Posted on 05/02/2006 3:40:39 AM PDT by IrishMike
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has announced that the Bush administration is prepared to use criminal sanctions to "break the back" of businesses that hire unauthorized workers.
No one seriously disputes the existence of an illegal immigration problem in this country. But aggressive and costly enforcement initiatives against employers are fundamentally unfair, since they fail to address the underlying problems, such as porous borders and the easy availability of counterfeit documents. Our immigration problems will not be improved by passing the buck to corporate America.
The simple reason is that decisions about a person's right to work in this country belong exclusively to the federal government. States can't do it, which is why they regularly and improperly issue drivers licenses or other identity documents to illegal aliens. Local governments also lack the resources and ability to make the determination of who is "legal" in the context of providing health, education and other benefits.
So, what makes anyone think private employers are equipped and able to take on a job that the federal, state and local governments can't or won't do?
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
If the United States wants to address the problem of illegal immigration, a number of constructive solutions have been proposed--including requiring the federal government to decide conclusively who is eligible to work and who is not. More secure borders might also be part of the mix. Both are within the federal government's exclusive authority.
But when Congress enacted the 1986 act, it took a significant step toward abdicating federal responsibility in this area. It will take Congress--not more enforcement against businesses--to fix that fundamental flaw. The place to start looking for that fix is at the border and within the bureaucracy, not in the boardroom.
Government Policy since 1988.............NOTHING
W, build and man the fence NOW!
Truthfully, I think you throw a few white collar executives in jail for gross misconduct, toss in one or two franchise owners and you are 90% of the way there... It would raise the 'cost' of immigrant labor, which would help reduce incentives.
The feds then need to crack down on states that hand out taxpayer dollars like candy. Federal dollars should in no way support states that turn around and then give that Money away. Any fungible dollars should be taken from said states and block granted to ICE as additional enforcement dollars for that state. Once the state wakes up they can have their money back.
Innovation is the product of necessity. Punish employers and they will find a way to regulate themselves. That people like the construction industry, or agriculture. are unkowingly employing illegals is pure BS. It is one thing to find an illegal in a crew of 100, and quite another to have a Tyson's Foods. I say throw the book at them; they have stolen enough from us.
This is an important point. It is totally unrealistic to put enforcement on the backs of businesses - who have no investigatory facilities, no enforcement powers and in fact are set up to do something entirely different (such as make a product!) - when even the police cannot determine somebody's real identity when they arrest him and scads of documents fall out of his pocket.
Immigration control is the responsibility of the government, not of private businesses.
What we are facing right now is the cumulative result of decades of bad, unrealistic and ideologically motivated "immigration" policy. The Dems don't want to fix it because they are afraid of losing their large illegal alien voting bloc, and the GOP doesn't want to fix it because it would mean making hard choices that might give the Dems some propaganda ammunition.
Forbes is dead wrong on this issue. I understand that they are defending their territory (the businessman) but targeting employers is the quickest way to dry up illegal immigration. That and a border fence would solve 80% of the problem.
Illegals might be beyond the long arm of the law because there are so many of them but if businesses are targeted and the jobs dry up the incentive to cross the border will be mostly gone. Not that I have any confidence at all that congress and the prez will lift even a little pinkie to do anything.
Another little noted fact is that House Democrats are responsible for keeping “felony illegal” provisions in the House Immigration Bill, HR 4437. In a slick maneuver December 16, House Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, was one of 191 Democrats who joined only 65 Republicans providing the majority voting to block an amendment to the HR 4437 immigration bill which would have removed provisions making a federal felony of illegal entry or presence in the U.S
I thought that provision had been removed.
Forbes and the Wall Street Journal are all for illegal alien employment. The big business lobby's insistence that businesses bear no responsibility for hiring illegals is what will make the Republican politicians cave and propose a "guest worker" amnesty. The result will be that masses of conservatives won't vote in Nov. and then Forbes and the WSJ will whine that the Dems won the election. The big business lobby just doesn't understand that there aren't enough millionaires in the US to elect anyone.
Hitting business will reduce job offers to illegals which in turn will reduce the numbers coming in.
Same with welfare/education/driving licenses.
Reduce jobs and perks and benefits and the number will start to dwindle.
"Immigration Reform On Whose Dime? "
Who else but LEGAL tax payers!
If I understand correctly, the Feds already have a toll free hotline that employers can call to check on the legal status of prospective employees. Most do not use this service because if they do, then they must also check the status of all potential employees and not just those with hispanic sur-names who don't speak a lick of English. I'm willing to bet that most employers of illegals don't even ask the question. Willful blindness is epidemic.
"Tyson Foods, the world's largest meat producer, shut 5 of 9 beef plants and 4 of 6 pork plants in anticipation of widespread absences. Perdue Farms, the nation's third-largest chicken producer, closed eight processing plants in seven states. Cargill Meat Solutions, the nation's second-largest beef processor, gave more than 15,000 workers the day off and closed plants in six states."
"Most employers support rallies"
Ilana DeBare, San Francisco Chronicle
Tuesday, May 2, 2006
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/02/IMMIGWORK.TMP
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1625091/posts
Reagan did much the same, except he granted Amnesty to 4 MILLION of them!
LLS
No, the rats shot down the provision removing illegal entry as a 'felony'.
I don't understand the Republican Senate. GWB did not ever, not once, call for anything more than a guest worker visa with a fixed termination date. You can go back and read his orginal speech from 2004 and he's very clear that amnesty and permanent status are not what he had in mind.
In fact, he's very clear that after six years, you go home and start the immigration process if you so desire, from the end of the line as it properly should be.
I don't have any great problem with that in principle (although the devil is in the details).
In any case, what is it with Senate Republicans pushing for a "path toward citizenship"? I think this is the one and only thing that is impermissable in the minds of most Americans, because it promotes breaking the law (e.g., amnesty) and it's unfair to those who follow the rules.
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.