Citizens in Houston have announced a petition drive to put a measure on the ballot ending the de facto sanctuary policy for illegal immigrants.

The heated national debate on immigration may give a boost to the Houston group that wants local police to help crack down on illegal immigrants, but getting the proposition on the ballot still won't be easy.

"It is a lot of effort and takes a lot of volunteers to mount a campaign like this," said Bruce Hotze, who has helped organize several successful petition drives but so far is not involved in this one. "It can be done."

On Tuesday, a new group called Protect Our Citizens announced a petition drive to require a citywide November vote on the contentious issue of whether to allow city police to question people about their immigration status.

Even with the recent spotlight on immigration issues, getting the necessary 20,000 signatures from registered Houston voters by Sept. 1 will take organization, volunteers and money, analysts said.

"It's doable," said University of Houston political scientist and pollster Richard Murray. "They'd have to hit the ground running."

Protect Our Citizens director Mary Williams said the group is doing that. It was contacted Wednesday by several community leaders and residents who wanted to help with the project, she said.

"It's a very basic grass-roots type of reaction," Williams said.

Petition supporters want to change a Houston police order, which they call a "sanctuary policy," that prohibits officers from seeking information about the immigration status of people they encounter, and from detaining anyone solely for being in the country illegally.

It is time to pull up the welcome mat for illegals in Houston.

Posted by: Greg at 11:13 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, at least one GOP presidential hopeful is willing to step up and try to do something about illegal immigration. That candidate is Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.

Governor Mitt Romney is seeking an agreement with federal authorities that would allow Massachusetts state troopers to arrest undocumented immigrants for being in the country illegally.

Currently, State Police have no authority to arrest people on the basis of their immigration status alone, said Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom. If they arrest immigrants for violations of state law, troopers can call a centralized US Immigration and Customs Enforcement center in Vermont to check on their status, and can detain immigrants if federal officials request it.

Under the agreement Romney is seeking, troopers would have greatly expanded powers: They could check an immigrant's legal status during routine patrols such as during a traffic stop and decide whether the immigrant should be held.

``It's one more thing you can do to make this a less attractive place for illegal aliens to come to work," Romney said.

The governor has instructed his legal counsel to contact Immigration and Customs Enforcement to begin the process. The powers, Romney said, would give the State Police a way of ``finding and detaining illegal aliens in the ordinary course of business."

Federal immigration authorities would provide the troopers with 4 1/2 weeks of training in immigration laws and procedures, civil rights, and avoiding racial profiling.

If the proposal is approved, Massachusetts would join a handful of states and localities that have entered into such pacts since they were first authorized in 1996. That list includes Florida, Alabama, and a few counties in California and North Carolina, where a limited number of officers have been trained to enforce immigration laws.

This move is an exemplary one – and I encourage my own governor, Rick Perry, to implement the same policy here in Texas.

Posted by: Greg at 08:55 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 321 words, total size 2 kb.

It looks like there will be no immigration reform before the election in November.

In a defeat for President Bush, Republican congressional leaders said Tuesday that broad immigration legislation is all but doomed for the year, a victim of election-year concerns in the House and conservatives' implacable opposition to citizenship for

"Our number one priority is to secure the border, and right now I haven't heard a lot of pressure to have a path to citizenship," said Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., announcing plans for an unusual series of hearings to begin in August on Senate-passed immigration legislation.

"I think it is easy to say the first priority of the House is to secure the borders," added Rep. Roy Blunt (news, bio, voting record), the GOP whip.

This isn't a defeat for the president so much as it is a defeat for the American people, as every delay in getting a handle on the immigration issue allows that many more illegals across teh border, that many more anchor babies to be born, and increases teh expense to taxpayers.

Not that Hastert's rhetoric is wrong -- we need immigration reform that actually considers what the American people want.

"We are going to listen to the American people, and we are going to get a bill that is right," said Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, who said he had informed Mr. Bush of the plan.

But what that means is that the negotiations for a new bill will not begin until after Labor Day -- making the volatile issue a bit too hot to handle in the weeks leading up to the election, with all sides engaging in rhetorical excesses in an attempt to get votes rather than make good policy. We are already seeing some of that now.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino sought to put the House announcement in a positive light, saying the field hearings could "possibly provide an opportunity to air out issues" that she conceded are "complex." But she added: "The president is undeterred in his efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform."

