*must NOT be able to provide any form of id or proof of citizenship, non-english speakers preferred, the less money you would like to give us the better*

This was taken from Snopes.com. I was hoping they would say this was not true, but you guessed it, we pay for illegal aliens to get free (and a hell of a lot better than what I get, that's for damn sure!) healthcare. Since most of the elected officials on the side of law abiding Americans were voted out, who can be the voice of reason in government now?

"Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, Texas is a fairly famous institution and for a variety of reasons:

1. John F. Kennedy died there in 1963
2. Lee Harvey Oswald died there shortly after
3. Jack Ruby, who killed Lee Harvey Oswald, died there a few years later by coincidence

On the flip side, Parkland is also home to the second busiest maternity ward in the country with almost 16,000 new babies arriving each year. (That's almost 44 per day — every day)

A recent patient survey indicated that 70 percent of the women who gave birth at Parkland in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants.' Crikey, that's 11,200 anchor babies born every year just in Dallas. According to the article, the hospital spent $70.7 million delivering 15,938 babies in 2004 but managed to end up with almost $8 million dollars in surplus funding. Medicaid kicked in $34.5 million, Dallas County taxpayers kicked in $31.3 million and the feds tossed in another $9.5 million.

The average patient in Parkland's maternity wards is 25 years old, married and giving birth to her second child. She is also an illegal immigrant. By law, pregnant women cannot be denied medical care based on their immigration status or ability to pay. OK, fine. That doesn't mean they should receive better care than everyday, middle-class American citizens. But at Parkland Hospital, they do.

Parkland Memorial Hospital has nine prenatal clinics. NINE. The Dallas Morning News article followed a Hispanic woman who was a patient at one of the clinics and pregnant with her third child — her previous two were also born at Parkland. Her first two deliveries were free and the Mexican native was grateful because it would have cost $200 to have them in Mexico. This time, the hospital wants her to pay $10 per visit and $100 for the delivery but she was unsure if she could come up with the money. Not that it matters, the hospital won't turn her away. (I wonder why they even bother asking at this point.)

How long has this been going on? What are the long-term effects? Well, another subject of the article was born at Parkland in 1986 shortly after her mother entered the U.S. illegally — now she is having her own child there as well. (That's right, she's technically a U.S. citizen.) These women receive free prenatal care including medication, nutrition, birthing classes and child care classes. They also get freebies such as car seats, bottles, diapers and formula.

Most of these things are available to American citizens as well but only for low-income applicants and even then, the red tape involved is almost insurmountable.

Because these women are illegal immigrants they do not have to provide any sort of legitimate identification — no proof of income. An American citizen would have to provide a social security number which would reveal their annual income — an illegal immigrant need only claim to be poor and the hospital must take them at their word.

My husband is a pilot for the United States Navy (yes, he fought in Iraq) and while the health care is good, we Navy wives don't get any of these perks! Car seats? Diapers? Not so much. So my question is this: Does our public medical care system treat illegal immigrants better than American citizens? Yes it does!

As I mentioned, the care I have received is perfectly adequate but it's bare bones, meat and potato medical care — not top of line.

Their (the illegals) medical care is free — simply because they are illegal immigrants? Once again, there is no way to verify their income. Parkland Hospital offers indigent care to Dallas County earn less than $40,000 per year. (They also have to prove that they did not refuse health coverage at their current job. Yeah, the 'free' care is not so easy for Americans.)

There are about 140 patients who received roughly $4 million dollars for un-reimbursed medical care. As it turns out, they did not qualify for free treatment because they resided outside of Dallas County. So the hospital is going to sue them! Illegals get it all free! But U.S. citizens who live outside of Dallas County get sued! How stupid is this?

As if that isn't annoying enough, the illegal immigrant patients are actually complaining about hospital staff not speaking Spanish. In this AP story, the author speaks with a woman who is upset that she had to translate comments from the hospital staff into Spanish for her husband. The doctor was trying to explain the situation to the family and the mother was forced to translate for her husband who only spoke Spanish. This was apparently a great injustice to her.

In an attempt to create a Spanish-speaking staff, Parkland Hospital is now providing incentives in the form of extra pay for applicants who speak Spanish. Additionally, medical students at the University of Texas Southwestern for which Parkland Hospital is the training facility will now have a Spanish language requirement added to their already jammed-packed curriculum. No other school in the country boasts such a ridiculous multi-semester (multicultural) requirement."

GO SEE IT!!

I just saw the screening for it Wednesday. Very relevant piece of filmmaking. Guaranteed to make you want to scream... These illegals are absolutely brazen in the face of our law enforcers and will do anything.

When will these traitors be hung? Starting with the head traitor Commander Koo Koo Bananas.

