Taxpayers on the hook for $2 trillion+ funding Obama’s amnesty

November 28, 2014

The Heritage Foundation’s expert on welfare and entitlement spending, Robert Rector, reports that illegal aliens who receive amnesty and work permits through Barack Obama’s executive actions will draw $2 trillion over their lifetimes in taxpayer-funded government services. Rector  based the figure on estimates that 4 million* illegal aliens will benefit from the actions and will live an average of 50 years.

“The net cost —- which is total benefits minus total benefits paid in —- of the amnesty recipients I estimate will be around $2 trillion over the course of their lifetime,* Rector told Breitbart News. “What [Obama] is doing is he is putting these 4 million people —- who on average have a 10th grade education —- into the Social Security and Medicare programs.”

In May 2013, Rector estimated the costs of the John McCain and Jeff Flake-led Gang of Eight’s 844-page amnesty bill, S. 744  to be $6.3 trillion. He applied that methodology to Obama’s executive amnesty. Rector looked at how much the average beneficiary would earn in wages over their lifetimes and then calculated how much they would draw in taxpayer benefits.

“Given their expected earnings, from someone who has a 10th grade education, they will draw about three dollars worth of benefits out of those programs over their lifetimes for every dollar they put into them. But the overall cost in outlays will be around a trillion dollars for those programs alone,” Rector said. “The bottom line to understand this is you are taking millions of people with a 10th grade education and giving them access to the largest entitlement and welfare system in the globe.”

Carrying the deceptive title, “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act,” S.744, clearly an amnesty bill, was approved in the Senate June 27, 2013 by a vote of 68 to 32, with the disappointing support of 14 Republicans. The Republican-led House did not pass the amnesty proposal. Check out the actual roll call vote to see how the individual senators “represented” their constituents.

* Editor’s note: Robert Rector uses 4 million illegal aliens in his cost analysis. Other reports put the number well in excess of 5 million, which would up the ante on the $2 trillion figure. Here on the White House website, the figure is acknowledged as 11 million as Obama sets forth the unenforceable provisions of his unilaterally imposed scheme which bypasses congress as he spits in the eye of the U.S. Constitution.

 


Credibility problems with lawyers defending Obama’s overreach

November 25, 2014

April Fool’s Day is still months away, but the gags keep coming

The U.S. Department of Justice recently released a letter* citing 10 legal academics at colleges across the country defending Barack Obama’s imperial executive action —- bypassing congress —- which grants amnesty to millions of foreign nationals who have illegally entered the United States.

But while the DOJ touts these professors’ prominence, their neutrality is certainly questionable.

In the letter, the legal scholars say they don’t always see eye-to-eye on presidential power and immigration policy, but that they “are all of the view that these actions are lawful.”

Of the 10 letter signers, seven are registered Democrats. Two live in states that don’t release party affiliation, but they both donate exclusively to Democrat candidates. The lone Republican, Eric Posner, is also an exclusive Democrat donor and has repeatedly written that Obama can literally “do whatever he wants” when it comes to executive authority.

Three of the lawyers work at the University of Chicago, where Obama taught constitutional law.

Another, Lee Bollinger, is the president of Columbia University, where Obama did his undergrad work. Bollinger is also directly involved in the effort to make Columbia the site of Obama’s presidential library.

Duke University professor Walter Dellinger, another who signed the letter, served in the Clinton administration and has an ongoing friendship with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who was nominated by Obama.

Finally, there’s Laurence Tribe, a mentor to Obama at Harvard Law School, who called him “the best student I ever had and the most exciting research assistant.” He also campaigned for Obama.

* The DOJ letter is missing from its website.

 


Awaiting GJ decision: Will mob rule reign in Ferguson? UPDATE

November 23, 2014

Taught by Obama, Ferguson vigilantes employ lawless tactics, pump up divisiveness

The aftermath of the Aug. 9 shooting death of unarmed black teen Michael Brown by white police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri has ignited a firestorm of protestors. Many are imported from outside the state to incite riots, including emboldened members of the Revolutionary Communist Party and New Black Panthers as spotted by the Blaze.

In anticipation of the worst, barricades have been erected around the building where a grand jury has been deliberating.

This surveillance video showing 6’4” and nearly 300 lb. Michael Brown engaged in a strong-armed robbery of a convenience store, just before the shooting, exposes him as less than an innocent “gentle giant” as he has been portrayed.

Last week in anticipation of the grand jury decision —- likely to come Monday —- Gov. Jay Nixon declared a state of emergency, even activating National Guard troops, as he cited the “possibility of expanded unrest.”

Businesses in both Ferguson and neighboring Clayton have boarded their windows in anticipation of violence and rioting if the decision is not to the mob’s liking.

Ryan Lovelace writing for National Review reports on the coarse disregard for police requests that the agitators outside the police department disband.

