BANK ACCEPTANCE OF MATRICULA CONSULAR IS IN JEOPARDY (their title)

National Immigration Law Center (NILC) ^ | 7/11/2003 | Joan Friedland

[I_Publius]

 

ACTION ALERT!

Matricula Consular

 

 

URGENT: COMMENTS NEEDED BY JULY 31, 2003
BANK ACCEPTANCE OF MATRICULA CONSULAR IS IN JEOPARDY
July, 11, 2003

YOU CAN EASILY SUBMIT COMMENTS BY VOTING NO TO A QUESTION ON THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT WEBSITE.

YOU MUST ALSO INCLUDE COMMENTS WHEN YOU VOTE. YOU CAN CUT AND PASTE THEM FROM THIS NOTICE

Bank acceptance of consular identification cards like the matricula consular is in jeopardy. Only a few months ago the U.S. Department of the Treasury issued final regulations regarding section 326 of the USA PATRIOT ACT. Those regulations allowed banks and other financial institutions to decide what documents they would accept as proof of identity before opening a bank account. This was an important breakthrough for non-citizens whose only form of identification was a consular identification card such as the matricula consular.

An anti-immigrant Congressman who is opposed to bank acceptance of the matricula consular pressured the Treasury Department to re-open the issue. On July 1, the Treasury Department -- in a very unusual move -- asked for additional comments about the final rule. COMMENTS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY JULY 31, 2003. You can easily express your opposition to a change in the rules by voting on the Treasury Department website. Go to http://regcomments.treasury.gov.

You must click on the section marked IDENTIFICATION. That will take you to a page where you first fill in your personal identification information. You may then vote whether you believe "the terms and conditions of the final section 326 regulation relating to financial institutions' ability to rely on foreign-issued identification be changed?" A "NO" VOTE MEANS THAT YOU BELIEVE BANKS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ACCEPT CONSULAR IDENTIFICATION DOCUMENTS SUCH AS THE MATRICULA CONSULAR AS IDENTIFICATION.

NUMBERS COUNT. AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE SHOULD VOTE "NO" TO A CHANGE IN THE RULES, SO PLEASE PASS THIS ALONG AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE. YOU MAY VOTE AS AN INDIVIDUAL OR AS A MEMBER OF AN ORGANIZATION.

YOU MUST ALSO ADD COMMENTS IN THE BOX BELOW THE VOTING SECTION. The following is a sample comment which you may revise or copy and paste into the Treasury Department comment page.

I am writing to oppose any change to the Section 326 customer identification rules, and I support allowing financial institutions to use certain types of foreign government-issued identification, such as the matricula consular, to open bank accounts for immigrants. Many banks and a number of credit unions across the nation now accept foreign government-issued identification such as the matricula consular to open bank accounts and provide lower cost remittance services for immigrants. Bank accounts help consumers build assets and avoid high cost financial services, such as check cashers, payday lenders, couriers, money transmitters, and the like. This has enabled banks to develop lower-cost international money transmission methods. In addition, the competition introduced by financial institutions in the money transmission industry has forced traditional money transmission services to lower their charges.

Enabling immigrants to open bank accounts also serves law enforcement purposes. First, it helps deter robberies and assaults against law-abiding immigrants. Immigrants often become the target of robbery because they are known to carry large amounts of cash on payday. Second, the acceptance of alternative identification helps law enforcement combat money laundering and terrorism. Banks and thrifts, in comparison to other financial providers, are subject to federal regulation, routine examinations, and more extensive record keeping and reporting requirements.

This enhances the ability of federal officials to monitor international money transmissions and distinguish legitimate transfers from those conducted for money laundering or terrorist financing purposes.

Denying hardworking taxpayers access to bank accounts will not make us safer as a country. It would be a flawed and ineffective means of combating terrorism and regulating our nation's immigration policies. You may also add a comment as a separate attachment to the Treasury Department comment page.

You may also submit comments by sending an email to identification@regcomments.treasury.gov with the caption in the body of the text "Section 326 Notice of Inquiry: Identification" or by mail to 326 Identification Comments, U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of the General Counsel, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20220-0002.

PLEASE SEND AN EMAIL WITH YOUR FULL CONTACT INFORMATION TO ward@nilc-dc.org TO ADVISE US THAT YOU HAVE VOTED AND SUBMITTED COMMENTS.

For more information, contact:

Joan Friedland
National Immigration Law Center
202-216-0261

Chi Chi Wu
National Consumer Law Center
617-542-8010

Brenda Muniz
National Council of La Raza
202-776-1570

 

Home | What's New | About NILC | Publications | Community Education Materials
Immigrants & Employment | Immigrants & Public Benefits | Immigration Law & Policy
Trainings | Links
California Immigrant Welfare Collaborative

[I_Publius]

I have not seen this posted anywhere, so I thought I would post it. There is a link to the Treasury Department where they are wanting people to vote on this issue.

Do with it what you will!!

Cheers, I Publius

[firewalk]

bttt

[Pa' fuera]

Just remember that a NO vote, as is suggested in this post, will keep acceptance of the matricula in place. Note that the memo is issued in part by the National Council of La Raza. The way to vote on this is YES.

[gubamyster]

ping

[dennisw]

Scumbag immigration lawyers hard at it again.

[OXENinFLA]

http://regcomments.treasury.gov/s.php?su=2&sp=1&camp=TRE030620

here's the page to vote on.

[Flyer]

Do with it what you will!!

I did.

[RonF]

Oh, and I sent an e-mail to the indicated address, as requested, informing them of my vote and comments. I'm sure they'll appreciate it.

[nuffsenuff]

DONE...

Yes on both.

This Matricula Consular card has been on my raday screen for months.

As usual, the dems love the idea.

That alone caused me to question it. On further inspection, anybody with a hint of common sense could see the potential National Security threat these ID's could pose.

[HiJinx]

Ok, been and voted.

You can't submit your vote without a comment. They need cogent and substantive comments to outweigh what the immigration lawyers are going to say.

Read the memo linked at the top of the government page, read this screed as posted by the immigration nazis, think about the treasury dept's comments, then have at it.

We have until Thursday to respond.

[RonF]

I voted "Yes". My comment:

The only foreign-issued identification that should be accepted at financial institutions should be a foreign passport with a valid U.S. Visa (when required) in it.

I especially object to the Matricula Consular card. For one thing, the safeguards taken by the issuing consulate in issuing them seem inadequate. And why shouldn't foreigners in the United States have passports? If they are here illegally, we should be helping them leave, not helping them stay.

[Pa' fuera]

My comment has been registered:


The matricula consular is a document that only illegal aliens need. If banks begin to open and offer services such as credit cards, mortgages, personal loans, etc., based on the matricula alone, they will be subjecting themselves to hidden credit risks. The illegals, since they have no work authorization or legal status in the U.S., may be fired and/or deported at a moment's notice. Not only would the illegal cease to have the revenues to pay their credit obligations, but also the illegal would be virtually impossible to trace if deported to Mexico. Illegals may also have credit obligations in place in Mexico which do not appear on a U.S. credit report, which makes their ratio of debt to income much higher than what the financial institution can discern from the credit report. Since illegals rampantly use false identities, including the documents they may use to obtain the matricula, to collect on a defaulted obligation becomes much more difficult for the financial institution. The banks are so eager to tap into this new source of customers that they are ignoring these risks.

There are also national security risks: The matricula may also be used by other foreign nationals, including those from terrorist sponsoring countries, to open bank accounts and use those accounts under false identities to support terrorism. The matricula can easily be used by Mexican nationals involved in the drug trade to launder money.

[RonF]

Then I sent the address another e-mail. It says:

I found the following on your web page regarding this:

Enabling immigrants to open bank accounts also serves law enforcement purposes. First, it helps deter robberies and assaults against law-abiding immigrants.

I have a question. If an immigrant is law-abiding, how come they don't have a passport with a U.S. Visa on it? Why would they need a Matricula Consular?

[lindagirl]

I Voted Yes

[hattend]

Yes vote recorded. BTTT

[NathanR]

I have a question. If an immigrant is law-abiding, how come they don't have a passport with a U.S. Visa on it? Why would they need a Matricula Consular?

Because Mexicans, Canadians, and people from certain other countries are not required to have passports for short stays.

Maybe it is time to rationalize and standardize this whole passport thing.

[CanisMajor2002]

BTTT.

My comment: The Matricula Consular card is a passport for terrorists to use our services against us.

[debaryfl]

Thanks for the heads-up. I voted properly, I believe. The Matricula Consular is a phoney document and if accepted, will be followed by the phoney papers from many other countries.

As identification, it proves only that the bearer is a criminal alien, who should be deported within 24 hours, as is the Mexican policy, I believe.

[Howie]

[Brian Allen]

Voted "Yes," with the comment:

"The only foreign-issued identification permissable in Law should be a foreign-issued passport displaying the appropriate United States of America issued Visa and the required United States of America Port of Entry stamps and endorsements etceteras that prove the legality of the applicant's entry and stay within the United States of America's Sovereign Borders."

[zerosix]

This is wrong. I have just returned from the U.S. from a 10 day stay in Equador and have traveled in both Mexico and Canada.

Non-citizens are not allowed to pass into the U.S. without passports identifying them, the length of stay and address where one will be staying.

[BabaOreally]

DONE!!!

We all have to go here and "vote" yes...it is a patriotic DUTY....

[banjo joe]

are wanting people to vote on this issue
They're inviting comment... you don't vote or decide squat.

[banjo joe]

As usual, the dems love the idea
And the neo-cons don't, nor do the libertarians?

[Ron H.]

Done... and thanks for the heads up.

[Ron H.]

That alone caused me to question it. On further inspection, anybody with a hint of common sense could see the potential National Security threat these ID's could pose.

Agreed. I also pointed out that if these (illegals) entered our country legally then there was no (valid) reason for them not to have a really genuine Made in the USA identification card issued by their (legal) host government. Of course this is just one of several common sense reasons I submitted with our national security being at the top of my list.

[Ron H.]

How about this one? Hehehe

[RonF]

Taxpayers?!?!? If you are illegal and being paid under the table, how are you paying taxes?

Sales tax, every time they buy something (in most states if not all). And many of them get false ID and false SSN and are not paid under the table, and thus have taxes withheld from their wages that they have no chance to get refunds on or the benefit of.

I don't defend illegal immigration or the deceits use to accomplish it, but the bottom line is that describing them as taxpayers is accurate.

[RonF]

Because Mexicans, Canadians, and people from certain other countries are not required to have passports for short stays.

But people coming over for short stays are not immigrants, they're visitors. Visitors (such as myself when I go to Canada with just my driver's licnese and a birth certificate) don't need to open bank accounts. Immigrants that are law-abiding should have passports.

[RonF]

I can't see that picture, just a small box with a red "X".

[Ron H.]

Ooooppss. I forgot that I have hotlinking turned off on that server. I'll move it off that server and repost the link. Sorry about that.

[Ron H.]

This one should work better.