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who is leading the fight against the Senate plan, said: "Odds were long that any so-called 'compromise bill' would get to the president's desk this year. . . . The nail was already put in the coffin of the Senate's amnesty plan. These hearings probably lowered it into the grave."

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), one of the main authors of the Senate plan, called the announcement "a cynical delaying tactic."

So expect immigration to be a major issue in the fall elections, but do not expect there to be any significant results until 2007 -- which means that GOP efforts to retain control of thehouse and Senate are vital if there is any hope of avoiding a bill with real amnesty provisions and little in the way of border control.

Posted by: Greg at 11:18 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 484 words, total size 3 kb.

Georgia's tough new laws related to illegal immigration is apparantly stopping some border jumpers from buying houses in the state.

wo months ago, all Alina Arguello had to do to find Latino home buyers was put up a sign and answer her phone.

But ever since Georgia passed one of the most stringent and far-reaching immigration laws in the nation, the number of Latino buyers who call the Re/Max agent's home office in suburban Atlanta has dwindled from about 10 to two a day.

"We're seeing a drastic drop," she said. "There's just a tremendous amount of people who want homes, but are not calling." Many real estate agents and mortgage providers who cater to Spanish-speaking immigrants across Georgia say that the flourishing Latino home buying market has faltered since April, when Gov. Sonny Perdue signed the Georgia Security and Immigration Compliance Act.

Almost immediately, Latino home buyers pulled out of contracts. Some who had already bought, put their homes on the market. And many prospective buyers stopped searching for homes.

Although Georgia's new legislation does not prohibit illegal immigrants from owning property, many wonder whether they will want to live in Georgia when it begins to come into effect in July 2007.

The law will require companies with state contracts to verify employees' immigration status, penalize employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, curtail many government benefits to illegal immigrants and require that jailers check the immigration status of anyone who is charged with a felony or driving under the influence.

Oh dear -- requirements that workers be here legally, that companies not break the law by hiring illegals, cutting off the financial incentive to settle in the state, and requiring that immigration criminals arrested for serious crimes be identified (and presumably reported to immigration authorities). How could the state of Georgia possibly enact such an unreasonable law!

There is a chill wind blowing here in America among the average ordinary people. We want those who violate our laws and disrespect our sovereignty OUT OF THE USA. So to all border jumpers who don't like the vlimate change, i suggest taking up residence in your homelands.

Posted by: Greg at 06:35 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 370 words, total size 2 kb.

These people have broken our nation's laws. Why the sympathetic portrayal by the media when law enforcement tries o do something about it?

SAN DIEGO - Fewer parents are walking their children to school in this border city's Linda Vista neighborhood. The crowd of day laborers huddled in a parking lot outside McDonald's has dropped by half.

A sense of unease has spread in this community of weather-worn homes since immigration agents began walking the streets as part of a stepped-up nationwide effort targeting an estimated 590,000 immigrant fugitives. Other illegal immigrants are being rounded up along the way.

Juana Osorio, an illegal immigrant from the Mexican state of Oaxaca, said her neighbors have largely stayed indoors since agents visited her apartment complex June 2.

"People rarely leave their houses now to go shopping," Osorio, 37, said as she clutched a bottle of laundry detergent in a barren courtyard. "They walk in fear."

Her husband, Juan Rivera, 29, has stopped taking their two children to the park on weekends. "We want to go out but we can't," said Rivera, a construction worker.

In a blitz that began May 26 and ended Tuesday, federal agents arrested nearly 2,200 illegal immigrants, including about 400 in the San Diego area — more than any other city.

Now wait just one minute. These people have an option -- go back to Mexico (or where ever they came from -- but in most cases that is Mexico). Apply to come to this country legally. Quit breaking American law.

And if you cannot bring yourself to do that, be afraid -- very afraid.

Posted by: Greg at 10:39 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.

I used all those zeros intentionally -- and that is only the money spent by the Harris County Hospital District directly out of local funds.

KTRH has learned the Harris County Hospital District is shelling out millions of dollars every year to treat people who are here in this country illegally.

When you subtract what patients paid for hospital district services, and money from federal grants and other sources, $97.3 million dollars is what the local property taxpayer subsidized the district budget for undocumented immigrant care in 2005. That's 14 percent of the entire hospital system's operating budget.

