Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Bad Fences Make Bad Neighbors

By Joseph Richey, AlterNet. Posted April 27, 2006.


No matter how much Bush pushes for guest worker programs, his administration intends to beef up border patrols, detention and deportation, and build a 700-mile fence on our southern border.
041306_story1
041306_story1
Advertisement

While Congress debates tougher immigration laws, including one proposal that would make many immigrants felons, resistance has erupted across the country in unprecedented demonstrations of citizens and visitors, legal and illegal immigrants. In warehouses, packing plants, construction sites and restaurant kitchens all over the United States, the word is: ICE crackdown, as Immigration and Customs Enforcement begins stiff application of existing immigration laws. The call on Spanish-language radio stations and televisions is: Take to the streets to protect our rights to live and survive. Huge marches are planned for May 1, International Workers Day, in every major U.S. city.

President Bush has publicly promoted a guest worker program and called massive deportation "unrealistic," but when he's not on the podium, he's already expanding an immigration plan that's not so immigrant-friendly.

With Bush's approval, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has ordered new and expanded programs on the frontier in Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and internally at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and its Office of Detention and Removal (DRO). Their 2007 budget request seeks ten times more funding for detention and removal than it does for employer violations and apprehension.

The respective fates of 12 million undocumented residents in the United States, 7 million workers and their employers hang in the balance of questions before Congress: Where to focus the enforcement effort? How best to document the undocumented? How to secure the borders of their states?

The centerpiece of the request is a new Secure Border Initiative (SBI) and a privatization plan for border protection called SBInet. Chertoff and his Deputy Secretary Michael Jackson claim that SBInet will secure the borders like never before.

Internally, ICE's Office of Detention and Removal will enjoy the biggest increase as DHS tried to achieve a stated goal of reducing the illegal immigrant population by 10 percent each year. Some highlights [PDF] from the DHS 2007 $44 billion request: $4.7 billion in enforcement funds, a nearly half-billion-dollar increase in detention and removal capacity alone. The employer violation and apprehension piece of the plan includes a mere one-tenth of the funding as Detention and Removal at $47 million. The Secure Border Initiative gets a half-billion: $100 million for technology, $50 million for fencing and other physical barriers in Arizona, $30 million for more fencing in San Diego.

What will the new infrastructure, technology, personnel look like on the ground? For one, there will be a fence. An acquisition plan for physical fencing and "smart fencing" to cover 700 miles has been ordered by DHS, confirms Clayton Church at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District. Many more miles of virtual fence in remote and rural environments: ground radar, infrared cameras, unmanned aerial vehicles for detection followed by integrated apprehension operations from 1,500 more border patrol personnel in the southwest region alone. Physical fencing will be completed and reinforced in urban areas like San Diego-Tijuana, Las Cruces-El Paso-Juarez. Vehicle barriers in remote desert zones will force migrants to walk greater distances.

But while the fence will certainly cost a lot of money and force migrants to walk even greater distances, there's no evidence it will be effective. Apolonia Arellano, 35-year-old restaurant worker from Fresnillo, Zacatecas, has crossed the Rio Grande into the United States on three occasions. Asked by AlterNet how her compatriots will respond to more fencing, she said they're accustomed to walking three days and two nights carrying a jug of water and a couple of oranges. "If it takes an extra night or day to get around a new barrier, that's what we'll do."

The expanded Expedited Removal Program can deport anyone captured within 100 miles of the border within 14 days of their entry without a hearing from a federal immigration judge. Numbers of attempts by single immigrants will increase.

As a result of Operation Gatekeeper in San Diego and Operation Hold the Line in El Paso, Arizona has become the main point of entry, as crossings have quadrupled. The Tucson, Ariz., sector will receive more ICE operation teams to conduct sweeps for illegals in Tucson and Phoenix. Subsequently, more undocumented immigrants will attempt to cross through the Yuma sector, where a U.S. Marines air station and the Barry Goldwater Gunnery Range covers a 37-mile stretch of border. There, more ground radar devices will attempt to keep "unauthorized personnel" from wandering into harm's way while training exercises are in progress.


Digg!

