Thread: Letter from Rep. Kirk re: Salvation Army and English

I got a letter from my US Rep. Mark Kirk today that brought a smile to my face. I come from the state that has Dick Durbin and B. Obama. Anyone else hearing this from their reps? If not pass it on so something can be done about simply being able to ask people to speak English on the job.


Dear Friends,

Should the federal government sue the Salvation Army for discrimination because it requires its employees to speak English within one year?

As you may have heard, the federal government is suing the Salvation Army for letting go two employees who refused to learn English. Most of the less fortunate Americans the Salvation Army helps speak only English. To make sure its employees can do the most good, the Salvation Army requires its employees to learn English within one year of their employment.

Last month, Senator Lamar Alexander amended the Commerce Department appropriations bill to prohibit the government from filing similar lawsuits. Two weeks ago, I voted in the House to support the Alexander language blocking such lawsuits. We won by a vote of 218-186.

Recently, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised to delete this provision, thus allowing the federal government to continue its lawsuit against the Salvation Army (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01866.html).

I do not think lawsuits like these against the Salvation Army are worth merit. A vast majority of the people the Salvation Army helps speak only one language: English.

What do you think? Please let me know with your vote on our issue survey below.

It is an honor to serve you in Congress.


Mark Kirk
Member of Congress

__________________________________________________ ________

He also has a survey on his website -but you don't see the results after you vote.

Dear Friends,

Thank you for taking the time to answer our survey. I really appreciate your taking the time to provide your views and comments.

Should the federal government sue the Salvation Army for discrimination because it requires its employees to speak English within one year? No.

Most of the less fortunate Americans the Salvation Army helps speak only English. To make sure its employees can do the most good, the Salvation Army requires its employees to learn English within one year of their employment. I support the work of the Salvation Army and think the government should help them, not sue them.

Last month, Senator Lamar Alexander amended the Commerce Department Appropriations bill to prohibit the government from filing similar lawsuits. Two weeks ago, I voted in the House to support the Alexander language blocking such lawsuits. We won by a vote of 218-186.

I disagree with Speaker Pelosi who wants such lawsuits against the Salvation Army to go forward. In my view, the lawsuit against the Salvation Army is not worth merit. Common sense tells us that a vast majority of the people the Salvation Army helps speak only one language: English.

It is an honor to serve you in Congress.

Very truly yours,


Mark Kirk
Member of Congress


Both Houses of Congress voted to block federal lawsuits against the Salvation Army for requiring its employees to speak English. Speaker Pelosi disagrees and wants these lawsuits to go forward.

Should the government sue the Salvation Army for requiring its employees to speak English?

Yes

No

Do not know

http://www.house.gov/kirk/

If it ws voted in.....how the h...can she say she doesn't like it and then block it.....Doesn't majority rule??????????????????????

I can't find the poll..................
Both Houses of Congress voted to block federal lawsuits against the Salvation Army for requiring its employees to speak English. Speaker Pelosi disagrees and wants these lawsuits to go forward.

Should the government sue the Salvation Army for requiring its employees to speak English?

Yes

No

Do not know

http://www.house.gov/kirk/

This is for grandmasmad as she thinks RP does not support our borders.
This is from the Ron Pauk Libraryl and what he says about illegal immiagration.

Border Security and Immigration Reform
The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. This is my six point plan:

Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.