Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Military Members Subject To Government Job Discrimination

February 21, 2012 by  

Military Members Subject To Government Job Discrimination

According to a new report by The Washington Post, the Federal government is the biggest offender when it comes to penalizing members of the armed forces who have to miss work because of military obligations.

Though it is against Federal law for employers to penalize service members because of their military service, government agencies have withdrawn job offers from service members who could not finish their military commitments quickly enough and has fired some for absences.

According to the article, in fiscal 2011 more than 18 percent of complaints about employer discrimination against service members involved the Federal government. About 14 percent of Guard members are also employed by Federal agencies, and a quarter of all Federal employees are veterans.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Military Members Subject To Government Job Discrimination”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • eddie47d

    Hey some of you are the ones who wanted budget cuts within the Federal government.Since there are fewer jobs now within some of their agencies someone will not be hired. Guess who that will be? In order to handle the influx of returning veterans I would say new jobs will have to be opened up yet you won’t let that happen. Sorry Vets your on your own.

    • Joe H

      Not really eddie, all they have to do is just get rid of the “good ol’ boy” attitude of ALL the pols and their cohorts!!

    • Steve Tanner

      eddie47d:

      I cannot speak for anyone by myself, but after six years active Duty (US Army, CW-2, 1974 – 1980)I returned to “the World” and never again sought employment by my Government. I’ve made a good life for my Family and myself. The US (Federal) Government for the most part could drop dead tomorrow and I would not miss them. I have VERY little empathy for anyone complaining they cannot find employment with “the Government”. There are other and better opportunities out there – sucking off the “Big Green Tit” isn’t my idea of a good Career choice, at least in terms of what is good for MY Country.

  • Kris

    Isn’t it considered “discrimination,” to dismiss or fire an employee who has come back from military service?

    • Sirian

      Yes, that is so, but here’s the problem. . . proof of said discrimination. Once you get into that area the litigation what follows can and unfortunately will be way to expensive, take an extended amount of time and in the end the veteran doesn’t fair to well overall. You have to keep in mind that word of such discrimination suits travels the grape vine at light speed.

      • 45caliber

        Sirian:

        Sadly, you are right. Just the fact that someone might file a discrimination charge will cause the government to discriminate against them.

      • Sirian

        45caliber,
        True, unfortunately true. Does it $sis me off – you bet!!

  • Sirian

    This is nothing new really. The same problems have existed for a very long time. Having worked with the Oklahoma Employment Commission for several years as a Veterans Rep. I know this problem first hand. It is not unusual that veterans that are getting back from being deployed and risking their lives 24/7 for all of our well being and safety aren’t always getting their jobs back. It too isn’t out of the ordinary that they are getting a lower level job instead of what they had before. Why? Due to their employer having to fill that position with someone that is qualified from either experience and or other reasons required. Again, nothing new, simply not right that it has been this way for years.

  • http://httpaol.com sean murrey ILLInio

    just like obummer screwing over the troops.

    • WoundedKnee

      ” Just Like Obummer Screwing Over The Troops ”

      ‘ Aint It The Truth, Aint It The Truth ‘

      Good for ” Nothing ????? “

    • Joe H

      Sean Murry and Wounded knee,
      Nah!! don’t you remember Odumberer saying how much he was FOR the troops??? Seems it was right AFTER the news announced that the troops were supporting R. Paul in record numbers!! Coincidence right??

  • Deerinwater

    Well , this is not good news to hear. But I find it odd that people working for a Federal employer, receiving better pay and better all around conditions and benefits then private sector would want to enlist in the military service if it’s not compulsorily.

    That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

    There is three kinds of people in the military today, career soldiers (life’res) , people that wanted to experience an adventure and be a part of history, and people that needed a job, security and insurance for their family and the educational benefits.

    I would suspect, that would explain the bulk of enlistment roles.

    But I can not say that I’ve ever heard in recent years, when a person with a nice Federal job, has subjected his/her self to the hardship of military life. A life of strict “institutional” behavior, low pay, long term separation without some motivating force they’d prefer not to be made known.

