Immigration Bill may raid the Social Security Trust Fund

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., an opponent of the immigration bill, argued that the legislation relies on $211 billion of Social Security revenue over the next 10 years and that without that money the legislation would cause a $10 billion deficit and that was against the budget rules.

So, Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., proposed Wednesday that the budget rules be waived, a measure that required 60 votes. The Senate voted 68-30 Wednesday to waive existing budget requirements to allow the immigration measure to proceed for a vote later this week that would increase the national deficit unless the Social Security Trust Fund is raided.

The immigration bill requires construction of 700 miles of Southern border fencing, the purchase of more than $3 billion in new technology for border security, and the mandatory hiring of 20,000 more border patrol agents. Those increased border security measures come with a price tag.

Republican critics of the measure stated that the Social Security Trust Fund shouldn’t be used as a slush fund to pay for other projects, since the money will have to be returned to the trust fund at some point.

Why is that Senator? Over $2 Trillion dollars have been taken from the Social Security Trust Fund and replaced by IOUs for decades. The fund is already borrowing the money to pay current benefit obligations.



  1. “Republican critics of the measure stated that the Social Security Trust Fund shouldn’t be used as a slush fund to pay for other projects, since the money will have to be returned to the trust fund at some point.

    Why is that Senator? Over $2 Trillion dollars have been taken from the Social Security Trust Fund and replaced by IOUs for decades. The fund is already borrowing the money to pay current benefit obligations.”

    Clearly these morons haven’t looked at the current issues in illinois.

    I would also wonder why they are building fences. What good are fences when they are using tunnels? This is nothing but false security.

    I also wonder once the border fences are done in the south will we start building fences to the north. What is stopping the canadians from sneaking in? Wont the terrorist just enter the country from the north? Didn’t we just have a plot spoiled up in canada.

    ” The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency has apprehended more suspected terrorists on the nation’s northern border than along its southern counterpart, CBP Commissioner Alan Bersin said Tuesday.

    “In terms of the terrorist threat, it’s commonly accepted that the more significant threat” comes from the U.S.-Canada border, Bersin told a hearing of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security.

    – See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/canadian-border-bigger-terror-threat-mexican-border-says-border-patrol-chief#sthash.sltgkCnv.dpuf

    • Ted Biondo

      You are correct, Joe. Didn’t the 911 terrorists come from the Canadian border?

  2. Brian Opsahl

    Im not sure what works best with protecting our borders…but they should be sealed just like just about every Nation.

    If a fence is the answer fine then build the dam thing already….we need to make sure that entry into our Country is proper and controlled what wrong with that…?

  3. How do other countries seal there borders? It sure isn’t with walls. The countries that have walls are usually countries that have been invaded. Ie Kuwait. Are u worried that Mexico is going to invade? We build fences while they dig tunnels. The plan makes no sense.

    Want to make this country safer. I would suggest ending the war on drugs. That would keep the gangs in Mexico. It would also free up a whole police force to patrol our borders. Instead our solution is to hire more cops. We can’t afford the ones we have now. How can we afford more?

  4. Joe sez: “How can we afford more?”

    For a start, tell Obama to quit taking $100 million vacations. I believe that cost is greater than ALL of Bush 43’s trips to Crawford, combined.

    Repeal, and then replace, ObamaCare. This not only cuts trillions in costs, but will spur the economy (more tax revenues).

    See $343 billion in cuts here: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/10/how-to-cut-343-billion-from-the-federal-budget

    Sounds like a good start.

  5. JRM_CommonSense

    I was under the impression that Social Security was now collecting less than it was paying out and therefore it has to cash in some of those “IOUs” which make up the trust fund in order to completely pay beneficiaries. That would mean that there is no excess income that can be used for other government spending and replaced with “IOUs”.

    If that is the case, how can this statement “Sen. David Vitter, R-La., an opponent of the immigration bill, argued that the legislation relies on $211 billion of Social Security revenue over the next 10 years and that without that money the legislation would cause a $10 billion deficit and that was against the budget rules” possibly be true.

    If there are no excess revenues over expenses in Slocial Security anymore, how can that “revenue” be used for the immigration bill? If there is no excess cash in the fund that can be turned into more “IOUs”, this $211 billion cannot possibly come from Social Security revenue. Maybe that is why the title to this blog says “Immigration Bill MAY raid the Social Security Trust Fund”.

