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

Originally Posted by Judy

Sure! I'm all for "clamping" down on employers who hire illegally, I just don't want to see them go to prison, I prefer to see them fined. Either way, if you clamp down on them all, that would free up a lot of jobs for Americans which I totally support.

Seems there's a lot of folks you don't want to see go to jail ..... illegals reentries, drug abusers and those involved in the drug trade, and the employers of illegals. How many more am I missing? Oh wait, you not only want those involved in the drug trade not to go to jail, you also want those already in jail to be set free if they weren't convicted of a violent crime. Additionally, you don't support the death penalty under any condition. Many of your positions make you the epitome of what some would call weak on crime. Just saying ......

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

This article is consistent with several reports we have received from ALIPAC supporters who tell us they have first-hand knowledge of illegal aliens successfully gaining employment with E-Verify certification!

This reinforces what I've been trying to tell folks for many years... the E-Verify and Real ID programs are not to keep illegals out. These programs are how the elites plan to maintain control and security for themselves in a future borderless world where national boundaries are as meaningless as state boundaries.

We used to have a lot of people here on these very forums fighting intensely for biometric big brother tracking technology deployment through Real ID who falsely promised Americans should submit to the program in the interest of stopping illegal immigrants. Now we see in America that millions of illegals have Real ID driver licenses no problemo! The creators of the program want illegals enrolled in their Real ID program. So the voices touting Real ID have retreated from that contention now that most of America is being forced into the Orwellian tracking program.

Now those same folks, including people at NumbersUSA and members of Congress are telling us E-Verify will save American jobs from illegal aliens, and this article is saying that is just not true either.

Nobody should be surprised after all the I-9 forms were part of Reagan's devastating Amnesty in 1986. Americans were promised no illegals could work jobs anymore because of that provision and now we see for the last three decades nobody in DC has been verifying I-9s or acting on them when they are fraudulently submitted.

Both Real ID and E-Verify are programs created to control the American and illegal alien population in the new North American Union, not stop or repel illegal immigrants who are being imported into America to accomplish the same super state creation goals.

YES! Thank you William, thank you very very much. So well said. We are in our Period of Ironies and Opposites where all types of programs and policies are designed to do one thing but we're told the complete opposite. Free trade was supposed to be "good for America", it wasn't, it has bankrupted us. Immigration was supposed to be necessary and proper because "we are a nation of immigrants" when we are not, we are a nation of settlers, developers and conquerors. We're told Illegal aliens "do the jobs that Americans won't do" which is a complete lie, because there is no job an American hasn't done, isn't doing and won't do. Unfortunately, the Real ID and E-Verify programs were designed to control US citizens through massive information databases but masked as a way to prevent illegal aliens from getting jobs, when it won't prevent even 1 illegal alien from getting a job with an employer who wants to hire them.

Tancredo: Mandatory E-Verify for Employment Should be Donald Trump’s Top Immigration Priority


Alex Wong/Getty Images7 Jan 20171,764

Yes, the wall on our southwest border can and should be built. But it is less important than enacting the mandatory E-Verify system for employment.

Let’s face it. We all know it is the prospect of a better life through employment that attracts the vast majority of border jumpers. Our system for blocking unlawful employment of foreign-born workers who lack a lawful work permit has always been a joke, and under Obama, enforcement has been an even lower priority than it was under Bush.

Congress can turn off the jobs magnet by enacting the mandatory E-Verify program, an internet-based system allowing instant verification of the legal status of job applicants. It has an error rate of less than 1 percent and costs employers next to nothing.

Foreign born workers have no constitutional right to employment. Like every European country, Mexico and all of the advanced nations of the world, the United States has a system of “work authorization permits” for legal employment by immigrants and all foreign nationals. The problem is, our laws against unlawful employment are not enforced– in fact, they are unenforceable without major changes and improvements.

The easy availability of unlawful employment is the giant magnet motivating millions of illegal aliens to cross our borders unlawfully. We also have a mushrooming problem of millions of “visa overstays,” people who arrive on a legal tourist or other temporary visa but do not leave on the expiration date. They, too, are most often seeking employment.

If we turn off the jobs magnet, illegal entry across our borders can change from a flood to a trickle. Then the Border Patrol could concentrate on stopping terrorists and drug traffickers, and job seekers would have to get in line for one of the many LEGAL guest worker programs already on the books.

The United States already has several guest worker programs that allow employers to hire foreign workers for seasonal labor– in agriculture, in seasonal ski resorts, in landscaping, and other fields. Foreign workers are brought in for seasonal jobs where it has been demonstrated that American workers are not available — and then they go home. We even allow the hiring of year-round foreign sheep herders from Peru, Portugal and Afghanistan because, evidently, Americans will not do those jobs.

There is an important principle involved in legal guest worker programs. They are authorized only when it has been demonstrated that American workers are not available at market-based wages. Foreign workers should be SUPPLEMENTING American workers, not REPLACING them.

As a member of Congress, I sponsored a bill to allow any employer to hire a foreign worker for any job after the US Labor Department had verified that wages had been rising in that occupation for at least three successive quarters, which would be a free market demonstration of a labor shortage. If wages are flat or declining, there is no documented labor shortage.

If there are genuine labor shortages in some occupations, then by all means, let’s have a viable, LEGAL guest worker program available to employers in those fields. But that is not the case with 98 percent of the jobs now going to illegal workers. The ready availability of cheap illegal labor has been a major factor in wage stagnation over the past 20 years.

That illegal spigot must be turned off, and making the E-Verify system mandatory for all employers is the way to do it.

The E-Verify system already exists as a voluntary program administered by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) bureau within the Department of Homeland Security. A 2014 statement by Lori Scialabba, Obama’s Acting Director of USCIS, endorsed the program as an immense success, with over a half-million employers participating nationwide: “Since it was established, E-Verify has experienced exponential growth, increased accuracy and high customer-satisfaction ratings.” So, why hasn’t mandatory E-Verify program been adopted by Congress already? It has been included as part of some of the amnesty bills proposed over the past decade, but only as a sop to immigration enforcement, never as stand-alone legislation to fix a concrete problem.

Why not? The answer is that the E-Verify program has been opposed because the open borders lobby knows it will work. It is opposed by the US Chamber of Commerce and every other member of the coalition that supported the 2013 “Gang of Eight” amnesty bill.

Rep. Lamar Smith’s mandatory E-Verify bill, HR 1147, was approved by bipartisan committee vote in the House in 2015, but never allowed to reach the floor for an up or down vote. Sen. Grassley’s bill was considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee but similarly never allowed to get to the floor.

With Republican majorities now controlling both the House and Senate calendars, there is no valid reason not to bring these bills to a vote. Differences can be ironed out in a conference committee and a bill sent to President Trump in the first 100 days of the session.

Sadly, despite lip service paid to mandatory E-Verify by scores of Republican bill sponsors, only strong push by President Trump and his executive branch appointees can move E-Verify program to a vote in Congress. If Trump is really serious about immigration enforcement, he will make this his top priority.

The E-Verify bill will be a good test case for his White House team. Will Trump’s White House policy team prevail over the “pragmatists” who will want to wait for “congressional consensus”?

Does Trump want to fix the problem, or merely continue blaming Democrats for obstruction? In truth, on many important immigration enforcement issues, the obstruction is coming from within his own party.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...tion-priority/

Originally Posted by MW

Seems there's a lot of folks you don't want to see go to jail ..... illegals reentries, drug abusers and those involved in the drug trade, and the employers of illegals. How many more am I missing? Oh wait, you not only want those involved in the drug trade not to go to jail, you also want those already in jail to be set free if they weren't convicted of a violent crime. Additionally, you don't support the death penalty under any condition. Many of your positions make you the epitome of what some would call weak on crime. Just saying ......

Right O!! There are 3 areas of crime that I believe deserve jail time.

1. Property Damage
2. Theft
3. Physical Harm

Originally Posted by MW

Tancredo: Mandatory E-Verify for Employment Should be Donald Trump’s Top Immigration Priority


Alex Wong/Getty Images7 Jan 20171,764

Yes, the wall on our southwest border can and should be built. But it is less important than enacting the mandatory E-Verify system for employment.

Let’s face it. We all know it is the prospect of a better life through employment that attracts the vast majority of border jumpers. Our system for blocking unlawful employment of foreign-born workers who lack a lawful work permit has always been a joke, and under Obama, enforcement has been an even lower priority than it was under Bush.

Congress can turn off the jobs magnet by enacting the mandatory E-Verify program, an internet-based system allowing instant verification of the legal status of job applicants. It has an error rate of less than 1 percent and costs employers next to nothing.

Foreign born workers have no constitutional right to employment. Like every European country, Mexico and all of the advanced nations of the world, the United States has a system of “work authorization permits” for legal employment by immigrants and all foreign nationals. The problem is, our laws against unlawful employment are not enforced– in fact, they are unenforceable without major changes and improvements.

The easy availability of unlawful employment is the giant magnet motivating millions of illegal aliens to cross our borders unlawfully. We also have a mushrooming problem of millions of “visa overstays,” people who arrive on a legal tourist or other temporary visa but do not leave on the expiration date. They, too, are most often seeking employment.

