Romney / Latino vote

The problem today vs. yesterday is Identity theft. The illegal immigrant today that has in all sense and purpose moved permanently into the US, they are part of a network that goes through 2-3 different identities a year. You can't ask employers to police that too, can you?

If a person presents the two forms of ID and it goes into E-Verify, it should be an immediate response, it is not. It sometimes takes 6-12 months for the Feds to get back to the employer that the ID is not valid or has been stolen. Hell most people don't even know until they file their taxes or they use a dead person's identity.

The job of policing illegal immigration is for the Federal Government, if they can't do it then they need to enlist the services of the states. If the FED is not doing their job then the states have to take care of their own.

A person does not go into business to determine if someone is illegal or not, have businesses created the market of illegal immigration or shared in it's creation sure, but so have you and I with our expectations of costs of various items.

It is not the businesses job to do the Federal governments work.
 
Major,

You're making the same argument that sanctuary city advocates make. "It's not my job." (In fact, cities actually have less of a duty than employers do.)

What you're pointing to is really a problem with E-Verify. It should be an instant check, and there's no reason why it's not.

However, I do expect employers to make a reasonable effort to know who they're hiring. What I would require them to do is check their person's SS Card and a photo ID, and I would require them to use E-Verify, which should be immediate. If they do that, I'd give them immunity, even if the person ends up being illegal.

Think about it. If a day care hires people, don't you expect them to make a reasonable effort to make sure they're hiring sex offenders? If a trucking company hires a driver, wouldn't you expect it to make sure its drivers are properly licensed and have a reasonably safe driving record? It's not a big deal to expect them to make a reasonable effort to make sure they're not violating immigration laws.
 
Deez,

I think you're right on all counts. Straightforward solution...fine the employer.

I can imagine a new industry that would crop up around verification if E-Verify doesn't work properly. Much the way employers refer drug testing to outside agencies, they could hire this new entity to verify eligibility and then the new entity would be on the hook. One company could take a $50 fee to do the digging and essentially provide a type of insurance on the employee.

But it won't happen until the masses make the connection between stagnant wages and high unemployment to illegal immigration.
 
Deez:

Again, there is not one whole idea that I like.

Sanctuary cities, hell no, if they are found to be illegal, back they go, do not pass go do not collect $200.

The border needs to be shut down. I don't like the idea of the fence, while it may work, it reminds me of the Berlin Wall and what did the East Germans say, we are keeping people out.

Pull all of our soldiers from across the world home, and put them on the Border, it puts a huge dent in illegal drugs and shuts down illegal immigration.

I am not advocating allowing the illegal immigrant to stay here, I was merely saying how they get jobs here and the racket that surrounds the illegal immigrant soaking them for money and the various governments from fed to state, to county to local.......

With E-Verify, this should take the burden off of the employer, but as most government programs it works half assed. If a person is here, an employer should do due diligence but not have to go out of their way to find out if a person is legal or illegal. Stiff fines will not resolve the issue, they will still come across the border, the border needs to be shut down.
 
I think we are on the relative same page, yes the blatant employers that are abusers of the system should be penalized. The problem as you well now is you can't pick and choose blatant users.

I do believe you can shut down the border between Mexico and the US, I think what 50,000-75,000 troops could do it.

It would also shut down a large bit of illegal drug traffic as well.
 
The original thread had to do with Romney not appearing live at a La Raza function and with his low poll numbers among the function's attendees, which you suggested was reflective of the Latino vote. You went onto suggest that GOP support has gotten weaker "due to the policies supported by the GOP since [2008]."

One can reasonably presume you meant immigration as one of these policies since that is one of the issues commentators frequently cite as germane to the Latino vote. Accordingly, it was perfectly reasonable for Major, CPF, and I to discuss illegal immigration incident to this topic. (Note - It shouldn't be relevant to the Latino vote, but it has become so, because it's an issue on which people (especially those in favor of an open border and lax enforcement of immigration laws) have exploited racial animus and division to avoid a true, merit-based discussion of how to deal with the problem.)

When you didn't like that direction (which I tried to bring back to Romney by indicating that he should change his focus), you made your sanctimonious comment that we're only discussing the immigration because you mentioned the word "Latino."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top