    This word MAY seems to be appearing in most of the “chicken little” proclamations that are appearing lately. I remember seeing it in the “chicken little” proclamations about the PPACA “doctor shortage issues” and “the need to assign doctors to rural areas” last week. Those making the proclamations MAY be trying to scare us or MAY be trying to blow smoke some place.

  6. @ Ted: The 9/11 terrorists entered the U.S. legally, using visas. Two of the terrorists had overstayed their visas. They DID NOT enter through Canada.

    See: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/04/blame-canada/

  7. Brian Opsahl

    Nuss…a 100 million dollar vacation…come on dude…?
    Is this another fox lying news special…?

  8. Carol Foster

    Now JRM,you know common sense isn’t allowed on this blog.
    Shame on you for bringing it to the table.
    Ted and his followers aren’t happy unless the sky is falling where Social Security etc.. is concerned.

  9. Brian Opsahl

    I have found posting on this site can get the blood flowing pretty fast….it’s like a shot of adrenaline sometimes….I have been called more deragatory names on this site in one week than anywhere else in a lifetime…all for just saying my opinion that dissagrees with the host….even being called a Nazi once…nice real nice..

  10. Ahh come on Brian there is good nazis and bad nazis. I’m sure you are one if of the good ones…….it’s easier to hate then to listen and discuss. Don’t let it get to you. It’s like when your kids tell you they hate you. They don’t hate you. They just having a fit of rage.

    Snuss Obama care is going no where. I wouldn’t even waste your time suggesting it gets over turned.

    These codes we punch in need to be easier. Holy macro.

  11. Brian Opsahl

    I got thick enough shin…otherwise you must consider the sourse…somedays it’s the gutter otherdays it’s like watching them jump off a cliffs…

  12. Brian Opsahl


  13. wilson

    Hey Carol you out there? Lots of common sense in CA.
    California man faces 13 years in jail for scribbling anti-bank messages in chalk

    As far as SS, there are no problems, I have read Pat’s blog and he assures us there are no problems.

    “Get ready for another front on the debate over privacy, consumption, and the trade-off between them. Yesterday, Judicial Watch announced that they had received data through a FOIA demand that showed warrantless surveillance on 5 million American consumers — not for national-security reasons, but for the new Consumer Financial Protection Board. The documents show that the controversial panel has contracted out the service of trawling through millions of transactions, emphases in original:”
    via hotair.com

  14. JRM_CommonSense

    Love it when people cannot answer the question they try to change the subject. Can ou spell sophomoric?

  15. I don’t know can ou?

  16. JRM_CommonSense

    Yes! Sophomoric is spelled right. Can’t ou see that! I just can’t spell ou.

  17. Brian Opsahl

    This immigration bill that passed the Senate will never see the light of day from the republicans in the house…why, because they don’t like immigration reform and fear the fact that most could end up voting for Democrats somehow..?

    The 1000 pages of this bill have waterdown any real hope of these folks ever actully using what’s in the bill to become leagles…it’s almost a joke as to what they would have to do to become American citizens…

    The fact that the republicans will not let this come up for a vote will continue to hurt them with the coming elections…just as the 72% majority did for President Obama…!

  18. JRM_CommonSense

    Oh my God! An 1198 page immigration bill? I guess that trumps the 940+ page PPACA. And yet, no one is complaining about the size of this one. How could these Senators possibly have read that whole thing? How could a bill with that many pages be any good?

    • Ted Biondo

      Thanks JRM, now I don’t have to say it. Without a secure border the rest of the pages are so much political posturing.

  19. The question is, how much B.S. is hidden in those 1198 pages? Or, do you follow the Pelosi Doctrine (We have to PASS the bill, to find out what’s IN the bill)?

    • Ted Biondo

      My problem is, Snuss that just like the Senators, I haven’t read the bill and, therefore, don’t know how much BS is in the bill – Republicans or no Republicans. I think it is safe to predict, however, that America will be in the same situation with ILLEGALS in another 10-15 years!

  20. Brian Opsahl

    No,nuss the question on many Hispanics minds will be will republicans bring this up for a vote….and I can tell you the answer is hell no…!!

  21. Jrm the bill has been around since 4/16. I would hope that is enough time to read the bill. It is these people job after all. Not to mention a 1200 page bill is equal to about a 600 page book.

