[Southack]

"Now you're saying the legalized illegals will turn in their employers, who would comply with the law because they would presumably be subject to penalties [VERIFICATION]."

You have two choices.

Your 2 choices are:

1. Let illegals and their employers remain unregistered and anonymous, or
2. Convince illegals to voluntarily register themselves (and their employers).

I know, I know, you hate those two above options, deny them, and insist upon some magical 3rd way, but those 2 options are all that actually exist.

Once registered, we can verify compliance. That's something that we simply can't do for 8 million anonymous illegals and more than 1 million anonymous illegal employers. The scope of the problem is simply too large (bigger than the roundup in Germany of 6 million during WW2).

Will people comply once they are no longer anonymous? I think, yes.

Will they comply if we continue to allow them to operate anonymously and unregistered? I think, no.

So to me, the obvious answer is to convince those 8 million illegals to voluntarily register themselves and their employers. Once registered, we can enforce compliance through verification.

For everyone else, i.e. those who oppose President Bush's registration/plea bargain plan (you know the ones, those who mischaracterize that plan as being an "amnesty"), then those are the people who are supporting, perhaps by default, the above option 1 that continues the status quo of not registering illegals and allows them to remain anonymous.

[Torie]

For everyone else, i.e. those who oppose President Bush's registration/plea bargain plan (you know the ones, those who mischaracterize that plan as being an "amnesty"), then those are the people who are supporting, perhaps by default, the above option 1

Your suggestion that it is a Hobson's choice is not very persuasive. There are ways to get the jobs to dry up for illegals over time that do not involve rewarding them for being illegal, as least not as much as the Bush plan does. I have posted one way, about 25 times. I am sure that you have read it. You bring in folks playing by the rules, and get THEM on the path to a green card and citizenship; their employers will have the bodies they need, and will lose interest over time with adequate enforcement to hire the wrong illegal bodies. The card and stick on the employers will harmonize like the polyphony of a Bach musical score.

[Fatalis]

[VERIFICATION]

What good is verification if it's not mandatory and backed up by penalties for noncompliance? You still haven't addressed your inconsistencies.

You have two choices.

Your 2 choices are:
1. Let illegals and their employers remain unregistered and anonymous, or
2. Convince illegals to voluntarily register themselves (and their employers).

I know, I know, you hate those two above options, deny them, and insist upon some magical 3rd way, but those 2 options are all that actually exist.

I'm not persuaded that those are the only two choices, as convenient as it might be for you to magically circumscribe the conversation as though they were.

David Dreier believes that mandatory workplace verification will work. So do I.

Once registered, we can verify compliance. That's something that we simply can't do for 8 million anonymous illegals and more than 1 million anonymous illegal employers. The scope of the problem is simply too large (bigger than the roundup in Germany of 6 million during WW2).

There are more than eight million illegals, not all are employed, and not all who are employed will be able to verify employment. The ones who can we can already find through the workplace verification program once its mandatory.

Your raising of the completely unrelated Nazi spectre indicates a flailing quality to your position.