Thread: KY. Rep. Geoff Davis

Totalization Agreement with Mexico is a Bad Deal for the United States

Before Congress adjourned last week, we took important action to stop the flow of illegal immigration into our nation. With the passing of the Secure Fence Act, Congress authorized the construction of a 700-mile fence along our southwest border. This legislation is now ready for the President's signature. I am proud of this legislation and believe it is a first step to combating our nation's illegal immigration problem.

Another, often overlooked, issue that could have a dramatic impact on our nation's fiscal health is a preliminary totalization agreement between the U.S. Social Security Administration ("SSA") and Mexico that was signed in 2004. Currently the U.S. has twenty totalization agreements with other nations. These agreements are intended to coordinate benefits for workers and to prevent double taxation for those who work abroad during their careers. SSA estimates that there are 94,000 beneficiaries that receive $15 million per month under totalization agreements. Current totalization agreements result in a savings of nearly $800 million annually for U.S. companies and employees who are eligible under these agreements.

However, the recent U.S.-Mexico totalization agreement is troubling and, at this point, Congress has not had the opportunity to review it. In a study conducted by the Government Accountability Office ("GAO") in 2003, SSA estimated that under a totalization agreement with Mexico, 50,000 workers would begin receiving benefits.

GAO's study concluded that a U.S.-Mexico totalization agreement could have significant impacts on our nation's Social Security solvency if the SSA's estimate of workers who would receive benefits under this agreement was off by 25% or more. It is estimated that there are currently more than 12 million illegal aliens living in our country. In 2002 alone over 166,000 Mexicans became permanent residents, giving strong support to the possible inaccuracy of SSA's estimates. Given these numbers, I strongly believe that SSA has grossly underestimated the number of workers who would be eligible for benefits under such an agreement.

Some current immigration proposals in Congress would provide amnesty for illegal aliens in this country. I am opposed to amnesty and believe that it could present long-term problems for the social welfare programs in our nation. Undocumented workers are able to earn credit towards future benefits. Once an illegal worker becomes legal, the worker and his or her dependents would be eligible to draw Social Security benefits under a totalization agreement. I believe that's wrong, which is why I voted to block the implementation of this agreement.

It is no secret that our nation's current Social Security system is in need of comprehensive reform to ensure its future solvency for American workers and their families. I am opposed to the unfairly lopsided U.S.-Mexico totalization agreement on the basis that it could have dramatic and unintended consequences for legal, American retirees and their dependents. To this end, I am a co-sponsor of H. Res. 20 that expresses disapproval of a U.S.-Mexico totalization agreement.

Rewarding those who enter and work in our nation illegally with benefits is wrong. As Congress continues to debate solutions to combating our nation's illegal immigration problem, I will continue to fight to protect the benefits of American citizens first.









D.C. and District Talk

Senate Passes H.R. 6061, the Secure Fence Act
Last week the Senate passed H.R. 6061, readying the bill for the President's desk. On September 14th, the House passed the H.R. 6061 by a vote of 283 to 138. This bill will strengthen our nation's border security and keeps the commitment of House leadership to pass border security legislation into law before Congress adjourns.

During the month of August, Congressional field hearings across the country highlighted this issue. Testimony from border patrol agents and law enforcement officials time and again stressed the need for the strengthening of our nation's borders.

Border security has long been my top priority in the effort to combat illegal immigration. I was a proud to be a co-sponsor of H.R. 6061, the Secure Fence Act. I believe that this bill is a strong first step to securing our porous borders and stopping the influx of illegal immigration into our nation. Among other things, H.R. 6061 will:

Authorize more than 700 miles of two-layered reinforced fencing along the southwest border with prioritized placement at critical, highly populated areas and requiring an evaluation of infrastructure needs along the northern border;
Mandate that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) achieve and maintain operational control over the entire border through a "virtual fence" that deploys cameras, ground sensors, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), and integrated surveillance technology;
Require DHS to provide all necessary authority to border personnel to disable fleeing vehicles, similar to the authority held by the United States Coast Guard for maritime vessels; and
Require DHS to assess vulnerabilities on the northern border.

ACTION: Sent email below:

This year I, my friends and family will be voting for candidates with a strong stand on illegal immigration. We are interested to know where your candidate stands on this issue within the following:

Securing the borders and protecting our sovereignty.

Removing taxpayer benefits and welfare from illegal aliens including licenses and in state tuition.

Enforce existing laws and crack down on employers that intentionally hire illegal aliens and aid and abet them in other ways.

Do you support funding of state and local police under 287(g) so they may deal with immigration violations in the course of normal duties?

Will you support the an end to new guest worker programs, amnesties, or any change in laws to allow illegal aliens in the country to remain in the country or fast track back after a visit to their homeland?

Will you insist that the Executive branch of the US Government enforce our existing immigration laws or face the full Constitutional authority of the US Congress to assure laws are enforced?

These are things we are looking for this year in a candidate. Please let me know your stance.

Thanks

P.S. If you are not within my district the purpose of this email is for deciding whether to endorse you on our Webpages and online forums.

RESULT:

Mr. ,

Thank you for contacting me on this subject. My answer is yes on all of your questions. We are in complete agreement. You do not live in the 4th District, so you have missed the television commercials we are currently running on this subject.

Please visit my website for more information at www.geoffdavisforcongress.com.

Thanks,

Geoff Davis

Have you seen his TV spots?

I've seen some of Geoff Davis' ads....mostly they are about getting armor for soldiers.

I receive constant updates from him on the illegal mess....the Democrat running against him, says he is tough on illegal immigration, but according to Davis, he is not....the Dem. is Ken Lucas.

He had been in Congress once before and voted to allow Mexicans to have our S.S.

I will vote for Davis again.


ACTION: Requested info from Ken Lucas, will post when he answers.