E-Verify doesn't prevent many companies from hiring undocumented workers

E-Verify doesn't prevent many companies from hiring undocumented workers

Tatiana SanchezThe Mercury News


When federal agents raided dozens of 7-Eleven stores across the country earlier this month and arrested 21 workers suspected of being undocumented immigrants, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement director Tom Homan declared that the highly publicized raids were meant to send a message to employers: "If you are found to be breaking the law, you will be held accountable."

But after all the smoke from the day's fiery rhetoric cleared, one huge question remained: How did these undocumented immigrants get hired in the first place?


At a time when the national debate over immigration is at its tipping point, questions have begun to resurface about E-Verify a 21-year-old electronic program designed to filter out undocumented immigrants who apply for jobs leaving many Americans wondering how millions of them slip through the system.

After all, credit card companies nearly seamlessly verify tens of millions of 16-digit numbers every day with a tiny little machine that easily fits on the counter of nearly every store in America. What could be so hard about verifying that every job applicant has a valid Social Security number or "alien registration number" that indicates that the jobseeker is a legal U.S. resident even if he or she is not yet a citizen.


But many immigration policy experts say E-Verify is not what it seems. They contend it's essentially a political fig leaf, with so many significant flaws and loopholes that it allows employers to knowingly hire undocumented workers with little repercussions for doing so.

Only 3,000 of hundreds of thousands of companies enrolled in E-Verify were audited during the eight years of the Obama administration, said Daniel Costa, director of immigration law and policy research for the Economic Policy Institute, a pro-labor think tank based in Washington, D.C.

"They continue to be able to hire undocumented workers without having to verify anything with the government," Costa said.

With such a low chance of being audited, Costa said, E-Verify is "a wink and a nod from the government to employers" that lets them continue to hire undocumented workers.

An estimated 763,500 employers were taking part in E-verify as of Jan. 16, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which oversees the program.

That sounds like a lot, but it's only a tiny percentage of the more than 18 million businesses in the U.S.
The reason for the low participation rate is that the program is voluntary in most states. It's mandatory only for businesses that have been caught hiring undocumented immigrants.

In the last fiscal year, 98.88 percent of the employees entered into the E-Verify system were cleared to work, requiring no employee or employer action, according to USCIS.

Calls for "mandatory E-Verify" particularly among immigration hardliners in the Republican Party could be heard in the halls of Congress last week as legislators unsuccessfully tried to reach an immigration deal that would allow 800,000 young undocumented immigrants to stay in the U.S.

Polls have shown that more than two-thirds of the American public believe the E-Verify should be mandatory.
Capitalizing on that sentiment, Rep. Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican who sits on the House Judiciary and Homeland Security committees, recently introduced a measure to require all employers to use the program. "By expanding the E-Verify system to all U.S. employers, this bill will ensure that jobs only go to legal workers," Smith said.

But Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute's Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity, a libertarian think-tank in Washington, D.C., said E-Verify simply checks documents that are submitted and accepts those documents even if they are fraudulent which is the way most undocumented immigrants secure employment.

The Social Security Administration estimated that 1.8 million immigrants were working with fake or stolen Social Security cards in 2010 and that number is expected to reach 3.4 million by 2040.

Even when E-verify is mandated, Nowrasteh said, "a large portion of employers still don't use it for new hires" because the government audits are so minimal.

"People think this is going to be the way that illegal immigrants can't work in the U.S.," he said. "That is fantasy."
So why does the program exist?

Nowrasteh contends it's because E-Verify allows politicians to claim the U.S. is being tough on immigration without actually having to be tough.

"Nobody wants to shut down businesses. That's expensive politically and economically," he said. "It's much easier to have a system that doesn't work (but which) sounds like a silver bullet."

But some groups trying to put more restrictions of immigration say E-Verify isn't as flawed as critics make it seem and have called on federal officials to expand the program.

The idea that somebody could put down a false or stolen Social Security number and get hired by an employer that uses E-Verify is "impossible" to believe, said Joe Guzzardi, spokesman for Progressives for Immigration Reform, an organization in Washington, D.C., that says it's fighting for more immigration restrictions on behalf of U.S. workers. The group wants to make E-Verify mandatory.

U.S. immigration authorities say they've gradually improved the system over the years to fix some of its flaws and to close loopholes.

Sharon Rummery, a spokeswoman for USCIS, said when it became known that people could get around E-Verify by taking on stolen identities, the agency in 2007 added a "photo tool" feature that allows employers to enter new hires into the system to check the photo on the identification card they used and compare it to the photo of the person who was originally granted the green card or work authorization document, Under E-Verify, once employees provide documents such as passports, Social Security cards and driver's licenses, employers use a device that looks a lot like the credit-card machines that stores use. A software program then runs the information on the documents through U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration databases to confirm whether the job applicant is here legally.

If the information clears the system, the employer will receive an "Employment Authorized" message almost immediately. If the job applicant isn't able to work in the U.S., the employer will receive a "tentative non-confirmation" message, according to USCIS.

The employer is then required to notify the employee, who is given a brief window of time to fix the issue. Those who are unable to provide documentation are not allowed to work.

Companies that don't use E-Verify require jobseekers to fill out old-fashioned forms to check work eligibility. The employers then must certify that the documents provided by the applicant appear to be genuine.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose and the ranking Democrat on the House's Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee, said E-Verify has a fairly high accuracy rate, but the underlying problem is the country's "completely broken" immigration system.
Get breaking news with our free mobile app. Get it from the Apple app store or the Google Play store.

She said employers may now have a reliable way to check if their workers are in the U.S. legally, but they know that they need those same workers to keep their businesses afloat.

"You go into the fields in Salinas and you have agricultural workers picking the crops. You could use E- Verify and find out that half of them or more are undocumented," Lofgren added. "So then who picks the crops? That's the problem."
E-Verify by the numbers

To confirm a job applicant's eligibility to work in the U.S., the E-Verify program compares information provided by a job applicant with data in Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration computers.

10.5 million � Number of queries run through the E-Verify system so far in the 2018 fiscal year, which began Oct 1.
763,500 � Employers registered for E-Verify as of Jan. 16.
2.5 million Number of hiring sites represented by E-Verify
1,316 Average number of employers who have registered for the program weekly so far in fiscal 2018.
Source: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...123-story.html

I've always been a big supporter of E-Verify. I'll be the first one to admit when I was wrong. It may still be a good thing if it's fixed to actually work.

Let me again stress the most important part of this article:

Quote:

---

With such a low chance of being audited, Costa said, E-Verify is "a wink and a nod from the government to employers" that lets them continue to hire undocumented workers.

---

Thanks for posting that article, Six Million Dollar Man. I've never been a big fan of E-Verify because I never thought it would stop the willful hiring of illegal aliens which is the problem, not the ones who unintentionally hire them.

Fine and JAIL the employers!

That puts Americans who work there out of work. The solution is MASSIVE RAPID DEPORTATIONS. That is the law, that is why the federal government has the authority to prohibit immigration in the US Constitution, so it can remove them from our premises. Fining and jailing employers that shuts down their business or results in the lay off of Americans for hiring illegal aliens the government is allowing to stay in our country makes no sense to me.

GET THE GAWD DAMN ILLEGAL ALIENS OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND KEEP THEM OUT. Everyone wants to punish Americans for something illegal aliens are doing. Punish the illegal aliens, get them out of here. Announce an EO authorizing all state and local law enforcement agencies to enforce US immigration law. They're every bit as qualified as any DOJ lawyer and and as equally qualified as any ICE agent or BP agent. This isn't rocket science, it's boots on the ground, removing this scourge from our otherwise lovely nation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beezer

Fine and JAIL the employers!

---

I agree. Send the CEO (if he knew) or manager who did the hiring to prison. No need to worry about the legal workers because someone else will step up to replace their former boss. Do this (send them to prison) and the new boss or hiring manager will not continue the practice that sent their former boss to jail.

I strongly support E-verify even if corporate America and businesses do not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

Nowrasteh contends it's because E-Verify allows politicians to claim the U.S. is being tough on immigration without actually having to be tough.

"Nobody wants to shut down businesses. That's expensive politically and economically," he said. "It's much easier to have a system that doesn't work (but which) sounds like a silver bullet."

---

;););)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

That puts Americans who work there out of work. The solution is MASSIVE RAPID DEPORTATIONS. That is the law, that is why the federal government has the authority to prohibit immigration in the US Constitution, so it can remove them from our premises. Fining and jailing employers that shuts down their business or results in the lay off of Americans for hiring illegal aliens the government is allowing to stay in our country makes no sense to me.

GET THE GAWD DAMN ILLEGAL ALIENS OUT OF THE COUNTRY AND KEEP THEM OUT. Everyone wants to punish Americans for something illegal aliens are doing. Punish the illegal aliens, get them out of here. Announce an EO authorizing all state and local law enforcement agencies to enforce US immigration law. They're every bit as qualified as any DOJ lawyer and and as equally qualified as any ICE agent or BP agent. This isn't rocket science, it's boots on the ground, removing this scourge from our otherwise lovely nation.

---

Quote:

---

That puts Americans who work there out of work.

---

No, most of the time it doesn't because there is always someone to step up and take on the job. Very few employers are actually expendable. That even goes for a corporate CEO or business owner. The business owner normally has another family member or his second in charge that can continue operating the business. Of course that may not work for a landscaping company owner that has eight workers and they're all illegal aliens. That's the kind of business that needs to go under anyway.

Quote:

---

Fining and jailing employers that shuts down their business or results in the lay off of Americans for hiring illegal aliens the government is allowing to stay in our country makes no sense to me.

---

If they knowingly hire illegals, they deserve to have their company shut down. However, as I explained above, that's not typically what happens. Of course you know that.

Quote:

---

Everyone wants to punish Americans for something illegal aliens are doing.

---

You're damn right we want to punish folks that aid and abet illegal immigrants! Aiding and abetting illegal immigrants is against the law and anyone that does it should be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible under law. What's wrong with that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Fining and jailing employers that shuts down their business or results in the lay off of Americans for hiring illegal aliens the government is allowing to stay in our country makes no sense to me.