    • 45caliber

      Deer:

      Actually you missed the biggest group in the military today. Those are the patriots that want to defend our country.

      • John Tedford

        I Remember the Experience of applying for work once. The employer was really impresed with my work experience he was going to give me the job. Then he asked me if I was ever in the service and where I was at and what I did. I told him i was in the Army and spent a tour of duty in Vietnam. His attitude changed at once. He called me a baby killer and a druggie, and showed me the door. That was the end of it. I told hin the truth, but i was none of those things. My father told me we were heroes. It wasn’t that way back then.

      • John

        I know plenty of people who are currently serving and who have served in the past. One thing in common that they all seem to have: they did not join the military out of patriotism. They do it for a paycheck, other perks & fringe benefits that they receive.

        The most common reason is lack of other options. No job, no stable place to live, a girlfriend/wife & a baby to take care of, extended family that is unwilling to offer help or no extended family option at all. In other words, they were desperate.

        The second most common reason is getting money for college and/or training in the military which will give them marketable skills in the private sector. I’ve heard from several that military experience / being a veteran also gives them an edge among other job applicants.

        Not once have I ever heard “patriotism” as the reason for someone joining the military.

        The most recent reason I was told by a soldier was that they simply wanted to get away from their mother, which I think really meant just getting away from their childhood home. They did not have the ability to do that on their own. No marketable private sector skills so no way to earn themselves an independent life outside of signing up for the military. IMO, that’s a pretty sad reason to join.

        Of course, none of this includes those who were forced to join through past military drafts. It’s pretty obvious that none of those who were drafted into joining wanted to for any reasons, otherwise they would have done so without being forced.

      • Deerinwater

        “Actually you missed the biggest group in the military today. Those are the patriots that want to defend our country.”

        The career soldier ? I think that maybe some patriotism is a factor in any decision.

        But I never met a fellow soldier where patriotism was the override force. Not in the war I fought. WWl , WWll ? probably so.

        My reasons for joining up were simple enough. My marriage had been a failure, I was 18 with a child and pretty depressed and confused about the grown up world. I’d worked the 500 lb.Bomb line clocking 78 hours a week operating a 5L Gisholt turret lath and then worked a year at Chicago Phuematic, cutting Aeo Space parts and helicopter transmission parts, I didn’t have time for a wife and wasn’t sure what to do with her. I was confused and restless.,while the draft was now on my heels.

        Father had served with the 2nd Armor and I seen enlistment a right of passage I suppose. But kicking a Bunch of under fed little people around for my country never entered into it for me. ~ It’s a damn wonder I make it back, since I joined for so many selfish reasons.

        We grew up early back then, compared to today. The old man was forcing you out of the nest at 11, ~ by 14 I’d had a belly full, there was no pleasing, he was trying to lighten his load, I understand that now, I’d left sooner if I could.

    • 101stRECON68

      A lot of people are in the Reserves or National Guard because of the extra pay and educational benefits. In addition, there are some government jobs that require one to be an active member in the National Guard. During normal times of peace, that translates to a good paying government job and additional pay from the National Guard each month. However, since the beginnings of the never ending Bush wars, the constant rotations back and forth have taken a toll on these volunteer forces as well as their employers. Listen, I can’t stand Obamas politics and what the politicians overall are doing to this country. But I think it should be absolutely illegal for ANY President to have the power to commit our troops anywhere without a WAR being declared by Congress. Once that war IS declared, every effort should be made to win it as quickly as possible.

      • John

        I agree 100%.

        If our government is going to send Americans into harms way the least they should do is have enough integrity to abide by their oaths of office to our Constitution by Congress declaring war.

        Without a declaration of war by Congress it means the war is unconstitutional & therefore illegal under our own law.

        We would end up in far fewer wars if more than a small percentage of soldiers understood this part of our law.

