News-Record.com

Has any fellow blogger been able to come up with any "support" for this sentence? :

"The vast majority of these employers pay good wages; they just can't find enough U.S. workers willing to do the work."

Mr. McKinney - I do hope you blog on here to help us out.

Just think how much money an immigration attorney stands to make with an instant 20 million person client base to draw from.

JDR, that's the main talking point of the open borders crowd.

The correct phrase should be "Work that Americans won't do at Mexican and Central American wages."

James,

I think Jeremy is trying to pull a fast one. I sincerely doubt he can produce the evidence to back up his own statement. I do not know that much about how things are everywhere, but I can tell you is is NOT a true statement around here.

I know construction company owners who do not pay minimum wage and do not provide benefits to illegals. One said "What they gonna do about it? Complain to the law?" He added that they are a dime a dozen so if one get peeved, there is another waiting to take his place. (I offered as how he was part of the problem rather than being part of the solution.)

There are five major chicken plants in this town. All have large numbers of illegals working for them. I know they do not offer a decent wage or benefits to illegals.

Jeremy and his ilk desperately want us to buy into the garbage he is selling. As Hugh pointed out, his bread and butter depends on getting people to believe the propaganda he is spreading.

There are strong, powerful hispanic liasons in this country with the sole purpose of foisting illegals on the US and getting laws passed that are slanted in their favor. This is just my opinion but, I believe most of the backing for these groups is connected to al quada or other terrorists groups.

When I made the statement that illegals will be America's downfall, I was sincere. Our enemy will defeat us because of our own stupidity. We should never have let over 11 million illegals here to begin with. And we definitely should not have let them stay.

BTW, I think the Hoover Dam will be the next target of terrorists and I think they will gain entry through our open border from Mexico. I don't think they will bomb it but will attack it in another way.

Rest easy Yvonne. It would take a small nuke to put a dent in the Hoover Dam.

I fish the Smith River in VA at the tailrace of the Philpott dam. The immensity of that structure is a fraction of the Hoover dam and it's 200'+ tall and 160' feet thick concrete at the base. Nothing short of a Corps of Engineers demolition team or major earthquake could bring it down.

Oh yeah Yvonne, and I guess if you go by the LTE, we are not allowed to call them "illegals" anymore. According to him there is no "law" that they are breaking. Does anyone have the 411 on this. I know it is not a felony or anything, but why are they referred to as "illegal aliens" if what they are doing is legal? I refer to this statement "First, it is not a crime to be in the United States without status. It is a civil, regulatory offense — not a crime. Equating immigration violators with "bank robbers" and "murderers," as Sowell attempted to do, is far from honest." Am I reading this the wrong way?

I don't know about his "ilk," but Jeremy is helping a friend immigrate (the honest way), and I can tell you, with the laws the way they are, it's virtually impossible to do. As I understand it, there is currently a five year period where the candidate essentially has to just *wait* until their case can get any action. Try to make any money when you can't bill your clients for 5 years!

The legislation currently being debated in Congress will have a positive impact on people trying to honestly immigrate. I can't comprehensively address what the impact on illegals could be.

But I think Jeremy has some interesting points. First is that the illegals are civil cases, not criminal. As he states it, it appears that it's not a crime to be here illegally. It's a civil matter. Secondly, his comment about the honesty of having so many illegals doing so much work speaks to me about our social values. I like how united we feel towards illegals not being deserving of tax-supported benefits, but I'm starting to think that we as individuals may want to address how we react as a society to companies that exploit these people, instead of turning a blind eye to it.

Finally, I think an immigration lawyer is in a unique position to offer us a different perspective than we get from the media. I, for one, will hope to see his responses to these criticisms/attacks on him. Until I do, I will withhold judgment on him and his positions.

From all I can read on this subject it is only a civil offense to be here illegally. If one is working and not filing taxes then it becomes a criminal offense for not paying taxes.
There is a bill pending that would make it a felony to be in the US illegally. It is doubtful that it will get to the floor for a vote. The McCain-Kennedy bill the top runner in this category to become law since it is more PC.

OK, here's a link to get information on immigration to the US; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States

All the information I read certainly reads that just being in the US illegally is only a civil offense.

However, the criminal offense occurrs when the indivual obtains a Driver's License, SSN, etc. without the proper legal documentation. This is when the felony's begin. And remember, it is virtually impossible to get a bank account of ANY kind without a "valid" SSN! This goes for most other things as well. So, that is the real crime that begins with those undocumented (illegal) aliens.

