Undocumented immigrants could serve on California boards under new bill
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Immigrants residing in California illegally would be able to serve on all state and local boards and commissions under a proposal introduced in the state Senate on Monday.
Senate Bill 174 amends existing state law to allow the appointment of any resident over the age of 18 to a civil office regardless of citizenship or immigration status. California law currently states that someone is incapable of holding office if they are not a citizen at the time of their appointment.
“California is stronger when we utilize talents of all our residents, and opening state and local boards and commissions to every Californian will allow us to better serve our diverse communities," Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens and the bill's author, said in a statement. “Undocumented Californians are our neighbors, co-workers and parents, and as lawmakers we can’t make good policy if their voices are left out of the discussion."
Lara's office said each board or commission would have to analyze federal law to determine if the appointee can be compensated for the work based on their individual immigration status. Federal law prohibits residents without legal status from seeking salaried positions, for example, but immigrants granted work authorization under the Federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program would be eligible for pay, Lara's office said.
Lara introduced the bill on Monday in the latest move by state lawmakers to provide more opportunities to immigrants in California without legal authorization as the Trump administration moves in the opposite direction. Lara has carried bills to expand health care coverage to undocumented immigrants over the years, including a proposal this year to offer Medi-Cal coverage to undocumented adults.
The California Senate made headlines earlier this year when a panel of lawmakers appointed Lizbeth Mateo , a 33-year-old attorney and civil rights activist, to the California Student Opportunity and Access Program Project Grant Advisory Committee. It marked the first time the Senate appointed someone living in the U.S. without legal authorization to a state post.
At the time, Sen. Kevin de León's office argued that the appointment was legal because Mateo's committee is advisory in nature and not delegated to adopt laws and regulations or allocate state funds.
Lara said the law banning immigrants without legal status from state posts dates back to 1872 and was written to target Chinese immigrants.
“The California Inclusion Act turns the page on the anti-Chinese laws written in the 1870s and our state’s shameful history of excluding immigrants from civic life," Lara said.
Lara gutted an unrelated bill and amended it with new language on appointments. SB 174 is currently in the Assembly.
Tags
Who is online
71 visitors
LINK TO BILL TEXT
It is the intent of the Legislature to remove barriers to service and authorize all California residents, including those without lawful immigration status, to serve on California’s diverse local and state boards and commissions so that their perspectives and voices are heard.
They may as well. California is an asset and a liability to the rest of the country. Guess we could just build a wall and keep dehydrate them.
Good point. Maybe the wall should be were CA borders the rest of the US. That is so damn sad I can't even put a LOL or
after it
OK the debate is on! I appreciate the fact we still have good ones.
First of all in CA where they are trying to pass this lunacy, the $15.00/hr minimum has already passed. Nice try.
Nobody made the immigrants take those jobs so they are not being taken advantage of. They are here by their own choice. Nice try again.
Here is the main point of the matter. You think it is OK to let non-citizens take positions that would allow them to make rules and decisions that US citizens have to abide by and I think that is nothing short of lunacy.
Your position on the matter would allow the very same Russians that meddled in the elections that you complained so EXTENSIVELY about to hold public office.
Wouldn't that make meddling in elections easier?
Please explain yourself.
I don't believe undocumented aliens are allowed to legally work in America.
If they are, then they are no longer undocumented.
Good point.
If you want a viable debate, don't talk down to me … particularly when you're posting misinformation!
So you advocate breaking US law by paying illegal aliens money for services---in other words, you want to pay them to work.
When they are illegal aliens.
Real freaking smart of you.
deleted
My apologies if you thought I was talking down to you.
You have a point that the minimum is not YET $15.00 and hour but it will be and is already higher than most the rest of the country. So $11.00/hr is not a "living wage"? Is $15.00/hr? I know it doesn't seem like much when you compare it to the myriad of handouts available in this country but that is another discussion.
This very well may be true but it really doesn't have anything at all to do with them having the right to hold public office or vote.
I wasn't putting words in your mouth I was simply pointing out just ONE of MANY undesirable consequences of your position on the subject.
You DO understand a Russian hacker could move to CA, meet "CA citizen requirements" run for office, get elected, and there would be NOTHING ANYONE could do about it if this law passed, right? (Short of proving they committed a crime, but I am not even really sure if that would apply in a sanctuary city, are you?)
In this country you are also allowed to vote for yourself if you run for public office. How do you think that will shake out in this case? Do you think it's worth the millions in court costs it will likely cause?
