Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bush's Temporary Working Program

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SKS
    replied
    marmaduk

    "Yep, I'm against welfare (at least at its current form, too many loophole being taken advantage off, ppl using welfare money for other stuff, etc), my friend used to say that welfare = bribing those in it so they turn into criminal."

    You are entitled to that. I won't argue that either. Across the board.

    "Lets not play the word twisting game here. If people are deadset on one thing, or undecided, it will be beneficial to let them see the negative cause of the action so they can comprehend the full ramification of it (and hopefully be more willing to act to resolve it)."

    Fine, as long as it is unbiased.

    "At the very least it'll lift some burden from an already depressed healthcare system."

    In the short term, perhaps, but not in the long run...

    Leave a comment:


  • marmaduk
    replied
    SKS:
    Yep, I'm against welfare (at least at its current form, too many loophole being taken advantage off, ppl using welfare money for other stuff, etc), my friend used to say that welfare = bribing those in it so they turn into criminal.

    Lets not play the word twisting game here. If people are deadset on one thing, or undecided, it will be beneficial to let them see the negative cause of the action so they can comprehend the full ramification of it (and hopefully be more willing to act to resolve it).

    As for healthcare, it won't exacerbate the problem if the decision is implemented right away. At the very least it'll lift some burden from an already depressed healthcare system.

    Leave a comment:


  • SKS
    replied
    marmaduk

    "Then don't let them get into welfare,"

    Many get welfare for their US Citizen kids......you're against helping your fellow Americans?


    "The elephants (reps) really curtailed down welfare back in mid 90s, so they surely can do it again."

    If you are against welfare as a whole, that is another story....


    "As for the other assistance, it has happen before (people in California banning illegals from getting medical benefits), it just need to be pushed past the judicial system and be enacted."

    Which isn't going to help our situation. Moreover, denying them anything isn't going to cause anybody to leave, only exacerbate the issue.

    "Of course that'll probably means many illegals and illegal's kids will turn to criminals."

    Great observation. And how is that good for America?

    "Definitely not good,"

    So, which is it?? Don't contradict yourself.

    "....but maybe then more people will see the problem that the illegals bring, and will be more inclined to take a stand one way or another."

    So, you want to make things much worse??

    I don't see how that is good for America.

    Leave a comment:


  • marmaduk
    replied
    Then don't let them get into welfare, cut off any assistance and let them fend for themselves. The elephants (reps) really curtailed down welfare back in mid 90s, so they surely can do it again. As for the other assistance, it has happen before (people in California banning illegals from getting medical benefits), it just need to be pushed past the judicial system and be enacted.

    Of course that'll probably means many illegals and illegal's kids will turn to criminals. Definitely not good, but maybe then more people will see the problem that the illegals bring, and will be more inclined to take a stand one way or another.

    Leave a comment:


  • SKS
    replied
    aliba

    "And just why would the US be better off educating illegal aliens?"

    The very question only serves to contradict yours and acelaws point.

    By not educating them, they are destined for a life of poverty, for the most part. Thus, all the b!tching that I hear going on from people like you, "There are so many in poverty," "So many on welfare", WAAAAAAAA means squat. Education is the key. Yet, you don't want that either. So.....the poverty will remain, just don't ever b!tch and moan to me about it.

    Leave a comment:


  • AliBA
    replied
    And just why would the US be better off educating illegal aliens?

    Public education was originally adopted in the belief that an educated electorate was beneficial. Illegal immigrants are not part of the electorate. Also, we adopted public education in the belief that an educated workforce benefits both the employer and the employees. Yet, the claim is made that we need uneducated and unskilled illegal aliens because they do the work Americans won't do. So, are we to bring them in to do this work, then educate them so that they compete for those jobs Americans will do? Which will, in turn, lead to them being replaced by yet more illegal aliens?

    Furthermore, we haven't the resources to educate an almost infinite number of illegal aliens without seriously impairing our ability to educate our own. Money that is spent to provide remedial education for illegal aliens, or English as a Second Language, is money that is not spent improving the abilities of our own students.

    Leave a comment:


  • SKS
    replied
    acelaw

    "tHIS IS YOUR AREA RIGHT? WHY ARE THEY SO FAR BEHIND IN BULIDING SCHOOLS?"