Joe Richey has written for Mother Jones, Aperture, Counterpunch, the Chicago Tribune, Nuevo Diario, Whole Earth Review, Yes, and other publications.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
GOP elite know that they have to cater to the people in order to save their hides. Oh, the horror!
Posted by: cry0fan on Apr 27, 2006 1:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
yeah, well, the GOP elite know that they have to do something to save their electoral bacon. It is not just Iraq that is the problem, but Americans are fairly uneasy about the general trend of where America is headed. I mean, it is fairly obvious that we do not have anything going on in trade. We are still selling financial and legal services overseas, however. But the trend is inesapable. If it were not for this housing boom, our economy would go bust.

THe funny thing is that our economic growth is mostly predicted on mass immigration. I mean, isn't it obvious that our respectable GNP growth is due to immigration. Not only just due to the sheer influx of people, but this mass immigration is holding down wages in huge sectors of the job market. THAT is where a lot of our Economic growth is coming from--we are cannibalizing our wage structure to get this growth.

And the income -- borrowing thing: that is based on home equity loans. But the entire housing bubble is based on immigration.

But Americans want less immigration. So if we get what we want, we are in many respects hurting ourselves. If our politicians DO what we want with respect to immigration, our housing bubble will pump with a vengeance, our GNP will go down significantly.

Right now there is a housing boom. Many of Ameircan citizens. esp. white males are making a good living off of the housing market boom, especially those who own their own businesses or who are foremen. Those who are still selling their labor as dry wallers, carpenters etc have however had a wage drop over the last 20 years or so, when inflation is accounted for.

But at least they have jobs. Without this mass immigration, there would be far fewer housing related jobs period.

So this mass immigration has an upside and a downside too.

But let me tell you a little parable related to a common fallacy in thinking. It is called TURTLES ALL THE WAY DOWN. Here it is:

A well-known scientist once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the Earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the centre of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy.

At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise."

The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?"

The old lady said, "well, the turtle stands on the back of another turtle."

"OK, then," said the scientist, " what does the second turtle stand on?"

"You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!."

continued below....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welcome...
Posted by: adp3d on Apr 27, 2006 3:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...to the New Police States of America! With liberty and justice for all rich, white, male hetrosexuals!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Welcome... Posted by: RoffleTheWaffle
Surprise surprise
Posted by: AlanSmithee on Apr 27, 2006 4:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nice to see Demolicans and Republicrats on the same page.

Clinton backs border 'smart fence'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not Bill - Hillary. Posted by: AlanSmithee
Wake up and smell the anti-immigrant breeze
Posted by: Moonray on Apr 27, 2006 6:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not just Republicans who want a tougher stance against illegal immigrants -- yes, and they ARE illegal. Many of us progressives feel the same way, and we hate that the conservatives are able to use this issue to regain public support.

It's ridiculous to take the position that to be a good liberal we have to ignore our borders and immigration laws.

If progressive leaders don't grasp the fact that the vast majority of Americans want strict border control and immigration laws, the movement will suffer big-time.

In fact, it's already happening, because the goofy, neo-hippie approach espoused by many immigrant advocates is way out of touch with current public sentiments.

If this trend continues, the Republicans will regain a lot of the public support they lost by five years of bungling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think this is bigger than just politics......or elections in Nov.
Posted by: Prophit on Apr 27, 2006 6:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets look at "facts" that can be verified if someone wants to take the time.

Fact: Nobody disputes Bush Sr. during his term did most of the damage to our economy (shipping manufacturing to Mexico) and gave the first amnesty in the late 80's and then Bill Clinton came along in the mid ninties and gave the illegals another amnesty.

Fact: Since Bush came into office in 2001 and we had that "so called" arab terrorist attack, he has increased both legal and illegal immigrants here greater than in the past and has spoken out for it his entire term

Fact: A budge was past last budget cycle that increased both legislative authority and authorization for funding for 2,500 border patrol as an example. However, Bush has only funded to date 200 additional guards, so funding doesn't make implementation so.

Fact: KRB, a subsidiary of Halliburton was given a huge contract recently to build 11 additional civilian internment camps besides the 60 that have already been remodeled and upgraded and these will be located throughout the US.

Fact: They "SAID" it was for illegal immigrants, but interestingly that is only supposedly 12 million. Deportation would take care of a goodly sum of those say 3 million, and most live hear the southwest, yet these camps are in Indiana and inland states well away from the border.

So, why is this happening. Bush definitely believes in slave labor as evidenced in New Orleans, where he publically lifted the minimum wage laws along with other labor friendly laws, resulting in (Bush contributor) companies who got contracts to ship in illegals to work the rebuilding instead of unemployed local Americans. If he did that, then why is he also preparing for the big crack down?

