Posted on 11/30/2005 8:40:01 AM PST by epow
To zap illegals, jail those who employ them
Published on: 11/30/05
On Monday, President Bush gave a speech designed to reassure his conservative base that he is serious about protecting the country from illegal immigrants.
Speaking before an invitation-only audience in Tucson, Ariz., the president didn't spend too much time talking about the valuable contributions that immigrants have made or about granting them the opportunity to become citizens. Instead, Bush focused on fences and raids and deportations. In so doing, he reached out to a disaffected Republican constituency that is increasingly hostile to immigrants — especially to those Latinos who enter the country illegally.
Bush's tough talk will certainly have widespread appeal in Georgia, where many voters have become anxious — even angry — at what they perceive as the staggering burden of illegal immigration. There is a backlash brewing — a rising tide of frustration born of resentment over schools forced to accommodate non-English speakers, hospital emergency rooms beset by uninsured patients and perceptions of higher crime rates.
Over the past decade, the immigrant population has grown faster in Georgia than in nearly all other states. Immigrants — with and without documents — find work in carpet mills in Dalton, poultry plants in Rome, farms in South Georgia and construction companies throughout metro Atlanta.
But Bush failed to call for the one policy change that would make the greatest difference in deterring illegal border crossings: harsh penalties for employers who hire undocumented workers. Most illegal immigrants, especially those who come in through the porous Mexican border, are drawn to this country by the promise of work. If jobs dried up, the torrent of illegal immigrants entering the United States would diminish to a trickle. And the best way to curb the hiring is to put employers in prison for hiring illegally.
But the president didn't say one word about harsh penalties for businesses. That's because business executives are a core GOP constituency, and Bush doesn't want to risk alienating them.
Oh, he gave the usual lip service to the idea of responsible hiring. He spoke of his plan for providing temporary permits for immigrants to work in those industries that need their labor, and he described IDs that would be tamper-proof, thwarting the common practice of using fake IDs. He announced the expansion of a program called "Basic Pilot," an automated system through which businesses may determine whether a prospective employee is authorized to work in this country. Basic Pilot is now available for use nationwide. But employers are not required to use it.
Bush didn't say anything about business owners who knowingly hire illegal immigrants because their labor comes cheap: They will work for less than minimum wage; they don't seek health insurance; they don't complain about safety violations in the workplace.
It's not difficult for employers to check on the immigration status of prospective workers. The Social Security Administration maintains a database of all Social Security numbers. It's easy enough for employers to learn whether a worker's number is valid. But many employers don't do that.
While many industries claim they can't find willing American workers, the truth is that they could find more Americans willing to do tough, dirty jobs if they paid more for their labor. Is it true that poultry plants couldn't find enough Americans to fill job openings? Or is it more likely they couldn't find enough American laborers for the wages they were willing to pay?
Of course, the higher labor prices would be passed on to consumers if the Bush administration and Congress really cracked down on illegal hiring. Homebuilders, for example, get to squeeze out a bit more profit when they use illegal workers, but they also pass some of the savings on to consumers. Houses are cheaper — and so is chicken, farm produce and lawn care, among other things — because illegal immigrants do so much of the labor. Americans who denounce illegal immigrants may not have calculated the additional costs they'd incur once that labor disappears.
It's easy to bash illegal immigrants. They are desperate; they are vulnerable; they don't vote. But they are here only because we've developed a bipolar policy that devours their cheap labor while discouraging their assimilation. If we are serious about curbing illegal immigration, the place to start is with business owners who hire illegal workers.
• Cynthia Tucker is the editorial page editor. Her column appears Wednesdays and Sundays.
So you're saying that it's OK for you to hire illegal aliens because you have a rotten profit margin?
Who's fault is that?
When they approve jail time for guys like you, my crews will come out and finish your screw ups.
"it is cost prohibitive to do background checks in industries where profits are tight, risk is high and wages are low."
This is the crux of this issue. The Gov. needs to provide a simple, cheap way to ID workers, and then provide the legal framework, incentives and resources to enforce the law. All the focus has been on amnesty and a wall. Both pale in comparison to the effectiveness of widespread employer based enforcement.
That said, we need to provide a means to identify illegals. The social security office needs to have a smart database that when an employer calls to verify a sosh, it will figure out if the employee could actually be working this job. It should also give distinguishing qualities to help the employee figure out if the candidate is legit.
