Thread: Kris Kobach Calls H.R. 2164 (E-verify) "1986" All

What a struggle. Even good news seems bad. This legislation might act to limit the growth of future illegal immigration but it serves to some extent as a stealth amnesty as well. Perhaps amendments can be passed to strengthen it. However, the Chamber et al have probably said they would pull support if the stealth amnesty provisions are removed. Lets face it there is a wing of the Republican Party that will not be satisfied no matter what unless their labor is being subsidized by taxpayers. The only time they believe in free market economics is when they are listening to a campaign speech.



http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/op ... 3fUcpXAphK

Another amnesty?
New bill hobbles border states
By KRIS W. KOBACH
Posted: 10:43 PM, June 15, 2011

History is threatening to re peat itself. Twenty-five years ago, Congress passed the Simpson-Mazzoli Act (better known among conservatives as the 1986 illegal-alien amnesty), which gave a path to citizenship to illegal aliens already here in exchange for prohibiting the hiring of illegal workers -- a provision that has been enforced only sporadically. It was a raw deal for conservatives.

On Tuesday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) introduced a bill (HR 2164) to require nationwide use of the E-Verify system, which checks a job applicant's citizenship and immigration status, via the Internet, to see if he or she is eligible to work.

While the Smith bill sounds good, in fact, it hobbles immigration enforcement. Negotiated with the pro-amnesty US Chamber of Commerce, the bill would establish a fairly toothless E-Verify requirement while defanging the only government bodies that are serious about enforcing immigration law -- the states.

The timing couldn't be worse. The bill stabs Arizona in the back, just after it won a victory in the US Supreme Court in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting on May 26. The court upheld the 2007 Legal Arizona Workers Act, which lets the state suspend the business licenses of employers who knowingly hire unauthorized aliens and requires employers to use E-Verify.

The decision was a significant defeat for the Obama administration, which argued against the Arizona law in the high court, and for the Chamber of Commerce, which also opposed Arizona and has resisted immigration enforcement in the workplace.

It gives a green light to the rest of the states, allowing them, too, to revoke the business licenses of employers who hire unauthorized aliens. Alabama enacted a law taking Arizona's approach on June 9, just two weeks after the Supreme Court decision. Other states, like Missouri, Mississippi, South Carolina, Georgia and Oklahoma, had already done so. More would have followed in 2012.

But now, the Smith bill threatens to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The Arizona law -- along with every other state law on the subject -- would be preempted under the bill.

The Supreme Court held that cooperative immigration enforcement, with the states and the federal government working together to restore the rule of law in the workplace, was permissible under current federal law. But Smith's bill would change federal law so that the states can no longer take any actions against employers who knowingly hire unauthorized aliens.

State governments, not the federal government, shoulder the lion's share of the fiscal burden of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration costs the states some $80 billion a year, net, after any taxes paid by illegal aliens are considered. The net fiscal cost to the federal government is a quarter of that.

In effect, illegal immigration is the ultimate unfunded mandate. Now, the Smith bill threatens to tie the states' hands in addressing the problem.

The federal government has been unwilling to aggressively enforce immigration laws in the workplace, and this bill would be no exception. There is zero likelihood that the Obama administration will go after employers who fail to use E-Verify or who knowingly help their employees circumvent the system.

In contrast, states like Arizona have been effective in enforcing their illegal-immigration laws. In Arizona, dozens of work-site raids and investigations have occurred. That's why the number of illegal aliens in Arizona dropped 16 percent from 2008 to 2010 -- more than double the national 7 percent drop.

There are other problems with Smith's bill, showing why the chamber was so willing to strike this deal. Notably, it grandfathers in almost all illegal aliens who are already employed here and stay in the same job. They won't be checked through E-Verify. Thus, the bill will help keep the current population of illegal aliens working, so that they are still here if a future amnesty (which the chamber supports) occurs.

Even worse, the bill would effectively allow agricultural workers to skip E-Verify. All an employer has to do is assert that the alien worked for him at some point in the past. This loophole alone would likely allow millions of illegal aliens to continue working here.

In sum, the bill is a bad bargain for any American who thinks our immigration laws should be enforced -- selling out the states for little in return. The chamber knew exactly what it wanted.

If Smith's bill passes, it will be 1986 all over again.

Kris W. Kobach, the Kansas secre tary of state, co-authored the Ari zona and Alabama illegal-immigra tion laws.

WOW! I wonder what happened to NumbersUSA? They were asking members to support this bill yesterday.

If you read Numbersusa blog it explains they know about this but they are so thrilled to get a National E-Verify Law passed they are willing to overlook these pit falls.

