Thread: A politics of wink and nod

A politics of wink and nod

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
February 6, 2011
By Cynthia Tucker
WASHINGTON, D.C.

The most conservative Republicans and the most liberal Democrats should be able to agree on a few things, including requiring businesses to use a national computer system to verify the legal status of employees. That would dramatically curb illegal immigration.

When those areas of common-sense compromise fail, you have to figure that somebody doesn't really want a solution.

So what's keeping Congress from passing a bill to require businesses to use E-Verify, an instant background check run by the Department of Homeland Security?

For all the posturing over illegal immigration, dramatically slowing the stream of illegal immigrant workers would not be difficult.

Illegal immigrant border-crossers usually come here for better economic opportunity. That's read "jobs." If they couldn't get any jobs, many would simply not come. They'd get word from family and friends that the hiring spigot has totally dried up.

And most members of Congress know that.

But there has been an implicit bipartisan consensus not to require businesses to use E-Verify, a "free" computerized system that works much like those instant background checks for in-store credit cards.

It's very simple; it's very fast; and, with a negligible error rate, it's very reliable.

Many congressional liberals and socialists haven't supported a mandatory E-Verify because they, of course, don't want to make it harder for illegal workers to get jobs. And guess what? Many congressional conservatives don't either. They know that some businesses depend on illegal immigrant labor.

Just last month, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee exposed their hypocrisy.

Led by committee chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, they announced plans to hold hearings demanding that President Barack Obama return to a failed scheme used by his predecessor --- workplace raids that punish illegal immigrants but leave their employers largely unscathed.

The president supposedly has a much higher rate of deportations than his predecessor did, but Obama has also aggressively targeted employers.

Employers were fined $6.9 million in fiscal 2010, up from $675,000 in 2008, according to the Los Angeles Times.

It seems the GOP and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wants to shield lawbreaking business executives. This should not be allowed in any country.

As Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Jay Bookman has written, Georgia Republicans have also wavered on strict policies toward illegal hiring.

At a recent breakfast sponsored by the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, Bookman wrote, "[Lt. Gov. Casey] Cagle echoed [House Speaker David] Ralston, saying that he opposed illegal immigration but would fight what he called 'overregulation' of business."

Why does Congress let business interests get away with exploiting illegal immigrants and force them into "indentured servitude"?

A law that aggressively cracks down on illegal hiring may be the best hope for pushing comprehensive immigration reform through Congress; it will force the business lobby to acknowledge the importance of illegal immigrant labor.

That's why those who want to put illegal immigrants on a path to legal status ought to rally around a proposal by U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., who would require all businesses to use e-Verify and face consequences for failure to do so.

He has drawn support from unsavory quarters, such as an anti-illegal immigration group called NumbersUSA.

Still, E-Verify may most certainly accomplish what years of activism has not --- opening a path toward immigration reform.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/En ... 82&start=1

Originally Posted by American-ized

He has drawn support from unsavory quarters, such as an anti-illegal immigration group called NumbersUSA.

Who is she calling "UNSAVORY"??

Of course, she would include ALIPAC in that group too.

A law that aggressively cracks down on illegal hiring may be the best hope for pushing comprehensive immigration reform through Congress; it will force the business lobby to acknowledge the importance of illegal immigrant labor.

That's why those who want to put illegal immigrants on a path to legal status ought to rally around a proposal by U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., who would require all businesses to use e-Verify and face consequences for failure to do so.

He has drawn support from unsavory quarters, such as an anti-illegal immigration group called NumbersUSA.

Still, E-Verify may most certainly accomplish what years of activism has not --- opening a path toward immigration reform.

Interesting point--she may be right. Businesses that depend on illegal labor will really start pushing for reform if they think they're about to lose their CHEAP workforce.

I don't know Lamar Smith's policy toward employers, but if he goes for Universal E-Verify as he said he would, most of the illegal immigration problem will cease to exist.
************************************************** *************************************
Americans first in this magnificent country

American jobs for American workers

Fair trade, not free trade

Enough pro illegal amnesty trash talk. First they say its about business's keeping cheap labor and thats the priority here right? So give them Amnesty so they have to be paid properly according to US Law? Gee doesn't that defeat the whole point of why we supposedly need illegal aliens? It just means adding millions more legals to the unemployed social benefit group.... and requiring us to apparently need millions more illegals to again fill those jobs as employers obviously can't afford honest wages. That way in 20 years again we can rinse and repeat with another amnesty right?

Great logic here. I can't find a single hole in their logic.... yeah right.

Giving Amnesty won't do a single good thing for the US even if one admits that business's need illegal workers to keep costs down. Assuming thats true amnesty would be the last thing these business's really want. Its all about more Union members, more socialism, and a bigger liberal voting block as Americans just aren't liberal enough.

Even if given amnesty, "former" illegals would still work for less pay than most of us and businesses would go for that. In my state, minimum wage is $7.25 and businesses would rather pay that than the $8.50 they might have to pay a current citizen.

Of course, they'd all have to start paying taxes and SS.

I'm not saying I LIKE the idea, just saying it's possible the writer is right that E-Verify may push businesses toward CIR. Personally, I think that any business person that knowingly employs illegal labor should have their business closed down and/or be put in jail!

Originally Posted by imblest

Even if given amnesty, "former" illegals would still work for less pay than most of us and businesses would go for that. In my state, minimum wage is $7.25 and businesses would rather pay that than the $8.50 they might have to pay a current citizen.

Of course, they'd all have to start paying taxes and SS.

I'm not saying I LIKE the idea, just saying it's possible the writer is right that E-Verify may push businesses toward CIR. Personally, I think that any business person that knowingly employs illegal labor should have their business closed down and/or be put in jail!

Your wrong though on many fronts, here's how.

They start paying taxes, SS, and medicaid. There goes 25% of there check like everyone else. They now are also having wages monitored so applying for welfare, food stamps, medicaid, and other benefits aren't applied as often making up for the "lower" pay. Keep in mind these illegals aren't working 40 hours a week only at minimum wage, often working 60-70 hours a week 2+ jobs, then ontop household income as often more then 1 working in a household.

So they lose 25% of their pay along with losing at least some of the benefits they were collecting. It also means that they can't as easily double identity with one collecting welfare and one working through all fraud and citizens they are far more accountable.

So they just lost 50-75% of what they were realistically getting, they aren't going to be agreeing to work for the same low wage. Keep in mind studies are showing that the illegals making $20k a year are realistically making $45k a year after all the welfare benefits. That doesn't happen to a citizen.