        Soldiers who are risking their lives are doing so while at the same time violating the oath they took to the Constitution, to uphold, defend and protect it. Add to that provisions in the UCMJ which state that each soldier has a duty to disobey orders that they understand to be unlawful. Going to war without a declaration of war by Congress is unlawful, yet soldiers still willingly comply with those orders.

        We would all be better off if those who are required to swear an oath to our Constitution actually understood it and obeyed it.

    • Old HiLLBiLLy

      As a 100% service connected disabled Vietnam veteran and an old Marine Corps drill instructor, I think you have totally failed to even faintly understand the mindset of the military.

      It isn’t a job or an adventure, it’s a calling.

      It’s a willingness to put yourself on the line for something greater than yourself.

      If someone isn’t willing to take a stand, to put themselves in the gapping holes, then the unknowing, uncaring, self absorbed, dingleberries will run around with their little blue tooth unaware that there is a world of danger just past the end of their own nose.

      If you can read……………. Thank a teacher.
      If you can read ENGLISH………………. Thank a Marine.

      Don’t worry, there will PROBABLY always be a few patriots who are willing to fight and die to protect you, your family, your freedom and your constitutional rights.

      • 45caliber

        Old:

        The real problem is, like Deer, the libs simply cannot understand patriotism and the willingness to defend others. To them, it is all about self – which means they think the young men and women are joining for money or adventure or …

      • Deerinwater

        Maybe you are right 45, but those people were no a threat to America. It was a political war and you know it. I didn’t run to Canada but helped kill men, women a children by the hundreds with 500 lb bombs and then I when over there and killed some more, so exactly what do you expect of me (offensive word removed)?

        At that point in my life, I had no political opinions, I was made a killer, I killed people, Richard Nixon was my Commander and Chief and if he said you needed to die, I was there to see it done by whatever means available. It wasn’t complicated. So enough of your (offensive word removed) labels and your high and mighty bull 4hit attitude. I was Stupid and you were too, ugh? Thing is , you’re still stupid, with your pontificating drivel about “patriotism”. So don’t lay that crap at my door step.
        People are just as dead regard of the reason. ~ Just pick one! He moved! They ran. Wrong place, wrong time.

        It was a war that didn’t need to be fought! I read the soldiers manual, You and I were there ” to secure the peace of a free and public election.” You still got yours? well, that didn’t work out so well, did it?

        Wars need to be “just wars” and need to be declared by the elected Representative of the people that make up these United States of America. If you send people off to kill people or be killed in the effort. Wars, need to be funded or there need to be beneficial gains seen from defeated nations. There needs to be Booty of war. These foreign wars over just “IDEAS” offered by some old fart that can’t bend over to tie his shoes is (offensive word removed).

        I’m am a much older and wiser man now and sending young men and women off to fight and die needlessly I take great exception to. If it means that you are I have to disagree and call each other name, that the least I can do for these young people and my country. For it’s people like you 45, that in the name of Patriotism is no more then a butt wipe for an old man full of greed and pockets full of loot that holds sway over media and elected Representative of our nation.

        I’m doing my “patriot duty” standing up to (offensive word removed) like you at every opportunity and speaking out and telling people what you and I’ve seen and done in the guise, of patriotism, freedom , liberty and country.

    • Joe H

      deermakingwater,
      you mistakingly combined lifers and carreer men. They are NOT the same. A lifer is someone that stays in because he can’t make it outside and can slack off in the service. A carreer man is a soldier that serves proudly and could make it ANYWHERE but chooses to stay in the service to try to limit the number of unnecessary deaths due to the lifers and pols involved in wars!!

      • Deerinwater

        Right! and needless to say, their numbers are few, especially where the rubber meets the road.

        and I don’t twist your handle, It’s “Longshanks Deerinwater” if you don’t mind, or you can just call me Deer.