I am not so sure...if the Chamber of Commerce is for this Bill then we know they have inserted laws in this Bill to get around any E-Verify law passed.

I believe the Chamber was so upset by the Supreme Court ruling on E-Verify they needed a way to stop States from passing real E-Verify laws and this National Law does just that !

Added to Homepage--

http://www.alipac.us/article-6351--0-0.html

SovereignMan wrote:

What a struggle. Even good news seems bad.

OMG, sometimes I feel like just banging my head against a brick wall. This is SO frustrating. Just when you think its good news......

I understand Kobach's concerns about this bill limiting states' rights to enforce the E-verify requirements. We have absolutely no reason to believe the traitorous Federal gov will enforce ANY immigration laws. However, I think I side with numbersusa on this one. Their blog article on this addresses all these concerns. With this bill, the states WILL be able to suspend business licenses of those who don't comply with E-verify, they just can't levy the fines.

And the problem right now is that there are only a handful of states that have strict E-verify laws. It could take years for many of the other states to come around, and some of the accomplice sanctuary states NEVER will.

I don't agree with Kobach's assessment that this is like the 1986 Amnesty, because it doesn't legalize any illegal aliens, it just prevents the use of E-verify being retroactive for current employees.

Of course, I wish it WAS retroactive. And how I wish it did allow states full enforcement. But as numbersusa points out, to throw out the whole bill because it has required some compromise to get it passed, might not be the best strategy, it might be missing a one-time opportunity.

'Chairman's E-Verify Bill' A Giant Increase Over States-Only Approach In Moving Illegal Aliens Out Of U.S. Jobs


THE OVERALL GREAT IMPACT OF THE CHAIRMAN'S NATIONAL E-VERIFY BILL (The 'Legal Workforce Act')

Let's start with what is fantastic about the bill -- H.R. 2164, the 'Legal Workforce Act' -- in terms of new hires.

E-Verify For New Hires:

99% of all hirings for U.S. jobs of any kind would have to be run through E-Verify within 2 years.


(Only 6 states come close to this requirement.)

(44 states don't require E-Verify for any private employers of any size unless they have government contracts.)

After 2 years, even employers of just ONE worker will have to use E-Verify, getting at the day laborers and other parts of the underground economy.

(Only 4 states have laws as good as this -- 46 states don't.)


100% of all state, county and city hirings would have to be run through E-Verify within 6 MONTHS.


(Current state laws affect an estimated 30% of state employee hirings nationwide and 12% of local government hirings.)


100% of all hirings by state government private contractors would have to be run through E-Verify within 6 MONTHS.


(That compares with around 25% of all state contractor hirings nationally under current state laws.)


Would make into law the very good executive action that Pres. Obama took in 2009 mandating E-Verify for all federal contractors (added to all federal employees).

NOTE: The percentages I am using for nationwide compliance under current state laws are based on very rough calculations since nobody keeps an exact count on these things. What we did was assume that jobs and hirings in each state are roughly proportionate to that state's population size. We then added the populations of each state requiring each kind of E-Verify compliance and divided by the total U.S. population. When I say around 25% of state contractor hirings nationally are currently covered by state laws, that means states with 25% of the U.S. population have laws requiring it.



3-PRONG EFFORT TO REMOVE ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS WHO ALREADY HAVE JOBS


Some 8 million illegal aliens currently hold U.S. jobs. A lot of them change jobs every year and would get blocked from a new job by E-Verify for new hires. But unless we have a vigorous system of going after illegal aliens who stay in their current jobs, we would be creating a kind of semi-slavery system in which illegal aliens would never leave their current jobs and employers could treat them as virtual slaves.

That is why Chairman Smith's bill is so important in its three-prong approach to finding virtually all illegal aliens holding payroll jobs and requiring them to be fired.

(States are prohibited by current federal law from requiring employers to deal with illegal aliens who are already on their payroll. )


Multiple Workplace Notification-Going After Identity Thieves


(No state has a law that goes after illegal aliens who get jobs by stealing identities.)

E-Verify's biggest weakness is that it fails to catch most illegal aliens who have paid big money to steal identities of U.S. citizens and other legal workers.

This provision in Lamar Smith's bill goes beyond E-Verify to close this loophole and catch perhaps the worst of the illegal workers, while alerting citizens so they can recover their stolen identities.

The bill:

requires the Social Security Administration once a year to identify all matching Social Security numbers and names that are being used at multiple workplaces (some are used at dozens and even hundreds of workplaces).
creates a system for the real owner of the name and SS number to contact SSA and establish ownership and where that person actually works.
requires SSA to notify all employers (other than of the true owner of the name) for a process that will result in the firing of the workers falsely using that name and SS number (although experience suggests that most of those illegal aliens will stop showing up for work once they get the notification letter from SSA).

