Author Topic: CA Senate approves taxpayer funded healthcare for illegals  (Read 735 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Belle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
  • Reputation: +42/-16
CA Senate approves taxpayer funded healthcare for illegals
« on: June 02, 2015, 06:26:06 PM »
Must be no money problems in California.  Or is this just a case of can't you feel the love?

"The state Senate on Tuesday approved a hotly debated measure that would allow many immigrants in the state illegally to sign up for special healthcare programs that would offer the same benefits as Medi-Cal."

State Senator Ricardo Lara:  "“We are talking about our friends. We are talking about our neighbors and our families who are denied basic healthcare in the richest state of this union."

The minor, opposing view, State Senator Jeff Stone: “This bill would only add hundreds of thousands of patients to the rolls with no one to care for them."

My opinion, that's what any government run health care program offers.  An insurance card, but no guarantee of service.

http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-california-senate-approves-health-coverage-for-some-immigrants-here-illegally-20150602-story.html

Offline RayRaytheSBS

  • "There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men."
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1193
  • Reputation: +200/-13
Re: CA Senate approves taxpayer funded healthcare for illegals
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2015, 04:20:59 AM »
Must be no money problems in California.  Or is this just a case of can't you feel the love?

"The state Senate on Tuesday approved a hotly debated measure that would allow many immigrants in the state illegally to sign up for special healthcare programs that would offer the same benefits as Medi-Cal."

State Senator Ricardo Lara:  "“We are talking about our friends. We are talking about our neighbors and our families who are denied basic healthcare in the richest state of this union."


The minor, opposing view, State Senator Jeff Stone: “This bill would only add hundreds of thousands of patients to the rolls with no one to care for them."

My opinion, that's what any government run health care program offers.  An insurance card, but no guarantee of service.

http://www.latimes.com/local/political/la-me-pc-california-senate-approves-health-coverage-for-some-immigrants-here-illegally-20150602-story.html

These people are not our friends, they came into this country ILLEGALLY, and we reward their crime by giving them driver's licenses and medical coverage. The blatant vote-pandering by these politicians sickens me.
“Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms”

“The best things in life are beyond money; their price is agony and sweat and devotion ... and the price demanded for the most precious of all things in life is life itself - ultimate cost for perfect value.”
― Robert A. Heinlein, Starship Troopers

Offline obumazombie

  • Siege engine to lib fortresses
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21815
  • Reputation: +1659/-578
  • Last of the great minorities
Re: CA Senate approves taxpayer funded healthcare for illegals
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2015, 07:49:32 AM »
Ann Coulter has a new book out about this very subject.

For anyone willing to objectively(a foreign word to the modern day "journalist") examine the impacts of immigration, our country is not being well served.

Terence Jeffrey concludes...

Quote

A pair of decisions handed down by federal appeals courts in the last month highlight two telling pillars of recent U.S. national security strategy.
They are:
open our border and collect everyone's phone records.

In Texas v. U.S.A., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit refused to allow President Obama to move forward with his plan to unilaterally grant legal status to as many as 4.3 million illegal aliens.

The administration argued that Texas and 25 others states that sued to stop Obama's plan did not even have standing to challenge the action.
These states, the administration argued, would suffer no injury from Obama's legalization of illegal immigrants.



The court was incredulous.
In Texas, it noted, the state would need to absorb a cost of $130.89 for each driver's license it issued to a person in this country illegally who was amnestied by Obama or else change its driver's license law.



"A plaintiff suffers an injury even if it can avoid that injury by incurring other costs," wrote Judge Jerry Smith, a Reagan appointee.
"And being pressured to change state law constitutes an injury."



Obama's amnesty, of course, would injure all Americans, not just those in the 26 states that sued to stop it.

The amnesty, the court said, would declare millions of illegal immigrants "lawfully present in the United States."

"That designation makes aliens who were not otherwise qualified for most federal public benefits eligible for 'social security retirement benefits, social security disability benefits, [and] health insurance under Part A of the Medicare program,'" said the court.


They also would "be eligible to apply for work authorization," "may obtain a Social Security Number," and "would be eligible for earned income tax credits once they received a Social Security number."



In short: Obama's unilateral declaration would give up to 4.3 million illegal immigrants a right to compete for jobs with U.S. citizens and permanent legal residents and make them eligible for Social Security, Medicare and disability programs that are already helping push the nation toward bankruptcy.



Alternatively, if the court did not believe the administration's argument that Texas and the other states suffered no injury from the president's unilateral amnesty, the administration argued that the court should maintain an injunction against the amnesty only in Texas, or in the other states that sued.



In the rest of the country, the administration argued, it should be free to move forward with legalization.



This, the court countered, would contradict "the constitutional imperative of 'a uniform Rule of Naturalization.'"



"Further," said the court, "there is a substantial likelihood that a partial injunction would be ineffective because DAPA beneficiaries would be free to move between states."



Is it possible the administration believed a foreign national who had crossed the international border to live illegally in Texas would not cross from Texas into another U.S. state so Obama could grant him amnesty?




full article...

http://cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/open-our-border-then-collect-everyones-phone-records

There were only two options for gender. At last count there are at least 12, according to libs. By that standard, I'm a male lesbian.