Posted on 04/20/2007 1:54:12 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
The Pataki administration yesterday accused Mayor Giuliani of trying to turn the city into "an international welfare magnet" by offering benefits to new immigrants.
In a letter to Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro, state Social Services Commissioner Brian Wing attacked the mayor for pledging to continue welfare for legal immigrants who have been in the country less than a year, even though the state's new welfare law eliminates those benefits.
"We believe that the mayor's proposal to provide instant welfare benefits to new immigrants could make New York City an international welfare magnet, surely a regrettable development," Wing wrote.
Wing, who said he was writing at the request of Pataki's deputy secretary, John Sweeney, said he hoped the mayor would reconsider his plans to continue the benefits at the city's expense.
But aides to Giuliani said the mayor has no intention of reconsidering and may even sue the state if it does not chip in support for any new immigrants who may need emergency assistance.
"In our view, the bar [on benefits] and the letter misunderstand the value of legal immigration to New York City and how hard legal immigrants work," said Anthony Coles, a senior adviser to Giuliani on welfare policy.
"Legal immigrants are the backbone of the city, and we think it is incorrect and maybe unconstitutional to treat legal immigrants differently than citizens under the state Constitution," he said.
Coles said the city is considering a lawsuit to force the state to continue paying its share of the benefits.
The city does not keep track of how many immigrants receive welfare in their first year, but Coles scoffed at the idea that the city would attract immigrants seeking welfare to the city. "That's not going to happen," he said. "This would be a negligible number of people."
"That's sad that Gov. Pataki is taking that position," said Stan Mark of the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund. "It's unfair and discriminatory."
1) Go to UAB online library.
2) Click on database icon (magnifying glass)
3) Click on "L"
4) Scroll down. Click "LexisNexis News"
5) Switch to "Guided News Search."
6) Input the following into the fields:
Step One: General News
Step Two: Major Papers
Step Three: ALBANY RIPS RUDY'S IMMIGRANT FUNDS
Step Four: From 1996 to 1997
Click Search.
7) The article should pop up.
Okay.
So New York state law said those welfare benefits for immigrants that had been in the country for less than a year no longer existed.
And Rudy tried to offer them anyway?
In other words, Rudy was either:
A) Lying to attract immigrants for nonexistent benefits.
Or,
B) Defying state law by offering those benefits anyway, all paid for at the expense of the American taxpayer.
Scary thing is, I can't really tell which one to pick. Probably B.
More about how Rudy fought to keep welfare available for immigrants.
Socialism at it’s finest. But Rootie’s a conservative, right?
And Rudy defied federal law and federal court orders to maintain NYC's sanctuary city policy.
Yep, Rudy's a law-and-order guy all right. He gave orders to ignore laws he didn't like.
these are LEGAL immigrants.
If this guy uses corrupt methods now, just think what he could do in the bully bullpit!
Considering how hard Giuliani fought to keep New York City’s sanctuary city status, I’m highly skeptical that legal immigrants were the only thing he had in mind.
Besides, he was offering these benefits despite the fact they were no longer allowed under state law. Does the fact that he tends to ignore some laws not trouble you?
Paging the rationalization gnomes.
Rationalization gnome line 1.
So? The state government said not to give them state welfare benefits. Rudy ignored that law and spent the state's money against the state's wishes. Just as he ignored federal law and federal court orders to end NYC's sanctuary city policies.
In any case, dems would swing the gates open and let in everything and everybody.
The issue itself is easy to solve with stronger employer enforcement, verifiable ID, and with real fines & jail time for violators. The party is becoming more unified around these themes. Bush would do well to push them much, much harder than he is now.
Thank goodness for the Internet. Otherwise, this stuff would never be found out. Not until election time, at any rate.
08/15/1997
In other words, Pataki was in his first term. You know, the one he earned despite Rudy endorsing his opponent, Mario Cuomo.
I doubt Cuomo would have signed a bill cutting off welfare benefits to anyone. So we now see why Rudy wanted Cuomo - to keep the welfare gravy train running for NYC.
Some conservative.
this “sanctuary city” moniker is a ruse - as we learned in cases like the recent DUI in Virginia - almost every single jurisdiction in the country does not use the incidence of non-felonies to report immigration status to INS - because INS doesn’t care, and won’t deport those people.
as such, every jurisdiction with the possible exception of Arpaio’s in Arizona, doesn’t use their local law enforcement to run down immigration status violations. You can go to any Home Depot or Dunkin Donuts anywhere in the united states, and outside there will be a collection of illegals waiting for job pickups - untouched by the police. so I guess all these locales are “santuary cities” also.
“his plans to continue the benefits at the city’s expense”.
Hardly.
A federal law was passed to require reporting illegal immigration status to the feds. Rudy defied that law. And court orders demanding he follow it.
Some law-and-order type. BTW, there was a horrific murder just after Rudy left office by an illegal immigrant who had been arrested in the past by NYC police - and never deported because they never reported him to the INS.
Coles said the city is considering a lawsuit to force the state to continue paying its share of the benefits.
Rudy sure does love them lawsuits, doesn't he?
He lost just about every First-Amendment issue he embroiled the city in, however.
“You can go to any Home Depot or Dunkin Donuts anywhere in the united states, and outside there will be a collection of illegals waiting for job pickups - untouched by the police. so I guess all these locales are “santuary cities” also.”
Anywhere in the US? Maybe in big liberal cities, but not small town USA. I have never seen illegals waiting for job pick-ups anywhere.
So your lame observation makes it all OK? Conservatives want this mess cleaned up and Rudy is obviously NOT the answer.
and so has every other jurisdiction. is Virginia Beach a sanctuary city? name one locale that isn’t? what locales are using local police for immigration roundups - and to what end, INS deports perhaps 3000 people a year. NYC has 400K illegals.
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.