Clinton fined 400 companies for hiring illegals, smirk fined 3

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800613.html


Illegal Hiring Is Rarely Penalized
Politics, 9/11 Cited in Lax Enforcement


The Bush administration, which is vowing to crack down on U.S. companies that hire illegal workers, virtually abandoned such employer sanctions before it began pushing to overhaul U.S. immigration laws last year, government statistics show.

Between 1999 and 2003, work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which subsequently was merged into the Homeland Security Department. The number of employers prosecuted for unlawfully employing immigrants dropped from 182 in 1999 to four in 2003, and fines collected declined from $3.6 million to $212,000, according to federal statistics.

In 1999, the United States initiated fines against 417 companies. In 2004, it issued fine notices to three.

-snip-

"The claims of this administration and its commitment to interior enforcement of immigration laws are laughable," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, an advocacy group that favors tougher workplace enforcement, among other measures. "The administration only discovered immigration enforcement over the past few months, five years into its existence, and only then because they realized that a pro-enforcement pose was necessary to get their amnesty plan approved."
-snip-
----------------------------------

this is a long article with much info

especially the companies that hire them. There's your proof right winger.

Why, it's Booooossshhhh***!

we really should give Bush a new name... how about flipped-out flipper?:evilgrin:

This is precisely the type of counterpoint that will turn the tables on the Rovian battle plan for the 2006 midterm elections. They want to talk illegal immigration? Then America deserves to know Republicans have rolled back prosecution of companies hiring illegals.

Dr. Dean, are you listening?

I was making trying to make this point earlier this year--that Republicans are just putting on a show about cracking down on illegal immigration. They've changed their tune since that time, to where some are actually stressing employer prosecution and emphasizing the wage-suppressing effects of illegal immigration.

Dems should beat them to the punch, and make employer prosecution the centerpiece of their plan. They can also point out the apparent 6-year delay in mandatory employer prosecution in the Sensenbrenner plan.

If I was a Democrat in Congress, I'd be screaming about there being this long delay in employer prosecution, and demand that the bill be amended to reduce or eliminate this aspect.

Some are stating the delay is only 2 years. But my reading of the bill is that it is 6 years. Below is a partial quote from the bill concerning this:

"Title VII: Employment Eligibility Verification - (Sec. 701)"

"(Sec. 703) Expands the employment eligibility verification system to include: (1) previously hired individuals; and (2) recruitment and referral.

Provides for: (1) voluntary employer verification utilizing such system two years after enactment of this Act for previously hired individuals; (2) mandatory employer verification three years after enactment of this Act by federal, state, and local governments, and the military for employees not verified under such system working at federal, state or local government buildings, military bases, nuclear energy sites, weapons sites, airports, or critical infrastructure sites; and (3) mandatory employer verification six years after enactment of this Act for all employees not previously verified under such system.

(Sec. 704) Amends the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to make employer participation in the basic pilot program mandatory two years after enactment of this Act...."

"(Sec. 709) States that the amendments contained in this title shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act, except that the requirements of persons and entities to comply with the employment eligibility verification process shall take effect two years after such date of enactment."

The text of H.R. 4437 (the Sensenbrenner Bill) can be found at
H.R.4437

Again, it's not clear to me if there is a 2-year or 6-year delay before employers are held accountable. (I'd appreciate anyone else's opinion here.)

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

400 compared to 3 is significant, but 400 compared to several thousand firms breaking the law is a paltry number, and it shows the nation hasn't gotten the right priority on the issue for a long time.

restaurant owners and the "illegal" vineyard owners and the "illegal" contractors being marched off to jail? I didn't think so.

run on this issue this fall.

Democrats are going to have to take a stronger position opposing illegal immigration. At minimum they could push for tough employer sanctions, or even beefed up enforcement of current laws against illegal hiring by employers.

But if the party elite remain advocates of amnesty, guest workers, and open borders, it won't do them any good whatsoever to point out the Republican hypocrisy on this issue. The Republicans will claim that they've changed their tune and are now for more prosecution, and that will be sufficient for most voters if Democrats don't change their current open-border advocacy.

This is a great opportunity for Democrats to make some gains. But that will only happen if they listen to their main constituents, rather than the interests of Corporate America and the amnesty/open borders advocates.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

I think democrats should have the high ground on this with those kind of statistics and a pro-labor philosophy, but they are not taking advantage in any meaningful way. Have you even heard any elected democrats (or any campaigning) say anything about illegal immigration hurting American workers? To me, this isn't that different from outsourcing. If we make a poor showing in the midterms, it will be because we were too stupid to take advantage of this issue.

Only time a Democrat seems to be invited on MSNBCABCCBSCNNFOX is when they need one to knock down.

Time for our Dems to rise for these occasions, now!

I mean, if they didn't keep coming to our country demanding jobs then Corporations would feel the need to hire them.

Get with the program folks - it's all their fault!

:eyes:

Whereas if he actually punishes those whose fault it is, well..they're his base.

Another straw-man argument. Most here are stressing employer prosecution over illegal immigrant prosecution.

In fact, there are not only ethical reasons to go after employers before illegal immigrants, but practical reasons as well. Employer prosecution works. Illegal immigrant prosecution does not.

We can easily catch employers, and they have a lot to lose from prosecution. Illegal immigrants have little to lose. Prosecution of employers would afford a large deterrent to illegal hiring. Deporting illegal aliens serves as little deterrent.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

I can't even begin to describe my total disgust with people on this board who peddle the bullshit strawman of "mass arrest" and "round up" ... neither of which are advocated by people who wish to prosecute the employers of illegal aliens and close down the importation of human labor as a commodity.

This whole issue is the creation of neocolonial global corporatists. They've created a banana republic in Mexico where public education is denied and nearly half live in poverty. The Gini Index in Mexico is above 0.50 and going higher. It's a country owned and operated by the global corporatists. They are now importing the same economic oppression to the US - an import that has no tariff and is not blocked at the border. Our Gini Index is at 0.45 and climbing. It's not just Mexico, but the cheapest labor comes from people who can't afford the airfare.

Absolutely no change in current law is needed other than to increase the penalties for employers, including criminalization and confiscation of assets - and establishing the enforcement mechanisms. A huge portion of the illegal alien workforce has no intention of "immigrating" - and merely shutting down the employment is sufficient to stem the flow. I'd be strongly in favor of amnesty (and a "finder's fee") for illegal aliens who provide material evidence leading to the arrest of employers and confiscation of their assets.

On the one hand, for the sake of the American worker, companies cannot turn to cheap labor where they can skirt safety regulations and wage requirements. On the other hand for the sake of the illegal immigrants themselves, companies cannot be allowed to treat them as a cheap resource to be used up and thrown out. So something needs to change.

But the differences come in what to do. Again, I think pretty much everyone agrees in going after the employers as they ought to do. However here's where it gets sticky. What to do with the illegal immigrants who are already here. And I HAVE seen "deport them all" here. And I have also seen people blame them and lump them in with other felons. I think it is on THIS point that we have a problem.

Not only that, data is being used from "questionable" sources. On any other issue, a group that was called into question by FAIR, ADL, SLPC etc. would at least be questioned by DUers. However CIS and FAIRus are just accepted. Same thing with Lou Dobbs. He's allowed to say whatever he wants. And if Media Matters questions it, well they are "biased".

I think, and I know I'm guilty of this, that people let their emotions get too heated. I think that we could probably come to an agreement and that we're not so different in our positions.

There is absolutely NOTHING we immediately "need to do with the people" who're illegally present in the US at this time. The first and foremost action in dealing with ANY problem is to keep it from continuing and getting worse. Shutting down the exploiters of illegal labor is the highest priority. The second highest priority is to increase the enforcement of the borders. It's just fucking insane to subject traveling American citizens to measures up to and including cavity searches while, sometimes less than a mile away, people are crossing the border in complete disregard for existing law.

The next principle is to stop treating people like a commodity! Just as the commoditization of human labor is at the root of the problem, the treatment of people who're illegal aliens cannot be treated like a commodity. Every situation is different, with differing considerations and differing impacts. "Coyotes"? I'd call for their imprisonment. Foreign nationals with no family in the US? Deport them - even though most will return to their homes willingly when their employment is gone.

The point is that it's meaningless to talk about how to "treat" the current population of illegal aliens as long as they keep on coming and working for exploitative corporatists.

"The first and foremost action in dealing with ANY problem is to keep it from continuing and getting worse. Shutting down the exploiters of illegal labor is the highest priority."

You're absolutely right. The 1st priority is making sure that we pass NO legislation that will in any way make the problem worse. And the Senate bill will make the problem exponentially worse.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

And I also advocate giving amnesty to any illegal immigrants that provide information leading to the successful prosecution of an employer who hires illegally. That's just an outstanding idea.

I further agree that we don't need any changes at all to our current laws, other than increasing penalties for illegal hiring, and, of course, actually enforcing the law.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

evidence leading to the conviction of a company that knowingly hires illegal immigrants? Bet there'd be some drastic improvement over-night.

I'm entirely against having a labor force ("working class") who aren't permitted to vote where they work and live. It doesn't matter to me whether they're ex-felons or immigrants, the fascists in this country who've 'built' a larger and larger low-end working class without voting rights or a voice in blowing the whistle on violations of fair labor practices is one of the lanes on the superhighway to complete fascism.

