The Arizona immigration bill is an exemplar of the type of immigration policies that focus on the immigrant. There is not much novel about the Arizona law except that the immigrant, or anyone suspected of being one, is sought out a bit more aggressively.
Immigration Laws following the last major Immigration overhaul, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 have been characterized by pushing against the immigrant rather than addressing the cause of immigration, employers in the U.S. Recently, however, it seems that the Obama administration is reforming immigration by going after those that call the shots, the employers. The administration has begun to systematically implement the rules that have been on the books for decades, but which have been overlooked in preference for the strategy of going after the player.
At the very beginning of George W. Bush's presidency it seemed as if an immigration overhaul agreement were going to materialize. In the wake of 9/11 all prospects of immigration legislation fell through. Instead the following years of the Bush presidency saw an immigration policy that focused on high drama immigration raids. The face of immigration became the black wind-breaker with yellow letters spelling out ICE. ICE agents crisscrossed the nation storming factories and farms alike. News cameras would capture the faces of hundreds of immigrants being handcuffed and stuffed into vans -the first leg of their journey to non-immigrant status.
In addition to raids, the tactic of choice to address illegal immigration has been beefing up the Border Patrol. In the mid 1990s Operation Gatekeeper and Operation Hold the Line were implemented in California and Texas, respectively. These operations saw millions of additional dollars in funding for increased Border Patrol personnel and detection technology. The presence of the Border Patrol on the border became ubiquitous. However, rates of illegal border crossings remained steady and in some instances increased. Border crossers simply adjusted tactics -- turning toward the Arizona border and risking more in terms of money and livelihood to get to those jobs that were waiting for them.
The immigration policies of the last two decades have had an almost exclusive focus on the immigrant. To address the most tangible manifestation of unsound immigration policies administrations have poured money into getting uniformed boots on the street -- Border Patrol, ICE, and now all law enforcement in Arizona, to nab the immigrant. These policies are flashy and make for good TV and newspaper shots, but its like treating the flu with cough drops rather than with an antibiotic.
True to his characterization of "no drama Obama", the President has recently shifted gears and begun to address the issue of illegal immigration by not going after immigrants, but those that employ them. What has begun to take place is an elite striking force of a handful of auditors visiting farms and factories to review the records of employees on staff. If their documents are not in order, the employer is obligated to fire those employees and pay substantial fines. The dozens of tough looking ICE agents have been substituted for a few auditors with laptops in hand.
The strategy of addressing the cause of immigration is doubly beneficial. First, the pull factor of immigration -- U.S. jobs -- is neutralized. Second, law enforcement ranging from ICE agents to local Arizona highway troopers can channel their limited funds to more serious crime matters.
According to police, the driver, Margarito Perez, 40, had no license or identification of any kind on him, but he did have three packets of powder cocaine in his wallet.
Perez was charged with possession of a controlled substance.
The passenger, Alejandro Perez, 57, had several fraudulent identification cards on him.
Pascagoula Police Lt. Davy Davis told the Sun Herald: “It was his photo on the cards, but they all had different names and Social Security numbers.”
Trinidad was charged with providing false information.
Though illegal aliens, both are employed locally.
Trinidad and Perez have been turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement."
http://www.examiner.com/x-35821-Immigration-Reform-Examiner~y2010m7d15-Two-illegal-aliens-arrested-in-Mississippi-found-with-drugs-multiple-Social-Securty-numbers
Firstly it took you three paragraphs to render the courage to type the word illegal in front of the word immigrant.
Second. Many of the illegal immigrants are NOT immigrants.They have no intention of becoming US citizens and could care less.
Immigration is an intent and a process. Many have neither, and wholesale integration of what appears to be a largely hostile and and crime ridden group of homogenous illegal immigrants into our system is a "tilt".
Third as far as "actual" crime goes, in Arizona the illegal immigrants account for a mighty swath of violent crime.
Fourth you are very adamant about making employers pay fines and fire workers, but do not want to address the illegal status of the workers. This is not right. These people are often practicing IDentity theft and should be charged with that crime and summarily deported. You can argue, but illegal immigrants with social security numbers, are showing up on people's credit reports. This could happen to you, and then you would have to clear your credit.
Finally, wouldn't simply denying the unethical employers their cheap illegal labor be enough punishment, or is it that you just don't like business ?
The employERs are breaking the law - and currently not getting punished for it.
Since they are committing economic treason by giving American jobs to people not in this country legally, lets revoke their citizenship and deport them.
And please, do not try to tell me that the poor, poor businessman has no way of knowing whether or not his/her employee is in the country legally.