---

Disagree about not jailing the employers. We have many citizens who are profiting from this invasion. They must be punished also.

5/27/2018 1:07 AM

What happened to E-Verify -- the government's popular way to curb illegal immigration?«

• http://www.dailyherald.com/storyimag...H=800&noborder
  Server Gustavo Salines delivers meals to a couple visiting from Britain at Skull Creek Dockside WatPhoto for The Washington Post by Stephen B. Morton

Waterfront Restaurant on Hilton Head Island, S.C. Staffing at the restaurant is down 10 percent because of a labor shortage.

Tracy Jan
The Washington Post
WP Bloomberg

http://www.dailyherald.com/apps/pbcs...ment=3&maxH=70


In President Donald Trump's many vocal pronouncements about stopping illegal immigration, one solution he promoted during the campaign has been conspicuously missing: a requirement that employers check whether workers are legal.

Eight states require nearly all employers to use the federal government's online "E-Verify" tool to check whether new hires are eligible to work in the U.S., but efforts to expand the mandate to all states have stalled, despite polls showing widespread support and studies showing it reduces unauthorized workers.

The campaign for a national mandate has withered amid what appears to be a more pressing problem -- a historic labor shortage that has businesses across the country desperate for workers, at restaurants, farms and in other low-wage jobs.

The urgency around that shortage was clear at a congressional hearing last week when senators pressed Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen on additional visas for seasonal foreign workers.
"There's not one manufacturing plant in Wisconsin, not one dairy farm, not one resort that can hire enough people," said Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

With the unemployment rate at a 17-year low and a Trump administration crackdown on foreign workers, lawmakers are reluctant to champion legislation that could exacerbate the labor shortage and hurt business constituents -- even one aimed at illegal workers that's popular among a broad swath of Americans.

House Republicans are forging ahead with a debate over the future of young undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States as children, but the fate of an E-Verify provision remains in limbo.


http://www.dailyherald.com/storyimag...H=800&noborderFood runner Gustavo Salines carries a tray of food past an closed off section of Skull Creek Dockside in Hilton Head Island, S.C. The restaurant owners said they lack the staffing to use the space for customers. - Photo for The Washington Post by Stephen B. Morton

Despite his administration's "Hire American" rhetoric, Trump and the GOP leadership have gone quiet on mandating E-Verify, draining momentum from a top policy goal of grass-roots Republicans.
"The president has been very weak on this subject. Even though he's not pushing hard for it, and even though the Republican leadership has been really sluggish on this, the Republican Party as a whole is overwhelmingly for this," said Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, an organization that has campaigned for a national E-Verify mandate since 1996 in its quest for reduced immigration.
"Allowing businesses to employ people illegally is like the government leaving the keys in an unlocked car," Beck said. "You're going to get a lot of stolen cars."

E-Verify has proved effective at keeping immigrants who are in the country illegally from taking American jobs. In Arizona, which pioneered the mandatory checks in 2008, the number of unauthorized workers dropped 33 percent below what was projected without the requirement, according to a 2017 analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

The federal employment verification system, introduced more than 20 years ago, has wide public support. Nearly 80 percent of those surveyed last fall by The Washington Post and ABC News support requiring employers to verify new hires are legally living in the United States -- more than double the support for building a wall along the Mexico border.

Trump touted a national E-Verify mandate while running for president.

"We will ensure that E-Verify is used to the fullest extent possible under existing law, and we will work with Congress to strengthen and expand its use across the country," Trump declared in a 2016 speech in Arizona.

Trump last October listed E-Verify among his immigration priorities and in February, requested $23 million in his 2019 budget proposal to expand the program for mandatory nationwide use. He uses E-Verify at his golf club in North Carolina, where the worker checks are required by state law, as well as other entities in Chicago, Miami and New York, according to an E-Verify database of participating employers.

But it is unclear whether E-Verify checks are performed across Trump's entire domestic portfolio of hotels and golf clubs. Trump Organization and White House officials have not responded to Post inquiries.

And Trump has yet to use the platform of the presidency to rally support for a national requirement, opting instead to push for building a wall, militarizing the border and stepping up deportations.
The labor shortage in industries that most depend upon undocumented workers -- like agriculture, construction and hospitality -- is driving up wages and deterring state authorities from rigorous enforcement of state E-Verify laws, factors that analysts say complicate any national campaign.

There is just one unemployed person for every job opening in the country, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, the lowest since the government began tracking this information in 2000.

"If you cut off the labor supply like these laws do, you are going to see employers get desperate when it becomes a lot more difficult to hire, and if businesses are following the law, they have to raise wages," said Pia Orrenius, senior economist at the Dallas Fed who found that states with universal E-Verify requirements typically saw substantial reductions in the number of unauthorized workers.

Orrenius's research has shown that E-Verify mandates resulted in increased wages for low-skilled workers born in the United States or otherwise naturalized. In the states that have mandated near-universal E-Verify, the average hourly wages of unauthorized Mexican men fell nearly 8 percent after the requirement went into effect, while wages for U.S. born and naturalized Hispanic men rose between 7 and 9 percent.

http://www.dailyherald.com/storyimag...H=800&noborderSteve Carb, president of SERG Restaurant Group, stands at the entrance of Skull Creek Dockside restaurant. He is struggling to staff his 12 restaurants. - Photo for The Washington Post by Stephen B. Morton


In South Carolina, restaurateur Steve Carb, the largest employer on the resort island of Hilton Head, is struggling to staff his 12 restaurants -- and having to shut down entire dining sections several days a week.

His dining establishments, from pizzerias to 450-seat waterfront seafood restaurants, now employ about 900 people but need 1,000 to function optimally, he said.

He has had to raise wages to attract and keep workers.

Dishwashers earn $13 an hour, instead of $10 a couple of years ago. Line cooks are paid between $15 and $18 an hour, instead of $13 to $15. Additional overtime costs mean tweaking the menu to stay profitable, from switching to smaller shrimp to raising the price of a plate of fish and chips by 30 cents.
"The whole island is a disaster zone right now," said Carb, president and founder of SERG Restaurant Group. "It's been a nightmare." Meanwhile, Carb noted, "there are people who are willing to work and pay taxes, but they can't get jobs because we can't legally hire them."
Other restaurants will, though, he said.

Even with the threat of fines or losing their business licenses, some employers in mandatory E-Verify states are not complying with the program because states have shied away from enforcement actions for fear of alienating business owners.

Only 55 percent of new hires in South Carolina were screened through E-Verify in the second quarter of 2017, according to an analysis by Cato Institute. In Arizona, 59 percent of new hires were checked against federal records during that period, according to Cato.

"There's no enforcement," said Bruce Dusenberry, former president and chief executive of Horizon Moving Systems before he sold it in 2013 to focus on commercial industrial real estate in Arizona. "If employers were required to follow the law just like they scream about immigrants following the law, it would reduce the demand," said Dusenberry, who supports a national E-Verify mandate. "We wouldn't need the military going down to the border."

Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at Cato, said states have been reluctant to crack down hard because legislators know businesses will suffer. His analyses have shown that compliance rates in South Carolina fall when the unemployment rate falls.


"The penalties aren't used very often because who wants to shut down a bunch of small businesses?" Nowrasteh said. "If you enforce immigration laws too much, you could do serious damage to the local economy and hurt a lot of small businesses that have a lot of political power."

In South Carolina, 2 percent of employers were audited for E-Verify use in 2017, according to state data. Of those businesses, 17 percent were cited for violating the law, but none had their licenses suspended.
Congressional Republican supporters of Trump's "America First" ideology also face political pressures.
Conservative members who represent rural farming districts, as well as Democrats, have said they will support a national E-Verify mandate only if it comes with the guarantee of a robust agricultural guest worker program and protection of existing workers who are in the country illegally.

"A lot of our elected officials are listening to those of us explaining the negative economic impact," said Bert Lemkes, general manager of Tri-Hishtil, an agricultural firm in western North Carolina that specializes in plant grafting.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said in an interview that the low unemployment rate has made it harder for Republicans to call for a federal mandate. He said he would not support a national mandate, but states that do require employers to use E-Verify, such as North Carolina, should receive priority for foreign worker visas.

http://www.dailyherald.com/storyimag...H=800&noborderFry cooks Gerson Gonzalez, center, and Modesto Lopez, left, prepare meals in the kitchen of Skull Creek Dockside. The restaurant's owner has had to raise wages to attract and keep workers. - Photo for The Washington Post by Stephen B. Morton

"There is a worker shortage, whether it's in low-skilled work or certified work like the construction trades," Tillis said. "There is going to be an increasing number of unfilled positions." He cited a business franchise with footprints in North Carolina and another state without an E-Verify requirement that he would not name because he did not want to identify the company. "In North Carolina, they have a couple hundred open jobs they can't fill," he said. "And in the state without E-Verify, they don't have a worker shortage."

Florida Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican, campaigned on the promise of implementing a statewide E-Verify mandate. But as governor, Scott told citrus growers in 2012 that it would be "foolish to put Florida companies at a disadvantage" because of the lack of a national requirement.

Nationally, 10 percent of U.S. employers are enrolled in E-Verify. The eight states that require nearly all employers to use the system are: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah.

California, a self-declared "sanctuary state" for undocumented immigrants, prohibits state agencies and municipalities from mandating E-Verify.

David Cox, owner of a family nursery L.E. Cooke Co. in Visalia, California, voluntarily began using E-Verify after a 2009 audit by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. A quarter of his field workers were undocumented and had to be fired.

But the E-Verify signs in his office and production facilities have discouraged many immigrants from applying. Instead, Cox began primarily attracting ex-convicts.

His absenteeism rate shot from nonexistent up to 10 percent as his new employees skipped work for drug court, anger management classes and appointments with their probation and parole officers. He slipped a new line into his orientation speech: "No guns, knives or bombs."

Whereas in the past, Cox harangued workers who showed up 10 minutes past the 7:30 a.m. start time, he soon began thanking the ones who bothered showing up by 10 a.m.

