Thread: Rep. Dave Brat Betrays Supporters On Immigration, Pushes Amnesty Like Eric Cantor

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

If you can't treat other ALIPAC member with respect you should go away and never come back.

You'd love that wouldn't you? I'd like to remind you that I've been here a lot longer than you have, now, shoo, go away from me.

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

Originally Posted by Judy

They are E-Verifying American Workers. Who wants that??!! You want your facial image and your drivers license and god knows what else in a federal database? What is wrong with you people? E-Verify isn't about verifying illegal aliens, it's about verifying ... you . . .

Mandatory E-Verify Remains Trump’s Most Popular Immigration Principle

RELATED

Gheen: Trump lied and amnesty lives

They don't understand how it works, when they find out, they won't like it or anyone involved in passing it. It's an information grab by the government concealed as an immigration control measure. Innocent Americans who don't understand the program believe the illegal aliens are the targets, when no, they are not building databases on illegal aliens they have no intention of ever deporting, they are building a database on Americans so when they spy on your phone calls and computers through NSA, they can flip over to E-Verify and find out where you live on your drivers license, get your picture, get your work and home addresses and if you're challenging the government or being a menace against their destructive policies, they can grab you. They already know where the illegal aliens work from the SS No Match Letters. If they had any intention of using that information to deport illegal aliens, they would have already done so.

Mandatory E-Verify Included in Trump’s 2018 Budget

By Kelsey Basten
Published on May 16, 2017

Trump’s 2018 budget proposes $15 million of the Department of Homeland Security budget be used to begin the implementation of a mandatory E-Verify.

Since 1996, E-Verify has been voluntary for most employers. It also has become mandatory for federal contractors, certain state contractors and employers that want to implement science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) when hiring foreign graduates of U.S. universities.

However, according to SHRM, barely 10 percent of U.S. employers are currently enrolled in the system today.

If E-Verify were to become mandatory, there is currently no prediction of how long it would take to roll out. The timing could be anywhere from one to five years.

Although it is not required at a federal level, many states have laws that either require or encourage some employers to use E-Verify including:

• Arizona and Mississippi: Required (all employers)
• South Carolina: Encouraged (all employers)
• Colorado, Georgia, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and Utah: Required (public contractors)
• Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and Utah: Required (state agencies)

GovDocs will be following this subject as it develops. Check back on this subject at Labor Law News – updates to come!

https://www.govdocs.com/mandatory-e-...s-2018-budget/

MANDATORY FINES TO EMPLOYERS! HIT THEM IN THE WALLET!

Originally Posted by Judy

They don't understand how it works, when they find out, they won't like it or anyone involved in passing it. It's an information grab by the government concealed as an immigration control measure. Innocent Americans who don't understand the program believe the illegal aliens are the targets, when no, they are not building databases on illegal aliens they have no intention of ever deporting, they are building a database on Americans so when they spy on your phone calls and computers through NSA, they can flip over to E-Verify and find out where you live on your drivers license, get your picture, get your work and home addresses and if you're challenging the government or being a menace against their destructive policies, they can grab you. They already know where the illegal aliens work from the SS No Match Letters. If they had any intention of using that information to deport illegal aliens, they would have already done so.

We can't allow hysteria brought on by excessive paranoia to stop us from ensuring all employers adhere to our written immigration laws. E-Verify is the tool that can help us do that. Unfortunately many employers aren't playing by the rules, which means they must be forced.

I'd still rather see the RAISE ACT passed that doesn't include E-Verify than Brat's bill that does. We get a whole lot more with the Raise Act than with Brat's bill, so it's VERY ODD to me that anyone here would be supporting the lesser bill that rumors already indicate will be offset with a DACA Amnesty.

Originally Posted by Judy

I'd still rather see the RAISE ACT passed that doesn't include E-Verify than Brat's bill that does. We get a whole lot more with the Raise Act than with Brat's bill, so it's VERY ODD to me that anyone here would be supporting the lesser bill that rumors already indicate will be offset with a DACA Amnesty.

I haven't seen anyone comparing the two bills. The RAISE Act doesn't include a DACA amnesty, which means there really shouldn't be any opposition to it on here. You turned this into an E-Verify discussion when you came out specifically against E-Verify. I'd say it's pretty much understood that no one here supports any bill that included an amnesty, even if it does include E-Verify. However, that doesn't mean folks don't support E-Verify.

Personally, I'd love to see E-Verify brought to the floor as a stand alone bill. Unfortunately though, that's not going to happen because mandatory E-Verify is strongly opposed by corporations, businesses, Chamber of Commerce, building industry, agricultural industry, and most labor unions. Very few Republicans want to go on record supporting E-Verify as a stand alone bill because they don't have the guts to go against the industries that staunchly oppose it.

Mandatory E-Verify is a no-brainer for most of us but is a seen by many politicians as a huge hazard, one they would rather avoid. That's why we'll will never see it as a stand alone bill.