Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate Gets Tough On Illegal Immigrant Employers
THE INDY CHANNEL ^ | 10 MAY 2006 | AP

Posted on 05/10/2006 11:06:19 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist

WASHINGTON -- Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.

Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.

Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.

What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.

Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.

Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.

The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.

Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.

"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.

"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.

U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.

All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.

A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires - altogether, about 140 million people.

The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously -specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.

Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.

Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.

To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.

The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.

Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.

The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase. President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.

Posse Set To Roll

Beginning Wednesday in Arizon's Maricopa County, a 250-member posse will operate similarly to the county's official anti-smuggler task force, patrolling the area for illegal immigrants who pay smugglers to cross through Arizona, the busiest illegal entry point along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border.

The posse will be made up of existing sheriff's deputies and members of the department's 3,000-member posse reserve of trained, unpaid volunteers.

Those who are captured by the posse may end up in jail, charged under a state law that has been used against more than 100 illegal immigrants in Maricopa County this year.

The law made human smuggling a state crime in Arizona - it was already a federal crime - allowing local law enforcement agencies to arrest suspected smugglers. It was meant to crack down on smugglers, but under a disputed interpretation, County Attorney Andrew Thomas argues the law can be applied to the smuggled immigrants themselves.

Thomas maintains illegal immigrants who pay smugglers to enter the United States are committing conspiracy to smuggle and can therefore be prosecuted under the state law.

The sheriff's office began arresting illegal immigrants under that interpretation in March, and with the new posse, will continue doing so by patrolling desert areas and main roadways in the southwestern part of the county.

"I'm going to catch as many as I can and throw them in my jail," said Sheriff Joe Arpaio. "And the jails are not that nice."

It remains to be seen whether a judge will uphold the smuggling law as applicable to illegal immigrants. Lawyers for some arrested illegal immigrants have filed motions to have the charges dismissed.

A Los Angeles attorney brought into the case by the Mexican Consul General's Office in Phoenix filed another motion claiming Thomas and Arpaio are violating state and federal law and are using the conspiracy charges to control illegal immigration, which is the federal government's job.

Arpaio said the motions don't worry him.

"I get sued when I go to the toilet. You think I'm worried about it?" he said. "If they think I'm going to slow down because of these threats, I've got news for them - I'm not going to slow down. I'll do more of it."

Alfredo Gutierrez, a Hispanic activist and former Democratic state senator, called Thomas' interpretation of the law and Arpaio's use of it "political pranks."

"Every act like this contributes to the angst and anger and desperation in our community," Gutierrez said.

Elias Bermudez, president of the pro-immigrant group Inmigrantes Sin Fronteras, or Immigrants Without Borders, questions the legality of the immigration posse itself.

"It is racial profiling," he said. "They don't follow guys that are blond and blue-eyed."

Bermudez said Arpaio is "a good criminal sheriff, but he needs to go out there and find criminals. He wants to go after the poor, undocumented immigrant who is hungry and thirsty in the desert. That is totally inhumane."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: aliens; immigrationreform; senate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
My mailbox is being flooded with mail concerning gas prices and illegal immigrants. To boycott oil companies or not; to provide amnesty to illegal immigrants or not, etc.

Since I have become jaded to the various solutions proposed by the Republicans, Democrats, Sierra Club, ACLU, etc. I have elected to solve the problems as they affect me. It solves both my gas and illegal immigrant problems.

I have hired illegal immigrants to push my car. They're plentiful and cheaper than buying gas.

I guess this means my plan won't work then huh?

SZ

61 posted on 05/10/2006 11:53:47 AM PDT by SZonian (Tagline???? I don't need no stinkin' tagline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
I have a better idea; fine each Senator $20,000 for each illegal found within the US border - let's put some teeth into the law where it belongs!
62 posted on 05/10/2006 11:58:18 AM PDT by Herakles (Liberals are stone stupid and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

"I thought employers were already required to check SSNs."


No, not at all. The program is completely voluntary.


And even establishing the volutary system was fought against tooth and nail by most of the Democrats in Congress as well as some Ted Kennedy Republicans.


63 posted on 05/10/2006 12:05:47 PM PDT by lsjogren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
There is no "Catch-22" problem. SS officials, have names and birth dates on each and every number. It also lists the place of birth and mother's maiden name along with the name of the father.

Twenty year old Mexicans would have a very hard time fooling anyone remotely interested in whether or not they are using fraudulent SS cards. If they show 000-00-0000 and it was issued to John Doe in 1945, born in Des Moines, while the guy at the desk is a 19 year old Mexican - bingo, he is not the legitimate card holder and therefore is probably illegal. No Problemo.

64 posted on 05/10/2006 12:05:47 PM PDT by zerosix (Romans 5:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Good idea, but I have a privacy question. I guess you have to submit the social, and it returns a name and other info to verify against the applicant? What's to keep someone from writing a quick script that submits a stream of of possibly valid 9-digit numbers (there's a formula for that), and recording the info from all the hits? That would be excellent for identity theft.

I don't like this unless there are safeguards, and 100,000+ businesses having 100,000+ login accounts doesn't make me feel safe. Set up a sham business, run the script for a day, get several thousand IDs, and split. Or just get into the office of any small business and read the password off the sticky note on the side of the boss' monitor.

Maybe it would work if an employer submitted all the info and got a yes or no, but then a typo could result in someone not getting a job. Or maybe businesses would only be able to submit so many checks based on their size, or other restrictions, but I don't trust the authors to think of this.

65 posted on 05/10/2006 12:05:49 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lsjogren

Actually I should clarify.

Job applicants I believe have to provide a Soc. Sec. Number but the employer is not required to use the verification system (Basic Pilot Program) where the employer has the govt check to make sure the soc sec number is valid and matches the name of the applicant (and possibly the date of birth, I'm not quite sure on that one)


66 posted on 05/10/2006 12:08:11 PM PDT by lsjogren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee

I do not believe a single, solitary word of these cretins.
We need to vote them all out, and start anew.


67 posted on 05/10/2006 12:09:41 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Immigration: Acting like dupes does not earn us their respect, but their CONTEMPT.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Yes, the existing social security number verification system is weak, although apparently it still does a fair job when it is used, but few employers use it because it is voluntary.


68 posted on 05/10/2006 12:09:53 PM PDT by lsjogren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

Comment #69 Removed by Moderator

To: oceanview

how about a implanted chip in our eye that sends a infared beam and you can access everything.


70 posted on 05/10/2006 12:12:10 PM PDT by Baseballguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

What is this, the Senate's version of the UN passing resolutions?

"We really mean it this time."

THe US government hasn't been enforcing existing immigration laws effectively for years, but now if they pass more laws it's gonna fix things right up? Yeah, right.


71 posted on 05/10/2006 12:12:18 PM PDT by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philoso12

"What's in it for them? Donations? Votes? "


Votes.



But they probably won't realize that until we've thrown their fat asses out of office.


72 posted on 05/10/2006 12:12:19 PM PDT by lsjogren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Baseballguy

that's the kind of hype that scares people, and prevents any real modernization of the current system.


73 posted on 05/10/2006 12:13:35 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

That's why amnesty/guestworker is a no-go.

The federal govt has to begin to show some credibility before there is even a DEBATE on legalizing any illegals.

(and I'll still be against doing so. But I will consider it legitimate to debate the matter at that point)


74 posted on 05/10/2006 12:13:37 PM PDT by lsjogren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

"Do you have any proof of that? I read it was required."

It is. The I-9 form is mandatory, but worthless.


75 posted on 05/10/2006 12:13:55 PM PDT by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
But the law was not strictly enforced...

So, another not-strictly-enforced law is just what we need to fix the mess created by not strictly enforcing the last one?

76 posted on 05/10/2006 12:14:07 PM PDT by TChris ("Wake up, America. This is serious." - Ben Stein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: angkor
That would be "people" such as Cargill Meat Packing, Purdue, Tyson, and Swift, all of which shut down all or most of their regional plants on May Day.

I like how your mind works. If I were INS, I'd record all the businesses that closed that day and put them at the top of the list for immigration raids.

77 posted on 05/10/2006 12:15:15 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #78 Removed by Moderator

To: moehoward

So why would something be mandatory if no one used it?


79 posted on 05/10/2006 12:20:41 PM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: doc30

We had a wreck near here in which an hispanic man died. In order to contact the next of kin, they used his name and social security number. They got over 20 hits using the same name and number.


80 posted on 05/10/2006 12:20:57 PM PDT by Ingtar (Prensa dos para el inglés)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson