Posted on 12/01/2003 11:28:35 PM PST by farmfriend
How is that possible? Simple. Every time you hire someone you have to check their papers. In the case of a US citizen, it must be a passport. In the case of a foriegner, it must be a greencard plus a federally issued id. In both cases a social security card must also be presented. To eliminate fraud, you require the employer to call into the Department of Homeland Security to verify that the passport or greencard is valid, and you must call into the social security office to make sure the SS card is valid. If the passport, greencard, and/or social security card do not check out against the federal databases, the would-be employee is placed under immediate arrest, charged with document fraud and immigration law violations if he turns out to be an illegal. Failure to cross-check a prospective employee's papers should land an employer 10 years in Federal Prison.
Oh, and another thing. We should not simply deport illegals when we find them. We should make them suffer for their violation of our laws. I say make them do a couple years of hard labor in Federal Prison, and then ship them back to where they came from. I'd prefer to drive them to the border, have them caned or flogged, and then deported, but we've become too squeemish as a nation for such a common-sense solution.
This system will require all citizens to have passports, and some Freepers won't like that. I say tough. You cannot have effective homeland security with 50 different forms of identification floating around. The lack of a standard ID makes forgery by terrorists, invaders, and crooks far too easy. We must rely on passports, which should become the national standard ID to get a job, open a bank account, get on a plane, etc. When you have one standard, it is much easier to minimize forgery and therefore much easier to crack down on crooks, terrorists, and invaders.
Whooo boy, that statement will bring out the Free Trade Cult foaming at the mouth.
"Guest Worker" programs are an abject failure. They simply invite more illegal immigration (gotta bring the wifey and kids up, ya know?). Employers will hire guest workers over citizens because guest workers can't vote to change their conditions.
In modern America, court mandated political redistricting based on ethnicity uses the Census of illegals and guest workers to gerrymander districts that guarantee someone of like ethnicity to be voted into office (unless you have a Caucasian ethnicity such as Polish, German, Italian, etc, which apparently count for nothing).
So the presence of Guest Workers and their (usually) illegal families skew the politics of the country and strip citizens of their civil rights in the form of proportionate representation (why else would the Sanchez sisters be in the Congress of the United States?).
Guest worker programs are a bad, bad idea that benefit only one group: employers who don't want to play the game by the rules.
No more "Guest Worker" programs, ever. America for Americans.
Just the other day, Mr. Ridge signed a consent order allowing 26,000 illegals denied amnesty under the 1986 amnesty to apply for, and become, citizens of the United States. The excuse was that their applications had been "unfairly" denied.
Just think: they will never have to plead guilty to the numerous Federal felonies that they committed over the years (in this particular case, crossing into and out of the country repeatedly when they were told to stay put), document fraud, employment violations, etc etc. A laundry list of crimes for which not only will they never have a record of, or be punished for, but in fact will be rewarded with citizenship in the most powerful and richest country on Earth!
Suffer for the violation of the laws, instead of just deportation? Not only are they not deported, they are given rights and privileges over every American: they have the right to commit crimes and not even have to plead guilty to them, even when the Federal government knows explicitly that they committed the crimes!!
Which means that...once they are citizens, they can become Police Officers, join the Military and get their very own machine gun, fly airplanes with thousands of pounds of jet fuel on board and hundreds of people, you get the drift. No records. No asterisk next to their names. Nothing. Clean as the driven snow.
Think about the "justice" of that.
I see. I was not aware that a US citizen was required to get a passport. Hell, I worked for over 15 years without one, until my job required international travel.
So now we will have passports for our internal commerce. Just like the late and unlamented USSR.
This system will require all citizens to have passports, and some Freepers won't like that. I say tough. You cannot have effective homeland security with 50 different forms of identification floating around.
He who would trade his freedom for security deserves neither.
Your proposal would kill the 10th Amendment for good. Maybe we should repeal a few of those other inconvenient amendments, too.
4th Amendment? Hey, you can't have effective homeland security if people can expect to be left alone without probable cause.
2nd Amendment, Hey, you can't have effective homeland security if the serfs--er, citizens--might be able to employ lethal force against the guardians of the revolutionary vanguard--er, "Committee of State Security."
1st Amendment? You can't have effective homeland security if you allow people to criticize their government undermines the public's trust in their leaders and guardians.
5th Amendment? You can't have effective homeland security if the guardians of of public virtue can't force the serfs to testify to their crimes against the people, or if the serfs can actually demand that they be paid for their property when the needs of the state demand that they forfeit same.
Guilt by association. Most free countries require passports as a standard form of ID.
He who would trade his freedom for security deserves neither.
What freedom am I trading?
Your proposal would kill the 10th Amendment for good.
Nonsense. Immigration enforcement is a Federal jurisdiction, and therefore requiring Federal IDs as verification of lawful immigration status falls within Congress's powers under the elastic clause, strictly constructed. The same logic applies for requiring a Federal ID for a bank account.
Requiring a Federal ID to get on an interstate flight falls within Congressional power under the interstate commerce clause, even as it was strictly constructed before 1937.
Please use quotation marks around the word "free" in that case.
What freedom am I trading?
If I am not actually engaged in interstate commerce, why do I need a federally-mandated form of identification to go about my business?
If you're taking an interstate flight, you are definitely engaging in interstate commerce. Even for intrastate flights, you are using the interstate air traffic control system, and therefore subject to federal regulation under the same clause.
Requiring a Federal ID to open a bank account or take a job is necessary to enforce Federal immigration law, under which one must be a citizen or legal alien to engage in such transactions. Therefore Congress has the power to require Federal IDs for such transactions under the elastic clause. The same clause gives Congress the power to enact the current Federal law that requires some government ID to open an account, though it is the enforcement of Federal tax law that is the aim in this case.
Again I ask you, what freedom are you giving up by having to show a passport to get a job?
The only people who would not tolerate requiring passports for employment are libertarian nutjobs who make up 0.001% of the population.
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.