SO, ONCE AGAIN, WHY? He doesn't really want to shut off the flow. If it were just to appease his base, that can be done easily without actually action. They are stupid and will believe any of the muck coming out of his mouth.

So, I am speculating here, but what logically explanation would match those facts?

Get the slave labor people who are used to working for peanuts to come to the US, hire them and then round them up, place them in camps and contract with the corporations to use the camps for production and prisoner labor???? Its what China did in China in the 80's.

I don't know but something smells really rotten here.

I am for supporting our sovereignty and for LEGAL immigration done in a manner that supports our culture, economy and freedoms of American citizens and LEGAL immigrants, yet even I don't like this disparity between his words and his actions. It goes beyond politics. As usual, with Bush, nothing is as it seems on the surface. If you dig long enough the true agenda comes to light.

Anybody else see this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another Dark Side of Patriotism
Posted by: Nan on Apr 27, 2006 7:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've listened to Lou Dobbs and as he presents it, he makes sense. With a little more perspective, however, and seeing the irrational ethnocentric patriotism behind the move against immigration, it seems sparked by racism and a sense of frightened hysteria from the fallout of Bush's shenanigans and his crimes that go unpunished.

We've calmly predicted the fact that by the year ___ there are going to be more hispanics in the USA than -- what do you call us -- WASPS? Those facts have not been met with cries of outrage, but as a matter of fact and acceptance of reality. They seem to have been met with politicians taking note and courting Latinos. Now the political pot is all stirred up and maybe it's time for Kucinich to run on an independent ticket.

I can get riled up at the thought of Bin Laden's terrorists marching into the USA from the South, and at the thought that we are letting the "crime" of illegal immigration go unpunished, but if one steps back even a little further the humanity of poor people struggling to survive might yet catch the attention of right-hearted people seeking to do the right thing. Where are we when we can only respond to the humanity of us and ours?

Why did the Roman Empire fail? Some say it was because of lead in their pipes which made them all crazy. Why is the USA failing? "Let me count the ways..."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another Dark Side of Patriotism Posted by: montana freeman
New slogan: Dems can be bigots too!
Posted by: AlanSmithee on Apr 27, 2006 9:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The democrat party can't let the republicans get all those juicy racist votes! Working against immigrants has to be a TOP PRIORITY!

After all, just look at the democrat party's proven trackrecord! NAFTA. CAFTA. and of course the party's ULTIMATE goal - The Free Trade Area of the Americas

So remember to send away for the new DNC bumpersticker: "DEMS CAN BE BIGOTS TOO!". AVAILABLE SOON!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No fences makes for one giant country
Posted by: Baranga on Apr 27, 2006 9:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think most Americans can accept another 11 million Latinos living in the US, but I don't think that Americans are prepared to leave the wound unattended, meaning that once we grant amnesty to 11 million, we will simply have another 11 million to deal with an a few years time if the inflow is not stopped at some point. Mexico has no intention of dealing with the problem on their side of the border, and by all rights are probably unable to. So we are left to accept Mexico's overflow until they simply overrun the country.

I think it's pretty easy to label everyone who disagrees with mass amnesty a "racist". It's not that cut and dry. Many Americans are frightened of watching the America they once knew turn into the largest Spanish speaking country in the world. At what point do we actually stop the flow or does being a good liberal mean porous borders forever. Yeah bad fences make bad neighbors . . . No fences or comprehensive security plan at all makes for one giant country with 80 million under employed or unemployed workers waiting to overrun the country. If we continue like this we might as well just incorporate Mexico into the US. Oh that's right, as evidenced by the number of Mexicans I recall jumping up and down in sheer delight after it was discovered that nearly 3000 Americans died on 9/11, they don't seem to happy to join us, just make a few bucks and go on as if they are a separate entity in the US. They won't have to be separate much longer. They already have the better strategy - convert the US into a country suitable for them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Template For Fascist Rule
Posted by: outsidea on Apr 27, 2006 10:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"With Bush's approval, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has ordered new and expanded programs on the frontier in Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and internally at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and its Office of Detention and Removal (DRO). Their 2007 budget request seeks ten times more funding for detention and removal than it does for employer violations and apprehension."