  22. FYI, many LEGAL Hispanic immigrants oppose expanded legalization. See why:

    Americans Of Hispanic Descent Speaking Out Against Illegal Immigration

    Groups pushing for illegal aliens to receive amnesty would try to have you believe that they represent the views of all Hispanics or Latinos in the United States, but there is a large portion of this country who are citizens and legal residents of Hispanic descent that do not agree with them at all. One such group, You Don’t Speak For Me was founded years ago during the push for amnesty in 2006 (Carmen Morales pictured at left).
    Since that time many Americans of Hispanic descent have become very active in the community opposing illegal immigration. They are largely ignored by the media because they don’t fit with their agenda. Most of the media will go to the National Council of La Raza or to some immigration attorney who happens to be of Hispanic descent to provide the “Hispanic view” when it comes to illegal immigration. One and all they spout that they represent the growing 44 million Hispanics in the United States and try to make sure it is understood that all Hispanics vote in a big bloc of voters.

    The truth is that the views on illegal immigration in the Hispanic community are nearly equally split.

    Arizona put forth a ballot proposal in 2004 called “Protect Arizona Now” (Proposition 200) to require photo identification to vote. The proposition also made it punishable by up to four months in jail and a $750 fine if a state or local official failed to report any suspected illegal aliens seeking welfare, medical care or other public benefits.

    At the time Proposition 200 was signed into law Mexico actually threatened to challenge it in international court. That shows you the real intent of those opposed to any laws to crack down on illegal aliens in the United States. Groups saying they represented “all Hispanics” rallied against it and filed suit.

    But there was just one problem with Mexico and the pro illegal alien lobby’s claim that they represented the Hispanic community in filing the lawsuits…
    Prop 200 was passed with 47% of the Hispanic community voting in favor of it.

    Read more at: http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/003375.html

  23. @ Brian: Obama’s Africa Trip Could Cost $100 Million

    According to a confidential internal planning document obtained by The Washington Post, hundreds of Secret Service agents will be dispatched to secure facilities in Senegal, South Africa, and Tanzania, which the first family will visit from June 26 to July 3.

    A Navy aircraft carrier or amphibious ship, with a fully staffed medical trauma center, will be stationed offshore in case of an emergency.

    In addition, military cargo planes will airlift in 56 support vehicles, including 14 limousines and three trucks carrying bulletproof glass to cover the windows of the hotels where the Obamas will stay. And fighter jets will fly in shifts to provide around the clock coverage over the president’s airspace.

    The president and first lady Michelle Obama also had planned to take a Tanzanian safari during the trip, which would have required a special counterassault team to carry sniper rifles in the event of a threat from wild animals, the Post reported, citing the document.

    But the safari was canceled in favor of a trip to Robben Island off the coast of Cape Town, South Africa, where Nelson Mandela was held as a political prisoner, officials told the newspaper.

    Read more at: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-africa-trip-millions/2013/06/14/id/509967

  24. Brian Opsahl

    Nuss unless your willing to present the numbers the last guy spent on his Africa trip….your just nit picking….complain about him (bush) also since he went there first..!

    The first black President visiting Africa is bothering you somehow nuss…? or is it the cost…as I stated bush took more vacations than any President in our history before him…so..?

    If this all you have to complain about Mr.Obama must be doing a hell of a job.

  25. JRM_CommonSense

    We know this immigration bill, no matter how many pages long or who has or has not read it, will never get through the House. Why? Well since Obama has said that this is an important priority for his administration, the Republican party leaders will oppose it and do everything they can to prevent it from getting to the floor. After all, their main priority now is to make sure that Obama doesn’t get a third term as president. It’s about time that they are setting priorities that they can achieve.

    • Ted Biondo

      No JRM, the House will oppose the bill because it is the rule of the laws of this country. And the Constitution limits Obama to two terms, not three, but you knew that. However, you are probably correct on the three terms – Obama never liked following the Constitution anyway, did he?

  26. Brian Opsahl

    Don’t tell-em JRM, they will be getting ready to tell us how everyting in his third term wont work…again..lol

  27. Looks like Bush made two rips to africa and his wife made 5 trips. They also went on the safari that the obamas canceled. Trips to africa are expensive but it sure looks like it is just something presidents do.

  28. Brian Opsahl

    Nuss…so what about those trips…are you still pissed off…?

  29. snuss

    Bush was promoting AIDS awareness on his trips, a cause that should be dear to you Leftist Liberals. “The Messiah” is promoting himself.

    • Ted Biondo

      The blind following of proponents of “The Messiah” regardless of his failings, multiple scandals, outright trampling of our Constitutional rights as citizens – reminds me of the end of George Orwell’s “1984.”

      After Winston’s successful brainwashing and as the bullet is entering his brain from an armed guard, Winston gazes up at Big Brother and thinks,

      “Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark mustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.”

  30. Brian Opsahl

    What matters is the cost nuss…right..!! You only brought up the cost…so now were adding aids..why..? because were talking about Bush now…is that why..because as Joe pointed out your bush went to Africa 2 times and his wife went 5 times…so witch is it nuss…?

  31. Brian whats funny Bush is in Africa right now. Him and Obama be hanging out. Fox news is reporting that Bush has been back to Africa every summer since leaving office. What is that costing us Mr. Snuss?

    By the way snuss Bush spent billions in africa to help combat aids? Are you ok with this? Would you be ok if Obama spent billions in this country to fight say poverty?

  32. Brian Opsahl

    As Pat would say….cue the criketts…!!

    A hint to nuss next time, just do a Romney…lead with your chin

  33. Juice

    One would think the long-term unemployed or those on welfare would be the ones bitching the most- that millions of illegals are here stealing their job opportunites thus leaving them “trapped” in government programs forever. Hmmm.

  34. Brian Opsahl

    Juice….who hires these illegles…thus keeping them here ….?
    The long term un-employed should thank Bush he’s the one who put them there long term…?

    • Ted Biondo

      You are entirely correct Brian. One of the biggest problem with illegals is that someone, usually a rich businessman, who exploits them with low salaries, and every union man in the country ought to worry about that, is not only allowing them to stay in the country, but for some Republicans, one of the reasons they voted for the Senate bill on immigration. The House will rightly oppose the Senate bill, but eventually even enough of them will be convinced by their political contributors to support the measure

      My question is, “How come the union members are allowing this?”

  35. JRM_CommonSense

    One might think that the senators, congressmen, and many other federal and state government employees are against the immigration bill because they fear that these “acceptable” immigrants might end up taking their jobs, thus losing the nice salaries, perks, and expense accounts that they currently enjoy on the taxpayers dime. Let’s build some more fences to make sure they cannot get here.

  36. Brian Opsahl

    And Hispanics will continue to vote for anybody but republicans….correct..72% said yes to Obama and 28% said no to you guys…just sayin

  37. snuss

    @ joe: We have spent TRILLIONS, since the “War on Poverty” was launched. We still have lots of poverty, and lots of rich political cronies. You figure it out.

    See: http://www.familyfacts.org/charts/310/since-the-war-on-poverty-began-in-1964-welfare-spending-has-skyrocketed

  38. snuss

    The “War On Poverty” Has Cost Three Times What All Of America’s Actual Wars Have Cost

    Welfare has grown 19% under President Obama, that’s two and a half times greater than any other welfare increase in the history of the country.

    But remember, Obama wears the “food stamps president” title as a badge of honor.

    Federal and state welfare assistance has grown almost 19 percent under President Barack Obama, according to the conservative Heritage Foundation.

    All in all, there are 79 means-tested federal welfare programs, at a cost approaching $1 trillion annually, said Heritage Senior Research Fellow Robert Rector.

    Rector conducted a comprehensive analysis of spending for government assistance programs, ranging from food, education and childcare programs to housing and medical care.

    Since Fiscal Year 2009, federal and state welfare spending has risen from $779.9 billion to $927.2 billion, an increase of 18.8 percent. That fiscal year includes spending from Oct. 1, 2008 to Sept. 30, 2009.

    According to Rector, the government has spent $19.8 trillion (in inflation-adjusted 2011 dollars) on means-tested welfare since President Lyndon B. Johnson launched the War on Poverty began in the 1960s.

    “In comparison,” he wrote, “the cost of all military wars in U.S. history from the Revolutionary War through the current war in Afghanistan has been $6.98 trillion.”

    “The War on Poverty has cost three times as much as all other wars combined,” he said.

    See more at: http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/the-war-on-poverty-has-cost-three-times-what-all-of-americas-actual-wars-have-cost/

  39. Snuss why does it appear one set of numbers has been inflation adjusted but not the other?

    I’m also not sure what point the article is suppose to be making. I would hope we have spent more on caring for human life then destroying it. You wish it was the other way around?

  40. Brian Opsahl

    Please dont lower yourself into the catagory with nuss and juice with your reference to Jesus or Messiah with Mr.Obama…it is insulting to the worst degree as a Christian to read someone of your intellagence dissrepecting not only Jesus but the President.

    nuss uses the lame excuse about Farrakahn saying this….so meaning he can and that is BS and you know it. Ted it’s insulting please stop..

    nuss I will admit the welfare has gone up under Mr.Obama….now you can admit that bush did so much damage to our economy that him losing almost 8 million jobs as President has indeed rolled down hill on Mr.Obama…?

  41. JRM_CommonSense

    “No JRM, the House will oppose the bill because it is the rule of the laws of this country.” Translation please!

  42. Juice

    I never comment about religion either way. Thanks for the inaccurate bash anyway.

  43. snuss

    Joe, the point is that subsidizing poverty only encourages it. Ben Franklin said it quite well:

    “I am for doing good to the poor, but…I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed…that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

    As to ” bush did so much damage to our economy”, there were quite a few Democrats (including then-Sen. B. Hussein Obama) involved with the sub-prime mortgage scandal. I do fault Pres. Bush for not doing more to strengthen regulations on loan qualifications, to prevent the failure.

  44. Brian Opsahl

    nuss just picked but one thing out of all the thing that went bad on the bush watch to cry that Obama did it to…really nuss…!!

    So then do you also fault him with starting war with Iraq that was brought on by BS intell that was incourged by Cheney/bush to the point of deseption….instead of getting the guy who masterminded the 911 attack…?

    Question nuss did bush hand off a budget surplus like was givin to him…?
    No he handed Mr.Obama the worst economy since the great depression….Correct..!!

  45. SNuss

    A depression created, in large part, by Democrats forcing banks to make sub-prime loans.

    BTW, that ” BS intell ” was widely cited by Slick Willie, and other prominent Democrats, well before Pres. Bush was even elected.

    See: http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

    So tell me, how did Bush force all those Democrats to use that same “BS intell”, before he was even nominated?

  46. SNuss

    More facts to dispel Leftist propaganda:

    National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush

    (CBS News) The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.

    The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

    The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush’s last day in office, which coincided with President Obama’s first day.

    The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.

    Mr. Obama has been quick to blame his predecessor for the soaring Debt, saying Mr. Bush paid for two wars and a Medicare prescription drug program with borrowed funds.

    The federal budget sent to Congress last month by Mr. Obama, projects the National Debt will continue to rise as far as the eye can see. The budget shows the Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion in 2013 and $25.9 trillion in 2022.

    Read more at: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/

  47. Come on snuss the debt is up way more then that. Is your search engine stuck on 2012? If Obama is number 1 who is number 2? How about 3 and 4? I find it interesting that things were going so well on our debt till Ron Ron was elected. 32 years in a row it was headed down. Then look what happened. Both Reagan and daddy bush had debt issues. Clinton paid it down and then bush jr piled the debt up.

    I think with Obama we have to wait till his 2nt term is complete to see how things turn out. We both know what kind of shape we were in when he took over. It would of been bad news for either party if you ask me.

    For what it’s worth people smarter then us don’t blame bush or Obama for the increase in our national debt.

    “What about Obama? Notice how the debt accelerated during Bush’s last two budget years. Obama’s debt is a continuation of that trend and neither Bush nor Obama are directly responsible for that acceleration. It happened because of the recession. Bush set the all-time record by increasing the debt by $1.1 trillion in 100 days between July 30 and Nov 9, 2008—but that had little to do with his choices.

    Recessions cut tax revenues—in this case, dramatically. That accounts for nearly half of the deficit. So blaming Obama for the full deficit is like blaming him for not raising the tax rate to keep tax revenues up. Most of the increased spending is automatic increases in unemployment benefits, food stamps, and social security payments for early retirement. Very little of it is from stimulus spending, and that’s over.”

  48. Brian Opsahl

    Well said Joe,

    nuss the differance between what Clinton did with intell as opposed to what Bush did with it is… a war that cost over 1.3 biliion to the taxpayers and Iraq’s over a 112,000 thousand lives and our Military even more with American blood and injurys that we will pay for into the future….

    The mere fact that Iraq had nothing to do with 911 and Cheney tried to tie them in with a intell picture of a supposed Iraqi intellagent agent was a BS lie that Cheney used to get us to believe his story for war…that is the facts nuss and the history books will speek the truth.

    Clinton never took us into a war on BS intell.
    Bush did….fact

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *