So which is it Mr. Greenstein?

An op-ed by Robert Greenstein executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in today's Washington Post goes after an interesting op-ed about the costs of immigration that appeared on Septeber 5th that I missed by Robert Samualson that starts off:
"The government last week released its annual statistical report on poverty and household income. As usual, we -- meaning the public, the media and politicians -- missed a big part of the story. It is this: The stubborn persistence of poverty, at least as measured by the government, is increasingly a problem associated with immigration. As more poor Hispanics enter the country, poverty goes up. This is not complicated, but it is widely ignored."
Just what many of us U.S. taxpayers suspected. But, Greestein attacks Samulson with all sorts of smoke about how well the Latinos are doing economically and how Samualson is wrong. But, when you look at the website Center on Budget Priority and Policy Priorities of which Greestein is executive director you find this quote:
"The current economic expansion has not reached low-income Latinos. Poverty among Latinos did not improve between 2001 (21.4 percent) and 2005 (21.8 percent), the most recent year for which Census data on income and poverty are available. And the poor are poorer: 40 percent of poor Latinos lived below half the poverty line in 2005, up from 38 percent in 2001. "
So on one hand Mr. Greestein attacks Samualson of "misreading poverty data" but, reinforces Samualson's argument on his organizations website. Like many pro illegal immigrant advocates Greenstein seems seems to want to use the facts about poverty both ways. Gotcha! Which is it Mr. Greenstein?