You did read that correctly -- unreimbursed medical costs for these sovereignty-violating foreigners are 14% of the annual budget for the entire hospital system. Put differently, that makes it $1 out of ever $7 spent by the hospital district -- or over $25 for each man, woman and child in the county.

But it gets worse. The state and federal governments reimburse an additional $28,000,000. That takes it up to over $125,000,000 in government subsidized medical care for those who have entered this country illegally or stayed past the expiration of their visas. That raises the cost to over $33 per Harris COunty resident.

The Harris County Hospital District's unreimbursed costs of caring for illegal immigrants approached $100 million last year, a 77 percent increase in three years.

"The costs are increasing because the population of undocumented immigrants is increasing and the cost of health care is rising," said hospital district spokesman Bryan McLeod.

The unreimbursed costs rose from $55 million in 2002 to $97 million in 2005, the hospital district said in a report released Friday. Last year's figure represented 13 percent of the district's $760 million operating budget.

The district treats about 300,000 patients annually, but lacks enough funds and facilities to care for all of the county's uninsured and underinsured residents, estimated to number between 800,000 and 1.2 million, McLeod said.

Commissioner Steve Radack, who requested the report on the district's costs of treating undocumented immigrants, said county residents are shouldering a burden created by the federal government.

The federal government doesn't prevent illegal immigration, but hardly reimburses local counties where the immigrants most frequently settle and use public health care facilities, he said.

"The federal government allows people to come here illegally," Radack said. "Because of that the cost shouldn't fall on the local taxpayer."

The district treated more than 57,000 illegal immigrants last year, at a cost of $128 million. The federal and state governments reimbursed about $28 million, and the patients themselves paid about $3 million. Over the past 11 years, the district has paid about $607 million in unreimbursed costs for treating undocumented immigrants.

The district does not directly ask patients if they are in the country legally, but infers their status from other information gleaned during patient screenings, officials said.

Well, maybe we should just be appreciative that the border-jumping immigration criminals graciously paid a whole $3,000,000 for their own medical care last year. That would be a whopping 2.34% of the total cost of treating illegals at the Harris County Hospital District -- or less than $1 per resident of Harris County.

And that does not include the medical care written off by private hospitals. Anne Linehan over at blogHOUSTON points to the information supplied by one caller to the Chris Baker radio show on KTRH.

Chris Baker was discussing this yesterday and one of his callers identified herself as an employee of a private, fourteen-hospital group here in the Houston area. She said they routinely write off anywhere from 40 to 60 surgeries each week, because the patients are here illegally and are unable to pay. She said the paperwork will often have Social Security numbers such as 111-11-1111, or 999-99-9999, and bogus addresses, but since hospitals are prohibited from turning anyone away, there is nothing they can do about it.

Now consider the implications of that figure. Little or no reimbursement from the state or federal government for thise surgeries (not to mention other treatment that is written off) means that the costs are being spread around to those of us who have insurance (or those who can afford to pay cash -- a small percentage of the public indeed). That means increased costs for all of us every time we walk (or are wheeled through) the door for treatment. That probably means that each and every one of us is paying significantly more for the treatment of those who are here illegally.

And the sad thing is that nothing is being done about this problem. The feds are not interested in stopping illegal immigration. The hospitals don't take immigration information directly, for fear of scaring sick illegals away from medical care -- and even if they discover that a patient is undocumented, they do not report them to immigration authorities.

Medical costs ae escalating every year -- and I cannot help but believe that one factor is the free medical care given to law-breaking border-jumpers at the expense of each and every US citizen.

OPEN TRACKBACKING TO: Conservative Cat, Samantha Burns, Stuck On Stupid, Bacon Bits, Adam's Blog, Dumb Ox, Lil Duck Duck, Third World County, Blue Star Chronicles, Echo9er, Cigar Intelligence Agency, Stop the ACLU, Wizbang, Gribbit's World, Assorted Babble, Pursuing Holiness

Posted by: Greg at 10:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 901 words, total size 7 kb.

Why can't we do this along the entire border? After all, border jumpers are already criminals.

On June 1, the three Ordaz-Valtierra brothers from Mexico illegally crossed the Rio Grande with the same dream that so many other Latin American immigrants have: head north from the border, get jobs and start sending money home.