Unless you can provide something other than non-substantive, ad hominem stuff, don't bother.
Unfortunately, there is a REALITY that we do not like … but unless that reality changes … we would be worse off without it.
American corporations and legislators brought us to this point of economic dependency through expediency and greed; now they want to blame those they incentivized to give them their bottom lines!
I'm not saying "it's right," -- I'm saying, "it's the reality." And I ask you, "how do we fix this without seriously destroying a vital industry and major portion of our economy.
Instead of asking your rhetorical questions, lay out a viable solution. Xenophobia and politicians who pander to it exacerbate their supporters blindness to what's real.
These U.S. industries can't work without illegal immigrants
Undocumented immigrant farm workers fill a vital role in the U.S. economy.
Mary Jo Dudley is director of the Cornell Farmworker Program at Cornell University.The nation's attention is currently on the southern border, where the Trump administration's "zero tolerance" policy has caused a crisis over separated immigrant children .
Sometimes forgotten as the nation focuses attention on migrants currently trying to cross the border is that millions of undocumented immigrants continue to live in the U.S. – and most of them work.
And in fact, these workers play vital roles in the U.S. economy, erecting American buildings, picking American apples and grapes, and taking care of American babies. Oh, and paying American taxes .
My work as the director of the Cornell Farmworker Program involves meeting with undocumented workers in New York, and the farmers who employ them. Here's a snapshot of who they are, where they work – and why Americans should care about them.
A snapshot of who they are
Pew Research Center estimates that about 11.3 million people are currently living in the U.S. without authorization, down from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007. More than half come from Mexico, and about 15 percent come from other parts Latin America.
About 8 million of them have jobs, making up 5 percent of the U.S. workforce, figures that have remained more or less steady for the past decade.
Geographically, these unauthorized workers are spread throughout the U.S. but are unsurprisingly most concentrated in border states like California and Texas, where they make up about 9 percent of both states' workforces, while in Nevada, their share is over 10 percent.
Their representation in particular industries is even more pronounced, and the Department of Agriculture estimates that about half of the nation's farmworkers are unauthorized, while 15 percent of those in construction lack papers – more than the share of legal immigrants in either industry. In the service sector, which would include jobs such as fast food and domestic help, the figure is about 9 percent.
Further studies show that the importance of this population of workers will only grow in coming years. For example, in 2014, unauthorized immigrants made up 24 percent of maids and cleaners, an occupation expected to need 112,000 more workers by 2024. In construction, the number of additional laborers needed is estimated at close to 150,000. And while only 4 percent of personal care and home health aides are undocumented, the U.S. will soon require more than 800,000 people to fill the jobs necessary to take care of retiring baby boomers.
Vital to American farms
Since agriculture is the industry that's most reliant on undocumented workers – and it's my area of expertise and research – let's zoom in on it.
Overall, the agricultural industry in the United States has been on the decline since 1950. Back then, farming was a family business that employed more than 10 million workers , 77 percent of whom were classified as "family." As of 2000 – the latest such data available – only 3 million work on farms , and as noted earlier, an estimated half are undocumented.
Increasingly, dairy farms such as those in New York rely on workers from Mexico and Guatemala, many of whom are believed to be undocumented. Currently, there is no visa program for year-round workers on dairy farms, so the precarious status of these workers poses serious concerns for the economic viability of the dairy industry.
In recent research conducted by the Cornell Farmworker Program, 30 New York dairy farmers told us they turned to undocumented workers because they were unable to find and keep reliable U.S. citizens to do the jobs. That's in part because farm work can be physically demanding, dirty and socially denigrated work. More importantly, it is one the most dangerous occupations in the U.S.
A study commissioned by the dairy industry suggested that if federal labor and immigration policies reduced the number of foreign-born workers by 50 percent, more than 3,500 dairy farms would close, leading to a big drop in milk production and a spike in prices of about 30 percent. Total elimination of immigrant labor would increase milk prices by 90 percent.
The U.S. fruit, vegetable and meat industries are similarly at risk , and without the help of unauthorized workers, production would drop and consumers would likely see higher prices.
This has become of particular concern as immigration enforcement in agricultural communities intensifies.
Although the focus is usually on the southern border, what happens in the north matters as well, in part because the Border Patrol's 100-mile jurisdiction means immigrants living in most of New England can be pursued anywhere. As such, the surge in immigration enforcement along the border with Canada in recent years has resulted in more farmworkers being deported.
