As immoral as the concept of amnesty for illegals is in the minds of most Americans, Congress is poised to deliver economic stimulus cash into the hands of illegal aliens. Have vote hungry liberal politicians lost their minds?

According to Fox News, "The $146 billion stimulus package intended to jolt the economy by giving taxpayers rebates up to $1,200 includes cash returns for illegal immigrants who pay taxes.

Under the plan passed by the House, illegal immigrants who qualify as “resident aliens” and earned a minimum of $3,000 would be eligible for rebates of between $300-$600.

Only those illegals who have been assigned an Individual Tax Identification Number (TIN) that allows them to file income taxes would be eligible. The basic issue comes down to how the IRS has defined "resident aliens". The IRS defines a resident alien as somone who satifies one of two tests. The "green card" test is used for individuals who are in the United States legally. The problem is with the "substantial presence" test which defines a resident alien as someone who spend a “substantial” amount of time in the U.S. and have not been deported -- illegal aliens.  The Center for Immigration Studies issued a white paper entitled "Giving Cover to Illegal Aliens" in 2002 discussing how the IRS is undermining US immigration law by issuing Individual Tax Identification Numbers to illegal aliens. 

Tom Tancredo picked up on it here and here. The Politico has picked up on it here. Now some politicians are running around like their hair is on fire trying to figure out "how did THIS happen?" News flash to the politicians... It is called the law of unintended consequences.

You can weigh-in on the issue by contacting your U.S. Senators and asking them to be sure not to adopt the House version of the stimulus package.

This afternoon Governor Tim Pawlenty held a press conference detailing his vision for immigration reform and enforcement in Minnesota.  Appearing with Department of Public Safety Commissioner and Minnesota Homeland Security Chief Michael Campion, Pawlenty issued four Executive Orders for immediate implementation and five legislative proposals to be acted upon as soon as the legislature is called to order in February.

This is arguably the boldest exertion of executive power by Governor Pawlenty in recent memory.  His vision for immigration reform was met with fierce opposition from liberal reporters and an incensed hispanic legislator, Patricia Torres-Ray (DFL, Minneapolis), who held her own impromptu press conference in the hallway after the Governor's presentation.

Pawlenty issued the following four executive orders with his signature today:

1. Minnesota law enforcement officers will work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to help enforce immigration laws.

2. New state emplyees and contractors doing business with the state will be required to verify citizenship through an Internet-based system operated by the federal governmnet.

3. Department of Public Safety will conduct a review of Minnesota driver license database to catch duplicate photos and examine for possible fraud.

4. Department of Public Safety will coordinate law enforcement summits to coordinate training in targeting criminal activity related to illegal immigration.

The five legislative proposals include prohibition of city "sanctuary" ordinances, strengthened human trafficking laws, enhanced penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, increased penalties for identity theft and establishing the crime of "aggravated forgery" of underlying documents used to obtain legitimate identity documents.

One must wonder how a “reporter” like Rachel Stassen-Berger of the Pioneer Press actually goes about the process of writing a “story” about an organization with which she personally disagrees. Let’s give it a try.

We now appear to have evidence of what most people have suspected for years.  As of December 3, the Star Tribune newspaper had published just six letters in response to Nick Coleman’s attack piece on Archbishop Nienstedt (besides the Archbishop's formal response).  And four of the six letters were in support of Coleman.  But here's the most revealing fact exposing the newspaper's apparent bias -- NOT ONE of the over 60 letters critical of Coleman's column submitted through our website were published by the newspaper.

Nine states have passed laws allowing illegal immigrants to attend colleges and universities for the same cost as a legal in-state resident.  Are American students being unfairly biased by this arguably "illegal" competition for a coveted slot in class?

California, Illinois, Kansas, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Washington currently offer illegal immigrants in-state tuition rates.  American citizens that attend school outside of the state of their primary residence are, in many cases, required to pay almost twice as much tuition as illegal immigrants.

Under U.S. law, illegal immigrants may not hold any job in the United States.  That raises the question as to why we would offer educational advantages to the very people we prohibit from having a legitimate job in our country.  Students without legal immigrant status continue to be ineligible for federal financial aid, although states are required to provide K-12 public education as a result of a 1982 Supreme Court decision.

The Wall Street Journal raised the possibility that the whole in-state tuition benefit for illegal aliens issue has been nothing more than a vote buying ploy for politicians appealing to hispanic illegals:

"Promoters expect few students to actually take up the benefit. Dropout rates are high and academic scores generally are low among Hispanics, who account for the majority of illegal aliens. "

 In-state tuition for illegal aliens is a violation of Federal Law.  Federal Law Title 8, Chapter 14, Sec. 1623 states:

"an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State... for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit."

In-state tuition for illegals is in fact a form of amnesty masquerading as an incentive for education.

You don’t have to be Catholic to be concerned about the harsh attacks recently levied against John Nienstedt, Coadjutor Archbishop of the Catholic Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis.  For the second time in less than a week, Archbishop John Nienstedt has been publically vilified for simply communicating the Catholic Church’s teaching on human sexuality.  In today’s Minneapolis Star Tribune, Nick Coleman castigated the Archbishop for his recent column in the Catholic Spirit newspaper in which the Archbishop concisely and charitably explained the Catholic Church's teaching regarding a homosexual's obligation to chastity and the Church's obligation to support and encourage such a chaste lifestyle.  Nick Coleman’s criticisms, together with those of other homosexual activists, expose a deep-seated intolerance and hatred some have towards those who hold traditional values regarding human sexuality.  Send a note of thanks to Archbishop Nienstedt for standing-up to the intimidation tactics of homosexual activists.  Send a message to Star Tribune's executive management in response to Nick Coleman's column.

UPDATES: Read Archbishop Nienstedt's response letter to Nick Coleman's column.  Watch a video news story about protestors who gathered at the Catherderal of St. Paul.