Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since illegals are so contributory and so well-off, they need no access to food stamps, free medical, or any other social welfare program, correct?

What law can you, an American citizen break, a not be held accountable for? And better yet, be rewarded for?

Massive Banking fraud. Shooting a black kid.

We jail bankers. And yes, all black kids are innocent. Lolol

Just curious: why couldn't there be an executive order decreeing that half the country no longer has to pay taxes? What are the limits? And executive orders can just be repealed by another pres. Not like there will ever be another Republican president again, though,what with the electoral college and all.

Anonymous wrote:Since illegals are so contributory and so well-off, they need no access to food stamps, free medical, or any other social welfare program, correct?

What law can you, an American citizen break, a not be held accountable for? And better yet, be rewarded for?

Massive Banking fraud. Shooting a black kid.

Since illegals are so contributory and so well-off, they need no access to food stamps, free medical, or any other social welfare program, correct?

What law can you, an American citizen break, a not be held accountable for? And better yet, be rewarded for?

Anonymous wrote:

Re:Establishment Republican's Reason for Opposing Immigration EO

We are a nation of laws.

and if you break our laws we will reward you with the most coveted nations' citizenship in the world!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

...the administration has started counting certain “returns” as “removals” in order to artificially inflate the numbers and create a “record level” of deportations. Specifically, those illegals caught by the Border Patrol who are shuttled to a different town along the border before they’re returned are being dishonestly counted as deportations. The point of this Alien Transfer Exit Program (ATEP) is to disrupt smuggling networks and make it harder to just keep crossing until you get through. But they’re still just returns, without any “administrative or criminal consequences placed on subsequent reentry.” This has falsely increased the number of total removals by more than 100,000 in the past two years. Smith noted, “When the numbers from this Border Patrol program are removed from this year’s deportation data, it shows that removals are actually down nearly 20% from 2009.”

This is not just a case of spin or fudging or “political lying,” as VDH describes it below. This is pure fabrication. And, naturally, the MSM fall for it.

If you're going to quote something, it would really help to know the source so we can make a judgment on the credibility of the information quoted. For example, a line like "And, naturally, the MSM fall for it" indicates that perhaps - just maybe - this quote might be from a source that's a wee bit biased.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316080/it-depends-what-meaning-br-deportations-mark-krikorian

This is the ATEP program that was started under Bush in 2008.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

...the administration has started counting certain “returns” as “removals” in order to artificially inflate the numbers and create a “record level” of deportations. Specifically, those illegals caught by the Border Patrol who are shuttled to a different town along the border before they’re returned are being dishonestly counted as deportations. The point of this Alien Transfer Exit Program (ATEP) is to disrupt smuggling networks and make it harder to just keep crossing until you get through. But they’re still just returns, without any “administrative or criminal consequences placed on subsequent reentry.” This has falsely increased the number of total removals by more than 100,000 in the past two years. Smith noted, “When the numbers from this Border Patrol program are removed from this year’s deportation data, it shows that removals are actually down nearly 20% from 2009.”

This is not just a case of spin or fudging or “political lying,” as VDH describes it below. This is pure fabrication. And, naturally, the MSM fall for it.

If you're going to quote something, it would really help to know the source so we can make a judgment on the credibility of the information quoted. For example, a line like "And, naturally, the MSM fall for it" indicates that perhaps - just maybe - this quote might be from a source that's a wee bit biased.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/316080/it-depends-what-meaning-br-deportations-mark-krikorian

Anonymous wrote:We are a welfare state with open borders. We are broke. It's insane and suicidal.

So if it's all about economics, then it should be relatively easy to evaluate what the least costly solution is. According to this CNN article (http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/01/news/economy/immigration_economy/index.htm) the US benefits from the presence of illegal immigrants. If it's better for the economy to have them here, then that ought to end the question, but let's dig into the analysis a little.