It also has meant fresh produce has been gone unpicked, left to rot in fields. One New York apple grower told us that due to labor shortages and dwindling prices for his red delicious variety, he plans to let his 100-year-old orchard go, because any investments in production would result in significant economic loss.
Who cares? Most Americans
Judging by the pronouncements from the White House, you might think most people don't realize how integral undocumented immigrants are to the U.S. economy. But in fact, polls suggest that Americans do understand this, and also don't believe that immigrants take their jobs.
In a soon-to-be-published poll Cornell conducted in 2017, we asked New Yorkers, "How do you believe undocumented farmworkers impact local communities?"
About 75 percent of those we polled said they have "generally positive impacts," up from 62 percent in 2008 . Of those who had a positive impression, most said it was because migrants fill jobs unwanted by citizens or provide essential farm help and keep prices low.
And national polling backs this up. A 2016 Pew poll found that 76 percent believe undocumented immigrants are as honest and hard-working as U.S. citizens, while 71 percent said they mostly fill jobs that Americans aren't willing to do.
In other words, not only are there lots of reasons to care, the vast majority of Americans actually do.
Let's see if the bill becomes law and determine if what you posit is true. An "appointment" to a government post is not an ELECTION to public office …
For now, in California's State Capitol …
ELECTIVE OFFICES
WHO CAN RUN FOR CITY COUNCIL?
Any member of the public who meets the requirements below may run for public office in the City of Sacramento. Candidates must:
While it’s true that undocumented residents living in California can obtain driver’s licenses, the state has not passed any laws that also provide them the right to vote. The New Motor Voter Act was passed in an effort to improve voter turnout, and while this law does automatically register citizens to vote when they obtain or renew their driver’s licenses, that action only applies to citizens who have already attested and/or documented an eligibility to vote.
In November 2016, the California city of San Francisco did pass a ballot proposition allowing some non-citizens to register to vote in local school board elections only.
I'm trying to have an honest debate; that's why I respond with specifics.I am NOT arguing the point that US industries need these workers. I agree.
The debate is if they should be able to hold public office so let's stay focused.
You have provided some facts to back up your OPINION that non citizens should have the right to hold public office, and I have pointed out just ONE on why they shouldn't and you are avoiding addressing it directly like the plague. Rest assured I have any others but lets address this one first.
You DO understand a Russian hacker (or spy or terrorist from other countries as well.....) could move to CA, meet "CA citizen requirements" run for office, get elected, and there would be NOTHING ANYONE could do about it if this law passed, right? (Short of proving they committed a crime, but I am not even really sure if that would apply in a sanctuary city, are you?)
You seem to agree that non citizens should not be able to vote. In this country you are allowed to vote for yourself if you run for public office. How do you think that will shake out in this case? Do you think it's worth the millions in court costs it will likely cause?
Are you really going to continue to try and defend this proposed law?
I am giving specifics as well. This is directly from the bill (Link in first post)
Honestly AMAC don't you see even MORE of a problem with APPOINTING non citizens to public office? I sure do!
Are you OK with Trump making those appointments???
Are you OK with letting ANY politician that I CHOOSE making those appointments?
Currently, non-citizens do not have the right to vote … as for court costs in conjunction with appeals, etc., would you prefer that we have no "day-in-court" in America.
We agree that this is not an ideal situation, but were it not for in incentivizing undocumented workers, we would not be discussing what has followed as a result; these discussions often arise, not based on pragmatism or reality, but because of white nationalists WHO NEVER RAISE THE ISSUE OF UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS FROM WHITE COUNTRIES LIKE IRELAND OR CANADA!
Of course I would prefer the money is not wasted, There is no need, the law is crystal clear. A day in court? Fine. That's all it should take. Why on earth would anyone want non-citizens to vote other than to build a constituent base at the cost (and complete disregard of the consequences) of the entire country?
I really don't care where they are from so let's not go down the racist rabbit hole, and you (purposely?) are straying from the point again, which is that the law is reckless and opens up our political system to unimaginable, potentially dangerous and even catastrophic interference by people who are not citizens of this country.
You don't want to debate, you simply want everyone to agree with you.
Every time, almost, I ever ask you a question, you go off on some tirade.
You can keep it.
Since hacking is a crime, if he/she had been identified as one he would not get citizenship but more likely a jail sentence if he/she moved to CA.
Projection!
Truth!
Yeah, I laughed at his response, too!
