Thread: SC: State can't afford cost of illegals

State can't afford cost of illegals
By Glenn McConnell
Tuesday, November 27, 2007

I read the recent op-ed by Rep. Phillip Shoopman, R-Dist. 18, in which he criticized the call for a constitutional convention and said that South Carolina needed to act instead. I am glad to see that Rep. Shoopman has decided that the problem of illegal immigration is serious and warrants quick action.

Last year, the South Carolina Senate completed its study of the issue of illegal immigration after several months of public hearings across South Carolina and passed a comprehensive bill based on the Georgia model. That bill sat in the House Judiciary Committee without any action. I hope that Rep. Shoopman will help ensure its quick passage.

The Senate has taken action on this issue and will take more action, and we look forward to working with House Speaker Bobby Harrell and other members of the House of Representatives to craft measures that penalize businesses who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. This may make South Carolina less appealing for illegal immigrants, but it does not solve the problem nor can we be sure that a federal court won't strike down any measure a state passes. The main issue is that the states can't do anything with the core problem of keeping illegal immigrants out or deporting them when they are discovered. The challenge of illegal immigration begs us to act on all fronts and not delay again.

Over the past several months, we have gotten statistics to show how serious the problem is for our state. South Carolina has had a 1,000 percent increase in the number of illegal immigrants between 1990 and 2004 with a total population of approximately 200,000. The illegal immigration prison population in South Carolina increased by 71 percent between 1999 and 2002. Finally, nearly 75 percent of Latinos in South Carolina, according to a recent study, either cannot speak English or have poor English skills. The results are staggering. South Carolina taxpayers spend nearly $186 million annually on illegal aliens to provide education, emergency medical care, and incarceration based on a 2006 estimate.

These are costs that we cannot control by choosing to provide or deny those services. The federal government mandates those costs, and no matter what we as a state pass legislatively those costs will continue and are likely to increase until Congress addresses the issue. That is why I proposed a constitutional convention on the issue of illegal immigration. I would prefer not to have to take such a drastic action, but the problem we face as a state and as a nation is reaching one of catastrophic proportions. We can no longer afford to sit idly by and hope for federal action.

It is my hope that the call for a constitutional convention will be a wake up call to those in Washington that we as states are in trouble and must be allowed the means to take care of ourselves. I have already received inquiries from other states asking for copies of the resolution so that they can draft similar measures for their legislatures.

The constitutional convention call would prevent the federal government from restricting or limiting a state's ability to enforce federal laws; allow states to decide what government benefits to provide or deny illegal immigrants; allow states to regulate immigration matters not addressed by Congress; and require the federal government to provide prompt assistance in expelling illegal immigrants found in a state. This would be basically self-defense against an illegal invasion we have no control over.

Some have concerns about opening up the entire Constitution to a constitutional convention. Since this is an unprecedented area of law, there is no clear answer to whether the convention can be limited. However, I believe that the states can choose to limit the scope of consideration in their call to the convention. I have included in my resolution a statement that the convention shall be called for one purpose and one purpose only — illegal immigration. The safety check is that anything done by the convention must be ratified by three-fourths of the states to be put in the Constitution.

South Carolina cannot afford to believe that any piece of state legislation will be a panacea when in fact it will be no more than a Band-Aid on a gaping wound. Illegal immigration will remain a major problem until our elected officials in Washington take a stand to protect our borders and enforce our laws. Unfortunately, it does not appear they have the will to do so. Perhaps the threat of a constitutional convention will scare them into action. For the well being of our state and nation, I hope it does.

Sen. Glenn McConnell is president pro tempore of the S.C. Senate.
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/nov ... _illegals/

Illegal Immigration Spurs Constitutional Amendment
Our Do-nothing Congress Must Be Circumvented by Using Our Constitutional Option
By Joel Hirschhorn
Among the millions of Americans frustrated with the refusal by the federal government to forcefully control illegal immigration is South Carolina Senator Glenn McConnell. As President Pro Tempore of the Senate McConnell has explained why he is calling for the nation's first use of the US Constitution's Article V provision for a convention of state delegates to propose constitutional amendments.

