Make E-Verify work
Tuesday's No. 1 editorial.
Last week’s raid of a manufacturing plant in Mississippi put the spotlight back on illegal immigration. Netting almost 600, it’s the biggest immigration raid ever made on a U.S. plant.
The raid also put the spotlight on problems associated with E-Verify, a federal program that provides employers a link to government databases to determine workers’ legal status.
The company, Howard Industries Inc., was using E-Verify and other methods to check immigration status, yet it still employed hundreds illegally.
Much of the anomaly could stem from employees hired before the company began using E-Verify. It was reported that enforcers began investigating two years before Howard began checking workers’ status that way.
With such a large number detained, you have to wonder if someone at Howard didn’t mind hiring undocumented workers. Still, Howard’s employment problems likely also resulted from a glaring weakness of E-Verify: It has a hard time detecting identity theft.
If an illegal immigrant has stolen someone’s identity and is using both that person’s name and Social Security number, E-Verify often can’t determine that.
E-Verify is set to expire on Nov. 1, unless Congress reauthorizes it. Democratic Rep. Health Shuler, of western North Carolina, has proposed legislation that not only would continue E-Verify but expand it. Called the SAVE Act, it would phase in mandatory use of E-Verify by all employers.
Shuler’s legislation might be good if there were no glitches in the system. But there are, and it’s not just the matter of E-Verify missing identity theft.
Studies of E-Verify have found that it can provide initial “false negatives.” One study found that it mistakenly flagged .1 percent of U.S.-born employees as problematic and 3 percent of employees who are foreign-born.
Other studies have found that the databases E-Verify taps into are riddled with errors. For example, the Social Security Administration’s own inspector general estimated that 17.8 million records in its agency’s database, which is used to check employment eligibility, contain inaccuracies.
Americans already have plenty of experience dealing with faulty information. Look at the indignities many have suffered because their names somehow were erroneously added to the No Fly List. The last thing we need is to have employers — and workers — ensnarled in similar problems.
E-Verify shouldn’t be scrapped. Employers need an electronic way to check immigration status. But the kinks need to be worked out of the program before it’s made mandatory.
A group representing business, educational and nonprofit interests sent a letter in recent weeks to Congress containing sound suggestions. They want funding to clean up problems in the Social Security database that’s a part of E-Verify, and they also suggested a trial program to target identity theft.
Those ideas should be incorporated into E-Verify reauthorization.
Comments (2)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
It's hard to reconcile the Editorial Staff's criticism of the E-Verify system with some of the other stands that it and its members have taken for certain types of arrests and detentions of suspected illegals. The underlying databases that E-Verify and law enforcement tap into are largely the same. The problems of "false negatives" are also similar.
The only difference seems to be that the Staff has now identified a system that hurts a sympathetic group--majority workers. When the system just hurt brown people, the harms were acceptable.
The tough questions with respect to immigration enforcement come down to the practical issue of identifying illegals yet remaining within our constitutional structure. The search for illegals essentially boils down to people having to prove that they belong here (it's not like we can expect the illegals to volunteer this information). But problems providing this kind of proof inevitably lead to some people being incorrectly identified as illegals. In E-Verify, the problems show up in the ability to work. In detention schemes, they show up in innocent people being able to maintain their liberty.
The Staff correctly recognized these tough issues in the E-Verify system. It should also recognize them in other systems.
Posted on September 2, 2008 2:46 PM
With regard to E-Verify, here’s the link to a legal opinion paper from an attorney at Michael Best & Friedrich regarding how E-Verify applies for your responsibility regarding independent contractors and sub-contractors.
http://www.mbopartners.com/blog/categories/E-Verify.html?id=91&category=11&type=43
Interesting stuff — government contractors who fail to comply with E-Verify may be debarred from doing business with the government, but compliance isn’t exactly simple. If you have misclassified employees as contractors (and therefore not performed E-Verify on them) then you may be out of compliance. But to perform E-Verify on contractors is inappropriate, probably illegal, and can tilt the classification decision (in the event of a misclassification audit) in the direction of making these people look like employees, as you have treated them as employees for purposes of verifying employment eligibility.
In conclusion, according to the paper (available full text at that link) your E-Verify compliance is ONLY as good as your independent contractor classification compliance.
Posted on January 20, 2009 1:44 PM