    • tome

      I was a Viet Nam Vet. Came back in 1965. Went to my old job and was called a baby killerI kicked me off the place. I was drafted. So not by choice! As far as I know I never seen a baby killed. (can not say it never happened) Never fought it because the Veteran Rep. said was a loosing battle. Took my $300.00 a month for two years and finished College. Applyed for Va. Medical. Never received it for 45 years. Finaly recieved it 2010. Had to use it once since. Took 9 years to get my discharge. Finally Senator Packwood got it for me. Went through the years getting called a baby killer by everyone, I was setting on the porch of a store in 2010 and a car drove up with Florida plates and the guy came up and asked if any of the three of us served in Viet Nam? Told him I was the only one if the three that served in the military and Viet Nam. He said he wanted to thank me. Shook my hand. First time in 45 years was thanked for serving! Have been thanked several times since. Pretty sh–ty return to come home to that after serving. I know several that joined the service to do it because they believed it was the thing to do.

  • 45caliber

    Not a surprise. In fact, I’ve heard lately that the vets being released from the service are being denied jobs too, despite the fact that the vets are supposed to get preference. One young man just released stated that the service is releasing those who reinlisted instead of new members and are refusing to release those who volunteer to be released.

    • John

      It’s kind of ironic that this article is about job discrimination against soldiers while at the same time we have a system which discriminates for soldiers and against the rest of us.

      By that I’m referring to your comment regarding “the fact that the vets are supposed to get preference.”

      Do you realize that when you give one group of people preference over another group that you in fact are discriminating?

      In my opinion, the only people who should get preference are those who are the most qualified for the job.

      I think the only exception to this might be those soldiers who are forced by the government into military service via draft. And even then, why should they be given preference for a job if they are lesser qualified than another person? Don’t the people who pay for those jobs have a right to receive the best quality work for their money? Maybe vets who were drafted should simply receive a bonus equal to twice their compensation. That might be fair.

      Outside of being forced into service via a draft, all other members of the military are there voluntarily and are compensated for doing so. They receive paychecks, bonuses and other fringe benefits. Having legal discrimination in their favor should not be one of those benefits.

      • 45caliber

        There is good discrimination and bad.

        The vets were to get preference for jobs as partial payment for their time in the service. When I went in, back in 1965, I was paid the princely sum of $89 a month. Tell me, can you support a family or pay bills on that? We were told that, because of the low pay, we would get preference for jobs and college as well. Unfortunately, that no longer seems to apply. Yet today, the military still doesn’t truly get paid enough to support a family. Yet those in even the lowest government offices can – and also get almost double what someone in the private industry gets.

        I’d say that they NEED that preference to help even things. They, at least, earned it.

        • John

          I agree that $89 per month in 1965 definitely was not enough. Not fair at all if that was total compensation. If compensation included housing, utilities and other kinds of fringe benefits then that number probably should be a bit more. Most regular jobs do not provide that as part of the financial compensation. Just for comparison, average wages in the US back then were approx $550 per month, so you’re definitely right that $89 would not be enough.

          IMO, legalizing selective job discrimination should not be a part of any type of compensation package. Merit based hiring is the only form of true equality in employment.

          About soldiers not getting paid enough, I think you’re right. I was talking to a friend not long ago who was saying how her husband does not get paid enough as a cop. He gets paid far above the average person, gets a lot of benefits, etc. She said that he risks his life every day so he should get paid much more, over 6 figures, regardless of how broke the government is. I simply asked her, based on her logic, what about all the soldiers who earn significantly less than cops but take way more risk on a more regular basis?

      • Joe H

        45caliber,
        I had it good! When I went in in 1968, I made the exstravigent sum of $98.00 a month!!! WOW!! WOOPIE!! Unfortunately, I left a job making $4.32 an hour and at 17, part time, it wasn’t too bad then!!!

  • Jennifer

    I’ve read where many employers are not hiring veterans of the recent wars because of the negative mental status of the veterans that are being portrayed by the media.

    • Sirian

      What you’ve read is without doubt a cleverly planted reason set up by the MSM, left embedded to the hilt, pundits. This claim is being made by but a few veterans that are having problems, mental or otherwise. We ancient ‘Nam vets had problems too, veterans of any war have memories of experiences that are not welcome to be the holder of. Disregard what the MSM pundits are feeding you Jennifer. Don’t trust anything they feed you anymore – none!

  • s c

    What brand of politics is involved? People who crap on vets who put their military service first shouldn’t get away with it. Perhaps individual states should be able to take over the matter, especially we’re temporarily stuck with a utopian dreamer who wants everything HIS way.
    WHY is this any different than Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution? When Uncle Scam WON’T do his job, then let the STATES do it. Screw Uncle Scam and ALL professional bastard ‘employers’ who use and abuse vets!

    • eddie47d

      How many have you hired SC? How many on here who now own a business have actively sought out veterans and employed them?

      • 45caliber

        eddie:

        I do not and have never had my own business. But I did do some selection for hiring for a company some years ago. One of the things I looked for on any resume was prior military experience – and I gave extra allowance for those who had it.

      • s c

        ‘E,’ if you’re looking for a medal, talk to your W H ‘God.’ If you want some enlightenment, talk to Old HillBilly (above).
        While you’re waiting, take a pill or go back to bed.

  • DH

    What happened to the soldiers and sailors relief act?

    • john p. waldron

      i was drafted in to the army 1967. and when i got out of the army .
      i went to the vets hospital for treatment . they told me i had no benefits .
      and i was told by the military i would have free medical for life and
      if i file a claim . i would need to prove every thing that happened to
      me . this is the way government treats the veterans who served our
      country . this is our congress. they are penalizing veterans

      • Joe H

        john p.,
        Is your health problem service connected? If it is and you need to prove it contact the vets magazines and put in a “looking for” ad most are free if trying to prove a disability. you would be suprised at the number that are solved that way. A person remembers something happening and you didn’t even realize they were there!

    • 45caliber

      DH:

      The government workers didn’t get it so those who served in the military shouldn’t – even though the government workers face no real danger and get twice the pay.

  • Glen

    This is just one example of job discrimination. I have witnessed where agencies, instead of posting jobs that veterans can apply for and get their preference as veterans, instead post the jobs as “Merit Promotion” announcements which essentially means that there is no veteran preference. This is the overwhelming method of filling vacancies. The VA and the DOD are among the worst perpetrators of this approach. Many jobs are only open to current VA employees – veterans cannot apply. I hope veterans will contact their Members of Congress and ask them to do the following: ask VA facilities and military activities in their district to post all jobs as DEU so that veterans preference can be applied or provide the Member of Congress a written explanation for each non-DEU announcement the reason why it is not being posted that way. This will not guarantee the veteran the job but it will give them the preference that they are supposed to get by law at the 2 agencies that should care about them. Members of Congress should also be asked to amend the law, requiring the DEU approach for the VA and the DOD.

    • 45caliber

      Glen:

      Many of the government workers at all levels dislike the military. They feel that the military is getting too much of the attention. After all, the government workers also work for the government just like the military does, so why should the military get paid attention as heros? It just isn’t fair! It is one of the reasons the government workers insist on getting more money than the military does. After all, they are the ones who turns out the work, right?

  • Joel

    Except for egregious disciplinary notes to my service record, I noticed that my DD-214 lacked any mention of my awards; my file lacked any mention of my commendations; and I had an unexplained code listed on my DD-214 that prevented me from re-enlistment in any branch of the service, even though I was honorably discharged. I tell this only to explain that when someone wants to screw you over while employed in the federal government, they can and they will. I grieve for those who return home to find their families torn, their jobs non-existent, and damn little help available in the form of the VA. This is no way to treat our heroes, and its going to bite the government in the ass.

  • Glen

    Joel,

    Don’t know how long you’ve been out or what might have happened, but you can always petition the military for a correction of your DD 214. That code probably doesn’t affect your ability to get a civilian job but you may want to get the record corrected just the same. In the Army, the activity was called the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records. I used the process to petition on behalf of my father in law to get his awards added from the Korean War.