"While this action is unprecedented, I also believe that the danger facing our country is unprecedented. We need to act now. ...Congress has refused or is incapable of acting, thereby leaving the states in the position of burning while Congress fiddles. ...the problem of illegal immigration is one that has reached a boiling point," said McConnell, a Charleston Republican.

He notes that if his resolution is approved by two-thirds of states it "would require Congress to call for a constitutional convention." What McConnell has not said, however, is that for many decades Congress has refused to obey Article V and call a convention that sufficient states have already asked for. The one and only requirement in Article V has been satisfied and Congress has no discretion in this matter.

McConnell's proposed constitutional amendment has these provisions:

1. No provision of this Constitution, or any amendment thereto, shall restrict or limit any state from enforcing federal law with regard to immigration violations. In the absence of proof of legal citizenship status, a state may decide what governmental services funded in whole or in part by the state may be provided to or denied from any undocumented alien located within the state's respective jurisdiction. States shall also have any power to regulate illegal immigration that has not been specifically preempted by an act of the Congress.

2. In implementing the provisions of this article, each state shall have the authority to prescribe civil and criminal penalties in addition to any provided by federal law for entering the United States illegally.

3. A state shall also have the power to apprehend and expel persons who are within the state's jurisdiction in violation of federal immigration law. The federal government must provide timely assistance to the state in expelling undocumented aliens upon request by a state.

Considering the historic record-low level of just 11 percent public support for Congress and the widespread public concern about the many impacts of unchecked illegal immigration, especially on communities and local governments, this call for an Article V convention is extremely timely. Few Americans are aware of their constitutional right to an Article V convention, provided by the Framers of our Constitution as a kind of escape clause should citizens lose confidence in the federal government. Could it be any clearer that Americans have lost confidence in the federal government?

While there are many other issues that merit debate by state delegates in an Article V convention, many of which have been proposed in previous state applications, the illegal immigration crisis has the potential to put enough political pressure on Congress to obey the Constitution and call a convention which it has refused to do thus far. Opponents of both the convention method of amendment and tough immigration law will assert that 33 more states must apply, assuming South Carolina acts. Senator McConnell has fallen into this trap. In reality, all 50 states have applied 567 times for a convention. Still, a new South Carolina application addressing illegal immigration may bring the failure of Congress to obey the law of the Constitution greater visibility and provoke public anger. We have something worse than a do-nothing Congress; we have a break-the-law Congress.

Americans that laud the Constitution and the rule of law, and want more effective actions to address illegal immigration - surely a super majority of citizens - should tell their state legislators that they support McConnell's proposal and the call for the nation's first Article V convention.

We have had more than enough talk, lies and spin. Now is the time for meaningful action. American is not a lifeboat that untold millions of poor, suffering people can illegally jump into - not without lifeboat-America sinking into third-world status. The corporate powers behind both the Democrats and Republicans are eager to sell out middle class Americans to get cheap labor. And their control over Congress has created the crisis that Senator McConnell has courageously addressed through a call for an Article V convention. Let's assist his bold effort.

We can expect opposition to the McConnell proposal from a number of groups that have always opposed using the Article V convention option. On the political left and right are many groups that fear a convention because they want to maintain their power and the status quo - a political system easily corrupted by corporate and other special interests through campaign contributions and lobbying. They have cleverly propagated the lie that a convention could by itself wreck our Constitution, which is impossible because proposed amendments must be ratified by three-quarters of the states. Elites fear an Article V convention because once convened it is independent of Congress and the White House, and could re-engage distracted Americans in their government by seeing the Article V convention as the means, finally, to reclaim their government. Learn more at www.foavc.org.

[Joel S. Hirschhorn is a co-founder of Friends of the Article V Convention and a former senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, and the author of Delusional Democracy - Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government at www.delusionaldemocracy.com.]
http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... tml?page=3

I made the illegal immigration meeting in Charleston, SC about a month ago. Senator McConnel was there and I distinctly remember one of his top aids getting up and saying that we were racists because we don't want hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens in the state. I wonder if she is still working for him?

craft measures that penalize businesses who knowingly hire illegal immigrants

And there's the intentional loophole. The greedy business owners claim they don't "knowingly" hire illegals.