Loading ...
Loading ...If you picked answer 2 or 3, click “read more” to continue
Loading ...I suspect many – maybe most of us will agree on the essential aspects of reform. JUST SO YOU KNOW, most of the above (except the general amnesty) are in the outline for comprehensive reform proposed last week by Senators Reid, Menendez and Schumer – a proposal designed to try to get some Republican votes – always a dicey gamble in today’s highly partisan atmosphere. But this legislation would put so much poison behind us, and if Republicans embraced it then it might not benefit one party over the other so much.
You can click here to encourage Congress to get off its fat lazy cowardly butt and get this process started (by all means read what you’re signing before you sign it!)
What is wrong with the current immigration laws?
(Just becuase some people do not comply with a law doesn’t make it wrong.)
Vern, You have ledft out a universe of people who (1) may be in favor of liberal immigration policies (i.e., “open borders”) but (2) believe that immigration should occur through ports of entry and that those who break the laws should be held accountable for their violation of federal law.
Believing that immigration policy should be changed to permit more people to lawfully enter into this counrty should not be linked to legitimizing those that so far have chosen to violate the law.
hm, you think I need to quickly put up a fourth category?
You’re using “open borders” wrong, that refers to no immigration enforcement (option 3), and I would expect only Greens like Duane and John Earl, and some libertarians, to pick that.
The middle, “reform” category I left pretty wide. I didn’t specifically include amnesty there although it could be included, and I DID say “strong enforcement” which is the same as “being held accountable.”
I almost made another secondary poll for the “reform” people like I did for the “hardliner” people. Maybe I’ll do that still, and use some of your suggestions.
[4PM - Done.]
PS. Does somebody want to answer Cook? Art, Francisco, Dr Lomeli? i don’t have the patience.
#1 Cook:
What do YOU think is wrong with our current immigration system?
And think comprehensively about the problem and the FEASIBLE solutions.
I think this is a good start, to know what your understanding of the problem and the solution is.
Francisco “Paco”
Let’s not forget that while enforcement of current laws is a must, until there is a secure border we’re spinning our wheels. Start with the border and everything else gets a lot easier.
Vern -
Dems want immigration for new voters they can put on the gov’t dole and their donors want the cheap labor. They are both wrong.
Fines, Yes.
Strict Enforcement, Yes.
Screening, Yes.
Requirement to speak English and pass civics test (unlike American citizens) Yes.
Requirement to be documented to work? Yes.
Streamline the documentation process YES!
My biggest concern is election fraud and I have first had experience with that several years ago making calls for Ruben Ross in the 69th AD (remember him?) – I called more than one Spanish-Speaker who was registered to vote – in 1998 (when Clinton knocked off Bob Dornin), but since it was 2002 (right after 911) the people answering the phone were telling me (in Spanish) I should not be registered, I don’t want to vote.
Vern – if you’re an honest Liberal – you’ll admit that is dead wrong.
In Conclusion Work, Yes… Path to Citizenship, Yes (with strict guidelines), Voting before Citizen, NO!
A friend of mine from Laguna Beach says the Log Cabin Republicans feel they have found a new hero in Republican Santa Ana Councilmember Carlos Bustamante because of his support for Harvey Milk Day and vote against the Arizona policy on immigration. Still no praise for Carlos and his 180 on immigration and Gay Rights Mr. Pedroza?
Aaron – Voting before Citizen, NO! For sure, that’s an easy one. I didn’t realize it was so easy to be an Honest Liberal. Don’t worry I’ll find some other way to be Sneaky.
Nice for the Log Cabiners to find a Republican who won’t treat them like dirt! Slim pickin’s though, eh?
Oh whoops I’m trying to be bipartisan on this post, I forgot.
Vernon oh Vernon – you’re party and its’ operatives get laws like motor-voter passed to make registering said folks easy.
A good buddy of mine is a senior case manager at Sac County Dept of Human services – guess what a part of the welfare packet is? They register people to vote – and the case workers, usually Dems register them as dems 95% of the time.
In addition – they are forbidden to ask about citizenship. Ineligible voters get registered every day.
All due to laws passed by your fellow liberals. Come on Vern… the immigration argument has been successfully bastardized as a race issue – it isn’t.
