The irony is that the new bill made it tougher on employers.
We are not in a great position here. If there’s no bill, as Sister Toldjah says, we may be stuck with one in the next Congress with less Republican representation.
It doesn’t mean that we throw in the towel, but it does mean that given the appalling behavior by the right on both sides of the issue that we have to have a better way to approach the problem and talk about the issues.
The left demands grand and large programs. We know these fail because the objectives are too broad.
Find a way to make an enforceable situation.
I will say that there’s a point to be made that by dumping on businesses, the illegals get away with it. Meaning that it’s not the businesses who made the illegals come here. It’s wrong to hire illegal aliens, but some businesses have their hands tied by state laws in what they are allowed to ask and California specifies how many taxpayer name and ID changes an employee gets to get away with.
SaveL-well tell us how did Tony Snow do on Fox this morn?
I have been pretty disappointed in him and his snow-job on this 1348 fiasco. You appear to be highly defensive of Tony and 11348...why so?
This is a mess. My fear is this bill is going to make it all a much bigger mess. Tony tells us over and over that securing the border comes first- but that’s simply not true. The first thing that happens is all the illegal aliens immediately have LEGAL status.
I just shake my head- I don’t trust this administration anymore.
It is as simple as that.
We provide both. We can stop providing both and therefore the incentive to come illegally.
I am an employer. Any new laws should be focused on the employer, housing and providing accurate quick checks of legal status via the Federal government. It is crucial that an employer can run a social security number and know if the person providing is who they say they are. With a online picture ID they could. Then there’s no excuse for not verifying legal status.
Employers that hire illegals increase their profits while everyone else pays for their children's education and medical care (among other costs). The illegals pay in taxes nowhere near those expenses past on to everyone else. Employers that knowingly hire illegals are effectively stealing from everyone else. I have no sympathy for them.
Nonsense. Currently, large sectors of U.S.. business are vulnerable to RICO suits by citizens, due to their shameless conspiracies to hire illegal alien peasant labor.
Amnesty lets them off the hook. For at least 18 months after the signing of this abomination of a bill, there will be no apprehension or deportation of any illegal alien who might be eligible for a Z1 visa. That is the law as written in S. 1348.
You're simply wrong on every point here. Making employers legally responsible when they break the law is NOT dumping on employers. Employers ARE driving illegal immigration...if there weren't an abundance of jobs available by employers willing to ignore and break our laws the largest incentive illegals have for crossing our border would be gone.
No business in America has their hands tied by the state when it comes to hiring illegals. Every employee hired since 1986 has to fill out an I-9 form to prove eligibility to work in the US. Every employee has to file either a W4 or other tax paperwork with the IRS and SS Administration and all of these forms or forms that support them require a valid SS number. If an employee files a false or stolen SS number the employer is promptly notified. Withing days. At that point the employer KNOWS that the employee is not legally eligible to work in the US and the employee should be fired...if he's not the employer is liable for some very serious fines and penalties. Most of which are never levied because we're not enforcing the laws already on the books.
“Find a way to make an enforceable situation.”
Why? The entire problem is no one enforced the last laws, why should anyone believe that a “new” law would be enforced?
No, there already is a standard set forward, the president is not meeting it. What you are suggesting is rather than say a foot is 12 inches, we should cut an inch of or the ruler and say that now a foot is 11 inches.
Which means that the next administration could say that a “Foot is 11 inches we need it to 10 inches” and so on and son.
You guys should really stop trying to parrot this line of defense.
The fact of the matter is that the next congress is free to do anything they want regarding immigration - what this congress passes doesn't matter.
In fact, the most likely course of events if this law should pass is that the next congress would eliminate all of the enforcement benchmarks and add to the "family unification" clauses.
Can we know agree that "pass it now or the next congress will do worse" argument is an fallacy and should be dropped from future discussion?