Did Pres. Bush sign add-on legislation to give illegal aliens full social security benefits after 18 months?

Question

I believe that when a President signs legislation, he may add on additional law which has not been previously approved by Congress. President Bush may have done just this and approved social security benefits for illegal immigrants who have performed 18 months of covered social security employment whereas Americans must have 40 quarters (10 years) of covered employment before they are eligible for full benefits. This is in accordance with a deal he made with Vicente Fox.

Answer 1

yes, he did :http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20070105/bs_ibd_ibd/200714issues01

Answer 2

This would only be for the illegals that may be granted amnesty.It is not signed yet,he cant "add on"" anything to a bill.

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1813

THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 4, 2007

"To get Social Security benefits, you do have to be legally in the United States. This agreement does not address in any way immigration, immigration laws or override current law," he said, adding that a 2004 law, the Social Security Protection Act, prevents illegal aliens from getting benefits.

But the group said the 2004 law also states that if those aliens later get legal status -- through an amnesty or some sort of legalization plan such as the one President Bush and the Senate tried to enact last year -- they would be able to collect the benefits based on their time as illegal workers.

The deal has not taken effect because Mr. Bush has not signed it or submitted it to Congress. Once he does, Congress would have 60 days to vote against it or it automatically would become law.

Answer 3

Nobody should be wanting to give ILLEGAL aliens anything, not even jobs. It is time for the silent majority to stand shoulder to shoulder and issue an ultimatum to the powers that be. THE ILLEGALS HAVE TO GO. We, as a nation, can not cope with the many social ills that we currently face such as illiteracy, illigitimacy, homelessness, etc. The Illegals will only worsen these already existing problems. Last but not least, WHAT part of illegal am I failing to understand. If it is OK to disobey immigration laws, then it should be OK to disobey any other laws. And why should I have to learn Spanish or any other language. Americans should establish English as the national language. Some of out citizens have problems with English. What will be happening if they have to learn Spanish? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand the numerous negative ramifications. GOD HELP AMERICA!!!!

Answer 4

Yes he did!! After they have worked for 18 months they can get Social Security.
Its an OUTRAGE!!

WE have to work for 10 YEARS!!!

From flatline's (up^there) link:

Surveys have shown that more Americans believe in the existence of unidentified flying objects than in the promise that they'll ever get back what they've put into the Social Security system. It also is against current law for employers knowingly to hire individuals who are in this country illegally.

So it must be somewhat disconcerting for them to find out that about to become law is an agreement signed on

>>>>>JUNE 29, 2004<<<<<

between the U.S. Commissioner of Social Security and the director general of the Mexican Social Security Institute that allows illegal aliens to collect Social Security benefits if they have as little as 18 months of employment history. U.S. citizens must show 10 years, or 40 quarters of job history, to collect benefits.

Answer 5

We have social security agreements with Canada, Austraila, Unitied Kingdom and no one cared then when it occured, and totalization agreement is just agreement to pay for benefits that were legally worked in United States. They should have number that is equal to what they get in thier home country. Not worth worrying about social security would of been fine if politcans did raid every year for funds. They shoud cut defense, social, instructure spending to put money back in the social security they looted for years. This agreement is a drop compared to the goverment war in Iraq

Answer 6

Social Security is not a welfare program. No person gets Social Security benefits unless he or a worker who is a close relative has paid in to the system. (For example, a widow could get benefits based on the contributions of her husband or a child of a deceased parent who paid into the system could benefits while he is still in school.).

If a person is in the United States illegally, he can be deported; and if he repeatedly enters the U.S. illegally, he can be prosecuted criminally. - but there is no reason to confiscate his paid for pension benefits.

Laws like this proposal are designed to protect people who work in more than one country during their working years and who might otherwise fail to qualify for Social Security benefits from either country. These kinds of laws could could even protect you if you worked outside the United States. Maybe you can't imagine working in Mexico, but suppose you worked for 8 years in the U.S. and then married a Canadian and moved to Canada, where you worked for the rest of your working life. Wouldn't you feel entitled to some kind of prorated benefits from each country when it came time to retire? I don't know if we have a treaty like the one you have complained about with Canada, but we should.

The agreement with Mexico is only intended to benefit people who were formally illegal immigrants who became legal through amnesty (which may never happen) or who became legal in some other way, or were legal in the first place but worked in both countries. - The agreement could be of financial benefit to our government. Suppose a person who is a legal U.S. resident works for 8 years in the U.S. and several years in Mexico and without the agreement would not qualify for benefits from either country when he reaches retirement age. Without the agreement, that person could end up on welfare in the U.S. with no contribution coming in from the Mexican Social Security System.

Prior to 1983, the Social Security was a pay as you go system where the younger generation paid for the retirement of the previous generation. But in 1983, congress recognized that the retirement of the baby boom generation would place an unfair burden on the next (smaller) generation of workers unless changes were made to the system. As a result of the 1983 reforms, the retirement age was scheduled to increase gradually to 67 to account for longer lifespans and social security (FICA) taxes were raised by about 1/3 to build up a real trust fund to help pay for the retirement of the baby boom generation. As a result ,the baby boomers became the first generation to pay for their parents' retirement while providing for their own as well. By one measure, the 1983 reforms have been wildly successful as the trust fund is now predicted to last at least until 2042, at which time most of the baby boomers will be dead. Even then the system will not be bankrupt - It will just have to go back to the pay as you go way of doing things that was in effect prior to 1983. The real problem is that congress has borrowed all the money in the social security trust fund, (over two trillion dollars) - every penny of which came from FICA taxes on the wages of working people and congress has no plan in place to pay it back when it is needed to help fund the retirement of the baby boom generation. Because the baby boom generation has not yet started to retire, this year congress will be able to suck more than 150 billion dollar in new surplus money out of the social security trust fund to spend on other things. Borrowing from the trust fund has masked the true size of the federal budget deficit and has made it easier for President Bush to give tax cuts to the rich. Now he wants to find a way to avoid paying back the trust fund so that he can preserve those tax cuts.

Ilegal aliens are just a distraction from the real issue. Don't be fooled.

Answer 7

He made this agreement with Fox a few years back. It was all a part of the secret little agreements made concerning the NAU. Now their wanting it to pass it with congress. It's a crock and I hope there's some serious outrage.

Answer 8

No, he may NOT add on a law that hasn't been approved.

The social security thing is an agreement he signed with Fox and you need to tell your Senators that you know about it and are mad as hell about it. You can find your senator's email on their web page through a 'contact me' link.

Answer 9

So much misinformation being spread on the internet. Katsulove is a very knowledgeable poster. Hats off to her for posting factual information. I might go so far as to say she is the "gold standard".

Answer 10

if so, there should be a revolution. It makes absolutely no sense at all. I highly doubt there is truth to that. And I don't think presidents can just tack on agendas to bills.