    Yes, this is my area. It is disgusting the amount of money WASTED at schools, doesn't "trickle" down like Title I money oughtta.

    There is no accountability for this.


    "We're so far behind now that if we build something like 100 schools a year for the next 10 years, we wouldn't catch up," he says."

    Yes, and much like the situation with not having the proper energy providers, we will end up in a jam.

    "We know that we've got a million more students coming to higher ed. We've known that for 10 years, and we've done almost nothing about it."

    Uhhhh, what exactly was your point acelaw?? WE have done nothing about it. Says so right here in YOUR article, genius.


    "The no-tax crew have had their way, so we're turning away 170,000 community college students this year alone."

    Yes, at the fault of the NO TAX crew. Read your articles dear fellow. These schools CAN be built.


    "THEY HAVE THE MOST ILLEGALS IN THE COUNTRY WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE ,"

    Impotent state government. Why did we have that power problem a while back??

    "The state has "a spending crisis,"

    Uhh, ok. Then why not spend some money on schools?

    "BUT THE SKY IS NOT FALLING"

    Right. Those issues can be helpd by efforts on the part of schools and the community. That isn't the end of the world. I find it amusing that people like you point to education for immigrants, yet you also are not in favor of it. When people like you finally realize it is in AMERICA's best interest to educate, you'll see the light. The fact of the matter is, these immigrants aren't going anywhere. Thus, we can either have illiterate people here or educated ones. So, keep at it with your rhetoric, because you are not helping the situation.

    In any case, those here, let me see, yep, still here. I didn't see any internment camps, did you? Checkmate.

    Leave a comment:


  • acelaw
    replied
    sks
    tHIS IS YOUR AREA RIGHT? WHY ARE THEY SO FAR BEHIND IN BULIDING SCHOOLS?

    Schools? In addition to his role with the Preparing California for the 21st Century joint legislative committee, Vasconcellos chairs the state Senate Education Committee. "We're so far behind now that if we build something like 100 schools a year for the next 10 years, we wouldn't catch up," he says. (Actually, the state only looks five years ahead. The California Department of Education calculates that meeting anticipated enrollment will necessitate the construction of 19 new classrooms every day, seven days a week, for the next five years. That's about 230 new schools per year. An additional 22 aging classrooms per day will need modernizing.) "We know that we've got a million more students coming to higher ed. We've known that for 10 years, and we've done almost nothing about it. The no-tax crew have had their way, so we're turning away 170,000 community college students this year alone."

    THEY HAVE THE MOST ILLEGALS IN THE COUNTRY WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE , CALIF SHOULD BE A POWER HOUSE WITH ALL THAT CHEAP LABOR!!!!

    The state has "a spending crisis," Schwarzenegger said in this month's State of the State message. But the state also has an evolving crisis of shifting demographics as immigration expands the underclass, which pays a lesser share of the tax burden. The Southern California Assn. of Governments' 2003 State of the Region Report found that the region's position "is slipping in nearly every performance category related to socio-economic well-being, including income and educational attainment. Among 17 major metropolitan areas nationwide, the region ranks 16th or worse in ... attainment of high school degrees, per capita income, persons in poverty, and children in poverty."
    BUT THE SKY IS NOT FALLING

    Leave a comment:


  • SKS
    replied
    acelaw

    "Wow can you enlighten us with any more brilliant thoughts such as these???"

    Only speaking the truth...

    "Calif will implode on itself under the weight of illegal immigration the writing is on the wall!!!"

    Uhh, ok. Then are you just b!tching for the fun of it then?? I guess you see it as a foregone conclusion after all??

    "Then we can always reminisce about the days that Calif had the 5th Biggest economy in the world?"

    Ah, ask yourself the same question about the brilliant thoughts.


    "OF COURSE THE SKY IS NOT FALLING RIGHT sks?"

    Right.

    Leave a comment:


  • acelaw
    replied
    and the train wreck is not over yet ,"

    Like I've said before, I always find the Chicken Little story very amusing.

    As for your article, only serves to prove my point that nothing will get done. Piece of garbage anyway, what else do you expect from the LA Times...
    sks
    Wow can you enlighten us with any more brilliant thoughts such as these????Calif will implode on itself under the weight of illegal immigration the writing is on the wall!!!Then we can always reminisce about the days that Calif had the 5th Biggest economy in the world? OF COURSE THE SKY IS NOT FALLING RIGHT sks?

    Leave a comment:


  • SKS
    replied
    acelaw

    "Thanks for the recommendation, interesting that you go out of your way to get your SHOT in !!!"

    You're no angel either....

    "Did they offer a amnesty ? NO ?,"

    Did they order massive deportations, internment camps, house-to-house raids, military checkpoints?? NO.

    "HMMMM just like I said they would not, now or ever, mark that down now!!!"

    Uhhhhh, ok, I never believed it would get passed now either...so, that makes two of us!!

    Moreover, did they order massive deportations, internment camps, house-to-house raids, military checkpoints?? NO, like I said they would. Go ahead and keep note of that as well.


    "What was TALKED ABOUT (not a law yet E) was a joke of a program , pandering was all that it was about."

    Whatever the case may be...........nothing was done either way. So, yep, you guessed it, STATUS QUO yet again. Better get used to it!

    "...guess we were right on the money HUH SKS,"

    As was I!!

    "lip service you say,"

    It is not a matter of what I say. It is the truth of the matter.


    "..and the train wreck is not over yet ,"

    Like I've said before, I always find the Chicken Little story very amusing.

    As for your article, only serves to prove my point that nothing will get done. Piece of garbage anyway, what else do you expect from the LA Times...


    In any case, yep, seems I was right again. I don't see any house-to-house raids do you? Checkmate.

    Leave a comment:


  • acelaw
    replied
    Don't get too worked up over acelaw.....he is a lost soul. You hit the nail on the head, and it is something I've stated this whole time.
    You are describing what I like to call "lipservice". PROVE to me, and you, that something will get done........
    Bah. I like the ol' "Well, the wheels are in motion." That one is my favorite because it has been used too much and means nothing.

    Sks
    Thanks for the recommendation, interesting that you go out of your way to get your SHOT in !!!Did they offer a amnesty ? NO ?, HMMMM just like I said they would not, now or ever, mark that down now!!!! What was TALKED ABOUT (not a law yet E) was a joke of a program , pandering was all that it was about.

    We predicted the budget problem way back in Sept. 28th of 2001 , and the reasons for it, guess we were right on the money HUH SKS, lip service you say, and the train wreck is not over yet ,
    ..


    Feature Story
    September 28, 2001
    CALIFORNIA BUDGET CRISIS LOOMS
    THIS TIME IT WILL REALLY BE BAD
     THE COMING CALIFORNIA TRAIN WRECK
    "America is importing permanent poverty and California is headed for a train wreck. The top 4% of income earners pay more than 50% of all income taxes collected by the state, while the bottom 49%, mostly Latinos, pay less than two percent of all income taxes. When the next downturn comes, and it will, state revenue will disappear overnight, leading to an unpredictable level of discontent among squabbling minorities." Bonds of Our Union, Part II.

    I did not post the whole thing as it is about 5 pages , but you may want to kiss Calif GOOD-BYE
    This will be the last train weck for this state

    http://www.latimes.com/features/prin...-home-magazine
    COVER STORY
    Infinite Ingress
    A human wave is breaking over California, flooding freeways and schools, bloating housing costs, disrupting power and water supplies. Ignoring it hasn't worked.
    By Lee Green
    For the Times

    January 25, 2004
    If projections through 2040 by demographers in the state Department of Finance prove accurate, conditions will only get worse. Much worse. New residents continue to wash over California's borders, but the state is neither attempting to restrain growth nor building adequate infrastructure to accommodate it. And the boat continues to fill.

    During the last half of the last century"”an epoch encompassing most of the baby boom and, a generation later, all of the boom's echo"”the state's population grew by more than 24 million. The next 24 million"”more than the population of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa and Nebraska combined"”will arrive more quickly, inflating the total to nearly 60 million within 36 years. Barring the long-overdue mother of all earthquakes, a tightening of federal immigration policy, or the Rapture, California's population, currently at 36 million, likely will double within the lifetime of today's schoolchildren. A close look at the numbers suggests that the 1990s began a pattern in which California receives more new residents each decade than it did the previous one. The 2020s will witness the greatest 10-year increase in state history, and the numbers in the 2030s will be greater still.