Yes, and they have identified so many of them...
You don't debate; you ask rhetorical questions that imply by innuendo and, which create straw men that you then knock down; you never make a substantive, definitive point and defend it with specifics … your game is to always try to put those with whom you disagree, on the defensive. And, when a viable defense is nevertheless provided …
You post a cartoon or a quip.
I ask real questions which you simply can not or will not answer.
it's okay, I expect it from you now.
Well, that and deflecting whenever possible.
Sadly enough, this appears to be the fact.
That comment deserves two
You're shrieking at the wrong guy. It's the employer who's hiring undocumented aliens who should be the target of your rage no matter how much they're paying these employees. Ah, but that would mean clamping down on people you admire, wouldn't it?
Not at all.
I am ALL FOR E-Verify for EVERY job in America.
I support stiff fines for employers for first and possibly second offenses, and loss of licenses for any further offenses.
I am also against issuing ANY type of licenses to illegal aliens, renting homes to them, allowing them utilities, registration of cars, etc.
Once they are required to pay taxes, they have literally and figuratively "paid" to be here. YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
Undocumented workers are necessary for a viable U.S. economy … whether or not it SHOULD be that way … is TOO LATE TO DEBATE … IT'S REALITY. Trump and his base can advocate cutting off their proverbial noses to spite their white nationalism faces …
Trump has already appointed far worse than undocumented workers … and to positions of much greater consequence than a $75/month advisory one. I understand your philosophical objection … but REALITY and PHILOSOPHY do not always coincide. To undermine reality and certain logistics of the economy because "THINGS AIN'T THE WAY WE'D LIKE THEM TO BE," is not just unwise, it's disaster waiting to happen.
So to be clear it looks like you are OK with having non US citizens hold public office regardless of if that office is elected or appointed....regardless of the obvious and potential harm and implications. Correct?
I think that is nuts but lets agree to disagree on that point, move forward and address the inconveniences you tried to ignore and try to make sense of your position on the matter.
Are you ok with Trump or another politician of my choice appointing them?
Regardless, will you put responsibility squarely on the Democratic party for ALL the problems caused by such a law since they passed the insane law in the first place?
Have you put responsibility on them for the "nuclear option"?
Didn't expect any replies to that one LMAO!
and just why should illegals have any voice in our stuff?
Non citizens shouldn't. It really doesn't matter if they are working here legally or not.
They don't. Move along.
Bullshit. in many cases, They go to our public schools, live off the welfare state, go to hospitals and leave someone else with the tab. They vote illegally, (I know you are OK with that but many aren't.) The list goes on and on.
You need to make the distinction between an undocumented worker and an "illegal."
But, to answer your question, once the IRS collects taxes from a worker, they literally and figuratively have paid for a voice; it's not as "loud" or extensive a voice as that of a citizen -- nor should it be -- but it can't be both ways. As long as the U.S. assesses them a tax liability, it has tacitly acknowledge the important roll they play in our economy.
White supremacists and pandering legislators want to make the immigration issue about "non-whites" -- and do so out of the ignorance and stupidity as to the tacit "deal" and the mutual benefits via "quid-pro-quo." The proverbial horse was let out of the barn by Ronald Reagan and others … it would be economic disaster to arbitrarily and summarily deport all undocumented workers and close the "barn door behind them.
Xenophobia, racism and zeal-without-knowledge is the Trump Base way of "seeing" … which is blind loyalty and stupidity.
Oh, yes, we're all fully aware of the rightwing bullshit lists. Your claim was that "illegals" are having a "say" in our politics or public matters and that's bullshit. The last thing undocumented aliens want to do is draw public attention to themselves--especially now that the big brave ICE agents are apt to kidnap their children and pack the parents off to who-knows-fuck-where. Just settle down and try to stop pushing bullshit and then maybe we could start having actual discussions about things instead of always having to spend all this time calling out that bullshit.
if that were true then no illegal alien would protest.
Estimates of the illegal population vary between 11 and 20 million. FAIR believes there are likely between 11 to 13 million illegal residents. In addition to the illegal aliens already in the country, the Census Bureau estimates that the illegal alien population is growing by a minimum of 500,000 per year.
Combining the estimated numbers of both legal and illegal aliens, there appear to be at least 26 million non-U.S. citizens in the United States at any given time. The bulk of them are lawful permanent residents and illegal aliens (a total of 22 million). The balance consists of roughly 1.6 million tourists and other brief-stay visitors; and approximately 2.4 million long-term visa-holders, such as students and temporary workers.
