is a misdemeanor under the INA. The misdemeanor is completed once an individual’s entry is complete. Suarez, according to Franceschi, did not enter without inspection; she entered with a valid visa. According to U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services statistics, about 40 percent of undocumented persons enter legally and overstay their visas (which, as stated above, is not a crime). Consequently, at least 40 percent of the undocumented population has committed no crime in regards to their immigration status.

Therefore, one cannot assume that a person has committed a crime simply because they are undocumented.

Franceschi is also in error in her allegation that getting married and having children while being undocumented in the U.S. is a violation of the law. It is not. Franceschi goes on to say that Suarez “apparently bought a house illegally.” It is unlikely that Franceschi knows exactly how Suarez purchased her home. Consequently, any allegation of illegality is, at a minimum, irresponsible.

It is also important to note that the Immigration and Citizenship Services doesn’t consider all undocumented persons criminals. When the Immigration and Citizenship Services publishes information about its enforcement activities involving undocumented workers, it are always sure to make a distinction between “criminal” and noncriminal aliens.

Another myth is that the term “illegal aliens” is a term of art or is legal jargon. This term is not found anywhere in the INA or in Blacks Law Dictionary. The INA refers to undocumented persons as either an EWI (entered without inspection) or as someone who has overstayed their visa. “Illegal aliens” is a term invented by anti-immigrant groups designed to put undocumented persons in the worst possible light and to instill fear in Americans. It is intentionally designed to associate undocumented persons with criminality.

This xenophobic view that undocumented persons are “simply criminals” comes from the historical stereotype that the foreign-born, especially undocumented immigrants, are responsible for higher crime rates. This misconception has deep roots in American public opinion and popular myth. This myth, however, is not supported empirically and has repeatedly been refuted by scientific studies. Both contemporary and historical data, (including U.S. governmental studies) have shown that immigration is associated with lower crime rates.

The studies have uniformly shown that recent immigrants (including the undocumented) are less likely to be involved in violent crime, and that when there is an increase in immigration patterns, violent crime decreases. This has been shown to be true in large cities with heavy immigrant populations.

In the most recent of these studies, The Myth of Immigrant Criminality and the Paradox of Assimilation (2007), from the Immigrant Policy Institute, it was found that among men age 18 to 39 (who are the vast majority of inmates in federal and state prisons and local jails), immigrants were five times less likely to be incarcerated than the native-born in 2000.

During the Proposition 187 debate, then-Gov. Pete Wilson published statistics that stated that
12 percent to 15 percent of the state prison population had Immigration and Citizenship Services holds or potential holds. The Department of Corrections analyst who compiled these numbers said Immigration and Citizenship Services holds are placed on inmates who were born outside of the U.S. (therefore 12 percent to 15 percent of the prison population was immigrants). The immigrant population at the time in California hovered at about 25 percent, showing immigrants were much less likely to be incarcerated than the native born in California.

In short, the data shows you are much safer if your neighbor is an immigrant.

Franceschi owes Suarez an apology. I am also surprised that the Tracy Press allowed a commentary to run without checking the facts. Although commentaries are designed to allow for the expression of differing opinions, the First Amendment is not as generous with misstatements of facts — especially when the facts can be libelous.

For the immigration debate to be a healthy one, we should strive for a debate based on facts, not myth or tired stereotypes. We should also not let our position on this topic strip us of one of the great qualities we possess as people — the ability to be compassionate.

Arturo E. Ocampo of Tracy has been a practicing attorney since 1985, with an expertise in immigration rights and class action lawsuits on behalf of immigrants, including the way the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was implemented, Border Patrol’s raids and Proposition 187. He is director of diversity and equal employment opportunity for the San Jose/Evergreen Community College District.


Facts
Comment posted September 25, 2010 @ 1:12 pm

Daniel Griswold: Immigration law should reflect our dynamic labor market

Daniel Griswold is director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute in Washington. His writings on immigration can be found at http://www.freetrade.org; e-mail him at dgriswold@cato.org.

Daniel Griswold, Director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies, says he believes that the key to immigration reform is a guest worker policy. He also explains that the competition between U.S. citizens and immigrants over low skilled, low paying jobs will not escalate since the number of U.S. citizens with a high school diplomas is rising. This means that the pool of native citizens who work as low skill laborers will become smaller

Before balming the Undocumented Immigrants consider two thoughts:

One, if low-skilled, illegal immigration is the single greatest cause of California’s woes, how does the author explain the relative success of Texas? As a survey in the July 11 issue of The Economist magazine explained, smaller-government Texas has avoided many of the problems of California while outperforming most of the rest of the country in job creation and economic growth. And Texas has managed to do this with an illegal immigrant population that rivals California’s as a share of its population.

Two, low-skilled immigrants actually enhance the human capital of native-born Americans by allowing us to move up the occupational ladder to jobs that are more productive and better paying. In a new study from the Cato Institute, titled “Restriction or Legalization? Measuring the Economic Benefits of Immigration Reform,” this phenomenon is called the “occupational mix effect” and it translates into tens of billions of dollars of benefits to U.S. households.

Our new study, authored by economists Peter Dixon and Maureen Rimmer, found that legalization of low-skilled immigration would boost the incomes of American households by $180 billion, while further restricting such immigration would reduce the incomes of U.S. families by $80 billion.

That is a quarter of a trillion dollar difference between following the policy advice of National Review and that of the Cato Institute. Last time I checked, that is still real money, even in Washington.

Among its many virtues, America is a nation where laws are generally reasonable, respected and impartially enforced. A glaring exception is immigration.

Today an estimated 12 million people live in the U.S. without authorization, 1.6 million in Texas alone, and that number grows every year. Many Americans understandably want the rule of law restored to a system where law-breaking has become the norm.

The fundamental choice before us is whether we redouble our efforts to enforce existing immigration law, whatever the cost, or whether we change the law to match the reality of a dynamic society and labor market.

Low-skilled immigrants cross the Mexican border illegally or overstay their visas for a simple reason: There are jobs waiting here for them to fill, especially in Texas and other, faster growing states. Each year our economy creates hundreds of thousands of net new jobs – in such sectors as retail, cleaning, food preparation, construction and tourism – that require only short-term, on-the-job training.

At the same time, the supply of Americans who have traditionally filled many of those jobs – those without a high school diploma – continues to shrink. Their numbers have declined by 4.6 million in the past decade, as the typical American worker becomes older and better educated.

Yet our system offers no legal channel for anywhere near a sufficient number of peaceful, hardworking immigrants to legally enter the United States even temporarily to fill this growing gap. The predictable result is illegal immigration

In response, we can spend billions more to beef up border patrols. We can erect hundreds of miles of ugly fence slicing through private property along the Rio Grande. We can raid more discount stores and chicken-processing plants from coast to coast. We can require all Americans to carry a national ID card and seek approval from a government computer before starting a new job.

Or we can change our immigration law to more closely conform to how millions of normal people actually live.

Crossing an international border to support your family and pursue dreams of a better life is not an inherently criminal act like rape or robbery. If it were, then most of us descend from criminals. As the people of Texas know well, the large majority of illegal immigrants are not bad people. They are people who value family, faith and hard work trying to live within a bad system.

When large numbers of otherwise decent people routinely violate a law, the law itself is probably the problem. To argue that illegal immigration is bad merely because it is illegal avoids the threshold question of whether we should prohibit this kind of immigration in the first place.

We've faced this choice on immigration before. In the early 1950s, federal agents were making a million arrests a year along the Mexican border. In response, Congress ramped up enforcement, but it also dramatically increased the number of visas available through the Bracero guest worker program. As a result, apprehensions at the border dropped 95 percent. By changing the law, we transformed an illegal inflow of workers into a legal flow.

For those workers already in the United States illegally, we can avoid “amnesty” and still offer a pathway out of the underground economy. Newly legalized workers can be assessed fines and back taxes and serve probation befitting the misdemeanor they've committed. They can be required to take their place at the back of the line should they eventually apply for permanent residency.

The fatal flaw of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act was not that it offered legal status to workers already here but that it made no provision for future workers to enter legally.

Immigration is not the only area of American life where a misguided law has collided with reality. In the 1920s and '30s, Prohibition turned millions of otherwise law-abiding Americans into lawbreakers and spawned an underworld of moon-shining, boot-legging and related criminal activity. (Sound familiar?) We eventually made the right choice to tax and regulate alcohol rather than prohibit it.

In the 19th century, America's frontier was settled largely by illegal squatters. In his influential book on property rights, The Mystery of Capital, economist Hernando de Soto describes how these so-called extralegals began to farm, mine and otherwise improve land to which they did not have strict legal title. After failed attempts by the authorities to destroy their cabins and evict them, federal and state officials finally recognized reality, changed the laws, declared amnesty and issued legal documents conferring title to the land the settlers had improved.

As Mr. de Soto wisely concluded: “The law must be compatible with how people actually arrange their lives.” That must be a guiding principle when Congress returns to the important task of fixing our immigration laws.

Daniel Griswold is director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute in Washington. His writings on immigration can be found at http://www.freetrade.org; e-mail him at dgriswold@cato.org.


PERM For Experts | Article Studies
Pingback posted September 25, 2010 @ 10:49 pm

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The Washington Independent [...]


PaulC1958
Comment posted September 26, 2010 @ 8:02 am

The same old BS. Good paying jobs for ALL American workers requires a TIGHT LABOR MARKET! Simple supply and demand theory tell you that if you flood the labor market with workers, wages and salaries will go down and working conditions will get worse. If free trade in labor is such a good idea, why aren't we importing CEOs from China to run our companies; they are cleaning our clock, at lest with respect to American workers!

The CHEAP LABOR policies of every President and Congress since President Reagan has driven inflation adjusted WAGES AND SALARIES DOWN! First they simply decreed that the US trade policy would open and free to every country without any meaningful reciprocity. As a result we went from the largest creditor nation in world history to the biggest debtor nation in world history.


World Wide News Flash
Trackback posted September 26, 2010 @ 1:18 pm

Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The ……

I found your entry interesting do I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog :)…


Secret meetings, Sept. 24, 2010 North Capitol Street
Pingback posted September 26, 2010 @ 4:31 pm

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


OK: Askins Tops $1 Million in Loans to Her Campaign North Capitol Street
Pingback posted September 26, 2010 @ 7:19 pm

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … [...]


BrendaSueBob
Comment posted September 26, 2010 @ 9:23 pm

So are you saying that Tax evasion isn't against the law? And that the milking of Tax payer services doesn't drain a states economy.


Elise 10 Light Silver
Pingback posted September 27, 2010 @ 12:41 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … "Illegal aliens" is a term invented by anti-immigrant groups designed to put undocumented persons in the worst possible light and to instill fear in Americans. It is intentionally designed to associate undocumented persons with criminality. Buzz By Elise Foley 9/17/10 11:06 AM The private detention industry stands to gain substantially from a growing immigrant detention system, so it's no accident that a lobbying group partially funded by Corrections Corporation of . [...]


Broward County Schools Employment
Pingback posted September 29, 2010 @ 11:35 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law « The … More » [...]


borderraven
Comment posted October 1, 2010 @ 1:05 am

The legally accepted term is “illegal alien” per the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/C054124.PDF

Case: Martinez v. Regents of U.C. 10/7/08 CA3

Appeals Court Justices: Sims, Raye and Hull

Page 3 Footnote 2


borderraven
Comment posted October 1, 2010 @ 1:07 am

There is no such thing as “undocumented immigrants”, they are illegal aliens who are not supposed to be here.


borderraven
Comment posted October 1, 2010 @ 1:10 am

The question isn't whether or not you look illegal, the question is what am I doing to create probable cause for police to involve themselves with me?
Am I driving a car safely, or is a head light out?
Do I stop here or drive through the red light? Do I pass here?
Am I transporting US citizens or
illegal aliens? Am I assembling with US citizens or knowingly with illegal aliens?


Slate Tables – Latest Slate Tables news – Conservative Pep Rally Draws Hundreds
Pingback posted October 8, 2010 @ 12:19 am

[...] Brewer Campaign Protests Union Boycotts Over Immigration Law [...]


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.