Melissa Morrison for State House District 19

[WHITEY]

Since you are running against the incumbent, I would like to know based upon her voting record as our state representative; how would you have voted differently? You already made it clear you would have voted against HB 87 because it didn't allow illegals amnesty.

 

A look at the incumbents voting record while serving on the school board is enough for me to vote against her.

 

Is their some reason you did not include this in the above question?

[Foxmeister]

Please show me where I endorsed any type, shape, or form of amnesty. I suggest you review the details as outlined in the DREAM ACT. It clearly does NOT endorse amnesty.

 

I have asked for your suggestions and input, and instead you twist my words to fit your agenda.

 

What do you suggest we do?

 

Here are your words.

 

The basic premise is the fact we have a huge financial investment in all of these illegal children, now adults, who we have paid to educate. They are here, working, and flying under the radar paying little to no taxes. The DREAM Act would provide them a legal means to seek legal working status with many restrictions, while they work, paying taxes and being a legitimate part of the community.

As they are here illegally, what you're advocating is granting them amnesty so they could stay here legally. What else would you call it?

[Foxmeister]

Actually, a Georgia license canNOT be used as proof of citizenship because they are issued to non-citizens who provide proof of legal presence and proof of residency in this state.

 

It's important to note however, an illegal alien is not eligible for a Georgia driver's license. The requirements for immigrants to be granted a Georgia driver's license are:

 

1. Valid (not expired) foreign passport with I-94 card or stamp or I-551 stamp
2. Permanent resident alien card (I-551)
3. Employment Authorization Card (I-766)
4. Reentry Permit (I-327)
5. For Refugees/Asylums: I-94 only (no passport required), or Refugee Travel Document (I-571)
6. For F-1, F-2, J-1, J-2 status:
   I-94 with valid foreign passport
   AND
   I-20 (F-1/F-2) or DS-2019 (J-1/J-2)
7. For customers from Visa I-94 waiver countries: Valid foreign passport with Visa I-94 Waiver stamp

 

 

 

 

[Foxmeister]

Again, you twist and turn my response. I made it clear I would not have voted for HB87 as written because it is/was seriously flawed and required, in my opinion, some re-writing. NOWHERE did I mention amnesty of any sort.

 

What's with you and amnesty?

 

I do NOT endorse amnesty for illegal aliens period.

 

If allowing granting them authorization to stay isn't amnesty, then what is it?

 

Amnesty -

1. a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses,against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.2.Law . an act of forgiveness for past offenses, especially to aclass of persons as a whole.3.a forgetting or overlooking of any past offense.verb (used with object)4.to grant amnesty to; pardon.

 

I disagree vehemently. You are darn straight that I carry proof of residency/citizenship. It's called a GA drivers' license. And if the fools at the Gold Dome hadn't knuckled under to D.C. and issued drivers licenses/ID cards to ILLEGALS, we wouldn't have to be having this discussion. Apparently all you want to do is perpetuate the situation.

 

If those who are here legally are "offended" by having to prove it, maybe they will work in their own community to get the ILLEGALS to either comply with the laws of the USA and apply for citizenship, or take their butts back to where they came from. A little peer pressure, if you will.

 

The argument that we have educated and invested in these people is lame. Those educational costs are a drop in the bucket compared to the other massive wastes. And of course, nobody is thinking about the incredible bureaucracy that will be required to monitor all the wishful-thinking compliance by all these law-breaking "future citizens". They are here illegally now, nobody had done squat about it, and now we want to make nice with them. They have to be laughing up their sleeve at the stupidity of the gringo politicians.

 

Federal laws require legal immigrants and guests to carry with them documentation to show they are in the US lawfully. It's no different when I travel to foreign countries that require me to carry my passport and visa with me at all times.

[ThornwoodMom]

I'd have a problem if my admin asst did it in a piece of formal correspondence and didn't correct it. But I wouldn't think ti would have any bearing on whether she could do the job of representing Paulding County. My mother is one of the smartest people I have ever known (retired microbiologist) and she can't spell worth crap.

Announcing your candidacy is pretty formal correspondence. Your mom would've probably used spell-check for that.

[Foxmeister]

Please show me where I endorsed any type, shape, or form of amnesty. I suggest you review the details as outlined in the DREAM ACT. It clearly does NOT endorse amnesty.

 

I have asked for your suggestions and input, and instead you twist my words to fit your agenda.

 

What do you suggest we do?

 

 

We should DENY illegal aliens access to employment and our public schools. I also have no problem with legislation that would heavily fine any employer who has illegals working for them. I think a $10K fine per employee would be adequate. We have federal laws that the government refuses to enforce.

 

Give us specific measures you think the state should take to alleviate our problem with illegal aliens in our state.

 

 

[bluebonnet]

Hmmm. I grew up in West Texas with LOTS of Hispanic friends --probably a few of them illegally in the U.S. Most are hard working people. You know what? How about we trade? One amnesty for every working illegal for one lazy, do-nothing, "entitled" citizen? I just got back from a meeting with a friend who's neighbor (four or five adults and maybe one child living together) bragged about getting over $50,000 back collectively from fraudulently filed tax returns. AND they get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. One of them was bragging about it! I make a motion we trade for the Mexican citizen who just wants a chance to WORK and provide for his family--no entitlements required.

 

Oh...and about illigals not paying taxes? From what I see in the accounting business, a great many of them do pay into Social Security and Medicare with absolutely zero chance of ever getting anything back.

[vslade]

I am not against some type of public transportation here.

We don't even have taxi cabs that are legal to drive incounty.

the We are paying an ambulance service for non-emergency trips to the ER.

Our lack of any type of public transportation leaves the elderly without transport to many needed services. It also puts people that have lost their jobs at a terrible disadvantage, they must find the funds to maintain a vehicle and insure it.

 

We have people camping on the Silver comet trail. We need more jobs within the county and that comes down to economic development.

As far as I am concerned, jobs are the number 1 issue here.

Housing is not going to come back, so my question is what now?

 

 

 

There sure are a lot of taxis driving not legal, everytime you turn around there is one on the road.

[TwoKidCircus]

+10.

 

Announcing your candidacy is pretty formal correspondence. Your mom would've probably used spell-check for that.

[cookies are sweet]

Hmmm. I grew up in West Texas with LOTS of Hispanic friends --probably a few of them illegally in the U.S. Most are hard working people. You know what? How about we trade? One amnesty for every working illegal for one lazy, do-nothing, "entitled" citizen? I just got back from a meeting with a friend who's neighbor (four or five adults and maybe one child living together) bragged about getting over $50,000 back collectively from fraudulently filed tax returns. AND they get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. One of them was bragging about it! I make a motion we trade for the Mexican citizen who just wants a chance to WORK and provide for his family--no entitlements required.

 

Oh...and about illigals not paying taxes? From what I see in the accounting business, a great many of them do pay into Social Security and Medicare with absolutely zero chance of ever getting anything back.

 

Hmmmm.

Break into my home and you stand a good chance of getting shot.

Break into my country and you stand a good chance of getting WIC and support from ... well people who I guess think breaking the law is ok.

Ever try buying land in Mexico, a US citizen can't buy land there.

They can get a long term lease but they can't buy it.

[LPPT]

Funny because I spoke with him also. Cell number 478-231-XXXX. And, I stand by what your colleagues have said about you.

I just called him 5 minutes ago and he denied saying anything negative about Mrs. Morrison, not sure what to make of this.

[Cabe]

A look at the incumbents voting record while serving on the school board is enough for me to vote against her.

 

Is their some reason you did not include this in the above question?

 

Because she now has 2 years as a representative to review. Let's look at that, shall we? Probably better done in a thread other than Mrs. Morrison's though.

[its mr sarcastic to you]

I just called him 5 minutes ago and he denied saying anything negative about Mrs. Morrison, not sure what to make of this.

Thanks for checking!

[Lady Raider]

I just called him 5 minutes ago and he denied saying anything negative about Mrs. Morrison, not sure what to make of this.

 

 

I bet who ever this is that everyone keeps calling is wondering what the heck has he gotten in to

[Guard dad]

Did someone throw some D-Con down over at the highway? I see the rats from there are scampering around pcom.

 

Dude!!

 

They are all members here too, members who still come here when there is content that interests them. As do I. Melissa is fielding questions here, and they are just doing their homework on a candidate for public office.

 

There's no reason why anyone can't participate in both forums, if that is what they want. It's not a competition.

[WHITEY]

Because she now has 2 years as a representative to review. Let's look at that, shall we? Probably better done in a thread other than Mrs. Morrison's though.

Mrs. Braddock voting record as a school board member is not a conservative voting record.I like to look into all of a persons past records when making a decision who I will vote for.

[Foxmeister]

Mrs. Braddock voting record as a school board member is not a conservative voting record.I like to look into all of a persons past records when making a decision who I will vote for.

 

 

Granted, when she initially ran for the state house seat, we all had to go by her voting record on the school board. Now she's in the state house and it's more important we look at how she voted there as that record is most recent and it's the office she wishes to retain. If you want to ignore her voting record for the last two years in the state house, but focus only on her record on the school board, that's your prerogative.

 

My question to Ms. Morrison asking how she would have voted differently than Braddock is a legitimate question as tough issues were attempted to be addressed through state legislation. The only legislation Ms. Morrison so far has addressed how she would have voted differently was the bill addressing illegal immigration in our state. In my opinion, she has taken a liberal position by stating the illegals should be able to stay because we invested money into their education and they now work.

 

Illegal aliens have caused a severe economic hardship on the state. Rewarding them for being law breakers is a slap in the face to the citizens of this country and those immigrants who worked very hard to come there legally.

 

I find it hilarious Ms. Morrison is accusing me of having an agenda by asking pertinent questions on the issues I am very concerned with.