It is about disenfranchising those coming legally and those who are citizens…
We’ll talk more soon? Prop 17 sucks – as an insurance agent, I hate it.
Voting when you’re ineligible (e.g. not a citizen) is a felony that can get you jail time. That’s why it’s so rare. Nobody with a brain considers it worth the risk for just one vote.
Tell us why as an insurance agent you’re against Prop 17. Put it here:
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2010/04/friends-dont-let-friends-vote-for-prop-16-17-part-two/comment-page-1/#comment-126521
As an immigrant to this country, there is nothing wrong with the immigration laws.. The problem is that Mexican and other south of the border nationalist’s think it does not apply to them.. Because. “THIS IS THEIR LAND”. and they really, really believe this, with the help of stupid ethnocentric/racist groups like LA RAZA (the race).
As I have said, Mexican activists have destroyed the, “American Dream”, for all other immigrants… and I really believe this.. because immigration just got a lot harder!
Keep waving that American flag, except American’s have not forgotten the last tantrum with you’re big ass Mexican Flags!
It was NOT a good approach!
Well, Quinn, you’re just wrong, and obviously you don’t know any Mexicans, and have only seen them on TV, yelling and waving signs at rallies.
Of dozens, maybe hundreds that I’ve known, I can barely think of a couple – feisty student types – that would say “This is our land” etc. 99% just want to work, have fun, and be left alone!
Can you get that into your potato head?
Francisco “Paco”,
“(Cook) What do YOU think is wrong with our current immigration system?”
I do not know enough about our (USA) immigration system, to make a meaningful judgment call or recommendation on the USA immigration system.
People
From my understanding of complaints, I gather that some people who make a personal choice to come to USA to work and live, have also made a choice NOT to comply with USA laws dealing with immigration.
There is a price to pay for freedom, and if some people DO NOT want to pay the price, they should go away from the USA.
Children and “Dream Act”.
A easily solvable problem. The kids in school who are not US citizens and who’s parents are not US citizens or legal residents, should take citizenship classes as part of high school civics.
Criminals.
I don’t think the USA needs an amnesty or blanket pardon to make Mexican (or other countries) criminals legal USA residents. The USA has plenty of home grown criminal and doesn’t need to import anymore.
Former Supreme Court Justice (An Arizona Native and former Legislator) Sandra O’Connor has come out against AZ SB 1070…although she has asked that her home state not be boycotted.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/03/BA2N1D9042.DTL
P.S. Also please see this useful law link, where AZ SB1070 is discussed, including the changes and legal challenges.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/conlaw/
Francisco “Paco” Barragan
“Supreme Court Justice (An Arizona Native and former Legislator) Sandra O’Connor has come out against AZ SB 1070″
MQ says:
Wow, I am shocked – NOT!
Mr F.. YOU do not live in Arizona, you have no idea what violence these people live in everyday that is the direct result of over the border influx of criminals.. ARIZONA has the RIGHT to protect themselves and if Ms O’Connor does not like it, then she is more than welcome to come up with an other solution or SHUT UP!
Judges are only upgraded lawyers and just like lawyers most of them suck!
Let the lawyers and La Raza type activist challenge this law, because really it is more about a cry for help and consideration!
Sorry to offend, but it is true!
My opinion and I am sure the opinion of many!
@Michelle Q:
You State, “Mr F.. YOU do not live in Arizona, you have no idea what violence these people live in everyday that is the direct result of over the border influx of criminals..”
My Response:
1) I live in a border state, and I am aware of the problem of illegal immigration (although I also know that the majority are NOT violent offenders, and are in fact contributing to the well-being of our Nation, and that we should penalize them so as NOT to reward illegal behavior while we adjust their status), but the point is NOT that you have to live in a particular state to know or be opposed to Unconstitutional flawed laws such as Arizona’s.
2) AZ’s law even if it mirrors the Federal law, VIOLATES the Supremacy Clause, and it also does so and violates the EQUAL Protection and Due-Process Clauses of our Constitution.
3) AZ has other avenues, the Attorney General and the Senators and the US Representatives, in particular those of border states or with large influx of illegals immigrants should be taking up it with the EXECUTIVE AND WITH THE CONGRESS (themselves)….and if not doing their job VOTE them out…but to jump to overreach with a flawed law is not the solution.
4) I have a problem, and I think we all should when LOCAL law enforcement can ARREST WITHOUT a WARRANT for what they think might be a violation of FEDERAL law, which they are not trained on, and for which the implementation is dubious as best. This appears to violate the Unreasonable Search and Seizure provisions of our Constitution. Additionally, while LOCAL law enforcement can work with FEDERAL agencies, i.e. as in Task Forces, their first point of contact will be in isolation.
5) Also, the ARIZONA Association of Police Chiefs is in opposition to the AZ bill.
I would imagine that they have a better idea as to how to combat crime and how to properly conduct law enforcement than those whose motivations are dubious at best (such as Russell Pearce and Kris Kobach writers of the bill, with ties to white racial supremacists.)
6) I also defer to former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor for insight, and she is also an ARIZONA native and legislator, who is also opposed because of her SUPERIOR understanding of the law, and her respect for our Constitutional laws, values and American Principles.
Michelle Q, You State,
“ARIZONA has the RIGHT to protect themselves and if Ms O’Connor does not like it, then she is more than welcome to come up with an other solution or SHUT UP!”
See My Response above.
@MQ, You state,
“Judges are only upgraded lawyers and just like lawyers most of them suck!.
Let the lawyers and La Raza type activist challenge this law, because really it is more about a cry for help and consideration!
MY RESPONSE:
1) You will have to come up with a True Argument. Your contempt for our Constitution or for a Supreme Court Justice with a long distinguished career is not an argument per se.
2) You see YOU are trying to have it both ways.
On the one hand you mischaracterize the efforts against a flawed laws, and in coming up for solutions to our broken immigration system as just a bunch of RAZA activists that hate America, and on the other hand you suggest that this supposedly Raza activists the challenge so that you can CONVENIENTLY ignore a distinguished and respected jurist as Justice O’Connor.
You ignore reality. The opposition is made up of faith-based organizations, educators, lawyers, law enforcement (even from Arizona; the AZ Police Chiefs Association and individuals cops; and current and retired military personnel.)
Michelle Q, you state, “Sorry to offend, but it is true!”
My Response:
The biggest offense is that you and those who support this flawed unconstitutional law do so and are too willing to trample on our constitutional values and principles.
Francisco “Paco” Barragan
My opinion only
Mr. F.. YOU do not live in Arizona, if you did it would be a different story.. Arizona has become so bad, that the national parks are too dangerous to hike.. There are hundreds of kidnappings ect.. but that does not matter right. It is only the AMERICAN citizen’s that are suffering!
COLATERAL DAMAGE!
Honestly, you seem like a reasonable man, were is you’re reason??
” EQUAL Protection ”
MQ says:
Where is it EQUAL to take the rights and protection away from the citizen’s and give it too non Citizen’s?? We want to keep allowing Citizens to be kidnapped, raped and harassed by non-citizens, because of some sense of, SOCIAL JUSTICE!.. what about EQUAL JUSTICE? – as in respecting the laws of the land by all! No one is above the law in this land, if they are, they are being given entitlements, that not all share. This is not the way of this country! It maybe this way in a lot of corrupt countries- but the US is not a place to be bought and sold!
Ms O’Connor does not live in Arizona and her OPINION is not shared by most Americans 60% of this country approves of the law and 70% of Arizona citizen do as well..That is my Argument!
This law mirrors that of the federal law. I would also like to state, the fact that you have such a low esteem of the police department is kind of troubling.. YOU WOULD, i assume call a police man if you were in trouble – yet you can’t trust them not to check immigration papers without racial profiling? Men and women of the police force are hero’s, not the KKK!
Really all this racial hype is just that,” HYPE”. Hispanic activist like yourself have become quite good at it!
As far as the constitution is concerned – I am a huge fan – I am not a fan of people like yourself MR.F distorting it! What is happing in this country today is that people like yourself, believe the constitution is a living breathing document that needs to chance with the times.. I believe it was written in stone!
My opinion and I AM MORE than sure the opinion of many!
Have a lovely day Mr. F:)
@MQ:
You can DISTORT if you want. But distortions or IGNORING facts, or IGNORING our Constitution are not the solutions.
a) Again, you conveniently IGNORE that there are other better solutions and avenues that are more cost effective and efficient AND that also respect our Constitution.
b) You IGNORE that a respected former SCOTUS respected Jurist sees the problem with this law.
c) You IGNORE that the AZ Police Chiefs Association and other Law Enforcement are opposed to this flawed law.
d) You IGNORE the FACT that Sheriff Arpaio’s narrow focus has caused CRIME to go up by 70% in Maricopa County, while his budget has been Quadrupled to $270 million and counting.
http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/Common/Img/Mission%20Unaccomplished.pdf
e) You IGNORE that most of us agree 100% that Federal, State, and Local agencies NEED to work together, and you IGNORE that you are mischaracterizing my statements.
A recognized problem is that if the state or local LE are tasked with enforcing a federal law, that the Fed reimburse the state or local agencies; and that we do NOT allow LOCAL police to enforce a FEDERAL law that they are NOT trained on, or one that they will be enforcing without proper training and in isolation.
f) The other issue that you IGNORE is that we don’t want to have their priorities INVERTED and that they should be as follows:
1) TERRORISM & Violent Felons first (which include some illegals- although none so far are identified as terrorists)
2) Violent Misdemeanors second (which includes some illegals)
3) Non-Violent Misdemeanors. (which includes some illegals)
Unfortunately, I think they will be doing more of #3 as is the case with Sheriff Arpaio, and which DIVERTS VALUABLE LIMITED LAW ENFORCEMENT (LE) resources from #1 & #2, and which in FACT makes Arizonans LESS SAFE, as DEMONSTRATED by c) and d) above.
g) Again, you can mischaracterize, and YOU IGNORE what I said.
I did NOT say racial profiling. What I said is that LE should work TOGETHER as long as LOCAL LE ARE TRAINED on FEDERAL law, and as Long as they Do NOT INVERT their priorities which makes Arizonans LESS safe. And it is also because I VALUE LE and RESPECT THEM that I don’t want their resources to be misused.
h) By the Way, I don’t consider Justice O’Connor; or AZ Police Chiefs Association as a bunch of “HISPANIC Activists”.
I view them and respect them as a Justice that is upholding our Constitution, and as Law Enforcement officers who understand and recognize the NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES to Safety and Security from implementing a Flawed law like AZ SB1070.
i) I am also thankful that the Framers of our Constitution contemplated the “Tyranny of the Majority” and put in place a system of checks and balances.
Unfortunately, our history has shown that by the time we get to correcting these abuses by Majority/Popular Rule the damage is done, which sets us all behind as Americans.
It might seem like a POPULAR idea to appear to be addressing something to serve narrow views, when the danger lies that we violate our values and in the end are less safe because of implementation of flawed laws.
Francisco “Paco” Barragan
My opinions only and not those of any group
@MQ:
You State, “Where is it EQUAL to take the rights and protection away from the citizen’s and give it too non Citizen’s”
My Response:
Being Alarmist and Mischaracterizing is neither an argument nor a solution.
1) Illegal entry is a CIVIL violation NOT a CRIMINAL violation.
2) Illegals do NOT have the RIGHT to a government paid Attorney in a CIVIL Proceeding.
3) Evidence can be used against illegal aliens, even if obtained illegally.
This is NOT what is at stake here.
What is at stake here is about implementing a flawed law, and which attempts to CRIMINALIZE people (who are contributing to the nation) and which also DIVERTS valuable Law Enforcement resources, and which also makes CITIZENS, and Legal Residents, less safe.
“Unauthorized entries are violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), but
immigration proceedings are [CIVIL, NOT CRIMINAL], in nature. A person who enters the
United States without properly being admitted is inadmissible under the INA and is
therefore removable.8 Also, a person who has been admitted into the United States but
fails to maintain the condition of admission is removable.9
A person in either case will then be placed in “[d]eportation proceedings [which are] purely civil actions to determine eligibility to remain in this country, not to punish an unlawful entry.”10 Notably, individuals in deportation proceedings are [NOT AFFORDED the SAME the same LEGAL PROTECTIONS]applicable in a criminal context.11
While it is the obligation of the immigration judge to advise a person of their right to representation, unlike criminal proceedings, their right to counsel comes at [NO] expense to the government.12 The Supreme Court has ruled that courts are required, under the 6th Amendment of the Constitution, to provide counsel [ONLY]in criminal cases for defendants unable to afford their own attorneys, [NOT CIVIL IMMIGRATION PROCEEDINGS]13 This is one critical example that differentiates immigrants in deportation proceedings from actual criminals.
In addition, the EXCLUSIONARY RULE, a legal principle stemming from the U.S. Constitution
which provides that unlawfully obtained evidence is excludable in criminal proceedings,
[DOES NOT APPLY IN CIVIL DEPORTATION] proceedings.14 Consequently, evidence is admissible
in an immigration court even if stems from a law enforcement agent’s unlawful stop or
arrest.
8 INA § 212 (a)(6)(A)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(6)(A)(i).
9 INA § 237 (a)(1)(C)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(1)(C)(i).
10 INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032, 1038 (1984) (citing 8 U.S.C. §§ 1302, 1306, 1325).
11 Id.
12 8 C.F.R. § 1240.10(a)(1).
13 See Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963).
14 INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984)
Francisco “Paco” Barragan
Mr. F.. I have to admit, I think you missed you’re calling, “CAR SALES MAN”.
When you read through all of you’re comments it is so easy to get lost in the legal gibberish – the fact is that ILLEGAL no matter how ILLEGAL it may be is,” BREAKING THE LAW”.
The constitution is a document to protect the civil liberties of the people of this country.
The fact that the federal government has NOT done their job when it comes to the southern border is a violation in itself..
Really you can go on and on about the fact that Mexican Citizens ect.. from south of the border should be treated with the same (if not more) rights than a US citizen but you are WRONG.. And if a illegal immigrant entered a US port without documentation -he/she would be deported right away…That is how it works in MEXICO and that is how it is suppose to work HERE!
Arizona laws are so much more PEOPLE FRIENDLY than Mexico’s!
This is my opinion and the opinion of ICE!!
@MQ:
It is easy to tell when people are out of arguments…they resort to name calling, or putting labels on people, and in a wishful thinking way, are dismissive of arguments as “gibberish”.
You state, “The constitution is a document to protect the civil liberties of the people of this country. The fact that the federal government has NOT done their job when it comes to the southern border is a violation in itself..”
My response:
1) As much as you might want to IGNORE it…or as much as you might want to trample on it, Our Constitution covers, US Citizens, Legal residents and illegals.
2) The Fed govt may be negligent in its duty, but that does NOT entitle AZ or any state to pass flawed unconstitutional laws that will violate US citizens or legal residents rights and protections.
3) Illegals are recognized to have LESS rights, in CIVIL deportation hearings, especially because their violations are deemed primarily a CIVIL matter not a CRIMINAL matter.
4) This is not about Mexican citizens, nor about what Mexico’s laws are.
We all agree we have an illegal immigration issue.
This is about HOW do we solve this for the well-being of America, in a way that conforms to our Constitutional values and principles and that recognizes the complexity of the matter, and in a way that PREVENTS FUTURE illegal immigration, and with a process that allows for the inflows/outflows of people to respond to America’s changing labor needs.
You state,
“Arizona laws are so much more PEOPLE FRIENDLY than Mexico’s!”
My Response:
The standard for us is OUR American laws, not Mexico’s. And by that standard, Arizona’s laws are so flawed, and NOT so American people friendly!!!!
This is my opinion, and I am sure that of many other Americans…if you doubt it…you will realize this is the reason the AZ Governor and legislature have been “tweaking” this flawed law…after they passed it.
Let’s see..on the one hand here is YOUR opinion, and then the Opinions that matters most… that of a distinguished jurist like former Justice O’Connor and the AZ Chiefs of Police Association that are opposed to this.
P.S. Thank you for thinking highly of me…me being a “Hispanic Activist” and all…”Come on Pat yourself on the back”…and thinking of me as a Car Salesman and not a Car Washer…or that you did not change my CPA license into a “Certified Parking Attendant”
Francisco “Paco” Barragan
My opinions only and not those of any group
Ignorant Michelle and equally ignorant Grate One:
Much of the Constitution – most of it – applies to “persons” in the United States, not just citizens.
I know you don’t like that, and you think me & Francisco & Dr. Lomeli are just making it up, but it’s what our Founding Fathers wrote.
Now if you want to amend the Constitution to take away rights from non-citizens, you’d better get started if you want to see it happen in your lifetime – it’s a long complex process, and I’m not sure a majority of Americans are or will ever be as hateful as you two that they would want to mess with our Founding Document that way. But knock yourselves out trying!
I think I will do a post soon on exactly what protections of the Constitution apply to non-citizens who are here. For starters, the Bill of Rights. Not that you’ll read or understand the post, but at least I will have done all I can educationally here.
I will get to you tomorrow.. three wee one’s will do that to ya!
Good night Mr. F.
My opinion and most mothers!
Vern,
why don’t you do a post on how hard it is to become legal in this country!
The right way!
Good night vern you are not wrinkled, you have aged well:)
Michelle Quinn – the alias queen
“The Fed govt may be negligent in its duty, but that does NOT entitle AZ or any state to pass flawed unconstitutional laws that will violate US citizens or legal residents rights and protections.”
The Queen of Ireland say:)
The fact that the US federal Government has been NEGLIGENT in their duty to protect the American Citizen, then it is the states MORAL and ETHICAL responsibility to do so UNTIL the feds figure out that the American Citizens are the 70% of the people who agree with the Arizona law!
Arizona AGAIN mirrored the law after the federal law! The only people bitching a moaning about the law are the illegal Aliens and the pro-illegal activist’s. The people who are the actual American Citizen’s want to enforce immigration laws because they are sick to death of the crime,kidnappings, rape and over all bastardizing of their civil rights as AMERICAN CITIZENS!
“We all agree we have an illegal immigration issue.”
We do not agree! This issue is not about illegal immigration. It is about a Federal Government and some American Citizens that have a lack of respect and concern for their own citizens rights and protections. Illegal immigrants are just a RED HERRING!
I believe this has become a war between the PEOPLE and the ELITIST’S like yourself Mr. F..
I believe the People of this country are starting to get this!
Sorry for the late reply. I thought I had commented on this before!
By the way, I do think highly of Car Sales Men, they can sale anything!
And Mexican Activists like yourself “Sale your VIVa latino nonsense very well too”.. Except I am not buying it!
I do not believe in Social justice, I believe in Equal Justice. I believe that the American people have shown that they are a generous and tolerant people. If 60% of the Nation says we need this law to help protect them,because they do not trust the US federal Government to do so… Then I stand by “WE THE POEPLE”.
The Queen of Ireland has spoken!
“Immigrants from Mexico take jobs that Americans want to do”, Vern, did you mean to write: Immigrants from Mexico take jobs that Americans “don’t” want to do?
No, Tony! That second list of answers is not a list of facts. It’s a list of statements that anti-immigr – I mean, immigration “hardliners” may or may not agree with.
That particular statement seems to be believed by less than half of them – 43% at this point. that’s still kind of a lot of white people who think there are other white people waiting in line to garden, wash cars, change babies, scrub floors, and pick strawberries.
But it looks like, whenever I get around to it, the biggest myth I need to explode – believed by a whopping 83% of them – is that they use up our social services and taxpayer dollars.
next time do a poll on ILLEGAL immigration, not immigration. there is a difference
This poll obviously deals with both, and I’m sure it’s got enough options for you to express your opinions.
By the way DWM, did you catch your cameo appearance in my Arpaio poem?
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2010/04/arpaios-comin-to-town-doggere/
There is a major problem with your poll.
You have mixed legal immigration with illegal aliens.
There is a difference, don’t you know!
You are pushing an agenda with this poll, not searching for public sentiment.
Well, Vivia… a couple people have said that. I think the questions are all fair though, I tried pretty hard not to push an agenda with this, and you should be able to find plenty of things to click on to show your opinion.
I’m guessing you picked “#1, immigration hardliner,” right? Then there’s ten statements you can click on, they use the word “undocumented.” They are about undocumented immigrant workers. That is a synonym for illegal, just a little more polite. Just pretend it says illegal if that makes you feel better.
Thank you for taking our poll. I still haven’t figured out what I’m going to do with it, although I think it may be helpful to convince people that ILLEGALS don’t use as much of our social services as some folks seem to think.