Bill on Table - Mandate E-Verify

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

Oh geeze... how about these things. One, it doesn't do anything to actually prevent someone in the country illegally from being able to legally work. All you need is a name and social security number. The system only pings the name and number for a match, and that's it. (Now remember, we have an entire island (Puerto Rico) where they have US citizenship status and Hispanic last names and are very poor. Many Puerto Ricans sell their SSNs to people in the US so that those people can work and use their names.) Two, it also requires law abiding, naturally born US citizens to have to prove that they are eligible to work in their own country. Three, it relies on the SSN which was never intended to be a national identity number (same problem applies when it comes to credit fraud and identity theft).

It also makes employers into immigration enforcement agents. An employer is caught in a no win situation. They are responsible for reviewing the documents presented to confirm employment eligibility. If the employer questions the validity of those documents too much (for example, a SSN written in crayon on a green piece of construction paper) they could be liable for employment discrimination by immigration rights groups. If they don't scrutinize the documents enough, then they could get hit with a knowing hire violation which can carry both civil and criminal charges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

1. local law enforcement in large cities have more important things to do than go around looking for illegal immigrants. I'd rather they spend time on violent crime and theft/burglaries than rounding up a guy/gal mowing the lawn or cleaning someone's house (I clean my own and do our own yardwork)
2. there is limited space in city jails. I'd rather those spaces go to violent criminals, thieves than the same guy mowing the lawn/cleaning house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

No, we will hold people if there is a judicial warrant. Why is that so hard to comprehend? The 4th Amendment is a thing. Read about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

Similar to how R party hates illegal immigrants but their business people like to hire them. Stop hiring them. They will stop coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

1. local law enforcement in large cities have more important things to do than go around looking for illegal immigrants. I'd rather they spend time on violent crime and theft/burglaries than rounding up a guy/gal mowing the lawn or cleaning someone's house (I clean my own and do our own yardwork)
2. there is limited space in city jails. I'd rather those spaces go to violent criminals, thieves than the same guy mowing the lawn/cleaning house.

I'm not talking about having local police conduct raids. I'm talking about asking local jurisdictions to run checks against criminals they have already arrested, and if those people are in the US illegally, notifying ICE and helping arrange for transferring custody if appropriate.

Dems argue that's too much work. Yet it's perfectly find to require a private company owner to make sure he only employs legal citizens, and penalize him if he makes a mistake. If it's too work for one, why isn't it too much work for the other?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

No, we will hold people if there is a judicial warrant. Why is that so hard to comprehend? The 4th Amendment is a thing. Read about it.

I'll wait while you explain how a 48 hour detainer request violates the 4th amendment more than our current police ability to hold people for 24 - 96 hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

Similar to how R party hates illegal immigrants but their business people like to hire them. Stop hiring them. They will stop coming.

Same with the D party. We can't get our cheap fruits and veggies without them, so they're perfectly ok with having an underclass ripe for exploiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

Similar to how R party hates illegal immigrants but their business people like to hire them. Stop hiring them. They will stop coming.

Same with the D party. We can't get our cheap fruits and veggies without them, so they're perfectly ok with having an underclass ripe for exploiting.

What do you think Melania and Ivanka eat... non organic strawberries from Mexico? Do you think middle class R Americans can afford expensive produce?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

No, we will hold people if there is a judicial warrant. Why is that so hard to comprehend? The 4th Amendment is a thing. Read about it.

I'll wait while you explain how a 48 hour detainer request violates the 4th amendment more than our current police ability to hold people for 24 - 96 hours.

Because this is in addition to being previously detained. You don't get to double dip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

1. local law enforcement in large cities have more important things to do than go around looking for illegal immigrants. I'd rather they spend time on violent crime and theft/burglaries than rounding up a guy/gal mowing the lawn or cleaning someone's house (I clean my own and do our own yardwork)
2. there is limited space in city jails. I'd rather those spaces go to violent criminals, thieves than the same guy mowing the lawn/cleaning house.

I'm not talking about having local police conduct raids. I'm talking about asking local jurisdictions to run checks against criminals they have already arrested, and if those people are in the US illegally, notifying ICE and helping arrange for transferring custody if appropriate.

Dems argue that's too much work. Yet it's perfectly find to require a private company owner to make sure he only employs legal citizens, and penalize him if he makes a mistake. If it's too work for one, why isn't it too much work for the other?

They have no room in their jails for non violent criminals breaking FEDERAL law. Have you never read/seen news reports about overcrowded county jails? Just google it, and you'll see how wide spread the problem is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

Similar to how R party hates illegal immigrants but their business people like to hire them. Stop hiring them. They will stop coming.

Same with the D party. We can't get our cheap fruits and veggies without them, so they're perfectly ok with having an underclass ripe for exploiting.

What do you think Melania and Ivanka eat... non organic strawberries from Mexico? Do you think middle class R Americans can afford expensive produce?

I don't believe I have the right to demand a permanent underclass subject to all sorts of abuses just so I can eat endless strawberries in the summer. No.

Do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

No, we will hold people if there is a judicial warrant. Why is that so hard to comprehend? The 4th Amendment is a thing. Read about it.

I'll wait while you explain how a 48 hour detainer request violates the 4th amendment more than our current police ability to hold people for 24 - 96 hours.

Because this is in addition to being previously detained. You don't get to double dip.

So you're fine with requiring that as part of in-processing, an arrested person's status is checked and ICE is informed right then? Great! I think we can all agree to that.

And you're not ok with anyone being held for more than 48 hours, because you think that's a violation of the 4th amendment and requires actually charges being filed, even in cases of serious crimes? Right? So places where they allow holds up to 96 hours need to cut back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

Oh geeze... how about these things. One, it doesn't do anything to actually prevent someone in the country illegally from being able to legally work. All you need is a name and social security number. The system only pings the name and number for a match, and that's it. (Now remember, we have an entire island (Puerto Rico) where they have US citizenship status and Hispanic last names and are very poor. Many Puerto Ricans sell their SSNs to people in the US so that those people can work and use their names.) Two, it also requires law abiding, naturally born US citizens to have to prove that they are eligible to work in their own country. Three, it relies on the SSN which was never intended to be a national identity number (same problem applies when it comes to credit fraud and identity theft).

It also makes employers into immigration enforcement agents. An employer is caught in a no win situation. They are responsible for reviewing the documents presented to confirm employment eligibility. If the employer questions the validity of those documents too much (for example, a SSN written in crayon on a green piece of construction paper) they could be liable for employment discrimination by immigration rights groups. If they don't scrutinize the documents enough, then they could get hit with a knowing hire violation which can carry both civil and criminal charges.

The problem is that the immigration rights group is the problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing wrong with E-Verify. Everyone should support it.

And bring back Secure Communities - even if the democrats are opposed to Secure Communities. It is the right thing to do.

I don't think most people are against e-verify, as evidenced by the polls, including Dems. However, a few years ago some Tea Party members and R Rick Perry were against it. It's usually the business people and politicians beholden to the business people who are against it, yes including some Dems. Something about too much regulation and burdening the businesses with more bureacracy and paperwork.

What is "Secure Communities"?

It's interesting that the arguments against e-verify and holding illegal criminals until ICE can pick them up are the same. Too much work/not the job of the person being tasked with the work.

PP here.. I agree with you, the only thing is that Dems aren't hypocritical about e-verify. Look up thread.. someone posted a list of senators who voted for the 2013 immigration bill, which included expanding e-verify. Lots of Dems were for it. Lots of Rs were against it.

Look at what the bill consisted of. It has a lot of really good immigration reform, specifically calls out chain migration and visas for low skilled workers. It does allow for path to citizenship, but it clearly states that these folks could not get any kind of federal aid while on the provisional status. And yes, it states the person cannot have any kind of criminal conviction to get amnesty. Lots of money for border security and law enforcement. Shame it didn't pass.

https://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/immigration-bill-summary-093557

The Dems being for e-verify and against local law enforcement holding illegal aliens who commit crimes for ICE is hypocritical. How can you be ok with requiring additional work and responsibility for private business owners (e-verify) but against requiring additional work and responsibility for government offices (holding illegal aliens for ICE/notifying ICE of criminals being held) without being a hypocrite?

1. local law enforcement in large cities have more important things to do than go around looking for illegal immigrants. I'd rather they spend time on violent crime and theft/burglaries than rounding up a guy/gal mowing the lawn or cleaning someone's house (I clean my own and do our own yardwork)
2. there is limited space in city jails. I'd rather those spaces go to violent criminals, thieves than the same guy mowing the lawn/cleaning house.

I'm not talking about having local police conduct raids. I'm talking about asking local jurisdictions to run checks against criminals they have already arrested, and if those people are in the US illegally, notifying ICE and helping arrange for transferring custody if appropriate.

Dems argue that's too much work. Yet it's perfectly find to require a private company owner to make sure he only employs legal citizens, and penalize him if he makes a mistake. If it's too work for one, why isn't it too much work for the other?

They have no room in their jails for non violent criminals breaking FEDERAL law. Have you never read/seen news reports about overcrowded county jails? Just google it, and you'll see how wide spread the problem is.

If they check status when processing those arrested, things should be fine. As soon as Congress gets itself together and removes pot from schedule 1 so we can be more rational in our approaches, that should also help.

But every excuse for why it's too challenging for the government to handle people breaking the law, goes easily for why it's too challenging for business owners to be responsible for e-verify. If you think it's bogus when people say it's not fair to put the work on business owners, then just fall back to all your reasons why the government can't enforce its own laws with its own people. Or, admit that everyone's being whiny because they benefit in some way by ignoring the law, and be ok with it for everyone, or decide that everyone needs to be held accountable.