Colorado - Illegal Immigrants no longer eligble for state health care - page 9

Effective Aug. 1, state services, including the state health plans and welfare, will no longer be given to illegal immigrants in Colorado. This law, enacted by Gov. Bill Owens, in considered the... Read More

  1. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from multicollinarity
    Hey, I'm all for voting out the oligarchy we have going on. I'm certainly not a fan of NAFTA and CAFTA. At the same time, I want the border closed to illegal immigration. I want legal, safe, and orderly immigration.

    ME 2! :spin:

    We can provide some assistance to our neighbors south of the US border. But we didn't create all of their problems, and it's not our responsibility (or ability!) to fix them.
    No we can't fix all their problems but we can set standards for doing business with them that will help improve their situation.
  2. by   HM2VikingRN
    Just a thought about immigrants and service......(11/1/2004)
    Today, there are more than 70,000 foreign-born, including nearly 40,000 non-citizens, in the US armed forces. Of the 1,000 US soldiers killed in Iraq through early September, at least 36 were foreign-born, and 10 were waiting for citizenship.
    California contributes nearly one of every three green card soldiers -- more than any other state. (“Fighting for their citizenship,” L.A. Times, 4/1/03)

    According to Goldich and other researchers, Hispanics account for many of today's immigrant service members, although there also is a significant presence of Asian Americans, including young Vietnamese men and women who resettled as refugees from the war there. All told, more than 37,000 members of the active-duty military -- nearly 3 percent of 1.4 million -- are noncitizens, one-third of them Latino, according to Defense Department figures. About one in six is a woman, similar to the military overall. (“For immigrants, a special sacrifice,” The Washington Post, 4/7/03)

    In fiscal 2002, 2,435 foreign-born military personnel were naturalized, up from 1,146 in fiscal 2001, the Immigration and Naturalization Service said. (“More immigrants filling the ranks of U.S. military,” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 12/15/02)

    More than 6,000 Marines are non-U.S. citizens, with the largest group -- 1,452 -- from Mexico. (“Immigrants could end up fighting war in Iraq,” Miami Herald, 9/19/03)

    Nearly 7 percent of U.S. Navy enlisted personnel are immigrants. (American Immigration Law Foundation Immigration Policy Report, 3/03)

    FWIW Henry Kissinger served in the ARMY as a non-citizen.....
    Last edit by HM2VikingRN on Aug 26, '06
  3. by   Sheri257
    Quote from multicollinarity
    I live in Southern Arizona. Last election, I went to a local political forum where the local interfaith counsel invites church members to ask questions of those running for office. About 1/2 of those in attendance were immigrants and their activist representatives. Many spoke Spanish and asked their questions thru interpreters. All of their questions were asking the candidates what they would give them. They call illegal aliens "undocumented immigrants." Examples of the questions:

    "Will you make sure that undocumented immigrants can get driver's licenses?"

    "We want health benefits. Will you make sure undocumented immigrants get medicaid?"

    "We want food stamps. Will you promise we get them?"

    "We want our AFDC. Will you promise we get it?"

    "We want in-state tuition at for undocumented immigrants. Do you promise and pledge?"

    "Will you pledge to exempt those whose first language is Spanish from the AIMS test for high school graduation?" (the AIMS test is an Arizona standardized test which is required in order to graduate)

    Now as a liberal democrat myself, I was astonished. It was one giant gimme gimme grab session. Please do not assume that those who wish to enforce immigration laws are cold or bigoted. It is crazy living here near the border. The cost of illegal immigration is a epic drain on the state budget.
    That is unbelievable.

  4. by   Sheri257
    Quote from cardiacRN2006
    What? Please tell me you're joking! The absolutely DEMANDED to get better treatment, and the absolutely THREATENED us with their Boycott and march. They flat out came on TV and threatened to not work, and to not buy anything American, and to do this until they got their demands. Maybe you missed the coverage of all the marches???????

    If you didn't know this little bit of information, than you are sadly misinformed about the subject.

    BTW, as a result of the boycott (which has been done twice now), the LEGAL Mexican-Americans lost thousands of dollars. Seems like since they illegals mostly work at Mexican restaurants, their boycott only hurt themselves.
    I have absolutely NO SYMPATHY for businesses that employ illegals. They SHOULD lose money.

    They keep claiming that prices will go up if illegals don't work here. It's a bunch of horse hockey. I've got illegals working construction all over my neighborhood where home prices have skyrocketed. Consumers don't save money on this ... only businesses do.

    Let them boycott, walk out ... whatever. Besides ... traffic was great the day they did boycott. In SoCal ... the illegal march was an instant solution to traffic congestion.

    :typing
  5. by   studentmalenurse
    We need to help these people survive, the fact is they are here to stay, they are not going away, we need to help them many of them are working at wages we would never work for. Take that away from them and the only thing left for them would be to steal in order to survive.
  6. by   studentmalenurse
    Its funny how the people who sit in high places cause majority of our problems, and we tend to look on ourselves and attack each other and blame others for our problems.
    This country has gone into so many other countries and destroyed their economy, we have gone into other countries and allowwed businesses to establish sweat shops which destroys their economy and all this is legal. We totally ignore countries that have no financial benefit to us.
    All our financial problems start from the head on down. We are a country that spends more money on the military then on education, no wonder our kids are behind other kids from other countries. Where so lazy that to learn a second language is problem. But if you go to other countries many of them are taught more then one language.
    Alot of immigrants come here to have a better life, even if its at the lowest level of our society. As long as they are working hard and are not performing criminal activity then let them live, if they are destructive then send them back to their country.
  7. by   cardiacRN2006
    Quote from studentmalenurse
    As long as they are working hard and are not performing criminal activity then let them live, if they are destructive then send them back to their country.
    By nature of being an illegal immigrant, they are performing an illegal activity.
  8. by   Fuzzy
    Quote from HM2Viking
    Children born in the US are citizens of the US by law.

