Posted on 05/31/2007 5:32:19 PM PDT by Checkers
Ditto!
If we look back, beginning in 2003, at actual floor votes in the Senate and the number of Senators acting as co-sponsors of legislation, we see that there is a consistent number of dems and pubs who will support comprehensive reform.
bump
NVDave, we're essentially in "heated agreement" on what to do about illegal immigration. (See one of my previous posts)
And you make a good point about the criminality of the "ID mills".
Still, methinks you apologize a bit too much for the businesses that employ illegals. You suggest that they are innocent victims. Indeed some are, but too many of them know full well that they are hiring illegals -- because they sought them out from the get-go --and they know from the start the documentation they receive is bogus. I stand my ground that these managers and executives are criminals and should do jail time for their crimes.
I agree that businesses are sometimes hamstrung in their attempts to validate status. As both you and I have suggested businesses need to be freed from the double bind of criminal liability for employing illegals on the one hand, and civil rights and tort liability for verifying immigration status on the other hand.
I’m not suggesting that they’re “innocent victims.” I’m pointing out that:
1. The US Government, on the IRS/SSA forms, says that you, the employer, cannot exercise sound judgment and discrimination on what documents you will accept as proof of ability to work. OF COURSE, employers know that there are false ID mills out there.
2. But per the I-9 form: the IRS/SSA tell you that you cannot discriminate in what forms of ID you will accept. Quote:
“Employers CANNOT specify which document(s) they will accept from an employee.”
(caps in the original)
That’s the US government telling the employer that they have to be a willing participant in this “wink-wink” document fraud game. If you’re an employer and someone comes to you with nothing but docs on paper that are easily forged, and is missing the more secure forms of ID (eg, a state driver’s license), what do you think? Well, you’re probably thinking that there’s something fishy going on here. You’re probably thinking the applicant is illegal. You’re probably right.
But Uncle Sammy says you cannot discriminate. Right there on the I-9. Go read it.
Of course, the employer knows full well that they’re hiring illegals. But the government has already told said employer that these illegals are able to be hired!
3. You want to charge these employers with felonies. OK, fine. Go back and re-read what I told you to read: Appendix G of that SSA report. They went through huge employers’ records with high rates of ID discrepancy and they could not bring charges against the employers. Why? Because thanks to the way the law is written, the employers, by following the law, have safe harbor. We’re talking dozens of companies with hundreds of thousands of employees. You’d think in all of that morass, there would have been some ability to bring charges.
No, not so. By following the letter of the law, the employers cannot be charged.
We’re in violent agreement that there is a problem here. We’re in violent agreement that the employers play a large part in this.
Where we differ is that I’m showing that the employment law must be changed if you really want to charge these employers and make it stick. In my version of “immigration reform”, changes to very basic ID and employment eligibility verification would stop 90%+ of the problem and cause the illegals to self-deport, because after my changes, employers COULD be charged with felonies and the felony charges would stick.
>> Where we differ is that I’m showing that the employment law must be changed if you really want to charge these employers and make it stick.
Roger.
Ever hear of the "War on Terror"? NO fence there either.
Build the fence and we can work the rest out then. I'm not unreasonable, but I ain't stupid either. I think we could at some point have a "clearing house" with qualified workers, already background checked, and ready to work. A farmer says he needs 50 pickers, we get them there on time and HE pays. If they go on welfare, they're done! If they break the law, They are done! The ones that want to be citizens, we have ways of doing that without working here for 22 years and breaking all our laws. NO free school, no WIC programs, or free health care. No EIC for kids back in Mexico with fake SS numbers.
The employer PAYS all their costs. If you think $10 an hr for a carpenter is cheap, then pay the emergency room bill when he saws his finger off. If the Mexican feels this is too strict, GO HOME!. If you want your 4 kids to go to our school, then pay the rate everyone else pays for them to go, OR LEAVE THEM AT HOME!
Like I said, I'm reasonable and can work out a bill, but not with open borders and employers getting virtual slave labor. For the life of me, I can't understand unions backing this crap. They have lost laborers, carpenters, bricklayers, almost every category of worker there is, and they want more. Somehow, they believe they all pick fruit or wash dishes or something. When I was first married, I could support my family with carpentry or bricklaying. These were desirable skills to have. Try it today on $10-$15 an hour.
It takes 3 months to get that and 8 months to get the green card after spending $3-5000 on a lawyer to run papers around. President Bush should have talked to these folks. They are raving mad about this. And they have a lot of money and property here and own businesses. Just ask the legal immigrant around you if they feel insulted. Just ask.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.