If we turn off the jobs magnet, illegal entry across our borders can change from a flood to a trickle. Then the Border Patrol could concentrate on stopping terrorists and drug traffickers, and job seekers would have to get in line for one of the many LEGAL guest worker programs already on the books.

The United States already has several guest worker programs that allow employers to hire foreign workers for seasonal labor– in agriculture, in seasonal ski resorts, in landscaping, and other fields. Foreign workers are brought in for seasonal jobs where it has been demonstrated that American workers are not available — and then they go home. We even allow the hiring of year-round foreign sheep herders from Peru, Portugal and Afghanistan because, evidently, Americans will not do those jobs.

There is an important principle involved in legal guest worker programs. They are authorized only when it has been demonstrated that American workers are not available at market-based wages. Foreign workers should be SUPPLEMENTING American workers, not REPLACING them.

As a member of Congress, I sponsored a bill to allow any employer to hire a foreign worker for any job after the US Labor Department had verified that wages had been rising in that occupation for at least three successive quarters, which would be a free market demonstration of a labor shortage. If wages are flat or declining, there is no documented labor shortage.

If there are genuine labor shortages in some occupations, then by all means, let’s have a viable, LEGAL guest worker program available to employers in those fields. But that is not the case with 98 percent of the jobs now going to illegal workers. The ready availability of cheap illegal labor has been a major factor in wage stagnation over the past 20 years.

That illegal spigot must be turned off, and making the E-Verify system mandatory for all employers is the way to do it.

The E-Verify system already exists as a voluntary program administered by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) bureau within the Department of Homeland Security. A 2014 statement by Lori Scialabba, Obama’s Acting Director of USCIS, endorsed the program as an immense success, with over a half-million employers participating nationwide: “Since it was established, E-Verify has experienced exponential growth, increased accuracy and high customer-satisfaction ratings.” So, why hasn’t mandatory E-Verify program been adopted by Congress already? It has been included as part of some of the amnesty bills proposed over the past decade, but only as a sop to immigration enforcement, never as stand-alone legislation to fix a concrete problem.

Why not? The answer is that the E-Verify program has been opposed because the open borders lobby knows it will work. It is opposed by the US Chamber of Commerce and every other member of the coalition that supported the 2013 “Gang of Eight” amnesty bill.

Rep. Lamar Smith’s mandatory E-Verify bill, HR 1147, was approved by bipartisan committee vote in the House in 2015, but never allowed to reach the floor for an up or down vote. Sen. Grassley’s bill was considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee but similarly never allowed to get to the floor.

With Republican majorities now controlling both the House and Senate calendars, there is no valid reason not to bring these bills to a vote. Differences can be ironed out in a conference committee and a bill sent to President Trump in the first 100 days of the session.

Sadly, despite lip service paid to mandatory E-Verify by scores of Republican bill sponsors, only strong push by President Trump and his executive branch appointees can move E-Verify program to a vote in Congress. If Trump is really serious about immigration enforcement, he will make this his top priority.

The E-Verify bill will be a good test case for his White House team. Will Trump’s White House policy team prevail over the “pragmatists” who will want to wait for “congressional consensus”?

Does Trump want to fix the problem, or merely continue blaming Democrats for obstruction? In truth, on many important immigration enforcement issues, the obstruction is coming from within his own party.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...tion-priority/

Tancredo was hoodwinked like a lot of people were hoodwinked about E-Verify.

Shocking: Tom Tancredo & Team America PAC Support Amnesty!?!?!



Former Congressman urges Republicans to legalize DACA, but at a price

POSTED 10:25 PM, SEPTEMBER 5, 2017, BY KEAGAN HARSHA, UPDATED AT 10:28PM, SEPTEMBER 5, 2017

DENVER -- The fate of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program now lies in the hands of Congress, but one former U.S. congressman is skeptical lawmakers will pass any significant immigration reform.

Tom Tancredo served two terms in the House of Representatives and followed that up with a run for president in 2008.

He's now watching the drama in Washington unfold from afar.

"Love to be in Congress? God, that's so hard to say," he answered when asked if he wish could help decide the fate of DACA.

Tancredo and many others say the debate over DACA isn't necessarily about immigration, but instead the way it was enacted, not by law, but by executive action.

"We can discuss the immigration side of this and what's right and wrong, but the legal side is not open for debate," he said.

"You have to be concerned about the way this was done because the precedent that was established was horrible.

"Most liberals would hate the idea of (President Donald) Trump doing a similar thing. I mean, they'd go nuts."

Tancredo said there is now a lot of pressure on Republicans and Democrats to pass immigration reform within the next six months.