The Obama White House sent a message that escalation of protests was acceptable when it sent three officials to attend Brown’s funeral —- three more than it sent for former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s funeral, which it snubbed last year. 

The administration has devoted considerable resources as it highlighted the case. At the time, Attorney General Eric Holder personally visited Ferguson and assigned dozens of investigators to conduct a federal civil rights probe.

The double standard, reported by the Washington Times, became ever more apparent as unarmed white 20-year-old Dillon Taylor was killed by a black police officer in Utah, with no White House representatives at his funeral and no federal probe underway.
Update-tag

November 24, 2014 8:25 PM

Ferguson Grand Jury: No indictment

Looting, fires and pandemonium in cities across U.S. follow decision

 After hearing all of the evidence based on a full investigation, a 12-person grand jury returned no indictment in the highly publicized and racially charged case involving white police officer Darren Wilson, 28, in the shooting death of black teenager Michael Brown, a suspect in a strong armed robbery.

The fact that the mixed race grand jurors did not shrink from their duty out of fear of violence  renews faith in our legal system, that functions on presentation of facts rather than intimidation. The jurors were not sequestered, and knew full well the political ramifications of their decision.

Grand jurors do not decide guilt or innocence.  After weighing a full presentation of evidence, it is the duty of the 12 citizens to determine probable cause as to whether or not sufficient evidence exists to bring charges that will then be presented in a criminal trial.

Officer Wilson’s safety has been an issue since the Aug. 9 shooting, but a recent bounty on his head has put authorities on heightened alert. He is expected to resign his post with the Ferguson Police Department.

As predicted, absolute chaos has taken over, but not just in Ferguson. Mob mentality rioters in cities across the country are setting fires to businesses, looting stores, shooting weapons and overturning police cars. With tensions further inflamed by fiery speeches by Al Sharpton and his ilk, mobs rioted in New York City, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Chicago, Oakland and Washington D.C.


Obama’s raw contempt for constitution’s separation of powers & Update

November 21, 2014

Statements from Arizona’s D.C. delegation

The President of the United States, a onetime senior lecturer who later claimed to be a “constitutional law professor,” has shown his ineptness regarding the subject.

By unilaterally implementing his brazen amnesty scheme via executive order —- bypassing congress —- he has rejected the voice of America’s voters. Barack Obama has exceeded his authority for what he undoubtedly views as  pure political gain.

This is Obama speaking more rationally to a live Univision audience in March 2011:

“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case,” Obama said at the time.

“We’ve got three branches of government,” he instructs.  “Congress passes the law, the executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws and then the judiciary has to interpret the laws,” he says.

“For me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”

When Obama was first sworn into office he had large Democrat majorities in both the Senate and the House. They were so large he could have designed and passed a bill exclusively through the Democrats. Instead he pushed healthcare reform and gun control bills. Now after a major 2014 midterm election loss repudiating his policies, and putting both the Senate and House in GOP control, an angry Obama has bypassed congress altogether.  This comes despite the fact that he has repeatedly acknowledged he does not have the authority to take such action.

Obama’s sagging polling numbers speak volumes. He will have no legacy as he leaves office in two years. Still, the question remains, are his actions legal?

Update-tag

These are the responses to Obama’s executive order under “press releases” from Arizona’s Republican members of congress. Rep. Trent Franks has a page titled “In the News.” His most recent newsworthy issue does not address this massive overstep of presidential authority.

 Rep. Gosar Responds to President Obama’s Unlawful Executive Amnesty Order

 Rep. Salmon Responds to President Obama’s Unilateral Immigration Actions

 Rep. Schweikert Secret Science Bill Passes the House

Trent Franks: Stand Up For Religious Freedom

 Longtime amnesty leader, John McCain attempts to feign outrage: 

Senator McCain on Pres. Obama’s Executive Action on Immigration

McCain’s amnesty doppelganger Sen. Jeff Flake  issued this two sentence equivocation:

Flake Statement on Obama’s Immigration Executive Order


Obama set to ignore America’s repudiation of his policies

November 20, 2014

Exhibits brash contempt for still struggling American citizen workforce

As we await this evening’s announcement granting amnesty to upward of five million illegals, it’s worth keeping a sharp eye on the Republican establishment, some of whom are poised to cave to this dangerous overreach that will give rise to a further surge of invaders.  Beware when the words, “our nation’s immigration system is broken,” are used.

Surprisingly, the habitually deferential MSM networks —- ABC, CBS and NBC —- are reportedly taking a pass on Barack Obama’s primetime address, as he outlines his executive action in defiance of the American people who soundly rejected his schemes on Nov. 4.

In fact, this newly released NBC/WSJ poll shows Hispanics do not overwhelmingly support Obama’s decision to bypass Congress. Nearly half of all Americans express disapproval.

