Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arkansas Congressman says illegal immigrants don't take from social security
Keeparkansaslegal ^ | 083007 | keeparkansaslegal

Posted on 08/30/2007 2:29:42 PM PDT by pulaskibush

KeepArkansasLegal met with Vic Snyder and tried to get some answers about what he is doing to stop illegal immigration. Here is the video footage of that meeting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3v-3bsbbBE


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arkansas
KEYWORDS: aliens; arkansas; congress; illegalimmigration; immigrantlist; immigration; mexico; socialsecurity; totalization
We met with Congressman Vic Snyder at his Townhall meeting 082807. There were several people who talked with Vic Snyder about illegal immigration. Afterwards, I talked with the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, who wrote an article about the meeting.
1 posted on 08/30/2007 2:29:44 PM PDT by pulaskibush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush; Ahban; Amazed1953; AmericanHeroes.com; Andy E.; Arkansas Gal; ArkieGirl52; Arkinsaw; ..

Arkansas Ping


2 posted on 08/30/2007 2:32:21 PM PDT by pulaskibush (USA, founded by tolerant Christians. USSR, founded by intolerant Secularist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush

bump


3 posted on 08/30/2007 2:32:57 PM PDT by lowbridge ("We control this House, not the parliamentarians!” -Congressman Steny Hoyer (D))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Someone better tell this Rep that Bush has already signed an executive order to give illegals full social security benefits after 18 months of work.....which was part of the latest Illegal Alien Amnesty bill.

Had Amnesty passed, this order would have become law.


4 posted on 08/30/2007 2:39:52 PM PDT by UCFRoadWarrior (FantasyCollegeBlitz.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush

Based on what I know about Arkansans, they won’t take kindly the comments made by this hack.


5 posted on 08/30/2007 2:48:06 PM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush

What a babbling old fool. He thinks we can’t enforce our laws until poverty and corruption is eradicated in Latin America! He knows very little about the illegal immigration problem. He has NO position on illegal immigration, the enforcement of immigration laws, and all he can say is we need to ‘HELP’ Latin America. “We need to recognize these different categories”?? What the hell does that mean? And, oh, illegals can’t draw Social Security? What does that have to do with the cost of tea in China? If you are not a citizen, you don’t get Social Security: not a huge secret. Why is he stating the obvious? Their involvement with SS is limited to stealing people’s SS numbers to use to work illegally. However, he didn’t mention any ways to stop SS fraud, perhaps because he has no clue. Oh, but he did manage to vote against English as the official language. Why would anyone ever vote for this person? Arkansas and his district is not well served. I am in awe that you managed to be so polite to him.


6 posted on 08/30/2007 3:00:55 PM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCFRoadWarrior
"Full social security benefits after 18 months"

According to the detailed chart in the GAO report on totalization, a lower paid illegal with 8 credits would receive $39.00 per month. With 20 credits, $99.00 per month. With 36 credits, $178.00 per month.

If the illegal has higher earnings, he would receive higher benefits.

If an illegal accrues 40 credits, he is ineligible for totalization payments. Whatever SS benefits he may, or may not, be eligible are covered by other laws/regs.

You don't have to be an expert on this. The vast majority of illegals will not be eligible for totalization because they worked off the books and didn't pay in, or if they did pay in, they don't have the documentation.

7 posted on 08/30/2007 3:02:08 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tennmountainman
"Based on what I know about Arkansans, they won’t take kindly the comments made by this hack."

Based on what the rest of us know about Arkansas, nobody there will ever find out what this hack said.

Radio and TV won't carry it, nor will the newspapers.

8 posted on 08/30/2007 3:04:20 PM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: UCFRoadWarrior; Ben Ficklin
Actually, it is better -- and much worse than you say.

Once the President submits the agreement to Congress, which he is expected to do this fall, it goes into effect automatically unless the House of Representatives or the Senate adopts a resolution of disapproval within 60 legislative days.

However, the resolution of disapproval mechanism currently in the Social Security Act is an unconstitutional legislative veto, based on the Supreme Court's decision in INS v. Chadha, in which the Supreme Court struck down a similar provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Since Congress has never rejected a totalization agreement, the fact that the mechanism for disapproval is unconstitutional has not been an issue. Unless the law is changed, though, the passage of a resolution of disapproval would result in a judicial challenge, potentially resulting in a judgment that the agreement is effective regardless of Congress' wishes. Nice, huh?

9 posted on 08/30/2007 3:26:14 PM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
"Congress has never rejected a totalization agrrement"

If you read the GAO Report, you would know why Congress has never rejected. Because all of the totalization agreements the the US has entered into have benefitted the US, US employers, and US employees far more than the other country(s). On the the order of 2 or 3 times.

