So what am I doing?
Catching up on my blog reading, of course.
On Nation Review, Marsha Blackburn is revealing the many ways our American banks and financial institutions are trying to undermine the borders. How are they doing that?
Without ever having produced a Social Security number, passport, visa, or credit history, an applicant can simply maintain a $500 balance in a checking account for three months for the bank to issue a credit card.Who is the person bringing this to our attention? Marsha Blackburn is a Republican congresswoman from Tennessee. Keep an eye on her - she's going places.
Having made no additional effort to verify the applicant’s identity or immigration status, the bank issues a card complete with a predatory interest rate of over 20 percent. An industry lobbyist assured me that opening checking accounts and providing loans to illegal aliens are simply good-faith efforts to cater to an untapped and underserved market. In his words, financial institutions should be able to “bank illegal immigrants.”
Apparently these banks have no problem catering to an “untapped market” that often trades in human smuggling, drug trafficking, and gun running. By “banking illegal immigrants,” it is quite possible that American financial institutions could be unwitting participants in the money-laundering efforts of a Columbian drug lord or a weapons dealer from the Middle East.
And who will pay the piper when illegal immigrants cannot pay their bills? Not the bank. Instead, the American people can expect higher interest rates for those who can pay: you and me. After all, if someone is willing to apply for credit with fraudulent documents, what reason do we have to expect that person to be responsible for the charges?
Not winning by the rules? Change them - the Democrats did this week, according to Dick Armey (Former House majority leader (R., Tex.), Dick Armey is chairman of Freedomworks.).
On Thursday night, Democrat Michael McNulty (D., N.Y.) gaveled a vote closed before the official tally had been read, thus manipulating a tight vote so that it finished in their favor. The remaining days of the session saw a string of unbecoming conduct from the majority, including votes unfairly blocked and floor records carefully cleaned to suit Democratic agendas and hide their misbehavior.Read the rest of the article to see what other nefarious antics the Dems have been perpetrating.
Just like Mah-jong? The Social Security Administration has a list of numbers from employers that don't match the name reported. So far, they just send a letter (no-match letters) to the employers, letting them know of the discrepancy. There is no criminal penalty attached to keeping the (presumed) illegal on the payroll. So, generally, the employers do.
Not under the new rules
the draft regulations were published in the Federal Register last June. Basically, they require an employer to ask an employee with a no-match W-2 to correct the information on the W-2. After that, the employer must verify with SSA that the name and Social Security Number now match. If a match is not verified, say the proposed regulations, “then the employer must choose between taking action to terminate the employee or facing the risk that DHS may find that the employer had constructive knowledge that the employee was an unauthorized alien and therefore, by continuing to employ the alien, violated INA section 274A(a)(2), 8 U.S.C. 1324a(a)(2).”There are some flaws with the new regs - SSA doesn't have to cooperate with DHS, for example.