Bush's Plan

[Sojourner]

Fining employers is never going to fly. You can't require employers to be document experts.

The current standards for employers is that they check documents (a "good faith effort") and that the documents aren't obvious forgeries.

Even if they get a letter back from the Social Security Administration saying that the number they've provided for an individual doesn't match up with SSA's records, employers aren't supposed to rely on that as grounds to fire someone because (gasp) the gov't can mess up. Immigration status isn't always readily apparent, and requiring employers to make that determination will never fly in the business community ... and we all know they're the ones driving government.

Now, if a business KNOWINGLY hires an immigrant that's a different matter ... but the burden of proof in such situations is on the government ... and really, the IRS is the agency that levies fines in such cases and the fines are pretty small.

[jasJis]

Yes you can fine emplyers. I check documents all the time. One doesn't have to be an expert. I do know of companies and employers who knowingly have hired illegals, were caught, and were not fined. They only had to show a completed I9 form for all employees and were subjected to regular checks. The IRS fines are not what you think they are, they are for failure to pay SS and FICA taxes and are rarely enforced.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Mar 31 2006, 09:26 AM']Yes you can fine emplyers.  I check documents all the time.  One doesn't have to be an expert.  I do know of companies and employers who knowingly have hired illegals, were caught, and were not fined.  They only had to show a completed I9 form for all employees and were subjected to regular checks.  The IRS fines are not what you think they are, they are for failure to pay SS and FICA taxes and are rarely enforced.
[right][snapback]929544[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Of course you CAN fine employers but I just don't think that's really a good option. In order to have such a fine be effective, you'd HAVE to require that employers be document experts and do all sorts of checks to make sure the people they hire are indeed authorized to work in the U.S. It would cause discrimination suits up the wazoo, because employers would be suspicious in cases where they shouldn't be and not suspicious in cases where they should be. The practicalities of requiring employers to be more vigilant about hiring undocumented workers and fining them preclude that being a realistic option. Not that our gov't won't ENACT such an option; I just don't think it's really workable.

Fining the immigrants themselves is really the key. You break the law, you pay a fine. They're coming here to work because they have a financial incentive to do so. Take that incentive away, or make it less appealing and Voila! you see a decrease in illegal immigration. It will be much more effective than fining businesses, because immigrants have no resources to fight such fines and defend against them, whereas businesses DO have such resources.

[jasJis]

Soj,
Then we have to agree to disagree. I check docs many times a week, and have for years. Yes, there are a few that have good fakes and the average person would not know they are fake. But erased and typed, poorly typed, different fonts for name and #, visible remnants of other names or numbers, bleached out cards, etc., are obvious. Mexicans around here call them 'bent-docs', a play on words because they look crappy (bent) and you buy them for $20, (viente).
Immigrants are already poor, I don't see any reason knocking them back a notch. There are two incentives, one for the illegals to work so they can live better then in their home country, and two, labor pimps and employers who want cheap labor so they are competive in the market, or competitive with others who are breaking the law. Two sets of laws are being broken, two sets of people need to be prosecuted. Just as illegal immigrants shouldn't get a pass (amnesty), neither should employers get a pass for breaking the laws.
Actually, as far as farm work and construction, the bulk of the illegals are part of labor gangs and are pimped out. The labor pimps may go to a farmer and give him a price per flat of 'berries to be picked. The farmer says go ahead, and it's the labor pimp who takes care of the hourly rates, etc. If he get's caught, or the field get's raided by INS, he just goes to a broker and gets into contact with more illegals and he's back in business in a week.
Both law breakers have to have the incentives removed. The illegal workers just want to work and have no way to act upon the incentive to have legal, better paying jobs because they are illegal. People will do what's quickest and easiest. If you and your familiy are living in abject poverty in the DR, being an illegal in the US picking fruit is great.
Not 10 minutes ago, the son of an illegal, along with other workers were making comments about our 'mascot' rooster that hangs out and we feed. The rooster is an escaped fighting rooster. He told a story that when he and his parents first got here they couldn't believe all the fat chickens running around wild. He and his family went nuts, eating and all the chickens they could catch for free. Can most American's even picture themselves eating road chicken, much less being amazed at their good fortune?

[Sojourner]

Jas, I agree that it's not fair. But if we really want to stop illegal immigration, which everyone seems to be in agreement NEEDS to be stopped, I just don't see fines on businesses being as effective as fines on the immigrants themselves. And, if a business really wants to keep an employee the business can pay the fine (which around here, many do ... my friend who's an immigration lawyer tells me she regularly gets requests from businesses to help sponsor their undocumented employees in gaining legal status. She can't help them, because the law doesn't -- and won't in the current proposal -- allow for these folks to get to legal status.) Maybe a "fee" is better than a fine.

Enforcement, setting standards for businesses, etc., is just too difficult and not workable on the scale we're talking about. I suspect business owners would just take the chance of being audited, then plead ignorance ... just like they do now. I just don't see it being really workable without imposing huge burdens on businesses AND on taxpayers -- we are, after all, the ones who are going to bear the cost of litigation and enforcement. With upwards of 11 million undocumented immigrants (estimates are tough, of course) enforcement is really going to be an issue.

We have to look at alternatives to enforcement. Enforcement alone is not going to do the trick. And it's simply not feasible to deport 11 million people. There must be some mechanism put in place for them to gain legal status.

[Sojourner]

BTW, jas, it's nice having you around. I've missed debating with you.

[J.R.D]

Sojourner you know you say that illagal immagration NEEDS to be stopped. What would have happened if our forefathers were stopped? Must we forget that George Washington (our 1st president) was an immagrent!

And when ever you say "we'er" who are you talkin about?

[Theoketos]

[quote name='J.R.D' date='Mar 31 2006, 02:21 PM']Sojourner you know you say that illagal immagration NEEDS to be stopped. What would have happened if  our forefathers were stopped? Must we forget that George Washington (our 1st president) was an immagrent!

And when ever you say "we'er" who are you talkin about?
[right][snapback]929954[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

George Washington was not an illegal immigrent. Immigration is necessary and just, illegal immagration is unnecessary and unjust.

[Socrates]

[quote name='J.R.D' date='Mar 31 2006, 02:21 PM']Sojourner you know you say that illagal immagration NEEDS to be stopped. What would have happened if  our forefathers were stopped? Must we forget that George Washington (our 1st president) was an immagrent!

And when ever you say "we'er" who are you talkin about?
[right][snapback]929954[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington"]George Washington[/url] was [b]not[/b] an immigrant - he was born and raised in Virginia! (Geez, what do they teach in schools nowadays??)

And the debate is about [b]illegal[/b] immigrants, not people who came here legally. And Sojourner is generally very pro-immigration, if you look at her posts.