Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[danielpalos]

According to the head of immigration, a border barrier simple persuades people to use an easier path across the 2000 mile border which is not hard find.

The 5 billion dollar Trump wall will not be a 2000 or 1000 mile wall but a 212 mile slatted fence, hundreds of miles of service roads, electronic monitors, aerial surveillance, and additional facilities to hold migrants crossing the border.
Trump will always claim it is his big beautiful wall which has stopped illegal immigration.

The fact is illegal immigration will continue as before with most illegal crossings occurring at ports of entry and the biggest problem untouched, overstays of visas.

So you're in essence saying a wall will work. It will force people to seek alternative places and methods to cross. Places and methods the border patrol will be prepared to interdict. The barriers assist the border patrol and are a force multiplier.

But it will also be necessary to change our laws, to criminalize visa overstays and provide expedited deportation procedures of all illegals.
.

I agree with both your points.

A wall will force or persuade people to seek an easier crossing. I think it's becoming pretty clear that there isn't going to be 2000, or even a 1000 mile mall completed. At most it will end up being about 200 mile of slatted fence with 1800 miles of reinforced fencing, cattle fencing, electronic monitoring, and aerial surveillance. Even if the "wall" were extended to 2000 miles, it wouldn't stop half the illegal crossing because most illegal entries will be at ports of entry. Less than 1% of vehicles are searched and only a small fraction of a percent of containers, boxcars or private planes are searched. Almost all of these searches are for drugs, not people.

Yes, reducing visa overstays, will require changes in the laws but it will also require a tracking system, and cooperation from sanctuary cities and states. In order to get changes in immigration laws needed to significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, democrat votes in congress are going to be needed, and that's not going happen without changes that republicans are not going to like such sharp increases the number of temporary work permits and increased country limits.

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Then go home.

Need help packing?

lol. i am more native than You.

 

[danielpalos]

I agree with both your points.

A wall will force or persuade people to seek an easier crossing. I think it's becoming pretty clear that there isn't going to be 2000, or even a 1000 mile mall completed. At most it will end up being about 200 mile of slatted fence with 1800 miles of reinforced fencing, cattle fencing, electronic monitoring, and aerial surveillance. Even if the "wall" were extended to 2000 miles, it wouldn't stop half the illegal crossing because most illegal entries will be at ports of entry. Less than 1% of vehicles are searched and only a small fraction of a percent of containers, boxcars or private planes are searched. Almost all of these searches are for drugs, not people.

Yes, reducing visa overstays, will require changes in the laws but it will also require a tracking system, and cooperation from sanctuary cities and states. In order to get changes in immigration laws needed to significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, democrat votes in congress are going to be needed, and that's not going happen without changes that republicans are not going to like such sharp increases the number of temporary work permits and increased country limits.

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Yes, it's natural these illegals should be deported.

how socialist of you. good capitalists simply fine them and make honest tourists of them.

Sure, time for the tourists to go home.

Capitalism; What is That, Sayeth the Right Wing. Tourism is the first, second, or third largest employer in twenty-nine States.

 

[danielpalos]

I agree with both your points.

A wall will force or persuade people to seek an easier crossing. I think it's becoming pretty clear that there isn't going to be 2000, or even a 1000 mile mall completed. At most it will end up being about 200 mile of slatted fence with 1800 miles of reinforced fencing, cattle fencing, electronic monitoring, and aerial surveillance. Even if the "wall" were extended to 2000 miles, it wouldn't stop half the illegal crossing because most illegal entries will be at ports of entry. Less than 1% of vehicles are searched and only a small fraction of a percent of containers, boxcars or private planes are searched. Almost all of these searches are for drugs, not people.

Yes, reducing visa overstays, will require changes in the laws but it will also require a tracking system, and cooperation from sanctuary cities and states. In order to get changes in immigration laws needed to significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, democrat votes in congress are going to be needed, and that's not going happen without changes that republicans are not going to like such sharp increases the number of temporary work permits and increased country limits.