    • Joe H

      Glen,
      Mine doesn’t list my Air Medal nor my second Army accomendation medal. It doesn’t list the fact that our whole platoon was awarded the vietnameese cross of gallantry but you know what”? I have the papers to prove along with orders so I konw so the hell with the DA!!

  • Bob Marshall

    Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” Henry Kissinger. I wonder how many in Congress and the Obama administration think of our military in this vein.i remember when Bush once promised in one of his speeches before the Gulf War that their jobs would be there for them when they returned. This was an impossibility and they had to realize this. How many Vietnam and Iraq war vet are living on our streets today?

    • John

      Here’s some food for thought….

      All members of our military swear an oath to our Constitution. So do all elected officials, judges, police, etc.

      The Constitution gives authority only to Congress to determine whether or not we go to war. The way Congress is authorized by our Constitution to send our nation to war is via a declaration of war.

      Do you know when the last declaration of war was? Back in 1942!!!

      Congress has not declared war a single time in nearly 70 years yet we still end up in wars on a regular basis.

      Members of the military also must comply with the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Part of the UCMJ mandates that it is the duty of soldiers to not comply with orders that they understand to be unlawful.

      Wars without declarations of war by Congress are unlawful, because they are unconstitutional.

      Yet, all these soldiers who have sworn oaths to the Constitution still willingly participate in these wars, both in violation of their sworn oaths to the Constitution as well as in violation of the provisions in the UCMJ to disobey unlawful/unconstitutional orders.

      It doesn’t take all that much to understand our Constitution or the UCMJ provision on disobeying unlawful orders.

      So, then, why do soldiers still willingly violate their oaths to the Constitution? Why do they not disobey when they should know that wars must be declared by Congress in order for them to be legal under our law?

      Could it be that Kissinger was right about them being dumb & stupid? I hate the idea of that, but what other explanation could there be? Are they just afraid of standing behind their oaths to our Constitution? Are they afraid to disobey unconstitutional (meaning unlawful) orders? If the members of our military simply took the time to read the Constitution and the little extra effort to understand it then we would not be in all the wars that we end up in, because they would be compelled via their oath to our Constitution and the UCMJ to not comply. Yet, nearly every one of them complies and are used by the government in the ways that Kissinger suggested.

      • 45caliber

        John:

        Apparently you missed the Congressional vote to go to war with terrorists and to go to war with Iraq. Even many of your heros on the liberal side of Congress voted for those.

        • John

          That’s incorrect. You have your facts wrong.

          There has not been a declaration of war by Congress since June 5, 1942.

          You should verify that fact for yourself. I was in the same shoes a few years ago, I refused to believe it when I heard that claim until I verified it myself. It was a big wake-up to what unconstitutional things our government has been up to.

          The legislation you are referring to are absolutely not declarations of war. That means both the legislation is unconstitutional as well as the wars that Congress did not declare.

          Our Constitution does authorize the government to take our nation to war by means of a declaration of war by Congress. ONLY Congress is constitutionally authorized to do this. Just a quick read of our Constitution confirms this as indisputable fact. (Article I Section 8 Clause 11, in case you want to look it up to see for yourself.)

          The Constitution does not authorize the government to use our military to attack any nation it wants simply whenever they want. It authorizes war ONLY when declared by Congress.

      • Joe H

        45caliber,
        I think if you check a little closer, you will find that Iraq was a police action that had the approval of congress but it was never a full declared war!

  • http://personallibertydigest gottaplenty

    Just a bunch of dumb animals. I for one must agree . For even going to their war till the Great leaders get up front and lead. Leading isnt flying from one golf course to another on AF 1 having the worst of the kind handing down orders to his czars for you to follow.And then in order to not have disorder in the job scene ,we can just hire more immigrants, legal or not to keep it running smoothly, while the top brain is creating more jobs… As if he knows what job means. There is a lot to be desired in the military from what it is supposed to be.. I definately remember from when i served in the Marine(corps) than what it has become with this idiot in chief….

