Presidential Candidates Need to Be Asked One Very Important Immigration Question



The American people do not control the immigration system or the types and numbers of people we allow in and we allow to stay. One question every presidential candidate needs to be asked is will this be addressed and how.

The U.N. vets our incoming refugees from failed states and the agencies that do it are agenda-driven.

Also, U.N. guidelines are being misused by some judges to determine which illegal criminals get to stay. The following is a case in point.

A federal appeals court ruled this week that an illegal immigrant and convicted felon can’t be deported back to Mexico because he identifies as a transgender woman, which leaves him vulnerable to torture back in his home country. He was being harassed at home and petitioned for sanctuary in the U.S. under the U.N. Convention Against Torture (CAT), according to The Daily Caller.

What laws do we follow now in the United States?

A criminal illegal felon is being allowed to stay according to a U.N. guideline. Harassment is now elevated to the level of torture. Will the U.N. rule our federal judges’s decisions with exaggerated claims of torture? The transgender criminal illegal alien who has been previously deported can stay and possibly kill someone.

Birthright citizenship, criminal illegal aliens, and border walls are vital issues.

Perhaps an even larger issue concerns the number and types of immigrants, both legal and illegal, that we allow into the country.

radical communist illegal immigrants

Very few politicians are coming up with viable solutions to illegal immigration other than another senate bill like the last one which closed the border on future promises. The there is legal immigration which is rarely discussed. It might be time to look at both as a new study shows that more than half of legal and illegal immigrants use at least one government welfare program, burdening the U.S. taxpayer.


In the past, immigrants could not come into the country unless they had the ability to live without government subsidies because of promises by sponsors. That’s no longer true since President Bush.

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) compiled statistics on welfare use by immigrant and native households, analyzing Medicaid, cash, food and housing programs. The results strongly suggest the need for a debate over the number and type of immigrants coming to the U.S. in the future.

Utilizing government census data, the report found that in 2012, 51% of immigrant households headed by a legal or illegal immigrant reported at least one welfare program compare to 30% of native households.

Study author Steven Camarota, director of research at CIS, found that both newly-arrived and long-term immigrants use welfare more than natives though most were working and here legally.

The differences between citizens and immigrants are striking and don’t conform to the narrative that foreigners are superior to natives, at least not the way the system is currently set up.

“Immigrant households have much higher use of food programs (40 percent vs. 22 percent for natives) and Medicaid (42 percent vs. 23 percent),” Camarota writes. “Immigrant use of cash programs is somewhat higher than natives (12 percent vs. 10 percent) and use of housing programs is similar to natives.”

Welfare use is tied to an immigrant’s home country.

Camarota wrote that “Households headed by immigrants from Central America and Mexico (73 percent), the Caribbean (51 percent), and Africa (48 percent) have the highest overall welfare use,” he writes. “Those from East Asia (32 percent), Europe (26 percent), and South Asia (17 percent) have the lowest.”

Education is also important. Among households headed by an immigrant without a high school degree, 76 percent used welfare. Among those headed by an immigrant with a high school degree, 63 percent used welfare. And even among households headed by an immigrant with a college degree, 26 percent used welfare — significantly higher than the figure (13 percent) for college-educated natives.

One Cato Institute writer said it is unfair to compare immigrants to the native population but the point of the study was to compare immigrants to natives and they did compare immigrants who have been in the country for years.

Illegal immigrants are generally less educated and not the highest achieving entrepreneurs as stated by Mexico’s former ambassador to the U.S. Then there is the fact that large numbers of immigrants are uneducated and low-skilled.

U.S. law (Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act) specifically forbids the admission of any immigrant who is likely to depend on public assistance. Both the Obama administration and George Bush refused to abide by that law.

A question to ask our candidates for the presidency is will they follow that law?