Illegals Won’t Only Get Credit for Their Social Security Earnings (Updated: Senate Passes Comprehensive Bill)
UPDATE, 6:40 p.m.: The Senate passed what is essentially amnesty by a vote of 62-36 (HT Michelle Malkin and Hot Air). You know there’s a big problem when the Washington Post calls it a “a rare show of bipartisan, election-year cooperation…. “. Both of Ohio’s senators were among 23 from the GOP who voted Yes. Only two Democrats (Nelson-NE and Dorgan-ND) voted No.
UPDATE, 8:30 p.m.: This roll-call vote, on an amendment described incredibly vaguely as “to improve the bill,” includes a provision that the US must consult with Mexico before building any section of wall or fence, per this Free Republic thread, this Michelle Malkin post, and this Senate by Cboldt live link (go to 17:16 update). It passed 56-41.
_____________________________________
Put down whatever you’re drinking.
Keep sharp objects out of arm’s reach.
What’s in the first paragraph of the excerpt below was in the first paragraph of this article I referred to in this post a few days ago, so it may not be new to you. It’s meant to ease you into what’s new without causing medical-emergency shock or unanticipated violent behavior.
What’s “below the fold” in the second paragraph (but only if you’re on the home page) is ON TOP OF what is in the first paragraph.
Here is the first paragraph I have excerpted from Senator Jim DeMint’s “Top Ten Reasons to Oppose the Senate Amnesty Bill†(Reason 6 at the link):
The Senate rejected Senator Ensign’s amendment that would have prevented Social Security benefits from being awarded to immigrants for time that they worked illegally in the United States. If the immigration compromise bill before the Senate were enacted into law, an estimated 12 million illegal workers would be able to use their past illegal work to qualify for Social Security benefits.
Let’s stop for a moment. If what you just read IS new to you, take a break for a couple of minutes before going below the fold. Your health is my first concern.
Okay, here we go with the second excerpted paragraph:
Provisions in S. 2611 would require newly legalized immigrants to file tax returns for work they performed while in the U.S. illegally. And while some would be required to pay back taxes, many others could qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit, which has a maximum payout of $4,400 per year.
Someone who has been working here illegally for the past 5 years and who, because of family size, would have been entitled to the maximum Earned Income Tax Credit for each of those 5 years could receive a tax handout of over $20,000 — plus interest.
You can start drinking again. You are forgiven if you change your choice of beverage to one with some punch to it.
I hope the House can retain its sanity; the Senate has lost theirs.
UPDATE, 6:30 p.m.: The Senate rejected an amendment introduced by Jeff Sessions to limit application of the Earned Income Tax Credit 60-37.
I hope the idjits lose control of the Senate over this BS! Have they completely lost their minds??? Mind you, I’m not the best one to get into a conversation with about the EIC garbage to start with. Robin Hood would be embarrassed.
Comment by LargeBill — May 25, 2006 @ 6:50 pm
#1, The EIC should never have been allowed to push a person’s tax liability into a minus number. I estimate based on previous posts taht about 20% of the population has a negative Federal income tax liability, and therefore no stake in how the government operates.
Comment by TBlumer — May 25, 2006 @ 7:02 pm
As a sidenote, the IRS has a 3 yr statute of limitations on filing refund returns from the due date. So, assuming that one filed old, full refund returns today, one could only get refunds from 2003-2005 returns. I know it’s quibbling, but they’d only be entitled to over $12k, not $20k as you indicated.
Comment by david — May 25, 2006 @ 7:34 pm
#3, I’m aware of that, and thanks for reminding me. But re-reading what DeMint had on his web site (which I know is not the law), I’m not convinced that the normal statute of lims will apply. “for work they performed while in the U.S. illegally” could be a lot longer than 3 years.
Given how little of everything else that normally would apply to you and me isn’t going to apply to illegals on the supposed path to citizenship, I’m going to wait until I either study the bill or someone else does before I revise.
Comment by TBlumer — May 25, 2006 @ 8:28 pm
If the GOP loses the Senate… who would notice the difference?
Comment by eLarson — May 26, 2006 @ 9:01 am
Mexico must approve any fence?????
This is outrageous. There is a lot that the House needs to remove, but this is definitely one of the big ones.
Trackback by Don Singleton — May 26, 2006 @ 10:06 am
#6, no bill passing this year is miles better than this.
It’s up to the House to stand firm. I think they will, but after the schizophrenia with Hastert the past few days, who knows?
Comment by TBlumer — May 26, 2006 @ 10:21 pm