Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

AZ immigration twitter feed

By Emi Kolawole  |  July 6, 2010; 7:52 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sen. Russ Feingold, in a close race, portrays himself as outsider
Next: Alvin Greene suggests making dolls of himself

Comments

There is an important piece of the conversation that the liberal media REFUSES to discuss: employer-related ID theft by illegals. Illegals steal someone else's Social Security number to gain employment. The victim is then on the hook for unpaid taxes. And that's probably the least of his/her worries. The illegal will use the SSN to establish credit. My intern had $500,000 in damages on her credit report caused by an illegal who stole her SSN and is living in the sanctuary state of California. California turned my intern over to a collections agency to collect back taxes; my intern had never lived in Calfornia. She had to send copies of her Arizona tax returns, her college records, etc. to prove she was an ARIZONA resident and paid taxes here (it's okay to force my American-born intern to prove she was a legal resident of Arizona, but it's racist to ask a suspected illegal immigrant to prove he/she is a legal resident?). After my intern provided the neccesary documentation, law enforcement in California refused to help her file a compalint against the illegal who had victimized her.

But it's not just California who says my intern was not a victim of ID theft. In 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a federal identity-theft law may not be used against many illegal workers who used stolen Social Security numbers to get jobs. The Court ruled that workers who use fake identification numbers to commit some other crimes must know they belong to a real person to be subject to a two-year sentence extension for “aggravated identity theft.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/us/05immig.html

Huh? Does that mean I can steal a car if I don't know that the car belongs to a real person? It's the same logic. What if a tweaker steals my SSN and wrecks my credit? Do we throw out all prosecutions of ID theft based upon whether the criminal knew the victim?

Yes, the U.S. government is complicit in the victimization of thousands of Americans. The failed federal immigration policies have allowed this, and the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed that it's okay for illegal immigrants to steal people's SSNs and wreck their credit (and defraud financial institutions, and state, local and federal governments of tax revenue).

And the illegal who stole my intern's SSN knew there was a real victim--she is using the intern's first name, a very uncommon name.

Posted by: pepperjade | July 8, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

I watched the Grapes of Wrath last night and was surprised to see that there were checkpoints at each state heading west from Oklahoma to California and that Arizona had the most aggressive police crossing. I have always thought of Arizona as an easy breezy wide-open beautiful space and enjoy working and traveling there.

Posted by: jamesdaddio | July 7, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

The following is part of a Fair Report.Read what the Post won't Print.
Year, Study Finds
By Ed Barnes
Published July 06, 2010
| FoxNews.com
The cost of harboring illegal immigrants in the United States is a staggering $113 billion a year -- an average of $1,117 for every “native-headed” household in America -- according to a study conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).
FAIR's report argues that there are two choices in the immigration debate: “One choice is pursuing a strategy that discourages future illegal migration and increasingly diminishes the current illegal alien population through denial of job opportunities and deportations. The other choice,” it says, “would repeat the unfortunate decision made in 1986 to adopt an amnesty that invited continued illegal migration.”
FAIR's report argues that there are two choices in the immigration debate: “One choice is pursuing a strategy that discourages future illegal migration and increasingly diminishes the current illegal alien population through denial of job opportunities and deportations. The other choice,” it says, “would repeat the unfortunate decision made in 1986 to adopt an amnesty that invited continued illegal migration.”
Moreover, the study’s breakdown of costs on a state-by-state basis shows that in states with the largest number of illegals, the costs of illegal immigration are often greater than current, crippling budget deficits. In Texas, for example, the additional cost of immigration, $16.4 billion, is equal to the state’s current budget deficit; in California the additional cost of illegal immigration, $21.8 billion, is $8 billion more than the state’s current budget deficit of $13.8 billion; and in New York, the $6.8 billion deficit is roughly two-thirds the $9.5 billion yearly cost of its illegal population, according to Jack Martin, the researcher who completed the study.
The report found that the federal government paid $28.6 billion in illegal related costs, and state and local governments paid $84.2 billion on an estimated 13 million undocumented residents. In his speech, Obama estimated that there are 11 million.

Posted by: SaginawJim | July 7, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Go Arizona! Most of us get where you are coming from. Thanks for being proactive in dealing with this foot dragging administration. We are being held hostage by the fed. gov't., who will not allow any movement against illegals, unless, and until, their comprehensive package is approved. Then, by gosh, we'll make them sorry they(illegals) ever came here. We'll make them admit they are, indeed,illegal, and fine them a pittance, then make them proud citizens. America, if we do this, we are either niave or just plain nuts?

Posted by: roanns | July 7, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company