 

 

[feelip]

Announcing your candidacy is pretty formal correspondence. Your mom would've probably used spell-check for that.

 

 

This from someone that is supporting a person that hasn't uttered a three word sentence without using the "word" umm at least twice? I don't think you want to drag Paulette into a battle of intelligence with anyone.

[ThornwoodMom]

This from someone that is supporting a person that hasn't uttered a three word sentence without using the "word" umm at least twice? I don't think you want to drag Paulette into a battle of intelligence with anyone.

I haven't decided who I'm supporting yet. I was hoping a thread like this would help. Not feeling it so far. I will say I looked at Ms. Braddock's voting record in the House and liked what I saw.

 

ETA: I think some missed my point. It's really not about spelling. It's about working somewhere for years and not, somewhere along the way, picking up on how to spell the name of your workplace.

Edited June 19, 2012 by TNlamb

[Foxmeister]

This from someone that is supporting a person that hasn't uttered a three word sentence without using the "word" umm at least twice? I don't think you want to drag Paulette into a battle of intelligence with anyone.

 

 

Just to be fair; I know a lot of intelligent people who say "umm" quite a bit. I don't think saying "umm" is a clear indication of a person's intelligence. However, if you want to use such things to measure intelligence, perhaps we should look at your little quirks? Let's just take a look now at your grammar in your post above. I placed in bold a misused word in your post above. The proper word should have been, "who" as you are referring to a person, not an object. I also italicized another error in your first sentence. Quotation marks should be around "umm" instead. Would it be fair of me to characterize you as "unintelligent?" Of course not. I'm just pointing out that if you are insistent at pointing out what you perceive to be the intelligence level of someone; expect others to be looking at you likewise.

 

 

To be perfectly clear, I am not saying you are not intelligent.

[WHITEY]

Granted, when she initially ran for the state house seat, we all had to go by her voting record on the school board. Now she's in the state house and it's more important we look at how she voted there as that record is most recent and it's the office she wishes to retain. If you want to ignore her voting record for the last two years in the state house, but focus only on her record on the school board, that's your prerogative.

 

My question to Ms. Morrison asking how she would have voted differently than Braddock is a legitimate question as tough issues were attempted to be addressed through state legislation. The only legislation Ms. Morrison so far has addressed how she would have voted differently was the bill addressing illegal immigration in our state. In my opinion, she has taken a liberal position by stating the illegals should be able to stay because we invested money into their education and they now work.

 

Illegal aliens have caused a severe economic hardship on the state. Rewarding them for being law breakers is a slap in the face to the citizens of this country and those immigrants who worked very hard to come there legally.

 

I find it hilarious Ms. Morrison is accusing me of having an agenda by asking pertinent questions on the issues I am very concerned with.

El Zorro

I think it is very important to look at a candidate’s entire voting record along with past accomplishments and failures including any business failures.

For too long House District 19 has been the laughing stock of the state of Georgia.

We have elected people to this House District who were womanizers, Tax and spend conservatives, some that have failed to pay their taxes, And, even some who have a quite an arrest record.

Paulding County deserves better.

I have a question for you; of the two House Representatives and the two State Senators that represent Paulding County what have they done for Paulding County to make it a better place to live, work, and, play? Exactly what have any of them done for us?

[LPPT]

I want to remind everyone the Paulett, Melissa and Micheal will be debating tonight at the Dallas theater,it starts at 7, plenty of time to plan to be there.

[kcarlsonlpn]

El Zorro

I think it is very important to look at a candidate’s entire voting record along with past accomplishments and failures including any business failures.

For too long House District 19 has been the laughing stock of the state of Georgia.

We have elected people to this House District who were womanizers, Tax and spend conservatives, some that have failed to pay their taxes, And, even some who have a quite an arrest record.

Paulding County deserves better.

I have a question for you; of the two House Representatives and the two State Senators that represent Paulding County what have they done for Paulding County to make it a better place to live, work, and, play? Exactly what have any of them done for us?

 

 

Not to mention that a school board member actually has to vote their conscience whereas a state representative can blindly follow their party's positions without ever having to, eh, think....which may explain why Braddock's record as a rep is more impressive than her school board days.

 

 

mrnn

[Foxmeister]

El Zorro

I think it is very important to look at a candidate's entire voting record along with past accomplishments and failures including any business failures.

For too long House District 19 has been the laughing stock of the state of Georgia.

We have elected people to this House District who were womanizers, Tax and spend conservatives, some that have failed to pay their taxes, And, even some who have a quite an arrest record.

Paulding County deserves better.

I have a question for you; of the two House Representatives and the two State Senators that represent Paulding County what have they done for Paulding County to make it a better place to live, work, and, play? Exactly what have any of them done for us?

 

I for one will most likely not be voting for Heath. I never cared for Braddock's voting record while on the school board. In fact, she wasn't my first choice in the primary held before for the last general election. I went with her in the general election over Avery because he was too liberal for my taste. As far as Ms. Morrison is concerned, I'm still waiting for her to answer my question on how or if she would have voted differently than Braddock did on legislation in the house over the last two years.