The "guest worker" programs, existing and proposed, are utter abominations - they're the legalization of a caste system that's completely antithetical to a democracy. That people who call themselves 'democratic' buy into these abominations is disgusting.

Good point about the Gini index. Mexico is one of the few countries that has a Gini index higher than ours. Bush would certainly like to increase ours.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

suddenly, a lot of new folks in the area left.

happen to business if they actually had to hire Americans for a decent wage? Congress can't even manage to raise the minimum wage after nine years though they've voted themselves a raise in each of those years.

.

Thanks for posting this. It's nice to see the exact numbers in print.

Bush is the best friend an illegal employer ever had. No wonder he's pushing amnesty and guest workers. Illegal immigration suppresses wages, reduces labor costs, and increases Corporate profits. And the latter increased Bush's campaign contributions.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

To find out if he defends the president's track record or not in a public setting. Could have screwed him on his statements on immigration too!

We certainly could have used this. It would also have been helpful if Busby had taken the position favored by her constituents, instead of the position favored by Bush, McCain, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Corporate America.

Pointing our Republican hypocrisy on this issue would have helped. But taking the opposite side of Bush and McCain would have helped far more.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

I don't like that guest worker bill EITHER, though it is better than the xenophobic bill that Sensenbrenner and Bilbray (supposedly) are behind.

The real problem is that the Democrats themselves need to articulate a THIRD view of what makes sense for immigration legislation, which NEITHER criminalizes and puts us and Mexican immigrants at each others throats at the border in an expensive confrontation that requires us to build walls, staff with soldiers, etc., NOR do we endorse handing out free rides to corporations getting cheaper labor that the guest labor program does. We should be focusing on criminalizing HIRING of illegal aliens, empowering employers with adequate means to comply with laws to determine people's work rights definitively, and puts more pressure on Mexican and other governments to build up their economies and the ability for workers to work there locally instead of coming up here to work. Then newer candidates like Busby and many others seeking to unseat Republicans will have a more sane alternative to advocate to their potential constituents than what Busby had to offer us. Neither approach I think is right for us here (to hold onto legitimate Democratic constituents, as well as to appeal to those that don't want to lose their jobs to "cheap labor" too).

I wish that Busby could be a leader in this, but I think it might be asking a bit much for someone who's in a district as heavily Republican as it is to try and come up with her own solution and sound like a maverick before she's even working in congress. I think the Dems need to help her out on this one.

It is the same for issues like public financing too. Busby told me at a meeting that she couldn't publicly support it just yet because it really hasn't been understood or "sold" to the public here and other places adequately yet. From her comments, I think she could jump on board with it later, when the time comes and people are seeing its value in general, but I can see her point that it is hard for her to be the salesperson for it now AND try and win this race at the same time.

Folks, I think she did an incredible job in getting as far as she did, but the Dems in general need to have better leadership to help new Dems to come on board.

What part of the Sensenbrenner Bill do you consider xenophobic?

I don't view protecting American workers from the wage-suppressing effects of illegal immigrants as xenophobic. I look at as a completely legitimate function of the U.S. government, as well as its obligation to protect the economic wellbeing of American workers, which is being worsened by competition with illegal workers.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

... to them as being xenophobic. I have NO problem with controlling our borders, preventing those workers from taking our citizens' jobs, etc. But there's a lot to Sensenbrenner's bill that is focused more on demonizing those workers, having a fortified border, etc. that is much like the "apartheid" wall going up in the Palestinian occupied territories, as opposed to going after the real culprits, which are those people who hire them, and provide them motivation to come here to start with. If you dry up the supply of jobs, then there will be less interest in trying to come here, and the problem isn't as expensive to solve as most illegals will take it upon themselves to move out instead of relying on us to find them and move them out by force and keep them out by force too.

A fortified wall with harmed guards will also serve to make Mexico a less hospitable place for Americans to travel to too, which makes San Diego a lot less fun place to go to, if you're afraid to go over to TJ will be met with that tension and perhaps worse.

The act of stopping the influx of cheap labor that takes away our job SHOULD be part of our solution as Democrats. Putting in prison for a felony someone who helps an illegal who has a medical emergency is inhumane and is NOT something we should endorse.

My dream is that at some point we can have a similar border situation like we do with Canada with our southern borders. Rather than focusing so much efforts in terms of keeping people seeking jobs out, we can focus more on keeping those out that might want to do other undesirable things like drug running and terrorism.