Wake up and smell the coffee - it is not the illegal who is your enemy, it is the crooked CEO that either Off-Shores your job to Brazil/India/China, or the creep that came up with On-Shore Off-Shoring - giving your job to someone desperate enough to take sub-standard wages and working condtions.
Does not play.
It does take two to tango. In fact it takes three.
The day people start saying to contractors " If you show up here with a truckload of illegal aliens, I will get someone else to do the job " things will get interesting.
But all humor aside, I actually agree with the approach of going after the employers too when it comes to the illegal population in this country. Instead of just troops on the border, those auditors she mentions might not be so bad. Capone was nailed as much by auditors as he was by gun-wielding agents. Ending the 'lure' for people to come here illegally has to be part of the solution to this.
Hmmm, this line does stand out..
"If their documents are not in order, the employer is obligated to fire those employees and pay substantial fines".
"Show me your papers", indeed!
Both illegal immigrants and their employers should be punished: both are guilty, neither are victims.
Same logic.
With unemployment at 9.5% nationally, and much higher in the border and neighboring localities (particularly in the low-barrier to entry industries), it is no wonder job-seekers aren't streaming north.
We won't really know how effective policies are, until the econmy recovers, and demand for labor outstrips domestic supply of labor. That future seems a long way off.
And we'll never really know unless the boarder can be secured, otherwise it will just be one group of ideologues invested in open-boarders arguing against the "boarders mean something" folks.
So simply cracking down on the ER's is only half that battle. That would only lead to alot more homeless and unemployed illegal immigrants, it wouldn't stop most of them from coming here in the first place.
And this is without taking into account the many American companies that advertise for jobs in Mexico and other Latin American countries, or without dealing with the one issue that Ms. DeFrancesco does not mention, which is the no-minimum-wage, free-for-all agricultural job market.
If only it were that simple, but there's a greater cultural/societal aspect to it as well.
Where would you rather be poor?
A country with laws that protect you, social services that can help you, and guaranteed access at least to emergency medical care...
...or a country where nothing functions if you don't already have money and connections?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/10/us/10enforce.html
Here is the link if you want to read it. This plan just might work. There can't be any racial profiling in it.
Yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported that the DOJ (Mr. Holder and gang) are stepping up action against employers who go "too far" in trying to determine whether a job applicant is legal to work in the US or not. That is, there are civil rights laws in place that say a business can only ask for some specific limited number of documents, and beyond that, they are discriminating.
Naturally, Mr. Holder is all over it.
Given the twisted and contradictory nature of current immigration laws, and since honest employers want a better way to determine who can work and who can't based on US law, isnt' it time for a biometric National ID card? Critics abound, but I have to think that any legal non-citizen resident will welcome that chance to have a card that says "I am legal. I have access. I have rights."
Concerns over privacy are overblown and the cost could easily be offset probably by reducing the number of frivolous DOJ law suits on the public's behalf.
The US Chamber of Commerce has succeeded beyond anyones expectations in getting the number of visas limited so that it is very, very difficult to get into this country legally.
Why? Because illegal immigrants are more easily intimidated, and more cheaply too - as ICE is taxpayer-funded, whilst Pinkerton et. al. costs would come out of corporate profits.
It is already a crime.It is federal crime like bank robbery.
Maybe the police should start turning a blind eye to bank robbery.
The country cannot absorb everyone who wants to come here.
The president of Mexico refers to them as "Migramts" which is more correct because they
aren't all here to be immigrant/citizens.
No amount of equivocation or name-calling, or distortion of reality can convince anyone with two functioning brain cells that the USA should grant extra special citizenship to 15-20 million largely homogenous illegal immigrants currently gaming the system and degrading themselves and our country. No one. Give it up.
Sometimes I wonder if any of you ever talk to these people.
Now granted there should be some accomodation and protection for the true migrant farm workers.
But beyond that, no. I will cut my own lawn and if a motel bed is not made it will not be the end of the world.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsHi6_l1XzA
Some of SB 1070 Legal Defense Fund's biggest contributors share his core views:
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2010/07/13/hate-groups-donate-to-arizona-laws-defense/
The long term strategy of the ghost writers of SB 1070 to bring back "whites only immigration":
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2010/07/14/the-fair-files-attacks-on-multiculturalism-will-help-us/”
Share it Permalink
That's rich.
Eliminate the jobs that the illegal immigrants find here all too easily and you will reduce the problem significantly. But businesses large and small and our politicians will never do that. They would rather write laws that undermine the Constitution.