Thread: Securing border, enforcing laws serious business for Republi

Securing border, enforcing laws serious business for Republicans

Ventura County Star
May 19, 2011
By Rep Lamar Smith, Texas

Re: Ruben Navarrette's May15 column, "GOP can't get it right on immigration": Navarrette was right about one thing, but it wasn't the headline. He wrote that the main reason illegal immigrants come to the United States is because of jobs. This is true, but it is the Republicans - not the administration - who are serious about turning off and ending the jobs magnet that encourages illegal immigration.

We have tools to limit illegal immigration, but the Obama administration is not enforcing the immigration laws on the books.

In the past two years, work-site enforcement activities have plummeted 70 percent.

Under this administration, there have been fewer arrests of illegal workers, fewer criminal arrests, fewer indictments and fewer convictions.

Without work-site enforcement, we can't stop employers from hiring illegal workers. And if we don't stop employers from hiring illegal immigrants, we can't reduce the jobs magnet.

And as long as the jobs magnet exists, millions of illegal immigrants will come to the U.S. and take jobs from lawful workers.

Administration officials have said that they increased the number of audits of companies' employment eligibility verification forms, also known as "I-9 audits."

While it is true that fines and audits are both up, these audits are of questionable benefit.

In fact, most businesses view these fines as the cost of doing business.

Although employers are required to check the identity and work eligibility documents of all new employees, the availability of counterfeit documents undermines this requirement.

Contrary to Navarrette's claims, this is precisely why the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 instituted the basic pilot program, also known as E-Verify.

While this program is currently voluntary, I support making it mandatory.

E-Verify allows employers to electronically verify that newly-hired employees are legally authorized to work in the U.S.

The program quickly confirms the Social Security numbers of 99.5 percent of work-eligible employees.

More than 250,000 American employers voluntarily use E-Verify and an average of 1,300 new businesses sign up each week.

Because this program is so successful and well liked by employers, I will introduce legislation soon to expand E-Verify and make it mandatory across the U.S.

Navarrette likes to point to the 1986 amnesty as a solution. But this isn't a solution if the end goal is to stop the entry and employment of illegal immigrants in the U.S.

The 1986 amnesty legalized about 3 million illegal immigrants. But rather than put an end to illegal immigration, the 1986 mass amnesty only encouraged more.

There are now over 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S.

If we want to secure the border and reduce the jobs magnet, there is no substitute for improved border security coupled with increased interior enforcement of immigration laws.

Enforcing America's current immigration laws, especially work-site enforcement activities, shows that we take our immigration laws seriously. This greatly deters illegal immigration.

Because Navarrette disagrees with my support for pro-enforcement policies - or because he knows I am right- he has to resort to name-calling and misrepresentations.

But America is a nation of laws and part of the role of government is to promote policies that reward those who follow these laws, not reward lawbreakers.

While Republicans are serious about securing the border and limiting illegal immigration, it seems Navarrette definitely isn't.

Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/En ... 35&start=2

We also need to shut off the anchor baby welfare for 18 years magnet as well.

I don't believe anything Ruby has to say. It is all racist diatribe and finger pointing. He likes to compare today's illegals with the late 19th/early 20th century European immigration. The only difference is that in order to immigrate here from Europe, the immigrants were given health screenings prior to departure and the trip required many months, even years of wages. This meant that the immigrants coming into the US were healthy and would not be public charges. The current immigration wave is exactly the opposite.