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

True, all illegals should be kicked out of the country.

how socialist of you. why not simply fine them and make honest tourists of them. we don't have an immigration problem we have lousy naturalization policy.

They had every chance to be honest tourists, but they chose otherwise.

True, we don't have immigration problem, since immigration is about people who are permitted to be here. We have a problem with illegal aliens and criminals who do not belong here.

We don't have an immigration clause. We have an Express naturalization clause. We should have no illegals.

 

[Taz]

So you're in essence saying a wall will work. It will force people to seek alternative places and methods to cross. Places and methods the border patrol will be prepared to interdict. The barriers assist the border patrol and are a force multiplier.

But it will also be necessary to change our laws, to criminalize visa overstays and provide expedited deportation procedures of all illegals.
.

I agree with both your points.

A wall will force or persuade people to seek an easier crossing. I think it's becoming pretty clear that there isn't going to be 2000, or even a 1000 mile mall completed. At most it will end up being about 200 mile of slatted fence with 1800 miles of reinforced fencing, cattle fencing, electronic monitoring, and aerial surveillance. Even if the "wall" were extended to 2000 miles, it wouldn't stop half the illegal crossing because most illegal entries will be at ports of entry. Less than 1% of vehicles are searched and only a small fraction of a percent of containers, boxcars or private planes are searched. Almost all of these searches are for drugs, not people.

Yes, reducing visa overstays, will require changes in the laws but it will also require a tracking system, and cooperation from sanctuary cities and states. In order to get changes in immigration laws needed to significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, democrat votes in congress are going to be needed, and that's not going happen without changes that republicans are not going to like such sharp increases the number of temporary work permits and increased country limits.

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Then go home.

Need help packing?

lol. i am more native than You.

So you have some spearchucker in you?

 

[danielpalos]

I agree with both your points.

A wall will force or persuade people to seek an easier crossing. I think it's becoming pretty clear that there isn't going to be 2000, or even a 1000 mile mall completed. At most it will end up being about 200 mile of slatted fence with 1800 miles of reinforced fencing, cattle fencing, electronic monitoring, and aerial surveillance. Even if the "wall" were extended to 2000 miles, it wouldn't stop half the illegal crossing because most illegal entries will be at ports of entry. Less than 1% of vehicles are searched and only a small fraction of a percent of containers, boxcars or private planes are searched. Almost all of these searches are for drugs, not people.

Yes, reducing visa overstays, will require changes in the laws but it will also require a tracking system, and cooperation from sanctuary cities and states. In order to get changes in immigration laws needed to significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, democrat votes in congress are going to be needed, and that's not going happen without changes that republicans are not going to like such sharp increases the number of temporary work permits and increased country limits.

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?
.

No, it doesn't make sense. We need more, a lot more immigrants. The 1.4 million figure is only 4 immigrants per 1000 of population.

Demographers and economists have been warning that the aging baby-boomer population presents a serious challenge to the nation’s finances, as the ratio of seniors to working-age adults—the age-dependency ratio—rises. However the problem is not just retirements but a shrinking birth rate. Without more young adults we not only face a seriously finance problem but a serious economic problem. Within a decade we will have a shortage 24 million workers and that number will continue to grow till at least 2050.

While many clamor for a halt to immigration, more immigrants are exactly what we need. They are younger, have a higher birth rate, and more entrepreneurial than native born Americans. Immigrants are the life blood of the nation as they have been in the past. Although more immigration means more cultural changes, that is nothing new to America because we are a melting pot of cultures.

I've never called for a halt to immigration, I do however think it is necessary to raise the quality of immigrants. They need to have skills that we need, they have to demonstrate they can support themselves. We can't continue to bring in impoverished, uneducated people who drop a kid and go immediately on welfare and food stamps and they don't tend to assimilate. I saw a man interviewed on the local news that had been in the country 23 years, he had to speak though an interpreter, he was here illegally.

.

Let's upgrade Ellis Island and raise the minimum wage.

I'd be all for upgrading Ellis Island with ovens. You want more than the minimum wage, then upgrade your skills, you fucking lazy lawnmower.

this is why I don't take the right wing seriously about morals, the law, politics, or economics.

 

[Taz]

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?
.

No, it doesn't make sense. We need more, a lot more immigrants. The 1.4 million figure is only 4 immigrants per 1000 of population.

Demographers and economists have been warning that the aging baby-boomer population presents a serious challenge to the nation’s finances, as the ratio of seniors to working-age adults—the age-dependency ratio—rises. However the problem is not just retirements but a shrinking birth rate. Without more young adults we not only face a seriously finance problem but a serious economic problem. Within a decade we will have a shortage 24 million workers and that number will continue to grow till at least 2050.

While many clamor for a halt to immigration, more immigrants are exactly what we need. They are younger, have a higher birth rate, and more entrepreneurial than native born Americans. Immigrants are the life blood of the nation as they have been in the past. Although more immigration means more cultural changes, that is nothing new to America because we are a melting pot of cultures.

I've never called for a halt to immigration, I do however think it is necessary to raise the quality of immigrants. They need to have skills that we need, they have to demonstrate they can support themselves. We can't continue to bring in impoverished, uneducated people who drop a kid and go immediately on welfare and food stamps and they don't tend to assimilate. I saw a man interviewed on the local news that had been in the country 23 years, he had to speak though an interpreter, he was here illegally.

.

Let's upgrade Ellis Island and raise the minimum wage.

I'd be all for upgrading Ellis Island with ovens. You want more than the minimum wage, then upgrade your skills, you fucking lazy lawnmower.

this is why I don't take the right wing seriously about morals, the law, politics, or economics.

If you want to be wrong, I don't care. And don't forget to trim the hedges.

 

[danielpalos]

I agree with both your points.

A wall will force or persuade people to seek an easier crossing. I think it's becoming pretty clear that there isn't going to be 2000, or even a 1000 mile mall completed. At most it will end up being about 200 mile of slatted fence with 1800 miles of reinforced fencing, cattle fencing, electronic monitoring, and aerial surveillance. Even if the "wall" were extended to 2000 miles, it wouldn't stop half the illegal crossing because most illegal entries will be at ports of entry. Less than 1% of vehicles are searched and only a small fraction of a percent of containers, boxcars or private planes are searched. Almost all of these searches are for drugs, not people.

Yes, reducing visa overstays, will require changes in the laws but it will also require a tracking system, and cooperation from sanctuary cities and states. In order to get changes in immigration laws needed to significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, democrat votes in congress are going to be needed, and that's not going happen without changes that republicans are not going to like such sharp increases the number of temporary work permits and increased country limits.

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Then go home.

Need help packing?

lol. i am more native than You.

So you have some spearchucker in you?

i know where the mountains of the Caucasians are.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it doesn't make sense. We need more, a lot more immigrants. The 1.4 million figure is only 4 immigrants per 1000 of population.

Demographers and economists have been warning that the aging baby-boomer population presents a serious challenge to the nation’s finances, as the ratio of seniors to working-age adults—the age-dependency ratio—rises. However the problem is not just retirements but a shrinking birth rate. Without more young adults we not only face a seriously finance problem but a serious economic problem. Within a decade we will have a shortage 24 million workers and that number will continue to grow till at least 2050.

While many clamor for a halt to immigration, more immigrants are exactly what we need. They are younger, have a higher birth rate, and more entrepreneurial than native born Americans. Immigrants are the life blood of the nation as they have been in the past. Although more immigration means more cultural changes, that is nothing new to America because we are a melting pot of cultures.

I've never called for a halt to immigration, I do however think it is necessary to raise the quality of immigrants. They need to have skills that we need, they have to demonstrate they can support themselves. We can't continue to bring in impoverished, uneducated people who drop a kid and go immediately on welfare and food stamps and they don't tend to assimilate. I saw a man interviewed on the local news that had been in the country 23 years, he had to speak though an interpreter, he was here illegally.

.

Let's upgrade Ellis Island and raise the minimum wage.

I'd be all for upgrading Ellis Island with ovens. You want more than the minimum wage, then upgrade your skills, you fucking lazy lawnmower.

this is why I don't take the right wing seriously about morals, the law, politics, or economics.

If you want to be wrong, I don't care. And don't forget to trim the hedges.

you only have gossip and one way street-ism. not enough morals to go around on the right wing?

 

[Taz]

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Then go home.

Need help packing?

lol. i am more native than You.

So you have some spearchucker in you?

i know where the mountains of the Caucasians are.

Good for you, now get back to the lawn.

 

[Taz]

I've never called for a halt to immigration, I do however think it is necessary to raise the quality of immigrants. They need to have skills that we need, they have to demonstrate they can support themselves. We can't continue to bring in impoverished, uneducated people who drop a kid and go immediately on welfare and food stamps and they don't tend to assimilate. I saw a man interviewed on the local news that had been in the country 23 years, he had to speak though an interpreter, he was here illegally.

.

Let's upgrade Ellis Island and raise the minimum wage.

I'd be all for upgrading Ellis Island with ovens. You want more than the minimum wage, then upgrade your skills, you fucking lazy lawnmower.

this is why I don't take the right wing seriously about morals, the law, politics, or economics.

If you want to be wrong, I don't care. And don't forget to trim the hedges.

you only have gossip and one way street-ism. not enough morals to go around on the right wing?

I'm enjoying watching the beaners get gassed at the border. Are they having fun yet?

 

[Thinker101]

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Yes, it's natural these illegals should be deported.

how socialist of you. good capitalists simply fine them and make honest tourists of them.

Sure, time for the tourists to go home.

Capitalism; What is That, Sayeth the Right Wing. Tourism is the first, second, or third largest employer in twenty-nine States.

No doubt it's not the first time you've heard it, but you fricken talk in circles. I'm sure you feel it's cute, but it's too damn stupid for anyone to make any sense of your gibberish. Adios.

 

[danielpalos]

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Then go home.

Need help packing?

lol. i am more native than You.

So you have some spearchucker in you?

i know where the mountains of the Caucasians are.

Good for you, now get back to the lawn.

with my native work ethic?

 

[danielpalos]

Let's upgrade Ellis Island and raise the minimum wage.

I'd be all for upgrading Ellis Island with ovens. You want more than the minimum wage, then upgrade your skills, you fucking lazy lawnmower.

this is why I don't take the right wing seriously about morals, the law, politics, or economics.

If you want to be wrong, I don't care. And don't forget to trim the hedges.

you only have gossip and one way street-ism. not enough morals to go around on the right wing?

I'm enjoying watching the beaners get gassed at the border. Are they having fun yet?

i no longer take the right wing seriously in abortion threads.

 

[danielpalos]

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

Yes, it's natural these illegals should be deported.

how socialist of you. good capitalists simply fine them and make honest tourists of them.

Sure, time for the tourists to go home.

Capitalism; What is That, Sayeth the Right Wing. Tourism is the first, second, or third largest employer in twenty-nine States.

No doubt it's not the first time you've heard it, but you fricken talk in circles. I'm sure you feel it's cute, but it's too damn stupid for anyone to make any sense of your gibberish. Adios.

not dumb enough for the right wing?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

True, all illegals should be kicked out of the country.

How do you propose to accomplish that?

Change the penalty for being here. Make being here illegally a first degree felony with a minimum sentence of five years in prison for the first offense. That’s how.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Ame®icano]

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?

.