By April, Cox concluded that, amid other labor market conditions, he could no longer compete against nurseries that continue to employ unauthorized immigrants, and he shuttered his field operations.

"If we're going to use E-Verify," he said, "it has to be done on a national basis all at once so everyone is on a level playing field and everyone feels the pain."

http://www.dailyherald.com/business/...al-immigration

Quote:

---

"If we're going to use E-Verify," he said, "it has to be done on a national basis all at once so everyone is on a level playing field and everyone feels the pain."

---

That makes sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

I agree. Send the CEO (if he knew) or manager who did the hiring to prison. No need to worry about the legal workers because someone else will step up to replace their former boss. Do this (send them to prison) and the new boss or hiring manager will not continue the practice that sent their former boss to jail.

---

I fully agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

I strongly support E-verify even if corporate America and businesses do not.

---

I do too, only if it actually works. The article says that it doesn't. I want it implemented, but I also want it to work. I don't want it implemented just for show, to sucker us into thinking that everyone who works and lives in the U.S. is legal.

Every single company in the U.S. is already required to have new-hires fill out an I-9 form, which is a document used by DHS (Department of Homeland Security), yes, the people who are supposed to protect us from terrorists and illegal immigration, to verify a new-hire's identity and employment authorization. But yet, illegals are still able to pass this background check done by DHS. How in the hell does DHS verify illegal aliens using stolen social security numbers to lawfully live and work in this country? There is something very, very wrong here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

E-Verify has proved effective at keeping immigrants who are in the country illegally from taking American jobs. In Arizona, which pioneered the mandatory checks in 2008, the number of unauthorized workers dropped 33 percent below what was projected without the requirement, according to a 2017 analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

---

How come 33% and not 100%? If it does what it's supposed to do, the number of unauthorized workers would have fallen by 100%. This tells me that it's not foolproof. The 33% who left probably did so because they were scared that it would actually work. I want to see E-Verify become mandatory for all employers, but I also want it to work. And like I said numerous times before, if you also include very heavy fines and prison time for employers who hire them, all the illegals in this country would immediately leave on their own, because they would have no other choice.

Is your goal of E-verify to get them to leave voluntarily, to self-deport? Is that the plan so you don't have to deport them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Fining and jailing employers that shuts down their business or results in the lay off of Americans for hiring illegal aliens the government is allowing to stay in our country makes no sense to me.

---

If they are employing illegals, that doesn't benefit American workers, it benefits people who are illegally in this country. There is also a thing called competition. A single business isn't usually the only business out there specializing in that product or service. If a company does get shut down, that will benefit the company who competes with the one that got shut down for employing illegals, and that company can hire even more Americans from the increased business.

But that doesn't happen anyway. I agree with MW, because I've seen it happen with companies who got busted employing illegals, they continue operating, but this time they are forced to hire AMERICANS. It would be nice if they also went to prison as well, in order to send a strong message to other criminal employers. Like MW said, there is always someone else in line to take over that position. If there isn't, then tough sh*t, let their competitors who follow the rules take on the extra business and make that extra money, and hire more American workers for all that extra business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Is your goal of E-verify to get them to leave voluntarily, to self-deport? Is that the plan so you don't have to deport them?

---

Yes, yes it is. That would be nice. But in addition to E-Verify that actually works, I would also like to see the people who employ them severely punished. Yes, that's the plan. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

If they are employing illegals, that doesn't benefit American workers, it benefits people who are illegally in this country. There is also a thing called competition. A single business isn't usually the only business out there specializing in that product or service. If a company does get shut down, that will benefit the company who competes with the one that got shut down for employing illegals, and that company can hire even more Americans from the increased business.

But that doesn't happen anyway. I agree with MW, because I've seen it happen with companies who got busted employing illegals, they continue operating, but this time they are forced to hire AMERICANS. It would be nice if they also went to prison as well, in order to send a strong message to other criminal employers. Like MW said, there is always someone else in line to take over that position. If there isn't, then tough sh*t, let their competitors who follow the rules take on the extra business and make that extra money, and hire more American workers for all that extra business.

---

I understand all of that, but putting Americans in jail because they hire people the government refuses to deport? Sorry, I support fines, but not jail. Our businesses aren't the criminals, they're just taking advantage of a resource the government allows them. Illegal aliens who come here and the bastards in DOJ, DHS, IRS, the Courts and in Congress who refuse to get them out of here and keep them out are the criminals.

I support fines, even shutting down their business for a week or something like that, but jail? No, sorry, I don't support that at all, while all these creeps in government enabling this crap and all these thugs pouring over the border roam around free as birds, and some poor schmuck trying to run a business, compete with Mexico and China and still serve his customers ends up behind bars? Oh no, I don't support that at all.

That makes our employers and businesses scapegoats for everyone else's wrong-doing long before they hired someone who lied on an I-9 form with a stolen social security number who shouldn't even be in our country to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

Yes, yes it is. That would be nice. But in addition to E-Verify that actually works, I would also like to see the people who employ them severely punished. Yes, that's the plan. ;)

---

Why wouldn't you prefer to deport the illegal aliens? They're the criminals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

I understand all of that, but putting Americans in jail because they hire people the government refuses to deport? Sorry, I support fines, but not jail. Our businesses aren't the criminals, they're just taking advantage of a resource the government allows them.

---

Businesses who employ illegal aliens over Americans, are traitors. I say lock them up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

That makes our employers and businesses scapegoats for everyone else's wrong-doing long before they hired someone who lied on an I-9 form with a stolen social security number who shouldn't even be in our country to begin with.

---

If the employer knows he/she is employing illegals, then yes, he/she should go to prison.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Why wouldn't you prefer to deport the illegal aliens? They're the criminals.

---

That too. In addition to punishing the people who employ them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

That makes our employers and businesses scapegoats for everyone else's wrong-doing long before they hired someone who lied on an I-9 form with a stolen social security number who shouldn't even be in our country to begin with.

---

Really!? You believe a company that hires 400 illegals and 0 citizens are scapegoats for everyone else's wrong-doing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoptheinvaders

Really!? You believe a company that hires 400 illegals and 0 citizens are scapegoats for everyone else's wrong-doing?

---

Exactly!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Illegal aliens who come here and the bastards in DOJ, DHS, IRS, the Courts and in Congress who refuse to get them out of here and keep them out are the criminals.

---

Your list didn't include the one who ran a campaign promising to straighten up this mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Is your goal of E-verify to get them to leave voluntarily, to self-deport? Is that the plan so you don't have to deport them?

---

We have to make their life as miserable as possible and preventing them from working helps to accomplish that goal. Will it take care of all of them? Of course not because some, such as drug traffickers, MS-13, human smugglers, criminal scammers, etc. are here primarily to prey on Americans. The only way to get rid of that crowd is through deportation and/or prison followed by deportation. Every illegal in this country is not here for the exact same reason. I firmly believe many will self-deport if we make their life here more miserable than it was in their homeland. The rest ... well ... DHS and DOJ can sort that out and deport their butt!

Our illegal immigration problem isn't a one solution will fix all kind of problem. It's more complex than that. That's why we need an entry/exit system for visa holders, Trump's promised border wall, E-Verify, an end to chain-migration, end to birthright citizenship, loophole closures on asylum cases, etc., etc. This is a multifaceted problem that requires a combination of solutions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MW

We have to make their life as miserable as possible and preventing them from working helps to accomplish that goal. Will it take care of all of them? Of course not because some, such as drug traffickers, MS-13, human smugglers, criminal scammers, etc. are here primarily to prey on Americans.

---

And illegals who don't have to work because they have an American citizen sugar mama or sugar daddy. But we'll eventually find them and deport their ass as well, if we implement all the things mentioned in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

That makes our employers and businesses scapegoats for everyone else's wrong-doing long before they hired someone who lied on an I-9 form with a stolen social security number who shouldn't even be in our country to begin with.

---

Also, the employers who hire them ARE the problem. They are the magnet that keeps luring illegals to come here in the first place. We need to cure the disease, not just the symptoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

Also, the employers who hire them ARE the problem. They are the magnet that keeps luring illegals to come here in the first place. We need to cure the disease, not just the symptoms.

---

Well said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoptheinvaders

]Really!? You believe a company that hires 400 illegals and 0 citizens are scapegoats for everyone else's wrong-doing?

---

Americans including our American-owned businesses are the victims of this problem, not criminals. If one dairy farmer hires illegal aliens, then they all have to hire illegal aliens to compete with each other, just like our manufacturers dealing with free trade treason, once one leaves and goes to Mexico or China, they all had to leave and go to Mexico or China to compete with each other.

It took a lot of wrong doing by a lot of people for those businesses to hire illegal aliens or those manufacturers to relocate to foreign countries. Did you know that under our laws, there is no law that forbids an illegal alien from stealing a job from an American worker or taking one that's unfilled? They can go to the US Department of Labor and file claims for erroneous pay and other things and the US Department of Labor will protect them and go after the business for the shortages or whatever the issue is. Isn't that crazy? It's illegal for the employer to hire you but it's not illegal for you as an illegal alien to ask for the job or take the job. Isn't that nuts? To me that's just nutzo.

Our laws set up our businesses to be the scapegoats of illegal immigration, not the Border Patrol who lets them in, the sanctuary cities who protect them, the drug cartels who own the smugglers who bring them here, the networks who make the arrangements, not the IRS who launders billions of our cash out to them in household sums of thousands of dollars a year in earned income and child care tax credits, not the hospitals who treat them, not the schools who educate them, not the 95,000 employees of the US Department of Justice responsible for deporting them but doesn't, not the 225,000 employees of the US Department of Homeland Security who are paid to keep them out, but doesn't, not the landlord who profit from renting to them, not the utility companies who profit serving them, nope, no laws against any of that.

Nope, just our businesses who hire them. If that's not a scapegoat by definition, then I don't know what would be one. Again, I'm not opposed to fines and temporary closures like for a week or so, to sort everything out and get straight, but to send them to jail when an illegal alien can kill a girl in a park and walk out free as a bird? No, I'm not for jail time of employers unless they're involved in illegal drugs or smuggling or something more than just hiring people who showed up and wanted a job when no one else was breaking their door down and their competitors were doing it and on and on and on.

