Arizona Prop 200 - No bennies to illegal aliens

[Hyperelastic]

@even sven

Pretty much. Most immigrants- legal or not- are very family oriented people who are here to WORK and make a better life for their kids…pretty much the American dream. They form a pretty essential part of our economy that really can’t just be removed at this point. The big drawbacks is that the undocumented workers lose some protections that legal workers get and the government loses some money in social services (although not so much in taxes- illegal immigrants largely
pay their taxes). Even with these problems, both sides of the equation come out ahead.

There are three sides: illegal immigrants, those with a legal right to work in the U.S. and employers. Illegal immigration benefits immigrants and employers but hurts legal residents. It doesn’t take a genius to see why. Furthermore, since legal residents are an overwhelming majority of the population (for now), the overall effect on the economy is negative, as documented
here and in many other studies.

Illegal aliens are not an essential part of our economy. Our economy was doing just fine before illegal immigration - the lettuce got picked, the houses got built, the floors got swept, etc. The difference is, you used to be able to make a living doing those things, and now you can’t. Tolerance of illegal immigration is essentially a welfare program for foreigners, paid for by American taxpayers and depressed American wages.

On the subject of whether illegal aliens are entitled to Social Security: Not yet, but if the Bush Administration has its way, they soon will. Illegal Mexican aliens who used counterfeit social security cards will be given social security benefits as if they had earned them legally. Americans who do that don’t get social security - they get sent to jail for fraud.

[Hyperelastic]

@Eva Luna

We can’t even get the people whose job it is to understand immigraiton laws to know what they are talking about half the time, so now we are supposed to get government bureaucrats in all sorts of unrelated fields to understand immigration laws? Not to mention innocent bystanders like emergency services employees?

The problem is not ignorance of the law, it is willful defiance of the law.

Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

“Any person who . . . encourages or induces an illegal alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each illegal alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”

It couldn’t be much simpler. Yet many big cities prohibit their employees from cooperating with federal authorities in finding and deporting illegal aliens. Plus, cities and businesses accept the “Matricula Consular”, which is prima facie evidence that the holder is an illegal alien from Mexico.

Is common-sense enforcement of a common-sense law too much to ask?

[capacitor]

Hyperelastic, you have to consider that Latinos are currently the largest minority. The immigration laws fall mostly on Latinos. Bush won the election with a huge help from citizen Latinos, many of them relatives to aliens. Guess which laws he won’t enforce as vigorously?

[Ottenok]

@Hyperelastic

Illegal aliens are not an essential part of our economy. Our economy was doing just fine before illegal immigration - the lettuce got picked, the houses got built, the floors got swept, etc. The difference is, you used to be able to make a living doing those things, and now you can’t. Tolerance of illegal immigration is essentially a welfare program for foreigners, paid for by American taxpayers and depressed American wages.

I’m assuming that “The Castle of Arrrrrr” isn’t in central California. One important thing you left out is that reduced labor costs for farmers = lower prices on things like, you know, food.

But that aside, you are correct, tolerance of illegal immigration is essentially a welfare program fore foreigners… if by “welfare” you mean “job” and “foreigners” you mean “Mexicans”. It is also true that they take much of that money home with them after the harvest to their families in Mexico.

However, instead of being typical and taking a pro/con stance, I’m going to go out on a branch and promote an aggressive anti-immigration stance. Make working conditions and wages in Mexico, and along with them standard of living, better.

Problem with this, many would instantly point out, is that they are then put into competition with us. My response to that is, “yes, yes it does.” I don’t know what makes people think that Mexico (and the other immigrant countries) should be inferior to America. (Western) Europeans seem to get along pretty well being neighbors.

The tricky thing with immigration is that it has a big effect on the economy. In your original statement, you make the case that “the lettuce got picked, the houses got built, the floors got swept, etc. The difference is, you used to be able to make a living doing those things, and now you can’t.” Oh, yes, the lettuce will still get picked, and the houses built, and the floors swept… but it will cost a helluva lot more to pick that lettuce and build those houses and sweep those floors, and that price goes right on to the consumer.

Hell, America sucks the wealth out of other countries by exploiting their weak labor legislation and horrid work conditions daily without batting an eye, and we get all uppity when someone makes a buck off our harvest.

Then you give the good little Mexican/Puerto Rican/Cuban/whatever boy a dollar as long as he keeps his mouth shut, right?

[Typo_Negative]

@bnorton

I’m sure they pay their sales and gas taxes - anything that’s collected at the cash register, but what about income taxes and all that other stuff that normally comes out of your paycheck? How would that even work?

I’m told that in the past many illegals would provide phony SSN’s to employers. Payroll deductions would be made normally and the tax money would be on it’s merry way to the goverment.

[manhattan]

@capacitor

Hyperelastic, you have to consider that Latinos are currently the largest minority. The immigration laws fall mostly on Latinos. Bush won the election with a huge help from citizen Latinos, many of them relatives to aliens. Guess which laws he won’t enforce as vigorously?

