If you every want to make an issue of something, just start talking about it, no matter what it is. Naperville is not going down the road towards bankruptcy. It can’t happen right? Well it could, but it’s not, correct? Yes the electric and water utilities are borrowing money from each other, but we’re OK overall right?
Downtown Naperville has had kerfuffles break loose late at night and early morning occasionally turning into chaos and mayhem resulting in pandemonium, but Naperville doesn’t need the National Guard to maintain peace does it? Maybe the city council needs to pass a resolution stating that downtown Naperville is safe and family friendly.
Just keep creating and passing resolutions stating the obvious, otherwise known as socially acceptable non-productive behavior on the part of the Naperville city council.
Naperville city councilwoman Becky Anderson wants Naperville to make a public statement in the form of a resolution that Naperville is a “welcoming city”, that residents and visitors alike are accepted within the city limits. That begs the question, since when has Naperville not been a welcoming city? What happened and when did it happen, that requires a formal resolution to prove to all that we are good folks living in a great city. What exactly does Anderson know that we don’t know?
Councilwoman Patty Gusting chimed in by saying, “they (people) know we are a welcoming city, we embrace everyone, we are so happy…it’s fantastic, we love being here”. OK, now I’m beginning to get worried, what’s going on in Naperville that we have to shout from the top of the Municipal Center, that all is well in Naperville. Since when did Naperville start going bad that we have to resort to a resolution to prove otherwise?
Naperville is a welcoming city, and Watchdog can prove it. Within the last few weeks Naperville police apprehended a couple of ‘bad dudes’, as our President would refer to them as, on separate offenses but using the same weapon of choice; a car to try and run over people. Not very nice behavior to say the least. Congratulations to Naperville’s finest for making these apprehensions. Now this is where the proof comes into play, that Naperville is truly a welcoming city. One of the ‘bad dudes’ was turned over to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and reportedly faces deportation. Congratulaltions to the Naperville Police Department for making this happen, and congratulations to the City of Naperville for proving they are a Welcoming City by welcoming the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to our fine city. Councilwoman Anderson, we don’t need another empty resolution. We simply just need to follow the law and let local enforcement do what they do best; enforce the law.
Some of the council people are bored and need a job rather than coming up with meaningless slogans .
I “welcome” Becky Anderson to house and support as many illegals as she can fit in her own home. This crazy virtue signaling that is going on around the country needs to stop. Would it be ok with her if I “borrowed” a book from her store? Or would she want me to follow the law and pay for it? Just because you rebrand a criminal activity so it sounds “nice” doesn’t change the fact that it’s still illegal. I hope people are paying attention and remember this kooky behavior at the polls.
Agree!!!! Let’s focus our time and resources on tangible results — Community safety, strong fiscal responsibility that controls increases in taxes and fees, drugs & suicide in schools, and programs to support our seniors and unemployed who can no longer afford to live here.
OK. A bar after midnight is not family friendly no matter what city it is located in. If you are hangout in downtown Naperville after every business except the bars are closed (after 10pm) with your family the problem is not that Naperville isn’t family friendly, the problem is you are a bad parent. Also, cities with the bond rating Naperville has are not even close to concerns about bankruptcy.
This kind of hyperbola is generally only used by people wishing to marginalize the concerns of people they disagree with in a blatant attempt to bully authorities into ignoring them or end up looking like ignorant A-holes for taking them seriously. The people that believe this kind a hyperbola has a legitimate place in a rational discussion are the one’s who’s intelligence and character are in question.
The term “Sanctuary City” has become a loaded one, with many misconception about what activities such cities are and are not engaging in being spread and perpetuated by certain conservative elements. So it is not surprising that some members of our city council would chose to use the term “Welcoming City” instead to avoid all these misconceptions, and the associated political rhetoric, so we as a community can focus our attention and discussion on the facts and issues involved. The major concern is our police force becoming subjugated by the federal government preventing or diminishing their ability to do their primary job of protecting and serving our community. No one is saying they should ignore their duties and responsibilities to our city’s residents, just that they should not become de facto Immigration agents.
The reality is that our police force does not have access to the database and information Immigration officials have making it impossible for them to do this job. All this really does is give the federal government an out when illegal immigrants commit crimes by blaming local law enforcement for not catching them when in reality immigration is a federal responsibility (one they have successfully argued before the SCOTUS as solely their responsibility, repeatedly). So when an illegal immigrant commits a crime it is the federal governments fault and they should not be given a way to neglect or avoid this responsibility/duty and the repercussion of failing to do so. This is the salient point in any discussion of “Welcoming” or “Sanctuary” cities and we should not allow ourselves to be Gaslighted into ignoring this fact.