I just don't see the employers as the real villains here to the extent of jail time. I see the illegal aliens as the only real villains. I don't believe in transferring a crime of a foreign national in our country in violation of US immigration to an American employer looking for workers to operate a business who hires them because they are here, in their faces, begging for jobs.

I also don't think it's a wise strategy for our efforts to solve this problem. We need businesses on our side to ever win this. Anyone who thinks we can win this issue without them doesn't understand how our system works, if we make businesses our enemies, we'll end up with the biggest amnesty in the history of the world.

Take this number, there are just over 40,000 licensed dairy operations in the United States and that's 17,000 less than a decade ago. How many of those do you think hire illegal aliens? I don't know the answer to that, but I think a lot of them or most of them hire at least some illegal aliens. They were very vocal about their situation during 2016 campaign. And 1 or 2 were shut down because of those revelations and prosecuted. So to be fair to that industry, you would have to do a raid on all of them. But that isn't how it works, they'll go after 1 or 2, shut them down, and all their fellow dairy operatives who didn't get caught just benefit from their demise and pick up their slack even though they may be hiring more illegal aliens than the one that was raided and shut down. So the result is a weird type of discrimination, because there's no fairness in it.

Illegal aliens need to be the primary if not sole target, because they are the ones causing all the problems for everyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

Also, the employers who hire them ARE the problem. They are the magnet that keeps luring illegals to come here in the first place. We need to cure the disease, not just the symptoms.

---

Illegal aliens are the disease. Everything else is just the consequence of them being here. Get them all out of here and all the problems they cause for everyone else ends and our country returns to normal.

State and local law enforcement can wrap this up in 2 years or less with authorization to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Americans including our American-owned businesses are the victims of this problem, not criminals. If one dairy farmer hires illegal aliens, then they all have to hire illegal aliens to compete with each other, just like our manufacturers dealing with free trade treason, once one leaves and goes to Mexico or China, they all had to leave and go to Mexico or China to compete with each other.

It took a lot of wrong doing by a lot of people for those businesses to hire illegal aliens or those manufacturers to relocate to foreign countries. Did you know that under our laws, there is no law that forbids an illegal alien from stealing a job from an American worker or taking one that's unfilled? They can go to the US Department of Labor and file claims for erroneous pay and other things and the US Department of Labor will protect them and go after the business for the shortages or whatever the issue is. Isn't that crazy? It's illegal for the employer to hire you but it's not illegal for you as an illegal alien to ask for the job or take the job. Isn't that nuts? To me that's just nutzo.

Our laws set up our businesses to be the scapegoats of illegal immigration, not the Border Patrol who lets them in, the sanctuary cities who protect them, the drug cartels who own the smugglers who bring them here, the networks who make the arrangements, not the IRS who launders billions of our cash out to them in household sums of thousands of dollars a year in earned income and child care tax credits, not the hospitals who treat them, not the schools who educate them, not the 95,000 employees of the US Department of Justice responsible for deporting them but doesn't, not the 225,000 employees of the US Department of Homeland Security who are paid to keep them out, but doesn't, not the landlord who profit from renting to them, not the utility companies who profit serving them, nope, no laws against any of that.

Nope, just our businesses who hire them. If that's not a scapegoat by definition, then I don't know what would be one. Again, I'm not opposed to fines and temporary closures like for a week or so, to sort everything out and get straight, but to send them to jail when an illegal alien can kill a girl in a park and walk out free as a bird? No, I'm not for jail time of employers unless they're involved in illegal drugs or smuggling or something more than just hiring people who showed up and wanted a job when no one else was breaking their door down and their competitors were doing it and on and on and on.

I just don't see the employers as the real villains here to the extent of jail time. I see the illegal aliens as the only real villains. I don't believe in transferring a crime of a foreign national in our country in violation of US immigration to an American employer looking for workers to operate a business who hires them because they are here, in their faces, begging for jobs.

I also don't think it's a wise strategy for our efforts to solve this problem. We need businesses on our side to ever win this. Anyone who thinks we can win this issue without them doesn't understand how our system works, if we make businesses our enemies, we'll end up with the biggest amnesty in the history of the world.

Take this number, there are just over 40,000 licensed dairy operations in the United States and that's 17,000 less than a decade ago. How many of those do you think hire illegal aliens? I don't know the answer to that, but I think a lot of them or most of them hire at least some illegal aliens. They were very vocal about their situation during 2016 campaign. And 1 or 2 were shut down because of those revelations and prosecuted. So to be fair to that industry, you would have to do a raid on all of them. But that isn't how it works, they'll go after 1 or 2, shut them down, and all their fellow dairy operatives who didn't get caught just benefit from their demise and pick up their slack even though they may be hiring more illegal aliens than the one that was raided and shut down. So the result is a weird type of discrimination, because there's no fairness in it.

Illegal aliens need to be the primary if not sole target, because they are the ones causing all the problems for everyone else.