Maryland currently has about 275,000 illegal immigrants (or at least it did in 2013 - see http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2013/02/map_illegal_immigrant_population_by_state.html), at an estimated cost to Maryland of $1.4 billion per year in education, medical care and incarceration (or roughly $5100 per illegal immigrant), according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform. Extrapolating roughly, this means 11 million illegal immigrants would cost U.S. taxpayers about $56.1 billion per year.

However, this ignores the fact that illegal immigrants pay sales tax when they purchase goods. According to Tax Foundation, in the period 2007-2011 the average person in Maryland paid $671 in sales taxes (see http://taxfoundation.org/article/state-general-sales-tax-collections-capita-fiscal-years-2007-2011). Assuming there are 275,000 illegal immigrants in Maryland, that would be $184.5 million per year going into Maryland's coffers, reducing the annual cost to Maryland to more like $1.2 billion per year (or $4,363 per illegal immigrant).

According to the Center for American Progress, locating, processing and deporting 11 million illegal immigrants would require a government task force at a taxpayer cost of $285 billion (or $25,000 per deportee). One of the major expenses would be finding them. However, the CAP is a left-leaning group, so they have an incentive to make this number high, so let's assume it's actually 20% lower and only $228 billion (or $20,000 per deportee).

So, it would cost the same as roughly 3.5-4 years worth of services to deport them. At that breakpoint, it probably makes sense to make the effort to deport them. (Even assuming the CAP's number is correct, that would be roughly 5 years of services, and it probably still would make sense.)

But that still underestimates the contribution illegal immigrants make to the economy. An estimated 30 percent own homes and therefore pay property taxes, and some huge percentage rent apartments (after all, they have to live somewhere), therefore paying property taxes via rental payments. Among other things, those property taxes fund the public education of their own children and the children of other legal residents of the state. Similarly, those illegal immigrants who are employed have taxes deducted from their wages - social security, unemployment, etc. - and they also pay income taxes.

Some might claim that illegal immigrants take jobs from US workers (which is one of the possibilities noted in the CNN article linked above), but, according to FactCheck.org, numerous studies by the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, the libertarian Cato Institute, the liberal Economic Policy Institute, and the White House under President George W. Bush all concluded that the addition of low-skilled immigrants expands the size of the overall economy creating more job opportunities for everyone, including more higher-wage opportunities for managers.

So, at this point, it's unclear whether it would cost more to deport illegal immigrants than it does to have them stay here.

Making it a little more complicated, according to the Pew Center, approximately 4 million of the illegal immigrants have children. Assuming 2 children per family, that means between 4 million and 8 million children, many of whom were born here and are, therefore, US citizens. We would either need to deport them, too, which would be an interesting and expensive legal exercise since they are citizens, or the government and/or social services would have to pick up the care for another 4-8 million children. That's an expensive proposition, and one that probably has significant social consequences. According to the Foster Care Alumni Association, it costs the Federal and state governments roughly $40,000 per year for a foster child.

So if it would cost $228 billion to deport 11 million, by extrapolation it would cost between $362 billion and $466 billion to deport the children, as well. This is almost certainly high, since there would be efficiencies associated with finding the children along with the parents, but there would also be the legal costs associated with the government attempting to kick a US citizen out of the country, so those might be offset.

If all of the children didn't go with the parents (unlikely, since not all of them are citizens), then there would be an additional roughly $160 billion to $320 billion per year in foster care costs for the children. So let's assume that half of them are citizens. That would be $80 billion to $160 billion per year, which, by itself, is far more than the unadjusted annual cost of having 11 million illegal immigrants here (without taking into account the economic benefits). Even assuming 10% of the children stayed, that would still be between $800 million and $1.6 billion per year that the government would have to pay to care for children who are legal citizens of the U.S.

So, assuming the cost of keeping the parents here plus the economic benefits to the US is a wash against the cost of finding and deporting them, the cost of dealing with the children of illegal immigrants who are themselves legal citizens of the US and entitled to stay here pushes the equation way over to the side that it's cheaper to keep them here.

But, hey, who would expect the party of business to be interested in a cost benefit analysis?

Anonymous wrote:

...the administration has started counting certain “returns” as “removals” in order to artificially inflate the numbers and create a “record level” of deportations. Specifically, those illegals caught by the Border Patrol who are shuttled to a different town along the border before they’re returned are being dishonestly counted as deportations. The point of this Alien Transfer Exit Program (ATEP) is to disrupt smuggling networks and make it harder to just keep crossing until you get through. But they’re still just returns, without any “administrative or criminal consequences placed on subsequent reentry.” This has falsely increased the number of total removals by more than 100,000 in the past two years. Smith noted, “When the numbers from this Border Patrol program are removed from this year’s deportation data, it shows that removals are actually down nearly 20% from 2009.”

This is not just a case of spin or fudging or “political lying,” as VDH describes it below. This is pure fabrication. And, naturally, the MSM fall for it.

If you're going to quote something, it would really help to know the source so we can make a judgment on the credibility of the information quoted. For example, a line like "And, naturally, the MSM fall for it" indicates that perhaps - just maybe - this quote might be from a source that's a wee bit biased.

Anonymous wrote:

What exactly did the Immigration Control & Reform act of 1986 do again

And, it was an ACT--not an executive order.

And, being an act, it was voted on by Congress. Wow. Imagine that.

Re:Establishment Republican's Reason for Opposing Immigration EO

We are a nation of laws.

What exactly did the Immigration Control & Reform act of 1986 do again

And, it was an ACT--not an executive order.

Anonymous wrote:What exactly did the Immigration Control & Reform act of 1986 do again? Remind me who President?

Answers: 1 Amnesty 2 Regean

And, as part of the act, remind me which part of the act was not enacted???

CLOSING/STRENGTHENING OUR BORDER CONTROL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When Americans break the law, they go to jail. When illegal immigrants break the law, they get free stuff. Meanwhile, our veterans have dropped dead waiting.

Sounds fair ....

Exactly. This “establishment Republican” doesn’t want Obama to issue an EO because:
1. I believe it is unconstitutional. He and his administration are already on thin ice NOT enforcing immigration laws. You know, that old promise to “faithfully execute the laws” and stuff.
2. It will send a message to others thinking about entering illegally that everything is fine - just do it.
3. Entering illegally is a crime. We have enough home grown criminals.
4. Unemployment is still high, despite what the administration says. We don’t need more people coming to take jobs.

Obama is using this as a political issue. You know.... rally his base and everything.

Obama has deported more people than either Bush. The administration was aggressively fining employer who illegally employed illegal immigrants, that is until the Republicans and big businesses pushed back. The Chamber of Commerce is all for raising the number of non-US citizens being allowed into the country to take Tech jobs, which is why they are for the EO.

I am sure that you also believe that if you liked your doctor, you could keep him, or if you liked your plan you could keep it.
His deportations are based on contrived numbers.

...the administration has started counting certain “returns” as “removals” in order to artificially inflate the numbers and create a “record level” of deportations. Specifically, those illegals caught by the Border Patrol who are shuttled to a different town along the border before they’re returned are being dishonestly counted as deportations. The point of this Alien Transfer Exit Program (ATEP) is to disrupt smuggling networks and make it harder to just keep crossing until you get through. But they’re still just returns, without any “administrative or criminal consequences placed on subsequent reentry.” This has falsely increased the number of total removals by more than 100,000 in the past two years. Smith noted, “When the numbers from this Border Patrol program are removed from this year’s deportation data, it shows that removals are actually down nearly 20% from 2009.”

This is not just a case of spin or fudging or “political lying,” as VDH describes it below. This is pure fabrication. And, naturally, the MSM fall for it.

What exactly did the Immigration Control & Reform act of 1986 do again? Remind me who President?

Answers: 1 Amnesty 2 Regean