VICTORY!!!! Verification expansion goes to President

S.1685 just passed the U.S. House of Representatives. (The Senate passed it last week.)

The expansion of the workplace verification program from 5 to 50 states is a wonderful step forward in the battle against illegal immigration and for the protection of American workers, their jobs and their wages.

The bill now goes to President Bush for his signature. He has yet to veto a single bill; we can't imagine that this could be his first.

Those of you who are registered in the NumbersUSA Action Network for "Total Activism" have gotten alert after alert on this bill for the last two months. All of you probably remember that in the beginning passage of this bill was an extreme longshot. Only the incredible efforts of all you citizen volunteers made this possible, I can assure you.

[Read more about this bill and the issues it addresses at: http://www.numbersusa.com/hottopic/workplaceverification.htm]

Nothing moves fast. But by December of 2004 (a year from now), every business in America will have a nearly sure-fire way to verify if a new employee is an illegal alien or has the right to work in America.

Most importantly, no business in America will have an excuse for hiring illegals.

As of today, the job of trying to figure out if the ID shown by a new employee is a counterfeit or not is just daunting. That is sometimes a legitimate excuse and sometimes a smokescreen for why so many businesses have illegal aliens working for them. But with the new system, businesses merely have to phone or type through the name, Social Security number or alien ID (for legal alien workers) of the person just hired. The feds then report back within a few days if there is something that doesn't match. This catches invented SS numbers, mismatches between SS number and name, etc. If the new employee can't clear up the discepancy, he/she is to be fired.

But the program is voluntary. The rotten, exploitative, unpatriotic businesses will still tend to keep the illegals or just not participate in the verification system. But polls show -- and our experience indicates -- that most business owners and managers don't really want to hire illegals, especially if they think their competitors aren't hiring them.

Basically, we believe every patriotic, community-loving, legitimate business in America will start using this system. Not using the system will be proof that an enterprise is a shady business.

Once this system is in place, we will be working with others to help citizens find out which businesses in their community are the shady ones not using the verification system so they can shine the public spotlight of shame on them. There is a lot of pressure that folks can put on businesses once everyone has a chance to participate in the system. I can imagine coming up with posters and stickers to attach to business windows, doors, signs, etc. that identify them as an "illegal-alien-friendly business" etc.

Furthermore, once legitimate businesses with half-way decent jobs no longer are available for illegal aliens, there simply won't be enough work to keep 10 million illegal aliens and their families in operation. There is a good chance that the institution of this nationwide system a year from now will lead to at least a slow attrition of illegal aliens voluntarily returning home. However, the effect will be much broader if combined with the full implementation of the visa-tracking bill passed last year and with passage of the CLEAR Act next year.

No one action will resolve the illegal immigration problem. We have to take strong steps forward in incremental fashion. The victory today is one of those very important steps.

The U.S. House considered S. 1685 on the Suspension Calendar (which allows for expedited handling without amendments when time is short and agendas are crowded). This requires not a simple majority to pass but a two-thirds super majority.

When our allies tried to pass the House version (H.R. 2359)the end of October, it got a strong majority (231-170) but not two-thirds.

Today, however, that same House passed the bill on voice vote. That is, there wasn't enough opposition to even call for a roll-call vote!

In October, the House Democratic leadership sent letters around warning of terrible civil rights violations against American workers and of setting up a national ID card system. They were able to persuade all but 24 Democrats to vote against the verification expansion.

Yet, today, there was Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas) as the ranking Democrat on the House immigration panel speaking on the floor and supporting the bill!!

What changed? Well, all of you have been pounding all the Democrats who voted against the bill last month, accusing them of siding with illegal workers and against American workers. You let them know that you are watching. You all also pounded Senate Judiciary Members, urging that the bill move through that committee. That laid important background pressure for our Capitol Hill team to work with Senate staffers to encourage and support work between the parties. In the end, Sen. Kennedy, the ranking Democrat on the Senate immigration panel, backed the bill in exchange for a couple of changes. We still can't quite figure out why he did this except that he has a history of being protective of American workers when direct threats are involved.

The changes that Kennedy requested are minor. One simply requires a government study of the 50-state system as it is being put in place next year. The other keeps state and federal government agencies out of the verification system and requires them to continue using a separate system that already is in place. Although it would have been tidier to have had all the verification in one place, our Capitol Hill team doesn't believe this will result in any more illegal aliens being hired by governments since they already have to verify.

====================================================== WHY TODAY IS SUCH A MILESTONE

After the passage of several improvements in tackling illegal immigration in 1996, not one single positive piece of legislation that would reduce overall legal/illegal immigration numbers was passed 1997-2001.

Our side and our allies defeated a lot of bad legislation, but we couldn't get any improvements through.

Then in 2002, we won big with passage of the visa-tracking bill that primarily will reduce the number of legal tourists and students who overstay their visas and become illegal aliens.

Now in 2003, we have won again by providing the means to remove the majority of America's jobs (after next year) from the reach of all illegal alien workers.

Two important steps in two years. We wish they were much larger steps and that there were more steps, but this is the right direction.

Congress may stay in session another two or three weeks, so we are still in danger of bad things getting through. At this point, though, we have won the two steps forward while totally blocking all amnesties since 2000.

These turning-point victories were possible only because of a constant barrage of citizen pressure on all kinds of immigration issues. And to our movement's highly skilled professionals working on Capitol Hill to "make the sale."

For 8 years, the giant Washington business lobbies fought to prevent a national workplace verification program. There is no indication that the majority of their business members actually opposed the verification. This is just the way that high-priced Washington lobbyists justify their existence. In addition, the Washington leaders of most trade groups tend to be of a much more extreme ideologically1 than their members across the country.