    John Vasconcellos, Democratic state senator from San Jose, says the Legislature's by-now renowned dysfunction ensures that "the government isn't capable of looking long-term at anything. The state is truly in dire straits. I'm not a pessimist and I'm not a doomsayer, but I've never felt so frightened by the prospects of the state in all my 37 years of serving the Legislature."

    Vasconcellos is nicely positioned to address those frightening prospects as co-chair of a joint legislative committee called Preparing California for the 21st Century. The perils of unending population growth would be a fine place to start, but in its first three years the group instead has examined the intricacies of racial diversity and the implications of new technology. Fine subjects both, but it's disconcerting to think that in a Legislature with a select committee dedicated to professional sports and another focused exclusively on the horse-racing industry, no committee exists to examine a mounting population burden that threatens to degrade every quality that makes California so ... California. The topic "would be fitting for our agenda," Vasconcellos says, "but right now our agenda and our staff are at capacity."

    So, perhaps, is California. Overshadowed by the state's long-term fiscal quagmire is the less publicized neglect of aging infrastructure that wasn't designed to serve current population levels, let alone a population projected to be nearly two-thirds larger within 36 years. The state relies on a staggering array of dams, canals, pipelines, pumping plants, levees, reservoirs, highways, bridges, parks, forest fire stations, agriculture inspection facilities, prisons, crime labs, mental hospitals, colleges and universities to maintain social and economic order. One would hope that the state would protect this investment of hundreds of billions of dollars, but the Legislative Analyst's Office reported just over a year ago that "appropriate maintenance ... has been a chronic problem," resulting in "deterioration of facilities and an accumulation of 'deferred maintenance.' " Not only does California have insufficient funds to correct the situation, it can't afford to do what's necessary to keep from falling still ****her behind.

    And that's just the stuff we already have. To handle the anticipated yearly increase of 600,000 new residents"”equal to three new cities the size of Glendale"”the state must engineer and build billions of dollars of new infrastructure and facilities. Seemingly earnest efforts are underway, including water desalination proposals, road-widening projects, and new classrooms, but just catching up to current population needs would require a Herculean effort"”Sisyphean, actually, given the task's uphill, never-ending nature. Los Angeles's ratio of freeway space to cars ranks worst in the nation, one-third too small to meet existing demand. Since the mid-1970s, the number of miles driven by Californians has more than doubled while lane mileage has increased by less than 10%. One study predicts that by 2020, Southern California drivers will spend at least half their driving time making exactly as much forward progress as they would sitting on the living room sofa.

    Water? The state should have no trouble keeping its head above it"”because there isn't much. For the past three decades, California's population has severely outstripped the state's ability to store water. Maurice Roos, chief hydrologist for the California Department of Water Resources, claimed three years ago that the state lacked sufficient storage capacity to get through two consecutive dry years. Even with continuing conservation efforts and occasional wet Sierra Nevada winters, experts agree that California will face chronic water shortages in the near future unless something changes.

    "The electricity crisis [of 2001] should be a wake-up call for all of us with respect to water in California," Feinstein says, implying that water rationing is no less plausible than power shortages. "We will not have enough water unless we begin to build the necessary infrastructure, the desalination, the recycling, the conservation that's really necessary for 45 [million to] 50 million people."

    The Assn. of California Water Agencies warns that as early as 2010, yearly demand could exceed supply by 4 million acre-feet, an amount equal to what 20 million residents use in a year. You won't be reduced to drinking from your rain gauge, but your water bill may get your attention, and green lawns, clean cars and full swimming pools could become as rare as a Dodgers appearance in the post-season. And that's in a good year. Even now the Colorado River, a prime source for Southern California, is so thoroughly tapped by seven states and Mexico that its waters rarely reach the sea.

