Posted on 08/13/2007 1:34:22 PM PDT by Delacon
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
This Mencken sentiment appears to be the guiding idea behind the administration’s announcement Friday of stepped-up immigration enforcement. After its relentless six-year campaign for amnesty crashed and burned in June at the hands of the common people, the White House has come up with a new plan: to start enforcing some of the laws they should have been enforcing all along, and so thoroughly scare the public with the consequences that there will be a popular groundswell for amnesty that will finally vindicate the administration position. You can almost hear the president thinking, “be careful what you wish for.”
Or as DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff put it, “There will be some unhappy consequences for the economy out of doing this.”
But just as the administration completely misread public sentiment on immigration — the president appears to have genuinely believed his “I’ll see you at the bill signing” bravado — they’re now misreading the likely reaction to increased enforcement. Because despite the hysterical exaggerations we can look forward to from some farmers and other employers of illegal aliens, the produce department of your local supermarket won’t be shutting down any time soon.
The only reason the White House thinks this gamble might pay off is that some of the measures announced last week really can make a difference. The complete fact sheet is here, and since it’s a p.r. document, it should come as no surprise that there’s a good deal of padding. Some of the measures included are just continuations of current policy (completion of about half the border fencing by the end of next year, for instance) or not likely to have major impacts (expanding the number of foreign criminal gangs whose members are ineligible for visas). These efforts are welcome, but should be routine.
However, there are several novel elements (well, not so novel, since you could have read about them in NR), that must be part of any comprehensive attrition strategy to reduce the illegal population. Most important is the final rule on Social Security “no-match” letters. These are letters sent by the Social Security Administration to employers who’ve submitted W-2 forms for employees whose names and numbers don’t match the agency’s records. Some instances, of course, are the result of clerical mistakes or unreported name changes, but the majority are illegal aliens using fake or stolen Social Security numbers to gain employment.
This matters because more than half of illegal immigrants with jobs aren’t living “in the shadows” but instead are working on the books. In the past, no-match letters were sent only to employers with the largest number of problem files, and created no obligation to follow up. In fact, one version of the letter advised employers that “You should not use this letter to take any adverse action against an employee just because his or her Social Security number appears on the list, such as laying off, suspending, firing, or discriminating against that individual. Doing so could, in fact, violate state or federal law and subject you to legal consequences.”
As you can imagine, after that caveat most letters were just thrown away.
The new rule sets out common-sense steps an employer must take upon receiving a no-match letter to ensure that he won’t be held liable if the worker turns out to be an illegal alien. Social Security is now sending out these letters to employers with more than ten mismatches that make up more than one half of one percent of its workforce — covering about 80 percent of all mismatches. Most employers are likely to follow through the process and, if necessary, fire those workers who turn out to be illegals (most of whom will likely have left anyway by that point); while some may re-hire the workers off the books, “An employer who does that,” as Secretary Chertoff points out, “is making a deliberate decision to compound their legal difficulties by committing tax crimes as well as immigration crimes.” (In other words, “You may not think much of my department, but the IRS isn’t fooling around.”)
The underlying rationale for ensuring that no-match letters are acted on by employers is to turn off the magnet of jobs that attracts — and keeps — illegal aliens here. As it becomes harder to get a job, and as the jobs illegals can get are less stable, sneaking across the border or overstaying a visa will become less and less attractive, and illegals already here — especially those with fewer attachments — will start deporting themselves.
Along the same lines is another, less-noticed measure in last week’s announcement. The administration says it will begin to draft a new rule to require all federal contractors to use the online system, redubbed E-Verify, that enables employers to check if new hires are authorized to work in the United States. This probably won’t identify a large number of illegal workers, but it will change the environment, representing an important step toward internalizing legal status as a labor standard.
Lobbyists for farmers and roofing contractors and others will soon be screaming bloody murder. But Congress and the media would do well not to take at face value the squealing of firms losing their cheap-labor subsidy. When the end of the last big guestworker program was being debated in the early 1960s, California farmers claimed that “the use of braceros [Mexican guestworkers] is absolutely essential to the survival of the tomato industry.” Instead, termination of the program prompted mechanization which caused a quintupling of production for tomatoes grown for processing, an 89-percent drop in demand for harvest labor, and a fall in real prices.