Right here in that paragraph is the big red light, the ultimate warning. The Department of Homeland Security with the Border Patrol, Immigrant Control and Enforcement (ICE) coordinated by the FBI under various local and regional groupings referred to as the Joint Task Forces on Terrorism (JTTF) where these guys will be coordinating "things".

Just what is the Department of Detention and Removal? Who is in it? What do their uniforms look like? Will they have bright shiny boots and cool badges? Will the Minutemen march at night with blazing torches? Will they save our white asses (and various other shades as well) from the hordes of ferriners?

Quick...lets all write letters to our brave Congress men and women and tell them we are suspicious! Maybe this is something dangerous to democratic underpinnings of our country, frayed and under assault as they are.

Liberal? Progressive? Conservative? I cant wait until they really put their plan into operation. All of us can get together in one of the detention centers run by the Office of Detention and Removal! Don't you just love that name? Old Philip K. Dick, the great sci-fi writer would have a great time with that one if he were still around. They will probably have an area set aside for folks like us called something like the Department of Reorientation and Confession, hows that sound?

Maybe I'll see you there.

Joseph

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's so obvious...
Posted by: Lathor on Apr 27, 2006 11:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The employer violation and apprehension piece of the plan includes a mere one-tenth of the funding as Detention and Removal at $47 million."
Call me cynical, but doesn't this clearly show the real focus of this "plan"? If we really wanted to stop illegal immigration, it would make more sense to go after the employers...because without employment, where's the incentive to come here??? But nooooooooo...the money's going to "Detention and Removal"--i.e., the same "prison economy" that we use for our "domestic undesirables." We'd rather build more prisons, which need more guards, who wear uniforms, and carry weapons, to use against the prisoners who wear uniforms and eat and...see? It's all about the jobs! With little or no oversight of the employers of the illegal immigrants, what will happen is that large amounts of money will go into building more "detention facilities", which will then have to be staffed, catered, etc. Of course, we won't lock 'em up until they've been thoroughly exploited (gee, what's to stop employers from hiring a bunch of illegal workers, not paying them, then suddenly realizing that *gasp* they're undocumented and reporting the lot to the D & R guys--or didn't something like that already happen in New Orleans?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's so obvious... Posted by: outsidea
Waiting for Alternet 's 'Employer Sanctions Campaign' . . .
Posted by: fairleft on Apr 27, 2006 12:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Employer sanctions are an occassional Alternet talking point... let's see them promote that idea the way they promote legalizing our mass illegal immigration.

The fate of America's 27 million non-high-school-graduate, less skilled workers hangs "in the balance" so to speak. They're the ones -- and they're disproportionately African-American and Hispanic -- get hurt most by mass immigration job competition. So I'm sure leftist Alternet will take up their plight and fight long loud and hard for enforcing sanctions (already on the books) on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Build it and they will not come
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 27, 2006 11:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The wall needs to be built and pronto. It is possible to control the borders, and it is dangerous to propogate the myth that it is not possible. In the UK, it is a massive government scandal that the left-wing government has lost control of the borders, and allowed foreign murderers, rapists etc. to roam free in the UK. A government report found that the immigration department has staff who refuse to enforce the border because they don't feel like it. This is a result of the years of passive attitudes to border control. We now live in a different world.

Both terrorism and globalisation have unleashed very dangerous individuals who are now on the move. Loose borders are their friend.

Get the border under control, and then talk about other issues. It's that simple.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Everyone should read the new book by Mike Davies
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 28, 2006 12:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mike Davies's latest book is about the balloning slumification of the world's cities, both in the developing world and the developed world. He points out the market forces and the lack of enforcement by national governments. He makes the starck assessment that most of us will be living in barrios before the end of the century. It will be some sort of Blade Runner, technologically enhanced hell hole. We already see this underway in cities like Los Angeles.

It partnership with this trend, we will see - despite what so-called progressive politicians like Gordon Brown say - a decline in all development indicators as the government loses control. To see how this happens, look at Africa.

It is not the future I want to live in nor pass on to my children. Period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dealing with illegal aliens
Posted by: Old Skeptic on Apr 29, 2006 2:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It really becomes tiresome to read all the presumably liberal writers who condemn anyone who is opposed to illegal aliens as being "racist" or "bigoted". Nonsense! What part of self-defense don't these people understand? It is utterly outrageous for these aliens who have invaded our country and brazenly broken our laws to speak of their attempt to force our country to give them retrospective legality as a "civil rights struggle". More nonsense. When African-Americans pushed for their civil rights, they were American citizens who were being denied rights inherent in BEING American citizens. These aliens wave their foreign flags and chant in a foreign language about civil rights that THEY do not possess because they are not Americans. They want to be given on a silver platter what legal immigrants work years to attain. As far as I am concerned, illegal aliens have no rights in this country and should be deported. If we really want to clear out most illegal aliens, we could do so pretty quickly by simply offering a cash reward to anyone who turns in illegal aliens and by strictly enfocing sanctions against the employers who hire the aliens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Negligent governments make bad neighbors
Posted by: fafnir on Apr 29, 2006 5:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The large inflows of illegal workers into the US is caused by Mexico's negligence to provide sufficient employment opportunities for their citizens, and by America's negligence to strictly enforcing employment laws that allow corporate America to unfairly drive down the cost of labor by any means necessary.

Mr. Richey, do you hate America?

You seem gleeful at the prospect of millions of mostly immigrant people taking to the streets in support of illegals and employers who willfully violate America's immigration laws.

You seem distressed about the DHS's expanded program to strictly enforce employment laws against employers who exploit illegal workers at the expense of hiring unemployed working-class Americans.

You seem opposed to American citizens exercising their right to petition the government to protect our nation's borders.

You seem to object to citizens' desire to restrict the number of illegals in their state who place a heavy, uncompensated economic burden on their community infrastructures and resources.

Mr. Richey, why do you hate America?

Where is your empathy and humanity for the millions of under- and un-employed, working-class natives who are caught in corporate America's cheap labor trap -- a trap that exploits illegal workers, while reducing fair-wage job opportunities that enable working-class citizens a chance to pursue their own personal goals and dreams?

Where is your empathy and outrage for the plight of neglected working-class Americans, who do not how earn enough money to afford health insurance, or buy a home in a safe, healthy community, or send their children to a good school, or save for retirement?

Yeah, I thought so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Proposals Please.
Posted by: Ratskii on Apr 29, 2006 9:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, we've been calling each other names and denigrating each others motives for quite a while now (I know, I've been guilty too). Lets begin talking solutions and a way to come together.

My personal opinion is that building an effective wall (and it would have to be something along the lines of the Berlin wall to be effective), manning it and attempting to apprehend and deport 12 million people would cost us about one trillion the first year and eight hundred million the next. Where is this money going to come from? And don't believe of a second that we'll get the government to bite the hand that feeds it by enforcing fines and jail sentences against the big employers.

I'll concede that the undocumented workers, in the numbers they are currently coming in, do pose a problem. I also concede that we need to be concerned for the wages and living conditions of the 40 million or so workers who are living on the edge.

Proposal:
1) Support a ticket that will pull us out of Irag post haste and use the money saved for:
2) Starting a program that will set a yearly amount (maybe $30 billion) to setting up start up industries(that are controled by the workers themselves) in Mexico's poorest areas and lean on Fox, or whoever is in power at the time, to match it.
3) Not start deporting undocumented workers only when we can deport them to jobs, so they won't come back.
4) Allow undocumented workers to stay for up to five years if they will send a certain amount of their wages to support the funding of new industry in Mexico.
5) Seek to get our government to stop supporting the corruption, political assassinations and cheating that is currently the norm in Mexico.
6) Set up a similiar fund with paid on the job training here in the good old U S of A for our most vulnerable citzens.

Yeah, I know. It's a long shot. But it would be both cheaper and have a better chance of doing some good than the current house bill.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternative or complement to a wall
Posted by: SendInTheLawyers on Apr 30, 2006 1:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I haven't seen mentioned one very effective method of stopping employers from hiring illegals.

The huge amnesty Congress granted in the 1980s came with a legal requirement for greater enforcement against employers of illegals. The amnesty happened, the enforcement did not.

However, we could get a federal law passed which allows trial lawyers to sue illegals' employers and win a share of the fines. They would act somewhat like prosecutors/DAs.

I guess they can sometimes sue already, with class actions and RICO-based suits. But this would let lawyers easily go after ANYONE hiring illegals.

The government will never be as thorough and diligent as lawyers with a profit motive. Especially since employers can use campaign contributions to encourage a lack of enforcement (which might be the current situation).

The trial lawyers might become a powerful lobby group favoring immigration enforcement. They would presumably work to establish this right to sue, and defend it from being weakened by other lobbyists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]