Immigration is the Feds responsible. We have just had >8 years where as a part of policy the Feds looked the other way. It is local police responsibility to deal with individual that commits a crime. I do not understand why it is a problem for local police to notify the Federal Government when they are detaining a potential illegal alien. I don’t believe I have heard of a case where the local police have been asked to do neighborhood sweeps. (The exception being major sweeps of known gang members.) It is in everyones interest to help all branches or the government for the safety of us all. To refuse to assist the Feds decreases the safety for everyone. The country currently has a very large number (>11 million) illegal aliens living in the shadows. If the government is to ever get this situation under control they will need the assistance of every branch of government. The option is to have a federal immigration officer on every corner and nobody wants to give the Federal Government that kind of police power.
A few years back Arizona had a solution to illegal aliens. They wrote a law that any company working an illegal alien would be fined $1,000 the first time and the second time they would lose there license to do business. In a very short time the illegal aliens left AZ on their on accord. (Nobody had to answer the question, where do we find the busses to deport 11 million people.) The companies that claimed they couldn’t find Americans to do certain jobs found Americans to do them. For some jobs the wages went up but the important jobs still got done. Keeping a large illegal alien population in the shadows is not good for anyone, the illegal individuals or communities with non-citizen sectors.
First, it has been a federal offense to knowingly hire an illegal immigrant since the 80’s, which is why every employer has to fill out and keep on file an I-9 form for all employees. Not having this form on file is grounds for a fine of up to $3000/employee and up to 6 months in prison. Federal officials simply choose not to enforce this law. I have not heard of as single case were Arizona authorities have enforced their law. I suspect it get enforced as frequently as the federal law does, simply because of the political implications of enforcement (i.e. Trump was cited but not find for violated this law).
Second, as I stated the police authority (as establish by court rulings) limits local law enforcement’s ability to detain people to only those they suspect of committing a crime. As I also pointed out being an illegal immigrant is not a crime so having local law enforcement detain people for this reason, so they could be turned over to the feds, would be a case of unlawful arrest and imprisonment, The resulting civil rights lawsuits could bankrupt a city. So it would be irresponsible for any government official (elected or appointed) to encourage this behavior by their police force.
Third, the illegal immigration population actually peaked during GW Bush’s presidency at over 12 million before dropping to around 11 million and remaining stable at this level for over 10 years. This has resulted in over 2/3 of all illegal immigrants actually having lived in the US for a decade or longer. These people are not living in the shadows. They have drivers license, social security numbers and jobs were they get a regular pay check with FICA withheld like everyone else. There are 12 states that allow undocumented immigrants to be issued a drivers license (Illinois is one of them) and 75% of all illegal immigrants in this country live in 9 of these states. The remaining 38 state accept a drivers license from any of these 12 states a adequate for issuing a license in their state. The only illegal immigrants without a valid US drivers license are the ones that simply do not want one. Those illegals that came here with valid documents (round 9 out of 10) in most cases are also eligible to get a social security number (so they can be lawfully employed) but then stayed after their documents expired.
Fourth, the mass exodus of illegals from Arizona was not because of the lack of work but because the Governor wanted all law enforcement agencies in the state to start verifying immigration status. These illegals did not leave the country they simply move to neighboring states.
Having local law enforcement get involve with immigration enforcement is a slippery slope with lots of legal pitfalls. It is not responsible behavior, given the complexity and legality of such actions, for local government officials to entangle their community in this issue especially if they have seen no increase in crime committed by illegal immigrants in their community. Such a course of action will do nothing to improve community safety while increasing the demands on their police force and exposing them to the possibility of civil rights litigation.
You are very good at talking in circles.
In your first comment, I question where you get your numbers. While in AZ I witnessed the loss of illegal immigrants. They didn’t have to arrest illegal immigrants but make it dangerous to employ them. As was observed, if you make the illegal immigrant job pool dry up you don’t have to deport millions they just leave on their own, the same way they came. I will agree that they probably didn’t go south (home) but east and west, but they did leave AZ.
The fact that states issue driver license to illegal aliens is a very serious ethical question. How many of these states also allow people with a driver license to register to vote. Is this also what you are proposing, let everyone that wanders into the country to be allowed to vote?