    Schools? In addition to his role with the Preparing California for the 21st Century joint legislative committee, Vasconcellos chairs the state Senate Education Committee. "We're so far behind now that if we build something like 100 schools a year for the next 10 years, we wouldn't catch up," he says. (Actually, the state only looks five years ahead. The California Department of Education calculates that meeting anticipated enrollment will necessitate the construction of 19 new classrooms every day, seven days a week, for the next five years. That's about 230 new schools per year. An additional 22 aging classrooms per day will need modernizing.) "We know that we've got a million more students coming to higher ed. We've known that for 10 years, and we've done almost nothing about it. The no-tax crew have had their way, so we're turning away 170,000 community college students this year alone."

    Human proliferation touches everything. Air traffic is expected to double in the next 25 years. Los Angeles currently can deal with its garbage, but the county can foresee the day when it will have to ship it elsewhere. Developers convert at least 50,000 acres of California's farmland to home sites and other urban amenities every year, a phenomenon with no end in sight. The state already has lost 90% of its coastal wetlands. "To me the issue most fundamentally tied to population growth is loss of habitat and endangered species," says former CAPS President Ric Oberlink, who still consults for the organization. "You can talk about air quality, and there may be technological solutions for at least part of the problem"”and in fact we have improved air quality in most cities over the last several decades. But when it comes to wildlife habitat, there's no turning back."

    Ben Zuckerman, a Harvard-educated UCLA professor of physics and astronomy, serves on the board of directors for both CAPS and the Sierra Club. "I have thought quantitatively through my whole career in the sciences, and I just look at the numbers, the extrapolations of the current trends, and they're just horrific both for the United States and for California," he says. Zuckerman advocates immigration reductions, but in doing so he takes pains to make clear that he doesn't speak for the Sierra Club, which officially abandoned that position in 1996. In the past decade, most other U.S. environmental groups have backed away from the issue as well"”the "deafening silence," Zuckerman calls it. It's a paradoxical shift given that human population growth underlies virtually every environmental problem.

    "Environmental groups are not talking about it anymore," says Oberlink. "There's been a retreat from even identifying it as an underlying issue. And if they're not talking about it, the legislators are not going to delve into this issue if they're not being pressured. It's what we call an unholy alliance of leftists concerned about human rights considerations and right-wing libertarians who don't think there should be any government interference in anything."

    Moreover, any stance against immigration, no matter how well articulated, guarantees cries of racism, elitism, all the old ad hominems.

    And then there is the pesky little matter of conventional economics. "To create a sustainable and prosperous set of communities with zero population growth requires a different economic system than we have," says urban planning analyst William Fulton, who has written extensively on California growth and development. "Whether your population is increasing or decreasing, it creates a set of problems. I grew up in a depressed area where people didn't have jobs, where there was hardly any demand for anything, and where the quality of community life eroded day by day because population was stagnant and the economy was in decline. The way I look at it, which set of problems do you want?"

    Can this be true, that to prosper we must increase population and consumption indefinitely, a feat quite impossible no matter how clever we think we are? The self-corrective, of course, is that as a place becomes less livable, people leave. That has already happened in California, though not in numbers great enough to matter. As long as other places are worse, people will come to California.

    The state has "a spending crisis," Schwarzenegger said in this month's State of the State message. But the state also has an evolving crisis of shifting demographics as immigration expands the underclass, which pays a lesser share of the tax burden. The Southern California Assn. of Governments' 2003 State of the Region Report found that the region's position "is slipping in nearly every performance category related to socio-economic well-being, including income and educational attainment. Among 17 major metropolitan areas nationwide, the region ranks 16th or worse in ... attainment of high school degrees, per capita income, persons in poverty, and children in poverty."

    Researchers at the Rand Corp. think tank spotted these troubling trends in 1997 after studying 30 years of economic and immigration data. Rand's review concluded that "the large-scale of immigration flows, bigger families, and the concentration of low-income, low-tax-paying immigrants making heavy use of public services are straining state and local budgets."

    The lifeboat keeps sitting lower, water spilling over the gunwales, provisions stretching thin. Yet we keep taking on more passengers, and nobody's doing much bailing. Is this any way to run paradise?

    "

    Leave a comment:


  • acelaw
    replied
    E
    And, Acelaw, you know well what I mean when I say "double message".
    I mean THE FACT that for many years there are contradictory laws that are debated in congress regarding this issue and none ever gets passed.

    There is Bills debated in congress all the time , HAVE BEEN FOR OVER 200 YEARS . They are not LAWS or even close to being laws, listen closely we have LAWS ON THE BOOKS NOW , THOSE ARE THE ONES WE FOLLOW UNTIL CHANGED!!!SO IF YOU BROKE THEM,THEN YOU/they ARE A CRIMINAL PLAIN AND SIMPLE!!!! You don't enter a country illegally ,then hang out waiting for the laws to change and then when they don't you throw a fit!!!! Where are you from!!!!

    Here is a BILL, not a law! that has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A date has not been set for a vote on the bill by committee members for referral to the floor for a full vote.
    So if you read more into this then what it is ,just talk right now,that's your fault because you have not taken the time to learn how our government works NOW HAVE YOU????

    Bill would require fingerprinting of undocumented aliens by ER staff
    By MICHAEL A. SALORIO, Staff Writer
    WASHINGTON, D.C. "” Emergency room staff would have to fingerprint or photograph any undocumented immigrant they treat and report the patient to the Department of Homeland Security to begin deportation procedures if a bill introduced here Wednesday is enacted.
    Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, introduced House Resolution 3722, also referreds to as the Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments of 2004.
    The bill seeks to amend section 1011 of the recently enacted Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. Section 1011 provides $1 billion to reimburse hospitals for the costs of treating undocumented immigrants. The bill would impose conditions on federal reimbursement of emergency health services furnished to these patients.
    The U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition funded a study in 2000 that found the 24 counties adjacent to the Mexican border spent $190 million to provide emergency care to undocumented immigrants that year. Of all the border states, California spent the most treating undocumented immigrants with unreimbursed expenditures at $79 million. Texas came in second with $74 million, Arizona at third with $31 million and New Mexico fourth with $6 million.
    In a December 2003 story published in the Press, El Centro Regional Medical Center chief executive officer David Green said the hospital incurs an estimated $1.7 to $2 million annually treating undocumented immigrants.
    In that same story, a hospital official said 80 percent of those costs are incurred by the hospital's emergency room where an average of 10 undocumented immigrants were treated each month in 2003 and 14 a month in 2002.
    Personnel with Pioneers Memorial Hospital in Brawley were unable to provide the level of losses incurred by the hospital's emergency room treating undocumented immigrants. Additionally, the number of undocumented immigrants treated each month in the hospital's emergency room was unavailable.
    Rohrabacher was opposed to the Medicare bill passed last year because of the $1 billion in funding it provided to hospitals for reimbursement of their costs associated with treating undocumented immigrants.
    Federal law mandates hospitals treat anyone requiring emergency care and prohibits a patient being denied treatment on the basis they cannot afford to pay. The $1 billion in the Medicare bill marked the first time the federal government made money available to hospitals to reimburse their costs incurred by treating undocumented immigrants.
    GOP leaders promised Rohrabacher they would bring his immigration proposal to a vote this year in exchange for his vote on the Medicare bill.
    "I opposed that and I was not going to vote for the Medicare bill because of that, but the leadership in the House agreed that if I would vote for the Medicare bill, that I could write legislation that would, in some way, mitigate the damage that I felt was inherent in providing U.S. tax dollars officially to pay for services, health services, for people who have come to this country or are currently in this country illegally," said Rohrabacher during his speech on the House floor introducing his legislation.
    "Our health care system, our emergency rooms are breaking down under the pressure and the strain of illegal immigrants. And that is what leads me to the legislation which I introduced today," said Rohrabacher.
    Hospitals would still be eligible for federal funding for treating undocumented immigrants under Rohrabacher's bill. However, in order to be reimbursed hospitals would have to ask patients if they are U.S. citizens or not.
    If the patient answers they are a U.S. citizen, no further action is required by the hospital. If the patient answers he or she is not a citizen, the hospital would then fingerprint or photograph the patient and contact the Department of Homeland Security to report the patient's immigration status, address and the name of their employer.
    The bill directs the Department of Homeland Security to begin deportation proceedings against any patient who is an undocumented immigrant. Employers of these patients would be required to reimburse the federal government for the Medicare money paid to hospitals.
    Dr. Michael Berger, emergency room director at Pioneers Memorial, said hospital staff would be required as a matter of law to follow the provisions of Rohrabacher's bill if it were to be enacted.
    Berger said that although the bill might make undocumented immigrants apprehensive in coming to the hospital to receive treatment, word would quickly spread that all they would have to do is answer ˜Yes' to the citizenship question since there is no requirement the hospital verify patients are citizens if they answer so.
    "It doesn't seem to have much teeth. If you just ask people and ask for no proof ... it's kind of hollow. ... Bottom line, this seems like a weak bill. ... Your heart is in the right place but your head isn't, Mr. Congressman," said Berger.
    Elise Bryant, spokeswoman for El Centro Regional, said the hospital had no official position on the proposed legislation in light of the proximity to the date it was introduced.
    Bryant added Rohrabacher's legislation might conflict with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act of 1986 that prohibits hospitals from asking patients financial status questions, under which citizenship queries would fall, until after the patient has been treated.
    Rohrabacher on the House floor said: "It is just a couple of more questions to be asked routinely in the process in which they are already being asked questions before they treat patients."
    "The way it reads, the congressman is proposing upon admission they ask whether they are a citizen. That would violate EMTALA," said Bryant.
    Jan Emerson, spokeswoman for the California Healthcare Association, an association of hospitals whose members include El Centro Regional and Pioneers Memorial, said the organization is opposed to Rohrabacher's legislation.
    "When a person comes into an emergency room under current legislation we're not allowed to ask a patient if they have health insurance or if they are a citizen. We first must treat them," said Emerson.
    The legislation is not practical because undocumented immigrants would figure out they only have to answer "Yes" to the citizenship question and give a false address and phone number, added Emerson.
    "Our mission is not to be the INS. Our mission is to heal. Our job is not to be an INS agent. It's the federal government's job," said Emerson.
    Rep. Bob Filner, D-Chula Vista, said the purpose of hospitals is to heal patients and not to be a law enforcement agencies. Filner added he doubts the bill will become law.
    "Hospitals are there to treat the sick and injured and not there to be police agencies. ... It's an incredibly mean-spirited approach to a real problem. What we need to do is reimburse hospitals for treating anyone that is undocumented and have a policy with Mexico that would help them bring down their rate of emigration. This is a horrible bill," said Filner.
    Rohrabacher's bill has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A date has not been set for a vote on the bill by committee members for referral to the floor for a full vote.