---

Wow, I don't even know where to start responding to this nonsense, so I won't. However, I will say this ... you certainly pegged out my B.S. meter. :roll:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

Illegal aliens are the disease. Everything else is just the consequence of them being here. Get them all out of here and all the problems they cause for everyone else ends and our country returns to normal.

State and local law enforcement can wrap this up in 2 years or less with authorization to do so.

---

I must admit it's shocking to actually here someone on here supporting the aiding and abetting of illegal immigrants. 8-O

Seems like the federal government should put together some program that helps farms facing a labor deficit. My father used to tell stories about the wheat harvesting in North Dakota, and how crews were somehow assembled that went farm to farm to get the crop in. This would only be a small fraction of the cost of detaining or incarcerating illegals.

Republicans might object to this because it would be a type of collectivism. However, what would the collective impact of farms going under be?(which they have often done in the past). According to the USDA, American farms are gradually losing market share to imports.

I don't support hiring illegal aliens, I think illegal aliens should be deported instead of putting all our businesses in jail. But if you think the reverse is a winning strategy, have at it. I would say I'm shocked that you would rather put our businesses in jail instead of deporting illegal aliens, but I'm not. That's been the position for 13 years, how's it working it out?

You can spend the rest of your lives pushing all these proposals. Trump bundled them for you, 70 of them, and asked Congress to pass them for you, with the DACA amnesty deal. He figured that was a fair deal if he got everything he wanted, because although 700,000 to 1,800,000 would remain, he would get what he needed to get the other 28 million out and stop the flow. But we opposed that, right? So here we are waiting for the people of our country to give us a Republican majority in the House and 60 Republican seats in the US Senate. It's possible, so we'll see what happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captainron

Seems like the federal government should put together some program that helps farms facing a labor deficit. My father used to tell stories about the wheat harvesting in North Dakota, and how crews were somehow assembled that went farm to farm to get the crop in. This would only be a small fraction of the cost of detaining or incarcerating illegals.

Republicans might object to this because it would be a type of collectivism. However, what would the collective impact of farms going under be?(which they have often done in the past). According to the USDA, American farms are gradually losing market share to imports.

---

Republicans would totally support a program that helps our farmers during harvesting season. Especially if they were American Workers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captainron

Seems like the federal government should put together some program that helps farms facing a labor deficit. My father used to tell stories about the wheat harvesting in North Dakota, and how crews were somehow assembled that went farm to farm to get the crop in. This would only be a small fraction of the cost of detaining or incarcerating illegals.

Republicans might object to this because it would be a type of collectivism. However, what would the collective impact of farms going under be?(which they have often done in the past). According to the USDA, American farms are gradually losing market share to imports.

---

What you're describing sound like neighbors helping neighbors ..... a collective of farmers and their families helping each other during harvest time. Of course during the great depression we had migrant farm workers (American's) that used to go farm to farm harvesting crops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judy

I don't support hiring illegal aliens, I think illegal aliens should be deported instead of putting all our businesses in jail. But if you think the reverse is a winning strategy, have at it. I would say I'm shocked that you would rather put our businesses in jail instead of deporting illegal aliens, but I'm not.

---

These businesses who employ illegals are the ones who hurt American businesses who play by the rules and only employ Americans, because they have a very hard time competing with these criminal businesses who can sell their products for less since they don't have to pay their illegal employees that much money. These criminal businesses who employ illegals are putting American businesses who employ only Americans, out of business. Yes, to me that's considered a criminal act and should be treated as such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

These businesses who employ illegals are the ones who hurt American businesses who play by the rules and only employ Americans, because they have a very hard time competing with these criminal businesses who can sell their products for less since they don't have to pay their illegal employees that much money. These criminal businesses who employ illegals are putting American businesses who employ only Americans, out of business. Yes, to me that's considered a criminal act and should be treated as such.

---

Oh, and not only the American business owners that they are hurting, but the biggy, American workers are being hurt the most because these jobs are going to illegals instead of to them. Let's think about that for a moment also.

Judy, I consider you a friend on here, although we're disagreeing like hell on this particular thread. Let's take a breather. Here's a video of me back in the 1970s fighting Bigfoot. Now that we're older though, me and bigfoot are good buds, like my avatar shows. We go and have a beer once in a while. He actually saved my ass a couple times in bar fights. He's a good person/bigfoot to have on your side in a bar fight. ;-)

https://youtu.be/IVYGHHc0Es4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6 Million Dollar Man

These businesses who employ illegals are the ones who hurt American businesses who play by the rules and only employ Americans, because they have a very hard time competing with these criminal businesses who can sell their products for less since they don't have to pay their illegal employees that much money. These criminal businesses who employ illegals are putting American businesses who employ only Americans, out of business. Yes, to me that's considered a criminal act and should be treated as such.

---

Are you familiar with the term scab? See back in the day when unions were strong, workers who went on strike didn't attack their employer when they had disagreements, because they didn't want to hurt the hand that was feeding them, they attacked the scabs breaking the picket line. Back in the day, Americans didn't blame an employer for hiring workers, they blamed the person stealing their job. Back in the day, we didn't expect the government to do everything for us, we ran those motherfvckers off the job site and sometimes all the way out of town. It's why everyone carried a baseball bat during a strike.