Listen to Thom Hartmann's show and hear his perspective on this. He "gets it" when it comes to what our approach to immigration should be.

years considering the family the new citizens will bring in under the present law.

what will half again the population do to the present traffic situation, housing costs, food costs when the crop land is paved over for housing.. will this clear cut all the forests left, cost for infrastructure, water,sewer, police.. with the rich paying no taxes.. toll roads, in El Paso they sell water by the cubic foot and paying a lot for it.. what about pollution,.. the mexican gangs that are spreading out of LA all over the nation now represents one of the largest army's in the world.

Only 3 companies after you created this insane media circus surrounding illegal immigration and your only plan so far is to build a 10 story electric fence around Mexico so your buddies can steal a few more of our tax dollars and stash them in Swiss bank accounts? What a lame ass you are, Bush!

:rofl:

1. Hate- and fearmongering among their xenophobic base
2. Securing a reliable supply of compliant slave labor to fatten their corporate cronies' profits.

It's not like this isn't obvious. Except for rare articles like this, the corporate-owned media have been helping the bushie juggling act along.

The corporatist neo-con types vs. the paleo-con right wing nuts

Most Americans don't fall into either of these categories on immigration. The Dems can speak to the majority, but we must take a position against the HIRING of illegal immigrants. Ordinary folks know that that is the issue!

.....about doing something. We need to find a way to spread this across this country between now and November.

Any ideas?????

K&R

... and is proof that Bush doesn't care about illegal immigration AT ALL.

To be fair, neither did Clinton particularly. The idea that "we can't deport 11 million people" is pure fiction, start penalizing employers and you won't have to deport anyone - the jobs will dry up and they will leave.

Implement a plan to let some number of people in, through easily attained legal means, and then ENFORCE THE LAW.

But don't worry, that is not going to happen as long as Cheap Labor Republicans have anything to say about it.

amnesty program! The Congress passed laws to penalize employers, but when enforcement was begun, those business buddies contacted Congress and said "Hey man! You can't do this to us!" Congress then told Justice to back off!

Do you REALLY believe that won't happen AGAIN?????

Smoke and mirrors folks!

thanks

Especially when it comes to making money.

K & R

Though the Republicans have tried to attribute every untoward event under the Bush dictatorship to Clinton, this is one they cannot. Clinton's record is clear on this issue. So is Bush's. And Bush has failed here, just like he has on every other single issue.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

quoting the Center for Immigration Studies.

I think I'll be using it quite often. The Bush plan for immigration ought to be called exactly what it is...Amnesty for Exploitation. It is not in their financial interests to penalize the employers so therefore they never will. All democrats need to stand up and call Bullshit on this so-called plan. This issue crosses party lines and it is a perfect opportunity to expose this group for exactly what they are... a bunch of greedy, ignorant thugs.

That's an excellent slogan. I think I'm going to use it too.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

very typical.

And that's the equivalent of not initiating fines against 415 of those companies.

I read somewhere that in 1993, there were over 2000 fines issued for hiring illegal immigrants. According to the original post, there were only 417 fines in 1999. In 2004, only 3. Then, I heard elsewhere that in 2005, it dropped down to 0. (Has anyone else heard that?)

It's not just Bush. It's the Congresspeople too, who have been influenced by the corporate lobbyists.

www.StopGlobalism.com       www.VOIDnow.org

of my state (Arkansas). Asa! Hutchinson, erstwhile floor manager of the Clinton Impeachment, and graduate of Bob Jones University. Want to make a difference? Donate to www.mikebeebe.com. That's our Democratic candidate, a good guy!

he is such a used up tote.
Seems he wanted Tom Ridges' job and the bush admin. did not want him.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Every day Democratic candidates for office should point this out. It is the Democrats who are trying to find real solutions on all the issues whild Republicans just want to play games.

...the Bush/Republican Controlled Congress tag teamed to De-fund the INS and it DHS successors, leaving it with little to no "resources" to enforce the existing laws.

This is the same tactic they used with the IRS, de-funding an agency causes them to have to fire their workers, leaving them with nobody to enforce the laws, which then leads to fewer fine collection, causing more cut-backs....

Bush favors big business who are the beneficiaries of the cheap labor. It's positively psychotic.

the people Bush is letting go. "Flagrant violators" sounds good to me.

Hopefully this will clear some of the irrelevancies from the debates here at DU.

:kick:

:kick:

On CSPAN that we are making progress on enforcement and that we are 125% ahead of last year's effort...so if 05 was 0....wonder how many arrests we made...she never gave a number and nobody asked her how many either.

Would be a good talking point for the dems.

in work site enforcement than her boss does. But again, 125% of what? Almost nothing, no matter how you slice it.

I don't know if I saw the same interview. But a woman was being interviewed on CSPAN about stepping up enforcement of employer sanctions. And she sounded very serious and sincere about doing so. In fact, I'd like to see her promoted to the director of ICE, or whatever dept. it is that is responsible for controlling immigration.

unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

Once again, excellent post.