Many illegals are buying and providing fake ids. The federal check on employees was way too slow at the time that I last heard.
I see. You aren't making enough profit so you should be allowed to break the law by hiring illegals. No sale.
For the record, and for all. I do not advocate or condone the hiring of illegals. I support identifying them and deporting them. The intent of my comment was to point out the difficult barriers that government puts up that inhibits the abilitiy for us to control the problem. Some suggest that it is easy to go to a website to make sure someone is legal. I'm sorry, it is not that simple. When a Mexican that barely speaks english presents a driver's license and a SS# that goes with the name on the license, there is very little else that we can afford to do. Sure, check a website to make sure that the SS# matches the name on the license.
My apologies to all that believe I advocate the hiring of illegals. I do not. The government needs to get serious about the issue on several fronts.
If an individual presents a drivers license or state ID card that matches the name on the SS# and is veribiable with the IRS, we are compliant. Additional investigation has been deemed invasion of privacy in the state of Virginia.
Why do public school systems allow illegal immigrant children to register. Much of the same issue.
That is the best proof I can offer for now. Weak as it may sound, we do our best and never intend to hire illegals.
Joe,
Ease off. I am no advocate of hiring illegal immigrants. I am not for amnesty and we do not employ a single illegal immigrant of the 200+ employees that we have that I am aware of. We only do about $175 Million a year in business and have been around for a while. The laws need to be more aggressive with suspected illegals. If a worker presents ID and a matching SS# or worse and more common, a greencard and matching ID, then there is little else a business can afford to or legal do.
No need to get excited and huffy. If I offended you, why then I take back what ever insensitivity I wrote.
The cops wouldn't show up when one of my workers had an AK 47. Show up for a forged SSn card. You're a funny guy.
My procedures? I'm telling you, I just follow the law.
I don't believe that. Employers check facts on employment applications all the time.
This is ridiculous.
I don't know, but I don't think that any type of SSN or proof of residency is required to enroll in school (at least in Texas).
As a matter of fact, the district here sends *free/reduced* lunch applications out and they specifically state that being a legal resident is NOT a requirement for free/reduced lunch!
Honestly, you may do your best not to hire illegals but many/most businesses that do know good and well what they are doing, IMO.
Thanks for doing the right thing.
Same in CA. How deep would you like me to dig into your life if you were seeking employment?
You folks wanting an easier method sound like those folks that advocate a national ID card.
Letter of the law, or intent of the law?
Ah geez. The intent of construction barriers is to keep traffic away from construction woprkers keeping them safe - so why not make them out of reactive armor?
The intent of labor laws is to keep illegals out of the country. Labor law is outside the envelope. To take it to your logical conclusion is anyone not seemingly 3rd generation Amercian should NOT get a job.
The law says, check their ID's, I do. It doesn't say verify, scrutinized, erect some sort of litmus test, hire private investigators, because what we really mean is . . .
I've always thought that the day a McDonalds is raided, the owners and managers jailed, and the establishment sold at public auction to the loss of the finance company, there would be a mass panick to fire all the illegals. ""
I like that solution....
That depends on the job, and its responsibilities and opportunities for mischief. I certainly wouldn't want someone convicted of forgery working in accounting. Or a college professor claiming to be an Indian getting preference for a job when they weren't. How about someone working at a nuclear power plant?
You folks wanting an easier method sound like those folks that advocate a national ID card.
So you don't have a national ID card already?
Sorry. I do go off sometimes. :-)
We just had a clown down here have his all illegal crew remove the wall braces of a cold pour after 8 hours to use them on the next wall. Wall Fall.... killed 3. The sub then hired 5 more illegals to clean up.
He's in jail. 3 illegals dead. 5 illegals captured and released. Wall still down. :-)
Thanks rey, I now know where you stand, and it is with the illegals.
[First Trespass - Arrest, gather biometric data, deport
Second Trespass - Incarcerate for 30 days, tatoo face with distinctive brand, deport
Third Trespass - shoot on site, cremate, deport ashes.]
Obviously this is over the top. But if they do get to the third trespass, send the ashes to New Orleans, they need all the fill they can get.
At least deep enough to find out if I committed a crime. Like, for example, entering the country illegally.
I don't believe that CA does not allow a business to check the facts on a resume or employment application. You people are making this stuff up.
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.