Nonetheless, all of you in all of the citizen action networks have this fall finally beaten the Washington business lobby. That is a spectacular accomplishment. Congratulations. You've also beaten the almost as gigantic leftist-illegal-alien lobby of myriad groups sponsored by the Ford Foundation. You have made this a sad day indeed for these unceasing advocates of illegal immigration. Enjoy and savor.

You wrote, "The problem in that instance is socialism, not immigration. You're going after the wrong enemy."

In this case, I believe strongly they're inextricable. Once the courts upheld granting public education to people here illegally, other social policies were rich chocolate candy to all who came on board. I'm increasingly resentful, for I work long hours every week and do not have the luxury of pushing babies down the street mid-morning and afternoon.

Let's keep fighting socialism together, wherever it exists!

Best regards,
Penny

I'm increasingly resentful, for I work long hours every week and do not have the luxury of pushing babies down the street mid-morning and afternoon.

I'm resentful of of socialists as well, but someone who comes here to work isn't automatically a socialist. Most of our immigrants come here to take fantastic opportunities like mopping the floors at night at Wal-mart, or picking fruit. Those people aren't causing me harm. End the socialism and the immigration is irrelevant.

The entire subject started over ILLEGAL entrants to our country. If people are legally entitled to enter the country and take whatever kind of job they can get, I do not find those people injurious to me. But 8 million additional undocumented people here cause increased road deterioration, overcrowded schools, housing congestion--need I go on about the sapping of our natural resources, too? I return to my original premise--perhaps not on this thread but on another today, namely: When only a handful of states suffer, the rest of the states easily turn their heads because they don't endure what citizens like me endure. Do you live in a neighborhood filled with illegal aliens?

So would you support measures to limit children born to American families? If 8 million additional people living in your neighborhoods, going to schools, and using roads is a problem, why are only immigrants to blame? Afterall, they pay gasoline taxes to support those roads when they buy gas, they pay property taxes to support your schools when they buy or rent propterty.

Restricting immigration was one of King George III's policies that we sent the Brits packing for, you've read the Declaration of Independence, right?

Malthusian cries about 'sapping our natural resources' seem shallow if only aimed at immigrants, and not at the population itself. Imagine if your parents, grandparents, or whomever made the actual trip had arrived and been told, "Sorry, no room, you might crowd my neighborhood, or use the road my taxes paid for." If they arrived when mine did, no one was asking for their papers anyway. To suddenly throw the door closed and say, "Sorry, no more room for the likes of you!" is a mistake.

"So would you support measures to limit children born to American families? If 8 million additional people living in your neighborhoods, going to schools, and using roads is a problem, why are only immigrants to blame? Afterall, they pay gasoline taxes to support those roads when they buy gas, they pay property taxes to support your schools when they buy or rent propterty."

There is a difference. Children born into families don't immediately have an impact on infrastructure like roads and schools. If a baby boom occurs, the future impacts can be planned for. When you bring millions of people into a country in a span of a few years, adults who drive on our already crowded roads, and children of school age needing to attend our overcrowded schools, it overwhelms the system all at once.

With legal immigration, the impact can be used to help calculate the total number of immigrants per year that will not have an adverse effect on infrastructure, resources etc. Illegal immigration by it's nature allows for no such regulation. People who want in, come in. There is also the effect of millions of people willing to work for any amount of money. They undercut the preexisting poor workers ability to make a living by driving down wages and benefits. As for the argument that illegals pay for what they use, with for example property taxes, that is not necessarily true either. Many illegals live with a large number of people in one house, so they can afford a place to live. When you have 10 or 15 or 20 people in one home they are not paying a tax for each family or group in the home, they are paying as if only one family lived there.

As for federal taxes since it's usually the case that illegals work the lowest paying jobs, they are refunded all federal withholding tax, and if they can get EIC many get back money that they never paid (redistribution of wealth). Consider too, that many illegals work under the table and have no taxes withheld at all.

The list goes on and on, if you are interested check out the statistics and articles on www.fairus.org, or www.numbersusa.com. They have much valuable information on the subject.

With legal immigration, the impact can be used to help calculate the total number of immigrants per year that will not have an adverse effect on infrastructure, resources etc.

You have more faith in central planning than I do.

Illegal immigration by it's nature allows for no such regulation. People who want in, come in.

Which leaves me wondering how the States grapple with interstate immigration, since they have no control over it.

As for the argument that illegals pay for what they use, with for example property taxes, that is not necessarily true either.

The answer to which is to remove socialism, and make them pay for what they use.

Consider too, that many illegals work under the table and have no taxes withheld at all.

I have no problem with that, the more the better. One thing they don't need more of in D.C. is money.

At first, I thought perhaps I was replying to someone with intellectual, rational capabilities. Please do excuse my haste; please do not bother me with your illogical drivel again. Penny

I always wondered how the informants in East Germany felt when the government opened up the Stasi files and let people see what 'crimes' their neighbors reported them for to the government.

Before working to implement a level of police state you feel will secure what you want, keep in mind how that police state could be used against you should you lose the handle to power.

Its is COMPLETLY Voluntary act. Employers are under zero obligation to participate.

S. 1685, the Basic Pilot Extension Act of 2003, was signed by President Bush on December 3, 2003.

It will extend for five years the workplace employment eligibility authorization pilot programs created in 1996. It will also expand the pilot programs from the original five states to all 50 states. Thus, all employers in the United States will have the option of participating, although the program would remain voluntary. Bush has been as successful at securing our border with Mexico as Clinton has.

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.