Many politicians are taking firm stances on issues affecting migrants, including amnesty, entitlements and sanctuary city policies. This gives noncitizens a significant incentive to register as voters and cast a ballot. For example, in East Chicago, Indiana, a city with 30,000 residents, voting fraud was so systemic in 2003 that the State Supreme Court ordered a new election with heightened verification. When unlawful voters were prohibited from casting a ballot the outcome of the election changed. 18
The problem is not unique to Indiana. A 2013 National Hispanic Survey study by Republican pollster John McLaughlin asked a sample of 800 likely Hispanic voters if they were American citizens. 13 percent admitted they were not. 19
In 2014, a study released by a team of professors from Old Dominion University and George Mason University estimated that approximately 6.4 percent of noncitizens voted In the 2008 presidential election. They also surmised that 2.2 percent voted in the 2010 midterm election. 20 In addition, the study estimated that 80 percent of noncitizens who appeared to have voted cast their ballots in favor of one party. Noncitizens are believed to have voted in these elections in numbers great enough to have affected the outcome.
Nate Silver, an acclaimed statistician with the forecasting firm Five Thirty Eight, calculated that states with newly implemented voter ID laws will experience turnout decrease by as much as 2.4 percent of the registered voter population. 21 Opponents of voter ID laws claim that any decreases in voter turnout are evidence that legal voters have been disenfranchised – discounting the possibility that the reductions are due to decreased participation by non-citizens. But, as Silver has noted, this argument doesn’t make sense because the vast majority of adults in America hold some form of photo identification and states with voter ID laws offer qualifying documentation at minimal or no cost. While it is impossible to prove that Silver’s entire 2.4 percent estimated turnout decrease is entirely attributable to noncitizen voters, it is highly likely that foreign nationals without authorization to vote will constitute the majority of this group. And Silver’s numbers are consistent with the results of other studies more specifically focused on reducing unlawful noncitizen voting.
If we take the mean of these three estimates -- 7.25 percent -- and apply it to just the 22 million non-citizen residents currently in the United States, then approximately 1.6 million non-citizens vote every year. According to the high and low estimates here, that number could be as high as 2.9 million (at 13 percent of 22 million), or as low as 528,000 (2.4 percent of 22 million). Both are unacceptably high numbers.
[1] In Evenwel v. Abbot the Supreme Court of the United States held that both non-citizens (i.e., aliens lawfully present in the U.S.) and illegal aliens may be counted when apportioning congressional districts.
[2] Public Interest Legal Foundation/Virginia Voters Alliance, Alien Invasion in Virginia: The Discovery and Coverup of Noncitizen Registration and Voting (September 2016), available at: and Brendan Kirby, Illegal Alien Voters Uncovered in Philly Are “Tip of the Iceberg,” Lifezette October 5, 2016, available at:
[4] U.S. Attorney’s Office – Western District of New York, Cheektowaga Woman Arrested, Charged With Voter Fraud (October 2016), available at:
[4] See U.S. Vote Foundation, State Voting Requirements and Information , available at:
[5] Pro Publica, 2016 Election Lawsuit Tracker: The New Election Laws and the Suits Challenging Them (November 2016), available at:
[6] Justin Levitt, The Truth About Voter Fraud (Brennan Center for Justice, 2007), available at:
[7] See Neil W. McCabe, Illegal Foreign Voting in Virginia Covered Up by Soros-Backed Democratic Officials, Says Report , Breitbart.com, October 2, 2016, available at: ; Jim Stinson, Bombshell: Over 1,000 Illegal Voters in Eight Virginia Localities , Lifezette, October 2, 2016, available at: ; J. Christian Adams, Yes, Virginia, Aliens Are registered or Voting… and in Pennsylvania, by the Thousands , PJ Media, October 3, 2016, available at: ; Kosar, Breaking: Thousands of Illegal Aliens Registered to Vote in This State , The Political Insider, October 4, 2016, available at: ; John Gibbs, Voter Fraud Is Real: Here’s The Proof , The Federalist, October 13, 2016, available at:
[8] National Conference of State Legislators, Voting by Nonresidents and Noncitizens (February 2015), available at:
[9] U.S. Department of State, U.S. Passports and International Travel , available at:
[10] National Conference of State Legislatures, States Offering Driver’s Licenses to Immigrants (July 2015), available at:
[11] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Secure Driver’s Licenses : Current Status of States and Territories , available at:
[12] See National Conference of State Legislatures at note 4.
