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
LOL,,,BOTH from Louisiana VOTED NO...BOBBY is comin’...;0)
It will be the democrats call to arms for “higher taxes” - the tax cuts just undermined our social security.
Now that is what I call an effective post.
The company I worked for employed less then 50 people. About 60% were Mexicans. Of course management knew they were illegal. At least one of them was about 14 years old. And there was an old man so old, he could barely get around. They were given extremely preferential treatment, too.
This isn't "ignorance of the law". Unless there is a law requiring employers investigate the ID and records for all prospective employees.
If this was the case many natural born Americans would have a hard time getting work as well.
BUMP DAT...
Oh no, it's the "Bush LIAR" mantra. Is that you Cindy?
And, as we have seen continually, the democrats will just claim racism or minority persecution and have the law thrown out. Nothing matters but the democrats’ right to buy votes so that they can gain final control over this country and set up their socialistic, government dependent country.
Did you read the posts on this thread? There is a lot of sound advice and very little ranting or irrational posting. This President and some leaders in the Senate led by Lott refuse to allow Sen Inhofe’s bill ENFORCE to get a hearing in Judiciary. Why? They keep asking if there is a better bill and there is — Sen Inhofe’s bill.
Senator Jeff Sessions has already found 20 loopholes in the bill so we are supposed to keep quiet about that too? Senators Inhofe and Sessions are leading the charge against this bill but we are to quietly go away so Pres Bush can have his way. Not this time!
A majority of the posters on this thread are also on the Bush ping list from 2004 so they are not anti-Bush types — they are American citizens expressing their dislike for a bill that three of my favorite Senators Inhofe, Coburn, and Sessions are against because they understand the ramifications if this is passed. You do realize that the passage of this bill would make our borders less secure?
This is not the time for Bush cheerleading but for every American to stand up and say NO! Enforce the laws on the books, build the fence, and identify every last illegal no matter where they came from and that includes students here on expired visas. This Country has too much at stake for anyone to blindly support this Immigration bill without knowing the details.
The person from the WH that posted this is hitting all the main blogs with the same information and not returning to answer questions. Why? I don’t like spin coming from any elected official. If you are going to post, you should be willing to answer the questions.
I’m agreeing with you and I am highly upset about it.
His stubbornness will be the undoing of America I’m afraid.
I would think he would be at risk of impeachment over not securing the borders or of allowing some to ignore the laws.
” However, as long as there’s demand for cheap labor, the market will provide it. So the bulk of 20 Million Mexicans laborers are here to stay, even if we are stringent with our laws. “
I’d like to point out your error in logic.
Think about Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, Adelphia, Global Crossing.
Jail time, bankruptcy, and public ridicule.
You’re saying that method won’t work for these current illegal activities? You’ll have to explain yourself. As it stands, you just sound like an open-borders thrall.
See ya - sundowner here.
Just enforce the laws on the books now and everything will be fine. Of course that means DEPORTING about 20 million people, excuse me, LAW BREAKERS, but it's their own fault isn't it?!?
See ya!
Google "I-9 employment form" -- it is required.
Just looked up the acronym ENFORCE from Senator Inhofe’s website:
http://www.inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=4eca820b-802a-23ad-4311-97a586990598&Region_id=&Issue_id=
E ngaging the
N ation to
F ight for
O ur
R ight to
C ontrol
E ntry
Very clever!
ENFORCE - Engaging the National to Fight for the Right to Control Entry Act (Senate Bill 1269)
Here is what he said about his English amendment:
INHOFE PRAISES NATIONAL ENGLISH AMENDMENT
June 7, 2007
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) today praised the approval of his National English Amendment (S.A.1151) to the Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S.1348) to make English the national language of the United States. Inhofe’s amendment was approved by a bi-partisan majority of the Senate (64-33).
“Last night, my amendment to make English the national language passed the Senate by a large bi-partisan majority – 64 to 33,” Inhofe said. “It was an historic vote and the Senate once again debated and affirmed that English is our national language.
“The immigration legislation being considered in the Senate includes language in Section 702 maintaining the requirement for foreign language entitlements in materials and services provided by federal agencies. My amendment recognizes English as the national language and states that federal agencies and officials are not mandated to act, communicate, perform, or provide services or materials in any language other than English, unless specifically mandated by federal statute.
“Polling of Americans throughout the country consistently demonstrates that Americans overwhelmingly believe English should be recognized as the national language of the United States. A Zogby poll conducted in May 2007 found that 83% of Americans, including 76% of Hispanics, believe that English should be the official language. Already, 30 states have adopted English as their official language.
“This debate is not just about preserving our culture and heritage, but also about bettering the odds of our nation’s newest potential citizens. It is vital to any immigration bill that we send the message to all those who have come to our country and those who will immigrate here in the future that English is the language of our land.”
Widespread U.S. polling supports making English the national language with a 2007 Zogby poll showing 83% support this initiative, including 76% of Hispanics. Currently, 30 states and 53 nations have made English their official language. Furthermore, the Office of Management and Budget estimates that it costs taxpayers between $1-2 billion to provide language assistance under President Clinton’s Executive Order 13166, which created an entitlement to services provided in languages other than English.
bumping that!
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.