No Match Notification-Going After Fictitious Identites


(No state has a law that achieves any comparable effect.)

The bill requires SSA's computers to identify every payroll worker who is using:

a SS number that doesn't exist
a SS number that doesn't match the name in the system
a number that isn't a SS number
other irregularities involving the SS number and information about that worker

After giving those workers a few days to straighten out any errors about them in the system, the employer is required to fire the ones who can't do so (in other words, fire the illegal aliens and also legal visitors who don't have the right to work).


Ensuring that Foereign Workers Who Lose Their Right To Work Cannot Continue Working Anyway


(No state has a law that achieves any comparable effect.)

The bill requires SSA to essentially deactivate the SS number of an alien whose visa expires, or who is deported or required to leave the United States, so that number cannot continue to be used to gain employment. The bill also requires DHS to notify employers of temporary workers when those workers' visas are about to expire, so the employer knows they must re-run those workers through E-Verify if they plan to continue their employment, thus ensuring that those whose work authorization has been extended may continue working, but others will be terminated.


BEEFING UP ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL LAWS AGAINST EMPLOYING ILLEGAL ALIENS


Chairman Smith's bill would impose big increases in penalties for businesses that continue to hire illegal aliens.

up to $25,000 fine per illegal worker
minimum prison sentences of one-year for offending employers


THE COMPROMISES IN THE CHAIRMAN'S NATIONAL E-VERIFY BILL


Obviously from the above, you can see that most of H.R. 2164 is fantastic.

But when I said yesterday that Rep. Smith's bill is the "most important" E-Verify legislation ever, I did not mean that it is the "best ever."

Mr. Smith's bill is "most important" because it has a real chance of getting through House, Senate and the White House and becoming law THIS YEAR. It has a chance because it isn't the "best" and instead involves some compromises to remove some key opposition that could keep it from reaching the finish line.

It is always critical to remember that a perfect bill that does NOT become law helps nobody.

H.R. 2164 does have a couple of major compromises that were necessary to turn the extremely powerful business lobbies from aggressive opponents into supporters of the legislation.

Would the country be better off with this "compromise" national legislation or with no national legislation and the need to continue to rely on state laws?

Some people have already suggested that since groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are supporting this bill that the bill must be a bad bill and favor illegal workers -- after all, the Chamber was in the forefront of pushing for amnesties during the Bush presidency.

But the Chamber now has a rational self interest in a mandatory verification law because its members now want a uniform set of rules across the country instead of what could become a patchwork of hundreds of local and state laws.

Whatever one may think about the motives or past behavior of those business lobbies, all those tough, sweeping, wonderful enforcement measures described above are real. Many of the lobbyists are saying that they don't like all of those measures but that they accepted them as part of a compromise for their support.

And what did they require in return?

Those are the two major deficiencies in the bill.

Agricultural Worker Delays & Loopholes:

This is the 1% that didn't make it into the two-year mandate of E-Verify for all new hires.

While all other jobs are phased in between six and 24 months, agricultural employers get an extra 12 months (3 years total) before having to run new hires through E-Verify.

I don't have much of a problem with the extra year. But a bigger loophole is a problem: the bill basically allows illegal farmworkers who return to a previous farm employer to avoid E-Verify indefinitely, as long as they continue to work for the same employer.

This relates to much less than one-half of 1% of the nation's jobs, but it ought to be fixed by amendment when H.R. 2164 comes to the House floor.

Restricting Ability of States and Localities to Enforce Employment Laws:

Considerably more consequential is a provision in H.R. 2164 that would "pre-empt" most state laws about employment of illegal aliens.

This pre-emption is NOT about state laws dealing with illegal immigration enforcement outside of employment issues.

And the bill WOULD allow states to revoke the business licenses of employers who refuse to participate in the E-Verify program. Thus, if a federal Administration fails to sufficiently punish employers who don't obey the requirement to use E-Verify, states could step in and punish by pulling business licenses.

However, H.R. 2164 would not allow states to levy penalties for employers cheating the E-Verify system by continuing to hire illegal aliens while officially enrolled in E-Verify. Punishment in this kind of case would be reserved to the federal government.

Led by state legislators of states and localities with the strictest laws, there is a move affoot to try to generate opposition to the entire bill because of this section.

There is great skepticism about the likelihood of a federal government truly enforcing the E-Verify laws, given the weak enforcement of the last 10 U.S. Presidents.

Those who are the most mistrustful tend to feel that only aggressive states will be able to force the feds to obey the law.