It is amazing at what can be learned just by reading a few pages of valid information.

Shalom

Crime is defined as conduct that is prohibited and has a specific punishment (as incarceration or fine) prescribed by public law. So, if improper entry by alien into this country is a conduct that is prohibited and has a specific punishment prescribed by law, then it is, by definition, a crime. Read Section 1325 the U.S. Code, and you'll find that this improper entry by an alien is punishable in two ways; as a crime and as a civil penalty. The letter writer is being disingeneous in saying that entering this country improperly is only a "civil" offense. A civil matter deals with matters between individuals, as opposed to criminal. Saying that this is only a civil, regulatory offense is "far from honest" from an immigration law attorney, just as he is accusing Mr. Sowell of being.

Section 1325. Improper entry by alien

(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts.
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Improper time or place; civil penalties
Any alien who is apprehended while entering (or attempting to enter) the United States at a time or place other than as designated by immigration officers shall be subject to a civil
penalty of -
(1) at least $50 and not more than $250 for each such entry (or attempted entry); or
(2) twice the amount specified in paragraph (1) in the case of an alien who has been previously subject to a civil penalty under this subsection.
Civil penalties under this subsection are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.
(c) Marriage fraud
Any individual who knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or fined not more than $250,000, or both.
(d) Immigration-related entrepreneurship fraud
Any individual who knowingly establishes a commercial enterprise for the purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined in accordance with title 18, or both.

I stand correct ORR. The information I read and referenced never went to specific legal codes for violations. Also, I did not reference legal codes. Again, my error.

Reading the legal code along with the immigratin reference provided, MUCH can be gleened.

Thanks for adding to my education!

Shalom

Ooops!

correct should read corrected.

My fingers do not work as well as I desire sometimes (medical problem along with not proofreading).

Shalom

I think the main problem is that we need to strengthen immigration laws to the point that they aren't merely a "civil regulatory offense" and make it a full blown felony. Next, let's make sure that any illegal alien has to pay a hefty fine in addition to being deported at his/her expense. Last, let's fine employers of illegals and make it so hefty that it is discouraging.

There is one thing I find a little disconcerting about this and previous discussions is that many seem to be lumping one ethnicity into the "illegal" bracket. I know there are other ethnicities doing the same as hispanics, but it seems many of us seem to miss them.

There are many middle-eastern people entering this country illegally. I wonder how many Pakistani, Afghani, Saudi, or Iranian people are here under false pretenses. As some of you have noted this could present a danger to this nation in the form of terrorism.

Now, there are other illegals entering under different types of visas that are purely falsified. For example, I met a young Polish woman through a friend. She was here on a student visa, but never went to a class. Her main purpose was to come here, work, and return to Poland. Once the proper amount of time passed, she would return here.....under a student visa. She had been doing that for about six years when I met her. When I ran into that friend about four years later, he related that this Pole was in the states again....under a student visa. I never could understand why no one at INS ever caught up with her.

My heart goes out to people who want to better their quality of life for themselves and their families.

Getting back to the initial letter from Jeremy, let's not get too hung up on terminology and I know that terminology is important.

For me, immigrants who are committing a civil, regulatory offense are here in the U.S. without proper approval and as such,if and when they are identified, are subject to be deported. This is one of the many reasons why they "stay underground". Unless they illegally get Id, drivers licenses etc. they are prey to the avarice and greed of employers. They accept
dirt low pay, receive no benefits, can't pay into any retirement plan because they can't legally do so and to boot wouldn't have the money to do so anyway. They do what they do so that they can survive. But there is a price and a cost to everyone.

Jeremy tries to get tricky when he uses the word
"non citizens" in his letter--he does not say how many are properly papered and how many are not properly papered (I may not be using the correct words, but I think you get the point.) I have many friends who are non citizens who are properly admitted in the states and do quite well---I don't think that we are talking about these people. We are talking about the unauthorized who can be sent back immediately (?) if and when they are identified and seem to be in the states in large numbers.

I read the other day that the average hourly wage (nationally ?) is approximately $ 12.00 per hour and that the minimum wage is approximately 40% of that. I can't imagine that an unauthorized immigrant (one who is committing a civil, regulatory offense) is getting paid more than minimum wage. If as Yvonne says, she knows construction companies who don't pay even minimum wages,these poor people are being forced to live in dire circumstances while others are getting fat. So, in conclusion, Jeremy, I don't think that you are giving the straight information either, and as JDR and Hugh and especially Yvonne state, Americans don't want to work for sub minimum wages--raise the wages and employers will have lines and lines of americans getting in line to work for decent wages. There are many things to be rectified and until then,many american workers are being displaced and the actual numbers are not small. One final point, a large number of americans are struggling, in general, to survive, pay bills, access health care and medicines etc and can't do it. People who have to work for even minimum wages,especially those who are irregularly here, really put a huge burden on communities to provide school, clothes, health care, food, housing, education and the like. They can't pay their way. I am not blaming the victim but let's not distort the problem either.