Every time a local law enforcement officer puts on his uniform he opens up that legal snake pit of potential law suits but we all should thank them for trying to do their best.
If you have no answer to how to control the illegal immigrant question, where do you draw the line? I am not ready to surrender US sovereignty.
I have read and re-read you post, no where did you ask me were I got my numbers/info, which is why I did not say anything in my last post. They come primarily from Pew Institute reports on studies of illegal immigrants.
As I pointed out the federal law prohibiting hiring illegal immigrants is much stricter then AZ’s ($1000 fine AZ to $3000/employee Federal as well as up to 6 months in a federal prison). If this AZ law (not the threat of law enforcement checking immigrant status) was the cause of the mass exodus for illegals from AZ then the more strict federal law on employing illegals,which has existed since the late 80’s, should have chased them all out of the US already, but it hasn’t so clearly these type of laws do not work.
I wonder if you actually fully read my post. In it I explain the difference between and illegal immigrant and an undocumented immigrant. Only around 1 in 10 illegal immigrants are actually undocumented and even they can get the drivers license required on the I-9 form as proof of legal status along with a Social Security Card (if you see IL issuing DLs to undocumented immigrants as an ethics issue I recommend you discuss it with your elected state representatives). Take a close look at your SS card, how difficult do you think it would be to counterfeit it? These two documents are all that is required for an employer to prove they have done their due diligence in hiring only people in this country legally. The reason this works is because our federal government does not do enough to prevent it. If the SS administration is getting payments from two different employers in two different states for the same SS number they do nothing. This typically means someone is using someone else SS number to legally get a job. The reality is the Fed created this problem and they are the only ones with the tools and authority to fix it not local law enforcement.
Having served in the Navy for over 21 years I have great respect for police officers, which is why making their jobs harder and placing them at greater risk simply by involving them in the federal governments immigration debacle is unacceptable to me. They are not trained for this job, they have not got the resources to do this job effectively and no amount of enforcement on their part is going to fix this problem. Their involvement is only a political placebo and placing them at greater risk for such a reason is disrespectful and show a lack of appreciation for all the hard work they are already doing.
There are lots of answers, from people that have made studying this problem their life’s work, to this problem but they can only be implemented effective at the federal level. While these are not my answers to the problem they are answers I believe in and support.
You talk of US sovereignty but only the federal government has the authority and responsible to protect this sovereignty. To involve State and local government in this area is like hiring a person for a job and hold them responsible for everything relate to that job but not giving them the authority to make any of the decision that impact the outcome of that job.
Totally agree with you Watchdog!
Jim: Are you serious? It is the fault of the federal government when an illegal immigrant commits a crime? Guess that means that only legal law abiding citizens are personally responsible for their actions.
Exactly were did I say an individual is not responsible for their own actions? Nice try, but its not going to be that easy to change the subject. Immigration is a Federal RESPONSIBILITY!!! PERIOD!!! The state, the county, the city, none of them have any authority to establish immigration policies and if they did we would not be having this discussion. They did not issue the visas that 9 out of 10 illegal immigrants used to entry this country and then simply not leave. None of these government bodies failed in their duty to secure the border that the other 1 in 10 crossed to get here. So why should any of these government bodies suddenly be required to commit there law enforcement resources to checking the immigration status of everyone in their jurisdictions? It is an ridiculous expectation for the federal government to think it is some how the responsibility state and local government to clean up their mess..
The sole responsibility of local law enforcement, the reason they were created, is to protect and serve the resident of their community not enforce federal policy. At no time has anyone on city council said a person that commits a crime in our city will be given a walk if it turns out they are an illegal immigrant, yet somehow that is what everyone keeps saying will happen. Despite the simple fact that in the communities that have declared themselves to have “Sanctuary” status illegal immigrant are not being given a walk, but are in fact being arrested and prosecuted when they commit a crime in these communities.
Yeah, I know the completely bogus claim that being a illegal immigrant is a crime. The reality is being and illegal immigrant is not a crime, only the way one became an illegal immigrant determines whether any given illegal immigrate has broken any law. It is only a crime to be an undocumented illegal immigrant and various studies, include Pew Institute studies, indicate that roughly only 1 in 10 illegal immigrants are undocumented (which simply means they entered the county without a visa, ie. permission). This is a crime that is basically impossible to get a conviction for so the Federal government does not bother to enforce it or convict people for. Why should local law enforcement be required to enforce a federal law that not even the feds are enforcing? It is simply an outrageous to expectation. If local law enforcement were to detain an undocumented immigrant and turn them over to the feds, the feds would not put them on trail they would simply deport them (i.e. treat them as if they were not a criminal).