[13] Ibid .
[14] U.S. Election Assistance Commission, Election Crimes: An Initial Review and Recommendations for Future Study (December 2006), available at:
[15] U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses (7 th Ed. May 2007), available at:
[16] http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/pdf/VoterFraudCases-8-7-15-Merged.pdf
[17] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement , Illegal Alien Arrested, Charged With Voter Fraud (March 2011), available at:
[18] Jason Snead, The Daily Signal,” There Are Nearly 300 Cases of Voter Fraud in America,” August, 2015,
[19] Hans Von Spakovsky, The Daily Signal , “Poll Shows Noncitizens Can Shape Elections,” June, 2015,
[20] Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, David C. Earnest, “Do Non-Citizens Vote In U.S. Elections?”, December, 2014,
[21] Nate Silver, FiveThirtyEight, “Measuring the Effects of Voter Identification Laws,” July, 2012
Go ahead and ignore all the factual statistics and where they came from and attack the sources that reported them.
False Headline Revives Voter Fraud Claim
Q: Did Fox News reveal that President Obama rigged the 2016 election with “4 million illegal votes”?
A: No. That falsehood is based on a pre-election interview with an election lawyer who discussed the possibility of votes being cast on behalf of dead people.
California Won’t Register ‘Illegal’ Voters
Q: Is California planning to “automatically register illegal immigrants to vote”?
A: No. The headline making that claim is false and misrepresents the law in California.
Trump’s Misguided Comparison
President Donald Trump made an apples-to-oranges comparison to suggest that his predecessor and Democrats have changed their tune on election rigging.
Video: Stats Not Voter Fraud ‘Proof’
This week’s fact-checking video from CNN’s Jake Tapper and FactCheck.org shows why Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach does not have “proof” of widespread voter fraud in New Hampshire.
Kobach’s Bogus ‘Proof’ of Voter Fraud
Kris Kobach, vice chairman of the Presidential Commission on Election Integrity, claims to have “proof” of voter fraud in New Hampshire that may have swung a U.S. Senate election in favor of the Democrats. He doesn’t.
25 Million Clinton Votes Weren’t Fake
Q: Did NPR report that a study found “over 25 million Hillary Clinton votes were completely fraudulent,” and that she “actually lost the popular vote”?
A: No. That claim was made in a story that conflates a 2012 article about inaccuracies in voter registration rolls with actual fraudulent votes.
100 Days of Whoppers
Donald Trump, the candidate we dubbed the ‘King of Whoppers’ in 2015, has held true to form as president.
No Evidence of Busing Voters to N.H.
White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller doubled down on President Trump’s unsupported claim that thousands of voters were bused in from Massachusetts to vote illegally in New Hampshire.
Video: Voter Fraud Claims
Our fact-checking collaboration with CNN’s Jake Tapper resumes this week with a video looking at bogus claims about voter fraud made by President Donald Trump and White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer.
More Trump Deception on Voter Fraud
In an ABC News interview that aired Jan. 25, President Donald Trump doubled down on false and misleading claims about voter fraud.
You keep implying only those with legal status meet the requirements.
Those who don't belong here are the ones that need to move, not me
I think it just chaps his big fat ass to no end that Hillary was more popular and is still more popular than he is or ever will be. Hence trying to claim all those votes were fraudulent.
Wow. Even after Hillary blamed:
For her loss......You think Trump is the one that has a chapped ass? Now that's funny.
Have you addressed a single one of my linked sources in all this or have you just posted a myriad of crap on voter fraud claims in general?
Yes his big fat stinky ass indeed is chapped raw over Hillary being more popular than him and got so many more popular votes.
I wish they would just take a day off of work, hold a ticker-tape parade for Hillary, and polish her popular-vote trophy.
Heck, I hope they elevate her to "legendary" status and run her again.
Still funny. She even suggested the electoral system be abolished. She lost so it must be flawed. LMFAO!
I sure wish Democrats would stop being a threat to democracy and just accept the results of the election.
This whole proposition is nonsense.
On one hand people are up in arms about foreign interference in our elections, but on the other hand, some think it is all good for foreign nationals to be elected to government positions in our country.
Really?
Go gotta love that loony logic! We can't have non-citizens interfering in our elections but it's OK to elect them to governing public office positions.
It seems some don't care about damage, implications, or hypocrisy...As long as it builds the constituent base!!!!
“The wall is, in my view, immoral, expensive, unwise"
Nancy Pelosi - Apr.23.2017
Now we know why !
"Immigrants residing in California illegally would be able to serve on all state and local boards and commissions"
Yep, it might keep the undocumented and illegal constituents out.
Such a tragedy for the left.
They even sing for Trumps ideal, and don't even know it (AMERICA FIRST). And they used the word "God" too.
I thought the "Left" hated religion.
Mostly it is just the FAR left and Alt right that hate religion.
The only ones the MSM USE for reports !
I have no use for religion in general but even less for the hypocrite believers who use it as a weapon--i.e., our rightwing bible humping brethren.
It won't. Even the Berlin wall and the extreme consequences of attempting to get by it didn't stop people from trying.
It wasn't designed to stop people from TRYING. It didn't stop them all from getting over illegally, but it sure stopped many.
Yep, that's insane.
So, people who broke the law to get here and break the law daily by remaining are supposed to be put in a position of creating law and regulations and the rest of us are supposed to obey those laws or suffer punishment.
Sounds legit.
Don't forget we're talking about California. These are the same moonbats that keep re-electing Maxine and overwhelmingly voted for Hillary. You must be patient.
I wondered how you "composed" your comments. Now I understand.
LOL... Sadly, I identify, some days maybe just a little too much !! ..LOL
"Lara's office said each board or commission would have to analyze federal law to determine if the appointee can be compensated for the work based on their individual immigration status. Federal law prohibits residents without legal status from seeking salaried positions, for example, but immigrants granted work authorization under the Federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program would be eligible for pay, Lara's office said."
For those with poor reading comprehension who got the idea this bill would just allow any undocumented person to be a paid board member in some of these communities, so far only DACA recipients are eligible. They are the children brought here who "are under 31 years of age as of June 15, 2012; came to the U.S. while under the age of 16; have continuously resided in the U.S. from June 15, 2007 to the present.". Otherwise if an undocumented person volunteers to work for free, why refuse?
For those with poor reading comprehension?
It clearly gives ONE EXAMPLE. This does NOT mean ONLY DACA recipients are eligible, but is an (ONE) EXAMPLE of those who would be eligible.
Comprehend?
Since DACA is AN EXAMPLE you can't use DACA qualifications to say these are the qualifications that must be met.
Just so you know. Anyone that is grated work authorization and lives in CA also qualifies.
LINK TO THE ACTUAL BILL IS ON THE FIRST POST. CHECK IT OUT FOR YOURSELF.
"Federal law prohibits residents without legal status from seeking salaried positions"
What other undocumented persons also have "legal status"? The only other persons eligible would be those immigrants living and working here on legal work visas, so they may not be citizens but they aren't "undocumented".
Glad you asked. Here is the legal definition:
I know what you are going to say...if they violated the terms the are no longer legal. Here is the problem. Undocumented and Legal can not coexist. This was not a problem until BO's law change. This change along with a couple others and the law Clinton signed (that the Dems never bothered to try and fix while they had the majority), exasperated and even created many of the border and immigration problems we now face.
How do you determine if one is DACA? How can you or anyone else prove when they got here or how long they have been here? How can you prove how old they were when they arrived? What if they graduated? Are they still DACA or are they illegal as soon as they stop school? What if they dropped out?
anyone 31 in 2012 would be 37. they may as well say anyone under 37 that has ever been in school is OK because there is no way to prove or disprove otherwise. The only documentation that MAY exist is that they attended school. So are pretty much all undocumented immigrants 37 and under are now "legal" by default as long as they illegally went to school in the US at some time in their life. Right?
Tell me. Are you OK with non citizens holding public office? That is the real question here.
It's very good that Trump's effort to end DACA was struck down by another court the other day.
The dude seems to lose a lot in court, like with the 4 or 5 federal courts which have struck down his effort to ban transgender folks in the military. I wonder if that's because he's constitutionally illiterate?
I wonder what your post has to do with Batshit crazy Dems trying to pass batshit crazy laws? Can't say I blame you for trying to deflect from the batshit craziness but don't worry, The liberal media is keeping it under wraps quite well.
Just saying that it's a great thing that the courts keep slapping down our Bigot-in-Chief on this and many other issues.
By the way I think it's a great thing what CA is doing here by involving all concerned members of a community regardless of their citizenship, particularly on school boards. All of America should be doing that.
We will have to agree to disagree on that one. I think you are in the minority and I hope I am right. I think most people have the foresight to anticipate the myriad of problems this could cause. It really doesn't take that much. Then again we still got a "nuclear option" which required about the same amount of foresight.
Still loving that? Still think it's good for the country?
Like what? So far you haven't cited any. Dust bunnies perhaps since those immigrants will be too busy on the school board to bother with dusting your house?
What is the difference between an illegal alien and an undocumented immigrant
Yes. What's the difference indeed. In this case. NONE
Not at all. They have to present themselves and apply for DACA status and their individual circumstances are investigated and reviewed. This is not some blanket amnesty for all undocumented children.
Yes I have. Read a little.
So are you trying to argue if they are non citizens but in the country legally they should be able to hold public office? I disagree, but the law goes much further than that anyhow. So are you OK with this or not?
Again, the link to the entire bill is on the first post.
The law doesn't change federal law which prohibits any undocumented person from holding any public office which is paid a salary which nearly every actual office seat is. The most this law would do is allow for DACA recipients and legal immigrants here on visas to sit on local boards and have a say in the communities they live, and yes, I'm fine with that. And if it's an unpaid volunteer position where an undocumented immigrants wants to help the community and offers to work for free, then I'm fine with that as well.
Good for you and I hope it passes because I think most Americans disagree and this is one of the points that is going to cost the Democratic party dearly. I think most people have the small amount of foresight necessary to realize this is very dangerous and opens a HUGE can of nasty worms.
I've read your comments and the seed. You haven't cited even one adverse consequence of this bill.
This "illegals can now vote" bullshit began because legal non-citizens are now having a say in a school board election. These are people who are legal residents, employed and law-abiding taxpayers. If a city decides to let them have a say in what goes on in the schools their children are LEGALLY attending that is just the application of one of our basic founding principles: no taxation without representation. This does not violate the U.S. Constitution nor any federal laws as the states get to decide these matters. This is the concept of "federalism" and "states rights" which seem to only matter to rightwingers when states are looking for ways to deprive actual citizens from exercising their rights. It's really rich that these people are so irate about letting these people vote legally when they can turn around on a dime and justify the efforts of republican dominated states to keep as many US citizens of a particular color or class as possible from voting.
Reading can be useful:
Yes, it can.
"Lara's office said each board or commission would have to analyze federal law to determine if the appointee can be compensated for the work based on their individual immigration status. Federal law prohibits residents without legal status from seeking salaried positions, for example, but immigrants granted work authorization under the Federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program would be eligible for pay, Lara's office said."
So the proposed California law doesn't change federal law in any way. The only ones that will actually be able to serve on the salaried boards are DACA recipients giving them legal status or those here legally on work visas. "California law currently states that someone is incapable of holding office if they are not a citizen at the time of their appointment." So it's just changing that for those who do have some legal status either through a visa or through DACA.
This is nothing but another pointless "squirrel!" distraction by the right who misunderstand and mischaracterize what the California law is and what it actually does.
Nope, I read what I read. It clearly does not prohibit illegal aliens under the new proposed law from serving on school boards, etc.
It clearly doesn't change federal law at all so it's still illegal for any undocumented immigrant to serve on a board that has salaried board members. If it's a volunteer position where they just want to help the communities they live in but aren't elected or paid then who cares?
Tell you what--if an illegal alien has time to serve on a board, then he or she has MORE than enough time to apply to live here LEGALLY.
There isn't a legitimate reason to have non-citizens chiming in on matters that shouldn't concern them.
According to the federal courts all children in a community have the opportunity to be taught in our public schools regardless of their immigration status or that of their parents. Are you saying that those parents don't have an interest in their children's schooling?
I didn't say they didn't have an interest. I don't believe that they have a right.
Looks like California disagrees with you.
What gave you a clue?
States rights. At least that's what the right is always screaming.
Cali is free to do this.
I am free to think it is an idea full of ignorance.
But do you agree with it? The point is to display how batshit crazy some on the left have gone. Is that why you avoided the question?
More proof of democrats wanting open borders. Remember who they are when the US descends into anarchy. I know I have a few households I'll be cisiting when it happens. They get what they deserve for selling the US out to foreign invaders. It won't be quick either
Yeah, they were good enough to build your railroad tracks through the mountains, which the "whites" were incapable of doing, to the extent of their becoming incapacitated and dead, but not good enough to be treated better than slaves.