The immigration issue could still muck up Obamacare. And the liberal Congressional Hispanic Caucus might end up supporting bars to illegal aliens from federal health care.

This issue’s fallen relatively silent — compared with attention to the Senate health bill’s loose language on abortion — since Rep. Joe Wilson pointed out illegal alien loopholes in the House Obamacare bill.

In his push to have the Census Bureau count the number of U.S. citizens, Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican, is taking a very parochial approach with his colleagues: Your state could be the one to lose an extra seat in Congress.

Mr. Vitter is holding up one of the 2010 spending bills in the Senate, demanding a vote on his amendment to force the census to add a question about citizenship status to its 2010 questionnaire. He has written letters to the senators from nine states he says would lose seats to states with higher illegal immigrant or noncitizen populations, telling them it's in their interest to support him.

The Obama administration took an overhaul of the country’s immigration laws off its legislative agenda this year, but the prickly issue of public benefits for illegal immigrants has resurfaced in the health care debate.

During the summer recess, members of Congress faced persistent questions from constituents worried that health care changes could leave taxpayers footing medical bills for illegal immigrants. President Obama has not been able to extinguish the doubts despite giving repeated assurances that illegal immigrants would be excluded from any subsidized benefits under proposals before Congress.

But the question of providing emergency care for those in the country illegally is a tricky one. Currently, illegal immigrants can receive health services at hospital emergency rooms. “Hospitals are required by law to assess and stabilize anybody who walks through the emergency-room door," say Richard Coorsh of the Federation of American Hospitals, referring to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act of 1986. Hospitals simply aren't allowed to refuse treatment in emergency situations, regardless of the patient's immigration status. It's part of our social contract, and anything else would be morally unacceptable. Unfortunately for hospitals, though, most illegal immigrants can’t pay for expensive hospital bills (because they don't have health insurance), so the costs associated with their treatment must be written off by hospitals as a loss.

President Barack Obama says giving illegal immigrants insurance is one of the “outrageous myths” about healthcare reform.

“That’s not true. Illegal immigrants would not be covered,” said the president in his weekly address last Saturday.

But in Harris County, the reality is that illegal immigrants do, in fact, receive millions of dollars in government-subsidized healthcare every year.

"Italy's conservative prime minister Silvio Berlusconi has sought to deflect criticism of Italy's harsh immigration policies by stressing potential migrants are welcome in his country. In an interview posted to the US television network CNN's website on Monday, he said immigrants who qualified to come to Italy should be allowed to work and create a better life for themselves and their families.

"We welcome those (immigrants) who have the right to come here. This is what the United States and all normal countries do," Berlusconi told CNN.

"We are absolutely open to those who come to our country with the wish to integrate and to work... we keep an open door to all who are eligible to come to work in Italy or request asylum," Berlusconi said."

"Despite the high unemployment rate, our industry still does not have a reliable workforce and will not until the AgJOBS bill is passed," said Jim Allen, president of the New York Apple Association.

Health care reforms that aim to insure every American won’t provide insurance for illegal immigrants and may not address the cost to state and local governments for providing medical care to this large group of the uninsured, Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus, D-Mt., said Thursday.

“We’re not going to cover undocumented aliens, undocumented workers,” Baucus said. “That’s too politically explosive.”

The May 8 Style article "No Turning Back," on the efforts of Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) to change immigration laws, outlined his strategy, which was "designed to project the most sympathetic image possible" of illegal immigrants by arguing that immigration enforcement separates families.

That strategy ignores the impact on families of failing to enforce our immigration laws. Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who have committed crimes are in state jails for murder, assault, gang activity and drug charges; more than 15 percent of federal inmates are illegal immigrants. Many of these crimes could have been prevented if our immigration laws had been enforced before the crimes occurred.

"Los Angeles, Ventura and San Diego will become the first counties in California to begin checking the immigration status of all inmates booked into jail as part of a national effort to identify and deport more illegal immigrants with criminal records.

Law enforcement officials in the three counties will begin running inmates' fingerprints through federal databases this month to see if they have had any contact with the immigration system. Immigration officials will place holds on those believed to be in the country illegally. Once the inmates have finished serving their sentences, they will be transferred to immigration custody for possible deportation...."

Seventy-three percent (73%) of likely voters agreed that hospitals should be allowed to inquire and collect data about the immigration status of those seeking Emergency Room care without affecting the legal requirement that they must provide emergency care. Just 18% said no. Seventy-seven percent (77%) of the respondents believed that providing health insurance to illegal immigrants will just encourage more illegal immigration. After receiving emergency medical care, if it is determined that an illegal immigrant will require long term follow-up medical care, 47% believed that the person should be deported to his/her home country. 38% believed care should be provided, but time and cost limits should Be established for eventual deportation. Only 8% believed long term care should be provided in the U.S.

Fifty-three percent reported opposition to providing healthcare to undocumented aliens. Forty-six percent felt that current proposals would likely provide coverage to illegal immigrants. Forty-eight percent of liberals and progressives felt that providing healthcare to undocumented immigrants would likely lead to increased healthcare costs. With regard to the President's handling of healthcare reform, the poll revealed that sixty- seven percent of self-identified liberals approve of the President's actions. Seventy-five percent were in support of a public healthcare plan administered by the federal government and forty-nine percent felt the President's plan would result in better overall quality of healthcare services.

Eighty-three percent (83%) of voters nationwide say that people should be required to prove they are a citizen of the United States before receiving government health care subsidies. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 12% disagree and five percent (5%) are not sure.

The desire to limit the benefits to U.S. citizens is found across demographic and partisan lines. It is held by 95% of Republicans, 70% of Democrats and 87% of those not affiliated with either major party. It is favored by nine-out-of-10 conservatives and moderates, along with 56% of those who consider themselves politically liberal. But 32% of liberals hold the opposite view.

Fifty-one percent of Arizona voters say it is more important for Congress to pass immigration reform than health care reform.

By a 65% to 20% margin, Arizona voters believe enforcing the borders is more important than legalizing the status of those already living here. Half of the state’s voters (50%) think it is possible to put an end to illegal immigration, while 34% do not.

A new Rasmussen poll shows that 66% of likely voters believe that the government should improve border enforcement and reduce illegal immigration.  However, only 32% of America's "Political Class" agree.

The poll also shows that 77% of likely voters believe that illegal aliens should not be able to receive driver's licenses and 73% of Americans believe that police officers should automatically check to see if someone is in this country legally when that person is pulled over for a traffic violation. 

In a Washington Post/ABC Poll released just before Barack Obama's inaguration, respondents ranked immigration No. 10 on a list of priorities for the administration. The economy, Iraq War, foreign policy and education were all ranked ahead of immigration. Twenty-one percent said that it was the highest priority, 48 percent said it was high priority, while 29 percent said it was low priority.

When asked about what governments should do to address illegal immigration, 83% of respondents supported stronger border controls, 74% supported cracking down on employers, and 68% supported deportation.

Only 32% of Obama voters considered his support for amnesty as a factor in their decisions to vote for him. 67% said it was either not a factor at all, or they voted for Obama in spite of his stance on amnesty.

60% of voters said reducing illegal immigration and cracking down on employers who hire them is important to them, while only 21% supported "legalizing or creating a pathway to citizenship" for illegal aliens.

57% of voters stated that amnesty would harm American workers and further strain public resources, while only 26% believe amnesty would aid economic recovery and ease public burdens.

Twenty-six of respondents are angry over immigration policy in the United States.

Sixty-two percent say gaining control of the borders is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers.