As eight senators huddled behind closed doors to craft a bipartisan and comprehensive immigration-reform bill, South Carolinians began seeing television ads bashing Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham for his involvement. "Who elected Graham to demand amnesty and welfare for millions of illegal aliens?" a faceless voice asked in the February ad paid for by advocacy group NumbersUSA.


Who would get welfare and other benefits under immigration reform is a complicated and still-unanswered question, with Congress far from done debating immigration legislation. But what Americans think of the idea is suddenly much clearer.

According to the latest United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, more than two-thirds of all Americans and nine out of every 10 Republicans oppose making legalized immigrants "eligible for government benefits ... before they become citizens," confirming the issue's potency as one of the main political attacks against immigration reform supporters in 2014.
http://news.yahoo.com/americans-oppose-obamacare-social-security-illegal-immigrants-made-215958056.html
NumbersUSA’s February ad against Graham may have been an early shot, but given how strongly the message tests, it seems sure to crop up again -- assuming attention remains focused on the issue.

Overall, 77 percent of respondents opposed making government benefits available to legalized (but noncitizen) immigrants.

In findings that are sure to feed a core conservative fear about the issue, the idea was broadly unpopular across party, race, and class lines:

Ninety percent of Republicans opposed it, as did 80 percent of independents and 65 percent of Democrats, suggesting the message could appear in general-election advertising as well as in GOP primaries.
Nearly two-thirds of nonwhites stood against the idea, as well as 84 percent of whites.
While college-educated women were the group of whites that most supported extending benefits, 71 percent of them still opposed it.

When asked specifically if legalized immigrants “should be eligible for health care assistance under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, before they become citizens,” the margins narrowed thanks to heightened Democratic, nonwhite, and college-educated support -- but respondents still remained hostile to the idea:

Sixty-nine percent of respondents said no, including 88 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of independents.
Fifty-four percent of Democrats said no, while 43 percent said legalized noncitizens should be Obamacare-eligible.
Among nonwhites, extending access to Obamacare polled exactly the same, while whites opposed it 76-20.

Immigration Reform....



Contains National ID thru eVerify on EVERYONE! Imagine if the the IRS wants to make your life difficult, or any other alphabet agency, they just blackball your ID!

It's not about immigration, it's about more gov't control!

Stupid Libs will try to pass it along with Repulsicons like Graham and McInsane who think of us as eaters and workers that have to be controlled by the likes of them!

The problem with America? The stoopid voters think our gov't still works for us thanks to our controlled media presstitutes!

You can't fix stoopid!

We're screwed!

something like this would have to be decided in an obligatory Referendum by all the Voters in all Cantons(States)
My Government couldn't foist something like this on us!
Maybe time the United States instituted the Automatic Referendum for Items like this,which are too important to be left to a Bunch of Purveyors to Special Interests to decide!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland

Referendums[edit]

Citizens can call constitutional and legislative referendums. Legislative referendums are only possible on laws passed by the legislature; citizens cannot initiate legislation of their own crafting.[6] The electorate, however, has the right to initiate constitutional legislation by popular initiative.[7] For each proposal there is a box on the ballot which the voter has to fill with either a "Yes" or a "No". If there are proposals that contradict each other, there is also a tie-break question: "If both proposals are adopted by the people, which proposal do you favor? (the so-called "subsidiary question" introduced in 1987)
Constitutional Referendums[edit]

Modifications to the constitution are subject to obligatory vote and require a double majority both of the votes and of the states. Such votes are called when the parliament proposes a constitutional modification, or when 100,000 citizens sign a "popular initiative" that clearly states a proposed constitutional change.

The double majority is not only required of the citizens, but of the cantons as well: Each full canton has one vote, but so-called half-cantons (because they were so historically split centuries ago) only have a half vote each. The cantonal vote is determined by a popular vote among the people of that canton; if the majority supports a proposal then the entire canton supports the proposal.

This cantonal vote means that small cantons are represented equally with the larger ones. For example, Basel-Country as a canton has about 256,000 inhabitants, but has only half a cantonal vote (the other "half canton" being Basel-City). On the other hand, the canton of Uri has a full cantonal vote, but only 35,000 inhabitants.

More than 550 referendums have occurred since the constitution of 1848 (legislative or constitutional).[8]WIKI

Mind you,decided by the Citizen-Voters,NOT by the State-Legislatures!