V I S I T U S O N T H E W E B A T W W W . F A I R U S . O R G

Inside . . .GUESS WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR

THE ADMINISTRATION’S AMNESTY

PROGRAM?PAGE 2

SMITH AND GRASSLEY: AMNESTY

PROGRAM LIKELY TO SEE MASSIVE

FRAUD

PAGE 3

ARIZONA GOVERNOR DRAWS THE

LINE ON BENEFITS FOR “DEFERRED

ACTION” BENEFICIARIES

PAGE 4

SCHOOL DAZE? GAO FINDS

DANGEROUS LOOPHOLES IN

STUDENT VISA SYSTEM

PAGE 4

ADMINISTRATION TO CLOSE INTERIOR

BORDER PATROL STATIONS

PAGE 5

MORE IRS LOOPHOLES FOR ILLEGAL

ALIENS EXPOSED

PAGE 6

25 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, NWSUITE 330WASHINGTON, DC 20001(202) 328 7004INFO@FAIRUS.ORGWWW.FAIRUS.ORG

Illegal Amnesty Unleashed: Implementationof Illegal Backdoor Amnesty Begins

Rules to Be Made Up as the Administration “Plays it by Ear”

On August 15, the Obama ad-ministration began imple-menting the unlegislated

illegal alien amnesty it announced inJune. Less than two weeks before im-plementation began, the Departmentof Homeland Security (DHS) issuedvague guidelines for how what it calls“deferred action” will be carried out,guidelines that created more questionsthan they answered. Since the June an-nouncement that the administrationintended to carry out the DREAM Actamnesty in spite of the fact that thelegislation was defeated in Congress asrecently as December 2010, the esti-mate of the number of beneficiarieshas more than doubled from the ad-

ministration’s original figure of about800,000. The Migration Policy Insti-tute — an amnesty advocate group —now estimates the number of potentialbeneficiaries at 1.76 million, barringmassive fraud.

Massive fraud is a distinct possi-bility. The DHS guidelines, issued onAugust 3, do not specify what forms ofdocumentation an illegal alien mustshow to receive deferred action andwork authorization. The guidelinesstate vaguely that medical, financial,and educational forms may be ac-cepted to demonstrate that an illegalalien meets the administration’s crite-ria for amnesty. They do not specify

CONT I N U E D on p age 7

PAGE 2 • FA I R I M M I G R AT I O N R E PORT

American Taxpayer to Pick Up Most of theTab for Administration’s Amnesty

Among the many questions to arisefrom the Obama administration’s

deferred action program for illegalaliens who would have qualified for theDREAM Act is the cost of administer-ing the program and who will pay forit. According to the Associated Press,the price tag could run to $585 mil-lion. However, since estimates of thenumber of beneficiaries continue to berevised upwards, nobody really knowsfor certain how much the amnesty pro-gram will eventually cost.

What is apparent is that whateverthe final tally, it will be the Americantaxpayer who will be on the hook forall or most of the cost. In the guide-lines released on August 3, the De-partment of Homeland Security(DHS) made a point of highlightingthe $465 in fees to be collected fromthose who apply for deferred action

(although the fees may be waiveddue to a variety of hardship fac-tors).

But even the $465 cost to theapplicants is deceptive. Of thattotal, $380 will cover the cost ofprocessing applications for workauthorization, which are to be sub-mitted simultaneously with the re-quest for deferred action. Of theremaining $85, that is the fee forcollecting biometric identificationfrom applicants. Thus, there willbe nothing left over from the $465to offset the costs of processing ap-plications for deferred action,

background checks (if there areany) and other administrativecosts.

Aside from the additional bur-den on American taxpayers andthe impact on the already prodi-gious budget deficit, federal law re-quires applicants for immigrationbenefits to bear the costs for theservices. But, of course, the imple-mentation of an unlegislatedamnesty and the issuance of workauthorization to millions of peoplewho are ineligible for employmentviolate federal law.

Since 2009, the Obama administration has systematically guttedeffective immigration enforcement policies, moved aggressivelyagainst state and local governments that attempt to enforceimmigration laws, and stretched the concept of "prosecutorialdiscretion" to a point where it has rendered many immigration lawsmeaningless. Remarkably, the administration has succeeded indoing all this with barely a peep of protest from Congress.

President Obama’s Record of DismantlingImmigration Enforcement

This new report from FAIR details

how the Obama administration has

carried out a policy of de facto

amnesty for millions of illegal aliens

through executive policy decisions.

S E P TE M B E R 2 0 1 2 • PAGE 3

Smith, Grassley Charge that Amnesty Program Invites Fraud

When the Obama administration first announced in Junethat it would implement the DREAM Act amnesty that

Congress rejected in December 2010, the White House estimatedthat some 800,000 illegal aliens would benefit. By the time theamnesty began accepting applications on August 15, illegal alienadvocacy groups were claiming that about 1.76 million illegalaliens would be eligible for “deferred action” and work authori-zation. But that estimate did not include the likelihood of fraud.

Two senior members of Congress, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) and Sen. ChuckGrassley (R-Iowa) believethat fraud will be ram-pant. In a letter ad-dressed to Homeland Se-curity (DHS) SecretaryJanet Napolitano, theChairman of the HouseJudiciary Committeeand the ranking Repub-lican on the Senate Judi-ciary Committee warnedthat “This administra-tion will undoubtedlypreside over one of the most fraud-ridden immigration programsin our history.” Based on how DHS designed the amnesty pro-gram, massive fraud may well be the administration’s desiredoutcome.

The legislators’ concerns are well-founded based on the wide-spread fraud documented in the 1986 amnesty, which had simi-lar loose documentary requirements. In addition to the likelihoodof widespread fraud in this new back-door amnesty, the concernsraised by Smith and Grassley also present the real possibility thatcriminals and terrorists may easily gain legal status in the U.S. Thelack of any sort of meaningful vetting process for the millions ofpeople likely to apply for deferred action will not only affect thejob availability, tax dollars, and educational opportunities ofAmericans, but could also be a threat to our security.

among the glaring deficiencies and

loopholes noted by smith and

grassley:

• “there seems to be little if any

mechanism in place for vetting

fraudulent applications and

documentation.

• “mere affidavits will be sufficient

to meet some eligibility

requirements for deferred

action.”

• “verified school transcripts [will]

not be required from applicants.”

• “fraud prevention and detection

method… [considered] ‘too

expensive’ or ‘time consuming’ or

that would ‘unduly impact’…other

responsibilities” will not be used.

• “immigration and customs

enforcement (ice) could not use

the information in deferred action

applications in subsequent removal

proceedings.” no exception is made

for fraud.

• the parents of those gaining

deferred action “will not be

penalized for breaking the law”

and “may also be allowed to work

and compete with unemployed

americans.”

Rep. Lamar Smith and Sen. Chuck Grassley

PAGE 4 • FA I R I M M I G R AT I O N R E PORT

Arizona Gov. Blocks Deferred Action Beneficiaries fromReceiving State Benefits

On the same day that the Obama administrationbegan implementing its unauthorized deferred ac-

tion program for millions of illegal aliens, Gov. JanBrewer moved swiftly to protect Arizona taxpayers frombeing further burdened by illegal immigration in herstate. Brewer issued an executive order stating that thepresident’s unilateral action “does not entitle them toany additional benefits” in the state of Arizona.

The governor’s action is consistent with the objec-tives of a 2004 voter-approved Arizona initiative thatbars illegal aliens from receiving non-essential, non-emergency state benefits and services. FAIR workedclosely with activists in the state to qualify the initiativefor the ballot and to counter a well-funded effort by theopposition to discredit the measure. In her executiveorder, Brewer noted that the president’s action does not“confer upon [deferred action beneficiaries] any lawful orauthorized status” that would entitle them to services de-nied to illegal aliens under Arizona law. Specifically, the

executive order states that Arizona’s estimated 80,000deferred action beneficiaries will not be entitled to “stateidentification, including a driver’s license.”

Gov. Brewer’s executive order also highlights thechaos created by the unilateral policy adopted by theObama administration. The administration is quite lit-erally making up rules as it goes and failing to addressmyriad questions about what benefits, services and priv-ileges will be afforded to those who get deferred action.Important questions such as whether deferred action bythe Obama administration makes illegal aliens eligiblefor state-issued driver’s licenses, or state-funded in-statetuition benefits have not been addressed.