As the world gets smaller, foreign trade expands, more employers and employees move around the world to do business and work, there will be more and more totalization agreements.

Even Mexico, who has totalization agreements with Canada and Spain, will sign more of them.

Besides Mexico, the US has 3 other agreements pending. Don't ignore the reports in the Indian media about an agreement between India and the US.

10 posted on 08/30/2007 3:42:15 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush

5:59 of a babbling, doublespeaking democRAT. He certainly learned how to avoid answering questions.


11 posted on 08/30/2007 4:16:09 PM PDT by Budge (<>< Sit Nomen Domini benedictum. <><)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush
Good interview, wonderful captions!

It's clear Vic was having difficulty dodging the questions. Listening to his answers was almost as entertaining as watching Ms. Teen North Carolina's pageant melt down. :)

Smile, Vic...you've been freeped!

sw

12 posted on 08/30/2007 5:50:25 PM PDT by spectre (Spectre's wife)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush

This is one rat that will NOT speak to citizens again. You can take that to the bank.


13 posted on 08/31/2007 5:03:29 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Liberals are "American aliens." They were born IN America but they are not OF America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

>>The vast majority of illegals will not be eligible for totalization because they worked off the books and didn’t pay in, or if they did pay in, they don’t have the documentation.<<

How do you know whether “the vast majority” worked off the books? What happens when they use somebody else’s SS number?


14 posted on 08/31/2007 5:39:43 AM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Illegals: representation without taxation--Citizens: taxation without representation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
Misquoting me?

".........or if they did pay in, they don't have the documentation."

15 posted on 08/31/2007 7:11:04 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 3pools; 3rdcanyon; 4Freedom; 4ourprogeny; 7.62 x 51mm; ..

ping


16 posted on 08/31/2007 8:54:23 AM PDT by gubamyster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
>>Misquoting me?

".........or if they did pay in, they don't have the documentation."<<

OK, I think I see what you mean. You assume that if they used someone else's SS#, they would not qualify.

The trouble is, I have seen sleazy senators put too many loopholes in amnesty legislation, and I believe Bush would is a kindred sprit. Once "totalization" goes into effect via treaty, Bush, congress, the courts, and perhaps Hillary or a RINO president can make the deal even sweeter for illegals.

My opinion is that the health of Social Security WRT illegals is very difficult to measure, even for the GAO, because the assumptions that some of them will be ineligible in the future may not hold.

The GAO report does not sound that optimistic to me:

The cost of a totalization agreement with Mexico is highly uncertain. In March 2003, the Office of the Chief Actuary estimated that the cost of the Mexican agreement would be $78 million in the first year and would grow $650 million (in constant 2002 dollars) in 2050. SSA’s actuarial cost estimate assumes the initial number of newly eligible Mexican beneficiaries was equivalent to the 50,000 beneficiaries living in Mexico today and would grow sixfold over time. However, this proxy figure is not directly related to the estimated millions of current and former unauthorized workers and their family members from Mexico and appears small in comparison to those estimates. Furthermore, even if the baseline estimate is used, a sensitivity analysis performed by OCACT shows that an increase of more than 25 percent—or 13,000 new beneficiaries—would produce a measurable impact on the long-range actuarial balance of the trust funds. Our review of cost estimates for prior totalization agreements shows that the actual number of beneficiaries has frequently been underestimated and far exceeded the original actuarial estimates.

Is the estimate of payments 25% too low? 100% too low?

IMO, Bush and congress have both proved themselves appallingly untrustworthy.
17 posted on 08/31/2007 12:13:09 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Illegals: representation without taxation--Citizens: taxation without representation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

Typo, should say “Bush is a kindred spirit....”


18 posted on 08/31/2007 12:17:31 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Illegals: representation without taxation--Citizens: taxation without representation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: pulaskibush

This guy needs to be fired.


19 posted on 08/31/2007 12:18:07 PM PDT by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
"Is the estimate of payments 25% too low? 100% too low?

The GAO says that if SS is off by 35%, it will result in a measurable amount. GAO then says that the measurable amount is a number that rounds up to 0.01%.

Rounds up to 0.01% is 0.005% thru 0.009%. For discussion, let's say 0.007 which is in the middle of the range.

Double it. Triple it. Whether it is 35%=0.007%, 70%=0.014%, 105%=0.021%, in the scheme of SS's viability, these numbers are nothing.

20 posted on 08/31/2007 1:06:00 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson