Saturday, December 5, 2009

FAIR Estimates That U.S. Taxpayers Spend $11 Billion On FREE Health-Care ILLEGALS

MEXICANOCCUPATION.blogspot.com

THE LA RAZA MEXICAN WELFARE STATE: ILLEGALS COSTS FOR “FREE” HEALTH CARE IN CA ALONE $1.2 BILLION. HOW MUCH DOES THE PRISON SYSTEM FILLED WITH CRIMINAL MEXICANS COST?
FAIR estimates that U.S. taxpayers already spend $11 billion a year on health care for illegal immigrants, and that the cost would rise to $30 billion if they are offered the same subsidies as citizens in the health care bill.
*
STATE: Federal health care bills exclude 1 million California immigrants
By YESSENIA ALVAREZ and AMELIA AHLGREN - California News Service | Posted: Thursday, November 26, 2009 4:40 pm
No matter what health care bill emerges from Congress, roughly one in six uninsured Californians will be excluded because they are not legal residents.
President Barack Obama still refers to the plan as "comprehensive health insurance reform,'' although essentially none of its provisions are likely to be available to an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, a group that typically receives no insurance at work and lacks the means to buy it on their own, advocates say.
That means an estimated tens of thousands living in San Diego and Riverside counties will remain without insurance — whether the Senate ultimately passes a bill and no matter how generous the subsidies for the poor or punitive the penalties for those who refuse.
"It will be out of the reach of many Americans. ... That is not comprehensive," said Jennifer Ng'andu, deputy director of the Health Policy Project at the National Council of La Raza.
SAN DEIGO COUNTY ALONE MAY HAVE 150,000 ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS RECEIVING “FREE” HEALTH CARE. NO WONDER LA RAZA AND THE LA RAZA DEMS DON’T WANT THE NUMBER OF ILLEGALS COUNTED IN THE 2010 CENSUS. THERE’S ALREADY ENOUGH RAGE FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVING TO HAND OVER THEIR JOBS TO ILLEGALS, AND THE PAY FOR THEIR HEALTH CARE COSTS, EDUCATION, WELFARE, AND PRISON COSTS.
San Diego County alone may have 150,000 illegal immigrants who receive millions of dollars worth of health care ---- paid for by taxpayers ---- in local emergency rooms, according to various estimates.
Excluding them has been a political flashpoint, with many conservatives arguing that providing more health care for people who are not legally in the country is both unaffordable and unfair.
"It shouldn't encourage future immigration or help out those who are here illegally now," said Dustin Carnevale, a spokesman for the Federation of American Immigrant Reform, a Washington-based group that advocates restricted immigration.
FAIR estimates that U.S. taxpayers already spend $11 billion a year on health care for illegal immigrants, and that the cost would rise to $30 billion if they are offered the same subsidies as citizens in the health care bill.
Such concerns have prompted some Democrats with a long record of supporting immigrant rights, including President Obama, to go out of their way to point out that they are not included in the legislation.
However, their exclusion may have some unintended consequences.
It means that a pool consisting of millions of potential customers who are typically younger and healthier than the general population will be kept out of the insurance exchanges. If illegal immigrants were allowed to enter the exchanges and receive health insurance, it would "reduce health care costs'' for other participants, Ng'andu said.
THE LA RAZA MEXICAN WELFARE STATE: ILLEGALS COSTS FOR “FREE” HEALTH CARE IN CA ALONE $1.2 BILLION. HOW MUCH DOES THE PRISON SYSTEM FILLED WITH CRIMINAL MEXICANS COST?