Their journey, instead, ended in a federal courthouse here, where, dressed in orange prison jumpsuits, each was charged with the federal misdemeanor crime of entry without inspection. Each pleaded guilty and was sentenced by a U.S. magistrate judge to 15 days. Under guard of U.S. marshals, they were put in shackles and bused to a West Texas jail to serve their time and await deportation home.

"I'm sorry," Juan Carlos Ordaz-Valtierra, 27, said through an interpreter as he stood before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dennis G. Green. "I didn't think it was this difficult to cross into your country."

It wasn't. But this year, most of the 210-mile stretch of riverbank between the small border cities of Eagle Pass and Del Rio became a "zero tolerance zone." If apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol, illegal immigrants are prosecuted by federal authorities for a misdemeanor, sent to jail for 15 to 180 days and then deported. If they are caught illegally entering the country a second time, they are eligible for a felony charge of illegal entry and as much as two years in federal prison.

"Catch and release" -- in which Mexican citizens are returned promptly to Mexico, but citizens of other countries are given a notice to appear in immigration court at a later date, set free and never tracked down by authorities -- would end here, said Department of Homeland Security officials at a Washington news conference earlier this year. "Catch and remove" would start. And, officials predicted, as this tough policy became known, immigrants would be discouraged from crossing through this slice of southwest Texas.

Every border jumper, every time. Make it clear that we will catch you, we will charge you, and we will remove you from our shores, with harher penalties to come.

Posted by: Greg at 08:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 365 words, total size 2 kb.

Imagine that you get a letter telling you that you owe over $15,000 in back taxes on income from jobs a couple of thousand miles from your home -- and that you had not held any job during the time period in question. This woman doesn't have to imagine -- it happened to her.

ne woman's Social Security identification number has been used by at least 81 people in 17 states. Though impossible to verify in every case, information gleaned from criminal investigations, tax documents and other sources suggest most of the users were probably illegal immigrants trying to get work.

Audra Schmierer, a 33-year-old housewife in this affluent San Francisco suburb, realized she had a problem in February 2005, when she got a statement from the IRS saying she owed $15,813 in back taxes — even though she had not worked since her son was born in 2000. Perhaps even more surprising, the taxes were due from jobs in Texas.

Schmierer has since found that her Social Security number has been used by people from Florida to Washington state, at construction sites, fast-food restaurants and even major high-tech companies. Some opened bank accounts using the number.

The federal government took years to discover the number was being used illegally, but authorities took little action even then.

"They knew what was happening but wouldn't do anything," said Schmierer. "One name, one number, why can't they just match it up?"

It is becoming a more and more common problem in America -- especiallysince the IRS and Social Security do not tell immigration authorities about the proble. All they do is contact the employers. Oh, yeah, and possibly fine them.

Under current law, if the Social Security Administration or the Internal Revenue Service find multiple people using the same Social Security number, the agencies send letters informing employers of possible errors.

The IRS can fine employers $50 for each inaccurate number filed, a punishment that companies often dismiss as just another cost of doing business.

"Sending letters is the limit to what can be done," Social Security spokesman Lowell Kepke said. "We expect that will be able to fix any records that are incorrect."

Fifty bucks.

No wonder employers ignore the law -- it is cheaper than doing things legally.

That needs to be fixed.

Posted by: Greg at 07:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 399 words, total size 2 kb.

Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs has been working to end the cityÂ’s sanctuary policy for illegal immigrants for some time. She authored a column in todayÂ’s Houston Chronicle.

OVER the past few months, the temperature has risen significantly in the immigration debate. Citizens and leaders at all levels of government are working together to find long-term solutions.

At a time when we are working diligently to put a stop to the flow of illegal immigration, I chose to vote against the renewal of a $100,000 federally funded contract for a day labor center in Houston's East End. This center assists people in finding work. It is the only city-authorized, federally funded day labor site remaining in Houston. Recent studies show that at least 85 percent of people who access day labor sites are illegal immigrants — a statistic punctuated by a May 18 Houston Chronicle article that points out that 100 percent of the day laborers a reporter talked to at this North Sampson Street site were illegal.

This is clearly a city issue. By funding this center, the city of Houston is supporting the process of hiring illegal immigrants. This is wrong.

But this does not have to be a partisan, divisive decision. In the past, day labor centers in our city have received support from City Council members regardless of party affiliation. The sites were offered as an alternative to day laborers loitering on private property while waiting for work, a common complaint received in City Council offices. Unfortunately, the calls are still coming in.

These sites have not stopped the problems that they were intended to, and in fact, they are having the opposite effect, by nurturing the increasing flow of illegal immigrants who have turned to our city to find work.

Meanwhile, Houston's "sanctuary city" status is only making a bad situation worse. This is a Houston Police Department policy that City Council members have no control over, and it should be abolished. The policy, forbidding Houston police from inquiring into anyone's immigration status, was established years ago under a previous city administration, has been reauthorized periodically and can only be rescinded by Mayor Bill White.

Council could try to bypass the mayor with a resolution opposing the "sanctuary city" policy, but that is unlikely to occur in our strong mayor form of government in which the mayor sets the council agenda. Even if such a resolution were passed, the mayor would be under no obligation to do away with the policy.

In addition, such a resolution would potentially open Pandora's box, encouraging the consideration of other resolutions dealing with federal matters, such as the war in Iraq. These resolutions would be merely symbolic and would not have a direct impact on federal legislation.

Congress can help put a stop to "sanctuary cities" across the nation by denying federal funding to cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws. For example, Houston faces sanctions, including a loss of highway funds, if the 2007 federal ozone standards deadline is not met.

Similar penalties could be imposed if cities fail to comply with immigration laws. At the local level, the responsibility to revoke Houston's "sanctuary city" policy falls squarely on the shoulders of the mayor.

Changes are needed to the Federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which currently clears the way for day labor sites to receive federal funding.

The act outlines our nation's welfare and immigration policy, which states that "self-sufficiency has been a basic principle of United States immigration law since this country's earliest immigration statutes" and that immigrants within our nation's borders "not depend on public resources to meet their needs" — yet it includes exceptions for programs and services that could be construed to allow day labor sites. This federal loophole must be closed.

The issue of illegal immigration is not just a federal one. It starts at our national borders but quickly spreads into cities such as Houston, where work is readily available.

As a top destination for illegal immigrants, we must do everything we can to assist in enforcing our existing immigration laws while responding to increasing demands for labor and honoring our tradition of welcoming immigrants legally.

It is very simple – the city of Houston (indeed, every community) needs to work with the federal government to enforce our immigration laws and ensure border security, not assist those who break our laws and violate our sovereignty out of a well-intentioned but misguided sense of compassion based on the notion that illegal immigrants are “just good people who want jobs and a better life.” While that may be true, it cannot excuse their law-breaking.

Shelley Sekula-Gibbs is one of those seeking to replace Tom Delay on the CD22 ballot. She has a solid record in favor of enforcing and strengthening our nation's immigration laws. Stands like this show her to be a pro-border conservative worthy of that nomination.

Posted by: Greg at 04:12 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 829 words, total size 5 kb.

The humanity of it all -- border-jumping immigration criminals are receiving substandard wages and working in unsafe conditions -- in their illegal jobs rebuilding New Orleans.

Illegal immigrants helping to rebuild this shattered city are working in hazardous conditions without protective gear and earning far less than their legal counterparts, a study says.

Nearly one-third of the illegal immigrants interviewed by researchers reported working with harmful substances and in dangerous conditions, while 19 percent said they were not given any protective equipment, according to the study by professors at Tulane University and the University of California at Berkeley.

Illegal immigrants also were paid significantly less — if at all — earning on average $10 per hour, compared with $16.50 for documented workers, the study said.

"What is fundamentally unfair is these are workers who have responded to a national priority to rebuild this city and yet whose rights are being violated," said Laurel Fletcher, director of Berkeley's International Human Rights Law Clinic and one of the study's co-authors.

What isn't mention is that their wages and working conditions are much better than those in Mexico and the other Latin American countries.

I do find this law to be particularly galling -- what other law-breakers do we provide such protection for in the course of their criminal activity?

Under federal labor law, illegal immigrants are afforded the same health and safety protections as documented workers. And regardless of their legal status, laborers can sue most employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act for violation of the minimum wage law and overtime regulations, according to the researchers.

Before you ask, I don't find it acceptable for employers to expoit border-jumping immigration criminals who violate our nation's sovereignty and laws. There is but one solution to this terrible situation in New Orleans and other places in this county where such exploitation presumably exists.

Round 'em up! Ship 'em back! Rawhide!

Posted by: Greg at 11:28 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

Can't folks understand that border-jumping immigration criminals are not permitted to work in the United States -- and so when they lose a job it really does not matter why they were fired. They certainly are not entitled to their job back or damages for being fired.

A group of immigrant workers, some of whom are in the U.S. illegally, are claiming an auto supplier fired them because they were trying to join the United Auto Workers, but the company says they were fired because they could not provide valid Social Security cards.

The UAW and the Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice, an immigrant rights group, are helping the fired workers file a complaint against Hope Global Industries with the National Labor Relations Board. It's illegal to fire or intimidate workers for attempting to organize.

"This isn't about invalid Social Security numbers," said Elena Herrada, a member of the Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice. "It's about workers who begin to stand up for their rights, and they lose their jobs."

Hope Global President and CEO Robert Louis-Ferdinand said the company did not learn of the workers' union efforts until after they were fired.

"That's outrageous," Louis-Ferdinand said of the charge.

The dispute comes several weeks after the Social Security Administration notified Hope Global that the workers, whose employment ranged from more than a year to just a few months, had provided the company with Social Security numbers that did not match their names, which is often a signal workers are in the country illegally.

"We had no choice," but to fire the workers, Louis-Ferdinand said. "We're way too small of a company to live in fear of IRS penalties and not comply with the law."

So there is a valid reason for firing these invaders -- they provided false documents, and this was brought to the company's attention by the federal government. It means one thing, clear and simple -- these immigration criminals were working in this country illegally. Fire them and ship them back where they come from.

But there is one stupid aspect to federal labor law that does need to be fixed.

Linn Hynds, a labor law expert in Detroit, said the National Labor Relations Act entitles workers to union representation whether they are in the country legally or not.

A right to union representation? For jobs they cannot legally hold? That is absurd!.

As foreigners who have invaded our country in violation of our national sovereignty, the only thing these people should be entitled to is to be dumped unceremoniously back in their homeland.

Posted by: Greg at 04:03 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 436 words, total size 3 kb.

Many of us have been saying this for some time -- why is it only now that we hear such talk out of the Administration?

President Bush told the nation's most prominent business group yesterday that "unscrupulous" employers have contributed to the illegal immigration crisis in the United States by knowingly hiring undocumented workers, and called for steep new penalties on those exploiting the shadow economy.

As part of his emerging public campaign for the immigration legislation pending in Congress, Bush visited the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to emphasize his focus on enforcement and to combat the conservative complaint that his immigration proposals add up to amnesty for millions of foreigners violating U.S. immigration law.

"Businesses that knowingly employ illegal workers undermine this law and undermine the spirit of America," the president said during a speech against a backdrop of U.S. flags, images of the Statue of Liberty and the slogan "Comprehensive Immigration Reform." "And we're not going to tolerate it in this country." Although most businesses abide by the law, he said, "there are some unscrupulous folks who want to take advantage of low-cost labor."

We really do not need immigration reform -- we need immigration law enforcement. Start aggressively enforcing the laws agaisnt employing illegal immigrants. Shipe them back wehn they are caught. Increase teh force at the border and explicitly authorize local law enforcement to aid with the task (to shut up the anti-border, pro-criminal folks who oppose enforcement). We can deal witht he problem quite effectively with just those steps -- and many of the border jumpers will head south if they can't find work.

Will the president match his rhetoric with action?

Posted by: Greg at 03:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 287 words, total size 2 kb.

Can you believe the gall of these border-jumping invaders? Not only are they demanding the right to stay in this country despite having entered illegally, they also want their jobs back -- jobs that they cannot legally hold!

Dozens of undocumented immigrants demanded their jobs back Thursday after being fired during an immigration raid here in Chicago.

Twenty-four workers were let go from IFCO Systems of North America after customs agents raided the plant during a sweep last April.

IFCO is a container company located off Damen and the Stevenson Expressway. It's accused of harboring and transporting illegal workers.

The workers rallied outside the federal immigration court on East Monroe Street. Inside, they begged a judge not to deport them.

"Last night was a very scary time for these families. They didn't know. The kids didn't go to school because they wanted to be here because they didn't know if their parents were gonna come home," said Ema Lozano with Center Without Borders.

The workers will have to wait several months to find out if they'll get their jobs back.

The judge granted a continuance until Oct. 12.

Why should this matter take until October to decide?

Round 'em up!

Ship 'em back!

Rawhide!

Posted by: Greg at 12:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.