    So, what a young, 16 year old must think when there is a DREAM Act that has bipartisan support on one hand and at the same time a CLEAR ACT , and none actually ever signed to law.
    Should he wait, hope for DREAM ACT to be enacted or should he leave before CLEAR ACT, avoiding unesessary arrest and humiliating enforcement of the immigration law?

    HE SHOULD OF OBEYED THE LAWS OF OUR COUNTRY TO START WITH, GET IT!!!!!HE SHOULD NOT EVEN BE IN HERE TO WORRY ABOUT IT, GET IT!!!

    Now, when there is no action but only contradictory talk-that is what "double message" is!

    What has this to do with people who have violated our laws and entered this country ILLEGALY ????So what there is talk until it becomes law , THAT'S ALL IT IS!!!!

    And BY THE WAY, ACELAW, LEARN TO READ!!!
    I AM NOT A MEXICAN AND I DID NOT CROSS BORDER ILLEGALLY!!!!


    Did I ever say you were?????

    Leave a comment:


  • Pasha Patel
    replied
    sorry wrong thread

    Leave a comment:


  • SKS
    replied
    Eazy-E

    Don't get too worked up over acelaw.....he is a lost soul. You hit the nail on the head, and it is something I've stated this whole time.

    You are describing what I like to call "lipservice". PROVE to me, and you, that something will get done........

    Bah. I like the ol' "Well, the wheels are in motion." That one is my favorite because it has been used too much and means nothing.

    OUR Congress ain't gonna do anything real serious either one way or the other......

    And as far as being labeled a Mexican and/or border crosser, that is acelaw's favorite thing to do. Anybody that disagrees with him, is somehow an illegal immigrant Mexican. He did the same routine with me, saying I was somehow involved in the group La Raza, which I know nothing about......

    Just get used to his B.S. and spin, and take it in stride.

    Leave a comment:

Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

Home Page

Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Questions/Comments

SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily



Working...
X