Posted on 06/10/2007 8:39:55 AM PDT by rface
Senators, working with the White House, have reached a compromise on an immigration bill.
Dubbed the "Grand Bargain," the bill would construct a physical and electronic border barrier, hire 18,000 new border guards, construct huge new detention centers, end "catch and release" and require employers to verify the legality of their employees. After certain benchmarks are met, a guest worker program would be established. Illegal immigrants could apply for four-year renewable work visas. Employers would have to certify that no American workers were available before hiring aliens. Heads of household would have to return to their country of origin to apply for the work visas. A point system for legal immigration would be established that would reward more educated applicants, family members and the ability to speak English. The total cost is not clear, but estimates are in the range of hundreds of billions of dollars.
Opposition to the compromise is emerging from the right and the left. The left objects to the point system and the treatment of family members, and on the right there is massive discontent with the visa provisions, which are being called amnesty.
The White House contends the bill is not amnesty, but many ordinary Republicans disagree. Republican senators are being booed at home by GOP audiences because of their support. The compromise hangs by a slender balance in the Senate and could fail with the adoption of any amendments from either side. It faces even tougher sledding in the House, where anti-amnesty Republicans seem eager to defy the White House; Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi is demanding that the White House produce 60 to 70 Republican votes before she will bring it to the floor.
I think Republicans are correct when they call the bill an amnesty measure. Supporters put flowers behind the pig’s ear, but it still amounts to amnesty. It is also highly complex, does not deal seriously with the root cause of illegal immigration and is massively expensive. The bill does provide political cover for the White House and congressional members of both parties. The bill also provides cover for the many U.S. corporations that knowingly violate the law by employing illegal workers.
The more complex the legislation, the less likely it will succeed. Once passed, it will be up to the federal government to enforce it. That thought does not inspire confidence. Given its high cost and given that it is likely to be unsuccessful in stemming the tide of illegal workers into our economy, I am inclined to oppose it. Having said that, I also believe those senators who worked to achieve the compromise were doing so because they believe this bill, although far from perfect, is an improvement on the status quo. I applaud them and President George W. Bush for their efforts to find a workable solution. They might not have gotten it right, but they all risked political capital to try.
I believe there is a workable and inexpensive solution. The most significant reason illegal immigrants sneak into our country is to work. Jobs here pay more than the jobs at home, and many American employers have expressed a preference for foreign workers instead of domestic ones. The problem is market-driven.
The way to alleviate the problem is go to its root cause: jobs. Prevent employers from hiring illegal immigrants. The way to do that is to establish a civil cause of action that permits a private citizen to sue any employer who hires an illegal alien. Provide for a fine to be paid by the employer to the citizen who brings the lawsuit, and make the employer pay the legal cost of the successful plaintiff. People will be on the lookout for illegal hiring. Lawyers will be eager to bring suits. The government will not have to enact a single regulation or hire a single person. Taxpayers will pay nothing. As soon as the suits start being successful, employers will stop hiring illegal workers. As the jobs evaporate, the flow will stop.
Some will say this is a full employment bill for lawyers. That is true, but so what? Either illegal immigration is a serious problem or it is not. If it is, and if we can arrange for the cost of solving it to be paid by those who profit most from the illegal activity, how are we harmed? As to effectiveness, who wants to argue that the trial lawyers will be less efficient than the federal government? Remember, either the bill now in Congress will pass or it won’t. If it passes, we get the huge cost, the complex regulations and amnesty. If it doesn’t pass, we keep the status quo, which nobody likes. Why not try a simpler, less expensive solution that actually goes to the root of the problem? The question is: Whom do you like less, trial lawyers or illegal aliens?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tribune columnist Chris Kelly is a former Boone County associate circuit judge and state legislator. Reach him at editor@tribmail.com.
My question is, why are we not enforcing the laws that we have on the books already. We do not need more stinking laws, just enforce the ones we already have!
This just a way for congresscritters to justify their cushy jobs & pay , and beni’s...
Employers get the benefit of illegal labor, therefore they are logically the ones to bear the cost of checking the legal status of their employees. This is in fact the case at law right now. Its just that we don’t enforce existing law.
He makes it sound like his proposal is a freebie for taxpayers. In fact, our courts do not need to be further burdened which only costs us all more money.
The solution is quite simple:
Where is your proof you are an American citizen or legal alien?
None?
Get on that bus right there. You are going back right now!
bump
I hear Senator Kyl of Arizona explain this. If I remember right, he said it is impossible to enforce this because it is illegal to hire illegal aliens, but it is illegal for emplyers to check to see if their papers are false or not. A true catch 22. I am not against immigration reform, but I am so cynical of government, that what ever law they pass, will never be enforced. The whole issue will never change.
I agree with you. And I can tell you that the system of making every employer a tax collector has driven millions of entrepreneurs underground courtesy of a ruthless IRS. Not every Jose with a lawnmower is capable of complying with all the redtape. Nor are the individuals who hire nannies, landscapers and day labor. I think employer verification is important, but I think it only applies to about 20% of illegals.
If they're hiring illegal aliens, they've already made criminals out of themselves. They just haven't been caught, tried and convicted yet.
I have been a bookkeeper for most of my life.
The laws are on the books for employers to have to ascertain the status of prospective employees. They must fill out a form called an I-9 and look at documents provided my the applicant.
The biggest problem with that is that the phony parers and cards are VERY good. Some Soc Sec cards I have seen are better than my own, and I know that is legal!!!
The biggest way- IMO- to help the employers is to establish a serious electronic method of fact checking the social security number and other ID documents that are presented.
When I can buy almost anything on a credit card and get the purchase verified in a matter of less than 10 seconds no matter where I go, there is absolutely NO excuse for the Feds to not be able to provide a service for checking at least that number.
The biggest problem , IMO, is that toooooo many people at sections of the Fed Govn’mt just don’t care about doing a good job. When after years of FOIA filings, we find out last year that 436 persons were using the same Soc Sec number, and the Soc Sec Admin had done NOTHING about it, then there is a big problem.
When I was a Payroll Supervisor—30 YEARS AGO— and I would recieve “Notices of Non-Match” regarding soc sec numbers for the egg ranch Mexicans they had hired, it wook 12-18 months for these notices to come to us. By then, these people had drifted on. They KNEW how long it took for these notices to come out. Perhaps for 30 year ago technology that was ok, but not today.
We can send space craft out into the Galaxy, and cannot verify Identification data in a less than 24 hours manner, then we have a great problem.
The total lack of interest on the part of the Federal Government and it’s employees puts the average employer at a total place of vulnurability for a fiscal punishment.
Not fair.
I would like to punish the Congress and the workers at Soc Sec Admin. They just don’t seem to give a s&&&.
By law hospital emergency rooms have to treat...regardless of whether you can pay or not.
Hospitals should be able to ask citizenship status...not so much to deport people....but to collect from their host nation...or US employer who illegally hired
[The question is: Whom do you like less, trial lawyers or illegal aliens?]
Umm... uh...
Hmm. Still thinking.
You mean like those who "want to put the burden of playing tax collector on employers". Sorry, dude, but THAT principle has already been established. So your argument is bogus.
Juan Kyl is just making more excuses. Every employer in this country must obtain documents verifying immigration status on employees as it is. If they do withholding for taxes (which many criminal employers of illegals don't bother with, because it is just a pesky business expense anyway), then the IRS actually does part of the verification job for them because the IRS will tell employers if an SSN turns up fake.
It hasn’t gotten through to all yet, they want no border and there will be no fence.
Way it is and it really sucks.
Those two things are not a part of Gop or Democrat agendas.
Our problem is that both parties, our leaders in government, both want the same result, but infight on how and who gets to run the show. Seems simple.
Just look to the drug laws. The Feds can take your apartment building if a tenant is dealing drugs. You say you didn’t know? Tough, the Feds say its your responsibility.
“Why is it that there are no calls to imprison doctors/hospitals who treat illegals, or teachers/schools that teach their children here illegally?”
Or Government Employees at all levels who provide them benefits, or law enforcement agencies who would rather not do the paperwork when an illegal is stopped/arrested for a violation, or mayors and city councils that give “sanctuary” within their jurisdiction, or the IRS for assigning “TIN” numbers to illegals, or Social Security Administration for not vigorously chasing down rampant social security fraud.....
We may as well be “inclusive” if we want to solve the problem.
The solution is to attack the problem from many different angles:
Exactly. It requires a multi-pronged approach.
Employers AND Government entitlements (including the mortgage guarantees and in-state tuition).
[Why is it that there are no calls to imprison doctors/hospitals who treat illegals, or teachers/schools that teach their children here illegally?]
Because doctors, hospitals, teachers and schools are mandated by law not to refuse service. They’d be imprisoned if they DIDN’T treat/teach them.
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.