    • Joe H

      Gottaplenty,
      There is where the problem lies. IKE deported the illegal immigrants to make room for the returning troops, Odumberer offers MORE illegal immigrants JOBS! He cares NOT for the troops!!

      • Deerinwater

        Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, noted Obama’s remarks Wednesday, saying he’s “frustrated about the administration’s deceptive marketing tactics in claiming that they have deported more undocumented people than ever before.”

        The administration is “playing a double game,” argued Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors tighter immigration restrictions. “They’re telling (pro-immigration) advocacy groups that they’re focusing on the worst of the worst” by committing more resources to the most dangerous undocumented immigrants.

        “But they’re telling the broader public they’ve achieved record levels of deportations. It’s a clever spin.”

        So what are the facts? Nearly 400,000 individuals were removed from the country in fiscal year 2011, which ended September 30, according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. ICE Director John Morton trumpeted the news, calling it the result of “smart and effective immigration enforcement” that depends on “setting clear priorities for removal and executing on those priorities.”

        The 396,906 figure is indeed a record — but not by much. A total of 392,862 people were deported in 2010 — a difference of little more than 1%, according to ICE. Almost 390,000 people were deported the year before that.

        Significantly larger increases in the total number of deportations occurred during George W. Bush’s administration. Fewer than 120,000 people were deported in 2001, when Bush took office.

      • Deerinwater

        The record number of deportations under the Obama administration has left a “wake of devastation in Latino communities across the nation,” Joanne Lin, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. “These record-breaking deportation numbers come at a time when illegal immigration rates have plummeted, the undocumented population has decreased substantially and violent crime rates are at their lowest levels in 40 years. Our country can no longer afford to pay for uncontrolled, unwarranted DHS spending, at the cost to U.S. taxpayers.”

        Some House Republicans have criticized Obama for issuing guidelines that encourage immigration officials to defer the deportations of individuals who are pursuing an education or have strong family ties in the U.S., among other factors. They say the guidelines amount to selectively enforcing the law.

        The White House has maintained that Obama favors both a secure border and reforms to offer a path to legal residence for those illegal immigrants who are living in the U.S. but otherwise observing its laws.

        Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano addressed the criticism of the administration during a speech at American University earlier this month.

        “Our policies have been simultaneously described as engaging in a mean-spirited effort to blindly deport record numbers of illegal immigrants from the country and alternatively as comprehensive amnesty that ignores our responsibility to enforce the immigration laws; two opposites can’t simultaneously be true,” she said.

        In fiscal year 2011, the Obama administration removed 1,119 immigrants convicted of homicide, 5,848 immigrants convicted of sexual offenses, 44,653 immigrants convicted of drug related crimes and 33,927 immigrants convicted of driving under the influence, according to ICE statistics.

      • Deerinwater

        Obama has deported 1.06 million illegal immigrants through two-and-a-half years in office, Reuters reports. This puts him on pace for more deportations in his first term than George W. Bush’s 1.57 million in eight years.

        However, while 41% of those deported by Bush had criminal records, the proportion has risen slightly to 46% under Obama.

        This comes quickly on the heels of news that the administration would attempt to clear lower-priority immigration cases from the Department of Homeland Security’s 300,000-deep backlog

        Read more: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-21/politics/30183509_1_immigrants-with-criminal-records-unauthorized-immigrant-illegal-immigrants#ixzz1n4R281Gw

      • Joe H

        Deer,
        Let’s face it. if they would just deport them when caught, instead of giving them “rights” that they don’t have as illegal immigrants, there would not be a problem!! Let the local law enforcement arrest them as they used to and have ice come round them up. THEN DEPORT!!!

      • http://personallibertydigest gottaplenty

        your right Joe. I am very aware of the thing you mention. Ike did the operation wetback verry succesfuly.That was my war years, and Ike will always be top shelf as a president. He deported more in one year than all the rest since. I was using a little satire there, not wanting any more to come here.

  • Joe H

    You know, I find it really annoying that the picture above looks like Odumberer in uniform!! He hasn’t even served in the BOYSCOUTS!!!

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.