These unanswered questions, which will have enor-mous impact on government and budgets at all levels,add to the imperative that Congress exercise its oversightresponsibilities and prevent the administration from car-rying out its policy of mass deferred action.

GAO Finds Dangerous Deficiencies in Student Visa Process

As we learned tragically on 9/11,our lax and poorly monitored

student visa process is not just an in-vitation to abuse, but a mortalthreat to our security. In spite of thehorrendous price we paid, and inspite of explicit warnings by thecommission that investigated the2001 attacks, a new report by theGovernment Accountability Office(GAO) finds that many of the samedangerous practices persist.

According to a report releasedin June, the government is failing toprovide adequate oversight ofschools that enroll foreign students,resulting in the issuance of thou-sands of illegitimate F-1 studentvisas. Schools that admit F-1 stu-dents must be certified by Immigra-tion and Customs Enforcement(ICE) every two years under theStudent Exchange and Visitor Pro-gram (SEVP).

Even more alarmingly, theGAO found that ICE has permittedsome flight training schools not cer-tified by the Federal Aviation Ad-ministration (FAA) to receivecertification to enroll foreign stu-dents. Moreover, ICE has not veri-fied that other SEVP schools, whichhave previously had FAA certifica-tions, are still valid.

The report found a systemic

CONT I N U E D on p age 7

S E P TE M B E R 2 0 1 2 • PAGE 5

Border Patrol to Close Nine Interior Stations

It is no secret that the Obama administration does not want to deportillegal aliens who have not been convicted of serious crimes. They’lltell you that themselves. A large percentage of non-criminal alienswho are deported are those who are apprehended by the BorderPatrol as they enter the country illegally, or head for locations in theinterior — which has been a source of irritation for illegal alienadvocacy groups.

In July, the administration took steps to remedy that. If you don’t catchthem, you can’t deport them. So, to minimize the possibility ofcatching illegal aliens that the administration is loath to deport, theDepartment of Homeland Security announced that it was closing nineinterior Border Patrol stations. These interior stations are part of asecond line of defense that allows the Border Patrol to apprehendpeople who manage to elude agents posted along the border.

The nine stations being closed include six in Texas — Lubbock,Amarillo, Dallas, San Angelo, Abilene and San Antonio — Billings,Montana, Twin Falls, Idaho, and Riverside, California. These locationsare along important transportation corridors through which illegalaliens are moved to the interior of the country. Closing these stations,coupled with the administration’s policy of refusing to accept illegalaliens arrested or detained by state and local police who do not meettheir definition of high priority, ensures that illegal aliens who make itpast the first line of defense are unlikely to be apprehended orremoved by anyone.

The move was justified as a cost-cutting measure, but many disputethat premise. The Border Patrol states that closure of these stationswill save the agency $1.3 million annually. But that savings is likely tobe more than offset by the cost of relocating personnel, breakingleases and other logistical considerations. Plus it will leavedangerous gaps in the Border Patrol’s ability to interdict humantrafficking and drug smuggling.

Career Border Patrol agents were among many to express concernsabout the closure of the stations. Agent Robert Green, who runs theAmarillo station slated for closure, circulated a letter pointing out thatthe plan will leave many local police departments without assistancewhen they encounter illegal aliens. “At this time…there is no activeplan for ICE assets to assist local authorities in this area when aliensmuggling or alien transportation situations are encountered by yourpersonnel.” Which is, of course, precisely what the closure of thestations is intended to accomplish.

PAGE 6 • FA I R I M M I G R AT I O N R E PORT

IRS Discourages Employees from Even Discovering TaxGiveaways to Illegal Aliens

Over the past year, we have reported about the In-spector General of the Treasury Department’s

(IG) report that illegal aliens collected $4.2 billion inAdditional Child Tax Credits (ACTC). We have alsoreported about several attempts by the House ofRepresentatives to close this very expensive loopholeand how Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has blocked those efforts.

In July, yet another Inspector General’s reportwas released revealing that IRS managers are dis-couraging agency personnel from even detecting taxfraud by people who file returns using Individual Tax-payer Identification Numbers (ITINs). Nearly allITIN tax filers are illegal aliens who are ineligible forSocial Security Numbers.

According to the latest report, IRS management“has not established adequate internal controls todetect and prevent the assignment of an ITIN to in-dividuals submitting questionable applications.” Asan example of the willful blindness on the part of theIRS to likely tax fraud, the IG found that there were154 instances in which the same mailing address wasused by more than 1,000 applicants for ITINs.

The blatant disregard for fraud turned out to bevery expensive. In 2011, ten addresses accounted for53,994 tax returns submitted by ITIN filers. Thesetax filers received $86.4 million in tax refunds, be-lieved by the IG to be fraudulent.

In spite of billions of dollars lost to the FederalTreasury as a result of fraudulent tax refunds and taxcredits being issued to ITIN filers, the IG notes that“no function of the IRS, including Criminal Inves-tigation and the Accounts Management TaxpayerAssurance Program, is interested in dealing withITIN application fraud.” Moreover, the IRS doesnot even know (or care to know) if applicants forITINs even exist.

AMONG THE GLARING DEFICIENCIES NOTED BY THE

INSPECTOR GENERAL, IRS MANAGEMENT HAS ENABLED

MASSIVE AND EXTENSIVE TAX FRAUD BY ILLEGAL ALIENS

BY:• CREATING AN ENVIRONMENT THAT DISCOURAGES

TAX EXAMINERS FROM IDENTIFYING QUESTIONABLE

ITIN APPLICATIONS;

• ELIMINATING SUCCESSFUL PROCESSES TO IDENTIFY

QUESTIONABLE ITIN APPLICATION FRAUD PATTERNS

AND SCHEMES; AND

• ESTABLISHING INADEQUATE PROCESSES AND

PROCEDURES TO VERIFY EACH APPLICANT'S IDENTITY

AND FOREIGN STATUS.

“NO FUNCTION OF THE IRS, INCLUDING

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AND THE ACCOUNTS

MANAGEMENT TAXPAYER ASSURANCE

PROGRAM, IS INTERESTED IN DEALING WITH

ITIN APPLICATION FRAUD.”—INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE TREASURY

S E P TE M B E R 2 0 1 2 • PAGE 7

BACKDOOR AMNESTY continued

what kind of forms will or will notbe accepted, nor do the guidelinesrequire the presentation of originaldocuments.

The susceptibility to fraud wasnoted by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who charged that, “The lackof specific standards for employeesprocessing the applications is anopen invitation to fraud, especiallybecause the administration is al-lowing illegal immigrants to submitthird party affidavits as proof of atleast one of the DREAM Act re-quirements.”

Increasing the likelihood ofmassive fraud, applicants will notbe required to appear in person forinterviews with officials from theU.S. Citizenship and ImmigrationServices (USCIS) agency. Thus, thehuman element of a USCIS officertrained to detect fraud has beeneliminated.

Even the administration’s as-surances that aliens with criminalrecords would not be eligible for

deferred action now appear to besignificantly short of ironclad.While the August 3 guidelines pur-port to clarify the types of criminalconvictions (“significant misde-meanors” in DHS’s parlance) thatwould disqualify an alien from de-ferred action, DHS asserts that itmay choose to ignore those convic-tions. “[T]he absence of the crimi-nal history outlined above, or itspresence, is not necessarily deter-minative, but is a factor to be con-sidered in the unreviewable exerciseof discretion.” Simply put, DHS re-serves the right to ignore its ownguidelines and grant deferred actionand work authorization even toaliens with criminal records.

Another area in which the goal-posts have been moved (in favor ofthe illegal alien, of course) is withregard to the educational require-ments for deferred action. Earlier,the administration stated that onlyillegal aliens who were enrolled inan educational institution as of the

day of the announcement, i.e., June15, would be eligible for amnesty.However, that requirementchanged under the guidelines is-sued on August 3. The administra-tion indicated that illegal aliensmust merely be enrolled in schoolas of the date they submit their ap-plication to qualify. This allowsschool drop-outs to re-enroll in aK-12 or trade school before apply-ing.

Exposing the egregious tacticsof the administration and exposingthe gaping loopholes in the Obamaamnesty has been left largely up toFAIR. With few exceptions, the re-sponse from Congress has beenmuted or non-existent. Filling thevoid, FAIR’s media team has ap-peared on hundreds of radio andtelevision programs to inform theAmerican public, while the field de-partment has worked with activiststo generate pressure on Congress torein-in the administration’s abilityto carry out an amnesty.

STUDENT V ISA PROCESS continued

failure on the part of ICE to evaluatethe legitimacy of schools applyingfor SEVP certification, or to assessrisk factors. The GAO’s investiga-tion found sloppy recordkeeping byICE and failure on the part of theagency to verify documentationfrom schools that are part of SEVP.

The evidence of inadequate su-pervision by ICE was so glaring that

the Chairman of the Senate Immi-gration Subcommittee, ChuckSchumer (whose home state of NewYork was attacked on 9/11), hascalled for legislation requiring ICEto fulfill its duties to monitor SEVPschools. The need for such legisla-tion is self-evident and critical toprotecting the security of the nation.It might also provide an important

precedent, as President Obama im-plements an unauthorized amnestyand refuses to enforce many immi-gration laws. Congress can demandthat the Executive Branch carry outlaws that Congress has enacted andprohibit the carrying out of meas-ures that have not been enacted.

Sign up today to receive FAIR’s Legislative Updates online!

___________________________________________________(please provide your email address)

$1,000 $500 $250 $100 $50

$25 Other $_________________

I am making my donation by checkpayable to FAIR, or credit card (check one):

Visa Mastercard Amex Discover

________________________________________________________ Cardholder’s Name

________________________________________________________ Card Number

_____________ __________________________________________Expiration Date Signature

With this donation, I would like to become aCornerstone Contributor (see adjacent panel for details)

WE ALSO WELCOME YOUR DONATIONS ON OUR SECURE SERVER

www.fairus.org/DONATE(enter code NL1209).

I have included at least $25 for a Gift Membership

Gift recipient’s name and address

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Stay Informed. Get Involved.Make a Difference!

NL1209FAIR is a 501(c)(3) organization. All contributions are tax-deductible.

FAIR is a member of the Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance andis one of a select few non profit organizations that meet their high standardsof operation, spending, truthfulness, and disclosure in fundraising.

Charity Navigator has awarded FAIR four out of a possible four stars. Inearning Charity Navigator's highest rating, FAIR has demonstrated exceptionalfinancial health, outperforming most of its peers in its efforts to manage andgrow its finances in the most fiscally responsible way possible

Cornerstone Contributors are the building blocks ofFAIR's citizen-supported foundation. Time and time again,through their continuing support they have become key offi-cers in our battle to end the destructive mass immigration thatis debilitating our great nation.

As a Cornerstone Contributor, you pledge to give a specificmonthly contribution to FAIR. This donation, electronicallytransferred conveniently each month from your credit card orchecking account, enables FAIR to count on you to help sup-port our ongoing immigration reform efforts.

To become a member, check the box on the adjacent form,clip and mail to FAIR or contact Melissa Bradley-Wilson at(202) 328-7004 or missy@fairus.org; or sign up online atwww.fairus.org.

to all federal and state government employees who helped in theFAIR fight for sensible immigration policies by making a pledgeto FAIR in the Fall 2011 Combined Federal Campaign and re-lated State campaigns!

Today, immigration, legal and illegal, is running at its highestlevel in history. This isn’t the result of any reasoned immigra-tion policy but rather the result of concessions made over theyears to special interests that profit politically or financially frommass immigration. It is time to put the nation’s best interestsahead of the special interests. To that end, we believe that:

• Every immigrant should be a legal immigrant• Illegal immigration must not be rewarded • There should be a comprehensive ceiling on immigration to

be fixed in accordance with the economic, environmental, andsocietal goals and priorities of the United States.

• Assimilation, which has historically benefited both immi-grants and the nation as a whole, must be encouraged.

• Immigration must not be allowed to displace American work-ers

• U.S. immigration policy should not discriminate for oragainst persons of a particular race, religion, culture, or na-tional origin

We work toward these goals through programs of research, ed-ucation, community outreach, and public policy advocacy. Wecould not do it without you.

FAIR will participate in the Combined Federal Campaign againthis fall. I hope we will have your continued support!

A Heartfelt ank You...