    I was born and raised here. Where is my FREE HEALTHCARE, my FREE FOOD, my FREE HOUSING? I WANT IT, I WANT I WANT IT NOW!!!

    Oh wait I'm one of those people who has a job with no health insurance kind of like a lot of other people who are US citizens. Since I don't have kids, I'm not eligible for public assistance because I make too much money. Oh yeah, I don't speak or understand Spanish so I haven't a clue how to get public assistance through fraud and illegal documentation. :angryfire

    I think that other states need to follow Colorado's lead in this matter. I also would like to see businesses shut down for hiring illegals. I don't care what country they come from. The US is the only country where a CRIMINAL can stand up and demand services without fear of arrest. I don't understand our government sometimes.

    Fuzzy
  9. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from fuzzy
    the us is the only country where a criminal can stand up and demand services without fear of arrest. i don't understand our government sometimes.

    fuzzy
    i never said don't hold illegal immigrants accountable for their mistakes. the real issue is that the immigration violation is a single offense as i understand the law. if someone who broke an immigration law is otherwise leading a productive law-abiding life then we should temper justice with mercy. those who have committed violent offenses while living illegally in the us could be deported back to their country with a permanent immigration bar. if the only offense is the immigration violation there can be other consequences for example the law could double the time that it takes for them to be eligible for citizenship once they have attained their green card.

    what i also spoke to was that if they have children who are born here that the children should not suffer as a result of the mistakes of the parents. these children are us citizens by place of birth under the law and as such should have all the social protections and supports that that status entails just as children whose parents and grandparents have lived here for a hundred years.

    the real question i have for everyone who has vented through this thread about immigration issues is "can you documment and prove that every single one of your ancestors came to the us legally?" if not then you should lose your us citizenship. (some posters have argued for that point of view.) i don't support or believe in that position. i posed that scenario to call attention to the possible implications of that position in your own life.

    we may not like that immigrants protested the proposed immigration laws but as long as the protest was peaceful they were acting within the rights of assembly and petition that are guaranteed to people under the first amendment.

    amendment i

    congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    amendment v


    no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    amendment viii


    excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

    in many ways our constitution was written to protect the minority from tyranny by the majority. the reason i posted these amendments was as a reminder that as people we are all guaranteed the right to freely and peacefully express our viewpoints if we believe that we are being wronged, emtitled to due process in a court of law when accused of a crime and a prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. :wakeneo: if people are accused of a violation of law that matter should be handled through the courts under due process.the courts not only decide whether a crime was committed but also what punishments should be imposed under the law. punishment is always tempered iaw other factors.
  10. by   gauge14iv
    Part of the problem with illegal immigration is that it is uncontrolled. So we deport the felons and criminals. So what? They come right back. There is no control under the current system.

    In the long run that does the immigrants who are working to do it the legal way no good either because now they can no longer be differentiated in most peoples minds from a group of criminals.

    Make it easier to be legal, and harder to be illegal. Punish employers who hire the illegal, either by law or by boycott.
    Last edit by gauge14iv on Aug 27, '06
  11. by   HM2VikingRN
    some annotations from the 14th amendment. (emphasis added.)

    thus, the court so far has drawn a tripartite differentiation with respect to governmental restrictions on aliens. first, it has disapproved the earlier line of cases and now would foreclose attempts by the states to retain certain economic benefits, primarily employment and opportunities for livelihood, exclusively for citizens. second, when government exercises principally its spending functions, such as those with respect to public employment gen[p.1874]erally and to eligibility for public benefits, its classifications with an adverse impact on aliens will be strictly scrutinized and usually fail. third, when government acts in its sovereign capacity, when it acts within its constitutional prerogatives and responsibilities to establish and operate its own government, its decisions with respect to the citizenship qualifications of an appropriately designated class of public office holders will be subject only to traditional rational basis scrutiny.27 however, the "political function" standard is elastic, and so long as disqualifications are attached to specific occupations28 rather than to the civil service in general, as in sugarman, the concept seems capable of encompassing the exclusion.
    when confronted with a state statute that authorized local school boards to exclude from public schools alien children who were not legally admitted to the united states, the court determined that an intermediate level of scrutiny was appropriate and found that the proffered justifications did not sustain the classification.29 inasmuch as it was clear that the undocumented status of the children was not irrelevant to valid government goals and inasmuch as the court had previously held that access to education was not a "fundamental interest" which triggered strict scrutiny of governmental distinctions relating to education,30 the court's decision to accord intermediate review was based upon an amalgam of at least three factors. first, alienage was a characteristic that provokes special judicial protection when used as a basis for discrimination. second, the children were innocent parties who were having a particular onus imposed on them because of the misconduct of their parents. third, the total denial of an education to these chil[p.1875]dren would stamp them with an "enduring disability" that would harm both them and the state all their lives.31 the court evaluated each of the state's attempted justifications and found none of them satisfying the level of review demanded.32
  12. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from gauge14iv
    In the long run that does the immigrants who are working to do it the legal way no good either because now they can no longer be differentiated in most peoples minds from a group of criminals.

    Make it easier to be legal, and harder to be illegal. Punish employers who hire the illegal, either by law or by boycott.
    This sounds like the basis of a rational immigration policy.
  13. by   HM2VikingRN
    from the un declaration of human rights

    article 6.

    • everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

      article 15.

      • (1) everyone has the right to a nationality.
        (2) no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
        article 25.

        • (1) everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
          (2) motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. all children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.


close