The same sort of thing happened half a century earlier, when the textile industry predicted disaster if child labor were ended. At a Senate hearing in 1916, one mill owner said that limiting child labor would “stop my machines”; another said “investors would never receive another dividend”; while a third said that ending child labor would “paralyze the country.”
We’re going to hear a lot more of this sort of thing — the White House is counting on it. Standing up to the coming lobbyist onslaught will be the final stage of the battle against amnesty. _
Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
EXACTLY. And then the politicians can cover their backside by "proving" how necessary the illegals are to the economy -- that "enforcing the laws" in getting rid of illegals really hurt the economy. Nevermind the heavy losses of the $1.75 trillion hedge fund industry on Friday.
Watch for 15 August -- many people want OUT before it gets worse.
Today, the euro came down because the currency and their markets are no longer insulated from possible subprime losses in the U.S.
AQR Capital Management, Highbridge Capital Management, D.E. Shaw and Goldman Sachs, among others, lost big time and some will not get their money back.
But hey, the world ecnomy hinges on illegal slave labor (according to those who'll use it for all it's worth). A strawman.
they are probably gonna want to know.
if you want money for your work.
and do you expect to be employeed
for more than one day.
and do you really want ss to be taken
out of your pay.
us americans sure are demanding.
The new rule sets out common-sense steps an employer must take upon receiving a no-match letter to ensure that he won’t be held liable if the worker turns out to be an illegal alien. ... “An employer who does that,” as Secretary Chertoff points out, “is making a deliberate decision to compound their legal difficulties by committing tax crimes as well as immigration crimes.” (In other words, “You may not think much of my department, but the IRS isn’t fooling around.”)
***Such corporations would be target-rich environments for RICO lawsuits.
RICO —Citizen Recourse
Private persons and entities may initiate civil suits to obtain injunctions and treble damages against enterprises that conspire to or actually violate federal alien smuggling, harboring, or document fraud statutes, under the Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO). The pattern of racketeering activity is defined as commission of two or more of the listed crimes. A RICO enterprise can be any individual legal entity, or a group of individuals who are not a legal entity but are associated in fact, and can include nonprofit associations.
Here’s what I’ve been pushing: it’s time to file Racketeering, Influencing, and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) lawsuits.
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.
The "rule" will be published in the Federal Register as a "proposed rulemaking" for Social Security Administration.
This is an opportunity for Freepers to get in there and make specific recommendations to the bureaucrats who wrote it up.
If there's something that effectively guts the rule, we need 400,000 people to protest that part. If there are possibilities of strengthening the rule, as few as 10 responses should be sufficient.
I intend to comment on the proposed rulemaking and will post what I have to say here on FR.
Would be nice for the Administrators to set up a standard keyword for us to link to once the rule is out for comment.
Still right in there flacking for the illegal aliens, I see.
And I keep wondering why we don't see civil rights lawsuits...discrimination against the American citizen by the American who can't get the carpentry job because the employer prefers the subservient illegal labor. If that's not discrimination on the basis of national origin, what is?
How about the $30B in remittances to Mexico?
It has perplexed me as well. But I smell money on the table and if no one else moves for it, I might set up shop doing exactly that. All I need to do is get through law school.
We also need to put a stop to that.
Think of all the idle rich Republican Elite wives who’ll have to hire honest household help or face the IRS...priceless.
Did you read those comments on the thread calling Kerkorian an OBL?
Somebody is paying attention !
Wonder if this has any bearing on the Iraqi ‘refugees’ he’s sending for , [ last rumored at least 100,000 ] ? We will have to cough up the money for more foot baths and schools rooms, rugs and prison mosques if this is true .
:::::
No wonder Rove left — I am amazed he stayed as long as he did.
Bush’s love affair with Mexicans is unseemly. In the immigration debate he actually places the interests of Mexicans above those of American citizens. He should have closed the border on 9/12/2001, regardless of his infatuation with Mexicans.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
The value of a Mexican construction worker is largely a myth. Sure, they work fast, but they do shoddy work, and it has to be redone in pretty short order. I’d rather have a competent carpenter and pay him a decent wage and have the job done right the first time.
“The value of a Mexican construction worker is largely a myth. Sure, they work fast, but they do shoddy work, and it has to be redone in pretty short order. I’d rather have a competent carpenter and pay him a decent wage and have the job done right the first time.”
Amen to that!
BTTT
“Currently he is in the doghouse.”
You do a diservice to dogs by putting Bush with them. They disearve much better.
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.