Treason at the USDA

Taken from Congressman Tom Tancredo's Web Page.

~~~~~~~~

Would you believe that...

President Bush’s Misstatements on Amnesty,
Border Security and “Jobs Americans Aren’t Doing”

If the President’s “comprehensive immigration reform” approach is superior to the enforcement-only strategy of House Bill 4437, why does the president have to mislead people and misrepresent the facts to get public support for his amnesty plan ?

#1 : ON EXPANDING THE BORDER PATROL

Bush misleading statement on “doubling the size of the Border Patrol during my administration,” Laredo, Texas, June 6:

“In New Mexico I saw the training facility that is going to put out enough Border Patrol to be able to tell the American people that we will have doubled the Border Patrol since 2001.”

FACT: The Bush Administration has fought against significant increases in the Border Patrol every year since 2001. Not once did his proposed federal budget include funds for adequate increases in Border Patrol manpower to allow the BP to fulfill its mission.

FACT: Bush’s avowed goal of doubling the Border Patrol to 18,000 still may not meet the manpower needs of the Border Patrol if its mission is to prevent all illegal entry into our country. Effectively securing the border is what is important, not the number of Border Patrol Agents.

FACT: Under the Clinton Administration, Border Patrol manpower increased by more agents before 9-ll than Bush has added since 9-11. The Clinton Administration increased the Border Patrol from 4,026 to 9,078, an increase of 5,052 agents or 125%. George W. Bush increased the manpower from 9,078 to the 11,800 in his first five years, an increase of 2,722 agents or only 30%.

FACT: In 2005 , a full four years after 9-11 , the White House’s FY2006 budget proposal included funds for only 210 new Border Patrol agents, not the 2,000 new agents authorized by Congress in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004.

FACT: Only after the House passed HR 4437 in December of 2005 did the President decide to accelerate the expansion of the Border Patrol — and he still has not adopted the goal of 2,000 new agents per-year for five years as authorized by Congress in 2004.

FACT: The national Border Patrol Academy has cut its training cycle from nineteen and one-half weeks to sixteen weeks to squeeze in more students, yet the facility still will not be able to train the 2,500 new agents each year needed to have a net gain of 2000 annually ¾ allowing for current attrition of 6% according to the National Border Patrol Council.

# 2 : ON REDEFINING AMNESTY

Bush misstatement on amnesty on June 6 (and on numerous other occasions since January 2004):

“Amnesty is: Okay, everybody who is here, you’re a citizen. That’s amnesty.”

FACT: Since his January 7, 2004 speech proposing a guest worker program, the President has consistently mis-defined amnesty as “automatic citizenship.” Yet amnesty is not a grant of “automatic citizenship” and only amnesty proponents define it that way because that gives them the freedom to call everything else “not an amnesty.” The fact is there is no such thing as “automatic citizenship” in American law and never has been.

FACT: Despite the President's effort to redefine the term "amnesty"; its definition remains the same: A general pardon granted by a government -- which is exactly what the Senate and White House proposals would award to illegal aliens.

# 3 : ON “JOBS AMERICANS AREN’T DOING”

Bush misstatement on “jobs Americans aren’t doing,” in Laredo, June 6:

“Border Patrol agents [are] chasing down people trying to sneak across and do work Americans aren’t doing.”

FACT: Out of 473 job categoriesstudied by the Center for Immigration Studies for the year 2004, only four ¾ plasters and stucco masons, dressmakers and sewers, agricultural graders and sorters, and miscellaneous personal appearance workers  had a majority of immigrant workers. Clearly, Americans are still doing jobs Americans have always done.

FACT: As labor economists understand, it is only lower wages and not the jobs themselves that make some low-skilled jobs relatively more attractive to foreign workers.

FACT: When a construction worker loses a $15 an hour job to an illegal worker who will do it for $75 a day and no overtime pay, that is not an example of “jobs Americans aren’t doing.” When a welder working on a natural gas pipeline loses a job that pays $28 an hour to an illegal worker who gets paid $15, that is not an example of “jobs Americans aren’t doing.” When small businesses providing janitorial cleaning services, roofing, tile-setting, landscaping or dry wall installation lose bids to companies that use only illegal labor, they are not losing jobs “Americans aren’t doing.” They are losing jobs which the President has given to illegal workers through non-enforcement of our laws. These are not 'Jobs Americans Wont Do' -- they are, in fact, jobs Americans won't do at such low wages.

# 4 : ON THE NEED TO PENALIZE EMPLOYERS WHO HIRE ILLEGAL WORKERS

Bush misstatement from the White House about enforcement of employment laws, May 15 :

“We need to hold employers to account for the workers they hire.”

FACT: The President’s record on enforcement of our employment laws is abysmal. While o ur laws are insufficient and need enhancement, we know they can be enforced better because the Clinton Administration did it. During the eight years of the Clinton Administration, 5,587 employers were fined for violating the laws against employing illegal workers, an average of 698 per year. During the first four years of the Bush Administration, only 218 fines were issued—less than 55 per year. In 2004 only three fines were imposed on employers. This record of non-enforcement raises serious doubts whether new laws will be enforced or ignored.

FACT: The current raids on worksites by immigration agents are being done mainly for headlines and cannot eclipse the fact that for five years the Bush Administration did not enforce the laws. Even the new, PR-driven raids show that the administration is not serious about deporting the deportable. To wit, o f the 1187 apprehended by ICE in the highly publicized raids —

* 461 were detained for processing and were not eligible for bond

* 399 were released on “OR” with no bond and a promise to appear for a hearing within 60 or 90 days

* 269 agreed to a “voluntary removal” to their home country

* 43 agreed to leave the country voluntarily by a certain date

* 9 were turned over to other agencies

* 6 were discovered to be in “lawful status” and not deportable

# 5 : ON ENDING “CATCH-AND-RELEASE”

Bush misstatement from the White House about ending “catch-and-release,” May 15:

“We have ended the policy of catch-and-release.”

FACT: Six months after announcing this policy change with great fanfare, thousands of non-Mexican “OTMs” are still being released after capture for lack of detention space, and some of them are from Middle Eastern countries.

FACT: A total of 605,210 OTM’s were caught from FY2001 to the first six months of FY2005, and over 50% of them were released on a promise to appear at a later date for a deportation hearing. Most of the 309,733 individuals who were released are still at large and the Bush Administration has no serious program to locate or deport them. Over 45,000 of those released are from Special Interest Countries or State Sponsors of Terrorism.

FACT: As of December 30, 2005, there were more than 544,000 released aliens with final orders of removal who have absconded.

FACT: Congress in 1996 authorized an end to “catch-and-release” policy by authorizing “expedited removal” proceedings for any alien captured within two years of his entry. The Bush Administration is applying this law only within 100 miles of the border, thus making most of America a safe haven for illegals. The President could change that policy without any new legislation.

FACT: In the summer of 2004 the Bush Administration ordered a halt to a successful program by the Border Patrol station in Temecula, California that had located and deported hundreds of illegal aliens ¾ and then lied about the reasons for halting it.

# 6 : ON BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR GUEST WORKERS

Bush misstatement on May 15 on requiring background checks for guest workers:

“Every worker who applies for the [guest worker] program would be required to pass a criminal background check.”

FACT: This is a deceptive promise because our government does not have the capacity to do this. We can only check criminal records within the U.S, not what crimes illegal aliens may have committed in their home countries.

FACT: Our neighbor Mexico does not have a centralized database of criminal warrants, nor can we adequately check the criminal records of Cubans, Vietnamese, Chinese, Syrians or Iraqis. Tens of thousands of child molesters, car thieves, and violent criminals who entered our country illegally would be eligible for a legal work permit under both the president’s plan and the Senate amnesty bill.

FACT: The ID problem goes beyond screening for criminal backgrounds. Most illegal aliens are undocumented, meaning that there is no way of verifying their true identities. The guest worker plan would provide these individuals with official “secure” identity documents under whatever name they give the USCIS bureaucrats who adjudicate their applications. It would be simple for terrorists to create new identities to gain access to airlines and other “secure” sites and to facilitate their travel across our borders and inside our country.

# 7 : ON “TEMPORARY” WORKERS GOING HOME

Bush misstatement that temporary workers will go home when their employment term is up:

“We’ve got to have a comprehensive approach that includes a temporary worker plan that says you can come and do a job…and then once you finish that time, you go home.”

FACT: There is no requirement in Bush’s plan, the Senate bill, or the Pence proposal that “temporary” guest workers actually go home after six years when their temporary work permit ends. They are then eligible to apply for permanent resident alien status (a “Green Card”) and to gain eventual citizenship. There is nothing “temporary” about the workers, thus it is dishonest to label the program a “temporary worker plan.” In truth, it is a permanent immigration plan.

FACT: Part of the 1996 immigration law called for the creation of an entry-exit system for non-citizens. Until US-VISIT is complete, there is no way to track whether a person overstays their visa. Without the ability to track overstays, it is difficult to be confident that the terms of a guest worker visa could be enforced.

# 8 : ON THE “SIMILARITIES” IN THE SENATE AND HOUSE BILLS

Bush misstatement on “similarities” of the Senate and House bills, Laredo, June 6:

“While the differences [in the Senate and House bills] grab the headlines, the similarities in approaches are striking.”

FACT: The only similarity the President could cite was a “common agreement that the federal government has a responsibility to control the borders,” but the two bills address that responsibility very differently. The House bill aims to achieve border security before any new guest worker plan can be enacted. The Senate bill does not.

FACT: TheSenate bill grants amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. The House bill does not.

FACT: The Senate bill’s amnesty and guest worker provisions will allo w up to 66 million new legal immigrants into the U.S. over the next 20 years according to a study by Robert Rector at the Heritage Foundation. The House bill will not.

FACT: The House enforcement-only bill was supported by 90% of House Republicans, whereas the Senate bill was OPPOSED by a majority of Senate Republicans (32 out of 55 voted against it).

Link
http://tancredo.house.gov/irc/WYB.2006.06.22.html