Thread: Westmoreland amendment (employer fines) passes House

http://www.thecitizen.com/?q=node/2131

Fayette | News
Tue, 12/20/2005 - 5:57pmBy: The Citizen

U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland's amendment to the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 easily passed the House Friday night, shortly before main bill was approved. The amendment caps financial penalties for businesses guilty of hiring illegal immigrants.

"I was a strong supporter of our effort in the House to strengthen our border security," Westmoreland said, "but I had serious concerns with some of the financial penalties that employers would face if the original legislation were passed as is. My amendment maintains serious fines for employers who hire illegal immigrants but sets reasonable caps and gives needed protections. Originally, there was unlimited liability for employers; I think we set penalties that have a deterrent effect without making a lot of Georgia businesses go bankrupt because of an honest mistake. There are gray areas here; for example, should you fine a general contractor thousands of dollars if a subcontractor hired illegal workers?

"We need to work with businesses to assure that the law is followed. I hesitate to make businesses the first line of enforcement on immigration."

The Westmoreland amendment does the following:
• Puts caps on monetary penalties for hiring or employing illegal aliens so that companies are not subject to unlimited liability. The amendment limits penalties to $7,500 for first time offenses, $15,000 for second offenses, and $40,000 for all subsequent offenses.

• Provides for relief from civil penalties for an initial good faith violation, such as paperwork error or other violation that happens as a result of an attempt to comply.

The amendment passed 247-170.

Westmoreland voted for passage of the overall bill.

Well if you think about it you could put the fine at a billion dollars. But if you don't enforce it. It doesn't matter what the numbers are.

This actually weakened the fines from where they are today.

What would really be effective as a deterent is if these fines could be collected by private attorneys on behalf of any legit applicants.

CIVIL DAMAGES to the millions of Americans cheated out of employment, business opportunities, medical facilities, taxes, safety, security, housing loans, life and futures by these perps that comprise the illegal immigration brothel.

GET AN ATTORNEY AND SUE THEIR BUTTS!!

There are gray areas here; for example, should you fine a general contractor thousands of dollars if a subcontractor hired illegal workers?

INA: ACT 274A - UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS
Sec. 274A. [8 U.S.C. 1324a]

(4) Use of labor through contract.-For purposes of this section, a person or other entity who uses a contract, subcontract, or exchange, entered into, renegotiated, or extended after the date of the enactment of this section, to obtain the labor of an alien in the United States knowing that the alien is an unauthorized alien (as defined in subsection (h)(3)) with respect to performing such labor, shall be considered to have hired the alien for employment in the United States in violation of paragraph (1)(A).

According to existing law, yes if a contractor or sub hires illegals the main company can be fined.

The Westmoreland amendment does the following:
Puts caps on monetary penalties for hiring or employing illegal aliens so that companies are not subject to unlimited liability. The amendment limits penalties to $7,500 for first time offenses, $15,000 for second offenses, and $40,000 for all subsequent offenses.

I wonder if those dollar limits are per illegal?

Yes that's how under existing law Wal-Mart paid the big fine and the subcontractor actually doing the hiring paid much less.

Originally Posted by Judy

This actually weakened the fines from where they are today.

Today's fines are do not mean anything. Rarely is any company fined. If the law isn't enforced, the amount of the fine losses it's financial bite.

magyart--I know but the law is there already with fines big enough to bankrupt them and prison terms long enough to jail them for life. Whether its these or new ones, what difference if the President isn't going to enforce them? Remember, Congress can't enforce or prosecute, only the President and he is refusing to prosecute.

During Clinton Administration, Clinton prosecuted hundreds of employers...in one year 795.

Bush prosecuted only 3 in 2004 and none in 2005.

2005 broke all records for illegal immigration.

That's IMPEACHABLE neglect of duty during record breaking illegal immigration in 2005? No prosecutions?

He's DARING US TO IMPEACH HIM.

He thinks he's got it in the bag.

I say he doesn't.

Let's find out who has what in whose bag?

IMPEACH--get him out of there.