And you have to consider that this thread is exclusively about state law, not federal. And you have to consider that the recent budget passed and which will be signed by the president provides for the largest increase in the border patrol in history, something which most Latinos oppose. And you have to consider that whilst Republicans generally and President Bush specifically have been winning an increasing share of the Latino vote recently, a majority of Latinos still voted for Senator Kerry. And given all that, I think you have to consider that you don’t have the faintest fucking idea what you’re talking about.

[lel]

Here’s the full text on Prop 200.

First, there are explicit statements that Prop 200 does not conflict with federal law regarding illegal immigrant benefits. In that case, what benefits are restricted to illegal immigrants? It seems that K-12 education and emergency health care are exempt by federal law.

Remember too that deporting illegal immigrants also seems more of a big deal in Arizona. There are frequent stories (well, at least 1-2 a year that I can recall, and I all too often forget to keep up with news) of (immigration officials? law enforcement?) trying to target areas around town to identify and deport illegal immigrants.

(By the way, when referring to a ballot initiative passed by a majority of voters in a state, is it simply a common referent to state that it is the “will of the people of Arizona” (Bricker quote)? If not, would it be perhaps more accurate to state “the will of the majority of Arizona voters”? I am a resident of Arizona, but Proposition 200 does not reflect my will.)

[Eva_Luna]

@Machetero

Eva Luna,

Do you know if illegal aliens can recieve any type of Federal Social Security benefits?

I don’t usually deal with that side of the equation, but I’m guessing no - how would they show eligbility? It’s not like they’d simply show theyir SS card - I’m sure the verification is a tad more intensive than that.

There is one exception, though - a friend who used to do labor law for migrant workers told me that if someone later legalizes, they can be credited for SS contributions already made, even those under other identities, if they can prove that they were the ones who actually made the contributions. That may have changed since she was practicing in that area, though - who knows?

[Eva_Luna]

@Hyperelastic

The problem is not ignorance of the law, it is willful defiance of the law.

cities and businesses accept the “Matricula Consular”, which is prima facie evidence that the holder is an illegal alien from Mexico.

I have to run off to work right now, so I’ll have to deal with the rest of your post later tonight. But the only thing of which the matricula consular is prima facie evidence is that the holder is a Mexican citizen, and his/her identity. Mexicans are not required to have passports to travel to the U.S., and there is no requirement for them to have a driver’s license or state I.D., so they need to be able to use something for I.D., no?

[Hyperelastic]

@capacitor

Hyperelastic, you have to consider that Latinos are currently the largest minority. The immigration laws fall mostly on Latinos. Bush won the election with a huge help from citizen Latinos, many of them relatives to aliens. Guess which laws he won’t enforce as vigorously?

I know Bush is pro-Mexican immigration, but it has nothing to do with Latinos voting for him. He lost the Hispanic vote 60-40, about the same as last time. And he only got 40% because the number of Cuban-American Democrats can be counted on one hand.

Bush, who is living proof that a high-functioning moron can get elected president, is also fooling himself if he thinks expanding immigration is going to please legal resident Hispanics. About half voted for the “dreaded” Prop 200. You know how many Hispanic voters rank immigration as the most important or second most important issue? 9%. 30% of Hispanics in California think immigration should be shut down completely. 75% of California Latinos think illegal Mexican immigration is a problem. Why is this? It’s because illegal immigrants are taking blue-collar jobs that legal Mexican-Americans traditionally hold. Most white liberals either don’t see it, because they work in offices, or refuse to see it, because they secretly despise the American way of life and want mass immigration to destroy it.

The reason Bush won’t enforce the immigration laws is that illegal immigrant labor pays for his CEO cronies’ mansions.

[Hyperelastic]

@Eva Luna

I have to run off to work right now, so I’ll have to deal with the rest of your post later tonight. But the only thing of which the matricula consular is prima facie evidence is that the holder is a Mexican citizen, and his/her identity. Mexicans are not required to have passports to travel to the U.S., and there is no requirement for them to have a driver’s license or state I.D., so they need to be able to use something for I.D., no?

No, because if they are legal residents, they can get a driver’s license or state ID. What kind of dingaling would mess around with a matricula consular if he could get a bona fide driver’s license? Even most Mexican state governments and banks don’t accept the matricula consular.

Also, Mexicans most certainly do need a passport and valid visa to enter the United States. That was one reason the Mexican government came up with the idea of using the matricular consular as an identity document for illegals - the alternative would be a passport with no visa, which will get you deported.

[cowgirl]

@Hyperelastic

Our economy was doing just fine before illegal immigration - the lettuce got picked, the houses got built, the floors got swept, etc. The difference is, you used to be able to make a living doing those things, and now you can’t.

No, the difference is, the ‘immigration’ back then was legalized slavery. There have been undocumented people in America for as long as there’s been America.

[JohnBckWLD]

@cowgirl

No, the difference is, the ‘immigration’ back then was legalized slavery…

Your comparing black Africans that were dragged here in chains and sold @ auction with people who voluntarily went to CA to pick grapes?

[Hyperelastic]

@cowgirl

No, the difference is, the ‘immigration’ back then was legalized slavery. There have been undocumented people in America for as long as there’s been America.

I’m talking about 1960, not 1860. If you think white people have never done jobs like that, no wonder you’re pro-immigrant.

[even_sven]

@Hyperelastic

Most white liberals either don’t see it, because they work in offices, or refuse to see it, because they secretly despise the American way of life and want mass immigration to destroy it.

Yeah, thats it. White liberals are fighting for a bunch of highly religious family-oriented people with very traditional views on sex and gender and an old fashioned work ethic as part of our plot to destory the American way of life…uhhh…

Heh, I better get back to my office now.

I think you need to work on your theory.

[Hyperelastic]

@even sven

Yeah, thats it. White liberals are fighting for a bunch of highly religious family-oriented people with very traditional views on sex and gender and an old fashioned work ethic as part of our plot to destory the American way of life.

Are you opening the door to making sweeping generalizations about an ethnic group? Because if you are, I can offer a few sweeping generalizations of my own that I’m sure you’ll love.

Of course immigrants hold traditional views. The problem is, it’s their tradition, not ours. Or do you believe that people are really all the same, so all cultural conflicts are easily solvable?

[even_sven]

@Hyperelastic

Are you opening the door to making sweeping generalizations about an ethnic group? Because if you are, I can offer a few sweeping generalizations of my own that I’m sure you’ll love.

Of course immigrants hold traditional views. The problem is, it’s their tradition, not ours. Or do you believe that people are really all the same, so all cultural conflicts are easily solvable?

I’m saying that Mexican culture, in general, is pretty similar to the “values” culture so many conservatives espouse. Their “traditions” are “different” in the sense that their skin is dark- which is to say that the fear regarding the “destruction of Western culture” by Mexican immigration is nothing more than a particularly poorly thought-out excuse for pure unadultured ugly racism.

If liberals were trying to undermine the American way of life, they’d invite a bunch of Scandanavians or something to destroy our family, religious and economic system. It is a totally absurd notion that people who for the most part speak a Latin language, pactice a Europe-based religion, value the very same family and gender and sexual roles that so many conservatives advocate (for example, Mexican-Americans have extremely low divorce rates) and who came here specifically to embrace our economic system are somehow a “non-western” threat to our culture.

There are economic concerns for sure, but to the notion that liberals are trying to destroy America with Mexicans is laughable if you can ignore the fact that it’s actually just cheap racism with a random potshot at liberals thrown in.

[Eva_Luna]

@Hyperelastic

Also, Mexicans most certainly do need a passport and valid visa to enter the United States. That was one reason the Mexican government came up with the idea of using the matricular consular as an identity document for illegals - the alternative would be a passport with no visa, which will get you deported.

You missed part of your own cite, although admittedly it’s not written very clearly.

From your link, Mexicans need a “Valid Mexican passport with valid U.S. entry visa or Border Crossing Card Form I-586 or Form I-186.”

That would be clearer as:

a) Valid Mexican passport with valid U.S. entry visa, or b) Border Crossing Card (Form I-586), or c) Form I-186.

Alternative cite, from the horse’s mouth (Customs and Border Protection):

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/id_visa/req_canada_mexico.xml

“In general, a citizen of Mexico must have a passport and nonimmigrant visa or Form DSP-150 (also known as a “Laser Visa”). Form DSP-150 is a biometric, machine readable, B1-B2 Visa/border crossing card that may be used to enter the United States from within the Western Hemisphere. If coming from outside the Western Hemisphere, a passport is required.”

So no, a passport is not necessarily required for Mexican citizens to enter the U.S.

[Eva_Luna]

@Hyperelastic

No, because if they are legal residents, they can get a driver’s license or state ID. What kind of dingaling would mess around with a matricula consular if he could get a bona fide driver’s license? Even most Mexican state governments and banks don’t accept the matricula consular.

A dingaling who lives in a state which refuses to issue state IDs or driver’s licenses even to people legally present in the U.S. who are not eligible for Social Security numbers, as my own state of Illinois did until recently.

Social Security numbers are only issued to people authorized to work in the U.S., and dependents of people in the U.S. on work visas are lawfully present, but not authorized to work, so they can’t get SS numbers. That’s just one example, which I already mentioned above. Let me dig up some cites…

[CBEscapee]

@Hyperelastic

the “Matricula Consular”, which is prima facie evidence that the holder is an illegal alien from Mexico.
No, because if they are legal residents, they can get a driver’s license or state ID. What kind of dingaling would mess around with a matricula consular if he could get a bona fide driver’s license? Even most Mexican state governments and banks don’t accept the matricula consular.

Also, Mexicans most certainly do need a passport and valid visa to enter the United States. That was one reason the Mexican government came up with the idea of using the matricular consular as an identity document for illegals - the alternative would be a passport with no visa, which will get you deported.

How interesting! My wife, who never spent one second in the USA illegally and has been a legal Resident Alien for over 20 years also has a Matricula Consular. When she leaves Mexico to return to the US she uses it in lieu of a Mexican passport when checking in at the airport.