Skip to comments.E-verify News Conference
Posted on 09/21/2011 10:04:13 AM PDT by tedw
Representatives of almost 30 conservative, Tea Party and limited government groups, representing millions, will affirm their opposition to the bill that would make E-Verify mandatory for all workers and businesses, according to Kathryn Serkes of Take Back Washington. Last week, the group launched a media campaign and sent a letter to Congress outlining their concerns.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/21/3927076/e-verify-news-conference-today.html#ixzz1Ybi2lzpE
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
E-verify under attack
I read about this yesterday. I don’t understand their opposition at all.
Until the gov't does their job, someone has to.
This makes no sense at all. Something here stinks.
I don’t buy it.
Not long ago I read that Obama’s SS got rejected by E Verify - related? I wouldn’t put anything past the Kenyan usurper.
I wonder if this has anything to do with someone using E-Verify to find out that Obama’s Social Security Number does not qualify him to work in the USA
Note involvement of Bruce Fein — ex Reagan DOJ appointee — trashed Bush over Patriot Act and Gitmo issues and called for Bush’s impeachment. He is now calling for Obama’s impeachment over the same issues!.
I’d expect Dick Armey and his FreedomWorks “tea party” might be behind this. GOP Texans are a major, major problem for the GOP, the tea party and the country.
Texas has the easiest big business donating to campaigns and Texas is rife with companies that have been making a fortune off of cheap illegal labor—while the rest of us taxpayers pick up the tab for it.
I don’t see FreedomWorks actually listed there, but believe me, this has been a top priority behind Armey’s involvement in this whole movement. There’s likely some backdoor funding or other incentives behind the scenes.
(And no, I’ve no proof at all.)
Everybody on the thread listen up!
The devil is in the details.
There is nothing wrong with E-Verify, although some of these listed opponents are “conservatives” who actually still want cheap labor. That is hypocrisy, but it is not the defect in this bill. Some of the others are libertarians who don’t want government in anything.
The real defect in this bill and the reason it must be defeated, is that the Chamber of Commerce lobbyists who wrote it have hidden deeply inside it a pre-emption clause that would invalidate all state and local laws passed to control illegal immigration because the feds won’t.
If passed, those laws in Arizona, Georgia, Prince William County Virginia, etc., will be voided. Right now, the only controls on illegal immigration are these state and local laws. The Republican Establishment and the Wall Street Journal and the Chamber of Commerce can’t tolerate these local laws interfering with agenda for open borders and cheap labor. And they think they can sell this law as a control on illegal immigration when in effect it is means of stopping existing controls, knowing that the feds will never enforce immigration laws, even this E-Verify attempt.
This law is a lie. It needs to die.
ACLU is against E-verify too.
With friends like this, who needs enemies?
More on EVerify:
Because you don’t understand the REAL reason behind illegal immigration: businesses (large and small) want cheap labor.
And not just cheap labor, but cheap labor they can abuse as they want. If an illegal immigrant is told to clock out after 35 hours, and work an additional 20 hours off the clock, who can they complain to? If an illegal immigrant is told to ignore safety protocals, then is injured on the job, who are they going to complain to? If an illegal immigrant is told to ignore sanitation regulations in a food processing plant, who are they going to complain to? If an illegal immigrant is told to ignore any of a hundred other workplace regulations, who are they going to complain to?
The real driver of illegal immigrations in this country (and why the GOP never does anything about it) is business. Businesses that want cheap labor AND to ignore all kinds of business regulations. Somthing they can do with an employee that is an illegal immigrant, because the illegal immigrant won’t report/complain to the authorities because of a fear of being deported.
E-verify makes it impossible for these businesses to hire illegal immigrants and stock their company with empolyees they can abuse. That’s the reason they oppose e-verify.
there are other ways we can deal with illegals without screwing over the freedoms of everyone else
AttackWatch + e-verify = our worst nightmare
What is the agricultural exemption in this bill?
Yes, Ted, but with Section 6 in place, this bill is an exercise in futility. We support this bill, but not with the Chamber of Commerce and ImmigrationWorksUSA-authored fig leaf Section 6 to stop Arizona, Alabama and others from punishing employers. the lesson of Obama’s amnesty decree is that the Executive branch cannot be trusted to enforce immigration laws in this nation. Bush and Obama both have made them political footballs as the nation’s workers and legitimate businesses have suffered.
Shoot them for a bounty?
It's quite simple. Half the groups are Libertarians, who are idiots on immigration, living in a fantasy world. The other half are fake "tea party" groups who are shills for the Left.
And you have the reason why Democrats are not only doing nothing about it, but actively encouraging more to come in?
Or were you just trolling with canards?
SEC. 6. PREEMPTION.
Section 274A(h)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
(2) PREEMPTION- The provisions of this section preempt any State or local law, ordinance, policy, or rule, including any criminal or civil fine or penalty structure, insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to the hiring, continued employment, or status verification for employment eligibility purposes, of unauthorized aliens.
By the way, it it is also a de facto amnesty for those illegals already hired, if you read the text concerning "continued employment". So anybody already on your rolls is exempted from this law, and don't think employers will not come up with magical papers showing their employees were already hired.
Can you point to the section or sections in the bill where this clause is?
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.