Posted on 06/14/2007 11:16:52 AM PDT by kristinn
A spokeman for the Bush administration sent an e-mail to Jim Robinson and myself confirming the authenticity of a post on Free Republic this afternoon regarding the immigration bill currently before the Senate as having been posted on behalf of the White House.
The spokesman, Nicholas Thompson, works for the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives. The Politico reported yesterday that Thompson and Kerrie Rushton, associate directors in the Office of Strategic Initiatives who work under Karl Rove, would be engaging the blogosphere on the immigration bill.
Thompson's post is on the thread titled Penalty Mitigation in the Immigration Reform Bill, a vanity posted by philman_36. Thompson posted at comment #53.
Thompson's e-mail to Free Republic included a brief introduction and the text of his posted comment:
Hi,
I just wanted to let you know that I just posted a response to the post "Penalty Mitigation in the Immigration Reform Bill."
The White House appreciates the opportunity to respond on Free Republic.
Response:
I would like to point out that the Secretary is authorized to reduce or mitigate penalities against employers who in good faith are trying to comply with the law. Certainly, we understand that not all employers knowingly hire illegal immigrants; this will remain the case, especially before the bill’s new secure documentation requirements are fully phased in. We do not seek to wrongly penalize honest employers who unknowingly hire illegal immigrants, therefore we reserve the right to reduce or mitigate their penalties if the employer can show good faith compliance in following the law.
For those employers who do knowingly hire illegal immigrants, please know that we intend to penalize these employers strongly, and the Administration has already stepped up these penalties in the last couple of years. For example, a 2005 program, “Operation Rollback,” assessed $15,000,000 in civil fines to employers, an amount greater than the sum of administrative fines collected in the previous eight years and was the largest worksite enforcement penalty in US history. In the first quarter of FY07, criminal and civil forfeitures have totaled $26,700,000 for employers.
As a reminder of what’s in the bill, fines for hiring an illegal worker are $5,000 maximum per illegal worker for the first offense, $10,000 maximum per illegal worker for the second, $25,000 maximum per illegal worker for the third , and $75,000 maximum per illegal worker for the fourth. In addition, the bill increases the maximum criminal penalty for a pattern or practice of unlawful hiring twenty-five-fold, from $3,000 to $75,000, and would impose a prison term of up to six months. This represents a significant increase in fines for employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.
Nicholas Thompson
White House Office of Strategic Initiatives
No harm in disagreement.
But, just as we oppose the wealth transfer from working tax-paying Americans to illegal invaders through public services, we should also oppose the same for our "former" enemies.
If the iraqis want a life of freedom let them work for it in their own country.
Post of the day.
To illustrate:
Dear Mr. Thompson:
We, the undersigned members of FreeRepublic.com hereby submit that, rather than insist on pushing a highly unpopular and ill-conceived immigration bill, the President, as the Chief Executive Officer of the United States Government, should vigorously carry out the following prioritized duties already embodied in existing legislation:
1) BUILD THE FENCE
2) DEPORT ALL ILLEGALS
3) FINE / PROSECUTE EMPLOYERS BREAKING THE LAW
4) INCREASE BORDER PATROL
5) CONTINUE LEGAL IMMIGRATION
This is the job we expect the President to do. Thank you.
Let’s NOT turn this into a DU-like forum, eh?
How ‘bout some thought and not just vitriole?
I understand your anger. Expressing it that way gets you nowhere.
‘You are so correct. My wife checked applicants via online services all the time. It ain’t that hard to do.’
I appreciate you speaking up on this, we are way passed the time where this particular lie should have been called for what it is.
I guess we have been served notice.
CAN YOU HEAR US NOW?
Is the first step....Allow whatever time, or years that it takes to reverse the mistakes of the last decades.........!!! ***first***
To say that this legislation is better than no legislation is a complete lie. No legislation means you at the White House should be enforcing the old laws already in place and President Bush does not enforce current law on the border. I am sorry I ever voted for George Bush or supported him and I will never give another dollar to the RNC. Teddy for lifeguard!
Fence? Somebody was going to build a fence? Ya right. A fence. And you actually all believed that? Did You?
I have district envy.
Here is what I’ve been pushing for...
RICO lawyers could turn it around in a few years and MAKE MONEY at the same time. I’m surprised they haven’t done it already.
In the absence of enforcement,we can get the word out in the meantime that there is money to be made in filing RICO lawsuits against employers who hire illegal aliens.
Employers would have no trouble shutting down the border if they could get sued by someone under the RICO statutes for hiring these people in the first place. The next time an illegal alien kills someone in a drunk driving accident or somesuch thing, I’m going to point out that the victim’s family might be able to seek compensation from the employer under these statutes in the hopes that it would catch on. If this did catch on, would see such a swift backlash against illegal immigration that no employer would go near these people and they’ll all simply want to go back home.
Oh YEAH!!!! ANd it was a big miss too, on a lot of our parts.
No disrespect intended but... please go get your boss. We have some questions that only he can answer.
Amen. What part of "NO AMNESTY" do these pickle heads not understand?
I guess the White House has never heard the acronym K.I.S.S. (Keep it Simple Stupid) NO AMNESTY!
Maybe if we are redundant enough the message will sink in eh? }:-(
Isn’t it considered spam when you post and run. I’m sure he’s spamming other conservative boards as well.
SPAM!
But in case he is reading replies... BUILD THE FENCE, BUILD THE FENCE, BUILD THE FENCE, BUILD THE FENCE, BUILD THE FENCE, BUILD THE FENCE, BUILD THE FENCE, BUILD THE FENCE, oh, and please BUILD THE FENCE!!!!
You forgot the part about getting Campeon and Ramos OUT OF PRISON AND BACK TO WORK!
Oh boy - this old line again. First of all, no one is talking about mass round ups of illegals. What is being advocated is cutting off the flow (sealing the border) and also inducing self-deportation by going after employers of illegals.
It is also not correct that we need immigrants for our economy. I am all for legal immigration and would like to see the process streamlined but they are not "needed" - they are a nice to have.
And for the line about "paying more" - we are already doing that - it's just in hidden fees. When an illegal's children attend public school that cost about $5000 per student per year. Where is that money coming from?
Where is the money coming from to pay for the increased prison costs? Where is the money coming from to pay for the medical care that is given to them but never paid for? Many hospitals have had to shut down their emergency rooms for this reason.
The list just goes on and on. How about all of the low skilled citizens that pushed out of jobs because of illegals? Illegals are a NET cost to this country.
It took 2 months for my back ground check for my CCW permit how is the federal government going to do a 24 hour back ground check on the illegals when you have to contact their home countries to get much of the info you need? That provision is a JOKE.
I agree. See my post 223 and perhaps write to kristinn and Jim Robinson and see if they would forward it to the WH guy.
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.