Representative Tom Tancredo (R-CO), sent a letter today about regulations issued by the Department Of Treasury regarding section 326 of the Patriot Act, to the US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. asking him to reconsider the 2003 policy which allows financial institutions such as Bank of America to accept the Matricula Consular as a form of identification.
“This is particularly troubling given that the intent of this section of the Patriot Act was to help prevent money laundering, yet FBI testimony makes it clear that these regulations would actually have the opposite effect.” Said Tancredo, "Tancredo pointed out that most adults who do not have a security number or driver's license are in this country illegally and that the implication of allowing institutions such as Bank of America to accept Matricula Consular card, would open up the financial system to exportation by illegal aliens and terrorist.
This is what the US Patriot Act was designed to prevent and what the FBI has described as a "perfect breeder document for establishing a false identity."
In 2003, an FBI official told Congress, “Federal officials have discovered individuals from many different countries in possession of the [cards]… at least one individual of Middle Eastern descent has also been arrested in possession of [a card]. The ability of foreign nationals to use the [cards] to create a well-documented, but fictitious, identity in the provides an opportunity for terrorists to move freely within the without triggering name-based watch lists that are disseminated to local police officers. It also allows them to board planes without revealing their true identity. All of these threats are in addition to the transfer of terrorist funds.”
additionally, when banks such as Bank of America, who offer loans to high risk groups such as illegal aliens risk bankruptcy for such a move, who is going to bail them out?
Please don't say "we are."
7 comments:
With ICE decending on many businesses hiring illegal workers, how is Bank of America getting away with this? I worry about what happens when the illegal is deported. The bank will not take it in the shorts, instead they will pass the cost along to everyone else.
Unfortunately we are. It's hard to garnish someone who doesn't have legal wages and probably didn't give you their real name.
Corporations have a bottom line that they are very protective of and they have shareholders to answer to. I would like to know if the shareholders agree with the Bank's decision. Some how I doubt it.
An angle that I've rarely heard mentioned ... what about the poor saps whose SSN has been hijacked? That person may initially be saddled with the responsibility for getting the debt out of his/her name that they never incurred in the first place. Not only do they have to try to clear their financial "name", they may have to spend hours and hours of uncompensated time away from work, and their personal finances to get it done. Then you have the unscrupulous "collection agencies" that like to buy old debtor lists, even with names of people have discharged their debts, who may be harassed all over again.
But the big banks don't care about that. They just want to rake in the bucks they can while they can.
Just for the record, Summit Bank *does not* accept the matricula consular as identification for opening a bank account. I spoke with one of their representatives, who said that they researched the issue (of accepting the cards) thoroughly, and decided that it was a very bad idea.
that a good point.
for some reason I was under the impression that falsifying a Social Security was a federal offense.
Another issue is the benefits from Social Security when you retire.
My father, when he used to work for the Department of Justice, had to retire because he had a heart attack. He did not go back to his job however but took a part-time job that was less stressful instead.
When he decided to start collecting Social Security for his retirement, SSA looked at his last job to determine his benefit amount, which turned out to be less than because his last job was part-time making less than his full-time job that he spent years at.
My point, if your Social Security has been hijacked and your work history has been altered... it may affect the amount of your retirement benefits.
I think I mentioned before that I know people getting SS funds that have never paid into it. I hadn't thought about an illegal entry to my account. I have however been hit by an ID theft and didn't know it until I accessed my credit report. Somehow the banks (or creditors) don't do much research when they approve credit, unless of course you are a legal US citizen then they crawl up your ass with a fine toothed comb.....what is up with THAT?
I thought SS benefits were cumulative, not like unemployemnt. Retirement is supposed to include everything you paid in. Robin's dad got the shaft.
That's good enough for me.
Tom Tancredo for President!
Post a Comment