Posted on 06/13/2007 6:57:12 AM PDT by philman_36
This morning on Fox and Friends there was made mention that much stricter fines are in the immigration reform bill. While this is true many folks may not know about a few words that follow the language about the tougher fines. Those words make a travesty of any "fines" as they can be waved and the employer could walk away owing nothing in penalties.
Here are the words I've got a problem with...
So while we're being told that "the penalties are tougher" we aren't being told that under some circumstances employers can face reduced or even no fine whatsoever.
At this point of time in our history America can't afford our officials not being completely truthful to us and not stating that the possibility exists for employers to potentially be let off the hook completely is simply unacceptable.
In the nation of Mexico, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, Mexico still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.
And now the Mexicans themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Mexico about a new policy of reform and openness on the borders. We hear much from this administration about a new policy of border enforcement and employer sanctions. Fines will be raised. Some economic enterprises that have been permitted to operate with impunity will now face criminal sanctions.
Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Administration? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the base, or to strengthen the Open Border system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that sovereignty and security go together, that the advance of American sovereignty can only strengthen the cause of American security. There is one sign the President can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of sovereignty and security.
President Bush, if you seek enforcement of our laws, if you seek prosperity for the American people and wish to gain the trust of the Republican base, if you seek a viable Republican Party: Come here to this gate! Mr. President, close this gate! MR. PRESIDENT, BUILD THIS WALL!'"
Yeah. Well . . . what he said.
I was watching UNITED 93 last night, and I have not stopped crying and yelling in rage at my TV.
How dare these congress people allow our immigration to run amok .. how dare they scoff at us and tell us to shut up .. when they have already forgotten the people WHO DIED TO SAVE YOUR SORRY REAR ENDS.
They dont deserve OUR VOTES or OUR MONEY .. and until they put America first and not the Mexican govt (and the democrats) .. they will get neither from me. And .. Im not alone in this sentiment.
(D) The Secretary is authorized to reduce or mitigate penalties imposed upon employers, based upon factors including, but not limited to, the employer's hiring volume, compliance history, good-faith implementation of a compliance program, participation in temporary worker program, and voluntary disclosure of violations of this subsection how much cash they donate to political campaings and/or to the Secretary.
there...fixed it.....
Thanks thanks.
Haven’t had TV last 6 months or so. Miss SG1 even though there are . . . globalist propaganda elements in it.
This will be a new authority not currently in law.
Anyone reading the bill would know that! It's even laid out at [Page: S6641]...
SEC. 301. PURPOSES.
(c) To authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to access records of other Federal agencies for the purposes of confirming identity, authenticating lawful presence and preventing identity theft and fraud related to unlawful employment.
(d) To ensure that the Commissioner of Social Security has the necessary authority to provide information to the Secretary of Homeland Security that would assist in the enforcement of the immigration laws.
And it's clarified at [Page: S6645]
Something else...You know that I-9 form that everyone fills out and is found mentioned at 8 CFR PART 274a -- CONTROL OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS? Why is it, what with the law being in 8 CFR PART 274a.2 Verification of employment eligibility under the auspices of CONTROL OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS, that Citizens are filling out I-9 forms? Are we just stupid and don't know any better, believing our government wouldn't mislead us down the primrose path of life or is there some other statute that requires Citizens to fill out an I-9? Or is the REAL ID and the EEVS supposed to legally fill in that loophole?
I also found that "Good faith defense." I mentioned in the other reply at 8 CFR PART 274a.4 as well as "The term knowing..." at Sec. 274a.1 under "Definitions".
It leaves a lot to be desired as far as finality and "proof" is concerned.
It states quite clearly what and why the SSA will share with ICE DHS.
Nonviolent crimes or criminal activity in other similar government benefit programs (cont.)
Requester/reason for request To identify and locate aliens (Immigration must certify that persons of inquiries are aliens and not U.S. Citizens.c) |
Personal information SSA discloses SSN and nontax return information. |
And if the average Citizen finds things hard to figure out...
Several possible reasons exist for the inconsistent application of SSAs disclosure policy. Although our survey showed that most SSA field offices receive requests for information from law enforcement, SSA field officials we spoke with said that they do not receive requests frequently. For example, several officials told us that they received fewer than 10 requests in 2002. Because requests are infrequent, staff must often consult the policy to help them to respond properly. However, many staff members consider the policy confusing. For example, one field office manager said that, We have doubts as to what information should be provided to U.S. Border Patrol. Similarly, a manager in another field office said, SSA[s] disclosure policy should be written in Plain English to make it easy to understand by all readers. A different field office manager commented, [SSAs] Disclosure policy is still frequently confusing for much of our staff. This lack of clarity leads to confusion about what should be disclosed. For example, one manager said, [SSAs policy] is quite confusing. Its hard to know what you can disclose. Another manager commented, I think the policy should be clearer than it is. Theres too much
if this, then that, but not this and so on.
It isn't amazing any more.
...especially your last sentence. Looks to me like the authority already exists.
Kind of like I figured, you’re a no show. Can’t handle one simple Citizen’s questions?
4 measly replies is all he's got to show for himself!
Dear Mr. Thompson,
In an interview with Sean Hannity last week, Rep. Duncan Hunter said that when he told President Bush during a meeting that only 11 miles of the double fence has been built, President Bush didn’t even know this.
Do you have any response to Rep. Hunter?
Do you intend to give any meaningful response to anything else that your constituents, donors and die hard supporters here have asked or commented on directly?
Or is this just a hit and run in which you post one comment and assume that everything is all straightened out now?
Please advise.
Thank You,
The People
My apologies. It seems that you did actually respond to two questions/complaints/concerns of fellow FReepers.
How about the rest of the responses? You can take mine last.
For crying out loud liberals engage the left wing blogosphere in direct interviews. You can answer more than two questions.
Two responses. 245 complaints and questions.
You are batting .008. Try to get your batting average above 220 and then maybe people will think that the administration is actually listening. We’ll be here whenever you are done with the other websites.
Thank you.
Is there a snowballs chance in Hell that he will answer anyone’s questions here?
Or are the ignorant unwashed masses unworthy of a reply from even the mouthpiece of our elected representatives?
Government by the people and for the people my ass.
None that I can descern.
Government by the people and for the people my ass.
Petulant people seem to be in charge.
Lindsey needs to come out of the closet already.
2nd this....................................!!!!
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.