JoeJoe,

You have touched on the human side of this issue and the ambivilance in people that big business preys upon. Let me explain myself. When I moved to my current location over twelve years ago, I had no idea I was moving to a town that the 2000 census would reveal was over 60% hispanic. I just knew, when I moved here and tried to get involved in local organizations, the meetings would last for hours. The main reason being, everything was interpreted into spanish for all the non-english speaking people. This so bogged down the discussion that the topic at hand would be forgotten sometimes.

However, I was sympathetic (initially) to the plight of the hispanic people. Yes, they were and are being used and abused by big and small business persons. Because the illegals earn so little, they are forced to live ten to twenty in a two to three bedroom house. I thought it was deplorable that the employers were allowed to get away with this abuse.

Then I lived here for a few years and my attitude began to change somewhat. I realized these people bring a lot of the abuse on themselves. Not all are victims. As some have pointed out, crime, disease and abuses of the taxpayers money by illegals have risen considerably.

Insofar as illegals being a civil issue rather than a criminal issue, I am reminded of a situation that happened to me several years ago. I rented some property to a family that turned out to be the family from hell. When they left they not only destroyed my property, they stole items from the house. I filed a complaint with the Randolph County Sheriff's Dept for theft and provided pictures of the stolen items.

Long story short, in court, they judge told me this was not a criminal issue but rather a civil one. When I asked "When did stealing become a civil issue rather than a criminal one?", I was told "When you rented them the house with the items in it."

Now it seems to me Jeremy is trying to lead us to believe, just because we do not toss the illegals out of the country upon arrival, we are giving unspoken consent for them to stay. Sort of like I was giving the tenants from hell permission to steal from me by letting them stay in my place to start with. Then crime can be called civil instead of criminal.

Just another way to water down the truth about behavior thus making it more acceptable. That is why I, for one, am not believeing Jeremy is performing any service to our country by helping illegals.

I posted this on another LTE several days prior but it seems to fit even better here than in the other.

The debate continues in Congress and all across this land on illegal immigration. Illegal's are entering the United States at the rate of roughly 150 per hour. That's an educated guess just like the Pew Hispanic Center's estimate that there are 11.5 million to 12 million undocumented residents in the nation. Educated guess or simply a wild estimate, it goes without saying, the problem is enormous and is not going away anytime soon from what is being reported.

This week, as the Senate Judiciary Committee struggled (that's a nice word for postured and name called too look good in an election year) to come up with an immigration reform proposal of its own. Meanwhile, President Bush addressed a group of freshly minted citizens. The President said, "America should not have to choose between being a welcoming society and a lawful society."

From what I can see currently it is neither.

Bush also said that "no one should claim that immigrants are a burden on our economy." And that is true when discussing LEGAL immigrants. However, that isn't true of illegal immigrants, nearly two-thirds of whom lack a high school diploma. They work hard but contribute little to the economy. Meanwhile, illegal immigration is driving down the earnings of America's most poorly paid workers.

Paul Krugman's column in the New York Times, cited a Harvard study that calculated that American high-school dropouts would earn up to 8 percent more each year if it weren't for illegal immigrants from Mexico alone. Robert Samuelson's piece in Newsweek reported that 35 percent of undocumented residents lack health insurance and 26 percent receive some form of federal aid. And educating the 1.7 million children of illegal immigrants has placed a crushing burden on many school districts.

As many here have stated , cheap housecleaning and landscaping come at a social cost and a high one at that.

Most people who come illegally do so to better the lives of themselves and their families. They really shouldn't be blamed for risking their lives to improve their lot as most of us would do the same thing if the situation dictated. But if they couldn't get jobs, few would brave border guards, what few there are, and desert.

Bills before Congress to toughen penalties for employers who hire illegal aliens deserve support, if they really have any teeth in them. It is the businesses that hire them, not society at large, that are profiting by their presence. Neglecting to check a prospective employee's citizenship status or winking at a fake green card should lead to fines large enough that employers can't treat them as just another cost of doing business. Chronic offenders should get prison time, but that is going to take some tough laws with teeth in them and most politicians,No matter what side of the asile, are not going to "offend" that particular group of people.

It is also taken as "gospel truth",that illegal immigrants are needed to do the dirty, dangerous or boring jobs that Americans won't do. Not so, what is true is that illegal immigrants take the jobs that Americans won't do at the low wages employers offer. So as the old adage goes, "Why pay more when you can get it cheaper." Isn't that the American way? Maybe it's time to change that attitude not only on labor and wages but on all products, but that's a discussion for another day.

Mr. Produce--thanks for your stats and opinion. I stand by what i said and your entry supports my thoughts. Before we can tackle a social dilemma, we need to be honest about the reality of the situation. I hope a solution can be equitably worked out but I want americans to be part of the equation--they have been here longer, have put in something and deserve our full blown attention first. I am not against immigration, but let's be planful and honest about it.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act was established in 1986. The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) legally mandates that U.S. employers verify the employment eligibility status of newly-hired employees and makes it unlawful for employers to knowingly hire or continue to employ unauthorized workers. With the passage of the IRCA, founders of Form I-9 Compliance worked closely with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to develop the original Form I-9 that required verification of a job applicant of their right to work.

The law specifies penalties ranging up to $10,000 per alien hired inviolation of this law. The answer to this problem is simple. Aggessively enforce penalties on employers that improperly or illegally hire people that are not eligible to work in this country by law. Employers will quickly learn that hiring illegal workers is not profitable. When the jobs dry up, the people will return to their countries. Then, people that are citizens or that have the right to work here (green card) will take those jobs at a salary dictated by market forces.

But, the question is whether our politicians on both sides of the aisle have the courage to do the right thing and quit thinking how to gain political advantage from this disaster.

This is a good letter and a good discussion. While the letter clearly downplays the downward pressure immigrants place on labor prices, there's a lot of truth in his claim that they're central to the American economy as is. Illegals fill a structural problem in the American economy: specifically, its need for low paying jobs. Whether they "pay well" or not is debatable, but many Americans prefer welfare to picking cabbage at $8/hour. With no native cabbage pickers and no illegals, cabbage would have to be picked at, say, $18/hour by natives enticed to work at that price. How the American economy would respond to such a labor vacuum is probably impossible to know, but inflation and wages would both almost certainly rise.

Brian444,

I know a lot of Americans that would gladly pick cabbage for eight dollars/hour. Unfortunately, I don't know of anyone paying that kind of money to pick cabbage.

I placed this in another LTE today too, and just wanted anyonhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12175475/e who is interested to take a look.
I am also going to try to find another article I saw on MSN about a man who 1)entered the U.S. illegally 2) had kids here 3) got busted using a stolen SSN and deported 4) tried to sneak back in and got caught 5) finally was able to sneak back again and now runs a business refinishing high end furniture and makes a right good living at it. He has an attorney fighting to keep him here but is having a hard time because he was convicted for using a stolen SSN. SO this man borke the law. Several times, and now he will probably be allowed to stay if the Immigration Plan that Bush wants is passed. Now who can think that that is right?

Bill failed inhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12200612/ Senate.

This has really been a lively discussion. Sorry I failed to blog earlier. A friend told me this site existed today. I am so glad Mr. Sowell’s column and my letter generated such thoughtful discussion (except for references to my ilk!). To briefly respond:

First, N&R invited bloggers to find support for my statement that most employers pay good wages in the cited occupations. Anyone interested in the truth of my comment should explore http://online.onetcenter.org. This is the U.S. Department of Labor’s wage center. The DOL conducts nationwide surveys and publishes the prevailing wages for virtually every occupation (that is, what employers are typically paying). Here’s a sample – the prevailing wage for a general farm worker is $7.85 an hour (make sure you tell your friends that are eager to pick lettuce), landscape workers typically make $9.92 an hour, fishing workers typically make $13.57 an hour, concrete finishers typically make $15.06 hourly. As I stated, most employers pay good wages in these occupations. Any farmer participating in our current flawed guest farm worker program (called H-2A) pays over $8 an hour to each worker. If a minimally qualified US worker comes forward, they MUST be hired per federal regulation. So, what is the experience of my clients? U.S. workers rarely ever come forward, and when they do, they rarely return after working one day in the fields. The problem is the lack of a work force – not the wages offered. I do not deny that there is a criminal element out there who perpetuates a system of slave labor using illegals. But do not make the exception the rule!

