I was just wondering if our current elected politicians and sheriff here in Charles County, consider our county a “Sanctuary County”, when it comes to illegal emigrants.
I was also wondering if anyone here at DD know what the candidates running for office in the upcoming election stance is on illegal emigration.
I think any candidate’s position on illegal immigration, while running for any office in Charles County, Maryland, is irrelevant. Immigration enforcement is a federal issue. The State of Maryland has very little—if any—say on immigration issues, on the County level, we certainly don’t have a say. Federal law is enforced by federal law enforcement agencies. Our local Sheriff, local police, and local elected officials play no role in those federal enforcement issues.
As to us being a “sanctuary County,” I’m assuming that you mean, ‘do we choose to not prosecute or investigate certain crimes committed by those thought to be living here without proper documentation?’ To that, I can say that our local law enforcement investigate and prosecute every violation of State, County and local law within their jurisdiction that has merit. Immigration law and thereby the enforcement of immigration law is not a State, County or local law, and it cannot be enforced by local police. To that end, we are NOT a “Sanctuary County.”
from this link , there is a list of ``sanctuary cities’’ in Maryland:
Maryland
Baltimore, MD (Congressional Research Service)
Gaithersburg, MD
Mt. Rainier, MD (Added 1-20-08, Source: The Washington D.C. Examiner, 1-19-08)
Montgomery County, MD (Added 11-3-09, Source: Frederick County sheriff worried about MontCo gangs, The Washington D.C. Examiner, 11-2-09)
Takoma Park, MD (Reported that City ordinance passed some 20 years ago; Congressional Research Service)
i agree that as a practical matter in Charles County what a local candidate’s position on illegal immigration is irrelevant. but just as you can learn a lot about the person behind the candidate if you ask the titles of the last three books they read, you can learn a lot from knowing about things this too.
as a practical example ... for any Congressional candidate who is running with “smaller government” as part of their platform, i would be very curious to know how they would have voted on that FISA Amendments Act of 2008. i’m sure my bias is obvious: if they answer in the affirmative, then i know they are not genuine, or at the very least not thinking things through very well.
at least to me, the world view of a candidate matters to me. not as much as what they will do for my community, but it matters.
i’m probably getting carried away with the point, but before 9/11 there were elected Congressional reps and Senators who didn’t have a U.S. passport because “nothing that happens overseas matters to my constituents.’‘
I have asked repeatedly to the Board of Ed about the workers that are hired to work on our schools IF they are Legal. I get no response. With the amount of unemployed Americans out of work, I want to see Americans working in the buildings instead of the countless illegals in the county.
I have asked repeatedly to the Board of Ed about the workers that are hired to work on our schools IF they are Legal. I get no response. With the amount of unemployed Americans out of work, I want to see Americans working in the buildings instead of the countless illegals in the county.
You do know there is a difference between seeing “Americans working” and an “illegal” having the job. There are plenty of workers, especially in our area, who are not U.S. citizens who are here working legally. Assuming, or even implying that every non-U.S. citizen is an “illegal” is wrong. But, it is one of the current hot buttons.
As to the CCPS hiring illegal residents, this goes a long way to ween out anyone who does not have a legal status.
From the CCPS:
Employee Background Check
Prior to becoming an employee of Charles County Public Schools, a job-related background check was
conducted. As you may know, a comprehensive background check may consist of prior employment
verification, criminal background checks (required for all employees working with students), professional
reference checks and education confirmation. Criminal Records
Maryland State law requires all education system employees to have a pre-employment criminal history
background check, which is intended to protect Charles County Public Schools’ students and employees. Driver’s License and Driving Record
Employees whose work requires operation of a motor vehicle are required to present and maintain a valid
driver’s license and a driving record acceptable to our insurer.
Working Americans who are looking for jobs should get the jobs especially over illegals & non Americans. I am so damn tired of the lame excuse that illegals ( LAW BREAKERS) are taking the jobs nobody wants.
You may say ahhh this doesn’t happen….Bull, Go look in the neighborhoods that are being built. Spanish signs are up. Hispanics are building the houses, not Average Joe American. That is just wrong.
I totally object to this and I don’t care if that ruffles some feathers, it is wrong.
It is wrong to take the jobs away that American construction workers need.
I can’t find the story in the paper- but it was 3 or 4 years ago that a hispanic (found to be illegal too) died in a construction accident when she failed to understand how to use a front loader and it flipped, pinning her and she died of her injuries. The operator didn’t understand English and paid a dear price for that ignorance.
My point is get rid of the illegals. Have the Commissioners & elected BoE check the green cards if the companies are going to use those kind of workers but only as a last resort.
Working Americans who are looking for jobs should get the jobs especially over illegals & non Americans. I am so damn tired of the lame excuse that illegals ( LAW BREAKERS) are taking the jobs nobody wants.
You may say ahhh this doesn’t happen….Bull, Go look in the neighborhoods that are being built. Spanish signs are up. Hispanics are building the houses, not Average Joe American. That is just wrong.
I totally object to this and I don’t care if that ruffles some feathers, it is wrong.
It is wrong to take the jobs away that American construction workers need.
I can’t find the story in the paper- but it was 3 or 4 years ago that a hispanic (found to be illegal too) died in a construction accident when she failed to understand how to use a front loader and it flipped, pinning her and she died of her injuries. The operator didn’t understand English and paid a dear price for that ignorance.
My point is get rid of the illegals. Have the Commissioners & elected BoE check the green cards if the companies are going to use those kind of workers but only as a last resort.
Put real Americans back to work first.
There are cases of fraud, where MVA officials have wrongly issued identification to people without the proper credentials, but that says nothing of the system, it says a lot about those individuals working within the system. Those wrong-doers are usually discovered and dealt with.
I never said that illegals were taking jobs nobody wants. I merely stated that non-citizens have the same right to seek employment as U.S. citizens. Non-citizens shouldn’t get preferential treatment nor should citizens. If you have the legal right to work as a non-citizen, you should be treated equally.
Your original question was specifically about the Board of Ed. While its not impossible for one to get through the cracks, it is highly unlikely given the background checks and screening that the Charles County Public School conducts for their employees for an illegal resident to obtain a job. Does it happen? I’m sure there is an exception. Even with all the background checks for all school employees nationwide, there are cases where pedophiles make it through the checks and balances too. But, all in all their screening works remarkably well.
The County government may not conduct the same level of background screening for some County jobs as the CCPS, but they do have a system of checks to verify the person they are hiring is who they say they are. I cannot speak as to if that same checks and balances goes for any contractor the County may hire—I would be surprised if they did.
Just to play devils advocate, where—here in Charles County—are the unemployed average Joe American workers in line for that construction job saying that they wanted to be hired but didn’t because some ‘illegal’ got hired? If average Joe American steps up and says “I am ready, willing and able” (sorry Jennifer to steal your catch phrase—don’t mean to drag you into this) “to work, and they won’t hire me because that ‘illegal’ got the job,” I will fight that fight in his defense. I don’t see any of those average Joe Americans stepping up and out, though.
If your issue is to “get rid of those illegals” talk to your federal representatives. They are the only ones with the wherewithal to lean on the federal agencies to do anything about it.
If your issue is to “get rid of those illegals” talk to your federal representatives. They are the only ones with the wherewithal to lean on the federal agencies to do anything about it.
this is a key point. no one with any authority whatsoever in the matter—-democrat, republican, or in-between—-has asked those here illegally to leave. not formally. not informally. no policy soundbites. nothing.
If your issue is to “get rid of those illegals” talk to your federal representatives. They are the only ones with the wherewithal to lean on the federal agencies to do anything about it.
this is a key point. no one with any authority whatsoever in the matter—-democrat, republican, or in-between—-has asked those here illegally to leave. not formally. not informally. no policy soundbites. nothing.
And you probably won’t see that happen any time soon.
Before anyone with influence opens their mouth, they need to have a viable plan to present. The plan needs to include a way to stop the influx of immigrants not entering through proper channels—regardless of where they are from or where they are entering (this includes those crossing the southern border, our northern border and entering all sea- and airports). Not an easy task in itself. The plan then also needs to include a plan on how to deal with those who are already here. Our laws aren’t simple. It seems simple to tell them, “you’re not here legally, go home,” but it isn’t quite that simple. There is a process to deport someone. It is a long, expensive legal process. We can’t break laws to deal with law breakers. Its kind of like a land lord trying to evict a tenant; even though they aren’t supposed to be there anymore, it takes a lot of effort, and money, to be able to legally force them to leave. If and when someone gets a legal deportation order, we need enforcement of those orders. But, as part of that, there needs to be a viable plan to deal with dependents of people being deported, as those dependents may legally be U.S. citizens. Are we going to start rescinding U.S. citizenship because of who we’re related to? Or, are we going to start deporting U.S. citizens?
We have a lot of politicians and a lot of citizens that are quite vocal about wanting to get rid of illegal immigrants, but NONE have presented a plan that covers all the bases. For those who have generic plans, none of those have any idea how to fund it. The same folks who want to secure the borders and deport illegals want smaller government, less taxes and to rake in federal spending. You can’t have everything. We’re still trying to fund tax cuts that are getting ready to expire. We’re still trying to fund stimulus and bailout bills that were passed and supported by the current and previous Administrations. We’re still trying to fund two wars. We’re going to be trying to fund a health care system that no one can agree on how much it will cost.
But, as you say, we could just “ask them to leave.” I, however, don’t think that will accomplish much.
The State of Maryland has very little—if any—say on immigration issues, on the County level, we certainly don’t have a say.
I disagree. The state can make it very difficult for illegals to remain if the state desires to do so. Not long ago, MD threw out the welcome mat for illegals causing a large influx from neighboring states. AZ, on the other hand, has taken a stand to enforce federal law in an attempt to quell the tide of illegals.
Gizmo makes reference to “illegals” in his posts. Quack, you refer to “legal” non-citizens. Big difference. I can’t get my head around the fact that so many Americans defend the “illegals” (certainly not a majority, but surely a well-covered minority in the media). Perhaps someone can explain to me the controversy. A law exists, there are people breaking that law, there are legal methods of identifying those breaking the law employed by the authorities, there are appropriate consequences for breaking the law (to include deportation). The alternative to any law prohibiting immigration by other-than-legal means would be open borders. You would have to be a special kind of stupid to be in favor of a zero-security border in this day and age.
Perhaps those who are supporting illegal immigration are simply grooming a new voter base. Seems un-American to me.
Perhaps those who are supporting illegal immigration are simply grooming a new voter base. Seems un-American to me.
perhaps those who fall into the category that you describe are not “supporting illegal immigration” at all.
perhaps instead they desire a sensible approach to immigration reform. there is a difference.
neither party will run those illegally here out of the country because both parties depend on swelling populations to support larger and larger tax bases because both parties have social programs that they want to fund. because population growth is leveling out (the current birth rate approximately equals the replacement rate), so they recognize that an amnesty program for those already here is the quickest way to add to party ranks.
even W. supported an amnesty program.
you (by “you” i mean the royal you) want to run them out? going to have to win an election first. problem is, you won’t win if this is a major theme/plank in your platform.
Gizmo makes reference to “illegals” in his posts. Quack, you refer to “legal” non-citizens. Big difference. I can’t get my head around the fact that so many Americans defend the “illegals” (certainly not a majority, but surely a well-covered minority in the media). Perhaps someone can explain to me the controversy. A law exists, there are people breaking that law, there are legal methods of identifying those breaking the law employed by the authorities, there are appropriate consequences for breaking the law (to include deportation). The alternative to any law prohibiting immigration by other-than-legal means would be open borders. You would have to be a special kind of stupid to be in favor of a zero-security border in this day and age.
Yes, gizmo referenced that, but you’re leaving out large sections of the exchange. I spoke of both legal and illegal residents. gizmo first posed the question as to whether CCPS checks to make sure their employees are legal. I then showed CCPS does check for several things that makes it unlikely that anyone without a legal status would be hired. gizmo then stated that they wanted to be sure that an American gets a job ahead of an illegal or non-citizen and threw in the fact that they’re tired of the cliche of “illegals ( LAW BREAKERS) are taking the jobs nobody wants.” I saw those statements as incorrectly labeling all residents into only two categories—all U.S. citizens on one side and all non-U.S. citizens on another. I wanted to clarify that legal non-citizens have the same right and opportunity (and should) to seek employment as a citizen. I even went on to say that if the cliche was specifically suspected to be true, where an illegal resident took a job from a legal resident who wanted that job, I would fight that fight with them. If there is no legal resident throwing a fit about not getting a job they wanted because an illegal took it, I think the cliche is a moot point. Show me the job that somebody wanted. And, this isn’t to be construed as me supporting illegal residents or employers hiring illegal residents.
The reason I stated that immigration is a federal issue is due to the U.S. Constitution. Article 1, Section 8 states, “The Congress shall have Power To…establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;” The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, in Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]). It would not make sense to allow Congress to pass laws to determine how an immigrant becomes a naturalized resident if the Congress cannot determine how that immigrant can come into the country in the first place.
There is also an argument that immigration is an implied power of any sovereign nation, and as such, the federal government has the power to regulate immigration because the United States is a sovereign nation. While it is true that the United States is a sovereign nation, and it may be true that all sovereign nations have some powers inherent in that status, it is not necessary to determine if immigration is such a power that does not even require constitutional mention, because the Naturalization Clause handles the power.
There are those that make the Amendment 10 argument: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This was the basis for Arizona’s law—that the Federal Government wasn’t doing its job, and therefore the power for immigration enforcement is being taken up by Arizona. This will soon play out in Federal Court, and likely the Supreme Court. We’ll have to wait and see how that pans out.
For the record, I don’t support “open borders,” I think secure borders and ports are vital to our National Security. I do however see the paradox in campaigning on increasing our Homeland Security efforts and decreasing taxes, federal spending and paying down the deficit. The shell game can only carry on for so long.
I don’t pretend to have the answer for immigration reform—either how to go about it or how to fund it. And I don’t envy the group that is going to have to figure it out.
Xcitor and Quack, I think that I did a poor job of making my point. Simply put, I was trying to say that the debate over what to do about illegals currently in our country, why they’re here and whether or not it is affecting our job situation are all side issues. The fact remains, as Federal law exists currently, entering this country without going through the precribed process, is “illegal.” The fact also remains that a certain percentage of illegal immigrants (that percentage can be debated) are here in the U.S. committing crimes. Some would argue that that number is disproportional to most other segments of society.
As for “throwing them all out” of the country, I agree that would be a daunting task that no politician would undertake. Making an effort to enforce the law, however, is not only possible but is a responsibility of our law enforcement agencies and our courts. The current administration in the White House is making every effort to ensure political correctness is applied as it pertains to illegals. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is about to undergo a name change because the current name sounds harsh to the illegals. When the president of Mexico badmouths the U.S. over its immigration laws and then gets support from our own president, we’ve got a problem. Obama is willing to sit with the leaders of Iran, Mexico and China and discuss “options” but publically condemns one of our own governors…I think he might be confused. Perhaps he’s not aware of the human rights and immigration enforcement policies of those countries.
People sneak into the U.S. for two reasons: It’s the greatest country in the world and it’s easy. Since I don’t think anyone wants to change the former, perhaps we should work on the latter.
As a retired Federal LEO, I have many friends in ICE, DEA, ATF, etc. etc.; these friends send me hats, T-shirts and other related things from their organizations which I wear quite frequently and proudly in and around Charles County.
The other day I wore a ball cap that a friend of mine sent me from ICE into a McDonalds in the Waldorf area, while standing in line waiting to be served I witnessed several of the worker’s behind the counter looking at me and whispering to each other, then amazingly two of them left and hid from my view in the rear of the TA.
I left the TA shaking my head and giggling to myself.
Just a Citizen: You should call the District or Regional Mc Donalds Organization that oversees the Franchise and ask them to look into your allegations.