NumbersUSA understands that concern, but the history of E-Verify leads us to believe that this law will be different. The fact is that over a quarter of a million employers have already chosen to use E-Verify voluntarily, with another 1,300 joining each week. Once all employers are required to use it, we believe that the vast majority of employers will, because they actually want to obey the law, especially if it is easy.

STATES THAT LOSE -- STATES THAT GAIN

We had a conference call today with some of our leading activists in the states. I explained the issue about federal pre-emption of state laws.

Activists from Oregon and Ohio responded that they don't have mandatory E-Verify and are unlikely in the future to have it. "This is not a tough choice for us," one of them said. "A national law is the only way we are going to have E-Verify to get at the illegal workers."

Without a federal mandate, illegal aliens in tough-enforcement states can just move to the states that don't have enforcement. It is difficult to see how a states-only strategy could ever get us where we want to be.

Still, H.R. 2164 as written would reduce enforcement in some states.

Let's see what the tally might look like if H.R. 2164 becomes law.

As for states being able to punish businesses for illegal immigration infractions beyond not participating in E-Verify . . . .

LOSE: 7 states (Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Missouri, Oklahoma and South Carolina) would lose because their current law allows them that kind of punishment, Kansas Sec. of State Kris Kobach told me this afternoon.
NOT LOSE: The other 43 states would NOT lose anything in this regard in terms of current laws (but would lose the option of passing that kind of law in the future).

35 States Would Gain Everything

These states without any E-Verify law of their own would be entirely net gainers with a national law in terms of:

comprehensive measures to go after illegal aliens currently holding jobs
mandate on hiring of state, county and city employees
mandate on hiring by state contractors
mandate on hiring by large and medium private employers
mandate on private employers of 1-15 workers
partial mandate on ag workers

The 35 states that would gain so much from the national H.R. 2164 are:

WEST: Alaska, Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, New Mexico

GREAT PLAINS: Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas

SOUTH: Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia

GREAT LAKES: Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York

NEW ENGLAND: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut

MID-ATLANTIC: New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland

9 States Would Gain Almost Everything & Lose Little

Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Nebraska and Oklahoma would have a six-month pause in their E-Verify mandate on (a) state employees and (b) state contractors but would gain a law for everything else listed for the 35 states above.

Missouri would have a pause on those two categories and also on the mandate for employees of local governments -- while gaining on everything else.

North Carolina and Virginia would have a pause only for the mandate on state employees and gain on everything else.

Probably most importantly, all 9 would benefit from the part of H.R. 2164 that goes after the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens in their current jobs in those states.

6 States Would Delay In Several Categories But Gain Big In Current Hires

Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina and Utah would have a six-month to 24-month delay in their mandate (a) on contractors with local governments, (b) on private employers and (c) on ag workers.

Alabama and Arizona would have the same delays but excluding contractors of local governments.

But without the national law, there would be no concerted, systematic effort to identify and fire the illegal aliens currently holding jobs in those states.

ROY BECK is Founder & CEO of NumbersUSA

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
Views and opinions expressed in blogs on this website are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official policies of NumbersUSA.
Subscribe to our Blog Feed


© 2011 NumbersUSA Action, 1601 N Kent St, Suite 1100, Arlington, VA 22209, All Rights Reserved


http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusab ... ch-moving-[/b]

Interesting post from TPN.

Obama and La Raza do not speak for all Latinos in the USA

Posted by Juan Reynoso on June 16, 2011 at 5:56pm in Tea Party Nation Forum

LATINOS FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
https://www.teapartypatriots.org/
http://grassrootstexans.net/pages/home/
latinosfed@gmail.com

June 16th, 2011

Fellow Americans, OBAMA, THE DEMOCRATS, LA RAZA, MALDEF, MECHA, LULAC, THE HISPANIC CAUCUS, THE TEXAS HISPANIC CAUCUS, THE NATIONAL HISPANIC LEARDERSHIP, AND THE PROMOTERS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. do not speak for all the Latinos in the United States. Most Latinos love our country "the United States of America". We believe in our Constitution, our Sovereignty and our immigration laws, we come to this country legally, to be part of this United States, our loyalty can not be question by any one and we are not going to let the political power grabbers, to let the rest of the country believe that we are part of their organization. Today we the Latinos loyal to our only country, The Unite States of America, declare war to the traitors enemy's of our country The United States of America.

La raza and the rest of the Mexican organizations agenda, is to promote socialism they are the Marxist of tomorrow, they betray this country; the country that open his door and welcome them with the amnesty of 1986 to be part of America; these people has not loyalty they are the promoters of the invasion of illegal aliens and defenders of the corrupt politicians and criminals that are here in our country in violation of our laws.

Fellow Americans, thanks God we have in Washington politicians that care about the future of our country and we must support them. This week on Capitol Hill, House Republicans, led by Reps. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Elton Gallegly (R-CA) and Steve King (R-TX), unveiled a plan to make all employers in the United States, to use the E-Verify law to prevent the employment of illegal immigrants in our country. The majority of Americans support the enforcement of our immigration laws because they are fed up with Obama and the promoters of illegal immigration refusal to enforce our immigration laws and protect our borders from the invasion of illegal aliens and the drug traffickers, that are destroying our country's values, school system, social service and most important they are taken our jobs and are a huge financial burden.

Fellow Americans, we know what the promoters of illegal immigration will do. their strategy to stop the implementation of the E-verify law and any enforcement of the immigration laws will be making statements such as:

Mandatory E-Verify WILL keep hundreds of thousands of American workers from working, because the federal bureaucracy to prove eligibility.

Mandatory E-Verify WILL burden small business owners who want to comply with the law.

Mandatory E-Verify WILL cost taxpayers double– in cost of implementation and in lost revenues from workers getting paid under the table.

Mandatory E-Verify WON’T keep employers from hiring undocumented immigrants.

Mandatory E-Verify WON’T catch over half of the undocumented workers who go through the system.

Mandatory E-Verify WON’T fix the broken immigration system. Comprehensive immigration reform WILL.

http://www.lawlogix.com/i-9-and-e-verif ... /state-map

Fellow Americans, without a doubt we are being destroy by our own Government, We elected Obama and our officials to uphold our Constitution, our sovereignty and protect the citizens rights by upholding our laws. Attorney General Erick Holder and the whole US Dept. of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security from Secretary Janet Napolitano on down seem to be working for the Mexican government and the Hispanics special interest, not The American citizens who pay their salaries.

Please stand for our country and support, Lamar Smith's Employment eligibility Verification bill, send a letter or fax to your representative in Washington and your Governor asking to support this Bill. We must stop the traitors “OBAMA, LA RAZA, MALDEF, MECHA,LULA, THE WASHINGTON HISPANIC CAUCUS, THE TEXAS HISPANIC CAUCUS AND THE NATIONAL HISPANIC LEADERSHIP" They are a threat to the US Latinos and to our country.

For more information about the Smith bill and its impact on workers, taxpayers, and businesses, see:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/ ... b9ac8924...

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/ ... f35e66f6...

http://www.hstoday.us/single-article/su ... arizona-...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Verify

latinosfed@gmail.com

http://www.teapartynation.com/forum/top ... -not-speak

I have to agree with what NumbersUSA said and go against Kobach on this one. We will NOT get the perfect bill that we'd all dream of. It'd be great if we did but have to many teeth or to sharp and it won't make it in the senate and even if did Obama would veto it citing harshness.

However like NumbersUSA said we have at least a dozen states that will NOT get a state E-verify bill passed..... ever. Well at least until we have 99% of illegal aliens gone and the country back in order. We have another number of states it will be hard and likely a few years before we can get an E-verify law in place as well.

With that said its better to have a national mandate that effects the ALL states especially the ones that have the biggest problems now such as NY, Washington, and our favorite California among others. Later on we can try and expand the E-Verify program and make the punishments tougher but for now its a step in the right direction at least.

Plus you think in honesty that many of the companies now hiring illegals when its a national law and punishable by major fines those bigger companies even if franchised will crack down rather then go into the full black market labor pool. Yes there are some loopholes but best to put sandbags up to at least slow and hopefully stop the flood for the moment while you continue building that concrete dam.

This one headline means that this bill Is not very good U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Home Builders, and the National Restaurant Association Endorse E-Verify Bill

Mark Krikorian also supports the federal E-verify bill. He is from pro-enforcement org Center for Immigration Studies.

Making the Perfect the Enemy of the Good
By Mark Krikorian

June 16, 2011

As I noted yesterday, some immigration hawks are balking at Lamar Smith’s bill to make use of E-Verify mandatory for all new hires. (My piece on the bill over at the home page is here.) That’s now come out in the open with Kris Kobach’s NY Post op-ed today.

Let me start by noting that Kris is a patriot, a genuine conservative, and a good guy, and I will happily vote for him when he runs for president some day, as I think likely. But his objections to the Smith bill, though real, just aren’t serious enough to outweigh the benefits of the legislation. First off, the headline was obviously not written by him because the bill contains no amnesty, no legalization, no path to anything. (Read the pdf of the bill here.)

Kris’s main objection is that the bill would “defangâ€