"I think the president has told Congress, put up or shut up. I don't think they're going to do either," he said.

However, Tancredo believes this is a big opportunity for lawmakers, specifically Republicans.

He believes Republicans could and should legalize DACA, so long as they get something big in return.

"I don't care about the wall. Everyone says the wall. The wall is insignificant. I mean, I'm all for it, but it is not the real solution to the issue. The solution is E-verify," Tancredo said.

E-verify is the online program that verifies an employees' immigration status to make sure workers are legally employed.

He said this is an opportunity for both parties to get what they want.

"There's got to be something that happens to people negatively if they are here illegally," he said.

However, that compromise might require larger concessions than either party is willing to make.

http://kdvr.com/2017/09/05/former-co...ut-at-a-price/

Tom Cat Bakery Workers Fired After Homeland Security I-9 Audit


Chicago Immigration Raid Leaves Swiss Baker Scrambling to Restaff 800 workers

Originally Posted by Judy

Right O!! There are 3 areas of crime that I believe deserve jail time.

1. Property Damage
2. Theft
3. Physical Harm

Incarceration serves more than one purpose. Deterrence of others. Treatment. Keeping truly dangerous people away from the public.

But I agree that fines would be more beneficial, if they can collect them. That way the public isn't on the hook for even more money. I think the typical outlaw is not going to have the money to pay them, unless they are a big time drug dealer, fast company business person or some fallen-from-grace trust fund kid. There was a local drug dealer here who built one of the fanciest houses in an exclusive neighborhood, and I understand it was after he got out of prison. Of course, construction typically has a lot of ne-er do wells and substance abusers so that's probably where he got his start.

I had a younger guy working here recently re-doing the wiring. Learned he was a serious jailbird; and actually you couldn't trust him. But I think he was mentally stuck somewhere; I talked to his dad more than a few times and he said that the guy and his 3 brothers were drug users so there is some kind of lunacy in that family.

Regarding illegals in prison, I would wonder if there is any real deterrence. We offer so many programs for prisoners it's ridiculous! They may even look at it as a step up, at least from what they would have at home. If they are in for several years and then get deported they are not going to find very good circumstances there either. Won't they likely resort to more crime, contributing to the breakdown of their own culture? I would say if we can have effective border control, just get rid of them as soon as possible so we don't have to pay for them.

Yes, Captainron, just get these illegal aliens out of here and keep them out. All of our attention and resources should be devoted to mass rapid deportations. Don't let them in, if they get in, get them out swiftly and keep them out.

There are two things the President can and should do that wouldn't cost us any money, wouldn't require funding, wouldn't require acts of Congress and would prevail in lawsuits if any were even filed.

1. Plan B:

Tell all these countries, if your citizens continue to enter our country illegally, then you country will have no aid from or trade with the United States. Period.

2. State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance

Do an Executive Order that authorizes all willing state and local law enforcement agencies to enforce US immigration law without any threat of reprisal or lawsuits from the federal government. Provide some simple working arrangements and cut them loose.

Originally Posted by Judy

Yeah, some of the unions got a little corrupt.

No, most have become majorly corrupt!

Originally Posted by Judy

But without that structure, workers won't fight, it's dog eat dog, it's why companies who hire a lot of Americans but also hire some illegal aliens have no complaint from the Americans at that job site, because the way they see it, if the company saves some money there, it makes their own job more secure.

So the three major car companies, Ford, GM, and Chrysler, all are run thought the same Autoworker's Union. That means all three must pay the same wages. There is no competition as to who would pay more for more productive workers. So no one (scabs) can help drive wages down.

I heard a similar story to 6 Million Dollar Man at a construction site by me where an electrician needed to move a cable. But a carpenter's hammer was laying on the cable, and he had to wait for a carpenter to come an move the hammer before he could move the cable. Union rules! Non union contractors could work faster and more efficiently than union contractors in many construction projects.

Originally Posted by Judy

That was in the 70's. When they blew up the Interstate, everyone got a big kick out of it and supported the Teamsters.

So you cheer violence?

I watched a rock quarry plant where I hauled out of, which was bought by Mitsubishi. They union voted to strike for higher wages. Mitsubishi certainly have the money to ride it out. I continued to haul out of there with most of the workers standing at the gate. One day I watched a union rep drive up in his long limousine and tell those guys who had been out of work to hang in there, they were winning. A month later, Mitsubishi locked out the union workers and only those who didn't strike still had a job.

My welder had a son who worked for a small company. He got the workers to organize and join a union. Once they did, the union ordered him laid off as they had other union member with seniority who needed a job.

Although you seem to be a Libertarian, you don't seem to embrace competition.