 

I have two concerns with Ms. Morrison right now. One is her position on illegal immigrants. She claims she hasn't made a decision on TPLOST yet, but indicated it would be difficult to pay for transportation needs without it, which indicates to me she is most likely leaning in favor of it. Perhaps she really needs to study this issue a lot more. All of the road construction and additions approved this year are already funded. Some of these improvements are funded for beyond this year. Approving the TPLOST would just shift that money already earmarked for these projects elsewhere if the TPLOST were approved. The TPLOST is nothing more than a tax hike to shift money around to pay for other things. I for one am opposed to the TPLOST for those reasons.

 

 

 

 

 

[gpatt0n]

El Zorro:

 

If someone is not out campaigning for the TSPLOST, then they are defacto against it, IMO.

 

That the legislature passed the buck to us for us to pass it because frankly they were to big of wimps to raise the money themselves. If they were truly anti-tax, they'd never passed the law giving us the chance to pass it.

 

The real question is what do our representatives do if it fails to pass? Do they say, okay, I guess you like mud and, anyway, mud was good enough for grandpappy so mud's good nuff for you?

 

Or do they do what they should have but were too gutless to do? (Just passed laws raising the taxes to build and maintain the highways needed.)

 

Oh, and in that same light, maybe ask why, if Georgia has the lowest gasoline tax of the surrounding states,why is gasoline typically still higher here?

 

pubby

[feelip]

Just to be fair; I know a lot of intelligent people who say "umm" quite a bit. I don't think saying "umm" is a clear indication of a person's intelligence. However, if you want to use such things to measure intelligence, perhaps we should look at your little quirks? Let's just take a look now at your grammar in your post above. I placed in bold a misused word in your post above. The proper word should have been, "who" as you are referring to a person, not an object. I also italicized another error in your first sentence. Quotation marks should be around "umm" instead. Would it be fair of me to characterize you as "unintelligent?" Of course not. I'm just pointing out that if you are insistent at pointing out what you perceive to be the intelligence level of someone; expect others to be looking at you likewise.

 

 

To be perfectly clear, I am not saying you are not intelligent.

 

 

 

Hey, I saw where you were coming home. Welcome home.

[Melissa Morrison District 19]

Concerning HB87 and the DREAM Act:

 

I clearly stated we do need to address the illegal problems. At NO time did I write or say anything about perpetuating the situation or granting amnesty. Please quit twisting my words to suit your agenda. If you want to disagree, fine. But don’t put words in my mouth and don’t warp or twist what I write please.

 

HB87 is flawed. Let’s fix the flaws and move on.

 

I am against any type of blind amnesty. No Amnesty, ….period.

 

I have no problem with having a Georgia law concerning illegals, and deporting them.

 

But it needs to be a constitutionally sound law that covers the issues without depriving citizens of their rights. As per the various Homeland Security Legislation on the Federal level, this type of legislation is stealing American citizen’s rights by the State. And that is just as wrong as the Feds stealing them.

 

So explain to me, under HB87, just what happens when a vehicle you are riding in is profiled, stopped, and everyone asked for their papers? Your driver’s license is NOT proof of citizenship or that you are here legally.

 

What do you do?

 

As written, LEOs can stop ANYONE and demand to see their papers. If they do not have any proof of legally being in this country they can be taken to jail and detained until such time they can obtain proof of their citizenship. You would sit in jail until you were able to get someone to bring your passport to get you released. No passport or available birth certificate…then sit in jail.

 

You really think that is constitutionally correct?

 

Take it a step further, and say your neighbor’s cousin is in the car with you, and it turns out the cousin is an illegal. Everyone in the car goes to jail, and can be charged and convicted of a felony with a 5 year sentence for harboring an illegal.

 

It’s a poorly written law.

Let’s stop arguing about that and see to it that HB87 is replaced with a sound piece of legislation that covers all the bases. We need to address this before the courts strike down HB87 as I believe they will within the next year, leaving us right back where we were in the 1st place.

 

At the same time, close the loopholes.

Why the exemptions for less than 5 employees with E-Verify? As written, a builder with 8 employees simply has 4 working for 2 different companies. No need for E-Verify and he stays under the radar with his illegals.

 

So I ask again, just how do you propose we address the problems with HB87?

 

 

 

I clearly stated I have NOT read and looked at all the details in the DREAM Act.

And again, I am against AMNESTY.

 

As I understand the DREAM Act, and I may be in error, please feel free to show me where I am wrong….. it is offering an opportunity to open a means for eventual permanent residency status to these people under 30 who were brought here as a minor children who have NEVER been in any trouble, who have graduated from high school, and who are self supported with employment of some type.

 

Even after completing the program for I believe 4-8 years, paying their taxes, no trouble with the law, they still have a long and somewhat arduous route to permanent residency or citizenship. This is far from amnesty.

 

So you have a lady who was brought here as a young child. She goes to school, graduates from college, goes to Med School and is ready to enter the workforce. She can apply for the DREAM Act, and become a further asset to the community and our country as a tax paying member of society, or we can deport her when she tries to get a legal paycheck and send her back to a country she does not even remember leaving as a young child.

 

This appears to be a means to legalize, legitimize, and tax a reasonable percentage of these Non-Anchor babies/children WITHOUT amnesty,

Or do nothing as we have been, and let them continue to fly under the radar.

 

Just how do you suggest we handle them?

 

Who is going to go around trying to arrest and deport them?

Who pays for doing this?

When this was discussed with Gary Gulledge in reference to I.C.E. 2 years ago he was adamant about not wanting to have anything to do with the program.

So do we create a new state LEO Agency to profile and arrest suspected illegals?

How long before they are back here and arrested only to be deported again?

 

Any with arrests or other run-ins with the law, or high school drop-outs are ineligible.

 

To reiterate once again:

I am against amnesty.

I do want legislation to control our illegal worker problems, but I want a constitutional law that can be enforced to catch and deport the illegals without infringing on the rights of the rest of the citizens. And I would prefer this to be a Federal law to create a level playing field all around the country.

[Foxmeister]

 

Hey, I saw where you were coming home. Welcome home.

 

 

Thanks. I've been home a couple of weeks now. It's good to be back.

 

 

[ThornwoodMom]

A brief review of HB87 refutes much of what was said above. You must have more than 7 illegals in your car to be convicted of a felony punishable by 1-5 years. A drivers license is proof of citizenship. And they still have to have probable cause to pull you over. Had me worried for a minute!

 

17-5-100.

(a) As used in this Code section, the term 'illegal alien' means a person who has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of federal law.

( During any stop of a criminal suspect by a law enforcement officer, where the officer has probable cause to believe that such suspect has committed a criminal offense, including any traffic offense, if, during the lawful detention of such suspect, the officer develops reasonable suspicion to also suspect that such person is an illegal alien, then the officer shall, when reasonably practicable, make an attempt to determine the immigration status of such suspect.

© A person shall be presumed to not be an illegal alien if the person provides to the law enforcement officer:

(1) A secure and verifiable document as defined in Code Section 50-36-2;

(2) A valid Georgia driver's license;

(3) A valid Georgia identification card issued by the Department of Driver Services; or

(4) If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid driver's license from a state or district of the United States or any valid identification document issued by the United States federal government.

 

Here's the other part:

A person convicted of transporting or moving an illegal alien who moves eight or more illegal aliens at the same time shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000.00 or more than $20,000.00 or by imprisonment of not less than one or more than five years, or both.

Edited June 19, 2012 by TNlamb

[LisaKW@bellsouth.net]

1340141681[/url]' post='3651617']

Concerning HB87 and the DREAM Act:

 

I clearly stated we do need to address the illegal problems. At NO time did I write or say anything about perpetuating the situation or granting amnesty. Please quit twisting my words to suit your agenda. If you want to disagree, fine. But don't put words in my mouth and don't warp or twist what I write please.

 

HB87 is flawed. Let's fix the flaws and move on.

 

I am against any type of blind amnesty. No Amnesty, ….period.

 

I have no problem with having a Georgia law concerning illegals, and deporting them.

 

But it needs to be a constitutionally sound law that covers the issues without depriving citizens of their rights. As per the various Homeland Security Legislation on the Federal level, this type of legislation is stealing American citizen's rights by the State. And that is just as wrong as the Feds stealing them.

 

So explain to me, under HB87, just what happens when a vehicle you are riding in is profiled, stopped, and everyone asked for their papers? Your driver's license is NOT proof of citizenship or that you are here legally.

 

What do you do?

 

As written, LEOs can stop ANYONE and demand to see their papers. If they do not have any proof of legally being in this country they can be taken to jail and detained until such time they can obtain proof of their citizenship. You would sit in jail until you were able to get someone to bring your passport to get you released. No passport or available birth certificate…then sit in jail.

 

You really think that is constitutionally correct?

 

Take it a step further, and say your neighbor's cousin is in the car with you, and it turns out the cousin is an illegal. Everyone in the car goes to jail, and can be charged and convicted of a felony with a 5 year sentence for harboring an illegal.

 

It's a poorly written law.

Let's stop arguing about that and see to it that HB87 is replaced with a sound piece of legislation that covers all the bases. We need to address this before the courts strike down HB87 as I believe they will within the next year, leaving us right back where we were in the 1st place.

 

At the same time, close the loopholes.

Why the exemptions for less than 5 employees with E-Verify? As written, a builder with 8 employees simply has 4 working for 2 different companies. No need for E-Verify and he stays under the radar with his illegals.

 

So I ask again, just how do you propose we address the problems with HB87?

 

 

 

I clearly stated I have NOT read and looked at all the details in the DREAM Act.

And again, I am against AMNESTY.

 

As I understand the DREAM Act, and I may be in error, please feel free to show me where I am wrong….. it is offering an opportunity to open a means for eventual permanent residency status to these people under 30 who were brought here as a minor children who have NEVER been in any trouble, who have graduated from high school, and who are self supported with employment of some type.

 

Even after completing the program for I believe 4-8 years, paying their taxes, no trouble with the law, they still have a long and somewhat arduous route to permanent residency or citizenship. This is far from amnesty.

 

So you have a lady who was brought here as a young child. She goes to school, graduates from college, goes to Med School and is ready to enter the workforce. She can apply for the DREAM Act, and become a further asset to the community and our country as a tax paying member of society, or we can deport her when she tries to get a legal paycheck and send her back to a country she does not even remember leaving as a young child.

 

This appears to be a means to legalize, legitimize, and tax a reasonable percentage of these Non-Anchor babies/children WITHOUT amnesty,

Or do nothing as we have been, and let them continue to fly under the radar.

 

Just how do you suggest we handle them?

 

Who is going to go around trying to arrest and deport them?

Who pays for doing this?

When this was discussed with Gary Gulledge in reference to I.C.E. 2 years ago he was adamant about not wanting to have anything to do with the program.

So do we create a new state LEO Agency to profile and arrest suspected illegals?

How long before they are back here and arrested only to be deported again?

 

Any with arrests or other run-ins with the law, or high school drop-outs are ineligible.

 

To reiterate once again:

I am against amnesty.

I do want legislation to control our illegal worker problems, but I want a constitutional law that can be enforced to catch and deport the illegals without infringing on the rights of the rest of the citizens. And I would prefer this to be a Federal law to create a level playing field all around the country.

 

Said woman should have been deported as soon as it was determined she was illegal as a child and then the issue wouldn't be there in the first place.

[Foxmeister]

Concerning HB87 and the DREAM Act:

 

I clearly stated we do need to address the illegal problems. At NO time did I write or say anything about perpetuating the situation or granting amnesty. Please quit twisting my words to suit your agenda. If you want to disagree, fine. But don't put words in my mouth and don't warp or twist what I write please.

 

HB87 is flawed. Let's fix the flaws and move on.

 

I am against any type of blind amnesty. No Amnesty, ….period. If you allow them to stay as you said because we invested in their education, you are in fact granting them amnesty. I even gave you the definition of amnesty and I also asked you if allowing them to is not amnesty, then what is it?

 

I have no problem with having a Georgia law concerning illegals, and deporting them.

 

But it needs to be a constitutionally sound law that covers the issues without depriving citizens of their rights. As per the various Homeland Security Legislation on the Federal level, this type of legislation is stealing American citizen's rights by the State. And that is just as wrong as the Feds stealing them. How so?

 

So explain to me, under HB87, just what happens when a vehicle you are riding in is profiled, stopped, and everyone asked for their papers? Your driver's license is NOT proof of citizenship or that you are here legally.

I suggest you study the federal immigration laws a little more closely. All lawful immigrants and guests from other countries are bound by law to carry their passport/visa with them at all times. Now why do you suppose that is? True that a driver's license is not proof of citizenship, but Georgia will only issue a driver's license to someone from a foreign country only if they have the required documents that prove they are in the country legally.

 

What do you do? Why are you asking us this question as your the candidate who wants the office? Shouldn't it be you who should be telling us what you think should be done?

 

As written, LEOs can stop ANYONE and demand to see their papers. If they do not have any proof of legally being in this country they can be taken to jail and detained until such time they can obtain proof of their citizenship. You would sit in jail until you were able to get someone to bring your passport to get you released. No passport or available birth certificate…then sit in jail. What's wrong with that? Your argument about having to carry and produce papers is the same argument the liberals have been giving for years. The federal immigration laws oblige those here legally to carry the documents that provide proof they are here legally with them at all times.

 

You really think that is constitutionally correct? Have our federal immigration laws requiring immigrants to carry their passport/visa with them at all times been ruled unconstitutional by the SCOTUS? NO.

 

Take it a step further, and say your neighbor's cousin is in the car with you, and it turns out the cousin is an illegal. Everyone in the car goes to jail, and can be charged and convicted of a felony with a 5 year sentence for harboring an illegal. What is the problem with that? Prove I knew the cousin was an illegal. The burden is on the State to prove that I knew my neighbor's cousin was an illegal.

 

It's a poorly written law.

Let's stop arguing about that and see to it that HB87 is replaced with a sound piece of legislation that covers all the bases. We need to address this before the courts strike down HB87 as I believe they will within the next year, leaving us right back where we were in the 1st place. Once again, I ask for specifics from you what would be sound law on this issue?

 

At the same time, close the loopholes.

Why the exemptions for less than 5 employees with E-Verify? As written, a builder with 8 employees simply has 4 working for 2 different companies. No need for E-Verify and he stays under the radar with his illegals.

 

So I ask again, just how do you propose we address the problems with HB87?

 

 

 

I clearly stated I have NOT read and looked at all the details in the DREAM Act.

And again, I am against AMNESTY. But you believe the young illegals who came here as children should be able to stay in this country because we invested in their education; right?

 

As I understand the DREAM Act, and I may be in error, please feel free to show me where I am wrong….. it is offering an opportunity to open a means for eventual permanent residency status to these people under 30 who were brought here as a minor children who have NEVER been in any trouble, who have graduated from high school, and who are self supported with employment of some type. It grants them amnesty.

 

Even after completing the program for I believe 4-8 years, paying their taxes, no trouble with the law, they still have a long and somewhat arduous route to permanent residency or citizenship. This is far from amnesty. No it's not. It's still giving them amnesty. If they have a social security number, they obtained it through means of fraud. If they have a GA driver's license, they obtained it by means of fraud. Fraud is a crime.

 

So you have a lady who was brought here as a young child. She goes to school, graduates from college, goes to Med School and is ready to enter the workforce. She can apply for the DREAM Act, and become a further asset to the community and our country as a tax paying member of society, or we can deport her when she tries to get a legal paycheck and send her back to a country she does not even remember leaving as a young child. Send her back. How many American citizens were turned down from medical school because there weren't enough seats?

 

This appears to be a means to legalize, legitimize, and tax a reasonable percentage of these Non-Anchor babies/children WITHOUT amnesty,

Or do nothing as we have been, and let them continue to fly under the radar.

 

Just how do you suggest we handle them?

 

Who is going to go around trying to arrest and deport them?

Who pays for doing this?

When this was discussed with Gary Gulledge in reference to I.C.E. 2 years ago he was adamant about not wanting to have anything to do with the program.

So do we create a new state LEO Agency to profile and arrest suspected illegals?

How long before they are back here and arrested only to be deported again?

 

Any with arrests or other run-ins with the law, or high school drop-outs are ineligible.

 

To reiterate once again:

I am against amnesty.

I do want legislation to control our illegal worker problems, but I want a constitutional law that can be enforced to catch and deport the illegals without infringing on the rights of the rest of the citizens. And I would prefer this to be a Federal law to create a level playing field all around the country.

 

I have comments above in red. You are against amnesty, but yet you advocate legislative changes to the current immigration laws that would allow them to stay in the country. THAT is amnesty.

 

 

 

[kcarlsonlpn]

I have comments above in red. You are against amnesty, but yet you advocate legislative changes to the current immigration laws that would allow them to stay in the country. THAT is amnesty.

 

Decriminalization and making something lawful are completely different animals. The same is true with telling Homeland Security to stop deporting if an illegal immigrant meets a set of criteria and granting blanket amnesty. Amnesty, as used by your hero Ron Reagan, creates a clear path to citizenship. Decriminalization of illegals meeting the set criteria, does not.

 

 

mrnn

[NewsJunky]

Good Morning. And congratulations on avoiding the topics at hand. I will reply to this once, and then move on to answering specific pertinent questions best I can.

 

Concerning your remarks about my job performance while I was Deputy Commission Coleman's administrative assistant:

 

I spoke with him this morning and he informed me he has not spoken with you or anyone else about me and will be happy to confirm this to anyone else who wants to contact him. I assume you have his cell number. If not give me a call and I'll give it to you. Dr Carter Black III also spoke with me this morning and suggested you give him a call as well about my job performance and qualifications for this District 19 House seat. He is still with the Ag Department on a part time consulting basis.

 

FYI: When I interviewed for the job as his assistant he specifically asked me who I voted for in the 2006 election for Ag Department Commissioner.

 

I honestly replied my husband and I both supported and voted for Gary Black, a rock solid Republican. At the time I assumed the former Democrat Speaker of the House might hold this against me.

 

Much to my surprise, he hired me for the job none the less.

 

We had our political differences but I performed my job duties well, with excellent job performance reviews and was with him for over 2 years, right up until the day he left.

 

Several times I was offered other positions within the Ag Department and he refused to sign off so he could keep me in his office.

 

I suggest you might want to consider staying with pertinent topics and let the Gold Dome gossip stay at the Gold Dome.

 

 

HB87 is Flawed as written, and I would have insisted on some re-writes before endorsing it. We are in need of serious immigration controls and reforms, but this bill is not the fix.

 

It excludes businesses with fewer than four employees from having to verify the immigration status of their employees.

Why exempt any company, large or small?

 

Authorizes bigger government

 

Mandates that all immigrants, legal and otherwise must ALWAYS have their documents on their person. Jim Crowe all over again.

 

Allows "Show me your papers" or "let's go to jail" by profiling.

This includes US citizens who unknowingly have an illegal in their car if stopped.

Are we to require proof of residency/citizenship of anyone we allow into our automobile ?

Do you carry proof of residency/citizenship ?

 

The point is, HB87 is flawed, seriously, and desperately needs to be amended. It would behoove us to take care of this prior to the pending court rulings.

 

The DREAM act was just signed as an executive order last Friday I believe, and I am not fully up to speed on all of the details. This originally, best I recall was a bill proposed by several Republicans, including Orin Hatch. It has bounced around the Senate for the past 10 years in various versions.

 

The basic premise is the fact we have a huge financial investment in all of these illegal children, now adults, who we have paid to educate. They are here, working, and flying under the radar paying little to no taxes. The DREAM Act would provide them a legal means to seek legal working status with many restrictions, while they work, paying taxes and being a legitimate part of the community.

 

I would appreciate input and feedback from the voters of Paulding County on these 2 issues.

I agreed with HB 87 and supported it's passage. I do not see it as flawed. I think Obama has usurped the power of Congress in what he did with the Dream Act. He has refused to uphold the laws of this land. If you see it as a good thing then we very much disagree. Paulette supported HB 87 and I have to support her on that. Thanks for your reply though. I think we disagree more than we agree.

[NewsJunky]

Mrs. Braddock voting record as a school board member is not a conservative voting record.I like to look into all of a persons past records when making a decision who I will vote for.

And it has nothing to do with her voting record in the District 19 seat. Two different jobs. I would think some folks could learn and mature in their opinions. Nothing wrong with that.

[Foxmeister]

A look at the incumbents voting record while serving on the school board is enough for me to vote against her.

 

Is their some reason you did not include this in the above question?

 

She's not running for the school board and that's not where she currently sits. I have watched her voting record for the last two years while in the House and I'm not disappointed.

 

 

 

[NewsJunky]

Did someone throw some D-Con down over at the highway? I see the rats from there are scampering around pcom.

What are you talking about? I never left p.com and I do enjoy the hwy. Not sure I am fond of being called a rat either!

[ThornwoodMom]

"Concerning HB87 and the DREAM Act.......I clearly stated I have NOT read and looked at all the details in the DREAM Act."

 

Ms. Morrison, you seem to be indicating that you DID read HB87. A quick google search indicates that most if not ALL of the facts you posted about it, and you even included an example about a neighbor's cousin, were false! Please clear up this discrepancy. Your potential constituents can't overlook this blatant disregard for the truth. Thank you.

[zoocrew]

Hmmm. I grew up in West Texas with LOTS of Hispanic friends --probably a few of them illegally in the U.S. Most are hard working people. You know what? How about we trade? One amnesty for every working illegal for one lazy, do-nothing, "entitled" citizen? I just got back from a meeting with a friend who's neighbor (four or five adults and maybe one child living together) bragged about getting over $50,000 back collectively from fraudulently filed tax returns. AND they get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. One of them was bragging about it! I make a motion we trade for the Mexican citizen who just wants a chance to WORK and provide for his family--no entitlements required.

 

Oh...and about illigals not paying taxes? From what I see in the accounting business, a great many of them do pay into Social Security and Medicare with absolutely zero chance of ever getting anything back.

 

And they are paying the cost of public education since that is funded by taxes on property, that they pay directly for owning property or indirectly as renters.

[zoocrew]

Hmmmm.

Break into my home and you stand a good chance of getting shot.

Break into my country and you stand a good chance of getting WIC and support from ... well people who I guess think breaking the law is ok.

Ever try buying land in Mexico, a US citizen can't buy land there.

They can get a long term lease but they can't buy it.

 

Illegals are not eligible for WIC or other welfare programs. Children born here are American citizens and they are entitled to assistance but not the illegal aliens themselves.

[zoocrew]

A brief review of HB87 refutes much of what was said above. You must have more than 7 illegals in your car to be convicted of a felony punishable by 1-5 years. A drivers license is proof of citizenship. And they still have to have probable cause to pull you over. Had me worried for a minute!

 

17-5-100.

(a) As used in this Code section, the term 'illegal alien' means a person who has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of federal law.

( During any stop of a criminal suspect by a law enforcement officer, where the officer has probable cause to believe that such suspect has committed a criminal offense, including any traffic offense, if, during the lawful detention of such suspect, the officer develops reasonable suspicion to also suspect that such person is an illegal alien, then the officer shall, when reasonably practicable, make an attempt to determine the immigration status of such suspect.

© A person shall be presumed to not be an illegal alien if the person provides to the law enforcement officer:

(1) A secure and verifiable document as defined in Code Section 50-36-2;

(2) A valid Georgia driver's license;

(3) A valid Georgia identification card issued by the Department of Driver Services; or

(4) If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid driver's license from a state or district of the United States or any valid identification document issued by the United States federal government.

 

Here's the other part:

A person convicted of transporting or moving an illegal alien who moves eight or more illegal aliens at the same time shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than $5,000.00 or more than $20,000.00 or by imprisonment of not less than one or more than five years, or both.

 

Sorry, but a drivers license is not proof of citizenship. That is pretty common knowledge that a drivers license is not proof.

 

5 or 7. Come on. The point that is being made is that there is a problem with the law.

 

Probable cause. DWH. Driving While looking Hispanic. "You were weaving. Lemme see your papers."

Edited June 20, 2012 by zoocrew