Still using the ER
Illegal immigrants will continue to use emergency rooms, which cannot turn away patients based on their immigration status, as their first line of medical treatment, a practice that cost California hospitals an estimated $1.2 billion last year, according to the state Department of Health Services.
And it may provide an added incentive for some employers to hire illegal immigrants rather than citizens in order to avoid new requirements that they provide health insurance to their workers, making it even more difficult for Americans to find jobs.
Nearly 7 million California residents lack health insurance. Of that number, more than 1 million are not legal residents, according the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research.
Even the millions of illegal immigrants across the country who do buy insurance would be barred under the Senate health bill from qualifying for the most affordable rates.
"Disease and illnesses do not discriminate based on immigration status,'' Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, and several other Democrats wrote in an open letter to congressional leaders, seeking to have such provisions eliminated. "It is not rational to exclude individuals who are willing and able to share in the responsibility of paying into the system. There are also public health implications when a large portion of the U.S. population has severely limited access to health care coverage.''
Yet a misconception persists that the measures will spend billions on illegal immigrants, wielded by critics as a reason to reject the bill.
It was anger over that issue that prompted Rep. Joe Wilson, R-South Carolina to howl: "You lie!'' at Obama as he addressed a joint session of Congress earlier this fall.
However, both bills ---- the one passed by the House earlier this month and the one currently before the Senate ---- explicitly exclude illegal immigrants from receiving benefits.
Senate bill most exclusive
Both bills forbid anyone without legal immigration status from receiving government subsidies, which are intended for people who are too poor to buy their own insurance. The Senate bill goes further, saying that they cannot participate in the measure's insurance exchanges. That means that even illegal immigrants who buy their own insurance will not be able to purchase the least expensive policies.
"Undocumented immigrants are going to be hit two ways ---- they won't have papers to be here and (they) will be uninsured because even if they have the money to pay, they are not allowed to," said Steven Wallace, assistant director of the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research.
That clause has prompted the greatest outcry from immigrant defenders in Congress, who point out that without insurance, the tab for immigrant care will continue to fall on taxpayers.
"They're going to go to the emergency rooms. They won't have insurance. The costs will be shifted to the rest of us and to taxpayers. We should encourage our undocumented population to buy insurance with their own money," said Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., on the House floor earlier this month.
Yet with the measure's outcome resting on the votes of a handful of Democrats from swing states and districts, any changes to the immigration clauses are likely to make the bills even more restrictive.
House compels coverage
In a further burden for some immigrants, the House bill requires residents to buy insurance regardless of their immigration status. However, it does not permit for government subsidies to those who are in the U.S. illegally.
That means that some immigrants deemed as residents under IRS rules ---- those who have been in the U.S. for 31 days of the current year and a total of 183 in the last three years ---- must buy insurance even though they will receive no help in purchasing it.
Some Republicans have pushed for tighter verification procedures in the health care bill to make certain that people who do not qualify for the government subsidies do not receive them. Conservatives contend that illegal immigrants will use fake documents to get coverage and that it will provide a new lure to come to the U.S.
Others reject stricter verification procedures for fear it will drive away legitimate users who do not have drivers' licenses, passports or easy access to birth certificates. Ng'andu estimated there are as many as 13 million citizens who lack such identification.
"Efforts to exclude unauthorized immigrants and efforts to tighten verification make barriers for citizens to gain insurance," said Marc Rosenblum, a senior policy analyst of the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute.
The California News Service is a journalism project of the University of California's Washington Center and the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. Contact the service at cns@ucdc.edu.

OBAMA'S BETRAYAL OF BLACK AMERICA FOR WALL STREET'S GREED

“CHANGE” for Barack Obama meant that Bush moved out of the White House, and Obama moved in, surrounded with all Bush’s corruption. Saudi Big Bush Oil, Bush War Profiteer & Obama donor, Dianne Feinstein, Hillary & Billary, and all of Bush’s architects for BANKSTERS’ WELFARE, and of course, LA RAZA… “THE RACE”…. Maintain the open borders means with NARCOmex means “cheap” labor, depressed wages and generous WALL STREET!
*
THE WALL STREET RAPE PILLAGE and SIEGE MENTALITY

OBAMA’S propaganda that we are in a “recovery” is as honest as his propaganda that he wants amnesty for 12 million illegals. Only the banksters have “recovered” and are daily pillaging the economy and consumers with the same rape and pillage. As far as the LA RAZA AMNESTY, try 38 million Mexican flag wavers and criminals in this country! To Obama, they’re just “voters”, to Wall Street, they’re just “cheap” labor. There’s a reason why the U. S. Chamber of Commerce and most of the FORTUNE 500 are LA RAZA DONORS pushing for amnesty and even chain migration: 38 million get to bring up their entire extended family!