As to the 9 in 10 illegal immigrants that have broken no laws. Local law enforcement’s detention/arrest powers come from their “police authority” that gives them the power to arrest and detain a person suspected of committing a crime. Since the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants have not broken any law, local law enforcement simply does not have the authority to detain them. Only federal agents have the authority to detain people for being in this country illegally.
And yes, whether you like it or not, the US constitution’s protections apply to anyone within the US borders, US citizen or not.
I wonder about your source for your last statement. The US Constitution is written as the outline for the US government and how it would relate to it’s citizens, not a UN carter for the world. Your progressive liberalism may be showing through.
You need to check the words you use. To say that illegal immigrants have broken no law makes you sound stupid. At least call them undocumented immigrants as most of the liberals do to confuse the issue. If they are illegal immigrants how do they file taxes, register for any government services, pay into social security, etc…. Do they use the name of an illegal immigrant or do they use the name and SS# of someone else? Isn’t this to illegal. Identity theft, forgery etc…
What you support is wrong in so many ways.
My source for my statement is the SCOTUS, which has ruled that the constitution applies to everyone within US borders and did not exempt non-citizens from this protection. At no time did I claim the Constitution applied to the entire world only to that part of the world that falls within the boundaries of the United States of American.
The Federal government has not established any law making overstaying one’s visa a crime and since this is how roughly 9 out of 10 illegal immigrants have gotten into the US they have broken no law meaning they are not criminals. The fact that the Federal government does not prosecute them but simply deports them is proof enough they have committed no crime to be charged with. Had you actually paid attention while reading my post you would have realized the undocumented immigrants are only those that entered the US without permission (ie no visa) so while all undocumented immigrants are illegal not all illegal immigrants are undocumented. Given your comprehension failure in this area you should be more careful in your suggests of who sounds stupid. These are not my definitions by the way but the definitions of the US government if you have a problem with these definitions I suggest you take it up with the “liberals” in the WhiteHouse.
I answered your question on how they get legally employed in my post but let me put it in the simplest of terms so you can understand. Most illegal immigrants can legally get a drivers license and a social security card since they entered the US legally. In fact federal law requires them to get these documents so that FICA can be withheld from their pay checks. Those that did not enter the US legally, undocumented immigrants, have not problem legally getting a driver license and obtaining a counterfeit Social Security Card is easy (most high school students could do this using any computer – home, school, library etc.).
The federal documentation required on the I-9 form to prove you can be legally employed in the US includes many documents, but the two used by almost all employers is a valid Drivers License and a Social Security Card. With these two documents anyone can legally get a job in the US, it is all the Federal government requires. As a legal employee they get a paycheck with FICA withheld, since most have valid SS numbers they have no problem filing income tax reports and getting refunds just like the rest of us. Most social programs are administered by the state, and most state use a persons SS number (including IL) to register for benefits. As to identity thief, the few using a counterfeit SS card are using their real name not the name of the person the SS number they are use belongs to. So no, they are not stealing anything. In fact the person who’s SS number they are using is actually benefiting from this use because the increased payments made by these illegals is increasing the amount of benefits the actual SS number holder is eligible for.
At no time did I say I support illegal immigrants, in fact that is not the issue in this article. The issue is should our local law enforcement be given the added responsibility enforcing immigration policies (note- policies not laws) and I say absolutely not.
I hear many hollow words for people residing here illegally. Let’s close the borders . Come here legally and we will welcome you with open arms .
That is the problem. Various studies, including those done by the Pew Institute, have determined that roughly 9 out of 10 illegal immigrants entered the US legally (they had a valid entry visa but did not leave when their visa expired). So closing the borders would have no effect on the main source of illegal immigrants. In fact your own post would imply that since these illegal immigrants entered the country legally they should be welcomed with open arms and give a path to citizenship.
I can’t create as many questionable fact as you can but really enjoyed the article below. Give them a voter registration when it takes at least 5 years to become a citizen should be looked on as a questionable action. Think they might have needed another package of diapers before they need to know how to register to vote?
Nebraska Democrats include voter registration forms in ‘refugee welcome baskets’
By: Chris Pandolfo | March 23, 2017
The Nebraska Democratic Party (NDP) is welcoming refugees with open arms, welcome baskets … and voter registration forms.
A donation drive organized by the NDP collected some 50 gift baskets for refugees. Each contained items like diapers and kitchen utensils, a welcome letter from the Nebraska Democratic Party signed by its chairwoman Jane Kleeb, and a voter registration form, according to a video posted to Facebook by the Nebraska Democratic Party.
The video, posted Saturday March 18, discusses the details of the “Refugee Welcome Basket” project and was recorded at the Nebraska Democratic Party’s Spring Meeting.
“Nebraska has, and welcomes the most refugees and immigrants on a per-capita basis,” Kleeb explains in the video as she describes the workshops set up by the NDP. The state welcomed 1,441 refugees, or 76 per 100,000 Nebraskans, between October 2015 and September 2016, according to a report by the Omaha World-Herald.
A statement on the Refugee Welcome Basket Project from the Nebraska Democratic Party website strongly condemns President Trump’s executive action that temporarily restricts immigration from six terror-linked countries. It also calls on individuals to donate items to make a basket.
“We made sure that we had individuals write a little note to the families, and then inside each basket there’s also a letter from the Nebraska Democratic Party welcoming the family to Nebraska.”
“It’s signed by me as chair of the party, and then we include a sticker in here for them to put on their car. It also includes a voter registration form,” Kleeb states on camera. The baskets were given to two refugee resettlement agencies in Nebraska, the Refugee Empowerment Center and Lutheran Family Services of Nebraska.
Kleeb explains that one of the goals of the NDP is to identify politically active immigrants and make them feel welcome by the Nebraska Democratic Party.
The inclusion of a voter registration form in a “welcome” gift basket designed for refugee families is eyebrow-raising. Individuals with refugee status in the United States are only allowed to naturalize after they spend a minimum of five years in the U.S. and obtain permanent residence (a green card). But presumably, individuals who accept a “welcome” basket are new arrivals to the U.S. and have not met the requirements to become citizens. They would be ineligible to register to vote.
Unfortunately, these requirements do not always stop voter fraud from occurring.
Reached for comment, NDP Chairwoman Kleeb categorically denied any wrongdoing, stressing that “it is not illegal to be handing out voter registration forms so folks start to get familiar with the forms.”
When asked what the NDP expects refugees will do with voter registration forms, Kleeb said “Once they become citizens, it is our hope, like back in the day you would hear these stories of the Democrats in Ellis Island welcoming the Irish with food and a voter registration form, so it’s really that same concept.”
“I put in my business card in those letters, and a bumper sticker for their cars just to make sure they knew that we, as the Democratic Party, welcomed them,” she added.
“I registered individuals from Somalia and Sudan this election cycle that have recently become citizens, and this is a very new process for them. We had to sit down with them and really help them understand how to fill out their name and where to put in their birthdate because it’s just a whole new process for them than what they had in their home country,” Kleeb said.
When asked if the letter signed by Chairwoman Kleeb made clear that any non-citizen refugee who received the voter registration form would break the law by completing and submitting that form, Kleeb replied “I can look at our letter, I’m not sure I said, you know, ‘you have to fill out this form.’”
“Can I just be very clear that on the voter registration form it says that you have to be a U.S. citizen, so I don’t think that I said that in the letter, but on the voter registration form it talks about that,” she clarified.
Conservative Review requested a copy of the letter from the chairwoman, but did not receive it before publication.
Advising a non-citizen to file a voter registration form would potentially violate Nebraska election law.
According to Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale (R), anyone” who purposely states a falsehood under oath, lawfully administered or in a statement made under penalty of election falsification ‘including a statement required for verifying or filing a voter registration application’, among other things, would be subject to a Class IV felony/ This would include a false statement that the person is a citizen of the United States. ( NE Rev 32-1502 ).”
“At the same time, under NE Rev 32-1503, subsection 11, any person who would aid, counsel, procure or advise any person to do any act forbidden by this section or to omit to do any act by law directed to be done shall be guilty of a Class IV felony,” he told CR in a statement.
A person guilty of committing a Class IV felony in Nebraska is subject up to a maximum two years imprisonment and twelve months post-release supervision and/or a ten thousand dollar fine.
– See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2017/03/exclusive-nebraska-democrats-include-voter-registration-forms-in-refugee-welcome-baskets
Interesting article on refugees, but you do know refugees are not illegal immigrants, right? And even if they were this article has nothing to do with requiring local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration policies. So what was your point? Or were you just ranting?