Advertisement

Archive for Friday, March 23, 2007

Immigrant ID measure faces criticism

March 23, 2007

Advertisement

— Republicans on Thursday sent to the full House a measure that supporters said would prohibit illegal immigrants from getting state benefits, including in-state tuition.

Democrats criticized the measure, saying it was unnecessary because there were no documented cases of illegal immigrants abusing state benefits, and that the bill would produce paperwork hassles resulting in eligible Kansans having to wait for or not get needed services.

"What we have here is a bill that fixes nothing," said state Rep. Ann Mah, D-Topeka.

But the bill's author, Rep. Lance Kinzer, R-Olathe, said he had heard of anecdotal evidence of illegal immigrants receiving state benefits.

House Bill 2367 would require people applying for assistance, such as Medicaid or food stamps, to have documentation that proves they are a U.S. citizen.

"When someone comes in seeking a benefit, you have to have documentation to prove you're entitled to the benefit," Kinzer said.

The House Federal and State Affairs Committee passed the measure, 11-9. Those in support were all Republicans; eight Democrats and one Republican voted against it.

The measure also would get rid of the law that allows the children of some illegal immigrants to pay the less expensive in-state tuition to attend college.

Under that law, the students have to have attended public schools in Kansas for three years and graduated or gained a General Education Development certificate. They also must sign an affidavit pledging to become U.S. citizens once they are eligible.

State figures show that 169 students received in-state tuition under this law in 2006. Since the law was established in 2004, there have been several attempts to repeal it, but all have failed.

On Thursday, Republicans on the committee defeated several attempts by Democrats to increase punishment and fines against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

Committee Chairman Arlen Siegfreid, R-Olathe, added language to the bill that mirrors federal law by requiring employers to verify a worker's documentation to prove citizenship.

But Rep. Nile Dillmore, D-Wichita, said the requirement was superficial.

"It's a get-out-of-jail-free card for anyone who wants to hire illegal aliens," he said.

Democrats said they feared that children or crime victims may be denied emergency services under the bill. But Kinzer said there were provisions in the bill to take care of those situations.

He also said there were safeguards in place that allowed people who couldn't immediately provide proof of citizenship to still get needed services.

Comments

KS 7 years, 9 months ago

Nice try but Kathy will veto it. Maybe we should just start sending the checks to Mexico and cut out the middle man.

ASBESTOS 7 years, 9 months ago

"Democrats criticized the measure, saying it was unnecessary because there were no documented cases of illegal immigrants abusing state benefits,..."

Then there is no reason to oppose it it there? Read my last post how those that oppose talk out both sides of their rear end.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

""When someone comes in seeking a benefit, you have to have documentation to prove you're entitled to the benefit," Kinzer said."

OK there KInzer, do you check the documents? NO? Then how does anyone know that illegal aliens are not getting the benefits?

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"The House Federal and State Affairs Committee passed the measure, 11-9. Those in support were all Republicans; eight Democrats and one Republican voted against it."

We need to find out who voted against it.

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"On Thursday, Republicans on the committee defeated several attempts by Democrats to increase punishment and fines against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

Committee Chairman Arlen Siegfreid, R-Olathe, added language to the bill that mirrors federal law by requiring employers to verify a worker's documentation to prove citizenship."

So I guess the Kansas Democratic Party is supporting a weak policy on illegal aliens, and the Republican party is trying to wind it up and make it difficult on illegal aliens and those who hire them.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'

"Democrats said they feared that children or crime victims may be denied emergency services under the bill. But Kinzer said there were provisions in the bill to take care of those situations."

I thought there were no illegals getting these benefits? And again read bleow:

"He also said there were safeguards in place that allowed people who couldn't immediately provide proof of citizenship to still get needed services."

SO I guess they ARE GETING THOSE BENEFITS!

Truley, Mr. Rothchild you need to read your work first. Adn do a little more investigation.

Porter 7 years, 9 months ago

I think this is the funniest part: "On Thursday, Republicans on the committee defeated several attempts by Democrats to increase punishment and fines against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants."

Proof that this is all just grandstanding and rhetoric.

Bill Chapman 7 years, 9 months ago

Sounds like a good idea to me. I don't like the idea of paying taxes to support ANYONE in this country illegally.

TANSTAAFL! = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch! Someone has to pay for it.

preebo 7 years, 9 months ago

Again, a Kinzer bill that does nothing...

This guys is wasting our time in the legislature.

I'll put this in simple terms, currently no one can obtain state spronsored services without identification. Current accepted forms of ID are social security number and drivers licsense or other state issued ID. If an illegal immigrant possess these documents then what can this bill do to stop them from obtaining services?

With regards to the withholding of education benefits to the children of illegal immigrants born in the US, there is nothing Kinzer can do to stop this. They are by "birth right" citizens of the United States of America and they are entitled to every benefit associated with that honor. So, to Mr. Kinzer I say, you are wasting not only your time, ours as well and not to mention our tax dollars on this obviously superficial piece of legislation.

preebo 7 years, 9 months ago

"When someone comes in seeking a benefit, you have to have documentation to prove you're entitled to the benefit," Kinzer said.

-Already done, sir.

oldgoof 7 years, 9 months ago

Kinzer, filling in for the former st. rep phill kline

Jamesaust 7 years, 9 months ago

Meanwhile, I see our old friend, Kris Kobach ("law professor") is off trying to bolster his bizarre legal theories now on the City of Hazelton, Pa. There, the City has adopted a policy of "illegal is illegal" and taken several measures to enforce their own immigration policy. Kobach was along for the ride to explain how it is that the Fed's comprehensive immigration statute still allows for the local yokels to adopt their own policies. (It'll probably get just as far as his Kansas anti-tuition lawsuit did, which is to say: ningun donde.)

ASBESTOS 7 years, 9 months ago

"I'll put this in simple terms, currently no one can obtain state spronsored services without identification. Current accepted forms of ID are social security number and drivers licsense or other state issued ID. If an illegal immigrant possess these documents then what can this bill do to stop them from obtaining services?"

A self deluding post from prebo. How do you know that no illegal alien is not getting these services and benefits? You don't! If they give a false ID in order to get the benefits that is fraud and a felony, and they should go to jail. IF OTOH, there no illegals getting benefits, then there is no reason to oppose the bill is there?

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

"There, the City has adopted a policy of "illegal is illegal" and taken several measures to enforce their own immigration policy."

NO! NOT a policy, but COMPLYING WITH EXISTING IMMIGRATION LAW!

"Kobach was along for the ride to explain how it is that the Fed's comprehensive immigration statute still allows for the local yokels to adopt their own policies."

How is complying with existing law "adapting their own policies" (which it is not) different from sanctuary cities that ignore immigration status and ignore illegal aliens commiting crimes just by being here.

ILLEGAL IS ILLEGAL!!!

Jamesaust 7 years, 9 months ago

ASBESTOS - if you knew anything about the case you would know that one key shortcoming is that the City's policy CONTRADICTS the immigration law. How do you believe adopting different policies "complies with" any law?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.