NEW YORK TIMES

December 5, 2009
OP-ED COLUMNIST

Black in the Age of Obama

By CHARLES M. BLOW
A hundred and fifty years ago, Charles Dickens opened “A Tale of Two Cities” with the now-famous phrase: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. ...”
Those words resonated with me recently while contemplating the impact of the Obama presidency on blacks in America. So far, it’s been mixed. Blacks are living a tale of two Americas — one of the ascension of the first black president with the cultural capital that accrues; the other of a collapsing quality of life and amplified racial tensions, while supporting a president who is loath to even acknowledge their pain, let alone commiserate in it.
Last year, blacks dared to dream anew, envisioning a future in which Obama’s election would be the catalyst for an era of prosperity and more racial harmony. Now that the election’s afterglow has nearly faded, the hysteria of hope is being ground against the hard stone of reality. Things have not gotten better. In many ways, they’ve gotten worse.
The recession, for one, has dealt a particularly punishing and uneven hand to blacks.
A May report from the Pew Research Center found that blacks were the most likely to get higher-priced subprime loans, leading to higher foreclosure rates. In fact, blacks have displaced Hispanics as the group with the lowest homeownership rates.
According to the most recent jobs data, not only is the unemployment rate for blacks nearly twice that of whites, the gap in some important demographics has widened rapidly since Obama took office. The unemployment rate over that time for white college graduates under 24 years old grew by about 20 percent. For their black cohorts, the rate grew by about twice that much.
And a report published last month by the Department of Agriculture found that in 2008, “food insecurity” for American households had risen to record levels, with black children being the most likely to experience that food insecurity.
Things on the racial front are just as bad.
We are now inundated with examples of overt racism on a scale to which we are unaccustomed. Any protester with a racist poster can hijack a news cycle, while a racist image can live forever on the Internet. In fact, racially offensive images of the first couple are so prolific online that Google now runs an apologetic ad with the results of image searches of them.
And it’s not all words and images; it’s actions as well. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s 2008 hate crimes data released last week, anti-black hate crimes rose 4 percent from 2007, while the combined hate crimes against all other racial categories declined 11 percent. If you look at the two-year trend, which would include Obama’s ascension as a candidate, anti-black hate crimes have risen 8 percent, while those against the other racial groups have fallen 19 percent.
This has had a sobering effect on blacks. According to a Nov. 9 report from Gallup, last summer 23 percent of blacks thought that race relations would get a lot better with the election of Obama. Now less than half that percentage says that things have actually gotten a lot better.
The racial animosity that Obama’s election has stirred up may have contributed to a rallying effect among blacks. According to a Gallup report published on Nov. 24, Obama’s approval rating among whites has dropped to 39 percent, but among blacks it remains above 90 percent.
Also, this hasn’t exactly been a good year for black men in the news. Plaxico Burress was locked up for accidentally shooting off a gun in a club. Henry Louis Gates Jr. was locked up for intentionally shooting off his mouth at his own home. And Michael Jackson died after being shot full of propofol. Chris Brown brutally beat Rihanna. Former Representative William Jefferson was convicted. And most recently, the “personal failings” of Tiger Woods portray him as an alley cat. Meanwhile, the most critically acclaimed black movie of the year, “Precious,” features a black man who rapes and twice impregnates his own daughter. Rooting for the president feels like a nice counterbalance.
However, the rallying creates a conundrum for blacks: how to air anxiety without further arming Obama’s enemies. This dilemma has rendered blacks virtually voiceless on some pressing issues at a time when their voices would have presumably held greater sway.
This means that Obama can get away with doing almost nothing to specifically address issues important to African-Americans and instead focus on the white voters he’s losing in droves. This has not gone unnoticed. In the Nov. 9 Gallup poll, the number of blacks who felt that Obama would not go far enough in promoting efforts to aid the black community jumped 60 percent from last summer to now.
The hard truth is that Obama needs white voters more than he needs black ones.
According to my analysis, even if every black person in America had stayed home on Election Day, Obama would still be president. To a large degree, Obama was elected by white people, some of whom were more able to accept him because he consciously portrayed himself as racially ambiguous.
In fact, commiserating with the blacks could prove politically problematic.
In a study to be published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences this month, researchers asked subjects to rate images of the president to determine which ones best represented his “true essence.” In some of the photos, his skin had been lightened. In others, it had been darkened. The result? The more people identified him with the “whiter” images, the more likely they were to have voted for him, and vice versa.
The Age of Obama, so far at least, seems less about Obama as a black community game-changer than as a White House gamesman. It’s unclear if there will be a positive Obama Effect, but an Obama Backlash is increasingly apparent. Meanwhile, black people are also living a tale of two actions: grin and bear it.

FRANCE DEALS WITH ILLEGALS How Cheap Is Illegal Labor? OR JUST EXPLOITIVE?

French government threatens to shut firms employing illegal immigrants
By Antoine Lerougetel

5 December 2009

The French government's November 22 announcement of draconian regulations against undocumented immigrants (sans-papiers) lays the legal basis for pogroms against hundreds of thousands of workers, as well as the firms that employ them. Between 200,000 and 400,000 sans-papiers live in France, largely working the worst-paid jobs in construction, restaurant and service industries.

The minister of immigration and national identity, Eric Besson, and Labour Minister Xavier Darcos announced the new regulations in separate statements.

Darcos announced that préfets (regional law-enforcement chiefs) would receive powers to shut down firms employing illegal immigrants. He added that the government will “reinforce inspections and apply sanctions hitting the wallets and the image of the firms in order to act as a deterrent.“

Besson told France 5 TV that it will be “a complete arsenal” against abuses, including “the administrative closure of establishments employing illegal foreigners” or “inelegibility for any offers of contracts for all firms,” public or private having employed sans-papiers. Increased fines and demands for the “reimbursement of public aid” will be imposed on offending enterprises.

With stunning cynicism, Besson tried to present the regulations as motivated by concern for sans-papiers: “If foreigners are exploited on our soil by mafia networks, it's also because there are employers and exploiters on our soil who take advantage of their situation.”

He said he would inform préfets of three conditions required for a sans papier to obtain a residence permit: presence in France for over five years, having declared to the authorities a request for residence rights at least a year previously, and working in a sector with difficulties recruiting labour. He set a quota of a mere 1,000 workers who could fulfill these extremely restrictive conditions.