As long as we are citing unnamed “friends” for broad generalizations, my construction company clients pay competitive wages for general construction workers. Many of these clients have to conduct broad recruitment campaigns to locate minimally qualified U.S. workers before they can sponsor a foreign national. Yet, every time we advertise and publish openings with the ESC, not one U.S. worker comes forward to apply.

I said “noncitizens” make up a high percentage in certain industries to reinforce my point – noncitizens, whether legal or not, are drawn to these occupations because of the need. If a job pays substandard (or illegal) wages, would a legal resident work there??

Second, as my letter stated, being in the USA out of status is NOT a crime; the statute cited by one writer states it is a misdemeanor to enter the USA without inspection or entering fraudulently. It is not a crime to be present in the USA in violation of U.S. immigration law.

Finally, I want to point out that, like the President, I am NOT in favor of an amnesty (that would be like a tax lawyer in favor of repealing the federal income tax). I am in favor of a fair system of orderly and circulatory migration. I do not think it is fair to give citizenship to someone because he or she “beat the clock.” The Judiciary Committee Bill and subsequent compromise bill recognize that employers need to recruit workers in certain categories and allows that to happen. It increases the number of legal visas and makes it easier to sponsor noncitizens for visas (after a job search for US workers I would add). It tightens the borders and ups employer enforcement. And finally, it deals with the millions that stayed here under our current flawed system. We tried an enforcement-only law in 1996 (under Clinton I would add), and it failed. We are not going to deport 11 million people. We can choose to pretend like they will disappear or we can deal with reality.

Jeremy how do you propose we handle this statement; "We can choose to pretend like they will disappear or we can deal with reality."

They (undocumented aliens) are not disappearing. And granting amnesty is criminal at best. What do we do with 11+ million people?

Shalom

I support earned legalization. Opponents of doing anything like to say, "Sounds like amnesty to me." But it is not. Amnesty is an automatic pardon, or free pass, granted to a group of individuals without any consideration in return. Earned legalization requires undocumented immigrants to earn legal status. To earn legalization under the Senate bill for example, an undocumented immigrant would have to demonstrate past work history, pay about $2000 in fines, work as a guest worker for six years, undergo rigorous security and background checks, learn English and American civics, and pay any back taxes. Reagan's plan in 1986 required none of this; it gave an automatic pass to anyone here illegally as of 1/1/1982. Earned legalization balances the need to punish immigration law violators with the recognition that our current system is unrealistic and in fact encourages illegal immigration rather than prevented it. Finally, you prevent another undocumented alien explosion by strenthing the border, tightening penalties on employers who used illegal labor, and have a guest worker program which provides for circulatory migration.

Reagans law also requried Employers to stop hiring ilegals.

imho: non-enforcement of that law is the master key that has led us to the current situation.

Are you saying, Jeremy that we're now better at enforcing written law than we were 20 years ago?

Ome more question;

When employers filled out the U.S. Department of Labor’s prevailing nationwide wage survey, do they included "Picked up 4 workers from the local street-based labor-pool and paid them each $60 cash per hour for a hard 12 hour days work."

THe real cost on hiring comes from not from the boss's half of the 15.3% FICA adder, but the burden of Workman's Comp', which after a layoff, requires the boss to reimburse the state 120% of the unemployment wages for the laid-off worker - at least that's how it's been explained to me.

Can you shed light on that?

James, you lost me with the last part. Workers comp is paid for through private insurance. Regarding unemployment insurance, every employer has an account with ESC-NC and that account is affected by a lay-off. But unemployment taxes are very reasonable (I know, I am an employer who has gone through many an assistant).

You asked me if we are better now at enforcement than we were 20 years ago. The answer is, of course not. Again, because we did not keep visa numbers realistic with both employment and family needs, undocumented immigration exploded. Because the new system would have more realistic visa numbers and a guest worker program, enforcement can concentrate on those employers who are doing the things you worry about - like employing illegals for slave wages. A participant in a guest worker program has to pay the prevailing wage.

As I have said, MOST employers already pay the prevailing wage This is where we will have to "agree to disagree." You believe illegal immigration has exploded because employers want to get their labor dirt cheap. I believe illegal immigration has exploded because (1) employers cannot find enough workers to fill jobs in certain occupations, even at the prevailing wage and (2) families are forced to be separated for years under the current limited number of legal visas. I would also add (3) the current immigration law encourages people to stay because of the stiff penalties which apply upon departure if a person has overstayed.

BTW, wage surveys are not conducted by employers filling out questionnaires!

As I have said, I do not deny that there are criminals who exploit undocumented labor. That is where enforcement should concentrate.