Acting unilaterally, the “Emperor of the United States,” as Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) has so correctly tagged, him is moving forward with imposing executive amnesty.

Rush Limbaugh notes that Sessions is also the most eloquent, consistent, outspoken critic of illegal immigration and amnesty.  He writes op-eds and delivers effective speeches from the floor of the Senate. He has been tireless in his characterization of the danger that this portends to the country, to the future. He understands what’s at risk, both democratically and constitutionally.

For his efforts, Republican leadership in the Senate want to kick Sessions off the Budget Committee, where he is the Ranking Member. If that occurs, it pretty much tells us all  we need to know about what’s going to happen with the new Senate majority we were just rejoicing over.

After winning the only nationally uncontested senate election in 2014, Sessions said, “The American people dramatically repudiated the policies of President Obama, Senator Reid, and Leader Pelosi. It was also a dramatic affirmation of the policies our GOP candidates campaigned on: controlling spending, balancing the budget, repealing Obamacare, unleashing American energy, and boosting wages through pro-worker reforms.”

“Republicans in the House and Senate campaigned against the Obama-Senate immigration bill and on the pledge to block President Obama’s unlawful executive amnesty. The immediate emergency facing our new majority will be fighting the President’s disastrous planned actions, and we will have not only a Constitutional mandate but also a popular mandate to do so,” Sessions said.

“President Obama’s immigration order would provide illegal immigrants with the exact benefits Congress has repeatedly rejected: Social Security numbers, photo IDs and work permits —– which will allow them to now take jobs directly from struggling Americans in every occupation. Congress must not allow this unconstitutional action. That means Congress should fund the government while ensuring that no funds can be spent on this unlawful purpose.”

“The last six years of the Obama-Reid majority have been a government of the elites for the elites. Our new GOP Senators will lead the way in returning government to the loyal citizens who sent us here.”

Those were Sen. Sessions words following the election that swept Republicans into office nationwide earlier this month.  Will they ring true?


$3 billion donor Obama imitates fashion of mass murderer

November 18, 2014

During his recent trip to China for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit, Barack Obama, the leader of the free world, emulated his Communist hosts by showing up in a Mao jacket.

In addition to his outlandishly offensive garb, during this speech given while in Australia he laid at the feet of the globalists, his vow to underwrite with American tax dollars an Al Gore-like and discredited Climate Change initiative. 

“We are going to contribute $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund so we can help developing nations deal with climate change,” he boasted.

The Green Climate Fund says that it aims to promote a “paradigm shift” in the use of energy and in development. Translate that to mean United States’ manufacturing and technology will be hamstrung while Third World countries will get a pass on complying with emissions standards. China, a global financial powerhouse, has a 15-year moratorium.

The U.K.‘s Daily Mail has an interesting comparison piece listing the world’s most murderous regimes. Note that China’s Mao Zedong, who made mandatory the Mao jacket, tops the list of murderous regimes, edging out the horrific and bloody dictatorships of Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler.


Obama 2011: Executive order on amnesty “not appropriate”

November 15, 2014

New_citizens

Obama 2014: Eagerly embraces Mexico’s poverty exportation scheme as political retaliation

The news is rife with speculation that lame-duck President Barack Obama intends to unveil a series of executive orders that will shield millions of illegal aliens living in the U. S. from deportation, while granting them work permits and access to taxpayer-funded benefits.

His timing is odd, given that the Nov. 4 midterm elections repudiated Obama’s policies —- including those making America an illegal alien sanctuary nation, with an intentionally unenforceable border. Voters across the nation spoke clearly by turning the senate to a Republican majority as well as retaining the House and GOP governorship dominance by even greater margins. Obama’s response is to engage in a flagrant and lawless assault on our constitution to enact measures wrathfully calculated to increase the Democrat voter base.

Democrat duplicity abounds. Obama was pressured to suspend such actions by his own political partisans concerned about the effect amnesty would have on their reelections. These self-serving liberal congressional stalwarts supported Obama’s agenda more than 90 percent of the time.

Of crucial importance is the fact our porous border provides entry to all comers, many who intend harm to America and her citizens. Obama, however, puts his leftist ideology before America’s security.

How do struggling American citizens, many still unemployed or underemployed, benefit by having at least 5 million suddenly legalized foreign workers competing for jobs while undercutting salaries? The new action will expand Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policies, which are already pitting our college-bound students against the now legitimized influx for university placement. 

By now it should be clear that Democrats stock in trade is not putting Americans first and lying about it. This is Obama speaking to a live Univision audience in March 2011. Univision television, based in New York, is an American Spanish language broadcast network with major production facilities in Florida.

“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case,” Obama said at the time.

“We’ve got three branches of government,” he instructs.  “Congress passes the law, the executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws and then the judiciary has to interpret the laws,” he says.

“For me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 339 other followers