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

True, all illegals should be kicked out of the country.

how socialist of you. why not simply fine them and make honest tourists of them. we don't have an immigration problem we have lousy naturalization policy.

They had every chance to be honest tourists, but they chose otherwise.

True, we don't have immigration problem, since immigration is about people who are permitted to be here. We have a problem with illegal aliens and criminals who do not belong here.

We don't have an immigration clause. We have an Express naturalization clause. We should have no illegals.

Funny, I don''t see word "express" anywhere in the clause.

But I do see the "subject to the jurisdiction" and no tourist is part of it.

 

[danielpalos]

We don't have an immigration clause, it is a naturalization clause. We should have no illegals in the US.

True, all illegals should be kicked out of the country.

how socialist of you. why not simply fine them and make honest tourists of them. we don't have an immigration problem we have lousy naturalization policy.

They had every chance to be honest tourists, but they chose otherwise.

True, we don't have immigration problem, since immigration is about people who are permitted to be here. We have a problem with illegal aliens and criminals who do not belong here.

We don't have an immigration clause. We have an Express naturalization clause. We should have no illegals.

Funny, I don''t see word "express" anywhere in the clause.

But I do see the "subject to the jurisdiction" and no tourist is part of it.

naturalization. we have an establishment clause.

 

[Flopper]

So you're in essence saying a wall will work. It will force people to seek alternative places and methods to cross. Places and methods the border patrol will be prepared to interdict. The barriers assist the border patrol and are a force multiplier.

But it will also be necessary to change our laws, to criminalize visa overstays and provide expedited deportation procedures of all illegals.
.

I agree with both your points.

A wall will force or persuade people to seek an easier crossing. I think it's becoming pretty clear that there isn't going to be 2000, or even a 1000 mile mall completed. At most it will end up being about 200 mile of slatted fence with 1800 miles of reinforced fencing, cattle fencing, electronic monitoring, and aerial surveillance. Even if the "wall" were extended to 2000 miles, it wouldn't stop half the illegal crossing because most illegal entries will be at ports of entry. Less than 1% of vehicles are searched and only a small fraction of a percent of containers, boxcars or private planes are searched. Almost all of these searches are for drugs, not people.

Yes, reducing visa overstays, will require changes in the laws but it will also require a tracking system, and cooperation from sanctuary cities and states. In order to get changes in immigration laws needed to significantly reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, democrat votes in congress are going to be needed, and that's not going happen without changes that republicans are not going to like such sharp increases the number of temporary work permits and increased country limits.

1.4 million immigrate to the US annually, we take an additional 50K refugees and you think it's ok to continue to flood the country with additional people from the third world. Does that really make sense to you?
.

No, it doesn't make sense. We need more, a lot more immigrants. The 1.4 million figure is only 4 immigrants per 1000 of population.

Demographers and economists have been warning that the aging baby-boomer population presents a serious challenge to the nation’s finances, as the ratio of seniors to working-age adults—the age-dependency ratio—rises. However the problem is not just retirements but a shrinking birth rate. Without more young adults we not only face a seriously finance problem but a serious economic problem. Within a decade we will have a shortage 24 million workers and that number will continue to grow till at least 2050.

While many clamor for a halt to immigration, more immigrants are exactly what we need. They are younger, have a higher birth rate, and more entrepreneurial than native born Americans. Immigrants are the life blood of the nation as they have been in the past. Although more immigration means more cultural changes, that is nothing new to America because we are a melting pot of cultures.

I've never called for a halt to immigration, I do however think it is necessary to raise the quality of immigrants. They need to have skills that we need, they have to demonstrate they can support themselves. We can't continue to bring in impoverished, uneducated people who drop a kid and go immediately on welfare and food stamps and they don't tend to assimilate. I saw a man interviewed on the local news that had been in the country 23 years, he had to speak though an interpreter, he was here illegally.

.

I was born in a very ethnic neighborhood and lived there until the age of 7. I distinctly remember how people off the boat would strive to learn the language of their new country. It meant just about everything to them. Of course people back then came here to become an American, not use America for the money or welfare.

Our local Catholic school held free English classes for the Polish immigrants. My Grandfather used to take us to the bar for chips and pop while he had a couple of beers, and American patrons were teaching the immigrant patrons the language. Most of the American people in the neighborhood were bilingual.

Our neighbors were off the boat too. My sister befriended the girl around her age and taught her English. My mother too was bilingual and spoke broken Polish, but certainly enough to easily communicate with the girl. That girl grew up and eventually became a Doctor.

Foreigners today couldn't have it easier when it comes to learning our language. If the people I observed back in the 60's could do it with very limited resources, there is no excuse how foreigners can't do it today given our much advanced technology.

I hate to break your bubble but immigrants today are no better or worst than those of the 19th and 20th century. Skilled workers, the educated, the middle class, don't leave their jobs, their homeland, their friends, and family to come to a strange new country. We certainly can attract a few "better class of immigrants" but most immigrants will always come from the lower socioeconomic class, the poor, the homeless, the wretched masses. It is from them that America was built.

 

[Flopper]

No, it doesn't make sense. We need more, a lot more immigrants. The 1.4 million figure is only 4 immigrants per 1000 of population.

Demographers and economists have been warning that the aging baby-boomer population presents a serious challenge to the nation’s finances, as the ratio of seniors to working-age adults—the age-dependency ratio—rises. However the problem is not just retirements but a shrinking birth rate. Without more young adults we not only face a seriously finance problem but a serious economic problem. Within a decade we will have a shortage 24 million workers and that number will continue to grow till at least 2050.

While many clamor for a halt to immigration, more immigrants are exactly what we need. They are younger, have a higher birth rate, and more entrepreneurial than native born Americans. Immigrants are the life blood of the nation as they have been in the past. Although more immigration means more cultural changes, that is nothing new to America because we are a melting pot of cultures.

I've never called for a halt to immigration, I do however think it is necessary to raise the quality of immigrants. They need to have skills that we need, they have to demonstrate they can support themselves. We can't continue to bring in impoverished, uneducated people who drop a kid and go immediately on welfare and food stamps and they don't tend to assimilate. I saw a man interviewed on the local news that had been in the country 23 years, he had to speak though an interpreter, he was here illegally.

.

If they can support themselves, all that means is that they will be taking a job from an American. We don't need any more immigrants, period, educated or not.

We have 9 million jobs available now, and you seem to have skipped over them having skills we need.

.

If you want wages to go up, then you need to restrict the supply of labor. Expanding the supply of labor can't fail to make wages go down or remain stagnant.

You want businesses to flourish and be able to expand, they need to be able to fill positions with qualified people to do that. Merit based immigration is a win win for the country. This thing we're doing now is a big negative.
.

Merit based immigration is invariably a point based system, based on such factors as education level, wealth, connection with the country, language fluency, existing job offer, or others. Of course the devil is in the details. Such a system could be used to severely limit immigration or increase it.

If such a system were used to provide better educated, better skilled workers in the numbers America will need in the future, then we would have to abandon the current country limits which could result in a large migration of Asians.

 

[Flopper]

True, all illegals should be kicked out of the country.

How do you propose to accomplish that?

Two steps: e-verify first, than cut sources of their income, entitlements, services, as second.

E-Verify is voluntary and is about 6 months behind immigration records which severely limits it's usefulness.

Federal law prohibits any federal assistance dollars being spent on illegal immigrants, this includes Social Security, Medicare, TANF, SNAP, federal housing assistance, etc which is why illegal immigrants receive very little public assistance. Federal dollars are used to assist children of illegal immigrants born in the US since they are US citizens. Free and Reduced lunch programs in schools are probably one the major violations of law because most schools don't track immigration status.